I think we have different definitions of "actual value". But even if I pick the flaccid definition, that isn't proof of value of the thing itself, but of any placebo. In which case we can focus on the cheapest/least harmful placebo. Or, better, solving the underlying problem that the placebo "helps".
I'll preface by saying I fully agree that psychics aren't providing any non-placebo value to believers, although I think it's fine to provide entertainment for non-believers.
> Or, better, solving the underlying problem that the placebo "helps".
The underlying problems are often a lack of a decent education and a generally difficult/unsatisfying life. Systemic issues which can't be meaningfully "solved" without massive resources and political will.
If we look back over the last century or so, I think we've made excellent progress on that. The main current barrier is that we've lately let people with various pathologies run wild, but historically that creates enough problems that the political will emerges. See, e.g., the American and French revolutions, or India's independence, or the US civil war and Reconstruction.
Actually, I'd go one step further and say they are harmful to everybody else.
It might just be my circles, but I've seen Carl Sagans quote everywhere in the last couple of months.
"“Science is more than a body of knowledge; it is a way of thinking. I have a foreboding of an America in my children’s or grandchildren’s time—when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the key manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what’s true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness.”"
Not dismissing your first argument but we had good success hiring talent through Discord servers. If you want to reach the same audience that attends hackathons and such it's in my experience the best platform.
Do you mean Discord is a kind of community for young hackers? I’m curious about Discord because I’ve been asked about a chat app for teenagers who don’t have mobile phones.
Well, Discord is from a gaming lineage. Definitely lots of script kiddies and pros alike hang out in various servers. It’s sort of like the forums of yesteryear, but more walled-garden, for better or worse.
Probably goes without saying here, but gaming tends to be an on-ramp for getting young people into computers/tech/programming. I started reversing, hacking, and writing bots for old MMOs to try to avoid the grind. I ended up enjoying writing naughty code more than playing the games themselves.
You don’t need a phone to use Discord AFAIK, but in my elderly imagination every teen is already on Discord.
They've used discord for a while for things like GSoC but in general it's becoming more widespread seeing that even Copilot has a Microsoft owned discord server, Valdi from Snapchat as well.
> The SpaceX docking simulator ported as an in-vehicle game, playable on the infotainment screen
Really? People want that? I know that Elon Musk would think that it would be great to play a video game about Elon Musk's companies, but are Tesla owners similarly afflicted?
Yup, and I played it back when it was new. at an arcade, not in my car.
To me it is like someone saying, "Honey, I'll be on the garage watching Football in my Tesla all afternoon." Yeah, you can do it, but is a car really where you want to do that? The second aspect is it is a game glorifying Elon's "genius". What is next, a FPS for your Tesla where you have a chainsaw and you run through federal buildings trying to get the highest body count?
Honestly, i know a few Tesla users and at least for them their Tesla is more than just a car. Its like a gimmick.
Driving to tesla meetups, adding certain accessories for led light stuff, its (sry to say) just weird.
I get the basic idea of telling the internet about some issue and getting faster feedback than from the manufacturer, but I never had the feeling i needed any of this for my non Tesla EV.
And as i mentioned in my comment: I would hate all the regular updates. As long as everything works as expected, pls do not change anything.
I think, the joke about Germany and Italy should team up is a reference to the new CEO of Deutsche Bahn, Evelyn Palla, who is from Italy. The "to make the trains run on time" gives a hint here, because this is her declared task.
Not about Germany, Italy, and Japan, forming some sort of axis, I guess.
> They are forced to (at least try to) make a profit for their shareholders,
This is not true at all.
The shareholders set the targets and since the shareholder is the government they can set any target they want: profitability, more trains, cheaper tickets etc..
If the shareholder wants to inject 10% every year in stead of taking a profit they are absolutely free to do so.
The DB AG has been specifically founded to be "market-oriented" and profit-making, so yes, it is true.
I am sure the state could try to do _something_ about it, but I am also sure that a very strong car lobby here in Germany is working against that. BTW, the road network, which I would consider to conceptually be the same kind of infrastructure as the rail network, is to my understanding mostly built and maintained by state organizations, so it is possible to do it that way.
I guess it is also harder to market "let's subsidize this private company with tax payer money so they can continue to offer mediocre service" to voters, compared to "let's use tax payer money to build and maintain one-of-a-kind critical infrastructure from which everyone (with a car, which due to the less-than-great alternatives is a lot of people) can profit".
Again, having it organized as a private company adds indirection, diffuses power and responsibility, and adds a certain more or less implicit expectation of what private companies are supposed to do. That's my main issue with it. Private companies aren't supposed to run critical infrastructure as a monopoly for profit. It's the states job to provide and maintain critical infrastructure in the interest of all.
>The DB AG has been specifically founded to be "market-oriented" and profit-making, so yes, it is true.
Again, if the shareholders decide this is the reason: yes.
But shareholders can just as easily set other targets or incentives.
>I guess it is also harder to market "let's subsidize this private company with tax payer money so they can continue to offer mediocre service" to voters,
The government owns DB AG, it is not a private company. It is a public company.
> The government owns DB AG, it is not a private company. It is a public company.
It is a private company, as in it is a legal entity under private law. This is in contrast to a "öffentlich-rechtliches Unternehmen" (I don't know if this even has a proper translation or equivalent in other jurisdictions). There is more than two options here, it can be both privatized and public according to your definition.
Fundamentally, the Germans tried to cheap out on high speed trains by trying to engineer them to run on normal tracks so they didn't have to build new, expensive high-speed tracks like France and Japan did.
This is the fundamental mistake underpinning their train service since the long distance trains frequently have to wait for other trains to pass, cascading delays through the system.
That and an almost criminal level of underinvestment in the past 20 years or so.
reply