InexSquirrel
These fridges may need more complex control for a variety of reasons, but that doesn't mean they have to be connected to _the internet_. To a local network for control, sure.
Put your security measures into the network itself, but I really do feel fridges are another thing which do not need to be IoT devices.
I get pissed off enough when I have to do stupid anti-money laundering facial scan BS.
That doesn't sound great to me (read: broken), because it means its not evenly accessible across your society. I wouldn't count that as a good system to be honest.
I have limited experience with the New Zealand and Japanese medical systems, and from a similarly arms-length engagement with them, I think I would prefer them over everything I've read about the US system. You still have the same issues with having to advocate for yourself, but you can at least get access to good healthcare across the board - and if you go private (which as a late 30s / early 40s guy, cost around NZ$60 / month), you can get access to care at private facilities much faster than via public.
It is most definitely imperfect, but it _is_ designed to be accessible to everyone.
I remember a particularly fun conversation where a very wealthy individual (one of the said 'elites') was in a conversation with a lead scientist from one of the CRIs here, and starts going off on a tangent about the energetic components of ley lines and their personal significance to him. Similar views against vaccinations etc etc.
Because of the definition of elite centering around money, power and 'hard' education (e.g. a PhD in a hard science), I've found those people to generally be more shallow but hyper-focused in fewer areas. They may very well achieve highly in that given area, but tend to be uninteresting and unbalanced in most other areas.
I've similarly observed those people to as emotionally unbalanced as the rest of us, but in some cases more childish and petulant when they feel they've been wronged in some way.
Maybe what we're both describing are the extremes of the curve, I'm not sure.
Dunno. Just feels like it reinforces my view unfortunately. But a good call out anyway.
Beyond their ability to extract money from anyone around them, I fail to see what is 'elite' about the group of people we currently assign the same classification to.
I'm probably just salty that I'm not rich, is all...
I... don't understand. Why do you think this is true for women but not men?
If wolves started encroaching on human settlements and were attacking life stock or worse people, I don't think the solution is 'kill all the wolves'. It's about re-location, better boundaries, and honestly stopping expansion-at-all-costs as a societal philosophy.
If you're talking about feral domesticated dogs - which tend to roam urban areas, then I'm largely in agreement with you. However we're talking about native species which is currently threatened and without intervention will be driven to extinction.
That said, I'll try a few new episodes and see if it clicks.
You don't have to save all the rhinos, defeat every poverty, slay every social cause or overthrow every tyranny. If anything it's arrogance to assume you can, or even should - that your specific brand of saving anything is even correct.
If you look at most people that do well for themselves and have good lives, they live narrow focused lives in domains they care about. They're very much the main characters of their own lives, but also recognize there are other characters running around doing their own things as well.
I think using the term NPC would be more apt if you're referring to someone that's purely on autopilot and not making any effort to ensure that they're leading a life that is meaningful to them.
But I did like the idea of them not being entirely clear about their own motivations, even to themselves - and that is a dangerous cave to play it.
It's practically the same reason for all of Southern African conservation - to stop species going extinct from the continual human expansion.
Also shows a lack of understanding of the dogs themselves, as they're diurnal and practically never hunt at night. You're at much bigger risk via leopards and lions than wild dogs.
I really like the idea of small scale social media, that's focused on small groups of like minded people and communities, but damn Facebook is a cesspool of not-that.
But I think you're talking about anger creeping into daily life and everyday interactions - and in that regard I agree with what you've said. I suspect it also goes hand in hand with victim mentality, which in turn justifies the anger.
You just can't make that distinction with people, especially not if just using IR or the likes. The guy with a rifle slung over his shoulder just happens to look like the guy with carrying a rake. Hand gun in hand happens to look the same as a power drill. Someone wearing a beanie looks suspiciously like a soldier with a helmet.
This all feels like a really bad idea.
Just give me normal bulleted items, I can read.
But I don't think that's the point. It's a continual erosion of people's ability to use hardware _they own_ in ways _they want_ under the guise of 'security' - which to be fair google does fuck all to actually prevent malicious, scammy and misleading apps from appearing on their play store.
Like, why make it harder _at all_? I develop Android apps for a company that is used only internally. I don't want to have to release apps to the play store so that they have to go through a bs review period before I can get them out the door users. Currently I have a <10m turn around from starting the build to having an app in user's hands, ready to go... Every other time we've had to use the play store it's 2+ days, and they don't test or verify anything meaningful.
I recognize my experience isn't universal, but I'm pretty opposed to changes like this. I'm not American so I don't really have underlying rhetoric around freedom etc, but this is an impingement and part of continuing anti-consumer trend. Google's not the only one, but certainly the one under the spotlight here.
Targeting small businesses can be good and fun, for a variety of reasons. It's just... small business mean everything from rivet manufacturers to real estate agents. The more generalised you are, the less you can set yourself apart.
The more focused you are, the more you begin to understand your market / audience - what matters to them, common problems, financial cycles, the overall network etc - the better you can serve them (including making actual products for them). This creates a positive feedback loop... over a long period of time. Years, probably (at least it was for me. I started from scratch in the web dev space, it's taken about 4 years to get to a 'good' financial position with nice clients).
I've begun specialising in web-tech-for-hardware (so not embedded, but web tech focused around accessing, commissioning, controlling embedded devices by non-engineers), and providing the supporting software for those (web apps with serial support, manufacturing test systems, in-field mobile apps to access & setup devices when there's no internet). It's niche, but I thought it was a good field because I also like UI/UX design, and I felt it's something embedded engineers aren't great at.
I originally started my career in the embedded space (before taking a detour into the business world), so I guess it gave me enough of a leg up to understand just enough parlance to talk shop. Not enough to really build anything, but to know what UART or I2C are, to know to poke fun at PLCs, the difficulty with soldering LGA/BGAs, why performance and low power matter, etc etc. This builds trust... but that's a by-product. I genuinely enjoy the space and like the people, so I guess that comes across too.
Maybe instead of focusing on a technical field, if you're interested in helping small businesses, see if they have any industry groups or bodies you can join + conferences you can attend. Be the guy in the room that has the skills they don't have. There might be lots of more competent engineers out there (certainly true for me), but in my case I'm the only guy I know that's willing to be in _this_ particular space.
1. Do you want to work IN the games industry? 2. Do you want to make and ship your own games?
I think the overall internal engineering standard for #1 is higher, because you're ultimately assessed against that standard by others.
For #2 _as long as it works_, you can get away with some under the hood crap, but you're the one that suffers for it (and hopefully not your players). I think I'd be wary (as I'm wary of this for myself), that aiming for #2 gives you an easy out to produce crap, as no one is holding you to standard other than yourself. Doesn't mean you shouldn't do it obviously, but it's a risk.