2026-09-18 03:45 UTC
That’s because, thus far, they get away with choosing not to distribute any of their trillions of dollars to the suppliers of the information they consume - money has only gone to the suppliers of hardware and power, and to influencing politicians and rewarding investors. That’s their choice, and they should not be allowed to continue to make that choice. Good luck to the NYT.
Replies (1)
-
@Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 2026-09-18 06:16
But would it be worth it if they had to pay the creative costs for it? They are only worth it now cause it doesn’t include that AND it’s subsidized by investor money.