So far my list includes Comcast, EA, and Nestle. Tell me yours, and I’ll help out.

    • pensa@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      56
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Why SpaceX? I hate Musk and do not support any of his other… anythings. However, rocket go zoom then land without boom is fun to watch. I am genuinely curious why SpaceX is bad.

      I completely agree about everything else you mentioned.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        97
        ·
        1 year ago

        However, rocket go zoom then land without boom is fun to watch.

        Yeah, Musk is a true innovater by having them blow up the concrete launchpad on launch instead…

        The government got more money from the patents NASA got then it cost to fund NASA. Privatizing space hurts everyone except the rich asshole who gets the parents.

        • pensa@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          62
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          For fucks sake.

          I clearly said I do not like musk. I even went as far as saying I hate him but still that’s the first place you went. What the fuck?

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            42
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, but there’s also the cognitive dissonance of you saying SpaceX is fun because they don’t explode…

            But they do explode. Waaaaay more than NASA. Because if a NASA launch goes bad, everyone pays attention. If SpaceX goes bad, people just shrug

            So by your own metrics you just said…

            NASA is better than SpaceX.

            No matter what position I took, it would have disagreed with your comment, because your comment disagrees with itself. Which explains why you think spacex is a positive.

            • pensa@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              17
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I did not say NASA was better than SpaceX, or the other way around. You are putting words in my mouth. Don’t do that.

              Here is a link to a comment that discusses exactly what you are saying, and it was posted before your comment. So maybe read first then comment.
              https://kbin.social/m/asklemmy@lemmy.world/t/568410/What-are-some-companies-that-deserve-to-be-boycotted-to#entry-comment-3161709

            • Balex@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              13
              ·
              1 year ago

              SpaceX has only had 2 mission failures out of 274 total missions. Since 2017 SpaceX has had a 100% success rate which is a vast majority of its total missions. The recent explosions have been test rockets and expected to blow up, it’s how they learn and innovate so quickly. NASA takes billions of dollars and 10+ years to successfully launch a rocket on the first attempt. It’s just 2 different approaches to design and innovation.

              • UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                1 year ago

                Nah dude. You don’t understand. A guy we don’t like is tangibly related to the space program. Fuck all them scientists and engineers. They’re all evil. Every. Single. One of them.

              • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                Personal insults and incorrectly using “big words”…

                For some reason the people who defend Musk and his companies love doing that.

                Does it work on 4chan? Is that where you all get this from?

                • pensa@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Could you please tell me what “big words” they used? I don’t see anything outside normal vocabulary.

                  Hopefully you don’t take this as me defending musk in some way.

          • SupraMario@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            1 year ago

            Some people can’t get over the fact that spaceX is a net positive for humans. Just as Tesla helped push other manufacturers into the world of EVs. They just hate musk to the point that anything he is associated with is bad.

            • echo64@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              25
              ·
              1 year ago

              everyone was moving to EV’s with or without tesla. if you want to credit anyone go back to the Prius way back in the late 90s. They set the trend, Tesla jumped on that trend.

              • pensa@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                11
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’m not defending musk. So tired of that qualifier in this thread.

                The prius is not an EV it’s a hybrid and nobody thought they were cool. Even tree huggers like me. Tesla made electric cars cool until everyone found out how poorly they were assembled. Then the other manufacturers, seeing that electric cars could be profitable, started tooling their assembly lines. You have your history completely backwards.

                The new Prius Prime is cool af in my opinion.

                • echo64@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’m not defending musk. So tired of that qualifier in this thread.

                  did not say you were.

                  The prius is not an EV it’s a hybrid and nobody thought they were cool.

                  it sold incredibly well and proved that there was a market, and yes it was a hybrid as the technology wasn’t there. do tesla get kudos for waiting for battery technology now?

                  You have your history completely backwards.

                  do you think that the prius came out after a tesla? you need to explain this one.

                  The new Prius Prime is cool af in my opinion.

                  it doesn’t matter what you find personally cool for what it’s worth, then or now.

