You and GP identified the problem. Humans acting like humans.
Indeed if all humans are well-informed and rational Saints (also a sort of oxy-moron) any system would work reasonably well to varying degrees - Monarchy, Democracy, Socialism, Communism, Libertarianism and whatnot.
His opinions may be ridiculous this time but he did serve the Army for ten years.
Even considering the likelihood of him given the least dangerous bases and tasks, 2 tours to Afghanistan is more than what one expects a average privileged rich kid to contribute, let alone a prince. Also considering that he's "just" a troop leader of 11 soldiers after a Troop Leaders’ Course at an earlier point, I think they haven't padded his positions or "trophied" him much just for being a prince and he did fair work.
People that are fixated to and have an unhealthy obsession to seriously weigh in every single statement made by royal family - those people are probably the larger problem, not Prince Harry.
While like you said some leaders are competent, once a party (it can be the "Party", Dictator, whichever) hold overwhelming powers against the other (a minority group or for this case, a powerless populace) there are very little mechanisms to right the faults when someone incompetent and/or corrupt rises to take the leadership roles, except perhaps a violent uprising.
Thus, Socialism that by design requires concentration of overwhelming control to one side to even work is, by design, quite flawed.
So why is the anti-vaxxer movement so heavily tied in many countries to the especially affluent, highly educated?
One contributor might be their lack of experience - first hand witness or heard - of all the horrors of communicable diseases which killed and ruined so many lives in the poorer countries. Most people from rich countries haven't seen an iron lung before unless they're very old.
Measles in USA, even at 387 cases this year, is probably perceived as a very remote threat, "things that just doesn't happen often in developed region; not in my neighborhood", compared to other perceived threats like drowning from the swimming pool, gun killings, or even (incorrect assessment) death from shark attack at their Florida beach.
Perhaps a little related, a tiny minority of highly educated, latte sipping youngsters supporting full fledged Communism while having lived nothing but a life of affluence struck me as having a similar vibe as Anti-vaxxers; people with first hand experience of full fledged Communism abhor it like the plague.
Kudos. Not to rain on the parade - The surgery can probably be called "successfully completion" but are/will such surgeries be "successful" or without complications at a reasonable rate?
For all I know this operation is 100% fatal due to operation removing its liver, so no data on survival rate on lab subjects can be derived.
If this operation is followed up with more successful operations (e.g. Liver Transplant) with reasonable survival rate, that'll be when the champagne bottles should be popped.
It strangely reminds me of career politicians that keeps on generating duplicating and often useless laws on the slightest provocation. Instead of using enforcing an existing assault laws against thugs that had beaten up a bus driver, some lawmakers had a career boost (and massive ego boost) by creating "a law that prevents the public from assaulting a public transport driver".
Sigh. I agree with your assessment about the most of the media themselves being click-baits. Dead-Check. Female body part- Check.
People since before Frankenstein has been amused with corpses - Victorians were obsessed with death; see Edgar Allan Poe popularity. It's only recent decades that taking about death (when people stopped dying in large numbers with gruesome ways in Dicken-esque factories and unsafe environments) becomes socially impolite while taking about vag cease being so.
Perhaps better rephrase comment as -
Individuals can make all the jokes one likes, just musing that the overall proportion of people caring about the factual details or serious medical discussion looks way off - No one seems to care about it being medical breakthrough (0 comments when I posted), or recognizing it as something miraculous for the said woman and child (0) vs people just wanting to make corpse and dry vag jokes (tons and tons).
And part of me thinks /. is supposedly a site of nerds. Why can't people just congratulate a medical breakthrough (or miracle for the mother/child) instead of degenerating into female-part slurs, crude corpse jokes and hurling "overpopulation" flamebaits against people for having a child within the first 15 posts?
>It's cheaper, it's cleaner, it's faster, it's going to be further range eventually per charge/fill than gasoline in a very short time period
(Emphasis mine) In that case then market forces will work its way. If it wins - I'd wish and be very glad if it does - kudos, and that also highlight how subsidies isn't needed to prop up its development, which is already running into its third decade.
