Many people like to say that if they had a time machine they would go back and kill Hitler or some other valiant act of heroism that would prevent the death of millions.
Yet when faced with the real possibility of killing (or even just properly holding accountable - removal from society, redistribution of resources of) an individual now, who is already responsible for millions of deaths by virtue of withholding resources alone, never mind the active oppression and exploitation of billions that go in to maintaining the system that allows them their power, people suddenly become squeamish.
But not even at the idea of them doing it, but at the idea of anyone doing it (to the point of actively opposing it), and that's just so fucking frustrating, that people can't see the glaringly obvious dictators "of tomorrow", who already literally control everything and are actively getting away with a lot shit directly out of the fascist playbooktoday, how anyone can still deny it to themselves just blows my mind.
We're never going to get a better future as long as so many people refuse to accept that we're never going to be given it by those living the high life off of our backs.
That begets the question, why do you feel okay with murder when there are no consequences?
Were you to find yourself in such a situation with say the CEO of Nestle or Nike, or Rupert Murdoch, or whomever you fancy, where you suddenly realize you have an opportunity to murder that person without consequence, would you do so?
Not that I disagree but it's absolutely fucking exhausting to come into the comment sections of a post like this and find a comment basically dropping a prepared lecture on something tangentially related because you saw a highly upvoted post involving something capitalism-adjacent and decided to set up your soapbox.
Like, could you at least try to act like the comment is actually in response to the content of the post. Slip one line in there about "ads" or "night sky" or something, anything, that makes it sound like you're genuinely responding to the post and not just deploying the speech you had in your back pocket.
Not to take away from anything you just said, but it's a different thing to claim you would do something in an impossible and hypothetical scenario, than to name a currently powerful person and say you'd make them dead if you could.
Anyone who's played Cyberpunk 2077 might remember the big ads projected into the sky above the city. It adds a really cool dystopian atmosphere to the game.
It's not theoretical, look up Candy Crush New York.
They can start going all out with regular ad programming over tier 1 cities many times each day almost as soon as they find themselves able to get away with it.
It's will be regular within a few years if we let it.
Harambe sires an offspring.
Covid was contained, however significant changes in social structures happened so that cross species viruses have a tougher time evolving.
Mitch McConnell shat himself on the senate floor, then proclaimed his love for flamin' hot cheetoes, then passes away.
Elon Musk takes a ride on Space X, it suffers a malfunction & he burns up on reentry.
Russia and China start a war, but both armies are the equivalent of an Ikea designed tank. All offensive and defensive maneuvers are so bad there are literally thousands of scholars writing doctorate thesis on them.
Beer cures cancer.
Universal pay is implemented worldwide, Amazon goes bankrupt.
Tipping culture in the US ends.
Nestlé board of trustees and executive committee are rounded up and hunted for sport by Tankies...capitalists tune in to the reality based tv show and place enough bets to wipe out world debt.
Argentina finally has a sound financial footing, a robust economy, and bright future producing most of the worlds green energy needs.
World temperatures stabilize and start trending towards normal as most automobiles, private jets, tankers and ocean liners are either converted to green power or scrapped.
People have a healthy relationship with social media.
Back propagating simulations of other possible less utopian courses reality could have taken within which a bunch of people are complaining about how much things suck and wondering what is happening in the prime reality.
This is such a stupid idea on so many levels but mostly because it's functionally impossible. The amount of satellites that would need to be launched in order to be able to form a visible image from the surface of the Earth would be prohibitively expensive and complicated to organise. They would all crash into each other within about 15 minutes - because orbits are inherently chaotic, and because of the ultra low altitude they'd have to maintain to make it remotely visible, they would burn up in the atmosphere almost instantly.
Basically no one with even a high school level education is actually proposing this.
It would especially be effective in cities, with a high density of people. And the base cost would not be that large compared to normal advertising spots, which already go for a lot of money.
Basically, if it was legal, it would have already been done.
They should project the night sky into city skies. As long as it doesn't add significantly to light pollution, I wouldn't be suprised if that would be good for people's mental health
Or we could introduce more strict light pollution laws instead. Big Island has some of the most beautiful night skies and it’s because they basically have to mandate using sodium lights to keep the light pollution super low for the telescopes on Mauna Kea.
How was the original proposal supposed to work? The only space add concepts I've seen have been a camera recording a screen with adds in space, essentially using the earth as a fancy background.
50 cubesats are planned. Each satellite would unfurl a 32 square meter sail that reflects the sun. Each sat forms a pixel and by getting into the right direction they can show s logo. Because it needs the sun to work it would only work at sunset over the target city.
Hmm, 50 pixels in one color for a few minutes for one day for a few minutes seems like little return for a lot of work. Let's hope it remains economicaly infeasible. Because space treaties for anything takes forever.
i remember reading about this idea on the paper in the 80s. i think the loggistics of launching such a large structure to orbit, just achieve bad PR would be have terrible ROI
I imagine if done irl it wouldn't be one solid space structure, but instead something like a ground based projector operating on cloudy nights, projecting an ad into the bottom of the cloud layer, or if actually in space, an array of satellites that each act as a "pixel", with a laser that they can shine at a city or location that they want the ad visible from.
Fortunately for us, this wouldn't actually work that way. Rather, each of the individual satellites would have a different orbit so the image wouldn't remain consistent, but instead converge into a point and invert itself on the other side of the Earth before coming back together again and repeating this process until they start colliding with one another or decay into the atmosphere. That is, unless each "pixel" made constant adjustments throughout the orbit, which would be a colossal waste of fuel.
Disclaimer: this is based only on my intuition from 780+ hours of Kerbal Space Program. I am not a scientist and I've never studied orbital mechanics.
Oh yeah, we are monitored all the time, we have ai cameras everywhere, all our devices have backdoors, big companies know everything about us, goverments support these companies, we are constantly being manipulated through the media, but ads in the sky is where I draw the line. Fuck off.