Do they also lock you up on the property for 5 months while they figure out how to remove you from the property?
People’s inability to comprehend the need for basic legal rights like Habeas Corpus is incredible. We literally have leaders who don’t know what that means and when challenged on it, don’t even bother to look it up and remain uninformed when asked months later.
This is a fantastic comment in response to this article since it exemplifies the criticism of the article.
Once upon a time (ie 2 years ago) the President following the law, living up to both implicit and explicit agreements made with foreign nations, not wanting to plaster their own name onto everything, not lying about the citizens of the country, etc would be considered a good thing.
Today, doing the opposite is considered praiseworthy because “at least he’s doing something”.
This is exactly the “anything goes” mentality the author is critiquing.
> Finally, only CIA insiders would know that officers donated some of their personal travel photos to The World Factbook, which hosted more than 5,000 photographs that were copyright-free for anyone to access and use.
Isn’t this sufficient to keep it around, even if the facts themselves may be available on Wikipedia?
Facts are, today, a threat. An encyclopedia of facts about various countries, published by a respected US agency, is dangerous.
What if public policy changes? What if it is announced that there are millions of jewish people living in Iran? A CIA website claiming that there are in fact far fewer than millions would fly in the face of declared national policy. We cannot have a list of official "facts", not when new facts are being announced almost daily.
How could one ever justify invading greenland to save all those penguins when the CIA's own website states that the penguin popultion of greenland increased by 27% in the last five years?
You say this, but the opposite is equally true. Why should I trust the CIA's website when it says that there are no penguins in Greenland, and so there's no ecological harm to strip mining the place?
It’s terribly broken, which is unsurprising since it was never designed to do what it does, and ends up placing healthy, non addictive foods under the ultra processed category 4, while including hyper palatable foods that are not healthy at all in categories 1-3.
Hyper palatability, which is much better defined and is designed to capture what the NOVA system is actually used for, is likely a better categorization.
My favorite nonsensical category 4 classification is anything with achiote in it. It's not part of a traditional European diet, and it's often used to add color so it makes the list, despite saffron having a similar role in European food and booth being a traditional and completely unprocessed ingredient.
Speaking of Mesoamerican ingredients, nixtamal is pretty heavily processed, and is a staple in many areas, but it's much healthier than unprocessed corn which can cause pellagra when used as a staple food.
I mostly agree but wouldn't swap "Ultra" for "Hyper": those are great to sell iPhones but their maximalism tends to push our understanding in emotional zone, which is good for marketing but dommageable for decision making.
The NOVA definition is meant to classify ultra processed foods, correct?
You seem to want the NOVA definition to classify between “healthy, non addictive foods” vs “hyper palatable foods”.
What these studies are doing is finding correlations between ultra processed foods and bad health. While the definition you seem to want would cause all sorts of circular definitions.
> The NOVA definition is meant to classify ultra processed foods, correct?
Yes. It does so very badly.
> You seem to want the NOVA definition to classify between “healthy, non addictive foods” vs “hyper palatable foods”.
If by "you", you mean "a ton of people who are involved in health policy", yes.
> What these studies are doing is finding correlations between ultra processed foods and bad health.
It's flawed because (A) Nova is so ambiguous and useless that we can't actually assume that "it was categorized via Nova" is true (B) what they hone in on is not actually related to Nova, it's actually about palatability, which Nova has no framework for. Inclusion of Nova is strictly detrimental to the conversation.
In the early days they were social networks. The idea was to connect people. (The Facebook movie is called the Social Network…)
Now they’re social media. The idea is to push messages to you but this time the message is coming from a person you know so you’re psychologically more inclined to believe it.
1. In 3rd world countries everyone has a phone, usually android, no matter how poor the are. Irrespective of whether or not it has desktop capabilities. So any phone purchase is already part of their baseline expenses.
2. Any desktop/laptop purchase, even if it is $1, is an extra $1.
3. The screens/keyboards/mouse again will not likely be purchased by individuals themselves. They will have “Internet cafes”, libraries, schools, etc where those screens will be provided.
>1. [...] So any phone purchase is already part of their baseline expenses.
Yeah but that base line expense can be 50$ or $300. Big difference. Not everyone in 3rd world countries has 300 for a Pixel 8. That's the biggest flaw in your argument. That, and the fact that walking around with an exotic 300$ Pixel 8 flags you as a potential target for mugging in the wrong neighbourhoods, verus a beat up 50$ Samsung or Huawei.
>2. Any desktop/laptop purchase, even if it is $1, is an extra $1.
Hence why a 50$ laptop and a 50$ android phone leaves you better off than blowing 300$ on just the phone alone. And if even 1$ is THAT critical to your daily survival, then you're not buying 300$ phones anyway to begin with. You're buying the cheapest you can get so that in case it gets stolen you don't lose 6 months of savings.
