It’s curious that you claim privacy and anonymity are clearly differentiable but didn’t bother to define either of them. Is your claim accurate? We have no idea, because we don’t know what you’re talking about.
George Orwell, Philip K. Dick, and Corey Doctorow already covered the basics, and two of those authors did so decades ago. Why are you asking this question now? What is it that you want to hear that they didn’t already say? Or are you asking us whether we’ve read those authors?
You’re the one who brought in a personal political view, and basic history realize your claim, which is why you didn’t actually cite any.
I mean, what’s a good example of cancer culture? If some white guy says something horribly racist, and then he loses an election, he complains about cancel culture. But that’s a good thing, because we don’t want racist bastards in office. Of course he doesn’t see it that way. So he looks for some new term to describe the phenomenon, some way to make himself a victim.
The term itself was created by right wing people who decided to deploy it against those they didn’t favor, as an excuse to justify their own bigotry, but the idea of public shaming and goes back centuries if not millennia. Quite naturally, the establishment has a strong interest in public shaming if it will keep them around longer.
It’s not “all of a sudden”. And it’s not “the world”. And it’s not even “America”. Rather, you’re now consuming media that’s exposing you to thoughts that have always been around, often on the fringes.
Remember, bigots have always existed, and polite bigots toe the line as much as they’re forced to. They aren’t going to disappear, ever. (That being said, we can make them less relevant and powerful.)
If you really are so hopeless with computers that you can’t figure out a modern popular Linux distribution, then you should not build your own computer, because that’s much more complicated.
I think that’s what they were asking for.
What kind of jobs are you talking about? People speculating in real estate are doing so for passive income, not for employment. I just don’t see this job loss concern being legitimate.
Maybe some property management folk would have to change to slightly different aspects of the service industry, that could happen, but it’s just not large scale. In comparison, we hear stories everyday of people who can’t pay their mortgage or can’t pay rent, then they become homeless, and then they lose their job as a result.
Which is to say, I don’t think politicians believe for a second that high housing prices are keeping unemployment low. Also, you mentioned economic statistics, but for some reason you feel that homelessness isn’t included in them. That’s a peculiar choice.
Your question is wrong. Few if any people need constant validation. The question is what frequency people desire it, and how, and that varies greatly by person.
Plot twist. The person holding the pot is Andre the Giant.
A lot can be done when one of the parties has four legs and two arms.
It’s unlikely that they forgot about boomer Democrats. Many of us have parents or grandparents who qualify. I can’t think of a single person who told me how great of a candidate Biden was. I don’t remember anyone who was extremely excited by the policies he wanted to enact. Of course I can only talk about people that I met, my friends and family and community.
F*** this article. Don’t even read the article. The title says it all.
My summary: “Blame the victim. Blame the trans person for their family member acting a fool. It only got bad after the trans person came out. It’s all the trans person’s fault.”
To hell with that.
The New York Times is so bad on politics. Obviously Vance said some terrible things and has some terrible views, but that doesn’t matter to his hardcore followers, and it doesn’t even matter much to people who are thinking of staying home. Nobody is going to listen to Democrats trash the man and all of a sudden decide that he’s worthless, because of course the Democrats would portray him that way. It happens to be true, but one would naturally be skeptical of such a portrayal.
But hey, the Times really wants to ride that centrist bandwagon, that mythical position where they aren’t pushing for anything except we all know they are, and all they want is more attention. I’m just happy that they put themselves behind a pay wall. Now there’s no chance I’m going to read their articles.
Remember folks, “the economy” means “rich people’s yachts”.
Perhaps the people who are talking should watch more Japanese cartoons. :-)
This one is easy to explain away… If you’re ranking countries on greatness, then you put America at the top. But then unfortunate things happen, like minority presidents and gay marriage and solar panels, so that makes America not quite as great, but still far better than everyone else. But if we could roll back the clock, maybe to some time before women’s suffrage and the civil rights movement, that would make America return to the extra high standard that it’s capable of achieving.
Chain and large businesses have bad internal communication. Assume that hiring and scheduling never speak, ever. But it doesn’t matter, because the fact that it’s been a month means they don’t want you.
That all being said, we would love to get an update if they respond to your email. What excuse will they give? Let’s find out together.
One year, Alaska. Hiking with friend on boulder field. We stop for a break, I stand below friend on the slope. 3-foot rock rolls down at me, luckily I was balanced enough to pivot out of the way.
Next year, nearby. High speed car accident with moose. I hit the brakes just before the moose. Came through the windshield a foot to the right of my head.
Alaska’s an amazing place, but it has its share of dangers too.
Unsurprisingly, people define words in many different ways. What’s your definition? We can’t tell you how you should be categorized until you tell us what you think the words mean.
And I don’t mean that in a snarky way. For example, some people use the words liberal and leftist synonymously. Many other people don’t. And there are many other similar examples involving any kind of political terminology. It really does come down to a question of definitions, which is why it’s so easy to have miscommunication on political issues, on top of the fact that people have varying opinions on the issues themselves.
This one is very obvious. It’s not specific to the tech world. Companies know that changing jobs is stressful, that there’s value in remaining where you are, and quite obviously many people are willing to accept smaller raises so that they don’t have to go out and apply. For most jobs in the world, you can’t work remotely, and renting a different place or selling and buying property is time consuming, stressful, and expensive. In other words, this is common sense economic reasoning.
One side point is that if you can work mostly or entirely from home, that gets rid of some of the pressure to stay where you are, which in turn should create more mobility, which in turn should create more pay raises for employees who stay. But work from home is relatively the recent phenomenon, so old company pay scales are unlikely to properly account for it.
Another point, that the author completely overlooks, is that some people don’t contribute as much as the author thinks they contribute. If they know that, of course they don’t want to move to a place that does contribution-based pay. They could get hired on somewhere during a probational period of some kind, and their new bosses might think they’re not good enough, and now they are out two jobs. Of course the turnover on their second job makes their resume look weaker, so they’ll have more trouble finding a decent third job.
None of what I wrote is new information. It seems like the author of the article did that standard thing in tech circles. They decided to reinvent the wheel and write about it, and try to make it exciting when it’s not. Good for them for examining the problem, but they should be slightly embarrassed for publishing before doing basic research to see if someone had already addressed the question at hand.