But if that store was any indication of how sloppy they're in handling of the wound down, you can expect more breaches uncovered.
If I'm not wrong, this one store made it into news only because someone obtained permission of the current landlord to document everything she found inside that is abandoned by Toy R Us.
Or by a friendly colleague of the shooter knew he was talking about shooting up the office, but didn't report him to the authority - probably because most people didn't mean it when they say in stress and anger that they want to shoot someone. Perhaps the said colleague also didn't want to ruin someone's life by reporting on a probable false positive.
I'm not from the west but I wonder if multiple gourmet foodstuff becoming "mainstream" take-outs (some also served in fast food like fashion) having some effect of people's perception.
If one has eaten a good $13 lobster roll off the back of a Manhattan truck, or take-out steak salad or a decent Wagyu burger - the take-out from a shop counter during lunchtime not dissimilar to the Mac - which they view as fair comparison (as opposed to family restaurant) against the Mac, and one start to acknowledge cheap, dry, crappy-tasting fast food for what it is.
>The fact that some states where thought of being 'communistic' doesn't make them so, it's oxymoron to be a 'communistic state'
Stalin, Mao, Kim family. Almost every single state that practiced (or claim to practice) full Communism instead degenerated into full fledged dictatorship within 2 decades.
While what you quoted is by definition correct, and Communist state an oxymoron, it seems that a significant minority of the population (too many still) fall into logical fallacy
and deduced that since true Communism have never been practiced it had never failed. And a small minority wanted to try it "one more time".
I think the other question more people should ask is "Why then, in every single instance when idealist tried to practice Communism, it quickly morphed into something that bears no similarity to the vision the implemented had when they started?" And take this into account when people judge merits of Communism. And weight the possibility of true Communism being as achievable as Utopia where everything works, where everyone will also behaves like honest, selfless angels to ensure everything works.
(...) currently runs a loss of $80 million a year. Meanwhile his other news papers constantly switch from full pages covers: "Australia NEEDS (this candidate)" to the next day, literally photoshopping the oposing candidate into a Nazi.
Reading what you said as someone who knows little about the Australian media and literary scene, my first deduction is not that newspaper cannot make money as an industry. Rather, if above statement isn't an exaggeration then it may just mean that number of people who would pay to receive Propaganda is low. Personally, if someone in the mall is trying to shove me a "newspaper" with covers of political candidates photoshopped as Hitler with other low-brow attack slogans, you can't beg me to take your rag home for free, let alone pay you willingly for that.
Just people few wants to pay to receive Rupert Murdoch's advertisement doesn't mean there's no demand for offline media.
In recent years I increasingly have problem coping with even 2D entertainment, especially fast paced movies whose special effect strives to become as 3D as possible. I've problems with Epic battles scenes (where angles switches switches over 30 times a minute) and any long gun and car chase scenes positively disorients me so much that I've to throw up in the restroom every single time I accompany friends to Thriller / Cop-Gangster movies these 3 or 4 years.
As movie effects gets more advanced person the entertainment industry may discover to their dismay that bodies of a reasonably large segment of population aren't as inclined to 'realistic entertainment' as they wished, if the visual and audio sensation they received doesn't match with the feedback from other senses.
Though unlike those duped into penny stock craze, not all of them are optimistic, gullible investors to Wall Street.
Many of them were people that are "anti-establishment", other thought themselves as visionaries ahead of their time, while some others are chicken little that thought themselves thought quick-thinking and prudent while more likely just being duped into the equivalent of the"the sky is falling" or some tin-foil hat conspiracies. Look at how bitcoin prices spiked or plunged to every semi-plausible or totally bizzare rumours, and how they overreact to every news including Trump being elected or yet another CEO calling bitcoin a fraud for the umpteenth time.
Bubbles happen all the time, but the amount of bitcoin-bull intellectual snobs you see online (some will make passionate(?) case on why the USA system will collapse, others make the case of boundless bitcoin potential while ignoring the elephant in the room) seems worse than many other bubbles, perhaps second only to the dot-com bubble if we only count this half-century.
