I didn’t contradict that notion. Apple devices are supported for longer than Android. But, again, it is an attempt to hook new people into a subscription-adjacent model. The pressure and nagging to change to a new phone every two years is still there, and they also kill software support to devices that are still functional.

Apple is in the same business model. They also kill their phones via software. They just captured the used market through various means so they get money off you more consistently. People think that trade in with credit options for a new phone every two years is such a great idea. Do the math, it’s actually a subscription model, you don’t own your iPhone, yet you’ll always pay more than what the hardware is worth.

Careful there, you are getting dangerously close to pre-crime justifications. I agree with you wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, drug distribution crimes are at the top on risk of re-offending (only bellow financial fraud and related economic crimes, mind you). Now, the other side of the coin is that most people who need mental health care the most, due to risk of violence or harm to self and others, are the ones less likely to willingly seek for it. Now, the US justice system sucks, and isn’t more than a slave making machine. However, in this particular case, the only way to ensure the person is not a danger towards others is to pass them through that faulty system. Because it is the only mechanism the system has at hand. I agree that more activism is necessary for a judicial system reform for humane treatment of convicts, and better access to social protections and mental health care opportunities outside of the system. However, that is the ideal world, this is the real world. And right now, just removing their license does nothing. Statistics tells us that he will just switch to be a life coach and keep distributing drugs to addicts, just illegally. Legality has never stopped anyone from doing something.

I agree. However, it has no bearing into this particular case. Truth is that you don’t know this person. You are not their forensic psychologist. You cannot claim in any certain way whether he will re-offend or not. All of that is for the system that is in place to decide. Hopefully with some level headed professionals making those decisions. Activism for more humane treatment of convicts and stronger mental health care to reduce the slave state of the judicial system is praiseworthy, I’m with you on that. But that change is gradual and involves a ton of changes on society and culture. But “don’t jail anyone ever”, while it might sound nice and noble, without its social care counterpart, is folly. You will have to jail people from time to time, even if it is to make sure they get mental health care. The number one risk factor with violence prone patients is that they don’t take treatment willingly and tend to fail to show up to care, even if it is available.

That’s a noble thought. However, do realize that even most, means that some people will not feel bad about killing people. The problem is that now you have to predict with certainty whether any one given person will repeat the offense in the future. A thing that all humans are pretty shit at.

Let’s say, in an hypothetical case, we let a murderer free. There’s no equivocal culpability, we know they did it. But, since you’re advocating for no prison. Then, if he reoffends, you go to jail instead. Would you feel as sure about advocating for a murderer?

It’s easy to presume rehabilitation if you’re not the one who will suffer the consequences. Also, spoken as someone who has never had the opportunity of interacting with an antisocial personality type.

Neither would I, hence the qualifiers. Doesn’t change the argument though.

Of course, drug dealers, famously reticent to distributing drugs without license.

It was not a misstep. He gave ketamine to Perry in the first place in order to get him hooked on it while counseling about his addiction with other drugs. He is not a poor repentant fellow who made a honest mistake. He is a corrupt health staff member that, without the proper behavior correctional support, would probably do it again if given the chance.

Oh, in this case it will. It will stop a corrupt guy who makes money out of distributing drugs of dubious origin under the guise of safe recreational use for recovery purposes, from further putting others at risk. For a drug counselor it should be obvious that you should not distribute drugs to addicts under (almost) no circumstance.

That’s not the issue, though. The age of consent is a scape goat to distract from the actual source of the sex tourism problem. Colombia’s laws for example are on par with the Canadian example quoted above. Yes the age of consent is technically 14, but there’s a ton of nuance, like access to sexual rights (which was a big issue, like contraceptives and medical care). As well as strict rules regarding no more than 5 years of age gap.

The real problem is that both Thailand and Colombia have armed criminal groups controlling large swaths of territory where they engage in drug and human trafficking. With both, forced and sex labor intentions. Effective modern day slavery, due to a complex web of factors that make establishing the rule of law very hard. They’re far from the only ones, tons of countries all over the world suffer from this issue regardless of age of consent.

Thanks for the honest insight. I will not be contrarian to what you said. But I do want to point out that honesty without emotional responsibility is cruelty. It might be a costume party, but it’s not always born out of malice, often it is self preservation. After all dissecting living beings usually kills them.

I appreciate the honesty, however, cynicism and lack of patience can be challenging for others to deal with in communication. However, I believe very thoughtful of you to keep it on the internet. Even if it makes the internet more toxic, at least you keep real life more sensible and that’s very considerate. I can see how it can be challenging, as I struggle with civility and empathy online as well.

Interesting, such a strong insight is actually part of soft skills. You know yourself, what you don’t want to do and stick up to it for your own moral preservation.

You think most people lack soft skills

Here’s an interesting example you just gave me. I don’t think that and never said as much. As I said, my impression, while anecdotal, was developed doing psychological evaluations professionally. Our understanding is that soft skills are not a given, there are actually several dimensions and degrees of different soft skills involved. Some people might be very good conversationalist, but completely emotionally inflexible at work at the same time, for example. Certainly, different social advantages derive into different opportunities to develop different soft skills. This complexity is exactly why I said that soft skills are hard to teach and learn. Also, why some people on the field are calling to rename them something else. The soft adjective is perhaps inaccurate.

Now to the example. It’s extremely frowned upon in a conversation to affirm what others think, when they haven’t explicitly expressed so themselves. Specially when the other person is still a complete stranger. It could be interpreted as hostility or an attempt to misrepresent other people’s positions in order to attack them.

It is usually easier to rent a vps with a domain to run as a reverse proxy or a tunneling server between your server and users. Dynamic DNS and static IPs depend on the internet provider offering real outbound access and not a NAT. Plus any internet facing service should be hardened for security in some way, which it is usually provided in service packages for the vps.

Well, curiosity, openness to new experiences, motivation to both learn and meet new people, tolerance to frustration and failure. Or at least be amicable enough to successfully navigate a learning setting, they are part of soft skills. In my professional experience, these are far from universal traits. Lack of soft skills is definitely not a minority, but it is also a gradient.

Fun fact. In psychology assessment this are being called hard skills: very technical abilities for doing specialized tasks; and soft skills: social and emotional abilities to navigate social contexts, manage conflict and self regulate emotions.

Hard skills are easier to teach, while soft skills are very hard.

So, they all promptly forgot about the humane pin? Did it flop so hard it fell out of collective memory? These AI wearables solve absolutely no real world problem.

Lithium is not the most abundant part of a lithium ion battery, despite the name. It is very important but it is also very reusable. It can even, theoretically, be recycled. It will never be equivalent to oil. There’s just not the same incentive to start wars over the thing.

Typically, people stay on the torrents because they are free, while all usenet costs money. Which is the point. Maybe genz can’t even afford Usenet access.