lmmarsano
@lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
- Comment on Why are people using the "þ" character? 4 hours ago:
You missed a chance to use character
Æin your name. Therefore, I’m disappointed. 😞 - Comment on Know the difference 11 hours ago:
If ypu ban nazi speech as the one major caveat to free speech, then they will never be able to exist in large enough numbers that you HAVE to fight them.
That’s deluded speculation & the old antifascists knew that.
I remember other instances of unexpected support, too. There were times when, during speeches I gave about the Skokie case, Holocaust survivors courageously stood up to say that I was right to have represented the Nazis. Several years later, another survivor sent me a letter saying the same thing. These survivors said that they did not want the Nazis driven underground by speech-repressive laws or court injunctions. They explained that they wanted to be able to see their enemies in plain sight so they would know who they were.
Better to see them right where they are.
Such legal compromises are trash. Look how they work for Germany: live police suppressing pro-Palestinian protests as anti-semitic, raids & arrests over calling a politician pimmel, internet patrols penalizing vitriol, insults, & satirical images of politicians showing fake quotes.
Its the logical conclusion of the paradox of tolerance.
It’s a paradox without a single logical conclusion, and you likely misunderstood it.
Image :::spoiler text alternative
The True Paradox of Tolerance
By philosopher Karl Popper[^popper-source]
You think you know the Popper Paradox thanks to this? (👉 comic from pictoline.com)
Karl Popper: I never said that!
Popper argued that society via its institutions should have a right to prohibit those who are intolerant.
Karl Popper: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance.
For Popper, on what grounds may society suppress the intolerant? When they “are not prepared to meet on the level of rational argument” “they forbid their followers to listen to rational argument … & teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fist or pistols”. The argument of the intolerably intolerant is force & violence.
We misconstrue this paradox at our peril … to the extent that one group could declare another group ‘intolerant’ just to prohibit their ideas, speech & other freedoms.
Grave sign: “The Intolerant” RIP
Underneath it lies a pile of symbols for Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Black power. A leg labeled tolerance kicks the Gay Pride symbol into the pile.Muchas gracias a @lokijustice y asivaespana.com :::
[^popper-source]: Source: The Open Society and It’s Enemies, Karl R. Popper
- Comment on Know the difference 12 hours ago:
Free speech: yes, even for Nazis advocating for evil shit. Throwing people in jail over words is stupid unless they meet the harm principle. The older US antifascists didn’t fight to weaken fundamental civil rights. In the Skokie Affair, some Jewish lawyers knew that offensive Nazi speech is not a credible danger, but that chipping away at fundamental rights is a danger that gives fascists what they want: those lawyers were antifascists.
That letter addressed the Village of Skokie’s ordinances that sought to prevent the Nazis’ demonstration. It explained that “…the Nazis are not the real issue. The Skokie laws are the real issue.” It pointed out that the ordinances were so broad that, “Skokie had already used the same law[s] to deny the Jewish War Veterans a permit to parade.”
It’s not hard to oppose fascists & advocate for free speech.
- Comment on Elon Musk says he needs $1 trillion to control Tesla's robot army. Yes, really. 1 day ago:
I learned some advisors at firms who usually follow Glass Lewis recommendations are taking unusual steps to request investor input specifically on Tesla. Apparently enough passive investors are dissatisfied enough to want a direct say on Tesla.
It was interesting to learn about shareholder voting.
- Apparently, shareholders get a non-binding vote on executive pay due to say-on-pay legislation.
- The SEC carries juicy documents on shareholder voting proposals & letters to shareholders by other shareholders urging them how to vote.
Voting proposals from shareholders & their letters reveal great dissatisfaction with Tesla.
Major shareholders (investment groups, pension managers, state treasurers & comptrollers) wrote a scathing letter urging other stockholders to vote against directors up for re-election & to vote against proposals the company favors.