>3. The screens/keyboards/mouse again will not likely be purchased by individuals themselves. They will have “Internet cafes”, libraries, schools, etc where those screens will be provided.
You think in 3rd world countries people just have displays with USB-C docks, keyboards and mice everywhere in public and at home? I know it's getting difficult to tell them apart these days, but we're talking about 3rd world countries, not the bay area.
The pixel 8 costs that much now. Give it a few years and check back on it later (when this feature actually drops) and the phone might end up being much more affordable.
Nonetheless, I do agree with you that simply getting a used low-end laptop is cheaper, but being poor in a GDP/capita way is not the only kind of blocker. Being poor in a "my family can buy me a phone because it's a necessity, but we don't have a computer" is not uncommon, and many people end up developing on their phone, simply because that's what they have.
4. used electronics in 3rd world countries are much more expensive compared to developed ones (because not as much units were sold when they were new to begin with), so 50 euros will get you a 3rd gen in a poor condition at best (or some shit tier Celeron N-thousand something with a soldered 4GB RAM)
For one, PCs still make it there via ewaste shipments that then get repaired and sold for cheap, so you can have decent variety of old stuff.
And secondly, even a "3rd gen in a poor condition at best (or some shit tier Celeron N-thousand something with a soldered 4GB RAM)" as you call it, is better for learning marketable skills and making stuff, than whatever you can do on your phone, since office jobs will ask for skills with using a PC, not how skilled you are using a phone.
But hey, if you think you can pass through engineering school with only a phone and no computer, then all power to you.
Just today I got a 15 year used laptop in a "developed country" (Germany) for €30. Windows 10 works in a VM. It did come with Windows 11, but I wiped that. What are you all arguing about?
Btw, I also got a Celeron laptop you were talking about, I got it for free.
I'm arguing that you can't find a laptop with 8th gen CPU for €50 in a developing country because used electronics (or simply all electronics) prices are much higher. I thought I was very specific about that.
You surely do realize that desktop mode on a smartphone needs a display, a keyboard and a pointer device too right? You can get a decent and complete laptop with 1070p screen for the price of a 720p only TV/Monitor.
All the conspiracies theories can be put to bed by walking into any engineering department (maybe outside of biomedical engineering…which makes me think this may be related to how Americans demonize math) and observing that the majority of students are foreign or maybe second generation immigrants.
This ratio gets worse because American students are disproportionately more likely to follow up their engineering undergrad with law or business school, so even if they may be engineers they’ll get into business and/or something like patent attorney going forward.
There wasn't any demonization of math when I was in school, but no shortage of "you can grow up to be anything" and "do what you love" rather than "get a job that will pay for doing all the things you love".
There's nothing wrong with being a librarian or getting an MA in Museum Studies, aside from the price of getting the degree and the low odds of getting a job without waiting for someone to die so another position opens up.
There's a reason you won't find a lot of foreign students pursuing them, though.
The conspiracy here is that somehow US spending on primary/secondary education ranks among the top, yet we are unable to produce competitive college students. And we mask this very serious problem from directly rippling into our economy by... importing students and workers.
You’re ignoring the part where FAANG massively overhired in the years preceding.
Meta and Amazon doubled their headcount in the 2-3 years of the pandemic.
Others like Google increased by 60+%.
You’re also forgetting about this little thing popularly called AI that happened in the intervening years.
There may be an argument that H1B isn’t fit to purpose in a post AI world (although that argument is also false if we think software engineering will remain a viable job going forward, but that’s a different topic).
But it’s much harder to argue that H1B hurt US employers when thr industry they hired the majority of H1B employees in the first 2 decades of the 2000s, also saw some of the highest growth in jobs while simultaneously posting the highest growth in salaries (there may have been certain minor industries hiring a few thousand people, like Oceanographer that had a slightly higher increase, but even that was likely not true because BLS data doesn’t factor compensation in the form of stock options which disproportionally provided wealth for SW engineers relative to other workers).
>You’re ignoring the part where FAANG massively overhired in the years preceding.
Yes, because overhiring is a lie generated to justify layoffs. I'd hope by year 3 that we'd see through this. If they "overhired", why is hiring still up globally while down in the US?
>You’re also forgetting about this little thing popularly called AI that happened in the intervening years.
What about it? Hiring numbers are still up. Its clearly not replacing workers as of now.
I also like these parts:
> Culleton testified that he did not sign the Notice nor did he write “I’m married to a citizen and have a work permit” on it.
> Secore testified that he remembered serving the Notice on Culleton, but not watching Culleton sign it.
> Secore also testified that the paperwork was riddled with mistaken dates because of the way ICE’s computer system operates.
> Secore testified that he should have caught those errors when processing the paperwork, but that he “missed” them.
reply