True, and also when you actually go to apply for a job it often kicks you out to another website, that will use who knows how many mbs? And you have to fill in your details again and again. Each one a different flavour. Sometimes saying the same thing multiple times for the same job ad.
Non technical people are afraid to block adds on their Android device since Google might find out about it and decides to eliminate their account; I was not able to convince them otherwise.
> To raise the tips of the chopsticks higher than the back of one’s hand.
Not doing this is just going to be awkward. I have food between the chopsticks, and I'm rotating my hand to place the food in my mouth and the tips will become higher than the back of my hand. Otherwise will commit agebashi.
In my case it did. I took "advanced math" (trig, mostly) in high school from an abysmal teacher. Ignoring her and developing an intuition through graphing was the best thing ever. I had the best final grade in the class.
There's potential case for a subscription model to keep security updated for the connection to the users' phones as well as on going support for less tech savvy users (e.g. "I told my assistant to turn on my smart dishwasher and it turned on the my smart washing machine instead"). I'd imagine the HN crowd would lean toward a open source version though.
If dishwashers were invented today they would be rented out to homes and businesses with DRM to lock you into buying approved detergent and tableware. Times change, and more exploitative arrangements are normalized. This ratchet is primed to go in one direction, and only moves the other way in fits and starts borne of great effort.
Well, custom/bespoke training for your families particular needs perhaps, performed once every 5 years.
I mean I envision analog/custom/bespoke ai hardware that is fundamentally 'good enough'. I mean as the market increases its need for these systems and as time progresses at some point it'll like warhammer 30k where these 'standard template constructs' are smart enough to basically teach you anything.
> ... but seeing how quick Europe and Canada turned on the US ...
I think they rightfully turned defensive in light of the current administration. Remains to be seen how/if they change when the administration changes.
The one thing I can't find a quick is a definition for "pronatalist." The obvious definition without the scare quotes is "those in favor of families having children." But we have scare quotes and references to men who definitely desire extreme levels of control over others.
It looks like "pronatalist" policy is "say you support increased birth rates while simultaneously being against any economic policy that would support families."
Which looks like the conservative playbook for decades. "Yes, more people in need, with limited education, so we can scare them into supporting more of the same."
I think the quotes is to say that these people who say that they are pronatalist have revealed preferences that indicate that it is not a serious concern for them.
There are a lot of flavors of "pro-natalist". For example Elon Musk is a "pro-natalist" but he seems to clear favor white Christian people and himself especially. Others are pro-natalist but have a general eugenics bent, rather than just white/Christian supremacy. And then others are pro-natalist in a more general sense, in that our culture in general should encourage at least rough replacement levels of fertility so that that we should avoid a population collapse.
Christian? Musk says he is not religious. He has said he is a "cultural christian" - a description also used of themselves by a lot of people ranging from Richard Dawkins to Anders Breivik.
That would still match "[favouring] white Christian people". Or at least that part matches the "Christian" part, the other stuff Musk associates with seems to suggest at least some racial (and not simply cultural) biases in his thinking, e.g. how he regards DEI as being a promotion of undeserving people rather than a way to give equal opportunities to deserving people who are demonstrably under-represented given their qualifications.
It is entirely unimportant how Richard Dawkins is categorised, isn't it? Last I checked, the "pro-natalist" part isn't there for Dawkins, so how other things modify a pro-natalist stance don't connect to anything.
You're the one who chose to combine Musk and Dawkins in the same group here with "cultural christian", that's absolutely a straw man if this is what you're doing.
I mean, your own link up there has a sub-heading of "Everyone has their own definition".
Especially when you're replying to "he seems to clear favor white Christian people and himself especially" rather than "is a Christian". Queen Victoria wasn't a feminist, neither.
You are saying they are Christian in the same sense of being "cultural Christians" rather than actual Christians. if you say one is a Christian it follows that the other is a Christian.
The point is that given Musk is clearly not an actual Christian he cannot favour Christians "himself included".
I don't think those groups are as distinct as you're implying, certainly not in the US.
