I wonder how many people with a profile picture of their face on their Twitter/Facebook accounts are seriously concerned about this
Readit Newsold man yells at cloud
Wissmania commented on Tracking China's Muslim Gulag reuters.com/investigates/... · Posted by u/petethomas
When there's somewhere between 500k->1m of them, it's very different then the occasional one off.
And that guy was approached by DEA agents posing as Taliban, so his connections are specious at best.
You just assume every Muslim in that region is a terrorist? Based on what exactly?
Allowing 19-year-old kids to have their name and photo published in the newspaper of record in an article that quotes their snarky comments about how they're not sure if they'd deign to work for any given company is journalistic malpractice.
I don't blame the kids. They're young and naturally earnest, and are marinating in an environment where performative wokeness results in positive social reinforcement. They don't know any better.
I'm a similar age group / community and this sort of perspective is not at all uncommon, and it's legit. There is no "performative wokeness" going on in my experience.
Sure, but this is not a problem money obviously solvable by throwing money at it. San Francisco already spends over $300m/year for helping the homeless, is Prop C going to be any more effective?
I was just making a general philosophical point. Whether Prop C specifically is a good idea depends on a lot of empirical information that I haven't researched.
Wissmania commented on Twitter shares drop after reporting declining monthly active users cnbc.com/2018/07/27/twitt... · Posted by u/okket
Honestly pretty pathetic that investors hadn't priced in the existence of bots into their valuation of the company. Perhaps I expect too much.
Unfortunately the laws and regulations in place facilitating this trend are put in place, for the most part, by elected representatives. For one thing, we need to change “first past the post” election results to decrease the polarizing results that have been shaping our politics as of late. I’m just saying, this isn’t a conspiracy by one party or group. To an extent, it’s the country we voted for.
It is true that multiple parties (which first past the post prevents) would make forming coalitions around issues like this easier.
Saying "this isn’t a conspiracy by one party or group" is pretty silly though. The economic policies advocated for and enacted by the two parties point in completely opposite directions.
> there will always be people who choose trivial entertainment, and there will always be folks who chase knowledge and self improvement
That's why the entire thing seems like a non-issue to me. If some people don't want to do anything useful with their lives, then who are we to prohibit them from continuing to do-nothing and thereby starving themselves?
(Of course, we already, rightfully, prohibit people from harming&stealing-from each other; that's beside my point.)
I think this is just way too simplistic of a view of it. People won't just follow two exact patterns of behavior regardless of their environment. We all have, to varying extents, a proclivity to instant dopamine-based gratification.
The difference now is that the technology that now exists makes this sort of gratification both constantly available, and better than ever at scratching that dopamine itch.
The evidence the article presents also points towards something happening after the advent of smartphones, and not before.
(/s)