The main difference being the scale we can (and we do) bring species to extinction nowadays, even collaterally. Also nowadays we know exactly what we are doing, yet we press the gas pedal even harder to maximize shareholder value. So no, the comparison doesn't hold.
Are we arguing about what the creepiest way is to film people on the streets? Who would want that in the first place?? I don't need encouraging creeps... I didn't hear yet "filming the ICE" as a argument - probably the only one I could understand, but there the problem is not the glasses anyway (nor the solution).
When you film with a camera you are holding a camera and you're pointing it at people. When you film with your glasses, nothing of such happens. And the ridiculous defense "it has a light" is just that, ridiculous: you can't see a light if you're not looking directly at it and have convenient surrounding lighting.
And is Lithuania doing anything about it? In Romania Facebook and TikTok do whatever they please, and whatever they are paid to do, with complete impunity as the authorities actively do nothing at all.
Indeed, that's the same answer when topics like public surveillance or dependency-inducing media are debated. It's difficult to criticize a problem, when you're a part of the problem, respectively paid to be the problem.
The portals of all Romanian authorities are built under the same corruption.fueled incompetence. The national land register is already down for ONE MONTH without identifiable recoveries and backups because of a hacker attack, so the US is not that bad (yet).
I think it's rather, keep those people around as useful scapegoats for empowering whatever next unpopular policy the oligarchy needs enacted to round up their next trillion.
I see lots of finger pointing at the workers without permits, but zero, and I mean really ZERO finger pointing at their employers. So basically it's totally fine and dandy to exploit poor people, but a crime to be poor people. All the rest is technicalities.
In Europe it's the other way around: the businesses employing folks with no right to work get fined to death, with no direct repercussions on the workers (except they lose that income, which is another discussion)
Not about your app but every and I mean EVERY app implements these social features, and I don't know anyone in my circles actually USING whatever social features - even if we talk about our experiences with common apps. Are you sure you're not just investing programming effort into nothing?
At least in theory, our governments are voted in place exactly by us. Trump voters loved his ideas and he's implementing them now, yay success. Also industrial pollution is fueled by our buying habits just as well - if nobody would order stuff brought by ship from overseas, well, we wouldn't have many of those huge(ly) polluting ships around. So I wouldn't leave out the personal responsibility here: we make decisions every day, and giving up paper straws is only the most insignificant one.
This, like elevator or contact center waiting music, has very little to do with "music" itself. It's just something to signal the waiting time and ease a bit of anxiety. While I'm saddened that somebody lost their income with automated background generation, I don't find the end product interesting at all, so whatever. However. However, listening to my genres does definitely need the connection to a human. No, I won't "hate" AI because of it, I will just ignore or press "skip" (where I can). Freedom of choice, baby.
The "iron law of oligarchy" (Robert Michels) says that any large organizations will be controlled by a small organized leadership - so the organized minority will control it.
Reality check: the workers never control the means of production. Not even in communist states, not even in China. On paper? Sure, paper is forgiving. But the oligarchy, either by party or by money, does what they want. The only enclaves where the workers own it is in small cooperatives (mostly insignificant).
I don't think the OP or anyone else here or in the study tried the argument that China was a real democracy. We're strictly checking the economy and its system here, and yes the party is definitely tipping it. But then, everywhere the state can tip it, and more often than not it even does tip it - with laws and regulations and subventions and wars and state contracts and and. So I think the argument is, as interventionism goes they're quite the same even when they claim big ass difference. At least until we look into personal freedoms.
Why should a contact form mean complex functionality? You can do it in plain HTML, even - is that complex already? Because validation? Like that (Google, it's you) address checking unable to place my house in the right village? Like phone number validation forcing you to add a 0 where no 0 is required to call me? And don't start me on streets and all that, or middle names, or dates or or or. Validations of form inputs are almost always a stupid yak shaving exercise, yet here we are.
I carry groceries and sometimes (rarely) do my short commute - 30 minutes electric instead of 50 minutes in PT. Vacations by car are maybe twice a year (I always prefer PT) and then, like the other commenter said, I stop anyway at almost every highway stop for a coffer or whatever, so the fast charger can fastly charge. So for this usage model, electric is yay.
ICE arguments: 1. debatable, today it's definitely not (I don't discuss imaginary situations). 2. I don't care, I don't drive thousand km. 3. and when I do, I do highway stops anyway, where the quick charger easily catches up. 4. "should" - again imaginary argument, I'll skip. 5. My actual electric costs are exactly half than gas previously (also, fast charging can happen in garages/parking spots). EV arguments: 1. again I don't care, racing is for kids. 2. inside they're both quiet. 3. indeed in two years no engine issues yet, but the car being new surely helped.
So, like I said: to me a car is just a car. But no stink and less cost so far.
Data set of one: yes I would. I despise the stink of fumes. And generally, I see zero advantages of gas over EV - also the other way around - a car is a car, costs some, takes you from A to B, unless it's some hobby (which is not this discussion).
I don't think driving around the country is the main selling point of a car, at least not around here. Huge commutes by car are not a usual thing in my environment, au contrary, I know companies who actively push against that.
For me as a user, not having notifications or having a way to easily block them is a boon. No site is sending me right now notifications, and I have yet to meet one where I'd even consider allowing them.
But what is the point of this discussion? That we deny a possible burst because we stand to lose personally? Or is it, we believe it could burst because reasons?