and in fairness to the mobile devices thing of abstracting file systems, when it comes to discoverability and organizing files or documents, a rigid hierarchy of nested sub-folders is far inferior to a single directory with tagging or other metadata properties you can use to filter and essentially build custom directories on the fly with.
Given this is a UI-focused repo, you really should be including some videos/gifs or at least some static images in your readme without having to run the demo. Like, I just dont get why you wouldnt? Its baffling to be quite honest. Especially given the advertisement of it being cyberpunk inspired. It's also actually quite good-looking having just loaded the demo, so you're doing it a disservice for not actively bragging or communicating how good it looks.
I'd also recommend more docs / tutorials on how to use the platform. Readme is great but when you click Documentation link you're just redirected to the readme which isnt useful and makes it seem like there is actual docs available.
It's because acompany promise is useless without actual enforced regulation which is harsh enough to actually add trust in such a contractual agreement being honoured.
This is how we have a free-market to begin with. You need enforcement and structures in place so people will actually trust any of this crap. Instead, we have the nutjob early 90's cyber libertarians thinking this will all be magically fixed with just magical freedom and the invisible hand fixing everything.
People "don't care" because they do not understand the implications or the technology, not because they genuinely have no interest in privacy. Of course its easy to dupe people without technical literacy by characterizing it as some benign "targeted advertising" as if its a service being provided for you (when clearly it's not) rather than the actual answer which is "we want to follow your every movement and pattern of behaviour as if we had someone following you in an unmarked car and then sell that data to anyone willing to cough up the cash without any of your consent".
This narrative is incredibly toxic and honestly a very antisocial viewpoint of people as if they are all just stupid sheep who deserve to be exploited.
There's zero reason why its unfair for a person to both object to advertising because of the annoyance (because it is annoying) AND for a person to not want to be digitally surveilled endlessly without their consent.
> People "don't care" because they do not understand the implications or the technology, not because they genuinely have no interest in privacy.
I don't disagree with you there.
> This narrative is incredibly toxic and honestly a very antisocial viewpoint of people as if they are all just stupid sheep who deserve to be exploited.
The people get what they vote for, whether or not its what they deserve. The only way to move the needle on this is to educate people. Telling people they're "stupid sheep" for not wanting the thing you think they should want is not typically a winning strategy, in my experience.
> There's zero reason why its unfair for a person to both object to advertising because of the annoyance (because it is annoying) AND for a person to not want to be digitally surveilled endlessly without their consent.
I'm simply saying I think most people care more about the first thing.
Yeah this is where I think government-regulation would actually be a solid-fit to try and govern some of this manipulative and unfair practices.
There just needs to be a blanket-law where your data is considered every-bit as intellectual property as a piece of copyrighted media and for there to be consent established to sell or give your data to a third-party there needs to be an active exchange of payment, credit or services that is opt-in only, not opt-out from an intentionally obfuscated EULA update email.
Require active opt-in and consent along with a clear set of goods/services/payment, and active simple on-demand revocation with strict timelines, and you could have companies actually properly incentivizing users to sell them their own personal data instead of it just being harvested.
Unfortunately too many libertarian nutjobs out here think that the market here will magically fix all issues.
> too many libertarian nutjobs out here think that the market here will magically fix all issues
I'll see your libertarian market nutjobs and raise you reflexive "regulation will fix it" liberals (I don't really know the right term here, but I guess it's the one that fits most closely with US politics for the last 60+ years). Neither group has much room in its worldview for the simple fact that some people are just jerks and will abuse any system.
Regulation can be done well, but doing so in a way that doesn't just hand the entire segment to the current incumbents is hard and regulatory capture isn't just something market worshipers conjured out of thin air.
Please look up the difference between private property and personal property. When people decry "property is theft", they're not talking about personal property, they're talking about private property.
Also, socialist states with advanced economies built airplanes, hydroelectric dams and all kinds of complex things. This is a joke of an argument. Say what you will about the living conditions, fairness, corruption or other issues with socialist states, but to pretend they "didn't build complex things" is ridiculous when you look up the number of scientific achievements made first by the USSR.
i dont get this blindspot by lots of developers parroting this uber technocratic nonsense.
