FussyZeus

Mine is to continue doing it. I've rid myself of everything but Search. Recommendations?

> This is so true. I really wonder about all the people installing these WiFi enabled light bulbs into lamps that end up being connected to some regular dumb switch next to the door in the wall...

Personally, for the bulbs that are smart, I simply don't use the switches, save for restarting the smart bulbs (haven't had to yet, though) but the smart stuff I have is smart for a reason:

The living room recessed lights are Hue bulbs, and that's so we can change the color on the fly, automatically when watching a movie, and schedule off when we've gone to bed and I've forgotten to turn them off.

The bedroom ones turn on automatically when we go to bed, and when we go to sleep, I use my siri shortcut to dim them to almost off completely, but just enough to provide a night light while starting some music we listen to while sleeping.

I have a smart light in the basement that turns on at dusk because it gets too dark down there to walk, and turns off when I trigger my bedtime shortcut.

I would never advise someone to smart everything in their home, but if you have reasons to add automation or have a desire for enhanced functionality, why not? Do your due diligence, know what you're buying, and know how to hook it up safely. I have a number of IP cameras on my property that are explicitly blocked from the Internet, and are only accessible to my home made DVR. I have all smart devices, where able, on a guest wifi that has no access to my computers or other devices, and has location services disabled. This stuff can be used safely and securely, and frankly the wider community looks ridiculous with the impression being they have a printer from the 90's on their desk, it's the smartest thing in their home, and they keep a loaded gun next to it in case it makes a noise they didn't expect.

It blows my mind that a company the size of and with the resources of Google can't get this right, even after all this time. It reeks of apathy to me. And even though I've been a dedicated iPhone user since the 6 Plus, I'd genuinely hoped Android would get better eventually since it's much more open and I enjoy customization, but as it stands, I have no compelling reasons to leave Apple's walled garden.

It seems lately that the only time Google can be deigned to do anything radical to solve problems is when it has one regulatory agency or another breathing down it's neck. It's genuinely disheartening to see a company that, when it started, looked to be ready to change how business was done succumb to the same forces that grind up so many others.

> The government is elected by the people, it doesn't fit that definition.

At the risk of invoking Godwin's law, the Furher was elected by the people. It's a disservice to society at large to so casually brush off judgements about whether a Government is "authoritarian," especially when the question deserves a nuanced answer.

I would say the United States can be quite authoritarian, when it's given the leeway to. The militarization of the police comes to mind. Overpolicing of certain communities, the ongoing struggle for many marginalized groups to attain the same rights and freedoms as the majority, the way the United States swings it's foreign influence and military around worldwide to get what it wants, etc.

I mean our current President was elected on a platform of building a wall on our southern border to solve a completely imaginary problem, and the Government is now trying to seize privately owned property to make that happen.

Is that authoritarianism on the level of China or North Korea? No, not even close. Is it authoritarian? I would say yes, it absolutely is, and that should be a warning to future generations so it never has the opportunity to become authoritarian like China.

Markets created this mess. Markets will not solve it. Single payer takes insurance out of the game entirely, just run the entire industry out of town and be done with it. Doctors fix people, Doctors are paid by the Government what is reliably determined to be going rates for their services.

We (the United States) are the SOLE western country that does not have state sponsored healthcare, and it shows and it's ridiculous. I don't know how anyone can feel we are the greatest or great in any capacity when a car accident can send a family into poverty.

A community is not a business. In fact it's hard for me to conceive of two conceptual entities further away from each other.

A business is interested in profit. Apple is no different. If you're not paying in, they're directly incentivized to make your experience suck as much as they can without crossing legal lines, to get you to do so.

I'm not saying I want to be in the fee-gating communities, I agree with you on that point. I'm just saying expecting a multi-billion dollar corporation to be interested in fostering that same sense of community is ridiculous.

I believe Hercules solved this one by cutting all the heads off at the same time. So, in theory, you just need one guillotine per head.

> without forcing anything into others

You are not an island. Neither am I. If we only act in our own individual best interests, we denigrate society as a whole. We are social animals. We do our best work and are at our most capable when we work together.

Individualism is fine enough for small communities. On the world stage, we need to get past our petty bullshit if we want to continue living the way we do on this planet. And the worst part is failure to do so will not affect those who failed, but their children, and their grandchildren.

I don't think humanity will die off. We're too clever for that. But our world will look quite different in many ways in a few hundred years, and good luck explaining to our children that, well, Amazon Prime was just too good to let go of.

A metaphor: You and your fellow fishermen live in a bog. The bog's water level is kept just so to allow for optimum fishing, and this is accomplished with a dam that was installed many years ago by your ancestors. However, one year the fishing isn't great, and you and your fellow fishermen are now working extra long days to make up for the bad fishing, and to keep your output strong and your family fed. One of the villagers explains that the dam is leaking; it's causing the water to rise, which is messing with the fishing and also threatening the village at large.

Your individual interest is to keep fishing, because you're already having trouble meeting your goals for fish to sell. Now more than ever. You might say something like "I can't help fix the dam, I'm barely making ends meet as it is! I don't have time!" And your fellow fishermen will say the same. But the fishermen are the only ones who know how to patch leaks in boats, so no one else in the village can do the work.

In this example, your individual needs are legitimate, and your objection to fixing the dam is correct; if you take time to fix the dam instead of fish, your family will go hungry. However, if no one fixes the damn, then everyone's home could be flooded, the fishing will continue to get worse, until the entire village is destroyed.

This would be where some kind of authority would come into play, either a tribal leader, or some elected official, who could step in and say "No fishermen. Today you will fix the dam, and in return, we will feed your families while you do so with the village food stocks." It's directly opposed to their individual interests, but is in alignment with the group's interests. And nobody goes hungry.

This incredibly simple stuff is what has made mankind the dominant species on the planet. The ability to not just group together, but to perceive and understand larger threats to that group and react accordingly with proactive solutions, and is the lack of that activity, because, as Greta Thunberg best put it I think, the leaders are too busy telling each other fairy tales of infinite economic growth, that we are now in trouble.

Civil unrest. Protests that devolve into riots.

Ever seen the painting "Bastille Day"? There are always options when the powerful fail the powerless. Large amounts of modern society were put in place to prevent this sort of thing from happening, but if the leadership is intent on making those protections ineffective, well, there's always guillotines again.

If you're sincerely asking these questions, I suggest you read up on climate change at large. This an incredibly large and dense topic and simply asking "how do we fix the planet" as though it's some busted code isn't productive for anyone involved.

What is authority if not a kind of power?