This looks like the plot of Chernobyl, which was a TV show creation of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster which tried to portray what happened mostly, re-enacted. I hope this fellow does not face harassment as a result of this article. Though that is unlikely.
It hurts everybody you know in different ways, and it hurts people more based on their socioeconomic status. It pokes and prods and twists millions of little parts of your life, and it’s everywhere, so you have to ignore it, because complaining about it feels futile, like complaining about the weather.It isn’t. You’re battered by the Rot Economy, and a tech industry that has become so obsessed with growth that you, the paying customer, are a nuisance to be mitigated far more than a participant in an exchange of value. A death cult has taken over the markets, using software as a mechanism to extract value at scale in the pursuit of growth at the cost of user happiness.
This ‘death cult’ is just ordinary people who take the easy way of forcing others to provide what they cannot do themselves. The commercial system is little more than a convoluted mechanism to fulfill this need. While, of course, not being extremely cruel to the workers because that always has consequences. This rule goes against the very instinct and reason for those radically believing in this system though, and as a result is disregarded in time by people who believe their predecessors who bit more than they could chew were foolish for not merely suffocating the poorer classes even more, in the hope they will work for them out of desperation.
These things have a simple root—it is people being unwilling to bear the burdens and pains for becoming capable of doing what they want to do, and seeing it preferable to push the pains on others instead. The most effective way to deal with it is to disobey and push the burden of pain right back to the cause of problems, rather than take up the pain for either pennies or the promise of easing the pressure, while the majority of the benefit coming from the work you put in goes to others. Push it back, reject it, and push it back again when these persons defiantly cause more problems. They’ll end up toothless and—the horror—with take up some form of technical skill learning to survive.
An organisation without the technically skilled persons to suffer under work for them are just a bunch of persons with many desires but no way to fulfill them. All the while the structure of ‘legitimacy’, which forces people’s hand to work for practically achieving nothing, breaks down. People are forced to work hard again if they ever had the idea of simply making others do the work and benefiting from it. In this happening you do not destroy co-operation and business themselves, but only trim these perverted aspects off them.
There are ways to mitigate this.
How about doing what is good for the people instead of the industry🤦
The comment section on this article is a little bit of hell.
Also, I get that this is part of Microsoft’s duties for its own OS security. But the role it has seems to be a bit too large. Currently it seems, even though it is seemingly working for the benefit of Ukraine in the conflict, that they could choose to aid Russia at any time. I don’t think I like them having such capacity. Being able to interfere in such events in such a drastic degree, if they choose to. Interference in politics in such a direct manner, even if aid with ‘intelligence’ is one of their offerings, cannot really be removed from their capability here. These are basics of state… just what are modern politicians doing. I’d say it is not so much the governments in specific places (like the US) running their regions anymore.
I don’t think China cares. Such places, the powers will sink down their entire region for ‘glory’.
The natural result.
To think they actually gave one of the reasons of invading Ukraine as ‘fighting Nazis’
Once EVs become the main type of vehicles sold, sellers will lower quality to ‘encourage’ you to replace them more often.
Every industry starts off like this and ends off like that.
Of course. Really it is the opposite of ‘better’
Selling your soul for coin is real easy. No sympathy for this person in particular, this person didn’t even suffer for the evil deeds done.
Do you know how much of a scumbag you have to be to attack a hospital.
They’re quite proud of their actions rather, I imagine. And I do not doubt they proudly make it a matter of morality in some or another way.
Bolster the defenses, make it harder for the malicious.
If a person refuses to see whether they are causing harm even unintentionally… refuses to even try… that’s all that matters. Responsibility lies there when the person causes harm. Same for persons who are aware and are personally fine with causing harm for gain. On the other hand, seeing and personally trying to reduce it, a person can atone for harm caused by oneself. These things cannot be forced. Attempts to be fully aware and not cause harm only brings happiness to the one making such attempts in the end. The ‘pains of life’, which is the purpose for the concept of ‘escapes’ to exist in the first place, go away completely. You could call such pains either the result of maliciousness or the naivety which aids people who want to cause harm.
This is a decision everyone can only make by themselves.
Education has, traditionally, been more about control than anything else. It just seems the two most focussed groups are those who choose ‘acceptable learning’ which is wholly detrimental (and against) to critical thinking and intellectual freedom, and those who take the desire for the lack of learning to the extreme.
The best education is the one which wholly focuses on learning, without restriction. Very few places in the world have that.
Learning did not start with education and predates it by a lot. However, many people I’ve known who are educated cannot comprehend where things came from before they became information. The mindset that you cannot know anything unless you read it in a textbook. I too am educated but it felt most inadequate to me. We live in a somewhat educated world, and most of the educated world believes that the nature of many problems cannot be known and many problems cannot be solved.
That said, what the article states is absolutely worse. It is taking the traditional meaning of controlled education and using it to the extreme. Short term political gain, long term pain. If they are lucky enough to change ways in an adequate manner to avert disaster (and that is a very unlikely if), there will still be many economic and violent socially disruptive consequences which will directly be influenced by this choice. Such models of real forced control are not really sustainable—either the total (or even near total) control is a self-appreasing lie, or it is the prulude to the fall.
Big corporations cannot survive in a real free market. For that very reason real free markets do not exist. So the ‘legitimate businesses’ which do not do things as well as others do can survive.
As horrible as it sounds, no regulation is what makes a free market. But there is no free market because when there is talk of free market, it just means extreme regulation to stifle small, extremely small business. These businesses run by people who work with their own hands are what give the large ones a run for their money. They’re the real obstacle to large entities which do things in not the best way (so almost all of them). What people are left with are legitimate small businesses allowed under regulation after everything has been restricted already… and with the methods these follow, they’re no harm to the big entities. The common human be damned, they’re forced to choose from the least bad option for anything.
‘Free market’ in politics is a joke, an intentional joke. It wouldn’t be a little bit surprising if the ones who advocate for free markets most have a laugh, outside of public view, at people who actually believe their points.
To be fair… real free market would see the crashing of many industries as things go back to being a bit more practical. A slow process which takes even luxury to be affordable—but the meaning of luxury changes. Things inessential for survival would then be deemed luxury and such things, good things which are also very accessible, would be fairly common around. The main flaw with that, however, is the purpose of luxury. Luxury is hardly used to refer to things merely inessential for survival, they’re considered mere vehicles of showing your status and power (even though a relatively simple trick would be to not pay no heed to them). They are objects to enable one’s pride, ‘pride comes before the fall’ be damned to them. One can have solace in the thought that the fall really does come, though.
Note: I do not support deregulation, it just means to allow big corporations to fuck around at the cost of other humans. But then, I do not really support anything.
Letting natural consequence play its part is better than accidentally making things worse. And doing things right the first time, in a skilled and quick manner, is better than letting a mess remain as it is.
It takes all sorts of horrible actions from all sorts of horrible people in many parts of the world, and the place itself, for these things to become possible. The guns they possess, the technical tools for population registration they have…
Seems to me like they do not know how to make a good oven.
It is an odd choice to argue over such a thing. No one was harmed in the making of the first comment. Or the second. If anything, that person is being completely reasonable instead of demanding what others should do.
In all seriousness, I hope this person will be fine. It is usually detrimental to self preservation, with either active or passive aggression, to openly state what things are. I hope this person can protect himself from any harm of any nature (even harassment).
Incidental, but the cause of Valery Legasov’s death is accepted to be suicide. Whether that is actually what happened I won’t argue for however, it is something I do not know anything about.