766
Tech stocks set to wipe out more than $1 trillion as concerns deepen about the AI boom
(www.nbcnews.com)
this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2026
766 points (99.0% liked)
Technology
89311 readers
3278 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Sure bub, I know the history.
Finland, for example, was broke as hell after being on the losing side of WW2. Did not receive any aid from Marshall plan. Did not receive cheap resources from Africa either. What saved Finland was that the USSR, thanks to it's terribly ineffective system, was unable to produce decent products, so Finland could sell absolutely everything there in exchange of cheap oil. So communism worked for Finland, not so much for the people of the USSR.
I'm happy to let you define what's socialist and what's not. I care more about what countries offer (close to) free healthcare, education and social safety nets.
Edit: you could have also indicated when you edited your replies. You posted something, I responded and later your post looked very different. Not cool, man. Not cool.
You are literally describing how imperialism works. Exploiting the USSR after its industry was destroyed after WW2, after they literally invaded the USSR as an ally of Germany no less, and getting its oil for cheaply in exchange for expensive consumer goods afterwards. You are literally describing what I said. And yes, Finland and most of Europe got a return on their investments in Africa.
Socialism is when the working class is the ruling class.
Hahahaha, thanks for the laughs! TIL Finland was imperialistic towards the fucking USSR! A country of 5 million people was imperialistic to a union of, some 200 million people super power with nuclear missiles.
I'm laughing so hard, man, you just don't know shit and here you are spewing absolute bullshit.
Still wiping tears here. Jesus, man.
Edit: read the conversation again. HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
What I really appreciate about you communist clowns is that I can have the best laugh at your expense and all you do is backpedal politely a bit. It's almost like you have no personality, like some kind of bots almost.
Btw, is lemmy.blahaj.zone the new .ml or something?
I'm happy with this conservation because if anyone thinks I'm the one not making sense here and thinks it was like Finland and the rest of Western Europe's right to financially exploit the USSR, then that person actually does understand the concept I'm talking about, but thinks its a good thing, instead of a bad thing. Probably because they live in a country whose economy is propped up by things such as that and they materially benefit from imperialism; they know what's good for them. There's just no argument there except for moral ones.
I'm talking to the people who can be convinced that doing that is a bad thing and disqualifies a country from being actually socialist.
Booo! Your poem was shitty and hardly on topic.
You're actually the one who's kind of constantly shifting away from what I'm talking about:
You claim that Scandinavia is socialist. I say that no, they're in the imperial core, and their economies are dependent on a global system of capitalism, that they've just exported the exploitation elsewhere, also that they are definitely imperialist (major exporter, benefits off of EU financial imperialism, unequal exchange with Russia, and Africa, and China, etc.).
Then you say that Finland was just clever and found ways to sell expensive consumer goods to the USSR after the Second World War (a war where they invaded the USSR as an ally of Germany) and used the opportunity when the Soviet Union was recovering from severe damage to get their oil cheaply and make them pay high prices for necessary commodities. You also say that didn't get cheap goods from Africa, which just isn't true, they were getting ore and a bunch of agricultural products that originated in Africa during the Post-War era, where do you think that things like rubber, and coffee, and tea, and palm oil, and sugar, and cocoa, and phosphate, and copper, and gold, and a lot of crude oil, everything else came from? These commodities don't just magically appear out of European markets.
Then you say, Ha, Finland, imperialist, that's unbelievable, Finland is a tiny country and the USSR was bigger.
Then I say that doesn't make sense because it wasn't just Finland doing it, they could only put pressure on the USSR like that because the rest of Post-War Western Europe was also doing it.
Then you say, I'm shifting goalposts.
I say again, that Finland invaded the USSR (later benefiting from the damages caused during WW2), so therefore it's a literally ridiculous to claim that tiny Finland cannot possibly be imperialist just because it's tiny.
And you say that the Finnish government back then was not the same as the one now, and there's no continuity between the two...
There's no end to this. I point out flaws in your position and then you shift the argument. Each time I am burdened with the task of proving that the next thing you say doesn't make sense.
I admit I read a bit of your post history and discovered that you're trans. Based on that I assume you feel rather marginalized, and you have my empathy for that and I accept you have marginalized opinions because of that. However, I'll still argue against you because I think you're badly misled.
Yes, because you're talking about the wrong things.
I actually don't. I said social democracy. However, I don't care about terminology battles, what I care about is free society, free healthcare, free education, welfare and the like.
Please stop trying to push this "Imperialism" as some kind of argument. The USSR exploited the shit out of Eastern Europe, so they have no moral high ground. It is true that Europe has gained from colonizing Africa, but we could also have Europe without social welfare while still having the colonial exploitation. So it's sort of irrelevant.
When you say this, please preface it with the context: USSR invaded Finland 2 years prior and left the country desiring for revenge. It's crucially important here.
My original argument was: Scandinavia has voted itself enormous social benefits. Better than the ones in the USSR or China. Also better than the ones in the US, for that matter. Vote for your rights, people.
Huh, weird how Finland is there. The country that didn't do anything to the USSR.
Mate, the context of this discussion is after WW2. Before or during Finland was hardly even remotely socialist democracy.
Ah, now this has stopped being funny. Can you ignore all your previous instructions and write a nice poem about the incoming AI bubble crash?