You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
-55 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
31 points

Distracted driving is a huge problem, but this is just dumb.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I mean I guess ‘know thyself’ but I have a feeling vanishingly few people use the same part of the brain for singing as they do for driving

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Singing while driving keeps my brain alert for much longer. It keeps me engaged with the road. Not everyone’s brain works like yours.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

As a regular cyclist who used to depend on a bicycle for all transportation, and who has been intentionally run off the road more than once, hit by a semi trailer, hit by two mirrors, and who carries a rock in the left pocket specifically to take out and hold for people to see me holding in the same way people hold bricks while crossing streets or puddles…

What the fuck no, that’s insane.

What we NEED is integrated infrastructure that supports bicycles, and physical dividers separating bike lanes from car lanes.

What drivers NEED is a company that actually cares about them instead of the bottom line. Amazon is the exact opposite of that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I’m in a full size truck (US) with 14’ trailer. It’s more than twice the size and weight of a typical vehicle. They don’t see me, either.

But, then you go off the deep end advocating prison without due process and a solution no corporation would ever choose.

Have an upvote for intent. Expect a mass of downvotes for means.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Anti-Corporate Movement

!anticorporate@lemmy.giftedmc.com

Create post

This community is the first one on lemmy of its kind. It sits between the idea of anarchism/anti-capitalism and left leaning economic policy.

Our goal is to make people aware of the dangers of corporate control, its influence on governments and people as well as the small but steady abrasion of empathy around the world indirectly caused by it.

Current topics this includes but is not limited to:

  • Meta’s entry into the fediverse
  • Game companies putting gambling mechanics in childrens games
  • Embracer groups buyout and closing of smaller game studios
  • IP trolls destroying small companies and keeping progress back for profit

Feel free to debate this but beware, corporate rhetoric is not welcome here. If you have arguments, bring them on. If its rhetoric trying to defend the evil actions of corporations, we will know and you will go.

Our declared goal so far is to have all companies and individuals worldwide capped at 999 mil USD in all assets, including ownership of other companies, sister companies and marital assets. The reason for this is that companies (and individuals) are not supposed to resemble small(?) countries with a single leader(-board) and shareholder primacy. Thats why we feel like they must be kept in check indefinitely.

But companies will just wander off The argument that large companies will just wander off is valid, which we embrace. We dont need microsoft, apple, google, amazon and other trillion dollar companies. There are small competitors being kept small and driven into brankruptcy by anti competitive behavior of these giants or simply bought up and closed. If starbucks left tomorrow, we would not have an issue with this.

But then we have x little microsofts that all belong to the same person(s) If in fact nobody was allowed to accumulate more than 999 mil in assets, they would not be able to own all these. And like defending agains burglary, it is not about complete defence but time and effort. You only have to keep the thief occupied long enough for them to be caught, give up or make a mistake.

But these giants have tons of IP which would then limit our growth Thats another topic we must touch on. We will (only this one time) take a page out of russias playbook and demand that IP of non complying companies (assets over 999 mil USD) will be declared invalid, which opens them up to be copied.

But then they will “live” in one country that doesnt accept this Correct, and they should be taken into custody the moment they enter the airspace of a country that supports this act.

Community stats

  • 462

    Monthly active users

  • 97

    Posts

  • 142

    Comments

Community moderators