[-] timewarp@lemmy.world 58 points 1 day ago

100%. It wasn't just the genocide though. They alienated the progressives. Kamala was scared to actually talk outside of mostly scripted messaging and interviews. They didn't provide and explain strong progressive policies. To me, Kamala was pretty indistinguishable from Joe Biden and other corporate Democrats. Her picking Tim Walz was a great move and she was way up in the polls. Had she leaned into him more, broke from Joe Biden (even thrown him under the bus a bit), and turned to other progressives for advice rather than the DNC corporate consultants, she would have won.

[-] timewarp@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago

Wow, finally a news outlet that calls it out like it is. Wait for CNN's take that blames black people, progressives, and Muslims.

[-] timewarp@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

The only one being naive here is you. I don't think it will stop cause Trump won. It will likely get worse. Democrats could have stopped it though, but their "we're terrible, but the other guy is worse" messaging isn't as effective as "no more genocide."

[-] timewarp@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

Agreed 100%. It's the refusal to self-reflect and attacks on anyone who dare to question that turns people away. Not only is Bill Clinton a terrible campaign messenger, but he was chastising Arab-americans in Michigan for being against genocide. Just like Obama was blaming black men.

[-] timewarp@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago

Almost like Kamala could have changed her stance on the situation and got those people out to vote for her. But sure, let's blame people not willing to hold their nose and vote for more genocide.

[-] timewarp@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago

I don't think the white guy thing is as important as at least he would have been someone that wasn't directly tied to the White House that has been lying about genocide for the last year, or apartheid for the last 4 years.

[-] timewarp@lemmy.world 43 points 1 day ago

I'm sorry, forgive me if I don't take advice from the party that just lost. After Kamala picked Walz she was up by more than 5 points in many states that she was trailing in at the end of her campaign. People skip voting when you pick unpopular policies like Praise the Cheney's, No Different than Zionist Joe, Billionaire Mark Cuban Is the Greatest, and Hollywood Loves Me.

[-] timewarp@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

It absolutely matters. If Democrats don't learn anything from this, which I doubt that they will, it will be the same thing in 4 more years.

[-] timewarp@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

Democrats will take no responsibility for why they lost.

[-] timewarp@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago

In other words, the people that refused to cater to the cultic cognitive dissonance are to blame and Democrats will learn nothing.

[-] timewarp@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

No they wouldn't have. You saw the polls when Kamala picked Tim Walz. The people wanted popular progressive policies. The donor-class establishment messaging that followed is precisely why they lost.

[-] timewarp@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago

I agree. Fuck the establishment Democrats. Fuck the astroturf bots and genocide supporters. We need a need left party that isn't full of corporate cucks.

12
152
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by timewarp@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
191

This is an unpopular opinion, and I get why – people crave a scapegoat. CrowdStrike undeniably pushed a faulty update demanding a low-level fix (booting into recovery). However, this incident lays bare the fragility of corporate IT, particularly for companies entrusted with vast amounts of sensitive personal information.

Robust disaster recovery plans, including automated processes to remotely reboot and remediate thousands of machines, aren't revolutionary. They're basic hygiene, especially when considering the potential consequences of a breach. Yet, this incident highlights a systemic failure across many organizations. While CrowdStrike erred, the real culprit is a culture of shortcuts and misplaced priorities within corporate IT.

Too often, companies throw millions at vendor contracts, lured by flashy promises and neglecting the due diligence necessary to ensure those solutions truly fit their needs. This is exacerbated by a corporate culture where CEOs, vice presidents, and managers are often more easily swayed by vendor kickbacks, gifts, and lavish trips than by investing in innovative ideas with measurable outcomes.

This misguided approach not only results in bloated IT budgets but also leaves companies vulnerable to precisely the kind of disruptions caused by the CrowdStrike incident. When decision-makers prioritize personal gain over the long-term health and security of their IT infrastructure, it's ultimately the customers and their data that suffer.

-14

About a month ago I got a notification that my subscription had been refunded and then another email that my account was terminated:

You are receiving this email because we have identified suspicious activity on your account. In order to protect our platform, we have refunded and canceled your subscription. You will no longer have access to ChatGPT Plus service.

This was after using the service for two months. I emailed and sent them a message almost immediately since I could prove my identity, but they haven't responded back in almost a month. Their customer support appears to be non-existent.

I keep wanting to sign back up, but I'm still pissed about it. I'm guessing it is because I used a virtual card when I signed up and they don't stay active for very long so I have to create a new one for each month of service. Usually I just get a failed payment notification and update my payment info with a new one which pulls from my bank account.

It sucks not being able to use the service though because it was so helpful at helping with programming tasks and Bard isn't nearly as good. Has anyone had any luck getting through to support?

view more: next ›

timewarp

joined 1 year ago