seagullriffic
Joined 3 years ago
Joined 3 years ago
These massively asymmetric choices occur elsewhere in life, e.g. "asking them out on a date"; "asking for a raise", and are good to look out for.
Is there a recording? It's very frustrating to read things like this and not be given a link.
Sociopathic. Regulations and safety standards should be updated to consider both occupants' and others' safety.
The auto manufacturers won't like this, because they are cheap and greedy.
The emails are phishy to the extreme and there's no indication or way to verify that it's an official service. See for example https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/uk-gov-keeps-...
While some parts of Gov.uk are done well, there are still terrible practices everywhere due to cheapness and ignorance and presumably because the Gov UK people can't do everything, unfortunately, even though it would be cheaper and better if they did.
Yes of course there are positives. Don't worry, we have never let negative consequences hold back progress before.
But the blind optimism is staggering, and let's get philosophical: what's the ultimate good, objectively? (Subjectively obviously _I_ and _you_ think it's that we get to be around for longer.) But objectively, from a humanity standpoint, is it (1) the most people in existence, (2) the most people to ever have existed, (3) the most consciousness, (4) the most happiness? Etc.
If we start letting people live forever, over a long time, because of resources, fewer people will ultimately exist. We'll also have slower progress because old ideas will live longer. It's very hubristic to think we've peaked, and it's inevitable that the first live-forever generation will put the brakes on progress/change.
I'd say those downsides far outweigh the upsides you've proposed.
* unbounded population increase * wealth and power directly proportional to age * dictators and other bad people not dying
Not insurmountable but all of those big problems would require massive sociological shifts.
I do. The BL is a national institution, and, like the NHS, would attract masses of free labour if they asked for it. There are volunteer developers and data scientists who work for charities in their spare time to help improve society.
Not everyone's so greedy that they must be compensated for every breath they take.
Why would they pay ransomware hackers when they would obviously have backups. Sucks to have data compromised, but presumably it's not lost. And what part of the system was designed to bad practices that this was able to happen? Aren't there lots of UK white-hats who would freely lend their services to help improve the library's infrastructure?
Presumably excluding attacks of this sort isn't arcane or impossible, because other major companies and orgs manage it. Is it secret knowledge, or something?
Surely there's a SOP to just not have this happen.
Go on holiday. At least two months. The first week you'll think you're still at work. The second week you might have some time to collect your thoughts, and plan. Then beyond that you might hopefully have the headspace to catch up on chores and life admin.
Month two is for enjoying yourself and your family.
Do the above first. Not addressing your main Q; I'm sure there are good jobs which would still hold your interest/excite you.