Whether that behaviour is good or bad have nothing to do with the economic system in place. Pure capitalism have obvious flaws. To me, a company being more powerful than a country is one.
I think the framing that "individual bad actors must be regulated for the good of the collective" is wrong here. In my opinion, what GP is saying is more along the line of "powerful actors must be regulated for the good of the collective powerless people".
When you look at it like that, then what Google and Apple is doing does not fit this point of view. They are (extremely) powerful entities imposing themselves on the whole world.
That's a common point of view, but when your disability is never someone else's problem, it becomes waaaaaay harder to manage. You should display more empathy to people that don't follow the norm.
Then maybe the easy solution is to make sure anyone showing up late doesn't disrupt anything? That accommodates everyone, is flexible, and does not unfairly punish anyone.
It really shows that you know nothing about sleep-related disabilities. I know someone suffering from idiopathic hypersomnia[1]. You can't just "choose" to go to bed earlier to wake up earlier in the morning. Sometimes it might work, most of the time it doesn't.
You think it's the disabled person's responsibility to never put a burden on others when others' expectations puts an unreasonable amount of burdens.
And we're talking about this specific kind of disability, but as someone else said in a sibling comment, it could be anything. Imagine you really have to go to the bathroom for some reason (pregnancy, diarrhea, ...). That can happen to a lot of people. Should all of them be prevented from being accepted into class ?
That's why we speak about "empathy, tolerance, flexibility". Empathy towards the weaker few, not empathy towards the "normal" many.
You do realise this system is unsustainable, though ? We just cannot grow infinitely just because .end of life care costs money.
We are way too many, and the #1 source of global warming is human activity. At one point we'll have to stop growing, so the system of how we pay for elderly care has to change.
And why should we maintain the population ? Have we reached the perfect amount of people on earth ?
We could be a lot less humans on earth, it would be amazing for the environment, and I think we'd be as happy.
The only downside I see is economic (in the sense that everything is built with the expectation of growth). But it is to me an economic problem, and not a reproduction problem.
A little nitpick : you seem to imply that buying a book is having an influence on parenting skills. I'd argue that's its correlated but does not have a direct influence.
As you said, if you're buying a book it means you're ready for self-reflection, which is what has an impact on parenting.
That's an interesting idea.
It would need some kind of tweaking for low values otherwise it would be exploitable to generate as much revenue from a 10 people sub then from a bigger one.
> This would encourage people to participate in smaller communities, which could be really nice for keeping the "small town" vibe of early reddit.
Couldn't it also cause a fragmentation of content across different same-ish subs ?