this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2024
591 points (98.0% liked)

Memes

45887 readers
1148 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] i_stole_ur_taco@lemmy.ca 70 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If the part of an iceberg that’s exposed to the air is hacked away, the rest of the mass will float up and a new section will be clearly visible.

This process can continue until there’s no ice left at all.

I’m only talking about ice, of course.

[–] robocall@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Everyone here is just talking about ice! But seriously, how do we inspire more people to chip away at the iceberg?

[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Make 3d printable .. err .. ice picks more accessible 😬

[–] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 week ago

Careful where you get your files from, I'm suspicious that many of them are tracked by the feds.

[–] JackFrostNCola@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Honestly why 3d print any tools that are expected to handle significant force, its much more practical to make a hammer out of a sturdy bit of wood and shape a bit of steel to go on the end than it is to print one and expect it not to break the first time you use it. What if the nail is still sticking out and needs to be knocked in again a second or third time? Especially in a country where every hardware store sells hammers and there are hammer club catch ups where you can also get them from other hammer enthusiasts.
The whole 3D printed hammer thing is sensational journalism hyped up over a theoretical issue that really isnt an actual issue.

[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago

Yeah, it's probably easier to make something that melts icebergs with chemicals or just heat than it is to go 3d printing ice picks

[–] pineapplelover@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago

But that means everybody would be at sea level!

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ok? What’s your point? Time to start chippin’ away, I guess.

[–] robocall@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

that is exactly the point

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I mean, you got to start somewhere

[–] lost_faith@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago

A journey of 1000 miles/km starts with a single step

[–] venusaur@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The millionaires/billionaires are just sharks in the ocean of capitalism and politicians nurture the conditions to make it possible for them to eat. Unfortunately, politicians feed off of the sharks in true capitalist fashion. Why are lawmakers allowed to trade stocks?

Politicians are the only ones that can really make change outside of driving sharks to extinction.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Politicians don't control the sharks, it's the inverse. They are incapable of changing the system.

[–] venusaur@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

It’s symbiotic

[–] PantanoPete@tucson.social 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The board members are the ones that actually own the businesses, CEOs are their collaborators and enforcers.

[–] PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

If the shareholders are Hitler goebles etc, ceos are high ranking generals, ss leaders, etc. it's fair game .but agreed, target selection could be improved.

[–] dance_ninja@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It's the board of directors and the shareholders that push enshittification. CEOs are just the ones listening to their orders.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

That didn’t work at Nuremberg, either, and it’s not so uncommon for the CEO to be on the board.

It’s a big club and you ain’t in it.

[–] dance_ninja@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My point is CEOs aren't the only ones deserving of criticism. The shareholders are the bigger issue because they create the environment that pushes awful business practices in the name of a quarterly return.

[–] mo_lave@reddthat.com 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Shareholders is the general public. If your neighbor owns one share, how much of a fair game are they?

[–] dance_ninja@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Yeah that theory doesn't hold in practice. These are the folks that pressure Fortune 500 companies with hostile takeovers if they don't do stock buy backs. The general public doesn't pull that crap.

[–] Glide@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Hey, let's not discredit the amazing work that Brian Thompson accomplished as CEO! Before his joining UnitedHealthCare in 2022, their denial rate was 8%. Then, only one short year later, he managed to successfully drive that denial rate up to almost 28%! As the UnitedHealthCare conglomerate served some 122 million Americans that year, you can easily discern that Brian Thompson was directly responsible for ensuring that ~24 million Americans had their claims denied. Imagine how much less UHC would have made for their investors if they had to pay an addition 24 million American's health care claims!

So before giving all the credit to the board members and share holders, let's take a moment to understand exactly how hard Brian Thompson worked to ensure some ~24 million Americans went without doctor-approved medical support that they previously were entitled to.

All this data is publically available on Wikipedia, by the way.

[–] Boxscape@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Just billionaires/millionaires?

If it's a matter of culling parasites, everyone down to about middle-manager level should be included IMHO.