Let's set aside specific terms like "fascist" for now. Below is one of the demands from the government:
> the University shall commission an external party, which shall satisfy the federal government as to its competence and good faith, to audit the student body, faculty, staff, and leadership for
viewpoint diversity, such that each department, field, or teaching unit must be individually
viewpoint diverse.
Do you feel this is ok for the government to demand of an educational institution? This isn't about specific political ideologies. If the Biden administration had threatened to withhold funding from a university because, for example, their hiring policies weren't left-leaning enough or something, it would be equally outrageous.
Let me start by saying that I am not American and I am not your enemy. Also, I am genuinely trying to understand the truth about these matters, with an open mind to the possibility that it's messy and complicated and I might not be capable of understanding it. I hope that provides context for what follows.
Honestly, I am not sure if it's okay. It reminds me of the anti-racist movement, in that the action almost feels like it's anti-fascist. It's using a fascist action (use of state power to enforce conformity), to undo a fascist policy (suppression of political opposition and dissent). This reminds me of anti-racism, which uses one type of racism to compensate for a different type of past-racism.
What I find interesting is the very last statement in your post. I am not aware of anything Biden did, but it does seem like Obama did something very similar with the DEI policies forced on universities which came with funding implications for non-compliance. It was a different time, everyone was upset about the great financial crisis of 2008, and on their surface I am sure these policies sounded like a good thing. In the end though these policies were very much a form of facism in that it was a state sponsored effort to suppress political opposition. This probably sounds like I am defending the political views of racists, but really I am defending the political views of people who believe leadership roles should be filled based on the merit of the individual and their ability to take care of those in their charge, and not based on the color of their skin, their gender or sexual preferences.
As I have tried to unpack all this, the perspective that is growing for me is that for the last 20 or so years both administrations have been taking steps towards fascism while hiding their fascist actions behind intentions that sound anti-fascist. If this perspective is even partially correct, it would explain why so much of this has been so confusing for me.
The way I interpret "#1 Company, #2 Team, #3 Me" is that faced with a decision that benefits the company as a whole (i.e., all teams at the company) one that benefits only your team or you, you should favor the decision that benefits everyone.
For example, say your team has a huge hardware budget, and you notice another fledgling team that's working on something potentially more impactful to the company is struggling to get a decent budget. Ideally, you should transfer most or all of your budget over to them to benefit the company overall. (Mind you, I have never really seen this happen voluntarily, but again... we're talking about ideal/desirable behavior.)
It does not mean that if the company is acting in bad faith and is, for example, putting policies in place to force people to quit to save on severance or something, you go along with that and throw your team under the bus.
I think of "OKRs" as just a fancy name for two things:
(1) What are you going to do in the next quarter/year/etc? i.e. what are you & your team's "objectives"
(2) How are you going to achieve that? i.e. what are the "key results" you're going to hit to achieve your objective.
I hope most people will agree that, in an organization, having an understanding - and agreement - of what each team plans to work on, along with the trust that they have reasonably well-thought steps on how to achieve that objective, is incredibly helpful.
The problem is, as with "Agile", "TDD", etc, people will run with this and lose track of what the actual end-goal is, i.e. to build things that matter while ensuring coordination between teams. So, you will see things that don't make much sense, like OKRs for individual contributors, OKRs that change monthly, objectives that aren't necessarily right for the company, key results that don't really tie into the objective, etc.
I'm not sure what the solution is. At a previous gig, I tried asking management plainly to state publicly what they're going to do and how they're going to do it, and no one did it. Then I tried, let's do OKRs "just like Google" and everyone jumped on, even though IMO it's the same thing...
Sponsor is perhaps a strong word. You need another WeChat user to verify your account by scanning a QR code displayed on your app using their app. You need to do this when you create an account, and also if you haven't used your account in a while. I assume this is some sort of anti-spam/anti-bot feature.
Note that the above is just for the chat feature. You have to jump through more hoops if you want to make payments using the app.
Wordpress is actually not that hard to setup these days, but maybe a better approach is to start with hosted WP (e.g. wpengine) just to get the site up and running asap, and then later transition out into your own WP install when you have the time/resources.
For what you're trying to do, I'd definitely bet on a hosted CMS + a nice theme. You'll get a pretty website that's easy to manage, and it will cost very little in terms of time and money.
I use my Gmail inbox as sort of a todo list. If a conversation is in my Inbox, it needs attention from me - I need to do some work related to it, reply to it, forward it, etc. Once I'm done with an email thread, I immediately archive it.
If you use this workflow (many do), snoozing an email is useful. I use it primarily for threads where I'm not able to reply and provide information immediately (so removing it from my inbox until I can reduces distraction), and for threads where I'd like to follow-up in a few days, if for example I don't get a reply.
Sounds like you should start using flags instead ("stars" in web-gmail?) Then your todo list should be easily accessible through a filtered list of flagged messages. Most IMAP clients offer this out of the box.
I have labels for organization but once something is marked as read or out of my priority inbox (where starred emails go) is has an extremely low priority and might as well not exist. If it's in my inbox and unread it gives me anxiety not to action it. A Snooze feature is a perfect middle ground.
Just back from a trip to India (from there originally), and don't quite agree with you that data plans are expensive. There is a lot of competition, and both talk time and data are quite affordable IMO. I pre-paid for 1GB of data and ~4 hours of talk time for just 250 INR (about $4).
Pretty much everyone in India - rich or poor - has a mobile phone these days. However, unlike the service, phones cost just as much as they do elsewhere so the poor usually end up using crappy feature phones with limited data support. A $25 smartphone with full web support would make an incredible difference IMO.
Well the poor don't necessarily end up with bad phones, there are a few indigenous phone manufacturers like Micromax [1], Maxx Mobile [2], Spice [3], Intex [4] etc. that have carved out a market for themselves in the past few years. These brands manufacture phones with features quite comparable to "good" smart phones and are comparatively very affordable. So, unless the consumer is brand conscious, its possible to get a smart phone with decent features and data support at affordable prices.
In fact, Spice and Intex are the manufacturers that Mozilla has partnered to produce the $25 smart phones.
You are forgetting about the cost of living and average income. While 250 INR ($4) is not that big an amount for you. Spending that much amount for just 1GB of 3G data may not be feasible/easy for a lot of people this phone is aimed at.
Like someone mentioned above, if you can afford the data plans, you would never go for this phone. The biggest hurdle I can see for this phone will be providing access to the internet.
I wouldn't call FirefoxOS a "thin client" (if that's what you meant) - it has a concept of "packaged apps" in which the app and all its assets are packaged and downloaded to the phone, and loaded from there. The built-in "certified" apps (like Phone, Music, Calendar and so on) don't require loading anything from the network at all, for instance.
You can think of FirefoxOS apps the same way conceptually you'd think of them on Android/iOS, except they are always written in open web technologies (HTML/JS/CSS).
App developers do have the option to provide "hosted" apps to the store (which is basically a regular web page but without browser chrome), however even in this case writing HTML5 apps that work offline is totally doable using existing cross-browser standards.
- It's a bit easier to pull out my phone from my pocket vs. pulling out my wallet, then locating my card, and then pulling that out
- Tapping my phone is an easier process than aligning and sliding my card through a narrow slit
- I'd love it if coin-like functionality is one day integrated into my phone, so I can select a specific card to use vs. digging through my wallet for it, or switch cards quickly and try again if the first one gets denied, etc.
These are all admittedly minor, but many successful technologies are about increased convenience anyway.
