A therapist. No joke. In my case it _seems to be_ a coping mechanism for anxiety. I'm so afraid that I force myself to be successful. It goes under the radar because it's seen as healthy to the outside world, but inside is turmoil.
It was put best to me: Don't tell the dog it's not a chicken, we need the eggs.
First, I don't think this is usually what is meant when someone is claiming an entity is selling data. My normal interpretation would be that if a company is "selling my data" then they are selling that data to parties I have zero contact or reason to think they would have my data.
I understand what you're saying, but I think it would be less confusing to keep the idea I described above and what Plaid is doing (AFAIU) distinct.
More specifically I understand it as: If I engage with some entity/company/developer and give them the permission and secrets necessary to access my account, they can pay Plaid to make use of them on my behalf in the process of doing whatever it is I gave them that access for.
This activity is, and always has been to me, completely distinct from the activity of "selling my data", although it could result in the one I authorized to access my data through Plaid turning around and selling my data.
When you enter into a transaction using your bank, someone who is not a party to that transaction can see it, and they pay for that access.
Under any framing, that's a third party paying for access to your transaction data.
The user hasn't opted-in if the co-founder of the company is telling people it doesn't happen. It's only opt-in if the user knows it's happening and agrees to it.
If I'm using a financial app, and it pops up with a "App Foo wants to use Plaid to link to your bank", and I go in and enter my banking credentials into that dialog... you're arguing that I have no idea what I'm doing and aren't consenting to anything? Huh?
If you're so confident, go survey Plaid users and find what percentage are aware that Plaid makes money selling their financial transaction history to developers.
Then ask yourself why the founding team goes around and tells people they don't do that.
That'd be a very misleading survey question, as it heavily implies they're selling it to other developers the user didn't engage with at all.
"Are you aware that connecting app Foo to your bank account gives app Foo access to your transactions?" is likely to be met with a resounding "no shit, that's the point..."
So your claim is that the average person on the street understands that if they send someone money on Venmo once, then Venmo gets 24 months of their bank account history?
And your claim is that the point of the user signing up to Robinhood or Venmo is to give Robinhood or Venmo their entire bank account history for the last two years?
I find this implausible. You have an empirical claim. You're welcome to test it.
We didn't have Fortnite but we had many other venues for entertainment on computers: MUDs, Ultima, DOOM, Duke Nukem 3D, Wolfenstein, Wing Commander, etc. etc. The list goes on.
My early family life resembled the parent's. The difference in my case and related to your point wasn't the absence of distractions it was to get at them I had to learn how to make the damn computer work. I once tricked my 286 into thinking it was a 386 so that I could install Windows 3.1. All for the purpose of... playing solitaire. Yeah, that's how bored I was.
I'm not even sure I could replicate doing that today. As a 9 year old I was better with a rudimentary BIOS than I am today with a modern one. I'm pretty sure it was because there was a barrier between me and what I wanted and the only way to get it was to figure out that horrendous system.
Well, now kids would be learning about overclocking video cards, messing with refresh rates, optimizing their gaming mouse etc. Same idea. I had Zork and PAC man growing up and while I enjoyed it I wasn’t completely addicted to it possibly because the graphics, multi player gaming etc weren’t there yet. It does bother me seeing my son play fortnite rather than learning python etc like I’d have been inclined to do if I were his age. Then again, I’d probably be addicted to fortnite as well.
I think all parents stress about video games. Mine did. Sometimes I'd get a new game and play it incessently. Eventually I'd get bored and go back to programming. If someone is interested in the topic fun games won't stop them exploring it, I'm sure.
So much truth. I must have beat Wing Commander 100 times. To play it, I had to tinker. I didn't want to tinker, but it was the only way to blow up evil cat people in space. Things are more stable and reliable these days. I prefer it for the usability, but I recognize the limited hackability of most modern computers means few people will take an interest.
I think you've missed this one - the typical long-haul truck driver drives somewhere far enough away that they can't return home and must stay overnight (sometimes sleeping in their trucks) before they can drive again.
This system seems to indicate that the automated trucks do the long hauls between cities and the human drivers do the shorter hauls within/around cities.
Well, maybe not for the drivers who see 90% of their income earning opportunity automated away and all they get is the local driving on each end. Well, probably on one end -- the warehouse where the truck is loaded will be located where an automated truck can drive to it easily.
We’re not great at environmentally friendly mining. Mountain top removal mining, open pit mining and strip mining are brute force tactics that demonstrate a capacity for efficiency, but remain controversial because of their destructive qualities.
No one will care about using destructive tactics on an asteroid, freeing everyone’s hand to not be gentle. On the other hand, much of what gets mined in space will need to stay in space. After all, what would happen, if three times the mass of planet earth were mined into managable resources? To add as much to earth’s surface would augment orbit and rotation for starters. Even bringing such mass near earth would wreak havoc on ocean tides.
> The total mass of the asteroid belt is approximately 4% that of the Moon, or 22% that of Pluto, and roughly twice that of Pluto's moon Charon (whose diameter is 1200 km).
(Wikipedia)
It will take a long time before we have mined enough mass to worry about things like tides.
Fascinating, this is a well-formed argument. To be frank, it's borderline the best argument for space development that I have ever heard. There are many things that we do well on Earth, but there are some industries where the arc of progress has stalled. In a broad, long-term, theoretical sense we all understand that Earth has limited mineral resources, but this is a weak argument. We are not near the depletion limits of this planet for the resources that we need the most - at least nowhere close enough to justify the poor mass economies of space activities.
Space might be the only place we can make heavy industries start to behave similar to software.
I wish that article included Japan in its analysis. Its construction industry is supposedly quite efficient, but I would have liked to seen the hard numbers.
Can you define what you mean by not spending a lot of resources on Mining?
A significant part of the world’s GDP is in mining and mining and its subsidiary industries (manufacturing for example could not exist without mining) contributes something like 60-70% of the world’s GDP.
We do not have vast excess supply. There are likely many deposits left to be found but it’s widely accepted that the easy resources have been found and we must go deeper to find more. Exploration over the last couple of years has not been invested in and the trove of known resources has been dwindling.
Mining space is impractical due to costs (there are a lot of cost savings to still be had on Earth).
Source: I work for one of the world’s largest suppliers of mining equipment and am heavily involved in the mining market in Canada and peripherally the rest of the world for hard rock mining.
Linking mining to manufacturing is meaningless. You can manufacture with recicled material. Outside of radioactive material we don't destroy anything else just transform it. Sure, marble for example has nice aesthetics, but we can't get marble from the asteroid belt just basic elements which don't disappear.
That's not just the tech industry. I've never worked in a place that it doesn't happen. I've uncomfortably watched it in the past but took a hard line when a female coworker's first question to me about my new hire was: "Is she hot?"
I responded rather abruptly and forcefully so that everyone within earshot could hear: "She's quite good at what she does."
It was put best to me: Don't tell the dog it's not a chicken, we need the eggs.