You're missing the forest for the trees. You're talking about specific faults with specific people. I'm talking the general principle.
And when you're looking at individual bad trees, it's very, VERY important to keep in mind that they do not represent the forest in any way. Our primitive mind is very poorly equipped for this task, as we are optimized for existence in tribes where a total number of people that are in your group is in two digits or low three at the most. And modern governments are far, far larger. So our unconscious tries to extrapolate due to inability to address the whole as a separate of the individuals.
This is not a disagreement, but a simple nomenclature issue. I count people who are in places that hold such critical information as a part of such organisations, and "normal people" as those who don't have such access. Because frankly, overwhelming majority of people do not have such access.
Slashdot with its somewhat specialist field of interest is likely to represent a significant societal outlier on this topic.
We're installing a tramway over next few years in that street, and there was a big news story on the fact that there's only one specialist in the entire country who knows how to remake that stone cobbled road back after it's removed so rails can be installed.
It's a part of history of the city. As such, it's valuable. Apparently it will take something like 4-5 years for that one guy to rebuild the road with his team, stone by stone. And he'll be doing it.
You may have a point on "watchful eye is present" in terms of damage, but you may have missed the larger message. My point wasn't just that people don't do damage to the relevant hardware. My point was that people learn to value the fact that they have affordable public transit that goes places where they need to go, to the point where they may skip driving there themselves, or even skip having a car at all.
If something appears to be free to us, we don't value it, even if we pay for it otherwise. This is easily seen in socialist and communist states, where people do not bother maintaining even their homes. Think about it - concept of "my hearth" is ingrained in us by evolution itself. It's central to our existence. And when it's considered to be property of the state that you have for free, people stop maintaining it, because they no longer value it.
It's a horrible fact that is linked to our psyche, and that needs to be taken into account when public services are generated. They must be both cheap enough that even the poorest among the society to whom this service is relevant can afford it, but expensive enough that it doesn't seem to be "free" to that unconscious part of our mind that assigns value to things.
Did you notice the last sentence in my post? Your writings presented a very good example of exact problem I outline. The security services in your country are ultimately about serving the interests of your country. Which in turn are you interests, because foreign entities would love to exploit you to the maximum potential.
Is the current NSA snooping regime bad on a principle? Absolutely. Not even a shred of doubt. Snowden was a hero for bringing what is happening to light. It needed to be brought to light.
But they still have the interests of your state in mind first and foremost. That is why they're doing those things. From leadership all the way down to rank and file people. That's why they're not interested in people like you and me. We're not relevant to interests of the state. They're interested in people who actually have some kind of connections to interests of the state, which means state security, technology and macro level economics.
The reason why they're protecting themselves first is the exact same reason why paramedics will not go into the active shooter situation before shooter is contained. They are the part of the system that they're protecting, and to protect the state, the system itself must be functional and intact. That means they insure the safety of themselves first, just as paramedics do, and of the object of their protection second. Because if they fall, it's not just that it doesn't help to solve the issues. It makes the issues that need to be solved much worse.
P.S. I'd be shocked if NSA didn't have significant amount of backdoors in Chinese hardware, considering that much of what China has is on base level literally copied with minimal understanding of what each component of what they're copying does.
These grandiose utopian plans tend to crash and burn when you go into details, specifically because they're utopian. You still want people to pay for the ride, if for no other reason than to make them value having it.
General goal in European major cities is that you get costs low enough that its a good and popular alternative, but high enough so people don't treat it like they treat all free things. With zero considerations.
And if you do it like that, it can work even in fairly low population density areas. How do I know? I live in a low density city myself, that EU classified as a "village of ~200.000 people" when we joined the EU. We have great public transit, to the point that as long as you only need to go to the city itself or the more densely populated areas of the surrounding smaller towns, you don't really need to have a car at all for daily transit. And if you do the economy part right, it will pay for itself and even turn small profit. See my other reply to this thread for more details.
