It would not embarrass the government. They’re lying and they know it. People who let the Nazis into Canada have long since retired or died. But their children and grandchildren are still around, as are the new generation of racists. It’s these latter groups that dislike any kind of transparency and justice. Embarrassment has nothing to do with it.

You’re even more cute, my friend.

I agree with you, and another way of looking at it is that the system is working perfectly as intended. The people who are happy with it are the ones who have the power to change it, but they don’t want to, because there’s no benefit to them.

The garbage is taking itself out

CS often requires working in teams, and working it teams is often more efficient if you have some shared approaches.

You posted the numbers. It’s not 1% or something small that people might argue is trivial. One trap of political reporting is that people conflate a country name with it’s military or its current leadership or its people. That inevitably leads to extrapolation and unwarranted conclusions.

Of course this is not unique to Israel. It happens all the time. And it’s not OK, but many people are lazy and others are manipulative, so the best we can do is be aware of the tendency to equivocate.

Paywalled, pointless.

Mostly good article. The end is wrong, though. People do care about policy. Any decent political journalist knows this.

If you want to suggest that 16 is a great age to allow people to start work, I don’t think you’re going to find much resistance. That’s true in the United States, and much of the world, as you remarked. But 13 is nowhere close to 16, so that’s where you’re seeing resistance here.

Another point that I thought it was obvious, but perhaps it isn’t, is how easy it is for older coworkers and bosses to manipulate children. Kids don’t have the experience, and they don’t have the experience or composure necessary to reliably walk away from bad work environments. So then, is there some totally necessary societal function that we desperately need young teenagers to feel? If there’s not, why don’t we take the risk off of them.

And finally we have to come back to the elephant in the room. In reality, people who propose allowing children to work are doing so because they don’t want to pay adults more.

And again I think it’s obvious, but maybe it’s not so obvious to others, that if the goal is to give kids a variety of experiences then there are plenty of great ways to do so. Sports, music, school, volunteering, extracurriculars, you name it. Structured environments with proper supervision, managed by people who care about the safety of those kids, and aren’t going to try to make a buck by mistreating them.

Right. Please research child labor exploitation and you will understand. It’s clearly documented. Just because you were lucky doesn’t mean others were, or will be.

You say no issues while ignoring the exploitation angle, which is historical fact. But even if it weren’t, are we so pathetic that our society somehow needs these kids to work instead of being kids? Really? We can’t do any better?

Um … you want permanent punishments for 13 year olds? That is sick, my friend. Do jobs teach teamwork better than ice hockey or D&D? That is a claim you could make, but maybe we don’t believe you. Remember, life is long, and expecting kids to learn adult lessons is at odds with psychology and reality.

High schools get jobs and learn that the assistant manager is always an asshole. Useful to know. But there’s no rush to figure it out, is there?

Nobody is buying anything, my friend. It’s the natural result of real estate speculation. Prices have to keep going up for investors to make their money, but at some point residents can’t afford to buy, so they don’t, and we wait for the bubble to burst. The whole field ought to be illegal, because housing is a human right.

We don’t need to hate on the developers, but neither should we respect them. They were taking advantage of a bubble, knowing full well it wasn’t sustainable, and if they get burned by it, meh.

Who cares where they live? Canada can tax its citizens globally, if it really wants to, and it can tax any businesses operating in Canada.

Prosody claims to support Message Archive Management and HTTP file sharing, sounds like the feature you want, or at least it is close.

It sounds like you’re suggesting that because our system of government is complex, increasing the complexity even more is generally a perfectly reasonable thing to do. If that’s what you mean, I disagree with you.

It also sounds like you’re repeating basic facts about crafting legislation that we all know. I’m not a lawmaker and I’m not trying to write a law here in the comment section, so I don’t particularly care to prepare a several page document. Certainly one could do so if one were so inclined…

CFCs are a good reminder that we can successfully ban dangerous things, if we carefully follow up to see what the workarounds are, and if they are harmful, too.

Or consider a simple car example. SUVs and trucks in the US have led to a massive increase in deaths. And they pollute heavily. And they fill up roads making traffic worse. And there’s less room for parking. Why not simply ban trucks over a certain size or weight for personal use? Obviously people are driving vehicles far larger than they need, and it’s killing others. So ban new sales starting in five years. Why not? The manufacturers know what they’re doing is unethical, and they don’t care, so nobody would feel bad for them.

I don’t understand what you mean about opaqueness being the principle of our civilization. Democratic government has the express opposite goal.

We can test your argument by asking what has been done historically, and we can successfully point to dozens of examples of environmental regulation that didn’t involve a tax. There can’t be any serious debate about the fact that we’ve done this in the past, and it worked in the past.

You could be right, maybe adding a tax is more effective on average, but I’m apprehensive. When you make the system complex and allow people to trade their credits, you’ve just created a system that’s designed to be abused, and of course it will be.

Regulate. You know, we have done so for decades. Remember leaded gasoline? No credits involved. New rules instituted, companies adjust, victory.

It’s so disingenuous to ask the question, when environmental problems and solutions predate the carbon tax idea by decades, or even centuries, depending how you define things.

You are too cute. Would you prefer this? … Regulate. It really is that simple.

Heads in the sand. Classic.

If we gotta have scientists tell us that, we have serious issues. The time for scientist warnings was like fifty years ago, when people could pretend not to see the future badness. And those warnings were there, ignored by many, especially by people in power.

I haven’t noticed any pitfalls, but some other sites have fancy looking interfaces, and they might organize things in a fashion that you find more convenient. In other words, it’s a question of what features you want and where you can find them.

I like to think of it from a different standpoint. Propaganda and fake news has existed for hundreds of years, if not millennia. It’s just that in the past it was mostly created by wealthy folks, and now anyone can create their own.

As a simple matter of fact, many people are still recommending TPB. It gets the job done a lot of the time.

Whether it’s really a loss in revenue is not the relevant question to the people making decisions at Reddit. They’re looking for sources of new revenue, and if they think they can monetize the feeds, then you know they will try.

Also, there is a slight cost to maintaining them.

Obviously the details matter, and many things happened all at once.

For example, the original policy was going to force out all free open source clients, and that was later retracted, but the damage to the company’s reputation was already done.

For example, clients for the visually impaired could have been set aside as a special case immediately, and they weren’t, and as I understand it they still aren’t.

For example, third-party clients that don’t show ads could have been blocked without restricting third party clients that assist mods.

For example, the result of the blackout could have been some sort of sympathetic statement, but instead it was the hammer getting laid down, leading to even worse results.

So you’re a question is whether the outcome would have been different if the administrators had acted differently, and of course the answer is yes. That being said, what we’ve learned is that the administrators do not value the mods or the end user. All of the above issues simply don’t matter to them because they don’t care.

You talked about capitalism as if it’s inevitable, but you’re wrong. The decision to try to make a lot of money was made, many other online services have made other decisions, and you don’t get to excuse the actions of anyone in the administration on the grounds that it’s just the natural consequence of capitalism.

Some private trackers are shady. Even if you seed, they might undercount your contribution and ask for money. If that happens, it’s a scam, just walk away.

It’s the activity that matters, not the subscribers.