I think it's more that for white collar jobs in the west, applications get spammed into oblivion that your resume will never reach an actual human without the ATS triggering a 100% match on all the buzzwords.
>When healthy competition exists, you can't just arbitrarily charge people more, because they'll just go buy from a competitor.
Competition is meaningless when they're all owned by Blackrock and Vanguard to an extent. They can easily sacrifice a brand to test the waters, knowing consumers will move to buy from their other brands which the also own.
>The gig economy is hiding the real employment problem in most of the West.
This. Jobs that were previously contract employment jobs that came with health insurance, workers rights and social security and were mostly taken by youth as part time jobs to fund studies, are now turned into gig jobs where you get none of those things and are mostly taken by migrants who live 10 in an apartment and send the money home.
Gig work used to mean that you have several customers you bounce around for doing part time gigs, not you work full time for the same tax dodging Amsterdam based food delivery company who doesn't want to hire local workers on employment contracts to evade labor laws and liabilities.
How does this benefit society? It only benefits the capital owning class. Why isn't the government regulating this gig industry abuse? It's literally what its job is.
As usual, size matters. Equating typical 401(k)s with the economic activity of the class GP is referring to is... absurd.
But pretending small-time participation in public markets is the same as billionaire participation in private markets is a great way to convince the lower classes our financial system isn't structured to move wealth away from them.
So do I... Europe is quite diverse. My retirement, if there is a society at that point, would be funded by a mix of a private pension fund and a public one (Ireland).
I know. That was tongue-in-cheek sarcasm for the Ponzi government pay-as-you-go pension system in most European countries that's said to collapse in the future unless we import infinity migrants to fund it. I was expecting people would catch onto it being tongue-in-cheek.
> Well then I guess we should just tear down the planet, the environment and society, burn, sell and grind to a pulp everything that isn't nailed to the ground for profit, and give everyone a cut, future consequences be damned.
Their main revenue is sending search traffic to Google. I imagine a near-future source will be paid subscriptions to LLM products that integrate tightly with the browser.
Both of those require convincing people to use the browser, which is "selling" in the sense of persuasion even though there's no exchange of money at that point.
By "sell" I do not mena to make a profit, I mean, make it visible to the market.
If firefox did its job and got out of the way, who would notice Firefox? It is hard to sell something with no "bells and whistles". Do you think it is a mistake that Liquid Glass exists? No. LG is there so you notice you are on an iPhone which uses to just get out of the way but now is just in my way all the time.
Adding AI to Firefox is to make it visible in the market.
>The interruption occurred after the institution exceeded the 152.5 terabyte storage limit contracted with the technology giant, which maintains a partnership with UFRN .
152 TB is something nerds self host in closet home labs, no need to tie yourself up to Google. I though people went to google for solutions with much more scale than just 152TB.
I did a quick check and for a name-brand (but not DELL or HPE solution) 200TB self hosted server with redundancy you're looking at 16K USD upfront cost and then you need to add your own maintenance and support costs which shouldn't be too high with Brazil labor costs and university's easy access to (often voluntary) skilled labor.
From what I can gather this is still cheaper than paying Google.
No, but the pattern of criminals of Jewish background fleeing to Israel for protection after commiting a crime, is too often to ignore.
Same thing happened in my post communist country and the neighboring country too. Perp stole tens of millons through a banking scam in the 90s, then fled to Israel because he was Jewish and claimed persecution.
At which point should the pattern be acknowledged?
And did you ask Israel for extradition? What his name was? And is this pattern actually unique to Israel or would you find other examples of people escaping to where the law can't reach them? If Israel wanted to convict a dual citizen who fled to your country, what is the required process?
No, the leaders of my country didn't try any of that. You were the first person to think about those things. I'll pass on your suggestions and hopefully everything gets resolved.
Instead of being sarcastic you could be good faith and provide further information and explore what happened and explain what do you think Israel should do differently?
>Instead of being sarcastic you could be good faith
What was bad faith? I told you what happened. I was sarcastic because your comment was redundant and didn't add anything to the conversation, only instigating.
> and provide further information explore what happened
How does that change the situation? Are you the head prosecutor of Israel and looking to rectify the situation?
>what you think Israel should do differently?
Extradite them or put them in jail over there and stop being a safe heaven for criminals.
Becuase you made an argument with a single supporting example yet didn't name any name that could be used to verify what you said and let other people judge the case nor have you explained at any point of there was any court procedure in Israel about extradition and whatever he ended up extradited. How are we supposed to disscus particulars like that? Resorting to sarcasm so fast that you aren't interested in genuine discussion. Furthermore if he wasn't extradited, you could use this discussion to make him more (in)famous.
> How does that change the situation? Are you the head prosecutor of Israel and looking to rectify the situation?
