So you specifically are rebutting the petty crimes however the real risk is leverage that the government and orgs gain by having asymmetrical access to information that no one else does at scale. This can be used for a variety of reasons but see below some examples of internal corruption by employees and what I would argue is the exact misuse of this power to gain political leverage.
https://www.reuters.com/article/world/uk/nsa-staff-used-spy-...https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/prospect-blackma...
These are what leaked. Which is to say that it is very naive to assume that large powerful organization is not going to use its power for gain.
Microsoft and Facebook both use the scanning to network your connections and to build profiles of users to better manipulate your behavior. Hence the Cambridge Analytica Scandal let alone what we dont know about.
Why hand over power to these super powerful and large orgs? What do we supposedly gain as a society?
I mean look at flock and Palantir, all it takes is for the political winds to change and the power is there because of these bills.
Thanks for the recommendations I really appreciate it. I have read a lot of philosophy piecemeal but nothing that gave quite the comprehensive connections that you described in either of your comments.
If someone wanted to read more into the theory(s) you highlighted do you have any recommendations on where to start?
I ask because I have not heard either of those ideas put that way of the real illusion being undeniable and needing to shatter that real illusion by raising consciousness, or the idea of "Walter Benjamin said, we must bring about a real catastrophe"
Any recommendations are welcome.
Context no background in German Idealism just some cursory understanding of Marxism and Nietzche.
Its not just the rich and powerful, its the knowledgeable experts and powerbrokers that facilitate and actually build out the power structure that enables the rich to take advantage of these opportunities.
As long as one of the most lucrative and prestigious routes to success for exceptionally talented people lie in the power structures that require the compromise of society, the rich will have abundant opportunity to harvest the wealth that lies in damaging the world we live in and make money on the "solutions".
Your completely correct if you mean the norm since the 80's when antitrust enforcement was abandoned. Her stances completely align with the standing anti-laws and regulations that have existed for over 80 years. The anti-trust bar and big business have been trying to redefine what anti-trust is for the past 30-40 years which is what got us into this mess of giant firms and too big to fail economics.
The perspective that bringing back regulatory action is outside the norm shows just how skewed economic thinking has been in the US.
While I totally agree with the defining of a subject first, I am curious about some of your implicit assumptions inherent in your statement/question.
While everything works on the same rules we definitely have not arrived at the completion of a list of those rules especially when it comes how biologic systems take advantage those rules to build systems. Its inherent in systems that they allow for increased complexity beyond what the base components allow. Its not a stretch to theorize that increased complexity and the opaque nature of physical interactions might allow space for Free Will or independence of consciousness in certain circumstances.
While ads are not the main driver of revenue at Apple they did develop a ad service at the same time they implemented the new "privacy" features on iOS.
Again I didn't mention any angst over the restriction I was simply reinforcing the OPs point that those items are not negotiable.
And I really don't see how the points you brought up are comparable. The bing search bar is removable and the iOS sign in is required for functionality.
The issue at play here are features that have nothing to do with functionality and are locked in eating up a large space on a limited space device.
This is just poor design from a UX perspective but great placement from a user habit and marketing perspective.
Its great that you degraded our comments/concerns as "hilarious" and that we are "angry" when the OP was simply sharing a subjective experience, with one part that is factually correct.
"I can't even customise the home screen as much ( Literally cannot remove a link to Chrome and other google apps )."
I was simply clarifying the point the OP brought up. You literally cannot remove that search bar from the homescreen
https://support.google.com/pixelphone/thread/133065648/is-th...
And my point stands, with the Pixel launcher you cant change either of the features mentioned.
And an aside: Interesting how you made me and the OP sound deranged because we don't want to install a 3rd party service to customize the use of our phones. Great Convo
I have a pixe6 and the OEM launcher has a date at the top you can't remove or change and a google chrome search bar at the bottom that you cant remove.
You have to install a 3rd party launcher to remove them.
https://www.stuff.tv/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2022/07/Goog...
Thanks for the extra context from the credit holders. It seems that this is completely overlooked in the solutions proposed to solve the housing crisis. Seems like there is an argument to be made that we need new policies to change this calculation at either the state or federal level.
Wouldn't public private partnership funding help with this?
"The idea that we can't do anything for 4 people because 1 of them has a drug problems is absurd."
