this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
176 points (83.1% liked)

Games

32480 readers
1268 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] imPastaSyndrome@lemm.ee 51 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Geez what a bunch of assholes

[–] Carighan@lemmy.world 49 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Well yeah, LTT has long gone fully corporate. This was a problem years ago already, it was just always weird seeing so many flock to their channel when it was clearly a rote production like a 15 years ongoing weekly crime drama, not an actual tech channel.

Their production value is often stellar, don't get me wrong. But that's it. That's all they have. It's all about optimizing the production to maximize ad revenue.

[–] ydieb@lemm.ee 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Imo, any large company, even if started hardcore by linus and luke (and co), will always in the end be mostly created by all the employees.

The ownership of any large company should imo always be gradually moved over to the people who work there.

Worker coops are not a silver bullet and will always be corruptible in any way any other democracy can, but at least it has the possibility to be proper, in contrast to strict founder / investor ownership where you are at their mercy.

[–] Voyajer@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

LMG becoming an ESOP would be an interesting development if implemented properly.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)