You were claiming that many criminals abuse Israel extradition system to esapce the law. I was making (implicit) claim that there is nothing special about it and if there was abduance of such cases is merely because more people in your country had means to escape to Israel than to other places. As already explained you provided a sole lacking in information example and I wanted more.
And because you were being glib, I will be too, yes for all you know I am Israel's head prosecutor.
>didn't name any name that could be used to verify what you said and let other people judge the case
Oh, I'm sorry, is running a Google search too much?
Vladimir Gusinsky Russian media tycoon charged in 2000 with large-scale fraud tied to privatization of state assets. Arrested briefly in Russia, then fled to Spain and subsequently to Israel in 2001, where he obtained citizenship and lived for extended periods. Extradition requests (including from Russia via Greece and Spain) were denied or rejected; he used Israel as a safe haven.
Leonid Nevzlin Major Yukos oil company shareholder and executive. Charged in the early 2000s with embezzlement, tax evasion, fraud, and money laundering related to Yukos operations and privatization deals from the 1990s. Fled to Israel in 2003, granted citizenship; multiple Russian extradition requests denied by Israeli courts (e.g., in 2006 and 2008). Lived openly in Israel for decades.
Other Yukos-associated figures (e.g., Mikhail Brudno, Vladimir Dubov, and minor shareholders) Partners or shareholders in Yukos accused alongside Nevzlin and Mikhail Khodorkovsky of embezzlement, fraud, and tax-related crimes stemming from 1990s privatizations. Several fled to Israel in the mid-2000s, obtained citizenship, and avoided extradition; Israeli officials reportedly stated they would not extradite such oligarchs to Russia.
Ilan Shor (also spelled Ilan Șor), an Israeli-born businessman and politician. Involved in the 2014–2015 "theft of the century," a massive fraud and embezzlement scheme that siphoned approximately $1 billion (about 12–14% of Moldova's GDP) from three Moldovan banks through fraudulent loans and money laundering. Convicted in Moldova in 2017 (initially to 7.5 years, later increased to 15 years in absentia in 2023) for fraud and money laundering. Fled to Israel in 2019, where he has lived in exile, leveraging his Israeli citizenship (he was born in Tel Aviv). Israel has consistently refused or not acted on extradition requests from Moldova.
> I was making (implicit) claim that there is nothing special about it and if there was abduance of such cases is merely because more people in your country had means to escape to Israel than to other places.
Yes, I'm sure it's nothing special and just a coinkidink why all these financial fraudsters flee to Israel and not to Sweden, Canada, Australia or Japan.
The reason this happens is Israel gives easy citizenship to people just based on being of Jewish heritage, so these Jewish fraudster from all over the world abuse this, make a big hit somewhere, then flee to Israel with their illicit wealth for citizenship and protection.
> Oh, I'm sorry, is running a Google search too much?
You are the one who made the claim is is your job to soppurt it and I don't need to start guessing which post Soviet country you are until I land on the right guy.
Ilan Shor now lives in Russia with Russian citizenship. As for the rest of them they need to be considered. Do Russia and Moldova have Extradition Treaty with Israel?
> I don't need to start guessing which post Soviet country you are until I land on the right guy.
You don't have to guess. Search today is so good enough that you can just ask to give you "all the cases of Jewish financial fraudsters in Eastern Europe that fled to Israel". That's how I got those names. Do you think I have reserved space in my head for names I heard once 20 years ago?
>Do Russia and Moldova have Extradition Treaty with Israel?
How about you start Googling basic stuff for yourself and then tell us what you found out. I'll leave the conversation here to save my time and sanity since you're obviously just stringing people along in bad faith as you already made up your mind a long time ago and aren't interested in any productive debate or conversation so nothing I say will change your mind. It doesn't matter how many answers I'll give you, you'll just come up with more gochas and nitpicks.
Conversation and debate means "here's the information I found, here's my opinion about it, tell me what your opinion is", and NOT "go find me the information that I'm requesting, then come back to me so I can give you my opinion on it".
I literally conceded that "As for the rest of them they need to be considered" (for extradition). Yes I think this conversation is at end of usefullness. Israel has good reasons form their perspective to why they give citizenship easily and pretty much all countries don't give up their citizens without good cause (I read about a case where France didn't want to extradite to Israel because they aren't part of the EU so it wasn't legal. At the end France court sentenced them, so Israel should do the same).
>>In socialism it's much more random: black markets, lists, lotteries
>Evidence: the vast majority of European countries who have socialized medicine and seem to be doing fine.
That evidence of socialism working well, only works as long as there are enough resources to cover the needs of most people, basically some of the wealthier European countries.
But when those resources become scarce due to poor economic conditions and/or mismanagement, then you'll see the endless queues, black margets and nepotism running the system.
