• 0 Posts
  • 8 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 26th, 2023

help-circle


  • They never had an Empire as the Soviet Union.

    But they did. That’s why Mao called them social imperialists.

    As for NATO, it’s to ensure western imperialism stays intact. The US is the main beneficiary, but western Europe participates because they also profit from brutal exploitation of the global south.

    That just brings into question how NATO is a threat to Russia then? The only way that would be true is that either a) Russia sees them as imperialist competition, or b) the threat is that Russia can’t attack its neighbors without retribution.


  • FreeFacts@sopuli.xyztoMemes@lemmy.mlOof some tough questions for them
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Why do you think Russia invaded Ukraine? Like, what is their primary goal. The impetus that drove them to approve the invasion.

    Because they want to become a global power once again. That is their dream. They want to be imperialists themselves, but unfortunately for them, they have failed to do so. In the past decades they have poked their noses into Africa and the Middle East, with some success. But simultaneously they have lost their grip on regions they previously considered to be under their imperialist umbrella. It started with Georgia, which they solved with violence. Next it was Ukraine, and then Syria. And then all the unrest in Belarus. They got spooked that their imperialist dream was failing, so they went in to change the regime in Ukraine. But that didn’t work out as they planned. And to top that, they also lost their foothold in Syria completely. And now, just recently, they are losing Azerbaijan too.

    Secondly, what do you think the functioning role of NATO is?

    Honestly, it is to protect US geopolitical interests in Europe. Making Europe depend on the US for its defense. But it is not that bad of a deal for Europe, as it keeps the peace (in “western” Europe).


  • Basically the company board has approved a policy where the company will issue new shares if one owner reaches a certain percentage of current shares. Those shares can be then purchased by the existing shareholders (excluding the one(s) that already owns more than the percentage) with a discount.

    So Nintendo could have such a policy in place that if one shareholder goes over 20%, new shares will be issued to other shareholders, lowering the value of each share, and effectively also the relative amount of shares (percentage) owned by that one shareholder. That basically leaves only one option, the buyer attempting the takeover would have to negotiate with the board directly. And in the case of Microsoft, the board would laugh at their face.

    Maybe they could achieve the takeover via shell shareholders remaining under the percentage each, and get them to vote in a new board that would revoke the policy, but that’s way more difficult to pull off.



  • Around where I live people, media and politicians have been talking about “diginative” generation for years. The generation that will have no problem adapting to ever digitizing worklife. But lately the reality has creeped in even in media, these young adults are having difficult time adapting to the software and hardware used by the corporate world. The devices and apps they grew up using are so dumbed down and strictly guided that they are lost with the amount of options and processes supported by the professional applications.

    The ease-of-use of consumer apps is counterproductive on that regard. Being able to use them is as valuable to businesses as being able to put a square block through the square hole and triangle block through the triangle hole. It’s essentially worthless as nearly every single human can do it, it’s designed to be just so easy and streamlined.

    But maybe business world is wrong and should adapt instead? Maybe they should also concentrate on making their processes as streamlined? Maybe generative AI could help with that? Who knows. In my opinion the problem isn’t in the “physical” processes, those are often in the end just mundane tasks, but in the mental processes that the dumbed down apps kids grow up using do not feed. They often give you one way to go through a use case and that’s it. No outside of the box thinking, no evaluation of options and requirements.


  • Considering that Bethesda doesn’t seem to have enough people to work full time with two major releases simultaneously, giving Fallout to other studios wouldn’t be that far fetched. Otherwise Microsoft would have to wait for Elder Scrolls 6 release to have a full team working on a Fallout game, and that release window is rumoured to be 5-6 years from now. So 8+ more years without a real main series game in one of their big franchises seems like bad business…

    Interesting thing is that Microsoft has the key building blocks from Interplay era under their banner already. Through Obsidian they have Tim Cain, Chris Jones and Feargus Urquhart, who lead the first two Fallout games. inExile has Brian Fargo, the original idea man of the series. And Bethesda has the IP. They could really get the original team together to cook up a new game.