There is too much good stuff to quote it all in this speech by Elizabeth Warren. Maybe she could be a pilot?
The central question America faces today is this: who does our government work for? Does it work only for giant corporations, for the rich and the powerful? Or does it work for everyone?
It’s time to rework our ideas about technology. Consumers should demand better security built in up front, governments should hold companies accountable for the problems their technologies create.
If we don’t fundamentally change how we build and secure tech our problems will get much worse.
Modern computing security is like a flimsy house that needs to be fundamentally rebuilt. In recent years, we have suffered small collapses here and there, and made superficial fixes in response. There has been no real accountability for the companies at fault, even when the failures were a foreseeable result of underinvestment in security or substandard practices rather than an outdated trade-off of performance for security.
There are better ways to make systems more secure. For example, you can build more isolation and separation into our systems, moving security functions to properly audited hardware and away from software (which is always more vulnerable). Things cannot be hacked if they cannot be reached. This may mean that we have to sacrifice some speed for security.
As things stand, we suffer through hack after hack, security failure after security failure. If commercial airplanes fell out of the sky regularly, we wouldn’t just shrug. We would invest in understanding flight dynamics, hold companies accountable that did not use established safety procedures, and dissect and learn from new incidents that caught us by surprise.
And indeed, with airplanes, we did all that. There is no reason we cannot do the same for safety and security of our digital systems.
The Looming Digital Meltdown https://nyti.ms/2Ef8fkf
Conservatives will use any shield they can to keep the truth of their intentions hidden, except when they don’t need to anymore. The GOP is now nakedly grabbing more for the rich and willfully harming those less well off. The Republican party is the party of Me, Me, Me.
They act as though taxes and government are designed to deny them their due. Thankfully most people can see through this. Democracy was designed to shield against the rich exploiting the poor. Not the other way around.
In “Inequality and Democratization,” the political scientists Ben W. Ansell and David J. Samuels show that this demand for political inclusion generally isn’t driven by a desire to use the existing institutions to plunder the elites. It’s driven by a desire to keep the elites from continuing to plunder them.
It’s easy to say that everyone ought to have certain rights. Democracy is how we come to get and protect them. Far from endangering property rights by facilitating redistribution, inclusive democratic institutions limit the “organized banditry” of the elite-dominated state by bringing everyone inside the charmed circle of legally enforced rights.
Democracy is fundamentally about protecting the middle and lower classes from redistribution by establishing the equality of basic rights that makes it possible for everyone to be a capitalist. Democracy doesn’t strangle the golden goose of free enterprise through redistributive taxation; it fattens the goose by releasing the talent, ingenuity and effort of otherwise abused and exploited people.
Ultimately, it’s the integrity of democratic institutions and the rule of law that gives ordinary people the power to protect themselves against elite exploitation. But the Republican majority is bulldozing through basic democratic norms as though freedom has everything to do with the tax code and democracy just gets in the way.
The Tax Bill Shows the G.O.P.’s Contempt for Democracy https://nyti.ms/2DcZp72
It’s harder to change the culture of harassment at corporations than they would have you believe. The story of Ford and their employees’ treatment of fellow female workers in the last twenty years is despicable. This is where culture change really needs to happen.
Women who work under these conditions who are told they are disloyal for speaking up have been failed by numerable organizations, not least of which: their unions.
The culture change we need is more than just fair treatment of women or even anyone other than white men. We need a culture change which says people are more important than profits. We have to embrace the belief that our citizens are our most important asset not our profit making entities. Along side this change will come an acceptance that marginalized groups like women and minorities cannot be mistreated in the name of capitalism.
much less attention has been focused on the plight of blue-collar workers, like those on Ford’s factory floors. After the #MeToo movement opened a global floodgate of accounts of mistreatment, a former Chicago worker proposed a new campaign: “#WhatAboutUs.”
How Tough Is It to Change a Culture of Harassment? Ask Women at Ford https://nyti.ms/2oMtVRY
Ted Chiang makes an impressive case for AI being an example of runaway capitalism which is the greater threat to humanity.
when Silicon Valley tries to imagine superintelligence, what it comes up with is no-holds-barred capitalism.
we are already surrounded by machines that demonstrate a complete lack of insight, we just call them corporations.
There’s a saying,popularized by Fredric Jameson, that it’s easier to imagine the end of the world than to imagine the end of capitalism.
Anti-intellectualism and fake news aside, we’re fomenting a slide towards idiocracy. There are some basic things we can do to slow that slide. The staff here is guilty of thinking inside safe space opinion bubbles. They’re hard to pop when you think you have the right info. We need to rebuild public discourse from a more basic and easily agreed to truths.
It’s time to promote and reward the learning of basic civics lessons. What a wonderful moment to see that STEM isn’t the only field of value to society.
STEM (STEAM too) exacerbated the fake news issue we are feeling so acutely, but as the writer points out, the real problem is that most folks don’t have a sufficient grasp of civic fundamentals.
How can we expect people to see through the propaganda and marketing if they never learned basic functions of our government, etc.
We’re With Stupid https://nyti.ms/2jz6NUS
Some interesting and timely arguments for getting rid of the Electoral College.
it’s terrible for the rest of the country, which is rendered effectively invisible, distorting our politics, our policy debates and even the distribution of federal funds. Candidates focus their platforms on the concerns of battleground states, and presidents who want to stay in office make sure to lavish attention, and money, on the same places. The emphasis on a small number of states also increases the risk to our national security, by creating an easy target for hackers who want to influence the outcome of an election. Perhaps most important, voters outside of swing states know their votes are devalued, if not worthless, and they behave accordingly. In 2012, 64 percent of swing-state voters showed up, compared with 57 percent everywhere else, a pattern that persisted in 2016. What better way to get more voters to register and go to the polls than to ensure that everyone’s vote is weighed equally?
amending the Constitution is a heavy lift. A quicker and more realistic fix is the National Popular Vote interstate compact, under which states agree to award all of their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. The agreement kicks in as soon as states representing a total of 270 electoral votes sign on, ensuring that the popular vote will always pick the president. So far, 10 states and the District of Columbia have joined, representing 165 electoral votes. The problem is that they are all solidly Democratic, which only adds to the suspicion that this is no more than a partisan game. It’s not: When Mr. Trump is not making up stories about millions of illegal voters, he has argued that if the presidency were decided by popular vote, he would have campaigned differently and still would have won. He may well be right.
Let the People Pick the President https://nyti.ms/2jamIc7