In my home city of Tampere, we have one of the cheapest tickets in Finland for a city of its size. Additionally city's population density is so low, that when we joined the EU, it was classified as a "village of ~200.000 people" by EU standards. Additionally our central street that most bus lines use is a historic street made of stone pavement, which causes excessive vibration on the bus structures over time requiring additional maintenance and making buses that operate on gaseous fuel impossible as valves cannot handle vibration for long. That kind of population spread coupled with unique problem of pavement on the central street makes public transit a significant challenge, so being one of the cheapest in terms of ticket prices in the country has been one of the point of pride to the folks doing the planning in the organisation. I listened to a couple of lectures on the topic in my old university some years ago.
To my understanding, the public company that handles the public transit lines is profitable and highly competitive with private bus companies. Latest city budget proposal for 2019 reports that it was profitable to the tune of 3,6 million Euro on the revenue of slightly under 28 million revenue in the latest numbers they have which is for year 2017. Revenue includes 2,1 million "support and assistance from the region".
Page 115 has the numbers First column is the final numbers for 2017, to which plans for 2018-2022 are contrasted. You can find what individual lines mean by running the document through google translate.
In case of cancer, that's wrong. Many cancers are fairly harmless, while procedures to find them and put them into remission are extremely damaging, far more so than cancer itself.
A good example is the modern findings on prostate cancer, which in many cases is much less harmful than measures that clinicians used to put it into remission. Nowadays, certain prostate cancers aren't treated at all and instead merely monitored for example, and patients are likely to live with minimal to no symptoms for decades. Whereas treatment would cause severe symptoms immediately and to an extent permanently.
So in many cases, as shocking as it may sound, it's actually better in terms of health outcome to the patient to get a false negative on cancer test than an accurate positive one. Especially true if it's a generic case like this, where someone may go look for cancer that ends up as a small benign tumour with a series of exceedingly invasive biopsies that may cause severe damage to patient's health.
Oncology is really, REALLY difficult field of medicine, because not only is the illness effectively incurable in most cases, but oncologist must always contrast the harm caused by his actions vs harm caused by the problem he's looking for or trying to address.
This story isn't really about "normal people", which typically refers to an average citizen. Those have nothing that Chinese intelligence would want. It's the same reason why we "normal people" are relatively safe against the likes of NSA too. We have nothing NSA wants.
It's the corporations that are engaged in competition with China, and state structures that need to be worried. They actually have things Chinese intelligence wants. But that doesn't sound as scary to the "normal people" unfortunately, because they often have trouble connecting "myself" to "my state" and "large corporations in my state that directly affect my livelihood".
It's not just brakes and tyres, it's also road surface itself. The heavier the vehicle, the particulates it pulls out of the road and into the air.
That's why in the Northern regions of Europe, where spikes in tyres are mandatory for safety reasons, worst kind of pollution happens on cold, windless, iceless and snowless days. That's when tyre spikes keep tearing particulates out of the roads and toss them into the air, where there's no wind to clear them out.
Because TAXPAYERS in Luxembourg overwhelmingly people of the rest of EU, rather than its own citizens. Their primary means of income is providing safe haven for tax evasion for large companies that want an office within EU and all the perks that come with it.
There's a reason why the current head of EU Commission and former PM of Luxembourg has earned himself a nickname "tax evader in chief". It's easy to pay for large array of benefits to a microstate worth of people when you can fund it via providing safe haven for large multinationals.
If you're an actually productive rather than parasitic economy, the picture looks very different and perks like these don't scale well.
And then you actually read the report, specifically page nine, and then came back to apologise for thinking that being a sarcastic twat passes as intelligence on slashdot.
Power plants in the West already work on razor thin margins. That's the status quo. And if you're even remotely sold on the idea that "batteries can replace peakers based on what I read in this story", you haven't actually read the story with any degree of understanding.
