In my personal environment I have many people that don't live in the city they work in, for various reasons. They do, however, live in the range of like 1h-1.5h away. 1.5h on a daily level, speaking from experience, can really make or break a (family) life.

I'm all with you. They wanted us to go to university. They wanted both partners to have jobs to support a family. Now they want to force those workers to live close to work (for the most part so management can watch butts-in-chairs) again.

This can only be prevented if employees stand and fight together.

You say that...I fear that myself. But it's like the prisoners dilemma I think...if that happens, then some places will indeed allow work from home and snatch those high-performers just off the market.

I have no opinion about measures to take or not, but what can be said is that this access to the markets was bought with industrial espionage, technology theft and questionable cooperation practices (cases where some company basically just changed owners overnight and kept all the workers and machines and so on).

All this was of course known, but knowingly or not, the Chinese played the westerners weakness perfectly: greed.

Unfortunately that is not the case here. These cars are more advanced than what we can make.

As much as the tracking I fear the access control.

Made some stupid comment online while being drunk? We take your ability to by transportation passes/plane tickets...

IIRC this is already happening in China.

Or Canada during the trucker protests.

More scary IMO because the US / Europe will never be China, but it's easy to see some president in the US logic their way into the same position as Canada, and use the same state apparatuses to banish dissenters.

No-fly lists don't require instant payments, so I don't know what point it is you're trying to make.

You can still use a train.

Not in china though:

https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/1/18246297/china-transportat...

I've read that is wrong, depending on what you define as (usable) train.

Allegedly there are the 'green' trains, because using older green wagons.

They aren't high-speed, but drive everywhere. As do busses. Which allegedly you can use. Just takes longer.

Can you provide an example?

Exactly as parent mentioned - in China, if you mess with Party or they just deem you undesirable for whatever reason ie ethnicity, you can't purchase plane tickets, not even domestic ones. Heck, not even trains so you can't effectively travel within China. No mortgages/loans. Of course it will affect your hiring options badly. I believe it goes way deeper. China is already 1984 for a decade+

That's not an example, I want a specific example

What impact does this actually have? Can you not get a credit card any more?

You are excluded from most decent jobs and relegated to an underclass.

you can't travel even domestically? or get a credit card?

You seem to argue strongly in favor of deception, but justifying that it's ok if all the other measures against false convictions are in place (lawyers, police who work by the book...).

To me, it's like wearing a safety belt. I mean, if all your driver assistance systems work and all the other drivers pay attention and drive perfectly, you shouldn't need it, right?

I think the court reviewing the confession and tape of the interrogation would be the safety belt. There are ways to verify confessions even with limited evidence. These false confessions are sloppy work. It seems the courts don't care much for safeguarding against abuses, so maybe the verification steps need some codifying.

There also needs to be some utility left to the interview. Sure we don't want to have long, aggressive, or abusive interviews. But how useful would suspect interviews be if you just asked questions based on real information? Sometimes you might get some info, but the smart ones won't be that easy. Sometimes it would be good to use some deception just to gauge what they know, even if you don't get a confession. It's a useful tool that doesn't present any downside with the proper safety measures in place.

Sweet. That makes my bathroom breaks after the day I had genuine Mexican food a sport, too.

Did you ever find out what it did there exactly? Like, what it collected and what the "gifted person" wanted to do with that data?

edit: Thanks for the write-up btw. Was a nice read, although a bit short (which is the story's fault I guess)

Is “gifted person” code for something? Are they from some sort of enrichment program?

It's in the article: The author found information about the presumed attacker on a site where parents write about their gifted (= highly talented) children.

Thanks! I couldn’t handle the tension and jumped to the end of the article to see how it unfolded.

Wow, that's a warped description if I ever heard one. I always felt like "gifted" was a label given to kids who were out-of-place in a normal classroom, to justify having special education so they were less likely to disrupt class or kill themselves out of boredom.

Hm, for me it meant I mostly stuck with the same student peer group throughout grade school, I think we got to skip some standardizes tests, and I was able to get a school bus to the bigger schools even though I was way out in the sticks. I had to go through an aptitude test and even though I was only like 7 I still remember sitting in the car after and being mad at myself for missing a question about "another word for water" being H20.

Yours is the warped one. Gifted student programs are very common, and while they are sometimes used for what you say, it's not the designated purpose.

However, there doesn't seem to be a correlation between membership in gifted programs and success later in life.

Do kids in gifted programs go on to become intellectual elites and “captains of industry” at higher rates than their peers?

Not by much, I'd bet. If at all.

The poster seems to have confused top-tier private schools and gifted programs. Read enough politician and C-suite and such bios and it's very clear what's going on. You practically never see "attended a pretty decent public high school—but was in the gifted program!" Private college prep secondary schools (at the very least—often it's private schools all the way) on the other hand are overwhelmingly the norm in that set.

