That makes a lot of sense. I think there’s plenty of research to back up your claim about writing helping memory, too. I used to try to remember things better by (1) writing it down, (2) reading it aloud, (3) thinking about the next level up.

Number 3 is probably less useful outside fields where you’re constantly trying to “scale” systems… but in any case, it’s a thought experiment that happens to be really good at exposing the boundaries of concepts. Like… “okay, I built one server… now, what if I needed to manage a farm of 1000? What issues then become more pronounced?”

Out of curiosity, do any of these platforms try to marry itself with paper workflows? Maybe stuff like:

• teachers can submit a printable paper doc
• students can print it out as needed, submit the finished result
• students can take pictures of their handwritten notes and store them in a digital journal
• platform comes with handwriting analysis, full-text-search, … all that jazz?

It sounds like there should be a platform designed for school. IT can block access to all resources except the platform. Kids log-in to www.my-school.platform.edu and immediately have an answer for:

• what’s the curriculum for today
• what was yesterdays homework
• what was yesterdays lesson
• what tests are coming up
• what’s my personal attendance
• what’s for lunch today
• …

Then there’s not any room for misusing, misunderstanding, or missing-out. Ideally, I’d think a good platform should empower teachers to handle their difficult workload more easily…

Should also have a Teachers view, an Admin view, …

Wealth privilege won’t end until legal disprivilege ends. You need a legal system that isn’t susceptible to discrimination based on wealth, race, or any other factor. Especially not any other factor, because wealth transfers to whatever incentives it’s needed to take form in. It should be incentivized by cultural virtues, ensuring the government heeds the public’s beliefs on right and wrong doing.

A coop-based executive branch might be worth your consideration. But, that sounds like a state-tolerated militia (in a way). Perhaps, more precisely, it should be a coop-based executive-executor branch. Effectively, a group of people motivated by civil virtues who spend time investigating and prosecuting actors in the government’s executive branch for the crime of discrimination, bias, bigotry, … can this be a path forward?

Again, it would need be a coop. It must have the interest of the public, in contrast to the interest of the government, in mind. You will and should expect to see stories about them causing trouble for the government—the government shouldn’t like them. But the government should somehow be forced to tolerate them, even work with them in cases where the government would likely wish not to.

Their claim is it was used for the water treatment system.

It applies to UASs, which applies to aircraft’s. Aircraft’s are quite broad by legal definition I think…

Can we spam register foam gliders as drones?

We’ll be saying “when the mess started” for decades.

Epstein could not have done as much harm as he did, had it only been two people. There are so many moving pieces to an operation at that scale, and so many must have been complicit. From direct coconspirators to enablers, even the networks of enablers who knew enough by association and still did nothing. People knew Epstein was no good but didn’t care.

I’ll be really interesting to see how people try to hide the source of their wealth / power in a world where everything is co’oped.

I hope Europe plays hard ball to over leverage the tech companies, then rips the rug out from under them. Tech companies will amplify even the smallest portions of American frustration, projecting it as a larger problem for the public than it actually is… but I for one will support Europe in playing dirty. Glad, even.

To me this read like they wanted to define the terms themselves. If Trump approves, he might start selectively validating that particular visa.

Didn’t all of this start with the ideological principle that a government by the people would inherently serve the people? So the groups of interest don’t diverge between public and government, in theory.

The FBI, CIA, NSA, … have been obvious contradictions to that claim well before Trump. I mean… shit, for starters, everyone knows about the CIA testing their truth serum on American coffee shop customers.

Seems that, for a while now, the reality has been more like that of two separate interest groups: government and public. Where did things start to diverge from the original intent?

I understand that governments are sometimes faced with need to act against public interest for the sake of public interest. For example, keeping the development of the atomic bomb a secret was vital to American goals at the time — despite the fact that many Americans would have probably preferred to have a much deeper discussion on the matter. Whether or not secrecy was the right call, it’s clear that not having it kept secret risked millions more American lives in a war… hence the conflict.

But that doesn’t seem to be the distinction here. For decades, the US government has been allowed to act in the interest of the government. Better surveillance, more lobbying and dark money, using economic and military influence to deter successful socialism in foreign states, the constant propaganda (especially regarding communism), … these are the behaviors of self-preservation, particularly for the government. How’d that start?

2+2=5

At first I think you were jokingly referring to them as demons. Now I realize you’re actually serious…

“You see that huge wall over there, Schumer? That’s the wall of victory. You only need to touch it and everything is over. We win.”

Schumer: “where are its jaws? I hear that’s where it keeps the goods.”

This shows you just how strong our culture is an influence here. You can leave a door open and cause enough trouble that they need to hire someone else to go manually shut it. I’m willing to bet there are a lot of seemingly innocuous ways to cause friction with these companies. The more people know and exploit them, the better.

Sharpie? This smells like Trumps doing…

Interesting, I didn’t think about that nor did I know about the mesh network someone else mentioned in a reply to you. In my case, I’m renting the home. The landlord pays for a very small internet package that is reserved for the cameras. He stopped paying for the subscription at some point but he still pays for the Internet it connects to, which is how we were able to access live footage in the past.

When I said “we no longer have the ring camera.” More accurately I could have said “we stopped charging it.” The landlord would probably have a minor aneurism if we tried explaining why we want to replace the camera he mounted a case for into the stucko by the front door.

I’m half curious if I cut open the box… you think there’d be an easy way to replace the camera with a video stream of my choosing? Because I wouldn’t mind cutting out the camera and leaving the device plugged into my PC for a constant headless stream of video content.

My wife and I recently moved to a home with ring cameras preinstalled, but no subscription of course. We can only access a live feed via the cloud service. I told my wife, I don’t think it matters whether we have a subscription or not… if they want to use the footage from our home cameras for any reason at all, it’s in their power to do so. They can save it, scan it, watch it, … they don’t even need to save the video, they can save results from a scan to get out the important details more efficiently.

My wife didn’t want to hear it. She said we aren’t paying them, so there’s nothing they can do. Then this news story dropped about Google Nest. I showed my wife. We no longer have the ring cameras.

Imagine there was some sort of drug that had the ability to recode culture in any of its users. You take this drug and suddenly you stop seeing all figures of authority as such. Any person might profess jurisdiction over a particular persons, geography, or ideological framework… but you just can’t see how any of that is significant anymore. You start to realize, after having consumed this drug, that you have no idea how to take care of yourself. Worse, you have no idea who within your community you can rely on for necessities. Given this concern, you begin to host gatherings where the goal is to produce a network of community support and knowledge sharing. Where can you find water? Where shouldn’t you find water? How can you clean water? Who has vital resources during a storm? Who knows how to make tools? … this goes on until the group develops an ability to be self sustaining.

Now imagine all your friends and neighbors took this drug, as well as their friends and neighbors. What would happen to the current power structures? I’m curious how much of there power is actually just given to them freely by our own culture, while sustained somewhat by the technology they employ.