Evidence: former European communist countries who experienced both systems and where in some, nepotism to bypass lists still work to this day.
I think the 2024 Economics Nobel disproves this. It showed that nations with strong institutions create wealth - and it was a causative link they proved, not simply correlation.
How does that disprove what I said about abundance or lack thereof in socialized systems? Feels like an orthogonal issue.
Socialized systems don't work without abundance. How you generate that abundance is orthogonal to socialism since even countries that are wealthy on paper suffer from shortages and long waiting times in public healthcare leading to a gray-market of using connections to get ahead or more private use.
Both are true. Because when the abundance runs out, people start using nepotism to get what they need. You can see it in the tech job market now. More and more good jobs are only through networking. Meritocracy alone was enough during the times of abundance.
There definitely are lists. You don't just get the surgery or therapy you need the next day. You get the next free slot in the list of people queuing at the hospital/practice that still has free slots.
For example the first appointment you can get at my state funded therapist if you call today, will be in june. How is that "not a list"?
Or like, if you call most public GPs in my neighbourhood, they'll all tell you they're full and don't have slots to take on any new patients and you should "try somewhere else". How is that "not a list"?
There are multiple lists here in the NL. I called for a surgery and got put on the fast list (she said that if it weren’t urgent, it would be over a year wait). Your doc has a lot of influence on how urgent things are and how far you are willing to travel. I got in to see a therapist in a matter of weeks, because I was willing to travel out of the city; otherwise it will be months. The doc can see the lines and give you recommendations; all you have to do is ask to be seen sooner.
Doesn't work like that in Austria. Or my doctor's were unwilling to fake urgency to bypass the waiting system for me.
Anyway, do you not realize the fault with the system in your logic? Because if everything becomes urgent in order to bypass queues, then nothing is urgent anymore.
It doesn't fix the problem, you're just scamming the system to get ahead of the problem.
In my case, there was no faking urgency. I was pointing out that urgency puts you in a different line that gets priority (basically, cancellations from the longer line).
For some other things, you can travel further away to where there is less demand for what you need, and if you're willing, you don't have to wait as long. These are all different "lines" and they're the ones doing the schedule.
I wish I could have waited one year. 0/10, would not recommend that proceedure. FWIW, it's a very common, usually also scheduled long in advance (even in the US). Pretty much every man has to get one over 40; so it makes sense the wait list is long unless you've got something else going on.
>Ok but urgency is a different kettle of fish. Life threatening cases get urgency everywhere and immediate care everywhere.
Except it doesn't. At least not in the United States. I have Peripheral Artery Disease.
I had two completely occluded arteries in my left leg and a third that was mostly occluded and had an aneurysm to boot.
One day, that third artery collapsed and I was left with zero blood flow to my left foot.
The doctor had me go to the Emergency Room to get testing and imaging to have surgery the following week.
He did not simply schedule surgery, as that would have required pre-approval from my insurance company and, in fact, the insurance company denied the claim and did not approve the procedure (which saved my foot) until six weeks later -- at which time I'd have had to have my foot amputated without the angioplasty and arterial bypass.
In fact, after surgery the insurance company continued to deny my claims and refused to authorize pain meds (they sliced my left leg open from my hip to my ankle and rooted around to use an existing vein to bypass the blockage on one of my arteries) for those same six weeks.
Oh yeah, US healthcare is so much better. /rolls eyes. My insurer would have forced me to wait until I required amputation if I hadn't just gone ahead on an emergency basis as suggested (because it's not unusual for that to happen) by the surgeon.
And in case you were wondering, yes I have private insurance and pay nearly $1200/month just for me. In fact, my deductible for next year just went up 20% and my annual out of pocket doubled, yet I'm still paying essentially the same premium.
No. The US healthcare system is completely fucked and I hope you don't die or lose important body parts learning that.
They do? If they misdiagnose something, you can end up in the slow line instead of the fast one, or vice versa. Compared to them, you have no influence.
> Homeless shelters are overcrowded and extremely unhygienic.
It's not just the hygiene. it's that in those shelters you're constantly surrounded by a few mentally ill and possibly violent people who will lash out in unpredictable ways and make life worse for everyone with their constant tics and noises making you live in constant anxiety.
If you're homeless but not mentally ill yet, then being in such an environment everyday will definitely negatively affect your sanity as your daily struggle becomes surviving the shelter, instead of working to getting back on your feet. Kind of like being locked up in a prison but from which you can leave.
So then no wonder a lot of homeless people feel safer and less stressed just living and sleeping in public areas than in shelters.
Where I live our homeless shelters are hygienic and not overcrowded (they will not go over capacity, ever, due to health code / liability reasons).
They are usually not full either. However they have a strict no drugs, no alcohol, and no fighting policy. That means a lot of people aren’t interested in going to them.