We write urging you to oppose the reelection of Directors Ira Ehrenpreis, Joe Gebbia, and Kathleen Wilson-Thompson (Proposal 1), the Amended and Restated 2019 Equity Incentive Plan (Proposal 3), and the 2025 CEO Performance Award (Proposal 4) at Tesla’s Annual Meeting on November 6, 2025.
Since the last annual meeting, we have unfortunately witnessed both the erratic performance of Tesla, Inc. (the “Company” or “Tesla”) and the Board’s failure to provide meaningful real-time oversight of management. The Board’s relentless pursuit of retaining its CEO seems to have harmed the Company’s reputation, led to extraordinarily high levels of executive compensation, and delayed progress on meeting key goals like full self-driving (FSD). The Board, a majority of which is made up of directors with close ties to the CEO, now asks for Tesla shareholders to approve a series of proposals that grant it broad discretion to execute an estimated $1 trillion pay package, as well as grant awards through a new reserve created specifically for Elon Musk. These pay packages provide so much discretion to Tesla’s Board that shareholders cannot be confident of impartial treatment. In summary, there is an urgent need to address these issues to preserve long-term shareholder value for all Tesla shareholders, which we believe justifies voting against all directors up for election this year, as well as the Amended and Restated 2019 Equity Incentive Plan (the “A&R 2019 Equity Plan”) and the 2025 CEO Performance Award (the “2025 Performance Award”). We believe that approval of these items is not in the economic or financial interest of Tesla shareholders for the reasons set out below.
Their clarifications are interesting: they highlight issues with the conduct of the board & CEO
- declining company performance (sudden decline in sales) & waning competitiveness with rivals like BYD & other manufacturers
- board’s lack of independence from CEO jeopardizes shareholder value
- the CEO lacks focus on the stable, sustainable returns of the company & its shareholders
- has leadership roles in several companies
- leadership of US DOGE negatively impacted company’s performance & brand
- board still awards CEO extraordinary pay packages with shares at discount
- the CEO fails to focus the company’s own resources on the company (reallocating to other companies), and the board "seems uninterested in getting concrete commitments from Mr. Musk, and unwilling to develop a CEO succession plan of their own"
- the board of directors is overpaid by earning 8 figure salaries when the "Average director compensation in the S&P 500 in 2024 was $327,096.13"
- the CEO lacks focus on the stable, sustainable returns of the company & its shareholders
- the board ignores mandates from previous shareholder votes, and acts to weaken accountability (supermajority voting rules, not all board seats up for reelection each year) & erode shareholders rights (adopted a Texas law to increase requirements for shareholders to sue the board for breach of fiduciary duty prohibitively far above federal standards)
- their proposal for a $1 trillion award in shares to the CEO lacks stringent conditions
- undemanding product goals
- vague terms
- conditions open to board discretion
Given the Board’s historical willingness to allow Tesla to commit substantial resources to projects that are personally beneficial to Mr. Musk but that fail to produce benefits for Tesla shareholders – most notably the Solar City acquisition – we lack the confidence that this Board will only recognize the accomplishment of these goals by the CEO in the fullest and most demanding way.
- the award increases power of an unaccountable CEO at substantial expense to shareholders of earning & voting power.
outside Tesla shareholders could experience a dramatic long-term dilution in both their voting power and the value of their equity relative to opportunity cost
If Tesla were to experience similar ups and downs over the next decade, outside shareholder value would increase at 10.8% per year, inferior to the price return for the S&P 500 from August 2015 to August 2025.
If Proposals 3 and 4 are approved, this year may be one of the last times that public shareholders have a meaningful voice in the Company and its leadership given the level of dilution that is likely to take place. Beyond that, the Company’s own disclosures make clear that the motivation to deliver these pay packages is driven by increasing Mr. Musk’s voting power, with no formal commitment to focus his time, attention, and Tesla’s own resources on Tesla. Further, we lack confidence that this non-independent Board can oversee the CEO toward a future that maintains stable and sustainable returns for Tesla shareholders.
