Seems like the kind of thing someone should go to jail for. You can't just run a "social experiment" by committing fraud and lying to people, and that's assuming this isn't just an excuse someone came up with once they knew they would be caught.
But most people don't participate, they just hunker down and wait it out. It's a small minority who are aligned with the government who do most of it. The prequel makes this very clear, where the government sent masked mercenaries to participate in the test purge to give them the results they wanted. The movies aren't high art or anything, but their message is pretty clear that they think the average person wouldn't be violent.
I feel like maybe you missed the point? The concept of the Purge movies is the government is using the Purge as a smoke screen to eliminate the people it considers undesirable. It's supposed to be like Kristallnacht with plausible deniability.
Do you think if a stalker found out about the AirTag silencer from an article they would decide not to use it because the article was critical? They made the choice that publicizing it would lead to harm, so didn't.
But to be real, does this really matter? Do any software engineers or other positions Microsoft is looking for in these examples look for jobs in the paper these days? Would they get more responses if they advertised in a larger paper?
Also also hard to fake and easy to slip in. You throw in a Latin quote in your conversation and either the other person gets it and you both know you're the proper class, or they don't and you both know you're higher up the ladder than they are.
This isn't really true though is it? Most people in history were some sort of farmer in a small village where everyone knew everyone, you probably had a home with one room, and your finances such as they were would be immediately obvious to everyone else in the village.
I agree the line between fantasy and sci Fi is very thin. In general I would say if the author intends for it to be a natural explanation like wormholes or something it's sci fi, if it's a magic teleportation spell it is fantasy. There is a series I read once Starships Mage which plays with this, it's hard sci fi for most things but magic exists and FTL is solved through teleportation. Everything non magic has to obey relativity and such.
I don't think crime thriller or horror have anything to do with if a story is fantasy. Alien is a sci fi movie and a horror movie. Psycho is a horror movie with no fantasy elements. Sinners is a fantasy horror movie. It sounds like you are talking about epic or high fantasy, but there is fantasy romance, fantasy detective, fantasy crime thriller etc. You can even have a fantasy sci fi movie like Star Wars.
I mean, if we have a war with Russia that involves destroying satellites, it seems like there is a pretty big chance that means it's going nuclear and we'll have bigger fish to fry.
This is one of those frustrating things. You're just not allowed to not be scared with kids. If you aren't scared of letting your kid walk to a pond, you get punished for it. If you're not scared of the kidnappers, you have to be scared of the police. None of it is rational, it's different how many of us were raised, yet if you try to opt out the law gets involved.
So this is just not correct.
First off a factory can run 24/7 regardless of the shift length, which is what will determine the total productivity.
Second off it assumes there are no trade offs in terms of more errors or anything else by having longer shifts.
Third off it assumes that factories in different countries are going to be equally effective with each other, instead of different nations/areas within nations specializing in certain areas.
It also ignores the economic benefits that come with having people in your nation having more leisure time, higher education, more time with children, etc. It's a very simplistic model that is also very incorrect.
"If a nation works 6 days a week, 12 hours a shift then obviously they will outcompete any nation where people work 5 days a week for 8 hours." - This is not obviously true to me, can you explain why it is for you?
This doesn't really hold water. Iron weapons aren't really any better than Bronze, it's stiffer and lighter with an equivalent size blade but not any harder or sharper. Bronze can be cast in more complex shapes that can help with weapon effectiveness and even during the Iron Age bronze Weapons were used alongside iron ones. Iron is much more abundant so the revolution of the iron age was having much cheaper and accessible metal, not superior. It isn't until Steel that you really see bronze (and iron) become clearly inferior.
I have a 10 and find the AI to be more annoying than anything else. Mostly I see it when I accidentally hit something and it pops up since they want it to be quick to access but I essentially never want to use it. The fact that they are going to be replacing the perfectly fine Google Assistant with the Gemini which when I tried it out was so much worse at doing the simple things I actually use it for has me regretting buying a Pixel.
But the person who is president when it incurs the cost, is probably not going to be the president when it makes the profit. That is one of the problems with things like this where you can get the blame for doing the responsible thing.
It's very annoying that the cost of fixing all this and replenishing the stockpile is going to most likely fall on people who had little to nothing to do with it becoming such a big problem.
It's also kind of odd because even a junior engineer has to cost a company around 10 grand a month in salary, taxes, and other costs. So if the company thinks it makes you 10% more effective it seems like it should be an easy choice. So either the companies are shooting themselves in the foot limiting spending or they aren't seeing the productivity boost.