jdmitch

That's quite a harsh judgment - I think the hustler is generally aware that they are on the losing end of the power dynamic, and that is what requires the hustle (partly to prove their eagerness/enthusiasm), but their self worth is definitely not zero as this would cause them to just shut up and not bother. I see hustle as an attempt flex muscle by the weaker person in the negotiation.

But that actually doesn't match with the paradigms of some of the most prominent world religions, which despite being surrounded (in some sects more than others) by the trappings of object-worship, self-identify as explicitly about belief/faith. Scientology does essentially sell a very-specific type of counselling insofar as it is transactional. Many "prosperity" churches, and the Roman Catholic church in the middle ages (and some would argue to a lesser extent today), sell promises of security/eternity. But the majority of monotheistic faith and practice isn't about creating objects of worship/adoration and an ideology that binds them together. Fundamentalism is a symptom of transactional faith, just as entrepreneurship (great or mediocre) engenders faith in a product, and the transactional opportunity to acquire it. Religion that isn't fundamentalist attenuates the acquisition of the object of worship.

From my experience this has almost certainly reversed, at least in reference to places I've lived in East and West Africa, as most men wear 3 piece suits or at least long trousers and shirts. Meanwhile in America, most people who work outside or in a non-arctic office will wear as little as they can get away with.

These "refugee centres" are known as Temporary Accomodation Centres (TACs), about which Refugee Legal aid [1] states:

Temporary Accommodation Centres: TACs are located throughout the Russian Federation and at great distances from metropolitan areas. Transportation to and from a TAC and nearest metropolitan area is often costly and dangerous.

I can't imagine that would be a very safe secure environment from Snowden's perspective...

[1] http://www.refugeelegalaidinformation.org/russian-federation...

"17m of Kenya’s 19m adults are signed up to M-PESA. Cash equivalent to nearly one-third of Kenya’s GDP washes through the service."

http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21579870...

Ultimately, the move toward less regulated currency is driven by the Kenyan Government's decision to tax M-Pesa transactions by 10% which threatens to tip them towards no longer being the most efficient way to move money. This is just a clever work-around to the poor regulation of mobile money.

“These people are having sex with a lot of people. Obviously, they don’t mind having sex with other people, and that gives me the right to have sex with them, by force if necessary.”

People unfortunately actually have made (and still make) similar statements to justify objectification and sexual predation of people labeled as promiscuous. It doesn't seem like something that has changed though at a certain point in time due to a watershed reconceptualization (the sexual revolution?) equivalent to the generational shift of offline-born to online-born.

It is about societal conceptualization of sexuality and (in the case of NSA situation) privacy, but I don't think it maps cleanly onto generational change. When people see sexuality or privacy as "all-or-nothing" matters, the same crude logic pervades, whether it's "they aren't a virgin, so they can't refuse sex" or "they share everything on facebook anyways, so they can't refuse giving it to us."

Ironically, it still required external ideas/stimulus to come up with topics of conversation. I was expecting the OP would say it gave them time to reflect, or be present to himself! One could just as easily browse books/news on a phone that would be of mutual interest for a coming conversation. There is some sort of "curation" that goes on in the bookstore, but nothing that couldn't be provided by software.

Surely "capture" is not unique to finance though - in fact it seems that political opportunists line up corporations with similar financial interests from across sectors. It doesn't take just finance to make a plutocracy with narrow interests.

Doesn't seem quite as far off as it might have before the Snowden situation :(

I think its almost more significant that in a post-piracy age (maybe we're not quite there yet), people seem to be increasingly willing to pay for something when they don't have to. I think open source may start to gain traction on a pay-what-you-want payment model, in the way that some musicians have.

It feels more and more like a deceptive charade that the US is actually a democratic republic. It is increasingly clear that in a number of significant areas the shady bureaucracy is taking action without the public's consent.

"EU cookie law. Piss off Von Rumpy. Me... I hammer visitors to death with cookies, so I can find out what they want. Cookies allow my website to serve visitors the content they need. Get used to it. The EU cookie law is an ass. - Ling"