EnderMB@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agoAmazon's Silent Sackingjustingarrison.comexternal-linkmessage-square46fedilinkarrow-up1293arrow-down17cross-posted to: [email protected][email protected]
arrow-up1286arrow-down1external-linkAmazon's Silent Sackingjustingarrison.comEnderMB@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square46fedilinkcross-posted to: [email protected][email protected]
minus-squarevexikronlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4arrow-down22·1 year agoCool, at least they recognize they are building their own personal wealth off of the suffering and exploitation of less well off people all around the world, sound like wonderful, moral people to me.
minus-squarekofe@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6arrow-down1·1 year agoHey, whatcha typing this comment on?
minus-squarevexikronlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4arrow-down7·1 year agoLemme guess, anyone who uses any kind of technological device to post on lemmy is using something likely built in a sweatshop? So thus because no one is without sin, its not possible to be a morally better person than anyone else?
minus-squarekofe@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7·1 year agoThe first yes, but the second is a straw man of my argument. I’m curious if you can steel man it
minus-squarevexikronlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down5·1 year agoWell you have to put the two together to make what I figured your argument was, so I apparently do not understand your argument.
Cool, at least they recognize they are building their own personal wealth off of the suffering and exploitation of less well off people all around the world, sound like wonderful, moral people to me.
Hey, whatcha typing this comment on?
Lemme guess, anyone who uses any kind of technological device to post on lemmy is using something likely built in a sweatshop?
So thus because no one is without sin, its not possible to be a morally better person than anyone else?
The first yes, but the second is a straw man of my argument. I’m curious if you can steel man it
Well you have to put the two together to make what I figured your argument was, so I apparently do not understand your argument.