It's kinda depressing as a parent. If you haven't scraped together 25+k/yr for elite prep school tuition (and, probably, boarding) all your "you can be anything you want if you try really hard!" is kinda a lie. Like, that's still much better than not trying hard and will likely improve your life outcomes, but, looking at the actual world, realistically... nah, sorry, you're probably locked out of a lot of options. There are de facto requirements, and we couldn't afford them. Sorry kid.

Similar story with The Arts. You start looking at the backgrounds of very high-paid artists of all kinds (actors, musicians, even authors a lot of the time if they're considered good and not "merely" popular) and you're likely screwed if you weren't at least one of: 1) born to a family that's already successful at that, or 2) had an expensive and very focused education starting before college. Lots of the successful folks had both of those things. Again: there are counter examples, and it's technically possible to get in if your parents weren't in the arts and you didn't start gigging/acting/attending-an-artsy-private-school by the time you were 12, but realistically you're looking at a serious uphill battle.

> Private college prep secondary schools (at the very least—often it's private schools all the way) on the other hand are overwhelmingly the norm in that set.

To which data set are you referring? Data from 2019 found that 80% of Fortune 100 CEOs hold undergraduate degrees from public institutions[0].

[0]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimberlywhitler/2019/09/07/a-ne...

I think in most cases supporting kids with money and professional experience is family merit. The family spent money and effort to help its next generation. Maybe they are not rich, just education focused and ready to sacrifice a lot to achieve it. On the other hand having too much family wealth correlates negatively with academic accomplishments.

The complexity of art and math doesn't change depending on how you learn or how rich is your father. Even with support a kid has to gain the same useful skills. What matters is ability, not how the kid got there. They are just kids, everything that shaped society into what it is happened before they were grown enough to have any say in it.

I was in the 80's gifted program in elementary school (for grades 3 through 6), but went to private schools for jr high and high school. I learned more from public gifted education.

FYI, $25K/year won't get you an elite prep school these days. For that, you'll need at least $60K+.

Good question. The programs themselves are generally good, as far as I’ve experienced, but the culture around them is often quite toxic. Many kids are treated like race horses. I’m not sure how effective they are on net. Most highly successful people seem like autodidacts that end up finding the resources they need one way or another. Would guess the best way to create more of those people is just to keep a lot of doors open and hope someone like that walks through.

Culture overrun by rich overachievers gaming the selection system?

That’s a fairly blunt description, but I think it’s roughly accurate. I think there are plenty of middle income and low income overachievers in there as well. Recent immigrants can be incredibly demanding and hard on kids who might not be naturally inclined to pursue that kind of thing without external pressure, as can competitive suburbanites.

But by trying to mitigate the risk of toxicity you can go too far in the other direction and end up not pushing smart kids to reach their full potential, which is also bad. Striking the right balance is hard.

I was put through through multiple gifted programs in both middle school and high school (Southern US). I loved the challenging course work from dealing with college level science classes as early as the 7th grade. The main problem with gifted programs is it really makes normal public schooling extra miserable once you are back with the general population. Uncaring teachers, scantron tests, and large classes sizes left me depressed with schooling quality.

Once I got to college after graduating from a boarding school for gifted teens it was like a culture shock back to the world of horrible professors. I nearly failed out of college due to being completely uninterested with the lack of engaging materials in first semester classes.

Ended up with a degree in broadcast journalism because it was an easy path to graduating in less than 3 years. Especially because I was graduating during the 2008 financial crisis and just wanted to be done with school and find whatever job I could to get a start in the real world.

It's a nice piece of paper for HR to nod at and let me pass the degree hurdle.

My favorite moment was working a shit retail job in 2010 and running into another graduate of the same gifted high school working a fast food job just to survive.

EDIT// I did have some classmates go to found companies, work for NASA, etc. They were driven people who could have prospered in any scenario honestly.

Nope, it's a dick shaking title that can give kids issues in life.

Someone I know was called gifted at some point, he didn't end up in any accelerated programs but he did end up in higher education... which he only finished after many years, meanwhile he was eating, drinking and smoking his student loans + job income away, he ended up broke and in debt, and to date - 10, 15 years later - is still unemployed.

Anecdotes are not data, but I was in the Gifted And Talented program in high school and I sure did not become either of those. I'm eking out a living as an obscure freelance artist. A lot of my friends are former G/T kids who did not live up to their supposed promise, too.

It got me some interesting opportunities here and there but I am fundamentally kind of a slacker :)

This one didn't:)

> How likely is that?

Well, having been in Paris: There are many times and places when all the shared bikes are borrowed.