I think scale matters because almost no person is as much of an island as your example fishing video guy. I actually have noticed almost the opposite in most people I know, YouTube is the default place to get entertainment. Across all their interests.

From both sides the network effect might be strongest with YouTube, the creators can't leave because YouTube has virtually all of the audience, and consumers don't want to watch singular people on other platforms because on YouTube you can stumble over interesting videos and all the people you like to watch are already there.

The only way I see for other platforms to actually grow is forced interoperability, as in videos of other platforms appearing in the YouTube frontend. Which Google would never do so the government would need to force them.

The good safety of nuclear in developed countries goes hand in hand with its costly regulatory environment, the risk for catastrophic breakdown of nuclear facilities is managed not by technically proficient design but by oversight and rules, which are expensive yes , but they also need to be because the people running the plant are it's weakest link in terms of safety.

Now we are entering potentially decades of conflict and natural disaster and the proposition is to build energy infrastructure that is very centralized, relies on fuel that must be acquired, and is in the hands of a relatively small amount of people, especially if their societal controll/ oversight structure breaks down. It just doesn't seem particularly reasonable to me, especially considering lead times on these things, but nice meme I guess.

The problem is obviously a general over reliance on motorized road transport and a continuing trend towards more.

I've been playing beamNg for 4+ years and it's been in ea the entire time since 2015, possibly the best car game you can get for 20€.

Slay the spire I've also owned since early access, it's maybe the most beautiful single player card game to exist. Although it only spent 1-2 years in ea.

Don't be the first to buy ea games I guess but if the game is already fun why not.

• Acerola - Video Game shaders and other digital art techniques
• Andrewism - hopefull Philosophy / Politics
• Eisenbahn in Ö, D, CH - Trains (in german)
• carykh - AI and various
• jan Misali - Conlang + various + Mashups
• Marco Reps - Electronics and EE
• Then & Now - History/Philosophy
• NeverKnowsBest - Lengthy Video Game reviews/ History of Gaming
• BobbyBroccoli - Science scandals
• Applied Science - Various science and Eng
• Asianometry - Semiconductor / Engineering / Taiwan / History / Economics (very frequent uploads)
• RMTransit - Transit (NA focus)
• Tom Nicholas- more politics
• Junferno - Software Development in sarcastic weeb
• Oliver Lugg - I don't even know
• People Make Games - Video Game Journalism

I tried to only pick stuff <1M subs excluding game play and news.

Idk in my world Denmark and Slovenia aren't as capitalist as the US while being significantly more democratic.

Always has been, especially since we have offshore banking and banking secrecy laws. Not that credit was ever particularly ethical. Neither investment banking tbh.

This is very interesting to me and I've played with this kinda idea a few weeks ago, the Activity Pub proposal you linked seems very sensible for communicating between actors but doesn't really offer much of a path to create a platform. In my view creating a platforms is the reason this should exist, because current platforms (Amazon,Ebay,Uber, AirBnB,DoorDash,Lieferheld) are mostly just engaging in rent seeking from buyers/sellers on their platforms. Rentier Capitalism

I don't believe a protocol can sufficiently challenge the current players without an underpinning organizational structure that ensures fairness and transparency to both sellers and buyers, when it comes to moderation, indexing, and categorization. Especially moderation but also hosting will have costs, and the consequences for bad moderation are likely much larger with commerce than with social media. So I would like a Coop with significant control from both sellers and buyers to provide the public facing platform which then federates with the Stores which can be self hosted by sellers (potentially as an extension to existing eCommerce Software).

Or alternatively two Coops if it's not reasonable for the sellers to host their own Stores e.g.: Uber and AirBnB, here the sellers should outright own the one providing the Stores, and own the minority in the one providing the Coop. Obviously middle grounds could also exist where e.g.: a Platform for Delivery food federates with seller servers that are hosted on a local level by Coops comprising of restaurants of a region.

I very deeply believe something like this could make our commerce much better and fairer, and while getting it of the ground might be hard, I think because the sellers make money on these Platforms it should give real incentive to develop both the tech and the legal orgs as well as advertise for them, and for the sellers to invest real money into it, or maybe agree to kick 1-2% of a purchase back to the coop.

You are completely correct I was essentially trying to move along the conversation from the last post.

Huh so schnell rausgemobbt hatte ich durchaus nicht erwartet. Ein etwaiger Ersatz sollte allerdings durchaus ihre frühere Arbeit ansehen sie hatte auf den ersten Blick nämlich durchaus Ahnung bzw. immerhin mal die richtige Einstellung zu ihrem Fachgebiet. Was natürlich nicht heißt dass man sie hätte halten sollen alleine schon wegen der Interessenkonflikte.

In the same issue of the Yale Law Journal, Scott Morton and Herbert Hovenkamp contributed a paper, "Horizontal Shareholding and Antitrust Policy," in which they argued that large institutional investors who hold stakes in direct competitors pose a competition problem than could be addressed by antitrust enforcement. Such “horizontal shareholding” or “common ownership” may lessen competition because the same owner of, for example, Coke and Pepsi would benefit from higher prices in the market.[23] Wikipedia

Heuchlerische Argumente von der selben Seite die ja durch die Werbung + Medienmacht generell für die nicht/um/falsch- Erziehung sorgen, klar die Kapitalisten unterdrücken meist nicht direkt Meinungen, sind aber bei der Propaganda bzw. halt Umerziehung locker, und auch schon seit langem auf dem ersten platz. Wir werden halt überwiegend von Kapitalisten zu effizienten obrigkeitshörigen Kapitalisten erzogen, und nicht vom Staat zu gesünderer Lebensweise. Dementsprechend halte ich generell Werbe Verbote für extrem sinnvoll auch wenn es nicht direkt um die gesundheit der Menschen geht.

Planned economies are actually very efficient, look inside of Walmart and Amazon, and what you'll see is a ton of planning, this planning isn't based on 'a handful of planners', but instead based on a fuckton of data, usually collected and analysed via SAP business planning software. These companies are able to respond to trends and price goods in a way that their profits remain high, and both of these companies at least have some of their supply chains under full control for themselves.

I'm pretty sure we can create this kind of planning and enact control over it for different goals apart from profit, and there are countries where this is already being tried like here