No they didn’t, quite the opposite, they were the main customers and and certainly accelerated the spread of the technology. Of course banning the printing of specific books is another matter.
Islamic countries OTOH handle banned or strictly restricted its use. Coincidentally most progress there ceased and they were stuck in the 1500s for the next 400 years or so..
How many people are involved in ISPs, data centers, and other internet backbones? Most people are consumers rather than producers or "printing press" operators.
You just broadcast your voice to millions of people, became instantly archived in google and several other sites, all at zero direct cost to yourself, other than the monthly access fee.
There is an obvious distinction.
Finally I'd ask you to observe the entirety of social media's existence.
Actually it's perfect. How long did it take rulers to go from fighting the printing press to using it for propaganda and their own ambitions? The internet has just speed run that same course.
> How long did it take rulers to go from fighting the printing press to using it for propaganda and their own ambitions?
Probably the moment something negative was published about them.
> The internet has just speed run that same course
And citizen journalism has never been more powerful.
There will be no invention of man that will eliminate jealousy, avarice or hatred. Objectively I'd rather be alive today than at any point in our recorded history.
Framework needs an audience bigger than that because mostly people don't think in terms of ecosystem, they think in terms of 'does it do what I want for a cost I want to pay' and Apple wins on this.
That statement doesn't stand on its own. For example, the most popular OS for laptops at my place of work is Windows. It has very little to do with what people want or price. It has almost everything to do with ecosystem lock in.
A significant portion of windows laptop market share comes from corporate purchases.
Is this totally true? There is advertising, marketing spend and retail shelf space. Surely it's more complex than "solves users problem at price point."
Advertising and marketing spend exist to make people aware of the device's capabilities and its price. I would be surprised to find that any consumer chooses a device because of its marketing spend and retail shelf space.
You wrote “I would be surprised to find that any consumer chooses a device because of its marketing spend”. But advertising does skew consumer choice by its presentation, and the success correlates with marketing spend. It’s far from merely informational. Otherwise we’d just have black on white listings of “this product exists” with spec sheets.
Well I’m from the US so you’re wrong on that point.
Your quality of comment is what I expect from conservatives who think their feelings are reality and complain about shit without making solid inferences or connections.
It’s a sovereign wealth fund and you’re complaining that one of the larger Canadian companies is included in it because Carney worked there. Then when pressed you say you wish someone else represented your(presumably you’re Canadian) people.
> Perhaps I would have simply had someone different represent Canadians. Is this too much to ask?
This was in reference to Carney. I dont think Carney represents the people very well.
It is not a sovereign wealth fund. The name is intended to clash with a real sovereign wealth fund like say Norway has. Basically you need wealth and Canada has the inverse of wealth it has deficits.
The fund was created (of course) by debt. It is a bit like borrowing to invest in the stock market rather than trying to invest your savings/income. Canada already has massive federal debt due to insane levels of mismanagment.
So why would Canada create such a bizarre 'fund'. Well it is what happens when you put a banker in charge of a country. You get banking solutions to country problems.
So now you see why Carney's career path matters.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. If you want to know more I can link you to many facets that you might find interesting.
>So now you see why Carney's career path matters. This is just the tip of the iceberg. If you want to know more I can link you to many facets that you might find interesting.
Nah I don't. So far I'm batting 11/12 for going down the rabbit hole with anti Carney Canadians before i find out they were in support of the trucker convoy.
Benefit of the doubt is gone if you don't open up with actual thought out critique.
You agree with a group of people that I generally disagree with.
There is the possibility that you are the rare mark that has consistent principles backing these thoughts, but the fact that you are aligned with a group that has consistently shown no consistent principles means I give you zero benefit of the doubt, and you opened the thread with an argument not backed by your later comment about wanting someone else to represent your country.
If you want to convince the other side of your beliefs then you need to start with a solid argument instead of doing a motte and bailey.
I dont know who this Group is but it all sounds very schmittian.
It is not my role to convince someone of anything. I have to much respect for the human for that.
You, as human, should seek out the truth in your time and not turn away from it.
