TaldenNZ

Are they kidding.

This is slavery, not even indentured servitude, let alone a fair exchange of labour for compensation… There is no point at which the slave is released to make use of those skills.

Any and all skills gained are either used as tools by the owner, or as coping/survival mechanisms by the slave.

Slavery is, in all ways, an abhorrent exploitation and degradation of a human being.

That there is even the slightest tolerance for this curriculum change is appalling. Is Florida really so filled with the morally bankrupt and apathetic that this can pass without ending the careers of the contributors?

How can we ever expect greater progress on stamping out the ongoing modern forms of slavery, when things like this can make its way into the classroom.

I really hope this change is crushed before it reaches the ears of impressionable children. But the fact that it got this far means that this is the kind of thinking that too many already get at home.

Maybe they go skiing the other months.

Essentially it boils down to - ways in which they can turn users into money.

• Control the content you see - Especially ads which provide income. Also injecting posts into your stream regardless of preferences to direct views towards sponsors preferences or to try to extend engagement.
• More visibility over user activity - It gives them better tools to manipulate users habits (that pesky engagement), and better (for them), user telemetry can be sold (people who like X like Y is useful knowledge but it can go far deeper than this).
• They want to discourage content that discourages advertisers - mostly this is NSFW content (since the advertisers don’t want their ads showing beside NSFW content) but I expect it’ll begin to span more than that over time.

With the elimination of third party apps, you can bet that ‘old Reddit’ is on the chopping-block soon too (mostly to boost ad views)

All large shops in England have been legally required to charge for single-use plastic shopping bags since 2015 - a move that has seen bags drop by mor then 95 per cent, according to the government. The legal charge was initially a minimum of 5p, but this was raised to 10p in May 2021 in a bid to further reduce usage.

Doesn’t this approach risk promoting elitism by wealth? Past a given income level that fixed overhead becomes irrelevant.

So those on a lower income, who are more cost-sensitive, are made to be more responsible for reaching pollution-limiting targets than the wealthy.

I prefer the level-playing field better I think (if only we were applying that to more things here).