...Our approximation is that less than 1 percent of reviews are inauthentic...
Notice that Amazon is not disputing the original statement, but they are disputing a statement that was not made.
In another words, the said Amazon VP is making what many would describe as "weaseling" out of the allegation. And I'd feel he's not doing a very good job at that (unless he stated this "less than 1 percent" number due to legal team interference) since most users will not believe this number base on their user experience. Had he allege it being 18% or even 7% (implying more for some categories) it'd have sounded somewhat believable.
I don't purchase much physical items online, but for categories like book or music, it's actually quite normal to achieve a 70% 5-star status - especially if said artist is relatively unknown - due to Very few people except their fans buying it. Rating demographics is especially skewed at tail end.
If a grand total of 718 readers liked the chapter 1 of the your Suspense comic (which you posted for free everywhere you can find as an startup and unknown author) enough to buy your book, assuming you didn't flop on your big reveal 95% of your genuine readers may reasonably rate you 4 or 5 stars.
THIS, plus air in concentrated urban settlements had been a bigger culprit for causing cancer and all sorts of ailments, in a magnitude not comparable in modern western world, almost since towns and cities started. Air quality was worse by so many magnitudes that automobiles that came with technology advancement should probably more regarded as an air improvement good, back in the old days.
Ancient people just happened not to have discovered cancer or properly documented many ailments from burning of wood in an inefficient fireplace or stove. Given how poorly designed their wood-burning devices (sometimes those are just dent in the ground or earth mounds) and quality of fuel they put in - just boiling some potatoes for dinner would often have rendered your whole house suffocatingly thick with smoke. This scenario, replicated x100,000 for an large city, and your whole densely populated working class zone is a death pit in modern standards.
At where I am there were tendencies of small restaurants to attempt to wriggle at the terms of dining and extra charges (10% service charge and 7% GST being included in a normal bill in our country, which IF owners have gotten only 25% from groupon here too hey practically were giving away free food) are redeemable with groupon, which I suspect was motivated by their regret and them literally having no more money to pay their own employees the 10% service charge they're entitled to.
Then groupon probably run out of business owners to fool here, and groupon Singapore was sold off to by another company last year.
While I don't know USA politics well enough to comment on this said politician, I seconded the sentiment. It appears to me there either is a lopsided algorithm (rules are set by humans after all and their bias can manifest unintentionally) or selective enforcement of rules after tweets have been flagged, or both. It may not even be Democrats vs Republicans but on based on ideal "values".
Otherwise, I don't comprehend why #K|||AllWhitePeople tweets are deemed okay (or at least for a good time being while it trended) but someone called a hunky female celeb a "dude" in the heat of their personal quarrel, and the said party gets banned permanently.
I was thinking about the income and employment levels of coffee drinkers.
Seems plausible to me that coffee drinkers are more likely to be currently employed, taking a boost at the start and during their work day.
For Starbucks and better gourmet coffee drinkers, their average income is likely higher than the population average, even if just slightly.
Life expectancy being higher correlated to financial condition is well documented, and unemployment is also highly correlated will physical and mental health (unemployment often being the cause of deteriorating mental health and compound with financial conditions detailed above).
And while the three subsets can overlap, it seems that if choice of high consumption drink is coffee - instead of soft drinks and alcohol - then the heavy coffee drinker group is less likely to suffer the ailments typically found among soft drink junkie and alcoholics.
Argument from article is closer to "While we have little sample of people living over x years, that doesn't mean everything have to die by x years.
The sample is not 7 billion and multiple verified people has hit over 115. On top of what other replies already suggested, there have also been multiple claims of people from developing countries - especially many claims from remote and highland rural areas (which fits the current narrative of low stress, plenty of exercise and simple diet being conducive of longevity) - of people over 120.
While most claims either remain unverifiable or since debunked because of the sketchy record keeping in the 19th Century (in many places birth cert didn't even exist then, Carmelo Flores Laura https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... being an example), there is a reasonably high chance that a small handful of the longevity claims are real but undocumented.
