Yeah that’s not very typical, I’d like to make that point.

(The idea’s that the company tanked, just like this tanker did.)

The front fell off.

I’d go with state actors first.

When a particular social media platform is centralized, you can buy yourself a say percentage of stock and have sway over it (cough tencent), or have a useful idiot ruin the platform (cough musk), or another useful idiot to run propaganda you like anyway (cough truth social, cough fox news, cough newsmax…), or yet another that will sell out it’s host country’s citizens for cold hard cash (cough facebook).

But when that social media platform is decentralized? Well, then you’d need to figure out how to poison the well early on to stave off adoption. The Saudi Arabias, UAEs, Chinas definitely don’t like the idea of lemmy, and it’ll be way harder for them to control if critical mass is hit.

I work in enterprise IT, and whenever I see new announcements from the C-suite offices that include the words “streamline” and “merging”, I can tell things are going to get worse, way worse.

I shouldn’t be surprised anymore that execs truly believe they have the perfect solutions, all of which actually make things worse, way worse. No difference to them, they’ll just fall up anyway.

In a similar vein is to look for government auctions in town. I’ve got a major public university in my city, and it maintains a permanent auction warehouse. Like once a month they sell all kinds of stuff, from mini fridges to laptops by the pallet.