Microblog Memes

5863 readers

3799 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
Be nice.
No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1273

"Labour Market" (lemmy.ml)

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

230 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The smoker is de facto responsible.

Then why do companies need to spend enormous sums on advertising and marketing?

Those are not responsibility in the de facto sense.

You seem to suggest there is no de facto responsibility for lying.

someone sells a car to a person that commits a crime using it; the car seller is not involved in the planning or execution of the crime

A mob boss throws one of his cronies the keys to his car. "If my rival ends up dead tomorrow, the car is yours. By the way, he's going to be at the corner of 5th and Main tomorrow."

But he's not de facto responsible, because he contracted a third party to handle the dirty work.

The tragedy of the commons is not a purposeful result

The tragedy of the commons is a foreseeable consequence of individual actions.

You can see this play out in a game of Jenga. Everyone is pulling blocks out of the base of the tower. Asserting that the last person to pull a block is "de facto responsible" neglects culpability of each of the other participants.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

What do you mean?

There is de facto responsibility (DFR) associated with any intentional action.

The mob boss situation is different from the car situation I was presenting The mob boss and his crony are both jointly DFR. The mob boss participated in the planning of the crime. Furthermore, the situation is a conspiracy.

Each party is DFR for their contribution to the tragedy of the commons at a bare minimum. DFR doesn't subsume other notions of culpability

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

There is de facto responsibility (DFR) associated with any intentional action.

An act performed under misinformation isn't intentional.

The mob boss situation is different

Only because the mob boss's intent is made explicit in the example. The same boss who owns a car dealership, and all his gang members just happen to get cheap cars there that they use to commit crimes, we're back to your example.

Each party is DFR for their contribution to the tragedy of the commons

That doesn't mean anything. There's no logical consequence that flows from it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

It depends on how the misinformation relates to the act. There can be cases where such an act is intentional

That sounds like a conspiracy. There are cases where the DFR party isn't imputed legal responsibility because there isn't enough evidence to determine who is DFR. It means we don't know not that there isn't a fact of the matter.

Natural resources are not fruits of labor. They should be socially owned. Each worker coop DFR for greenhouse gases would be liable to society