First and the most obvious problem is material science. You're not just going to produce terawatts of battery capacity which would be needed for the project size of your suggestion. Then there's the problem that while high momentary output and fast response of batteries is excellent at frequency control, it's actually not that good at spinning reserve for any meaningful amount of time, and utterly awful as cold reserve because the capacity is simply not there.
What can CCGTs do? Everything of the above.
It's obvious that there will be some effort of seeing if battery deployments will make frequency control easier. Perhaps to some very limited extent, peaking in main grids. Actually replace CCGTs? That's like saying that sedans will replace heavy duty trucks, because they get more mileage when there's a small load.
This is literally false. Even a cursory observation of Western political system tells you that while power flows from money, money does not flow from power. It is evidenced by desperate fundraising drives of most incumbents who aren't wealthy from other sources. Power doesn't give them money. In fact, should they wield political power against interests of those with money, their careers end swiftly.
Which is the exact opposite of what happens in totalitarian communist states like China.
Regardless, I see that you're far too invested in your world view to be able to look at things objectively. I've said my piece. Take it for what you will.
Not really. This is the edge case of isolated grid. It has very little meaningful commonality with well interconnected grids.
Notably, you can substract "Tesla" from the story and it still makes sense. Battery storage has been used successfully in other similar places. It's just that in the past, PR has been less than stellar because those deployments were on islands, usually to the tune of single MW or so. This is showing that with significant amount of work, they could create a system that has a total of 35MW of momentary output. Which is great, because peaking an isolated grid is a complete and utter bitch to get done right.
But that's not even remotely true in a large, well connected grid where balance is achieved through the fact that where someone has deficit, someone else likely has surplus. And we have about a century worth of experience how to balance such interconnects for maximum efficiency. In current consideration, there just isn't that much use for fairly expensive frequency control with a battery system when you have a multiple redundancies to handle this across any large interconnected grid.
The good news here is that isolated regions will no longer have to pay exorbitant amounts for their electricity where they can't really tap into large interconnected grid for some reason (such as geographically remote location as is in this case). It's likely to be a massive improvement for such locations if rolled out en masse.
You put the cart before the horse. This is a story about edge coming to win7 and win8. Both of which can simply not install telemetry, as on both operating systems, user has full control over updates.
It therefore makes little sense for MS to put additional spyware to the similar tune as google into their version of Chromium. Those who don't care about spyware on win7 and win8 already installed it via windows update. There's no benefit in having second layer of spyware for these users.
There's only benefit if you could get users who chose not to install spyware via update to install edge with spyware. But chances of this happening are near zero, because it takes a whole lot more effort not to accidentally install spyware via windows update than to simply not install that new edge.
So it would make sense to not include spyware in that new edge. It's a low benefit, high risk proposition. It obviously doesn't mean that they won't do it. There are plenty of dumb people making these decisions based solely on some internal company benchmarks without considering the overall situation. But it's very likely that someone in the leadership chain will have the foresight.
You keep stumbling on your blindness due to the lens you're using. "Ownership" has completely different meaning in China compared to US. You act as if "owning something" is even remotely similar in China to what it is in US. It is obviously not. In communist systems like Chinese, state doesn't guarantee private property. It merely temporarily cedes control over it to private citizens, and this is subject to state's whim to take back at any time. That is why in the adage I mention, "in the East, he who has power has money". Having power brings money, but having money not only doesn't bring power, but has a significant chance of costing you everything if you don't toe the party line.
Which is the exact opposite to the Western system, where state acts as an absolute guarantor of private property, to the point where state has to burden itself to the extreme to be able to confiscate anything from private citizen. Hence "in the West, he who has money, has power".