There's no such thing as some apolitical, objectively best approach to a technical problem. Instead of arguing about specific merits about specific issues people throw out this big wide handwave about how "idea X is simply technically the wrong choice", as if this is a legit position to have.
Take a philosophy course for god's sake before you engineer us all to death.
Who currently gets fired due to engineering malpractice? It would be the same thing if there was actual certifications and engineering sign-offs in cybersecurity or other critical areas of development.
I wont pretend that accountability in the physical engineering world is all smiles and rainbows but at least there are actual laws dictating responsibilities, certification and other real consequences for civil engineers. When a Professional Engineer in Canada signs-off (seal) on work they are legally assuming responsibility which means the practitioner could be held accountable in the event of professional misconduct or incompetence regarding the engineering work. There is no reason but corporate greed and corruption why there isn't similar legislation in North America for cybersecurity or software engineering where you have professional bodies certify people to be legally obligated to sign-off on work (and refuse work that isn't up to standards).
But this would require introducing actual legislation which god-forbid how could we do such a thing to the poor market! It would stifle their innovation at leaking everyone's data.
There's no reason we couldn't extend the same existing system of licensure [1] that professional engineers require.
Sure maybe its overkill for someone stringing together a python app, but if you're engineering the handling of any actual personal information then this work ought to be overseen by qualified, licensed and accountable professionals who are backed by actual laws.
What? The author isn't claiming they were abused or a victim of abuse. Abuse is only mentioned through one specific story, which was from a friend:
> In one case, GPS was used to first construct an inaccurate and accusatory narrative about a partner’s behavior that nitpicked the details [...] and then to show up unannounced to physically confront them.
I mean, this very much does sound like abuse. What are you going on about and what is your issue with the post?
Calling this an issue of resiliency is completely missing the point about autism. I recommend you do some more reading because it has nothing to do with resiliency. People on the spectrum can have incredible resiliency in certain activities that neurotypical people couldn't (for example, hyper focus on a very complex cognitive task or dedicate hours of "boring" repetitive practice in a physical activity).
I think lots of people on the spectrum would gladly grow vegetables or kill chickens over having to go to the grocery store. Tolerance levels on activities placing you in highly social situations with overwhelming stimuli can be significantly lower for people on the spectrum.
Someone above this said the boxes in a grocery store are "shouting" at them with their bright colors. I know autism has varying levels but like, I sincerely worry about their ability to live if looking a box is causing a truly remarkable level of distress.
> hyper focus on a very complex cognitive task or dedicate hours of "boring" repetitive practice in a physical activity
That's awesome, take that win for sure that it's easier for them to do that and if one would rather go farm than take place in society then I think that's a fantastic goal to work toward.
> I sincerely worry about their ability to live if looking a box is causing a truly remarkable level of distress.
It’s sort of built into the definition of a disorder that otherwise normal stressors or negative pressures have an outsized and excessive impact on the person with the disorder relative to what it would be if they didn’t have the disorder.
Think of it like this, if I punch you as hard as I can in your leg, that might hurt quite a bit and make you favor your leg for a few hours. But if you have a broken leg and I do the same thing it’s going to be much worse for you and you won’t recover nearly is quickly. The input hasn’t changed, only the underlying condition that amplifies the results of that input.
And if you had a broken leg and I did punch you as hard as I could, no one would really be “worried for your ability to live” if you complained that my doing that ruined your ability to function today and tomorrow. Because of course it did, you have a broken leg.
Same idea here. Autism makes the inputs excessively intense. The only difference is se expect your broken leg to eventually heal, and we generally don’t go around punching people in their legs. But autism doesn’t heal and we do live in a word of intense advertising and flash in an attempt to grab your attention.
That is an excellent point. As an autistic person I would happily kill and clean chickens every meal . If it meant not feeling like a panic attack every trip to the store .
reply