Not until it has gone bust. 🔥

It’s almost impressive to lose 61% of your stock value while your founder is literally president. Apparently even running the country isn’t enough to make a social network profitable when its entire business model is one man shouting into a room full of people who already agree with him.

Imagine spending nearly half a billion dollars trying to buy an election, only to discover voters still get a say. He moved to Texas to escape California politics and ended up facing the same thing he was running from: accountability. That’s a remarkably expensive geography lesson.

For an industry obsessed with risk models, betting everything on Trump’s popularity was quite a choice. Especially while telling ordinary people to accept higher power bills and endless data centers. Turns out the electorate wasn’t as easy to disrupt as the CEOs hoped.

Meta spent years demonstrating what happens when you trust it with personal data. Now it wants your email, password vault and bank login too. Calling that an AI assistant doesn’t make it less absurd.

Sorry, this one is missing: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/oct/27/defund-elon-musk

Given that this has only happened twice so far, and exclusively with The Guardian, it would seem to be at least an indication of this.

If that is the problem, AutoMod would have to delete an estimated 50% of all links in Technology.

Or is it a simple trigger that reacts to »comment« or »opinion« in URI, title, or text?

I’ll shorten the URIs soon so that this can be ruled out as a variable.

I always share without using variables. The links are also here in this thread.

That makes it even more baffling. Both times it was explicitly on tech:

Today: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/nov/03/datacentres-are-deeply-unpopular-so-the-geniuses-at-openai-are-rebranding-them

3 days ago: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/oct/27/defund-elon-musk

~~https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/oct/28/ai-climate-crisis-humanity~~

It was in Technology, both times. And both times it was a Guardian commentary on tech topics.

So the plan is to call data centers »compute campuses« and hope everyone forgets about the electricity bills. I suppose »campus« sounds nicer than »industrial facility that wants your water and power.« Shame the utility company doesn’t accept branding exercises as payment.

Google certified the boxes, the manufacturer installed a backdoor, and 1.3 million customers got an involuntary side hustle as residential proxies. Now the botnet is disconnected, but the malware remains and Play Protect is still disabled. Apparently »certified« just means the box passed inspection before it started spying.

Anthropic says Smart Reports shouldn’t be used to evaluate employees, then lets management attach names to their Claude sessions. Apparently workplace surveillance becomes ethical if you put a disclaimer on it. The real innovation here is outsourcing micromanagement to the machine.

Funny how AI has supposedly surpassed the greatest scientists, yet the greatest scientific discovery here is always announced by the guy selling subscriptions. If it really is that smart, perhaps it could explain to Sam the difference between a peer reviewed breakthrough and a product launch.

The very fact that you believe that shows just how much you still have to learn. It’s no coincidence that even top universities have stopped their witch hunts. Or perhaps you should just work on the way you express yourself?

It’s a shame my comments are too much for you. Perhaps you’ll learn something over time?

It would be even better if there were fewer insolent block wardens and more active participants.

This is the kind of funding the Fediverse actually needs: Better tools are great, but without people making things worth watching or listening to, we’re just building increasingly elegant infrastructure for arguing about infrastructure. Pairing creators with developers is a genuinely smart move.

So Alberta can look at a solar farm that generates clean power, supports pollinators, and keeps land productive, then decide the real threat is that someone might have to see it? This isn’t environmental protection. It’s bureaucratic sabotage dressed up as concern for the countryside.

If the allegations are true, Brave has found a remarkably efficient business model: block the publisher’s ads, bypass its paywall, scrape its articles, then sell the results to AI companies. All while marketing itself as the browser that protects people from shady internet practices.