So you mentioned the 'truckers'. Here [0] is the truth in your time. I will make no attempt trick you into holding position.
Finally to complete the picture you should understand that the Carney government was recently formed in opposition to the democratic voice of the people. It was formed by nullifying the votes of the electorate. Everyone on all sides know this was a deeply immoral act. One has to ask what kind of leader is this?
Wow! This guy knew a lot about working in an environmental/social/governance framework, AND he knows enough about money to have been an international central banker?
I knew Carney was great, but I didn't know he was so well-qualified too.
Carney was the governor of the Bank of Canada through the financial crisis and Canada was one of the least affected developed countries. To be fair, Canada’s insular banking system also helped limit exposure, but Carney’s handling of the situation was good enough that the UK made him the first non British governor of the Bank of England, during which period he oversaw the whole Brexit saga, where again his handling of the UK economy was extremely highly regarded.
There are justifiable question about whether he will be a good PM but he is probably one of the most successful central bankers of all time.
Be patient with Australians. They have have a terrible tradition of vicious racism.
The indigenous people of Australia were only considered part of Australian society (e.g. counted in the census) in 1967. As a New Zealander visiting Australia the casual racism of white Australians is mind blowing. New Zealand is not free from racism, far from it. Australia is next level
It will take a few generations for Australians to come to terms with living on stolen land, and to adjust to being colonisers. (White New Zelanders, Pākehā have been doing this for over thirty years, it is a process)
It is odd to put that declaration on a web page, how a digital asset is comparable to standing on land is clearly something the Australians are working on. Good luck to them, move on and let it be.
Acknowledgements of Country are not uncommon on Australian web sites, especially with arts organisations. Sometimes they're in the footer, sometimes as an interstitial. They're also common in speeches/formalities.
Edit: I'd agree though that NZ has a more mature perspective, stronger Maori population and that the condescension is probably fair.
What exactly is supposed to happen though? "Don't be horribly racist" is a nice idea, but it's not like we see people who put these acknowledgements up actually attempting to return the "stolen land"
I think it makes sense to put it on the website if you're going to do it though, since it's a website about, basically, a building in melbourne.
Well, similarly to how the neo-right slowly shifted the social frame with frog memes and screaming slurs at children on online FPS game lobbies, things like land acknowledgments slowly shift the reference frame of society towords a place where some good outcomes might actually be possible.
> it's not like we see people who put these acknowledgements up actually attempting to return the "stolen land"
It's a humiliation ritual that legitimizes claims of theft and invites stochastic violence against the people outing themselves as colonizers.
It's like apologizing for dubious rape allegations; once you apologize for it you've admitted guilt, and invite retribution from everybody positioned to impose it.
Forgiveness is never offered so there's no point to going along with any of these charades. They condemn you either way.
Land acknowledgements are the ultimate in virtue signaling; once they actually mean something, they suddenly end. Two overlapping tribal claims in New Brunswick cover 100% of the province. Thus, New Brunswick provincial employees ordered to not make land acknowledgements while working, because of legal case <https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/first-nations-n...>.
The counterfactual to virtue signaling is genuine, anonymous, or quiet action—acting on moral convictions without seeking public recognition or social status.
While virtue signaling is a public, often insincere display of moral superiority (a "recognition desire"), the true alternative is "walking the walk" through tangible deeds.
It _is_ performative (not sure it's nonsense) because it doesn't actually do or intend to do anything. It's cheap.
(I personally think it's also _disingenous_, because you can't undo things done 100+ years ago -- not because they are no longer "bad" but because you can't figure out how or who to undo it to, and you should instead focus on "who needs help today", because they are alive).
> It _is_ performative (not sure it's nonsense) because it doesn't actually do or intend to do anything. It's cheap.
Yes, that's my point. Once some risk—however small—came to be of land acknowledgements within New Brunswick actually having some legal or practical ramification, poof there they went.
Given how widespread tribal territorial claims are in Canada (the entire city of Richmond BC, for example), I expect more such prohibitions.
reply