this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2024
1017 points (96.1% liked)

memes

10698 readers
2799 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 102 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I thought this image had already been vehemently claimed as not the guy, in order to stop putting this guy at risk.

Internet must stop chasing updoots as a priority over chasing the right information.

[–] TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world 44 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Risk of what? Hugs and cheers?

[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 30 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Being targeted by the FBI as a way to show action being taken.

Or weird nerds doing the Smithers thing.

[–] supercriticalcheese@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago

I Think they might have seen this picture already!

I am not an expert obviously so I will admit I might be wrong here, but overall I feel the likelihood is pretty low.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 4 points 2 weeks ago

Reprisals and doxxing.

[–] realitista@lemm.ee 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If it's not him, I'm happy to share this image far and wide. If it is him, I'd feel a bit dirty about doing the police a favor and get everyone looking for the guy.

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 26 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If its not him, you are terrifying and doxxing an innocent person with a lovely smile.

[–] realitista@lemm.ee 8 points 2 weeks ago

That's true, I'd prefer not to share this image at all, I don't think it's helpful.

[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 84 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I swear that if they catch him he should run for president from prison. I don't know how we keep them from pulling an Epstein on him but other than that it could actually work.

[–] shittydwarf@lemmy.dbzer0.com 117 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 22 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

One can hope but he isn't going to be let out on bail pending trial.

[–] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 30 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

You think his fellow detainees are going to let something happen to the man? The guys gonna get 360° 24/7 protection from every cliques at the same time.

[–] Texas_Hangover@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

As nice a thought as that is, you have never been to prison, have you? Convicts aren't going to give two shits about this guy.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ToxicWaste@lemm.ee 7 points 2 weeks ago

that's a nice thought. however, life is not a hollywood movie, so i wouldn't count on it.

[–] GuyDudeman@lemmy.world 74 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

It’s not him. Different jacket.

[–] dexa_scantron@lemmy.world 62 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)
[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)
[–] WhatYouNeed@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

I'm Brian and so is my wife!

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

They crucified all of them in the scene after this, which may or may not be relevant.

[–] Supernova1051@sh.itjust.works 26 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

its more about what he represents

[–] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 26 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

It's not what he represents. It's not the same person. You want what the other guy represents. Unless you're talking about the hoodie and backpack combo, in which case I have no idea what that represents.

[–] Tylerdurdon@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago

That represents hoodie/backpack culture which is historically.... Bah who am I kidding.

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 59 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

These two covers need to be mixed.

[–] elrik@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Well that didn't age well, did it.

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

Their timing was perfect. It was just around the time when "you" started losing all the power all over the internet.

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago

in 2007, they had an article in the magazine titled : The year of Them

https://content.time.com/time/specials/2007/personoftheyear/article/0,28804,1690753_1695417_1695397,00.html


Hey there, you! It's been, what, a year? I don't think I've seen You since we named You Person of the Year 2006. What did we praise You for again? Oh, right: "for seizing the reins of the global media, for founding and framing the new digital democracy, for working for nothing and beating the pros at their own game." Remember? You wrote about it on Your blog! We cornered the world market in reflective film for all those mirror covers! Good times, those. Hey, You've lost weight, haven't You?

So I see You've been flipping through this issue. Ahem. This is a little awkward. Well, as You can see, we ... we went in another direction this year. Please don't take it personally. We still love You. But let's face it: You had kind of an off year. It's not like You ran for President or anything. O.K., a few of You did, but to be fair, Rudy was already Person of the Year once.

Don't get me wrong: all the things that made You You in 2006 are still there. All year long, You were YouTubing, Facebooking, Twittering, chronicling Your life and community, scrutinizing the candidates and the media, videotaping Yourself getting upset on behalf of Britney Spears.

But who made the big noise in the Web 2.0 world this year? It was Them. The professionals, the old-media people, the moneymen — all of Them, conscious that there was profit in Your little labor-of-love socialist paradise. Story of Your life, right? You make the discoveries, They make the Benjamins.

So if 2006 was the year of You, 2007 was the year of Them. Big media companies (like this one) stuffed their sites with blogs, podcasts and video.