I think there is considerable overlap, in the form of people who believe in the "Great Replacement" conspiracy theory. Essentially "we need to make sure there are enough white babies so that white people can outbreed <insert preferred minority scapegoat>." That thought is inherently eugenicist because it implicitly holds that white people are "better" in some way. "Christian" is also often implicit in "white babies," especially in contrast to Muslim or Jewish people being a common choices of scapegoat.
I guess I would like a distinction because I personally would like to avoid population collapse, thus I am pro-natalist in wanting a replacement level fertility, and I would prefer if that fertility was well distributed rather than highly concentrated in the most conservative religious folk. I do fear what will happen if we continue to shrink, it has to stop somewhere.
That's why I specified the US, where the population is still growing, and the remnants/echoes of the baby boom aren't as stark. I don't think it looks like we're headed for population collapse, and if we are, it's far enough in the future to course correct pretty gently.
I have less insight into the culture of natalists in countries like Japan or South Korea where their population pyramids are heavily inverted. I don't know what they're doing to address their age demographic issues, nor do I have any ideas for what they should do.
Some seem to use it as cover for being predators. Musk exposed his genitals to an employee without their consent, in a confined space without ability to escape, for instance.
Well, there's a little two-step here where pronatalists will insist “it's not political” with one side of their mouth, and then invite Jack Posobeic to be the opening night headline speaker at NatalCon with the other.
Oh, and how do you propose politics is even able to have an impact? Force people to have sex with each other?
It may be an ideology but I don’t think this is a red/blue topic and certainly not a legislative one imo. It is more of a geographical issue and a byproduct of industrialism that isn’t really reversible, you just hope the ride down is more of a slope and not a cliff.
If I knew how to solve the problem, I'd have proposed it. Yet, this is certainly a political issue. As populations decline, the smaller and smaller generations will be asked to support older generations, keep government services afloat, and so on. If nothing is done, at some point, the advanced, post industrial societies will become poor agrarian societies, infrastructure will decay, and governments will collapse. Then, people will begin having large families again because they will have no choice. Farms need hands.
Banning birth control and reversing efforts to enable women's equality in the work force are big ones. But we also see it in policies like the Trump Accounts and various proposals to pay people who have larger families. And you can see it but up against immigration policy too, where people who hate immigrants seek to replace the economic benefits of immigration with policies that promote a larger white population in the next generation.
It isn’t exactly a red/blue issue is what I should have said. I thought given the parent I was replying to that was the implication anyway. You can make anything political, of course.
Its a a general term that a lot of people adhere to.
It's just that those people tend to be about 2 standard deviations out on whatever normal distribution you're dealing with.
Here in the US, you get a lot of these incel-y types with women control and breeding kinks.
But in China, it's more the very hardcore commies worried about the future of the party in 30 years and maybe have one chubby grandchild.
In Korea and Japan, you get a lot of Moonie types and that sort of folk.
In the Middle East (huge, I know), these are the hardcore Muslim folks but with a family bent (think strange uncles without children themselves).
South Americans here will be the turbo Catholic variety typically with a lot of kids already
Generally, the person that is in the pro-natalist camp is generally a person that is conservative in their social ideas. They want yesterday to be like to day, and today to be like tomorrow.
But, their individual ideologies and day-to-day-life are about as opposed to each other as can be and they may outright hate each other.
"...they went on to become the faces of the pronatalist movement, and so far they’ve been given several long profiles for mainstream media outlets to share their pronatalist ideals. This week, it was the Telegraph. In January, it was the New York Post. Last year, it was Business Insider. As Business Insider put it, pronatalism—espoused by Elon Musk, for example—is about breeding supposedly “genetically superior” people. The Collinses have expressed in multiple profiles that certain traits like empathy and even political beliefs are genetically inherited, and so breeding among people who hold those beliefs will carry them forward. In an email to Motherboard, the Collinses disputed this characterization and described pronatalism as “a movement that urges individuals from low fertility cultures to have kids to preserve as much genetic and cultural diversity as possible.”
Pronatalist also usually implies a racist/nationalist angle, some of the reason you want more births is because your people are genetically better than immigrants in some way. This isn't universal, but it's often true.
