aspec

Good insight, that would explain the mechanism propelling a fractionally small minority of cheaters at best.

This isn't controversial? We know this based on the testimonies of the Jewish survivors they forced to do it.

Even if software didn't have tremendously higher cultural barriers for usage than manual equipment, the rapidity of exchange is a very small component of the exchange value for the means of software production (which is primarily hardware anyway). The value of both hardware and software is measurable by the amount of labor needed to produce them, so it's not even comparable--it's identical.

The Nazis concealed and eliminated any traces of Babiy Yar before retreating, there was nothing there at all already.

What do you mean "cover up"? The Soviet Union as a nation suffered some of the greatest numbers of causulties in WWII at the hands of the Nazis by far. What are you talking about with regards to "medallions"? Are you even aware of who fought against and defeated Nazi Germany?

> Yad Vashem is working with Jewish organisations in those countries to try to reach remaining survivors in the former Soviet Union, where the Holocaust was not officially commemorated, and who may have little awareness of the memorial's existence.

This is an unbelievably cavalier piece of revisionism. The USSR never commemorated the camps they themselves liberated? Holocaust denial in Russia is still a criminal offense, how totally absurd.

> Harnessing the energy of people across the planet by letting them trade with each other has so clearly been a disaster for everyone, has it?

Yes. Mining and drilling have obliterated the natural resources of hundreds of millions of people around the world. That's why oil spillage in Nigeria is called an environmental disaster.

> Essentially, isn't this capitalism with all its fault lines? One way or another it can be got to work for everyone's advantage.

Not when capital is turned into a commodity that has necessarily less value, which are then still traded on the market as securities with no regulation. Then you end up with scenarios in which political intervention is the only method for preventing the entire global economy from collapsing. That's already happened once, which is evidence that this article's fairly milque-toast thesis is correct.

The legislative branch of the government cannot be replaced with machines. Think a little harder.

I wasn't talking about a general problem with capitalism. I'm saying that this is a unique problem that Twitter as a company has to face, for the reasons the article describes.

Social capital is still capital. If social capital is what draws users to Twitter, then Twitter's user engagement as a whole determines the value of its shares. If new users aren't able to gain that capital through Twitter, then Twitter's userbase will begin to stagnate, and its stock value will drop. Regardless of who's to "blame", this is undeniably a real problem.