this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2025
233 points (99.2% liked)

science

19838 readers
1240 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Montreal_Metro@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 hours ago

Stupid people are a very real threat.

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 37 points 1 day ago (2 children)

yea I already think it is one of the biggest threats but it is just a tool not the source. you destroy this tool they will find another. the problem is billionaires getting intermingled with politics and state affairs. We need a separation of state and billionaire affairs.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago (3 children)

We need to outlaw having more than $100,000,000 in personal wealth. You hit that mark, and you get a "Congratulations! You won Capitalism" medal. Tell them it's made of unobtanium, but just make it out of a titanium steel alloy.

After that every single penny they make is poured into "The Sovereign Fund For Humanities Poor."

This would absolutely fund UBI, and climate change solutions.

[–] gian@lemmy.grys.it 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not to demoralize you, but it seems a pretty stupid solution. First because you need to implement it world wide to hope to have some effect and second simply because this way nobody will ever try to go over the limit so your

This would absolutely fund UBI, and climate change solutions.

will get exactly 0 funds. So the guy that have 100.000.000 $ in personal wealth is still rich and you don't have any other resource for your UBI or whatever thing you want to do with them.

It is what is happening here were we have a lower limit to pay taxes, if you earn less than that you don't pay taxes (or a very small amount) and people simply avoid to go over the limit. BTW, the limit was introduced exactly with a similar reasoning, even if for different reasons.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 3 points 22 hours ago

Alright, no limit, but every week we guillotine the top one.

[–] WanderingThoughts@europe.pub 3 points 1 day ago

They've fought for decades to keep these things from happening

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

ideally yes but that might take sometime (if one follows a more peaceful approach that is...). This is more like an emergency measure, completely sever ties of billionaires with any politics and state business. If it becomes a norm in some European countries like separation of state and the church, then others would follow hopefully.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

A non-peaceful solution would be preferable. The billionaires have clearly chosen to kill as many of us as they can get away with. Killing them back is just self defense at this point.

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I am also completely OK with redistribution of excess wealth or anything that applies going forward too as long as this mental disease is dealt with and people recognise it for what it is.

[–] FreakinSteve@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

It is absolutely a severe mental derangement

[–] FreakinSteve@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Musk alone has killed thousands, subjected thousands to cancer risk, given HIV to babies, fueled violent murder sprees by dozens of radicalized Nazis. Bond villains arent as evil as him, and he gets adoring fans for the death he causes.

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Historically the guillotine has been good at separating the wealthy from politics.

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Ive been talking to a bunch of my ex friends that voted for trump. It seems the problem isnt neccassarily disinformation, the issue is that people want to be dumb. Most people CANNOT have a single conversation about politics. The lowest level of analysis hurts their brain. They just want someone to rally behind who gives ~~me~~ them an out group. I don't see a realistic solution to working with these people when they seem dead set against allowing the world to improve. The closest i can think is an education test to vote, but that comes with some serious issues.

Edit: lmfao

[–] dbtng@eviltoast.org 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

There's no answer. We are all going to hell. Along with them. Yay for us all.

[–] Hermit_Lailoken@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago

Don't forget disinformation, it is intended lies.

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

I doubt it will be more of a thread than I think it is. I don't think there is anything that is MORE of a thread.

[–] AmidFuror@fedia.io 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] dbtng@eviltoast.org 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Love the equal up/down vote count in this innocuous comment.
Do we need it decoded folks?
This person means to say that they feel misinformation is a huge threat to democracy and this is no surprise at all.
But they said that in 3 words.

[–] AmidFuror@fedia.io 2 points 22 hours ago

Some people get it. Some people don't.