Slashdot Mirror
You and GP identified the problem. Humans acting like humans.
Indeed if all humans are well-informed and rational Saints (also a sort of oxy-moron) any system would work reasonably well to varying degrees - Monarchy, Democracy, Socialism, Communism, Libertarianism and whatnot.
His opinions may be ridiculous this time but he did serve the Army for ten years.
Even considering the likelihood of him given the least dangerous bases and tasks, 2 tours to Afghanistan is more than what one expects a average privileged rich kid to contribute, let alone a prince. Also considering that he's "just" a troop leader of 11 soldiers after a Troop Leaders’ Course at an earlier point, I think they haven't padded his positions or "trophied" him much just for being a prince and he did fair work.
People that are fixated to and have an unhealthy obsession to seriously weigh in every single statement made by royal family - those people are probably the larger problem, not Prince Harry.
While like you said some leaders are competent, once a party (it can be the "Party", Dictator, whichever) hold overwhelming powers against the other (a minority group or for this case, a powerless populace) there are very little mechanisms to right the faults when someone incompetent and/or corrupt rises to take the leadership roles, except perhaps a violent uprising.
Thus, Socialism that by design requires concentration of overwhelming control to one side to even work is, by design, quite flawed.
So why is the anti-vaxxer movement so heavily tied in many countries to the especially affluent, highly educated?
One contributor might be their lack of experience - first hand witness or heard - of all the horrors of communicable diseases which killed and ruined so many lives in the poorer countries. Most people from rich countries haven't seen an iron lung before unless they're very old.
Measles in USA, even at 387 cases this year, is probably perceived as a very remote threat, "things that just doesn't happen often in developed region; not in my neighborhood", compared to other perceived threats like drowning from the swimming pool, gun killings, or even (incorrect assessment) death from shark attack at their Florida beach.
Perhaps a little related, a tiny minority of highly educated, latte sipping youngsters supporting full fledged Communism while having lived nothing but a life of affluence struck me as having a similar vibe as Anti-vaxxers; people with first hand experience of full fledged Communism abhor it like the plague.
Kudos. Not to rain on the parade - The surgery can probably be called "successfully completion" but are/will such surgeries be "successful" or without complications at a reasonable rate?
For all I know this operation is 100% fatal due to operation removing its liver, so no data on survival rate on lab subjects can be derived.
If this operation is followed up with more successful operations (e.g. Liver Transplant) with reasonable survival rate, that'll be when the champagne bottles should be popped.
This, and to less extent looking younger means other people would likely treat you as a younger person, so THAT helps some feel younger as well.
It strangely reminds me of career politicians that keeps on generating duplicating and often useless laws on the slightest provocation. Instead of using enforcing an existing assault laws against thugs that had beaten up a bus driver, some lawmakers had a career boost (and massive ego boost) by creating "a law that prevents the public from assaulting a public transport driver".
It's largely about controlling your subjects.
Sigh. I agree with your assessment about the most of the media themselves being click-baits. Dead-Check. Female body part- Check.
People since before Frankenstein has been amused with corpses - Victorians were obsessed with death; see Edgar Allan Poe popularity. It's only recent decades that taking about death (when people stopped dying in large numbers with gruesome ways in Dicken-esque factories and unsafe environments) becomes socially impolite while taking about vag cease being so.
Perhaps better rephrase comment as -
Individuals can make all the jokes one likes, just musing that the overall proportion of people caring about the factual details or serious medical discussion looks way off - No one seems to care about it being medical breakthrough (0 comments when I posted), or recognizing it as something miraculous for the said woman and child (0) vs people just wanting to make corpse and dry vag jokes (tons and tons).
Seconded.
And part of me thinks /. is supposedly a site of nerds. Why can't people just congratulate a medical breakthrough (or miracle for the mother/child) instead of degenerating into female-part slurs, crude corpse jokes and hurling "overpopulation" flamebaits against people for having a child within the first 15 posts?