This SEC 14A filing lists all the proposals up for shareholder vote. A good number of shareholder proposals the board opposes concern board accountability to shareholders
- assert shareholder rights: either repealing restrictions or safeguarding them from restrictions enabled by Texas that would disqualify the vast majority of shareholders from submitting proposals or suing the board for breach of fiduciary duties
- elect each director annually
- require only simple majority approvals.
The others concern better public reporting & oversight on senior executive pay & transparent audits on child labor dependence throughout the supply chain.
To promote an independent board of directors accountable to shareholders & to restore shareholder rights, I suspect Glass Lewis and ISS will vote against all board members & company proposals and vote for all shareholder proposals. Seems about right to follow their recommendations & oppose Musk on this.
- Comment on Hundreds of public figures, including Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak and Virgin’s Richard Branson urge AI ‘superintelligence’ ban 1 day ago:
What a monster.
- Comment on another TUI 2 days ago:
a narrative that would slowly “unmask” me as one who works for the thought police
would have been rich
- Comment on another TUI 2 days ago:
You don’t think you’re taking a possibly mentally unwell person too seriously?
- Comment on another TUI 2 days ago:
We stopped doing that because they’re inhumane. (There is an academic debate on if they’re inherently such or simply attract/foster abuse, but were not having that debate today.)
Notwithstanding OP’s argument (which is just bizarre to me), that’s not a great argument, and it’s not merely academic: the welfare of the mentally ill hang on it today. Here was a more nuanced discussion and the article it referred to.
Releasing the mentally ill from asylums onto the streets lacking adequately funded community services to support them isn’t benevolent, either. Without adequate support, they’re highly vulnerable to violent victimization resulting in more prison institutionalization. Proper support matters regardless of setting whether in an adequately funded & regulated asylum or community services. The real problem is insufficient funding & oversight of humane treatment.
Giving them humane treatment (even in the guise of an asylum) is better than the lack of that they’re getting in the streets.
It would be fairer to say asylums ended because they were inhumane, which they definitely were.
- Comment on another TUI 2 days ago:
Shouldn’t we welcome all states of mental diversity on lemmy?
- Comment on another TUI 2 days ago:
Consistency is not required on lemmy.
- Comment on Hundreds of Instagram accounts push graphic real-life violence to millions, CBS News finds 2 days ago:
Oh noes, my internet isn’t censored enough! Please censor harder, social media megacorp daddy, so you can keep monetizing my attention!
Pathetic.
- Comment on Carrot 2 days ago:
Because the peel tastes nasty?
- Comment on Carrot 2 days ago:
In the old days, god-sized carrots were the norm I was told.
- Comment on Is there any way the average American can insulate themselves from the AI bubble bursting? 2 days ago:
Follow the classic financial advice of setting aside enough emergency savings for a period of unemployment and diversifying the asset classes in your investment accounts (eg, retirement, health, education savings) to align with your risk tolerance & goals.
I keep 6 months of emergency savings in a high-yield savings account & let a robo-adviser passively invest my other savings on autopilot. While that means losses with market downturns, all the advice I’ve read & studies they refer to that run simulations over historic data (including shocks, downturns, bubbles) say that impassively holding that strategy has historically come out gaining & beating inflation.
- Comment on I always wondered why hotel rooms had bibles 4 days ago:
There are seven words in every Gideon’s Bible – y’know, the one they stuff in every hotel room – that can’t be found in any other bible. If you repeat those seven words to yourself while grasping the doorknob to your room, the door will open to any hotel room in the world. Of course, if you want to control where you’re going, you’ll need to know the Gideon’s Key – one more inserted word, unique to each copy, which acts as an index for each room.
- Comment on 4chan faces UK ban after refusing to pay ‘stupid’ fine 5 days ago:
Are you saying if you listen to hatespeech all day, then you feel compelled to commit violent acts? Or are you saying you need to lock others away for speech that merely offends you?
If the former, then maybe you need to be locked up. If the latter, then you need help working on your authoritarian tendencies.
- Comment on 4chan faces UK ban after refusing to pay ‘stupid’ fine 5 days ago:
They should start with you.