I'll reiterate my initial point one more time. In China, if you're a son of important party functionary, you get a chance to rule some small township somewhere. As according to adage I point out above, that comes with stewardship rights, which you confuse for something like ownership is in the Western system. But if you want to advance from that, you need to show merit. Your township needs to appear to thrive to your immediate superiors. If you fail to do it, that's it. No amount of daddy's intervention will save you. In fact, your father will suffer harshly for having incapable offspring, as that will cause him to lose face, which is why party functionaries take educating their offspring extremely seriously to the point of sending them across the world to get educated before allowing them to get on the track for political leadership.
Which is why proponents of the Chinese system can proudly and correctly state that they're the most technocratic system full of most intelligent and meritocratic people in the world. And their system is a great argument against technocracy and intelligence as the sole, or even primary merits to look for in entirety of leadership.
Because that's how Chinese system works. Literally, read what I described above. You're observing correct fact through a lens of a wrong culture, and coming to conclusions that are diametric opposite of what is actually going on.
Perhaps the best descriptor is the old Cold War adage. "In the West, he who has money has power. In the East, he who has power has money".
Are you aware that Win10 telemetry was pushed on win7 via updates something like a year ago? It makes no sense to fuck themselves over as anyone who doesn't care about telemetry already has it installed.
Bears are already some of the best armed creatures in the nature and to my knowledge, best armed animals on North American continent.
Not even a joke. Bears are horrifyingly powerful predators, both in terms of weaponry and armour. Those claws powered by the musculature of your typical brown bear has will inflict horrifying wounds. And there's a reason many people call things you hunt them with "bear guns". Typical hunting rifle has a significant chance of not being able to do more than seriously anger a bear by injuring him/her in a non-lethal and non-debilitating fashion. You need high power rifles to go through that combination of thick layer of fat, huge muscles and thick bones.
Don't try to fuck with bears. You'll be the one getting the shaft.
Slashdot Mirror
It's interesting that you derived that meaning from it. I was using it as it originated - as a geopolitical term.
Would you like to provide a non-idealistic and non-utopian reasoning as to why?
You're missing the forest for the trees. You're talking about specific faults with specific people. I'm talking the general principle.
And when you're looking at individual bad trees, it's very, VERY important to keep in mind that they do not represent the forest in any way. Our primitive mind is very poorly equipped for this task, as we are optimized for existence in tribes where a total number of people that are in your group is in two digits or low three at the most. And modern governments are far, far larger. So our unconscious tries to extrapolate due to inability to address the whole as a separate of the individuals.
This is not a disagreement, but a simple nomenclature issue. I count people who are in places that hold such critical information as a part of such organisations, and "normal people" as those who don't have such access. Because frankly, overwhelming majority of people do not have such access.
Slashdot with its somewhat specialist field of interest is likely to represent a significant societal outlier on this topic.
We're installing a tramway over next few years in that street, and there was a big news story on the fact that there's only one specialist in the entire country who knows how to remake that stone cobbled road back after it's removed so rails can be installed.
It's a part of history of the city. As such, it's valuable. Apparently it will take something like 4-5 years for that one guy to rebuild the road with his team, stone by stone. And he'll be doing it.
You may have a point on "watchful eye is present" in terms of damage, but you may have missed the larger message. My point wasn't just that people don't do damage to the relevant hardware. My point was that people learn to value the fact that they have affordable public transit that goes places where they need to go, to the point where they may skip driving there themselves, or even skip having a car at all.
If something appears to be free to us, we don't value it, even if we pay for it otherwise. This is easily seen in socialist and communist states, where people do not bother maintaining even their homes. Think about it - concept of "my hearth" is ingrained in us by evolution itself. It's central to our existence. And when it's considered to be property of the state that you have for free, people stop maintaining it, because they no longer value it.
It's a horrible fact that is linked to our psyche, and that needs to be taken into account when public services are generated. They must be both cheap enough that even the poorest among the society to whom this service is relevant can afford it, but expensive enough that it doesn't seem to be "free" to that unconscious part of our mind that assigns value to things.