(Emphasis mine) In that case then market forces will work its way. If it wins - I'd wish and be very glad if it does - kudos, and that also highlight how subsidies isn't needed to prop up its development, which is already running into its third decade.
And also thanking the police state for making you "right" again quickly after they wronged you with no due process.
But if that store was any indication of how sloppy they're in handling of the wound down, you can expect more breaches uncovered.
If I'm not wrong, this one store made it into news only because someone obtained permission of the current landlord to document everything she found inside that is abandoned by Toy R Us.
Seconded. The title was phrased as if competition is bad.
Whole story would be better interpreted as "How Anti-competitive agreements between media oligarchs hurts competition and the push for legal content."
Or by a friendly colleague of the shooter knew he was talking about shooting up the office, but didn't report him to the authority - probably because most people didn't mean it when they say in stress and anger that they want to shoot someone. Perhaps the said colleague also didn't want to ruin someone's life by reporting on a probable false positive.
I'm not from the west but I wonder if multiple gourmet foodstuff becoming "mainstream" take-outs (some also served in fast food like fashion) having some effect of people's perception.
If one has eaten a good $13 lobster roll off the back of a Manhattan truck, or take-out steak salad or a decent Wagyu burger - the take-out from a shop counter during lunchtime not dissimilar to the Mac - which they view as fair comparison (as opposed to family restaurant) against the Mac, and one start to acknowledge cheap, dry, crappy-tasting fast food for what it is.
>The fact that some states where thought of being 'communistic' doesn't make them so, it's oxymoron to be a 'communistic state'
Stalin, Mao, Kim family. Almost every single state that practiced (or claim to practice) full Communism instead degenerated into full fledged dictatorship within 2 decades.
While what you quoted is by definition correct, and Communist state an oxymoron, it seems that a significant minority of the population (too many still) fall into logical fallacy and deduced that since true Communism have never been practiced it had never failed. And a small minority wanted to try it "one more time".
I think the other question more people should ask is "Why then, in every single instance when idealist tried to practice Communism, it quickly morphed into something that bears no similarity to the vision the implemented had when they started?" And take this into account when people judge merits of Communism. And weight the possibility of true Communism being as achievable as Utopia where everything works, where everyone will also behaves like honest, selfless angels to ensure everything works.
(...) currently runs a loss of $80 million a year. Meanwhile his other news papers constantly switch from full pages covers: "Australia NEEDS (this candidate)" to the next day, literally photoshopping the oposing candidate into a Nazi.
Reading what you said as someone who knows little about the Australian media and literary scene, my first deduction is not that newspaper cannot make money as an industry. Rather, if above statement isn't an exaggeration then it may just mean that number of people who would pay to receive Propaganda is low. Personally, if someone in the mall is trying to shove me a "newspaper" with covers of political candidates photoshopped as Hitler with other low-brow attack slogans, you can't beg me to take your rag home for free, let alone pay you willingly for that.
Just people few wants to pay to receive Rupert Murdoch's advertisement doesn't mean there's no demand for offline media.
In recent years I increasingly have problem coping with even 2D entertainment, especially fast paced movies whose special effect strives to become as 3D as possible. I've problems with Epic battles scenes (where angles switches switches over 30 times a minute) and any long gun and car chase scenes positively disorients me so much that I've to throw up in the restroom every single time I accompany friends to Thriller / Cop-Gangster movies these 3 or 4 years.
As movie effects gets more advanced person the entertainment industry may discover to their dismay that bodies of a reasonably large segment of population aren't as inclined to 'realistic entertainment' as they wished, if the visual and audio sensation they received doesn't match with the feedback from other senses.
Many of them were people that are "anti-establishment", other thought themselves as visionaries ahead of their time, while some others are chicken little that thought themselves thought quick-thinking and prudent while more likely just being duped into the equivalent of the"the sky is falling" or some tin-foil hat conspiracies. Look at how bitcoin prices spiked or plunged to every semi-plausible or totally bizzare rumours, and how they overreact to every news including Trump being elected or yet another CEO calling bitcoin a fraud for the umpteenth time.
