How well did these cultures fare against the imperialist Europeans, exactly? How well do they fare against their more technologically advanced neighbors?
Incidentally, you may also wish to read "Industrial Society and Its Future" by former Berkeley mathematics professor Theodore Kaczynski.
>Therefore, in order to attract a mate, logically women should try to attract a mate when they're younger, and try to improve the way they look. They should not be trying to get more educated or accomplish more in their careers.
Now that's ridiculous, why should women care about getting a mate, it's not like we have a sub-replacement birthrate or anything, or that having children later increases the chance of birth defects.
>Does a chinese family moving into an italian neighborhood all of a sudden mean that no one can open an italian restaurant?
No. It does mean a lot of other things though, like a vastly increased chance of chinese/italian intermarriage for their descendants, which means their descendants will not share your ethnic identity - it will be destroyed. Whether you think that's a good or a bad thing is an entirely different matter.
>the only reason you would not want to live near someone else, is because you (not you personally, in the general sense) don't like that someone else.
Not liking someone is not the same as not wanting your descendants to be like them. Wanting for yourself (or, your group) is not the same as hatred of everyone else.
>Does anyone have suggestions on how to fix this? One option would be to have the cultures integrate so there are not sub communities for PoC.
I find it a bit insane that people think that this is even something that needs to be fixed - why can't different ethnic groups live among themselves, instead of being required to lose their ethnic identity and become part of the larger group? Do you seriously think that's what they actually want? What you're advocating for is the destruction of their ethnic identity. I think that's wrong.
>Why can't we treat people from outside our community as the same as people inside? If we better understand and critique what a community is and how it forms I think it's possible.
Your point is basically that we should destroy the very concept of community and ethnic identity. Groups and their corresponding identities are defined entirely by who is not in them.
I don't think products like this encourage the "deep surveillance state" - if anything, they weaken it by loosening their monopoly on high-tech covert surveillance. These things can be used for good as well as evil - you could spy on a corrupt official or catch someone cheating just as easily as anything else.
I think it would be pretty easy actually, to keep up with the data - you could just get a Bluetooth headset and set your phone to automatically accept calls from your spying device, then listen in while you go about your day.
SQLite is one of my favorite pieces of software for this exact reason, that it is actually a more or less "finished" program instead of a mire of shifting design requirements and constant security updates, a comfortably static and unchanging object against the chaotic backdrop of modern software development.
Do you not realize the downside of having some shady syndicate controlled by rich and powerful people dictate which symbols people are allowed to use to communicate with each other electronically? Or do you realize it and you think it's great, because you expect them to act in your interests, and against those of people you hate?
>For some people, race, fighting for for recognition, let alone equality, is a daily battle. You may live and work far from this conflict, but it exists, and in some part the diversity modifiers for emoji provide folks with empowerment.
Have you ever considered how condescending it is to these people to say that white people need to be the ones to give these people the ability to "reflect their world" via technology by encoding things relevant to other groups of people in the specifications they write? Why don't these people "fighting for recognition" write their specifications, and their own software? Making white people do it for them cannot be empowerment - it's charity, and with that charity comes dependence, which is the exact opposite of "empowerment". The only real empowerment comes from the self, not by other people deigning to give you things for free so their peers will think more highly of them.
>And it's political, which goes against the HN guidelines.
People violate this "guideline" so much that I literally did not even know it was a rule (and yes, I checked beforehand) until I was shadowbanned for it without warning. Apparently the rule is that you can talk about politics if you don't talk about too much, or exclusively, although I strongly suspect it had more to do with having the wrong views than posting about them too frequently (data on this would be welcome).