car_analogy

> And we'll be monitoring the Politicians and Police with this too right?

And what will you do when you find corruption among them? Even when symmetric, surveillance benefits those with power.

> I see that dangers of the CCP taking over high tech industries

Then you see more than our wise economists, whose theory predicts, by way of simplified models and comparative advantage, that our instincts are wrong and everything will work out okay.

Don't confuse downplaying significance, with downplaying novelty. As if big tech has been our friend up until now.

> I think ~90% of ivy league schools have a Jewish Dean

You think? Who the deans are is public information - why not test your hypothesis and check?

Edit: Instead of sarcastically apologizing, please find sources to either prove or refute your statement.

Edit 2: As dragonwriter points out, each school can have many deans. Perhaps you meant president? In which case, according to their wikipedia pages, only 5 of the 8 Ivy League presidents are Jewish (Yale, Brown, Harvard, UPenn, and Princeton), for a total of 62.5%, well short of your 90%.

> If it detects that the driver is speeding it can perform one of four actions: send out a visual or acoustic warning (like a warning message in the instrument cluster or a chime), emit a series of vibrations (likely through the steering wheel), provide haptic feedback through the accelerator pedal, or automatically slow the car down to the posted limit. Carmakers are free to choose how the system they adopt reacts.

While the main issue is forcing items we own to disobey us and instead answer to a different master, I'd like to point out that all the proposed actions are either distractions when one should be focusing on the road, or a dangerous override of user inputs (will it slow down when you're trying to overtake or merge into traffic?)

Is the "content" described as "Movie Title" or "License to view Movie Title for a limited time arbitrarily determined by us"?

That's too bad for Ticketmaster because the large print calls them a "purchase". How are consumers supposed to know which parts of their business communications are lies and which are truth? Or rather, why should Ticketmaster get to choose which of their words count and which are just decoration?

> Facebook has hidden much of Instagram's content behind logins, so that makes most of it "not public".

1) It was public when the content was posted by its authors. Facebook locked it down retroactively, regardless of the author's intent.

2) A login requirement doesn't make it non-public, if making an account is trivial, and there are already hundreds of millions of accounts. Is the plot of Avengers: Endgame also not public, because it's locked behind a ticket purchase or subscription?

> Ehr, yes? Shouldn’t we decide to avoid bad companies?

What I clearly meant was if that should be the only defense we have against such companies. Or should we also have things like food and work safety regulations, and anti-child-labor laws.

> What’s more democratic than a vast majority of people making such choices without coercion?

Consumerism is the ultimate democracy, voting for laws and representatives is tyranny...