When it comes to getting a neutral response, the advice risks falling into the middle ground fallacy, where people might mistakenly believe that the truth always lies between two opposing arguments. Most people, myself included, don’t have the expertise to fully grasp complex issues, and there's no shame in that—we can’t expect everyone to be well-versed in every subject. This can make it tough to determine which side is more credible, leading to confusion or a false sense that both sides are equally valid, even when they’re not.
Well, it really falls on the individual. If you read both sides and realize "yeah, it's fine to protect the children by any means necessary", I wouldn't consider that radicalization so much as that person's own pre-existing philosophies.
But yes, I highly doubt you won't at least gain some sympathy for both sides of you read both spins. I'm not an expert on law and don't have the money to consult a writer versed in law to "explain to me in detail that I can understand". The next best is simply consuming a variety of content and understanding yourself at the end of the day. Someone looking for nuance to begin with like the GP probably is less prone to radicalization to begin with.
Microsoft would have been totally incapable of coming up with a product like the Iphone.
Even if you gave them a crystal ball in 2006 that sees 8 years into the future and showed them pictures of the smartphones being used in 2014, they still would have botched it, because they're culturally incapable of understanding the end user.
So, I while I do think the second mover advantage contributed to the Iphone's success, the biggest factor was Jobs' user-focused, opinionated vision.
The concept of second mover advantage doesn't mean you have to go exactly second - your reply is somewhat pedantic - you just get the advantage by not being the very first. Apple absolutely enjoyed some second mover advantages in bringing iPhone to market.
The second mover advantages Apple enjoyed went beyond just the cellphone design too - they completely rearchitected the relationship between a carrier and a cellphone OEM. People forget that pre-iPhone, virtually all cellphones had to carry crappy software insisted on by the cell carrier - the iPhone was one of the first ever handsets that shipped with the OS completely under the control/design of the handset vendor with no network involvement. Just getting AT&T to agree to this alone was massive, and hadn't been figured out by any of the pre-existing smartphone manufacturers on the "first move" either. We take this for granted now across the industry that cellphones can easily arrive this way in carrier stores with little/no carrier interference.
Heck, pre-iPhone, it was close to impossible to buy a phone in an AT&T/"Cingular" store that didn't have AT&T/Cingular's logo custom printed on it, such was the extent of the carrier choke-hold on the OEM handset supply side. This was true of virtually all the carriers in North America at that time. Again today, it's rare a phone is branded with the carrier logos, and smartphones rarely ever now have bundled carrier software/OS changes at the user application level.
The prosecutors who would have been filing those charges were instead offering to grant immunity from prosecution for them in exchange for a sweetheart plea deal.
It's understandable to feel disillusioned by the current state of online discourse. Expecting social media platforms alone to broaden horizons is akin to relying solely on a library's size to educate the illiterate. Perhaps it's time for a more holistic approach to digital literacy and critical thinking, rather than outsourcing the responsibility to tech giants like Bluesky.
I had a similar question before reading Moby Dick. I noticed it was being sold online, although inexpensive, which made me wonder. It turned out the English text is in the public domain, and anyone can profit from it. So, why did the publisher charge for it? I wanted to read it in my native language, Polish, and the translation was not in the public domain. Additionally, I wanted to easily upload it to my Kindle, so I also paid for convenience. I know this not fully answers your question, but wanted to share my experience.
Was curious myself so asked chatgpt and this what I got:
Nested aggregates in databases are useful when you want to perform calculations or summaries on groups of data within larger groups. For example, imagine you have a database of sales transactions with products and categories. You could use nested aggregates to find the total sales for each category and then calculate the average sales per category. It saves effort by allowing you to perform calculations at different levels of granularity in a single query.
A quick Google search shows that there are 2.3 billion people between ages 20-39 years. Even if we make a generous assumption that Shein has 100 million users within that group, that's still around 4% of the total population. So, your thought is not really as "insightful" as you wished it to be.