I've noticed this with almost all social issues especially social services for a long time. People I am close to would argue how they don't support food stamps for example because there was corruption or some people would be taking advantage of it. I always argued back that they were completely ignoring the unspoken majority of beneficiaries that it dramatically helped.
As you can probably see by so many of the comments in this thread there is a lot of that thinking that the problem is intractable due to the minority being seen as the majority.
My concern is how can we change the narrative? How do we communicate the unseen majorities plight in a way that doesn't get ignored or overlooked?
It seems that using statistics like those provided would be enough but in my experience it rarely convinces those that solely think that the homeless should "get a job" or be put in jail as the OP of this specific thread stated. They seem to have a negative visceral reaction to this and really any of the social ills that are affecting so many people. What is driving that visceral reaction? How can we create solidarity between these disparate groups and organize people in a way that real change can occur?
I am not OP but I don't think you are on the same page as the OP. I believe OP was trying to say was that parents heavily impact their children's ability to perform well in school. There are a ton of studies that show involvement from parents, parents level of educational attainment, the amount of resources that parents have access too etc. directly impact their children's educational outcomes.
I could be wrong but I don't think the OP was blaming teachers
I think OP would agree with your statement
"Meanwhile, the entire time she has taught, parents have done everything they can to shift blame from bad home life and kids that don't value education to "you aren't doing enough""
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2853053/https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C6&q=pare...
Your comment is very atypical in this thread. It is the only one that puts the impact of the visa in perspective. The displacement of risk from company to employee.
This is my main concern of H1B's impact, lack of training or opportunity for existing candidates. It is telling how a few other comments mention the skills gap but all of them focus on it being a employees problem and to solve it they just need more college or training. While I can't argue with the positive impacts of H1B's creating value there is a continuing cost imposed on society to make the individual take the risk of training instead of the company cultivating a workforce. I think individuals do need to have some skin in the game when they receive a investment from a company but by completely displacing the cost on to workers and making up for lack of investment by allowing more H1B's seems to be a shortsighted solution.
So you mention that its "like talking about dreams - it's boring and personal", why do you describe it like that? Are you not interested in others inner lives? Do you think people aren't interested in your own inner life?
I have always had the opposite experience that peoples journeys from dreams, trips, spiritual experiences are the most profoundly interesting experiences someone can share with me.
I have seen your opinion mirrored by others and am always taken back by that attitude that what is personal is not interesting.
Interesting that the top major of student loan holders is Nursing
https://educationdata.org/student-loan-debt-by-major
Also student loans and the funding of education and the artificial scarcity and perverse incentives that it produces is one of the direct causes of the shortage of medical professionals of all stripes in the US.
https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/lawmakers-fixes-healthca...
As the OP that I responded to argued, the risk of loans prevented him from pursuing a degree. That risk most definitely plays apart in prospective medical students deciding to enter the field because if they fail at any point in that journey they are directly responsible for a ungodly huge sum of money.
Also the moral hazard argument is a red herring to rage bait the blue collar segment of the population and disregards the breadth of actual majors of student loan holders. And secondly it still does nothing to address the actual government policy decision that gave rise to this problem.
The policy of student loan (public and individual student risk) vs direct public funding (public and institutional risk).
Because the math you were forced to do was caused by very specific policy decisions at the government level that radically changed how schools were publicly funded directly(lower costs to all students) to one where it is "public funding" but private risk by student loans that drove up perverse incentives to bloat school bureaucracy and lower the educational standards and raise costs.
https://educationdata.org/average-cost-of-college-by-year
While you were in a position to make a certain career decision due to the field you wanted to go into (tech), other field require schooling. For example medicine doesn't have on the job training that allows one to be a nurse, radiology tech, respiratory tech, dr, surgeon and so forth. Do you want there to be even less of those people?
What about accountants? What about engineers? Should they just "teach themselves". The idea was that all these roles are publicly beneficial and we used to recognize that.
The "Policy" of student loans was a government decision and directly created this problem and it is what needs to change to solve it.
These are what leaked. Which is to say that it is very naive to assume that large powerful organization is not going to use its power for gain.
Microsoft and Facebook both use the scanning to network your connections and to build profiles of users to better manipulate your behavior. Hence the Cambridge Analytica Scandal let alone what we dont know about.
Why hand over power to these super powerful and large orgs? What do we supposedly gain as a society? I mean look at flock and Palantir, all it takes is for the political winds to change and the power is there because of these bills.