Did you notice the last sentence in my post? Your writings presented a very good example of exact problem I outline. The security services in your country are ultimately about serving the interests of your country. Which in turn are you interests, because foreign entities would love to exploit you to the maximum potential.
Is the current NSA snooping regime bad on a principle? Absolutely. Not even a shred of doubt. Snowden was a hero for bringing what is happening to light. It needed to be brought to light.
But they still have the interests of your state in mind first and foremost. That is why they're doing those things. From leadership all the way down to rank and file people. That's why they're not interested in people like you and me. We're not relevant to interests of the state. They're interested in people who actually have some kind of connections to interests of the state, which means state security, technology and macro level economics.
The reason why they're protecting themselves first is the exact same reason why paramedics will not go into the active shooter situation before shooter is contained. They are the part of the system that they're protecting, and to protect the state, the system itself must be functional and intact. That means they insure the safety of themselves first, just as paramedics do, and of the object of their protection second. Because if they fall, it's not just that it doesn't help to solve the issues. It makes the issues that need to be solved much worse.
P.S. I'd be shocked if NSA didn't have significant amount of backdoors in Chinese hardware, considering that much of what China has is on base level literally copied with minimal understanding of what each component of what they're copying does.
These grandiose utopian plans tend to crash and burn when you go into details, specifically because they're utopian. You still want people to pay for the ride, if for no other reason than to make them value having it.
General goal in European major cities is that you get costs low enough that its a good and popular alternative, but high enough so people don't treat it like they treat all free things. With zero considerations.
And if you do it like that, it can work even in fairly low population density areas. How do I know? I live in a low density city myself, that EU classified as a "village of ~200.000 people" when we joined the EU. We have great public transit, to the point that as long as you only need to go to the city itself or the more densely populated areas of the surrounding smaller towns, you don't really need to have a car at all for daily transit. And if you do the economy part right, it will pay for itself and even turn small profit. See my other reply to this thread for more details.
In my home city of Tampere, we have one of the cheapest tickets in Finland for a city of its size. Additionally city's population density is so low, that when we joined the EU, it was classified as a "village of ~200.000 people" by EU standards. Additionally our central street that most bus lines use is a historic street made of stone pavement, which causes excessive vibration on the bus structures over time requiring additional maintenance and making buses that operate on gaseous fuel impossible as valves cannot handle vibration for long. That kind of population spread coupled with unique problem of pavement on the central street makes public transit a significant challenge, so being one of the cheapest in terms of ticket prices in the country has been one of the point of pride to the folks doing the planning in the organisation. I listened to a couple of lectures on the topic in my old university some years ago.
To my understanding, the public company that handles the public transit lines is profitable and highly competitive with private bus companies. Latest city budget proposal for 2019 reports that it was profitable to the tune of 3,6 million Euro on the revenue of slightly under 28 million revenue in the latest numbers they have which is for year 2017. Revenue includes 2,1 million "support and assistance from the region".
Here's the document I took the numbers from:
https://www.tampere.fi/tiedost...
Page 115 has the numbers First column is the final numbers for 2017, to which plans for 2018-2022 are contrasted. You can find what individual lines mean by running the document through google translate.
In case of cancer, that's wrong. Many cancers are fairly harmless, while procedures to find them and put them into remission are extremely damaging, far more so than cancer itself.
A good example is the modern findings on prostate cancer, which in many cases is much less harmful than measures that clinicians used to put it into remission. Nowadays, certain prostate cancers aren't treated at all and instead merely monitored for example, and patients are likely to live with minimal to no symptoms for decades. Whereas treatment would cause severe symptoms immediately and to an extent permanently.
So in many cases, as shocking as it may sound, it's actually better in terms of health outcome to the patient to get a false negative on cancer test than an accurate positive one. Especially true if it's a generic case like this, where someone may go look for cancer that ends up as a small benign tumour with a series of exceedingly invasive biopsies that may cause severe damage to patient's health.