- Comment on 4chan faces UK ban after refusing to pay ‘stupid’ fine 5 days ago:
Germany make a strong stance against any “trolling” nazi joke/imagery/salute
And look how that’s working for them: clamping down on pro-Palestinian protests as antisemitism, raids & arrests over calling a politician pimmel.
America’s First Amendment seems to not understand that reason
The 1st Amendment “understands” just fine. You don’t understand and want a thought-police state.
- Comment on 4chan faces UK ban after refusing to pay ‘stupid’ fine 5 days ago:
hate speech
Nope: unless you’re arguing people are mindless automatons who must act on whatever message they’re exposed to, people can be expected to self-control.
- Comment on Not promoting hate speech but what happened to all the slights/slurs/vulgarity from like the 20s and 40s. There were so many. Now it seems well I can only think of three? 1 week ago:
Are you sure? It’s odd to feel the need to tell us what you aren’t doing & who you aren’t.
It’s like you think we’re all assholes who will assume & claim these things about you. Maybe you know lemmy too well.
- Comment on Does anyone else notice an up tick in hostility on Lemmy lately? 1 week ago:
No one wrote exclusive. I know autists & aspies find precautions around irrational neurotypical tendencies incredibly annoying like walking on eggshells.
- Comment on Does anyone else notice an up tick in hostility on Lemmy lately? 1 week ago:
I see an attempt to attribute problematic conduct to conditions at least as likely to resist it, doesn’t necessarily promote it.
- Comment on Does anyone else notice an up tick in hostility on Lemmy lately? 1 week ago:
It comes & goes in waves. Do you not like ridiculing their impotent outrage?
- Comment on Not promoting hate speech but what happened to all the slights/slurs/vulgarity from like the 20s and 40s. There were so many. Now it seems well I can only think of three? 1 week ago:
Not promoting hate speech
Why not?
- Comment on Does anyone else notice an up tick in hostility on Lemmy lately? 1 week ago:
ADD, ADHD, Asperger’s, or some other form of autism
I’d think the latter would lead to more fixation on logic & opposition to neurotypical nonsense like biases & overdramatic outrage.
- Comment on Does anyone else notice an up tick in hostility on Lemmy lately? 1 week ago:
Like this post & comments where the original context they leave out has an obvious, inoffensive interpretation, and they instead go wild fixating on a small part with disparaging interpretations not indicated by the context?
- Comment on Japanese Government Calls on Sora 2 Maker OpenAI to Refrain From Copyright Infringement, Says Characters From Manga and Anime Are 'Irreplaceable Treasures' That Japan Boasts to the World 1 week ago:
However, the “don’t generate and distribute infringing material” is a whole different story. IP holders are on pretty solid ground there.
Is any of it infringing? Explain the knock-off music & art in popular media when they don’t want to pay royalty fees for the authentic article. Explain knock-off brands. Cheap imitations to sidestep copyright restrictions have been around long before generative AI, yet businesses aren’t getting sued: they apparently understand legal standards enough to safely imitate. Why is shoddy imitation for distribution okay when human-generated yet not when AI-generated?
I don’t think your understanding of copyright infringement is solid.
Even supposing someone manages to generate work whose distribution infringes copyright, wouldn’t legality follow the same model as a human requesting a commercial (human-based) service to generate that work?
- Comment on 4chan fined $26K for refusing to assess risks under UK Online Safety Act 1 week ago:
The rest of the help explains headings, paragraphs, line breaks (if you want those to render). Otherwise, it’s better.
- Comment on 4chan fined $26K for refusing to assess risks under UK Online Safety Act 1 week ago:
Nope: the horizontal scroll boxes don’t contain code & no one should have to horizontally scroll long prose.
- Comment on 4chan fined $26K for refusing to assess risks under UK Online Safety Act 1 week ago:
long, horizontal scroll boxes of text that isn’t code
proper blockquotes elsewhereYou clearly know how to blockquote: use it correctly.
