I feel (but have no substantial reason) that the subtext of this sudden governmental interest in this issue is more so the fight between the lobbies of ad-supported tech giants (Google, Facebook) and Apple
more like try explaining to your son or daughter that they wouldn't have been born at all
edit: I dont understand how poor war-torn countries can have a better educational system than the most developed country in the world.
pretty clear that the implication is right to life of a human being > right to privacy of mother
edit: fetus -> being
Edit: The bearded guy in the sky notion of God is the least popular in my circles (Catholic/Muslim/Hindu mostly)
> Personally I worked for a company like Company C twice, one time it was a big upgrade in my career, the other time I had a lot of fun, stayed a year, and had a long job search and would up at something more like A where I am today, but I feel like I am developing personally and professionally now.
do you feel the same developments (both personal and professional) would've happened if you jumped to Company A directly?
I am currently at a career crossroad with multiple offers and sort of lost on where to go. Would like to hear what people who were in my position did. Anonymized because people I interviewed with may be reading thisMe: BS in CS. 4-5 years experience in Field A, very hot field these days.Currently have 3 offersCompany A - very safe bet financially, stocks more than doubled in this decade....
I am currently at a career crossroad with multiple offers and sort of lost on where to go. Would like to hear what people who were in my position did. Anonymized because people I interviewed with may be reading thisMe: BS in CS. 4-5 years experience in Field A, very hot field these days.Currently have 3 offersCompany A - very safe bet financially, stocks more than doubled in this decade....
Populism is one hell of a drug
Agree to most of the point, but note that AQI predates the 2003 Iraqi war (founded in late 90s)
> They have a significant part in lobbying for war, for weapons export, for more spending on military spending and so on.
Also agreed, for good or bad (I would say mainly good)
> Defense companies also strongly coordinate with Israel and the Israel lobby to make sure continuous money flows to Israel and Israel can be a first class buyer of US weapons.
That goes both ways, Israel is one of our main partners in defense (and related) research, they are also the US's main ally in the Middle East, Allies trade is nothing new?
> They have strong ties to government and make absurd amount of money on many of these projects despite routinely going over budget by absolutely insane amounts.
Yep, there is a certain culture in those companies that tends to... encourage that behavior. And the lobbying makes that space harder to get into
> Yes, companies that build weapons to some extend need to exist but the defense contractors are not ethical in the least and I would not work for them. Maybe in the civilian part of the company, possibly but even that would require a lot of thinking.
If you want to extend the ethical thinking train, the only companies you can work for are the ones that operate on a mom-and-pop shop scale and there is nothing wrong with that. Applying that critical lens to only defense contractors (not that you are doing right now) is a bit disingenuous
edit: elaborating on the point
For those who dont want to read more into the articles, this is a good summary "Decades of free-flowing arms into Iraq meant that when IS took control of these areas, they were like children in a sweetshop."
Tell that to the Bosniacs, Iraqis who lost everything due to ISIS and were pushed back with coalition air cover help, Kuwait's existence today... etc (and this is coming from an Iraqi)
The HackerNews "Defense Company Bad" trope doesn't hold up to reality as much as HN likes to believe. Life's not as black and white as you might think
I disagree
1. We don't need tech to dehumanize people, you can say that it brings down the barrier of cost to do it to mass but governments can already do this without this tech
2. Assuming tech does make the dehumanizing part easy, this isnt the only "natural" end game. I can easily see how this can help higher ups make more effective decisions and reduce civilian causalities
> The rest of your anecdote was really interesting, thanks for sharing!
No problem :) of course what I typed is simplistic but such is the case for mediums like these
I recommend Al Basheer Show if you want to know more, think John Stewart but Iraq, I linked some English episodes
Confessionalism in post 2003 Iraq - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-KVPWXWlNk
Infamous PM Nouri al Maliki - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbPMDBebSRk
Current Protests against the government, assassination's of civil rights activists and intellectual figures by Iranian backed militias - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lc0EOr_Rq_w
As someone who interacted with troops in combat before (in Iraq before immigrating), I am all for anything helping soldiers do their job more effectively and modernizing their tech.
No they aren't seen as an Imperial force, in 2003 they were seen as liberators by most people (I was against the war, it was dumb, replaced a dictator with 500 mini dictators with no real plan besides theft). In 2013, realistically, without the US support ISIS would still be a threat on the ground. And now majority of the population would want more US intervention as a hedge against being an Iranian puppet state.
identity politics: economic problems are economic and fixating on identity is never going to solve them but further alienate people. What this sounds like is disrupting meritocracy "we <insert combo of minority identities> president or engineer... etc" but in reality is nothing but an extension of confessionalism, which never works. Look at where such politics ends (Lebanon's current crisis <-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Pact, Iraq's current crisis <-- https://www.mei.edu/publications/nation-or-religion-iraqs-hy...). Increase representation by fixing the pipeline problem not instating qoutas without sunset deadlines or criteria
scientism: the usage of phrases such as "believe science" when talking about social issues like abortion where worth is assigned to lives and even ignoring it completely when talking about puberty blockers. Never mind how anti-scientific "believe science" is.
American exceptionalism: A lot more subtle than the right's "shithole country" comments but no less dangerous, look no further than how Poland is talked about, or Hungary... etc. Can't fathom how different societies look at issues from other perspectives. This is a form of cultural imperialism.
All of the above are subject to your definition of left and are points of debate within the left too.
that is not very clear to me, care to explain how we know dogs have consciousness?
On a separate note, I am interested in comparative theology (traditions in general) and the link you mentioned seems very interesting, thank you
---- Edit: For context: grew up in the middle east and living in California now, studied a ton about middle eastern theology and western theology, would love more resources on the east