Oncology is really, REALLY difficult field of medicine, because not only is the illness effectively incurable in most cases, but oncologist must always contrast the harm caused by his actions vs harm caused by the problem he's looking for or trying to address.
This story isn't really about "normal people", which typically refers to an average citizen. Those have nothing that Chinese intelligence would want. It's the same reason why we "normal people" are relatively safe against the likes of NSA too. We have nothing NSA wants.
It's the corporations that are engaged in competition with China, and state structures that need to be worried. They actually have things Chinese intelligence wants. But that doesn't sound as scary to the "normal people" unfortunately, because they often have trouble connecting "myself" to "my state" and "large corporations in my state that directly affect my livelihood".
It's not just brakes and tyres, it's also road surface itself. The heavier the vehicle, the particulates it pulls out of the road and into the air.
That's why in the Northern regions of Europe, where spikes in tyres are mandatory for safety reasons, worst kind of pollution happens on cold, windless, iceless and snowless days. That's when tyre spikes keep tearing particulates out of the roads and toss them into the air, where there's no wind to clear them out.
Because TAXPAYERS in Luxembourg overwhelmingly people of the rest of EU, rather than its own citizens. Their primary means of income is providing safe haven for tax evasion for large companies that want an office within EU and all the perks that come with it.
There's a reason why the current head of EU Commission and former PM of Luxembourg has earned himself a nickname "tax evader in chief". It's easy to pay for large array of benefits to a microstate worth of people when you can fund it via providing safe haven for large multinationals.
If you're an actually productive rather than parasitic economy, the picture looks very different and perks like these don't scale well.
And then you actually read the report, specifically page nine, and then came back to apologise for thinking that being a sarcastic twat passes as intelligence on slashdot.
Power plants in the West already work on razor thin margins. That's the status quo. And if you're even remotely sold on the idea that "batteries can replace peakers based on what I read in this story", you haven't actually read the story with any degree of understanding.
First and the most obvious problem is material science. You're not just going to produce terawatts of battery capacity which would be needed for the project size of your suggestion. Then there's the problem that while high momentary output and fast response of batteries is excellent at frequency control, it's actually not that good at spinning reserve for any meaningful amount of time, and utterly awful as cold reserve because the capacity is simply not there.
What can CCGTs do? Everything of the above.
It's obvious that there will be some effort of seeing if battery deployments will make frequency control easier. Perhaps to some very limited extent, peaking in main grids. Actually replace CCGTs? That's like saying that sedans will replace heavy duty trucks, because they get more mileage when there's a small load.
>Having power brings money everywhere
This is literally false. Even a cursory observation of Western political system tells you that while power flows from money, money does not flow from power. It is evidenced by desperate fundraising drives of most incumbents who aren't wealthy from other sources. Power doesn't give them money. In fact, should they wield political power against interests of those with money, their careers end swiftly.
Which is the exact opposite of what happens in totalitarian communist states like China.
Regardless, I see that you're far too invested in your world view to be able to look at things objectively. I've said my piece. Take it for what you will.
Not really. This is the edge case of isolated grid. It has very little meaningful commonality with well interconnected grids.
Notably, you can substract "Tesla" from the story and it still makes sense. Battery storage has been used successfully in other similar places. It's just that in the past, PR has been less than stellar because those deployments were on islands, usually to the tune of single MW or so. This is showing that with significant amount of work, they could create a system that has a total of 35MW of momentary output. Which is great, because peaking an isolated grid is a complete and utter bitch to get done right.
But that's not even remotely true in a large, well connected grid where balance is achieved through the fact that where someone has deficit, someone else likely has surplus. And we have about a century worth of experience how to balance such interconnects for maximum efficiency. In current consideration, there just isn't that much use for fairly expensive frequency control with a battery system when you have a multiple redundancies to handle this across any large interconnected grid.
