Faster and more complex hardware can also have bugs or back doors, as can cheaper hardware. That said, I'm not happy with buggy and untrustworthy code either.
On Twitter and Tumblr you can make extra accounts to participate in discussions you're interested in, and select people to follow based on that, so the feed system is okay for talking about things other than yourself if the feeds don't include everyone you know by default.
Tumblr has some pretty good discussion about movies and books.
Twitter not so good for discussion because off the length limit, but there's plenty of people posting concise observations and jokes rather than posting about themselves.
On both systems, people can reply to content from strangers, and there's lots of conflict arising from that.
I do think Tumblr would be improved by making it easier to have discussions that don't go to all your followers by default, for example like on Twitter where if you tag people at the start of your tweet, it doesn't go into the main feed for your followers who aren't tagged.
Or you can go all the way to partitioning a system into topics, as with Reddit. I wouldn't call that a social network though, you don't just casually start a conversation with people you've chosen to connect with, you start a conversation with a subreddit.
One thing I really want to know is what data can apps access. Is it like most phone apps where my data in one app is secure if some random game would like to read it?
Do the apps or the users manage security choices like these?
They want the ease of use and security of a phone OS and app store, but they also don't want the data stuck in separate silos. I'm not sure if the idea is to have isolation between apps like iOS has or what.
This is true. What I find puzzling is that advertisements have most of the same issues but many people accept them. You could argue that people's acceptance of ads suggests they should accept micropayments, or people's rejection of micro payments suggests they should reject ads. But I put up with ads and haven't signed up for any micro payment schemes yet.
Compared to a regular welfare system where they stop paying if the recipient has the ability to support themselves / doesn't need it (from each according to his ability, to each according to his need) UBI is the opposite of communism. This one where people have to be jobless at the start isn't ideal though.
What about postal voting? Probably less of a threat because it's not that common I guess. But does it mean there are no countries complying with secret ballot demands?
In Australia we have the option of voting for someone as our first preference, and letting them direct your lower preferences for after they get eliminated (according to their previously published preference list). If you made that the only option, you'd just need to count the votes for each candidate, then any further calculations could be based on these totals.
I would suggest voting for the lesser of two evils if you'd do that in a plurality voting system, plus whoever else you like better. Though there might be three equally likely winners you hate, in which case I dunno.
