> But they think they can do it because they can spin it as "you did it first".
They are happy to do whatever they want, and they don't worry about needing false-equivalence precedent to do it.
17,959 karma · joined April 15, 2013
They are happy to do whatever they want, and they don't worry about needing false-equivalence precedent to do it.
Since the only god our corporatations worship goes by power and money, they all started tripping over themselves to kiss the ring.
I'm going to go with the degrowth, or the steady-state economics guys, they are more likely to be closer to the mark of what is actually achievable in the real world.
2. Drones are more effective in an asymmetric fight. The stronger , more developed side gets hit harder. Which is why Russia and the US is having such a bad time with them. They are both starting shit with countries that have far less to lose, and have far more resolve to fight.
So yes, it is in fact a pretty easy answer.
2. Because they think (rightly or wrongly) that the benefits of monitoring and ease of maintenance and their contractor having direct access to the data outweigh the risks.
3. They think it outweighs the risk because IOT has been socially normalized, creating the wide perception that no, it's not that bad.
They almost certainly have insurance for this kind of event, and their insurer will almost certainly think real hard about the pros/cons of this, and will adjust rates accordingly. The grocer is free to take those rates into account when deciding on whether their next store will have an IOT HVAC.
Groceries see HVAC in the same way. If they can get their issue addressed or diagnosed by their HVAC contractor without him having to schedule and physically travel to their site, they'd prefer him to solve/start solving the problem immediately. Time is money and the faster the tech can diagnose the problem, the faster he can get on fixing it.
And yes, the prevalence of these systems means that many HVAC techs have the ability to turn off their customers' air conditioners/fridges. They don't use it maliciously, because that would be actual suicide for their business.
---
Source: A close friend of mine runs an HVAC business (~8 employees) doing residential and commercial installs, repairs, and maintenance.
That's not entirely true. Websites that don't actively try to fuck over their users (because their purpose is not shoving third party ads at you, it's providing information about/a platform for their company's product) often provide a modal with two buttons:
'Accept' 'Decline'.
This, IMO, meets both the letter and the spirit of the law. The funny thing is, for any website actually doing that, if you click 'Accept', your data will likely only be used to improve it.
To wit: When one gets an order to, say, pick two people to fire, or get fired himself, carrying out the order doesn't regularly mean that they 'side' with it.
They aren't fundamentally different from a bunch of assholes sitting in an airplane 25,000 feet above you, flying above the ceiling of your flak and air interceptors, dropping a few thousand tons of firebombs on your town.
> I'm curious about how to defend against such drones.
Looking at what most of their targets have in common, I'd say that there's an easy answer to that - don't start wars.
Provide a bloody baseline. Every child deserves an environment they are given everything that a child needs to succeed, regardless of how fucked their home life is. The state can only control what happens outside of school so much, but it can control what happens in school.
It means transportation to and from school, or walkable access to them. It means school lunches. It means a space to work and study. It means a space that is safe and free from antisocial disruption. It means dealing with the antisocial disruption, through the counseling and support services children need.
You can't fix every broken human being, but you can not just abandon them after putting in minimal effort.
> Education is free and lower income areas generally have more school funding.
That delta is nowhere near enough, because the job of educating a child with an absolutely fucked home life is monumentally harder than one who doesn't have one. But it's necessary to do it, to work on the problem long-term.
---
> How do we get people to value themselves and their families, much less something abstract like our republic?
Teach them to be a part of their community. Put them to meaningful work that improves it. This is huge for social cohesion, and every high-cohesion society or high-cohesion subculture in a low-cohesion society does it.
For a trivial example, Japanese students don't clean their classrooms because their schools are too cheap to hire janitors. There's no shortage of that kind of work that children can meaningfully do that improves them, their environment, and their town, and gives them a reason to give a shit about it.
Clubs are another. The level of support and funding for them dramatically falls short of where they should be. They should not be an optional activity largely available and patronized by the college-application-padding upper-middle-class. They are necessary for proper development.
You can also attack the problem from the other direction - doing less to actively create broken families and households. There's an incredible perception of unfairness in society, and reasonable people will treat it the same way that they feel it treats them.
The whole point of corporate capitalism is to do exactly that. The corporation is a machine whose most-optimized purpose is to turn people into money.
Human dignity is not a concern for it.
On the subject of children and what they are raised to learn and value, the country also happens to be allergic to instilling a common, non-toxic civic culture. It chants the pledge of allegiance before it's old enough to understand half the words like a prayer or a magical incantation, without ever taking the time to drill down or stand behind any of the values it purports.
PS. Drug use and abuse, shitty parenting, and poor family planning happens to a very significant degree in all communities in this country, but the consequences all those things cause are actively amplified for people living in the trailer park and on MLK way, while society bends over backwards to mitigate them for people living behind picket fences.
I understand this sort of thing is fantastic for social cohesion and has no negative consequences. (/s)
Everything turns to shit, but hey, the picket fences are white inside my gated HOA.
The every other part of the business is what's hard. Oh, and doubly so if access to markets will be controlled by a few giant incumbent gatekeepers. We're heading straight into a new gilded age.
Whats the timeline on that promised $1.99 gas, again? Or was that going to be $1.99/litre?
One can be blamed on fog of war, the other is straight up murder, and all involved need to be prosecuted as such.
This regime and its enablers have done more quantifiable harm to more people and institutions in America than anything Russia has, and one of its favorite tools is propaganda.
If America stood for any of the principles it claims to, the servicemembers and their commanders who performed them would be held to account for them.
Whatever private-market liquidity events they will be permitted to participate in will be highly disadvantaged compared to the other two groups.
And we aren't talking about something esoteric. How To Cook Everything. (4.5 rating on Amazon, 4.0 on Goodreads), one of the most popular cookbooks in the world...
Has its first recipe for chicken cutlets produce undercooked chicken (15 minutes at 325F has not resulted in 165F internally).
Worse yet, its chile recipe for some weird reason involves boiling and simmering a whole onion with the beans before throwing it out (WTF). It then has you drain the beans only to add that drained water right back (WTF?), unless you optionally replace it with tap water (WTF was the point of boiling the onion then?), so that you could bring them to boil again. The recipe barely has any spice besides actual chile peppers.
This... Is not good or helpful, but is incredibly opinionated with a bunch of bullshit steps. Like, yes, I could tweak that into something that's not insane, but why would I choose that as a starting point..?
I get it. Compiling a thousand-page cookbook is really hard. But this... Ain't great.
Could you list, say, a dozen such fields? It should be very easy if there are, uh, hundreds of them.
> There hasn’t been any significant paradigm shifting progress in genetic engineering because everyone’s hands are tied
Or maybe there hasn't been such progress (across a wide range of polities with a wide range of regulatory environments) because it's incredibly hard?
I often find their contents to be both incredibly broad, and incredibly shallow, and often lead to dishes that don't quite suit my tastes.
I have generally had more success with the internet than I have with them.