burner831234

I mean we realize this thread of argument has nothing to do with the point right?

A cell phone number does not equal your kitchen phone in terms of access to information. The whole this is moot. The issue now is that this is my personal phone number, me, personally, and is being used as a piece of validating information in a variety of compromises databases.

It's possible that you aren't thinking of the west in terms of the last 100 years. I feel like sometimes when we're all discussing privacy on here, we forget surveillance is iterative as an industry as well. This isn't the first time that privacy has attempted to be eroded.

Here are a few for you to consider: Post 9/11: the tracking of muslim american communities and all that came from Snowden's disclosures

Interment of Japanese Americans: identify, tracked and literally interned during WWII

WWII Axis decisions: the tracking, internment, and death of Jews, Slavs, gypsies and others

WWI: The Wilson administration banned radical and Socialist journals from the mail system, jailed the leader of the Socialist party even though ~1% of the US population voted for the guy

McCarthyism which was shown to be used against political rivals as much as it was against socialists

The list honestly goes on and on. A government cannot be trusted with expanded surveillance tools and there just needs to be oversight. Its not to say it shouldnt exist, its to say it should always be viewed with a critical gaze.

As far as the ideological goal sitting above your security, its important to remember that your ideological goal may be at odds. Democracy was at odds. Socialism is at odds. Freedom of religion in communist china and russia was at odds with the existing govt. Its easy to say these things when we feel like we're on the 'right' side and things will never change.

Its always surprising when on HN these degrees are considered non desirable and yet every time one of us starts a company we realize we need them.

While we really should just ask the original author to explain, my interpretation is: younger employees are more likely to simply acquiesce to unreasonable demands like short notice for working late. Or working to prove themselves bc they lack confidence.

Older workers have gained the confidence to ask for what they are worth. Employers do not appreciate this. They may have a more efficient way of working or may not have a singular definition of self (work == my identity) and obligations like family outside of work.

This is the thing @lotsofpulp that everyone else seems to be missing. The amount of your income that is available to spend on goods after all of your other fixed expenditures. This has been so solidly tracked in terms of stagnant wages and applies to the SMB in the area as well.

Open a grocery and try to staff folks and have consistent supply of goods. Deal with shrinkage, spoilage and inefficient supply chains.

Meanwhile Wal-Mart (or other MNC) has a ton of capital, their employees are on social services and the cost of their goods for this town's store is in a negotiation of not one store but thousands.

People spend what they can. The middle class shows us this in their consumption of target over walmart and other such brand divides.

+1 and if you need a pop culture version to explain it to you check out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJlqsdezhhk (adam ruins everything) complete with references

Actually its the continued extreme pressure to commercialize this.

Technology can enable a diversity of content or it can reinforce you staying on the website by serving up continuously sensationalized or aligned content. It chooses the latter to provide more advertising.

This is a serious case for the release of advertising and generation of new revenue models for internet products and presences.