Month: June 2017

Be Careful Celebrating Google’s New Ad Blocker. Here’s What’s Really Going On.

Google’s ad blocker, far from a benign offering, is another step toward dominating the internet itself.

Source: Be Careful Celebrating Google’s New Ad Blocker. Here’s What’s Really Going On.

What ads would get blocked? The ones not sold by Google, for the most part. … So this is a way for Google to crush its few remaining competitors by pre-installing an ad zapper that it controls to the most common web browser. That’s a great way for a monopoly to remain a monopoly.

It’s hard to build a coalition in favor of annoying ads. And publishers would be guaranteed a revenue stream, either through charging consumers for an ad-free experience, or from the ads themselves. So the policy aligns the interests of virtually everyone on the web content side.

Improving Google’s bottom line and crushing anyone who tries to compete is just a nice side benefit.

In a New York Times op-ed in April, author Jonathan Taplin laid out the path forward for regulators: It’s time to break up the Alphabet

Bernie Sanders’s Religious Test for Russell Vought – The Atlantic

During a contentious confirmation hearing, the Vermont senator questioned the faith of the nominee for deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Source: Bernie Sanders’s Religious Test for Russell Vought – The Atlantic

 

There are many religious sects which hold strongly that their specific and particular beliefs are the one and only true collection of such belief/knowledge and that all other people are damned for failing to learn, understand, and follow such information and practices as they have.

If any country is to include these people as citizens and strongly support “freedom of religion” and “freedom of speech” for all, including government officials and public representatives, then those people must be allowed to accurately state their beliefs, especially/particularly outside the context of acting *as* the government.

The important question is not “What does Vought think defines a good/true/proper Christian?”, nor is it “Does Vought think everyone other than proper Christians is condemned?”. The important question is whether or not Vought can act in the public interest to the benefit and respect of all citizens. Bernie Sander’s narrow line of questioning did not explore this, nor was his conclusion appropriate by this reasoning.

Basically any core religious argument could be seen as fantastically disrespectful to people of all other beliefs. If an atheist writes “Religion is outmoded, magical thinking which ought to be avoided.”, is that respectful to those with deeply held religious beliefs? Is it respectful to Christians when a Muslim argues that Christians are condemned for not following the prophet Mohammed?

And yet I would say that both of the above *and* Vought’s writing can be seen as respectful of other citizens insofar as they are communicating, explaining, clarifying, etc. their own religious beliefs (and potentially the actions and positions of religious institutions).

However…

Every country *totally* has religious litmus tests — limitations on both the speech and actions of public officials and of private citizens. No country on earth permits it citizens to murder each other and claim “My religion demands I do it.” as a legal defense. Religious freedom ends where the collective ethics and values of the body politic begin. Less extreme examples include the restrictions on drugs taken for religious reasons/purposes, restrictions on sacrificing animals, and policies against awarding custody to a parent guilty of child abuse.

Rethinking Ethics Training in Silicon Valley – The Atlantic

If technology can mold us, and technologists are the ones who shape that technology, we should demand some level of ethics training for technologists. And that training should not be limited to the university context; an ethics training component should also be included in the curriculum of any developer “bootcamp,” and maybe in the onboarding process when tech companies hire new employees.

Source: Rethinking Ethics Training in Silicon Valley – The Atlantic, by Irina Raicu

This is why infrastructure is so expensive — Strong Towns

If we can align the incentives of the players involved, we can build infrastructure that is actually necessary and while doing it quicker and at lower prices than we do now.

Source: This is why infrastructure is so expensive — Strong Towns

One of Goldhill’s key devices is to place the language and values of the health care industry on a metaphorical island. He constantly talks about life “on the island” and “on the mainland.” For example, on the island, nobody ever talks about prices, they only talk about costs. This is not a subtle nuance. …

Does it really matter to you how much it costs the grocery store to provide that twelve pack of your favorite beverage? Of course not. It’s only matters to you — someone living on the mainland — what the price is to you. Price is how you determine your preferences among competing items. Profit is how the market receives feedback on those preferences. High prices invite substitution. High profits invite competitors. This is all basic and obvious to us on the mainland.

Which is why, on the healthcare island, the conversation is about costs. … Just like on Healthcare Island, on Infrastructure Island we have our own way of talking about things. And we never talk about prices, only about costs.

RE: The U.S. Has Forgotten How to Do Infrastructure – Bloomberg, by Noah Smith

That suggests that U.S. costs are high due to general inefficiency — inefficient project management, an inefficient government contracting process, and inefficient regulation. It suggests that construction, like health care or asset management or education, is an area where Americans have simply ponied up more and more cash over the years while ignoring the fact that they were getting less and less for their money.

Georgia GOP Candidate For U.S. House: ‘I Do Not Support A Livable Wage’ | HuffPost

Karen Handel faces Democrat Jon Ossoff in a June 20 runoff.

Source: Georgia GOP Candidate For U.S. House: ‘I Do Not Support A Livable Wage’ | HuffPost

Georgia’s minimum wage is $5.15 per hour, but the federal minimum wage of $7.25 applies in most cases. The minimum livable wage for a single adult in the three counties that make up Georgia’s 6th District is $12.01 per hour, according to MIT’s Living Wage Calculator.

“Look, if somebody’s working a 40-hour workweek, they deserve the kind of standard of living that Americans expect,” Ossoff said. “That’s part of the American dream, and there are too many folks having trouble making ends meet.”

Handel followed up by saying the issue is “an example of the fundamental difference between a liberal and a conservative.”

“I do not support a livable wage,” she said. “What I support is making sure we have an economy that is robust with low taxes and less regulation so that those small businesses that would be dramatically hurt if you imposed higher minimum wages on them are able to do what they do best: grow jobs and create good paying jobs for the people of the 6th District.”