Droobfest

I don't understand why your post is phrased so negatively. Some buzzwords have a sort of standardised meaning across a company so everyone knows what you're talking about.

"We agreed that delighting clients is important and I argue that I can better optimize it by not attending" There is nothing wrong with this?

Sure I'd agree customer satisfaction is a much better word for it.

Starting/growing a company is the obvious investment that increases productivity (pg isn't wrong). But selling your labor also increases it on a smaller scale, as long as you don't replace someone else. Actually literally anything that creates anything increases productivity. Even creating bitcoins in a sense does (but trading them doesn't)... until they crash.

But real estate and stocks only move ownership from one person to another. They don't create anything. Even issuing new stock only moves ownership.

It's not entirely zero sum, some investments increase productivity and thus create actual wealth. Unfortunately investment in stocks and real estate don't increase productivity at all while rent-seeking only directs an ever increasing proportion of available wealth towards rich people.

This also goes for all other apps...

In the grand scheme of things brexit might be a bad idea, but you're effectively saying people shouldn't govern themselves because they would vote for more self-governance...

This might be fun...

Edit: Don't know if segmentation offloading is on by default in Android, but on my default Arch kernel it is, so I wouldn't know why not.

There is a whole social context to it. It could teach people that it's ok to disrespect grieving people. Or a sliding scale that would eventually make lying ok in general and/or other contexts.

On a societal scale these things do have a bigger impact even when in one case itself no damage seems to have been done.

> Can you provide an example of a real harm, or of a real decision that would be affected by this?

Not exactly because they're consequences beneath people's directly observable behaviour. It's also long term.

The social the fabric in this world is actually important, even though I cannot quantify it.

I'm not trying to deny anything about wealth inequality, but I wonder what this clickbaity statement really says about anything.

Could you maybe also benefit from more scepticism of your own opinions?

I ask this, because of the way you project the opinion of a 'wrong' group of people with two simplified strawmen. I don't think many people exist in the way presented. At least not in a quantity that makes the web rubbish.

It's easy to think other people are simplifying things too much, but maybe that's just an oversimplification itself..

Yes, whether this is sustainable does depend on increased economic activity. Which is why it's so important to lend for (sustainable) productivity growth or you get a bubble which creates liquidity problems when it pops.

I honestly think ideas like this are one of the most problematic beliefs in the current political discourse. This type of thinking only means we look less and less at the merits of someone's arguments and more and more at the tribe they associate with, or even worse the tribe that chooses to associate with them.

We have absolutely no control over these associations. If some nutjob chooses to support my cause does that somehow means my arguments are less valid?