I didn't say unilateral, although I support that as well. The United States is the only country ever to use nuclear weapons, and is also one that I reside in. If I lived in Russia or China, I would advocate for unilateral disarmament in those countries as well. Nuclear weapons are an absolute horror and should be completely eliminated from this planet. The United States (unlike China) does not even have a "No first use" policy -- it reserves the ability to use nuclear weapons aggressively or pre-emptively.
“Hawking's rationale was that humankind would eventually fall victim to an extinction-level catastrophe - perhaps sooner rather than later. What worried him were so-called low-probability, high impact events - a large asteroid striking our planet is the classic example. But Hawking perceived a host of other potential threats: artificial intelligence, climate change, GM viruses and nuclear war to name a few.
In 2016, he told the BBC: "Although the chance of a disaster to planet Earth in a given year may be quite low, it adds up over time, and becomes a near certainty in the next thousand or 10,000 years.”
Horrifying mindset that led to the disastrous war on terror in the aftermath of 9/11. Our foreign policy should not be based on an animalistic thirst for blood.
While your personal anecdote may vary, my personal anecdote does seem to indicate that tech is a pretty meritocracy directed industry. Maybe this is a Silicon Valley / CA trait given thing like non-compete clauses being non-enforceable.
Tech is often more of a meritocracy than other fields/industries.
It is quite possible for a talented engineer to rise quickly out of university but nearly impossible for a talented surgeon or industrial engineer without a decade+ of effort.
The tech industry has a bias for youth, which is mutually exclusive with experience. I don't know much about the medical industry, but I wager surgeons face less ageism once the gray hairs start coming in. With that age comes experience younger surgeons simply couldn't have.
Maybe that makes them better surgeons, or maybe not. But it seems to me that ageism in tech complicates comparisons to fields which value experience instead of youth.
My point was that the OPPOSITE is true in most other fields.
If you don't have grey hairs, you simply are not considered for the top jobs at all in certain industries. YOE (years of experience) is nearly everything for some professions, tech is surprisingly quite robust in that regard.
Personally, I would be more amenable to a statement like "tech is not an absolute meritocracy". Many industries are however, roughly meritocratic. While talent may not be perfectly recognized or rewarded, it often eventually is - simply because it makes good business sense. When you have easy to recognize signals of merit and value, like in the tech industry where work can be more objectively evaluated, it makes it easier to implement a meritocratic culture.
Unions are not perfect and unionized workers often have a complicated relationship with their union, but fundamentally a Union is just a democratic organization representing workers. The policies are set by the union on behalf of the interests of workers, however imperfectly. Without a union, the policies are set by management and there is no institutional power that workers have collectively against policies they don’t like.
> I disagree with this move. Why should we force a cap rather than let market competition improve prices?
Because the demand for delivery services on behalf of restaurants is inelastic right now -- they are relying on delivery for their revenue, and it's difficult to manage that in-house. This leads to price gouging.
Not necessarily. There aren't really that many frictionless ways to gamble hundreds of thousands of dollars on your phone. People, especially young people, may make stupid, reckless decisions, but those decisions are often harder to get into and limited in scope and damage.
Cash advance on credit card and you can gamble on whatever you want. The cash advance on the credit card is the dangerous part.
You could even cash advance on a credit card, buy a car, and wreck it and be in the same financial situation as you would if you gambled it away on robinhood.
Antifa is a decentralized organization of people fighting against fascism. They don’t have a positive ideology, literally the only thing that unifies them is anti fascism. Communists, anarchists, and liberals may all call themselves antifa
Using that logic Republicans could call themselves antifa since almost everyone, Republicans included, is against fascism. It's when you define "fascism" as anything right of Trotsky that people start have issues with your ideology.
Fascism is not he only form of authoritarianism. Many people commit thuggery and intimidation against people who hold normal everyday views in the name of anti-fascist action. The name of a movement doesn't mean it can't be coopted for other purposes/drift from its original purpose. Just like the nature/culture of subreddits change over time.
If you think antifa is targeting “normal everyday views” I’m concerned about what sort of views you think those are. Do you think that neonazi and alt right organizations hold “everyday normal views”? That’s what antifa targets
If you think The Spanish Inquisition is targeting “normal everyday views” I’m concerned about what sort of views you think those are. Do you think that not acknowledging God as our one true saviour and creator and those jewish/muslim/eastern-orthodox/atheist organizations hold “everyday normal views”? That’s what the Spanish Inquisition targets?