Celebrities became Web entrepreneurs. Hillary Clinton made a Sopranos-parody viral video. In 2006 the Web was a proving ground where new musicians could take their art directly to the public. And maybe it still is, but what band struck it big selling its new album online this year? A little undiscovered combo called Radiohead. Meanwhile, Will Ferrell launched funnyordie.com, where he posted comedy videos starring himself and celebrities like Bill Murray. Because, You know, Ferrell's comic vision is just too avant-garde for mainstream Hollywood.

The list goes on. Last year You gave us lonelygirl15, the cult-hit, independent online video series. In 2007, NBC bought an original online series and made it the first of its kind to air on broadcast television — but the show, quarterlife, was created by a couple of Them: Marshall Herskovitz and Ed Zwick, producers of classic TV shows thirtysomething and My So-Called Life. It debuts on NBC in February. I hope You're getting a piece of that action.

Because that's what it was about in '07: getting a piece. Last year You shared the POY package with the founders of YouTube. This year Viacom sued YouTube for hosting its content — posted by You, fans of Viacom shows like The Daily Show, who wanted to celebrate and engage with your favorite programs. When the TV and movie screenwriters walked off the job, they grabbed pens and cameras and used the Web to end-around the old-content distributors and take their case directly to the public. Very You-school. But this was still about one set of Them (pro writers) fighting an even richer set of Them (media moguls) over the money to be made by moving in on Your territory, online video.

Maybe what really happened in 2007 was not that They took over from You but that the boundaries between You and Them blurred. In some cases, You became one of Them, by cashing in on old-media celebrity. In 2007 MySpace pinup and recording star Tila Tequila, profiled in last year's POY issue, made A Shot at Love with Tila Tequila, a bisexual dating show that was MTV's most popular new show of the year. Perez Hilton went from online gossip renegade to VH1 host. Chris Crocker, of the notorious leave-Britney-alone video, signed a deal for a reality show.

And then there's 2008. The election is shaping up to be a delicate act of power sharing between You and Them. On the one hand, They've tried to keep control: CNN political comic relief: Obama Girl, the global-warming snowman video. On the other hand, You raised $4 million in one day for Ron Paul and freelanced that brilliant "1984" parody ad against Hillary on behalf of Barack Obama. You seem determined to go into 2008 not as a follower but as a player. (Although: Hillary invited You to help pick her campaign theme song on her website, and You went with Celine Dion? Dude.)

Of course, all this assumes You define success in Their terms: signing contracts, getting paid, making the cover of this magazine. Fact is, You're probably just as glad to take off that POY 2006 tiara and go back to dreaming up the future and getting recognized for it, much later, by the rest of us. It's still Your world, after all. They just pretend to run it.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah and it was Vladimir Putin the year after that. So we had the Internet for a year until Putin came along and fucked it all up.

Then they had Zuckerberg in 2010, Trump in 2016, Musk in 2021. Nice reference to get a feel for optimism in certain times while also being able to track some things going to shit.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago

I miss the days when the internet really did belong to the people.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 50 points 2 weeks ago

The hero this world needs

[–] bennypr0fane@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Can we get some context over here, across the pond? 🇪🇺

[–] jadedwench@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Dude whacked a CEO responsible for the pain, suffering, and even deaths of millions of people, all for the sake of profit. Plenty of Americans go bankrupt, suffer, or die if they have a medical issue. Healthcare is expensive and insurance companies get to dictate what medical care you receive and will do anything to not have to pay out without having to spend hours on the phone fighting for basic human decency. There is absolutely no reason for anyone to feel bad about having one less monster in the world.

My hope is for the "status quo" to finally be disrupted enough to make a difference. Problem is Americans, and probably a good chunk of the human race, have the attention span of gerbils. Usually a week or two goes by and unless if the Media is continuing to ram it down our throats we move on to the next dopamine hit on TikTok. I might be bitter. I might be really bitter.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 15 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

You have socialist healthcare. You wouldn't get it

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 14 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

breathe in

breathe out

They know the difference between socialized and socialist, I'm sure

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

This dude shot and killed a health insurance CEO. After about a day, insurers stopped denying coverage arbitrarily to people. The longer-term effects have not yet been seen, but I expect more to follow.

Edit: bunch of people think it's wrong for me to say that we can't perfectly predict the future.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (7 children)

The second part isn't anywhere close to true. You're going to need a lot more dead CEOs for that to happen.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] metaStatic@kbin.earth 6 points 2 weeks ago
load more comments
view more: next ›