This is not in any way a victory for feminism, or for anyone else. The men are basically slaves, and the women are considered to be too inferior to be slaves so they do black market work.
The sanctions from outside generally don't limit outside countries from providing aid, but the north korean government closing its borders clearly does. They've never allowed foreign aid workers in generally, and now they've evicted pretty much all foreigners. As the article says, they don't want anyone to understand how much better life is in other countries. Even when foreign countries attempt to send them aid materials no strings attached, the government typically stockpiles it for the benefit of those in power.
And yeah, the argument of "other people have it worse than you so you have no right to complain" is lazy self-serving garbage.
I'm always amazed when I search for any generic term on Google Maps at how many places I know about don't show up in search results. What a shame. They clearly ran out of new ideas years ago.
That is an interesting idea, but I can guarantee employers would fine ways around that very quickly. For example, maybe the law stipulates that employees must be compensated for 80% of salary, so employers start paying mostly in benefits and equity. Or we specify 80% of total compensation, and they find a way to say healthcare is worth nothing and grossly underestimate the initial value of equity. There's always a way. Banning it outright doesn't even guarantee it will work, because cartels will agree not to hire each other's recently departed employees.
In addition to all of the control issues that other commenters have mentioned like blocking adblock and including tracking, an app also puts the user in the mindset of using your service by default and exclusively. If you view Reddit on the web, you might copy and link and repost it to Twitter. You're less likely to do that in an app. Additionally, it leads people to use Reddit by default, for all purposes. On the web, I might think "Oh, I should search for this on Reddit", but then if Reddit doesn't have the results that I need I'll check another website. Humans are creatures of habit. Once I get used to opening the Reddit app by default, I'll subconsciously invent ways to use the Reddit app for everything, as my one-stop-shop. Which is why I don't use any proprietary apps, ever, if I can do the same thing on the website. And also why I don't use mobile internet very much, to be honest.
Oh god yes. It filters out ~50% of my youtube. I'm at the point where I can't view websites on my phone anymore because I can't stand all the ads, three popup videos all autoplaying and talking over each other ... ublock origin provides such a stark contrast.
Maybe you already know it: you can filter ads by DNS on phones (manually configured or with pseudo VPN apps), and if you don't mind using other mobile browsers, on Android Firefox supports ad blockers and Brave (Android and IOS) has an integrated one.
Only on Android, not iOS. I have an iphone now after android my whole life. The biggest feature it's missing is the ability to block ads. It means I refuse to use the browser on my phone, which is a pretty big feature to lack.
Without VPN, iOS doesn't have an ad blocker for in-app ads, like YouTube. And blockers for browsers is extremely poor, routinely failing to block ads. Then there are sites which detect ad blockers and flag them, prevent the site from being used without disabling the ad blocker on Safari/WebView.
One problem is that people just give five stars by default. "I didn't find any insects or hair in my food. Five Stars." Another problem is that there is no consistency. People who only ever eat at McDonalds give all the McDonalds near them four or five stars and people who only eat at Michelin Star restaurants give all of those four or five stars. There's no standard across restaurants. So my solution is, I'm going to actually visit and review every restaurant in my town (there are about 30 of them) and I'm going to use a consistent scale. 5 means wow, this is genuinely the best I've ever had in this genre. 4 means very good, above average. 3 means decent, average, worth your time. 2 means not great, but edible. 1 means don't go here.
I think that the people who rate McDonald's 5-stars are probably being more helpful about the system than you are, because "restaurants" is far too broad a category to have a consistent scale within.
Instead, it's more useful to rate a given restaurant compared to its sub-genre (or at least its price band) -- was it good for a fast-food restaurant? -- so you might rate a disappointing experience at a Michelin star restaurant lower than you'd rate a clean McDonald's with fast service, just because of how they're meeting your expectations.
This results in usable review aggregates. If I look at a Yelp! listing for a McDonald's and I see it's 2-stars, I want to know that's because it's bad for a McDonald's, not just because the person rating it thinks that a McDonald's inherently has a cap of being "not great, but edible".
In addition to not rating within a category/genre, I actually find that people tend to overweight meal price in their weighting (e.g. an expensive but average Italian dinner gets a higher rating than a phenomenal and cheap slice of pizza)