Bubbles happen all the time, but the amount of bitcoin-bull intellectual snobs you see online (some will make passionate(?) case on why the USA system will collapse, others make the case of boundless bitcoin potential while ignoring the elephant in the room) seems worse than many other bubbles, perhaps second only to the dot-com bubble if we only count this half-century.
Notice that Amazon is not disputing the original statement, but they are disputing a statement that was not made.
In another words, the said Amazon VP is making what many would describe as "weaseling" out of the allegation. And I'd feel he's not doing a very good job at that (unless he stated this "less than 1 percent" number due to legal team interference) since most users will not believe this number base on their user experience. Had he allege it being 18% or even 7% (implying more for some categories) it'd have sounded somewhat believable.
I don't purchase much physical items online, but for categories like book or music, it's actually quite normal to achieve a 70% 5-star status - especially if said artist is relatively unknown - due to Very few people except their fans buying it. Rating demographics is especially skewed at tail end.
If a grand total of 718 readers liked the chapter 1 of the your Suspense comic (which you posted for free everywhere you can find as an startup and unknown author) enough to buy your book, assuming you didn't flop on your big reveal 95% of your genuine readers may reasonably rate you 4 or 5 stars.
Ancient people just happened not to have discovered cancer or properly documented many ailments from burning of wood in an inefficient fireplace or stove. Given how poorly designed their wood-burning devices (sometimes those are just dent in the ground or earth mounds) and quality of fuel they put in - just boiling some potatoes for dinner would often have rendered your whole house suffocatingly thick with smoke. This scenario, replicated x100,000 for an large city, and your whole densely populated working class zone is a death pit in modern standards.
Replying to undo wrong mod.
At where I am there were tendencies of small restaurants to attempt to wriggle at the terms of dining and extra charges (10% service charge and 7% GST being included in a normal bill in our country, which IF owners have gotten only 25% from groupon here too hey practically were giving away free food) are redeemable with groupon, which I suspect was motivated by their regret and them literally having no more money to pay their own employees the 10% service charge they're entitled to.
Then groupon probably run out of business owners to fool here, and groupon Singapore was sold off to by another company last year.
While I don't know USA politics well enough to comment on this said politician, I seconded the sentiment. It appears to me there either is a lopsided algorithm (rules are set by humans after all and their bias can manifest unintentionally) or selective enforcement of rules after tweets have been flagged, or both. It may not even be Democrats vs Republicans but on based on ideal "values".
Otherwise, I don't comprehend why #K|||AllWhitePeople tweets are deemed okay (or at least for a good time being while it trended) but someone called a hunky female celeb a "dude" in the heat of their personal quarrel, and the said party gets banned permanently.
I was thinking about the income and employment levels of coffee drinkers.
Seems plausible to me that coffee drinkers are more likely to be currently employed, taking a boost at the start and during their work day.
For Starbucks and better gourmet coffee drinkers, their average income is likely higher than the population average, even if just slightly.
Life expectancy being higher correlated to financial condition is well documented, and unemployment is also highly correlated will physical and mental health (unemployment often being the cause of deteriorating mental health and compound with financial conditions detailed above).
And while the three subsets can overlap, it seems that if choice of high consumption drink is coffee - instead of soft drinks and alcohol - then the heavy coffee drinker group is less likely to suffer the ailments typically found among soft drink junkie and alcoholics.
Argument from article is closer to "While we have little sample of people living over x years, that doesn't mean everything have to die by x years.
The sample is not 7 billion and multiple verified people has hit over 115. On top of what other replies already suggested, there have also been multiple claims of people from developing countries - especially many claims from remote and highland rural areas (which fits the current narrative of low stress, plenty of exercise and simple diet being conducive of longevity) - of people over 120.
While most claims either remain unverifiable or since debunked because of the sketchy record keeping in the 19th Century (in many places birth cert didn't even exist then, Carmelo Flores Laura https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... being an example), there is a reasonably high chance that a small handful of the longevity claims are real but undocumented.