Will you also blame the telephone companies and mailman too?

This is the old dichotomy: either you dont censor and are just a medium (like electricity) or you do censor some things and then you are responsible of what is published. Social media seems to want to censor while not being responsible.

Section 230 of the communications decency act explicitly gave these companies this power, on purpose. Unmoderated online spaces are mostly useful to scammers and spammers.

And thus now they are responsible for all content published there.

If somebody kept using the same phone line to trigger bombs, do you think that the phone company doesn't have an obligation to shut that line down? Let's say the police came to the phone company and said "we know that if you shut this phone line down, so and so wont be able to trigger the bomb they have planted in XYZ space." Do you think the phone company should do nothing?

What about a courier that knows it is delivering bombs? We should look past that too?

Which principles are you invoking exactly?

Traditional telephone is currently at risk of being so full of scams that it isn't sensible to keep a number.

I think that when GP stated "All the social networks mouthpiece accounts spouting nonsense suffer no repercussions whatsoever." they were referring to the people lying and not the social networks them themselves.

Healthcare attached to employment makes no sense ina world where people constantly need to switch jobs

Tiny homes like the coffin homes of overpopulated cities, you mean?

Or tiny homes like the luxury single occupant container buildings on a bit of land?

Tiny homes are not the solution, they are hipster semi-cottage-core fashion homes. You're probably thinking of regular apartments, but for some reason they aren't built at the rate needed. Build ten million apartments (for starters) and the cost of living will go down. Satisfy / saturate the market first, then think of gentrifying with fashion homes.

>but for some reason they aren't built at the rate needed.

crabs in a bucket. Those who got in and got theirs don't want their property value falling. Americans treating housing as a stock instead of a necessary resource for living really ruined a lot of the dynamic of city planning.

Seems like this would hurt those laid off here. They are probably in the top 20% of property values.

That said, I think it is a pretty bad idea. Use of public funds dont increase with property value, it just means you have deeper pockets. I would be more in favor of flat taxes on homes independent of value, so people pay their fair share for community resources consumed.

Tiny homes are great! Provided you have no family, and no hobbies.

Correction, Beat the CPI, not inflation

Paywalled

Yes but they’re also politically biased. Not to mention, the enormous amount of web content that is effectively banned from seArch engine results due to low prestige

Considering just how toxic the modern day diet is, I’d say most people are in big trouble

They said t was a boat fuel. So how do you avoid it? Just don’t eat seafood??

Given how big oceans are, you'll probably be getting more exposure from living in a coastal city and breathing in the fumes that blows ashore.

I agree with most of these but the cause isn’t computers. Computers are just another thing to add to the list

When you say "the cause isn’t computers", do you mean that within the complex causality that underlies it, computers are nowhere to be found?

If you look deeply enough into the 'complex causality' you'll find anything you want. It doesn't mean much by itself.

You may, but not me.

Though, I suspect you are like most people in that if you gaze into the unknown (which is what we are dealing with here), you will see what you want to see.

You see, the actual causality is unknowable, so your mind has generated a simulation of what "the" casualty is.

This is clearly obvious, is it not?

I'll play along with your attempt at armchair psychology. What makes you special that you are immune to this effect you propose I suffer from? Are you not just seeing what you want to see? Why is your simulation of causality better than mine?

They’ve got a lot less time than that. Check out Nate hagens work on resource depletion and you’ll see to simplify it x1000, it’s a matter of a century or two left before the high tech comes to a halt.

> Nate hagens work on resource depletion

May be correct, or not, but it's not that connected to either "will aliens contact us" or "will AI give us scifi future" or "when do the stars go out".