Conventional “wisdom” is rarely anything but simple convention.
It always amazes me how people tend to short circuit all rational thought and higher order intellect when it comes to certain, almost inexplicably obsessed about things.
This fluoride issue is a good example, people who aren’t self-important and “educated” have been derided and ridiculed for years now simply because they suggest there may be something wrong, even though their claims are based on the very science the self-important group claims to hold to be sacrosanct.
So objective evaluation leaves you with the realization that it must be something else than actual scientific method and rational intellect that incenses the self-important cohort.
My belief is that it is really based on a naked kind of supremacism of the “educated” and self-important people who, although extremely competent and skilled in many ways, seem to lack quite basic skills like humility and exhibit strong psychopathic tendencies, which would allow them to cede the very notion that those they have utter contempt for (usually those not in a concentration of self-important narcissism of urban self-selection) May have actually bested them or have pointed out the worst thing possible to the self-important supremacist psychopathic group … that they were wrong about something. There seems to be an odd kind of psychological or even cognitive barrier that prevents that group from accepting divergence from beliefs that have been psychologically comparnentalized and shielded from approach that it causes almost violent and very much cognitively dissonant reactions.
Just float the notion that climate change is the 21st century’s alchemy andbthat there is a whole science industry behind it that inherently depends on furthering the notion of climate change in spite of fundamental issues that question the whole notion. Just alone the violent reaction to “denying” climate change should indicate to any rational person that something is not right. Serious, old school, died in the scientific wool actual scientists with no financial incentive have raised serious questions about the whole notion … but those are summarily ignored and violent reaction is the norm upon possibly informing anyone of the dissenters. That’s another example of how our supposedly most educated, learned, and intelligent; seem to be incapable sometimes of getting over themselves.
Clearly none of any of this will end up badly at all. Because if there’s anything we know its that technological advances are always managed totally responsibly and are extremely well understood in all its ramifications.
What could go wrong? Everything will be perfect and there will be zero problems. Clearly.
Add another 1/3 for the actual cost estimate, and that’s only if no unforeseen issues arise. So roughly $25,000,000,000. But hey, it’s only other people’s money, right? Why don’t we just raise the fares to cover the cost. You know, pay for stuff you want yourself.
Is the problem really that RSS needs replacement, or can it simply be improved. I think there is quite a bit of room for extension to address some of the concerns that are expressed here too, including accurate meta tagging for educational resource discovery purposes.
So they are going to create websites ... inside an email client! Do I even have to say that it's nonsense?
I really feel like the kiddos have lost all real connection to what the internet is and what it can do and what purpose it serves. You would not see half the nonsense we see these days if they did.
It's as if people are just running out of ideas so they have to try and create derivative nonsense from solid foundations. It's like postmodern art of technology ... can't created real art? No worries, drop a boulder on a car or splash some paint on something and call it art. It's all relative, things are what the mod declares them to be.
It's quite amazing to me how people seem to be incapable of understanding what a grave danger and risk not just Google, but also Facebook, Amazon, et al., are to the whole economy they cannibalize in the short run and all of humanity in the long rung.
They are all run and organized and structured like cults and they operate just like it. They are manipulative, abusive, liars that are shrouding and masquerading their true nature in throngs of brainwashed cult followers who not only are recruited to infiltrate and disseminate supporting propaganda, but also operate to undermine and subvert competition and threats. It's not really all that ironic that all these tech companies all exhibit similar behaviors and do so all from Silicon Valley, the epicenter of Indian cults and which is also overrun by Indians that bring that cult or sects or "devotional community" mentality to the USA and have infiltrated the tech companies with that mentality as they have risen in the ranks and even taken over many of the tech companies.
You also highlight, maybe without realizing it, an inherent blind assumption that somehow more humans on the planet is better than less humans, when in every regard and all measures would indicate the clear opposite being true. It almost feels like an addiction, a compulsory habit or even a physiological dependency on the notion that more people is a good thing.
The sustainably and ecologically balanced and qualitatively positive carrying capacity of the planet is far lower than even today's population, but for some reason even just bringing that notion up is not only ignored, but even countered not with rational argument, but violently aggressive hostility ... just like one would expect someone addicted to react to the confrontation about their addiction.
It's interesting what a white wash of the monster this piece is. Get the bad out of the way so the "good" can clear the conscience. When do we start applying this technique to the Nazis?
It would, in essence, but you can't really list every obscure site, can you now? Facebook is the most public offender of this even if Google's offenses may be more prolific, but it's not as in people's face as facebook.
This is kind of a typical German/socialist heavy handed approach to things. I don't agree that it should be illegal if you want to share it, but there needs to be a mechanism to give control over data back to users. This may be a bit too advanced for people, but we are really talking about a kind of digital slavery that Facebook and the like are engaged in; the taking of one's free choice and liberty and the fruits of one's labor to sustain the lifestyle of others against their will. It would be a different matter if all of this were transparent and above board, if you were told you are worth $800 per year to Facebook and $1,500 to Google and $700 to Amazon, etc. and that using their services comes with that cost. But you are told or given the impression that it is all "Free", while they harvest you and your information and data.
This is really a question about liberty and freedom and personal agency. I don't even think people quite realize just how much of themselves and their value and freedom they give up to Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc.
For all the self-destruction of Germany that Merkel's de facto communist dictatorship is bearing down on the German and European people through cultural genocide, at least the country is getting one thing right.
Can I just plug the MIT Solid project at this point, that seems to be attempting to give users control over their lives and person's again to break free of this age of digital slavery.