History is written by the victors unfortunately and world history gives me little reason to believe things will be different this time around. Part of the point of erasing all these things is quite similar to destroying the past to control the future. But from their perspectives this is all corrupt, immoral, unethical information barely distinguishable ethically or even worse than Mengele’s experimental data. Except even people left of absolute insanity somewhat concede the relative scientific validity of all the data obtained while those ordering the deletions and redactions now have zero authority nor experience in the fields.
It’s a pity that creating anything of value takes at least an order of magnitude more effort than to destroy something, but I suppose this is why we’re funding back-ups and archives of all this data out there.
There's 3a which is "cherry-pick customers / clients to make it appear that privatized services are more cost-effective than public services that are by default providing services." Picking and choosing one's customers already makes it an invalid comparison if one wants to talk about value.
But essentially creating self-fulfilling prophecies or moving goalposts is one of the oldest tricks in the book by dishonest folks of any ideological alignment. In an alternate universe where socialism / central planning is the default ideology if we wanted to make as unfair of a comparison demonizing private sector we'd have asked half of Silicon Valley companies to forego VC funding, not allow them to do M&A, demand that they be able to serve the general public for even the most obscure of problems, and so forth. That sets them up for failure out of the gate by measuring them against the criteria of the status quo and eliminates any of their advantages over a centralized planning system. And in fact, a large part of these ridiculous restrictions is exactly why NGOs are structured to fail to make much progress on any of the important societal problems they work on.
There needs to be generalized a term for NIMBYs for resisting various solutions to a number of issues because this pattern in liberal democracies around the planet isn’t exactly helping anyone make progress on the more core issues these folks seem to also be interested in.
The three Rs were in order of priority but because reduced consumption didn't exactly translate into what works for a sustainable economy under current incentive paradigms almost anywhere in an economy with lots of consumption we kind of wound up with the least important of the guidelines being what we could more reliably practice (the reasons are another discussion entirely).
Almost all the most pressing problems for the human species seem to be Wicked Problem classes and it's part of why I don't have a lot of expectation that any of them will be solved even _if_ catastrophic events like constant war and mass deaths happen. I also have doubts that whoever survives any of these kinds of events would be more genetically predisposed to solving these problems in the future either.
I think we should add that the outcomes are worse at _all_ socioeconomic levels. The rich get screwed over as well in this system as well. It's unfortunate that so many of them have better overall outcomes and/or myopic experiences that many are emotionally invested in being _able_ to pay exorbitant amounts for more personalized care - regardless of the societal consequences - as an interpretation of "freedom."
But hey, it's not like the US is a democracy exactly given that public opinion generally doesn't translate into policy changes anymore.
Resources are not always in terms of material terms. Poor people with family, friends, associates, familiarity of a region, etc. stay there. What's a bit unique for American migration patterns in the past 60-ish years people have become less and less mobile for economic opportunities and the cultural shift has sometimes become more resentful toward those that feel betrayed by those leaving regions for better economic opportunities. In a lot of countries people are happy and even envious of those leaving their areas of origin. The underlying reasons for lack of mobility is another heatedly debated topic altogether but there's absolutely plenty of things the poor, particularly rural ones, absolutely have plenty to lose.
Up front though in every other thing I’ve read is that this is going to be hard, so that doesn’t seem like a fair argument either. I don’t tell people that the VI text editor is easy to learn or even that it’s even superior to anything at all, only that’s worked for me and that I hope everyone finds something that works for them. It’s not like we need any more barriers to helping people code and write, yet they all take a set of complex practicing to be proficient given we aren’t wired by genetics or anything do such complex activities such as language and walking upright.
Bad analogy in my opinion. Learning basic vim can be done in a couple of hours and I think would benefit literally every programmer to know the basics because it is so much nicer to even navigate a single line of code using the vi keys (w, b, f, % etc) than any other alternative I've heard of.
I think more broadly you’re talking about the concept of “third places” and this has been suggested as another reason for decline of community. However, my argument is that the Internet replaced the “third place” for most people given it’s where people are spending time in terms of attention and resources rather than necessarily physical presence.
Free internet spaces (think old school forums, some subreddits, discord channels, of MMORPGs servers for instance) are pretty much OK, especially when the population is stable and not too big (idk how big is tolerable, but it's likely under 10k). The problem is that these ones too have declined a lot in favor of algorithmically managed internet places which attempt to boost “engagement” by using evolutionary psychology and neuroscience tricks.
You didn't answer my question. How is internet compatible with human biology, which was not designed for (no matter whether you believe in God or evolution) a technological lifestyle?
We can look at a bit more regulated industries like airlines (see: Boeing) and see that it’s not necessarily working whatever path we’re on is certainly not that approach.