The good news here is that isolated regions will no longer have to pay exorbitant amounts for their electricity where they can't really tap into large interconnected grid for some reason (such as geographically remote location as is in this case). It's likely to be a massive improvement for such locations if rolled out en masse.
You put the cart before the horse. This is a story about edge coming to win7 and win8. Both of which can simply not install telemetry, as on both operating systems, user has full control over updates.
It therefore makes little sense for MS to put additional spyware to the similar tune as google into their version of Chromium. Those who don't care about spyware on win7 and win8 already installed it via windows update. There's no benefit in having second layer of spyware for these users.
There's only benefit if you could get users who chose not to install spyware via update to install edge with spyware. But chances of this happening are near zero, because it takes a whole lot more effort not to accidentally install spyware via windows update than to simply not install that new edge.
So it would make sense to not include spyware in that new edge. It's a low benefit, high risk proposition. It obviously doesn't mean that they won't do it. There are plenty of dumb people making these decisions based solely on some internal company benchmarks without considering the overall situation. But it's very likely that someone in the leadership chain will have the foresight.
You keep stumbling on your blindness due to the lens you're using. "Ownership" has completely different meaning in China compared to US. You act as if "owning something" is even remotely similar in China to what it is in US. It is obviously not. In communist systems like Chinese, state doesn't guarantee private property. It merely temporarily cedes control over it to private citizens, and this is subject to state's whim to take back at any time. That is why in the adage I mention, "in the East, he who has power has money". Having power brings money, but having money not only doesn't bring power, but has a significant chance of costing you everything if you don't toe the party line.
Which is the exact opposite to the Western system, where state acts as an absolute guarantor of private property, to the point where state has to burden itself to the extreme to be able to confiscate anything from private citizen. Hence "in the West, he who has money, has power".
I'll reiterate my initial point one more time. In China, if you're a son of important party functionary, you get a chance to rule some small township somewhere. As according to adage I point out above, that comes with stewardship rights, which you confuse for something like ownership is in the Western system. But if you want to advance from that, you need to show merit. Your township needs to appear to thrive to your immediate superiors. If you fail to do it, that's it. No amount of daddy's intervention will save you. In fact, your father will suffer harshly for having incapable offspring, as that will cause him to lose face, which is why party functionaries take educating their offspring extremely seriously to the point of sending them across the world to get educated before allowing them to get on the track for political leadership.
Which is why proponents of the Chinese system can proudly and correctly state that they're the most technocratic system full of most intelligent and meritocratic people in the world. And their system is a great argument against technocracy and intelligence as the sole, or even primary merits to look for in entirety of leadership.
Because that's how Chinese system works. Literally, read what I described above. You're observing correct fact through a lens of a wrong culture, and coming to conclusions that are diametric opposite of what is actually going on.
Perhaps the best descriptor is the old Cold War adage. "In the West, he who has money has power. In the East, he who has power has money".
Are you aware that Win10 telemetry was pushed on win7 via updates something like a year ago? It makes no sense to fuck themselves over as anyone who doesn't care about telemetry already has it installed.
This is projection of your values on people who hold dramatically different values.
It renders any conclusion you draw wrong, often to the worst kind of wrong. To the opposite of correct.
It's not google. Therefore likely less spyware.
Bears are already some of the best armed creatures in the nature and to my knowledge, best armed animals on North American continent.
Not even a joke. Bears are horrifyingly powerful predators, both in terms of weaponry and armour. Those claws powered by the musculature of your typical brown bear has will inflict horrifying wounds. And there's a reason many people call things you hunt them with "bear guns". Typical hunting rifle has a significant chance of not being able to do more than seriously anger a bear by injuring him/her in a non-lethal and non-debilitating fashion. You need high power rifles to go through that combination of thick layer of fat, huge muscles and thick bones.
Don't try to fuck with bears. You'll be the one getting the shaft.
Bloody retarded slashdot formatting.. "Any number that is greater than zero and lesser than one".