To be honest, no. No, I do not know why you find this so funny.
99 karma · joined December 9, 2021
If a virus is on your system it is already too late for the tool to do anything.
In China, for example, it is generally considered outright irresponsible to not get genetic testing done, to not abort a fetus with the wrong number of chromosomes, etc. These topics are discussed very openly, matter of factly, etc.
On a separate note but still in response -- Wikipedia is not a reputable resource for anything even remotely political and is outright banned in classrooms (and some countries due to the politicized nature of the content).
Most discussions I have had on the topic with experts and such in their labs are usually in good faith with collective enthusiasm for what science can one day bring to humanity. It is only online that I encounter a sort of political extremism in opposition to the idea of leveraging what we know (of DNA) to make the world better.
There is, however, the weird outliers. There are those people with similar brain patterns that are not of the violent variety. They seem to succeed in business, for example.
I wouldn't be surprised if, for example, Steve Jobs or Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk or Linus Torvalds (essentially the tech greats) were all sociopathic in some way.
FWIW, I am not a trained psychiatrist and am only speaking from the sort of popular psychology news articles and documentaries and TED talks I have seen on this particular topic.
I suppose maybe we have a different set of definitions we are using. I do not view my stances as compatible with those of the time.
When I think of eugenics, I think of Gattaca, CRISPR, cloning, saving lives, and gene therapy.
well Einstein was against this idea of, you know, German pseudoscience, where they had these men going through mountains in the Middle East and measuring skulls and what have you, I do think applied genetics is a very different science.
But, maybe things like this should be, you know, patched in an update to the system. It could always be better.
In my comment, it is to be understood that an exceptional individual like Einstein is worth more to the species than an average person. It is not to imply average people are worthless, but rather that exceptional people are rare and the species values them.
That is the root of a simple division that a coordinated state actor will exacerbate, amplify, meme-ify, and repeatedly upvote with bot armies.
Taking as fact that social media platforms program the brain of their users via dopamine rushes obtained through the upvotes, likes, and user engagement. Thus and therefore we can conclude that this is the easiest attack vector in the history of state versus state psychological warfare.
Adversaries use benign divisions as a tool to cause discord. This has always been the case, but social media is a tool that has been weaponized to tremendous effect and now you can see it being leveraged as a weapon by simply opening Reddit and seeing what divisive was botted to the top.
Maybe you refuse to believe this is happening and you assume this is all a paranoid fiction. That is fine. How then do you explain the legions of PHDs and psych researchers and language experts working at Chinese and Russian information warrior farms and leveraging machine learning empowered bot identity generators? Do you just assume Russia and China are pissing money away?
It is also very similar to an organic movement from China that got banned and censored just before it suddenly became a top three thread on reddit every day for all of this year.
I suspect movements and divisions that are studied and analyzed in (adversarial nation) are then exported, translated, and weaponized by their information warriors.
What I have noticed about anti-work is that the insane opinions are amplified and encouraged. They promote and advocate for digital sabotage of your own work places.
This all has numerous effects down stream that would slightly benefit an adversary.
Most attention grabbing platforms are designed to use a variety of reward mechanisns to reinforce the politics of the platform.
Some easily botted platforms (like reddit) will constantly bombard people with anti-civilizational content promoting "anti-work" or very toxic identity politics that further isolates the users, and, in turn, strengthens their addiction to reddit because they will have no friends or family.
I wonder if the platforms are complicit in this or if they are passively incompetent and this terribleness is just being exacerbated by foreign adversaries trying to poison western dialogues and minds.
Any other business in the country would just have products / services and prices without any of these games.
Had the same experience as you, FWIW.
They are a bit of an improvement over some devices out there, but they are probably a downgrade from Bose bluetooth devices I have owned temporarily (I returned them to exchange for a wired buds pair).
I think you are giving Apple too much credit. I would say Airpods have good marketing and it is smart to give them away for free with their other products to create or perpetuate an illusion of popularity.
(1) Battery is nearly useless.
(2) The vendor decided to artificially slow the device with forced updates, or worse, the vendor decided to publish a list of CVEs and then declare your device ineligible for the necessary security updates going forward.
Most people I know use only one airpod at a time. That applies to my two teens in highschool and a multitude of professionals I work with. The same people a decade earlier would just be using the Samsung mono ear pieces or the multitude of other ones that existed.
The earpiece craze started long before. I remember my mono-audio Samsung earpiece that went into one ear and worked perfectly from a decade before Airpods. The samsung charged with a simple USB cable, too.
The digital age is scarey in that it tends to preserve the past in a way that allows a mistake from five years ago seem like it happened just today.
For example, Mel Gibson. Two damaging recordings got leaked of him a decade or more ago and those cringe moments of his life will be preserved forever.
It wasn't like that before and this is not a cool feature of the modern age.
If we are under attack from a foreign adversary, then the logical thing to do would be to firewall our social medias off into national siloes.
Instead, they use their positions to censor our speech amongst eachother, promote their own political ideologies, and cause everyone to live in a state of unknowingly being censored, shadow banned, algorithmicly limited, etc for having a very human opinion that differs from that which the platform seeks to amplify.
Anyone can then claim fake news about anything that wasnt enumerated on their resume.
Essentially, he bribed the toxic political radicals to leave and take the payout.
A company that can afford to do identity-politics based hiring initiatives is a company that has more money than they know what to do with. Companies in the earlier stages that will go on to be successful are going to be lean and meritocratic.
FWIW, I really like how the Coinbase CEO handled the toxic woke employees they got burdoned with.
This is all rather easily averted and solved if someone actually cared, but no one cares.
The problem could be solved by a sort of KYC (know your customer) rule that then is used to silo the platform on a per country basis.
Imagine a reddit that consisted ONLY of your countrymen's genuine comments, without any bots or alt accounts, without any foreign state actors repeatedly pumping divisive stuff to the top.
Further, imagine a sort of certificate authority for identity per the KYC systen.
Americans using this free speech platform could all be anonymous to eachother, but still visible to the feds if they used the platform to post illegal content. There would then be no need or reason to censor speech. People could talk of taboo subjects freely and openly behind their usernames without having foreign ragebots in a Russian trollfarm tur ing it into a flamewar.
You know, maybe Trump's team that recieved huge investment would build such a thing. Who knows.
Regardless of one's feelings towards China, this statement from the US state department, themselves a part of the conflict, more or less describes the events in almost exactly the same way.