DrWumbo

The discussion around this on other platforms is turning into a case against Diversity&Inclusion policies when it should be strictly seen as poor leadership.

I can see that as a possible interpretation of my statement, thank you for the context. I see that being a mod on this site isn't easy, so thank you for your work. Reading the full guidelines now I can tell I've broken some of them in the past too.

I believe in this case you may have missed one of the more nuanced guidelines when labeling my comment as flamebait: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize."

My original comment has the key phrase "with the rest of" which shows the subject (US) , as a part of the set being referenced ("developed world")

Not sure why my comment is flagged, or why this would be introductory to a nationalistic flamewar. Saying that the US has a lack of emphasis on passenger rail travel has nothing to do with Nationalism. This thread is about Southwest's breakdown and the fallout caused by it. I think it's fair to say that our reliance on air travel is a relevant topic. Fwiw I use the term "developed world" in quotes because the term is considered offensive to many other nations around the world that don't have the same resources or global presence as the US or large EU nations.

If a small dealership has higb fixed costs and they only turn a small profit per car, and don't sell enough volume they are operating at a loss. Sure each car might not be a loss, but if you can't keep the lights on then what's the point?

Carvana is losing money. In one year their losses for q3 increased by 200 million. You can apply all the fancy metrics you want about how much profit each car generates, but you still have a company that shouldn't be able to continue business without huge investor backing.

I'm curious how long a local small business used car dealership could last if it was unprofitable. This seems like another example of how technology doesn't 'disrupt' markets via savvy new ways of operating, so much as injecting venture capital and loss leading disrupts markets. I know car dealers that were struggling to maintain inventory during the pandemic because Carvana was driving up the price of cars at the auctions. It's a shame because it's big investors taking that inventory out of the hands of small businesses only to turn around and sell the car at a loss.

Yeah there's obvious reasons why organized crime is dangerous, but it's designed to lure people in with quick money/protection/sense of identity and then trap them.

The same goes for any behavior where one knows adverse consequences beforehand. I remember I bummed my first cigarette from a stranger one day when I was stressed out as a teenager. When I got hooked on the addictive properties and irreversibility damaged my lungs should there have been no room for empathy?

I'm not saying choosing to view this kid as a victim solves anything or that people should share my view. I want more voices spreading it so people can see there's another way to see the world.

And fwiw like most people my attitude flips 180 when I'm the victim of a crime. I am after all, only human.

There's a lot of shitheads out there for sure and when one commits crimes in which there are victims one makes a moral decision to inflict some kind of harm. Even with that, you can never truly know another person and categorizing who committed crime out of necessity and who is morally devoid is near impossible. I think we tend to judge our peers harsher than we judge our corporate overlords.

Imo this type of crime is a symptom of our broken society more than a symptom of a broken person.

Copaganda and western hero-villain stories teach us from a young age that there has to be a bad guy who needs to suffer for their actions.

I think you're overestimating Americans

We got credit cards with chips way after Europe. We don't have anything close to GDPR because enough voters don't understand data privacy (and ofc regulatory capture).

I see a lot of commenters here talking about how they have no sympathy for the kid. I think it's important to remember that it's hard out there these days. A life of crime may not be the only option available, but it becomes more and more appealing as access to education or training gets more difficult to afford, inflation increase outpaces wage increases, workers rights aren't expanded.

Dehumanizing criminals is a very privileged way of approaching the world.

What we have here is a child who was failed by society.

I think part of the challenge is increasing tech literacy in America. Most of my friends and family have trouble understanding password managers or hardware 2fa.

I think the article presents a few different ways that this technology is concerning: the budget aspect (which seems to be neutrally aligned), the concern for privacy of US Citizen's near the border (also not a left aligned concept), and the regard for human life regardless of immigration status (something that I imagine isn't unique to the far left).

Regardless of one's take on immigration law, or characterization of undocumented immigrants as criminals: the practices of CBP absolutely should be under scrutiny given the unparalleled power they wield.

Given the risks involved in storing this type of data, it may make financial sense to go the "don't store data" route.

Legislation has actually taken us in the opposite direction. With FOSTA/SESTA online platforms were required to make an effort to go through user content. I think a better analogy to use is these platforms being like bars or cafes. You don't expect the wait staff or bartender to snoop on your conversations, but if law enforcement asks what they know they might be forced to comply. If a bar notices you pimping and doesn't act, they could be liable.

Not sure what is supposed to be controversial about balut. The article reads like an American boy experiencing another culture as a gross thing you do on a dare with some wikipedia bits mangled in.