We were able to tack a bunch of domain and header functionality on top of the email system that helped us know if the sender was authentic which is much more than we can say for the POTS
I am constantly amazed how few people understand that preventing spam is below the last thing the FCC is actually interested in.
First of all, the decision makers at the FCC profit from directly from spam, Christ.
Secondly, the indirect value of spam to the FCC is that it helps to justify initiatives to ruin the privacy of ordinary people via the constant push for KYC.
Just like "age verification", Flock cameras, license plate scanners, ubiquitous IoT with microphones and cameras, etc. Governments and corporations both profit from shredding every molecule of your privacy.
Compare and contrast "Saudi extremist holed up in Pakistan who has been targeting Americans for a decade succeeds in blowing up three buildings with large planes on American soil: Well, I guess it's time to invade Iraq and Afghanistan then" 8I
> Can, say, the Belgium government read along with all messages on Whatsapp?
There is something to be said for "our populace relies on tech built by foreign companies" though. Said foreign company is at minimum less likely to install a backdoor for a local government (or be as easily hacked by said local government) than if popular language issues leave the ground ripe for local alternatives to be more popular.
Yes, that is about the single only upside to relying on US Big Tech rather than sovereign local tech. It doesn't nearly weigh up to the downsides, but it is a real thing. In Belgium's case though, even if every Belgian migrated iver to WhatsBelgian for their IMing needs tomorrow, given the competency of the government it would take at least a decade before they had things in place to read along.
Maybe I wasn't clear enough, the point was that all above things do hold for Korea yet are not at all the norm in the West.
Well I for one am always in favor of arbitrary humans having better ways to voluntarily attenuate their own fertility, full stop.
We may have a depopulation shock problem on our hands at the moment, but trying to encourage more accidental births isn't the way to solve that: we need to increase social and financial incentives for forming families and pull away as many of the social and financial barriers thereupon that we can. Not to increase population but to better slow the free-fall of it decreasing so badly that it upsets the actuarial tables.
While I have no way to assess whether better male birth control options would directly positively impact education in particular, I see zero ways it could negatively impact it.
If the purpose of a system is what it does, then what does the system of "not going to school" do?
If schooling and learning/education are truly mutually exclusive then who is the most learned and educated person you can point to that never stepped foot in a school? And how do those rare examples compare against the breadth of modern PHD holders?
There are a non-negligible fraction of kids that are kept out of school, homeschooled, etc. If school was as bad for learning as you suggest then one would expect those kept out of it to demonstrate higher-than-average aptitude.
Part of the goal there is not only "relatability" (demonstrating how this could be useful in reality) but "applicability" (demonstrating HOW to distill a math problem out of some potentially messy real world anecdote).
I have legit seen real world adults do things like say "Well, I got ten widgets because I know that's enough for two people. But there's gonna be four coming so.. uh.. 10+2=12, I'll bring 12 widgets"
reply