              • buzz86us@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                I can’t say that without Tesla EV would be as popular, mainly because at the time when Tesla started was 9 years after the GM EV1 was a failure. I don’t think other companies would have seen building EV as a good investment, but who could know?

              • toasteecup@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                Tesla did help get the economy moving faster to EVs which is a net positive.

                I think the way things turned out, anyone could of had that effect Tesla just happened to be in the right place at the right time though.

              • whofearsthenight@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                EVs are still going to be the wrong answer to the problem. Sure, more efficient than combustable, but still vastly less efficient than good public transport systems, walkable/bikeable cities, etc. If Elon really wanted to save the planet, he’d be building bullet trains.

            • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              I don’t get the crazy musk hate. I mostly ignore him but I love that he created the market for electric cars.

              Being an adult means you can look at situations in more complex terms than Elon bad.

              I think he’s a man child. I dislike his attitude like the Wikipedia name change. That’s just douche material.

              I love that he funded Tesla and now we have a viable electric car market.

              • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                but I love that he created the market for electric cars

                This is like saying OJ Simpson invented Smuckers Uncrustables so he’s not all bad…

                Firstly, it’s not true.

                Secondly, even if it was true, it doesn’t amount to enough to celebrate him.

                Because putting peanut butter and jelly in a sandwich was already a thing that was popular. It just became worse for the environment and more expensive for consumers by individuall packaging them and requiring them to be frozen.

                • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It is true. Tesla paved the way.

                  Who said celebrate him. I said I’m glad he did it.

                  I get you have a binary view of the world. As you mature you may outgrow that but the world is wildly complex.

                  We wouldn’t have modern electric cars without musk. It took someone willing to take the risk and the big 3 weren’t doing it.

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            25
            ·
            1 year ago

            They do…

            The only advantage SpaceX has is that if NASA blew up a launchpad, there would be an investigation.

            Everyone is used to Musk fucking shit up, and his defenders pretend it’s really a success.

            Your problem is with the politicians who control NASA funding, not NASA.

            • Vlixz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              There was a very long investigation, pretty sure it hasn’t even concluded since they don’t have their license yet for their next test flight.

              And why wouldn’t it count as a succes? You don’t see learning from design flaws as a succes? They clearly learned and iterated on the design

              • pensa@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                If you read all the comments by givesomefucks you will see that they ignore context and make wild assumptions repeatedly. They are on the hate musk train and not addressing the topic.

                You: SpaceX?
                givesomefuck: musk is terrible, musk blow up things, musk stole my girl/boyfriend
                You: Okay, but what I was asking was…
                givesomefucks: musk is the worst human ever, EVER!!!

                Dude or lady is triggered. I get it musk is a douche of the highest order but givessomefucks has let it cause them to miss context and make wild assumptions. Sad really. I wish we could talk about things without whatever bullshit their on. My original question was only answered to the extent of musk is bad.

                • intensely_human@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I just worry there could be GPT-4 instances here that’ve been instructed to make these conversations turn nasty

              • intensely_human@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Hey it’s got the best lawyers alright? It’s an amazing legal team, one of the most powerful in the space industry.

            • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              They don’t.

              That’s the difference. NASA wants every launch to be a success.

              Space x is willing to blow some shit up to test an idea.

              I prefer the nasa method for rockets. Too much risk just blowing shit up in my opinion.

              • pensa@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I disagree. I think NASA still innovates but they do it on things like propulsion and earth sciences.

                • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  They are slow but it is by design. They want things to be safe. Some say they over engineer things but I think when we are talking about people, that is needed.

                • Balex@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  SpaceX created the first successful Full Flow Stage Combustion Cycle Engine, so they’re also innovative in the propulsion department.

            • intensely_human@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              They literally don’t innovate in the same way. Like you said, if NASA blew up anything there’d be an investigation, making it impossible for them to iterate rapidly, meaning they are unable to innovate in the way private companies can.

          • pensa@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            They can’t because when they fail the public and then congress wants to cut their budget. NASA can no longer innovate and maintain funding.

            I hate that I have to put this qualifier but this is NOT an endorsement of musk.

      • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        54
        ·
        1 year ago

        why SpaceX is bad.

        For example they “decorated” our night sky with thousands of their satellites. Never asked permission. Astronomers around the globe are pissed because their work & results gets worse. Other people who own satellites are pissed because they don’t behave up there.

        • pensa@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          1 year ago

          I have read about the interference with astronomy and am not for it. It didn’t occur to me when I asked.

          Thanks for answering my question.

        • Jikiya@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          1 year ago

          I would like to point out that they did ask for permission. Though obviously they didn’t ask for permission from every government in the world, nor did they ask the astronomy community.

        • Mnemnosyne@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          Providing global Internet is worth it. That said, I’d much rather see it done in a non profit way, and definitely not under the muskrat’s control.

      • mommykink@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        1 year ago

        Private companies have no business being in space. It sets a dangerous precedent for the future.

        Any good publicity for SpaceX is ultimately good publicity for Musk, who’s made himself the face of that company too.

        • pensa@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Thank you for being the first comment that is not simply “musk bad.” I’m not being sarcastic. I seriously appreciate you answering my question.

          You make a good point about private companies in space and I agree with it completely.

          • intensely_human@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Really? We want all of the galaxy other than the surface of Earth to be the sole domain of government activity?

            Armies marching on the moon, but never a McDonalds, because that would be horrible?

      • forrgott@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        Really? “Yeah, boycott that jerk!! But not the silly rockets, I like em!”

        Uh, no. Just, no.

      • HMN@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Destroying environments? Wasting money and fuel on false-promises (the Elon way)? I’m sure there’s a tonne of other reasons.

          • alsimoneau@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Space. They’re killing radio astronomy, endangering optical astronomy and threatening everything else in orbit, from telecoms, to earth observation, to the ISS.

            They’re also spreading rare earth metal everywhere when the satellites burn up and wasting a lot of energy to get them up there when we’re facing an energy crisis.

          • HMN@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Just one? I’ll do you a few better…

            • The Falcon 9 rocket put a hole in the ionosphere

            • Falcon 9 makes use of kerosene, which puts black soot into the atmosphere (if they used solely liquid oxygen or liquid hydrogen the only thing left would be water vapour)

            • Serious damage at a Texas base (caused craters and debris to scatter around remote cameras)

            • An explosion on the launch pad during a test caused damage

            • Boca Chica…

              • Massive amounts of dust, which contain toxic shit

              • Destroyed the launchpad (scattering large chunks of concrete into delicate marine and coastal sanctuaries nearby)

            Edit: fixed up formatting

      • SpaceBar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Because Musk is a vocal ass and so many on Lemmy can’t distinguish the good some of his companies do from the jerkoff owner.

        Nestle does evil and is run by evil. Tesla is pushing the automobile industry in the direction it needs to go, but it is majority owned by evil. It’s not as simple as a keyboard activist response, so I’m looking forward to the downvotes as I point this out again.

        Good luck ever trying to defend Tesla and Space X on Lemmy.

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          Why would you want to defend those companies? Literally what the fuck good do you think they’re doing? How does it outweigh the huge government subsidies they take away from non-garbage companies that could do the same things but without being as awful?

        • pensa@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oh my fucking god. I am not defending shit.

          I asked a fucking question and the only answer I got was “musk bad.” I posted very clear qualifiers in the original comment and every other comment stating exactly that but somehow a whole bunch of y’all completely ignore that, repeatedly. It’s a critical bit of context that completely negates any defenses of any thing.

          Then you go on to mention Tesla which was not mentioned in the comment you replied to. So it’s obvious you’re reading what’s written throughout the comments. It also makes obvious that you’re only picking out the parts you want. I never, not once, in any way defended Tesla.

          I DON’T SUPPORT MUSK. I DID NOT DEFEND SPACEX OR TESLA. How else can I make it clear? What the fuck is going on with people missing the key bit of context?

          I asked a question about SpaceX and someone else mentions Tesla. Somehow a bunch of you fuckers read it as I’m defending both SpaceX and Tesla.

          Fucking fuck!

        • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Tesla is pushing the automobile industry

          When they were new and people still believed their promises, they could push the real car makers.

          For a while. Long ago.

          Nowadays everybody learns how bad these cars really are and how shitty this company acts to their customers after the warranty.

        • toasteecup@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          32
          ·
          1 year ago

          A really shitty tech company.

          Oracle hires more lawyers than they do developers then they do things like “oh? You’re using this product in the cloud with the license you purchased? But you didn’t purchase the cloud license”

          They also buy technology and proceed to violate whatever license it has, like ZFS.

        • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Stands for One Rich Asshole Called Larry Ellison, not officially but I like to think it is. It’s a corporation built around a database engine.
          They have a well deserved terrible reputation based on their commercial practices, including but not exhaustive, shipping full fledged software with functionality locked behind paywalls, buying and demolishing established open source companies/projects, suing the shit out of their customers for license violation (see above), price gouging their customers who often have no other choice than to run their products.
          The engine itself is nice and reliable but the business practices of Oracle drives a lot of companies to settle for the competition, at least, those who can afford to leave.

    • VieuxQueb@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      And teflon and other chemicals used in large quantities while delaying the inevitable reports of danger they pose.

  • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    1 year ago

    Autism Speaks. It has a pro-eugenics mindset, so you’d think everyone would be boycotting it, right? Nope, in fact it’s partnered with the Jim Henson company.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/02/14/biggest-autism-advocacy-group-is-still-failing-too-many-autistic-people/

        Tldr:

        It’s founded and ran by two boomers who have an autistic grandson and were very very upset he had autism. That’s the generation that would actively try to avoid diagnosis and help because they thought the label was worse than the disease, preventing an entire generation from getting assistance.

        So its less about empowering people with autism, and more fearmongering how bad it is and that someone with autism shouldn’t have any agency or choice in their lives.

        I didn’t dig very deep, but yeah, I could see how that organization does a bunch of problematic shit

          • ThunderWhiskers@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            That was my confusion as well. Genetic screening isn’t worthy of condemnation but “pro-eugenics” has a pretty broad spectrum.

            • Bye@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Autistic people, as they define it, are not just differently abled. They started the foundation where that word didn’t include people with mild cases.

              If you could screen out non verbal, low functioning autism, that would be a good thing, just like screening out downs and whatnot.

    • Rolivers@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wish I could. I use linux whenever possible but gaming, hdr and some drm features won’t work on Linux any time soon.

      • Deckweiss@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’ve been on Linux exclusively for a decade now and I am super excited to get an HDR monitor when it gets implemented (there was some major work being done by redhat and others).

        In the meanwhile, I am still having fun with games, hdr or other fancypants features won’t vhange that.

  • BilboBargains@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    1 year ago
    • Facebook
    • Apple
    • All of the defence contractors
    • Every telecom I’ve ever used apart from EE and Giffgaff
    • YouTube
    • Any website that tries to circumvent privacy rules with fuckery
    • Governments like the UK that insist prohition is a better alternative to harm reduction but continue to profit from poisons like alcohol.
    • Any company that makes devices with proprietary interfaces e.g. WiFi printers, BT routers, Apple in general, Tesla, battery power tool manufacturers.
    • The list goes on…
    • sic_1@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago
      • Oil refineries
      • concrete factories
      • mercenaries
      • energy producers that still don’t use renewables exclusively
      • private hospital corporations
      • cruises companies
      • unsustainable agrarian producers

      All of these are literally killing children. Not directly and immediately but according to the IPCC report we have 1,5 to 2 years time to get to ZERO emissions, else we got some tipping points and risk turning earth into a Venus-like planet.

    • Pyro@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Governments like the UK that insist prohition is a better alternative to harm reduction but continue to profit from poisons like alcohol.

      How does one boycott the government? Would I cut up my ID and declare myself a sovereign citizen? As much as I agree with the sentiment, I don’t think it’s as easy as that haha

  • Perfide@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    1 year ago

    As far as which companies “deserve” it, it would be quicker to list the ones that don’t.