Within a hundred yard radius of my home are several high rise apartment buildings, two pubs, the entrance to three parks (one of which winds between significant transportation routes, a Canadian Legion, a drug store, and a bunch of other stuff. Barely outside that radius is a school, and several more high rises.

So in my case, that little bit of "fuzzing" spells anonymity. My point, though, is that even the smallest steps can help. If you're really serious, there's a lot more you can do without a lot of drama. I personally like the idea of "muddying the data pool" because it's something that can be done by average people without a lot of technological expertise. The larger the number of people involved, the more unreliable that pool becomes. That's all we want, really...to mess up the efforts of government and corporations to thrust themselves into every area of our lives.

Steps can be taken to make casual surveillance by police and other bad actors a little more difficult, such as turning off location services unless you really need them enabled. As far as I can see, though, the only way to keep the long, flexible nose of our government and corporate rulers out of our business is to poison the data pool. In this particular case, I'd just start with the consideration that there's no requirement for your phone and you to always be in the same place.

I like the poetic justice involved in me ordering plans for a guillotine from that thumbhead pr^ck Bezos.

All you have to do is look what happens when an entertainment giant like Disney gets hold of a franchise. They run it into the ground. Some franchises ruined by corporate greed (not all Disney): Star Trek, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Mulan, Pirates of the Caribbean, the MCU...probably a lot more if I googled around a bit.

Mega-corporations want maximum profits, and they don't care how much damage they do getting them. And in current business terms, "maximum profits" means wring the asset dry, discard it and move on to the next acquisition. The idea of steady, long-term profitability seems to have died.

Less competition means less innovation, and when one CEO only has to call three other CEOs to figure out how they're going to divide up the pie, there's virtually none.

As a Canadian, I look at the US and I can't help but think, "It might have taken a while, but the Confederacy has finally won the Civil War".

I believe there are good reasons to suspect this story is not true. If this was really a "Survival" style corporate retreat, I would expect instances of cannibalism. Without strong evidence for such behaviour, maybe a femur in the fire pit, or perhaps a couple of picked-clean ribs, I have to question what we're being told.

My point is that if the US, which at the time was one of the world's leaders in technological innovation, had put time and resources into developing renewable energy, the whole Free World would have weaned itself off burning fossil fuels for power. There would still be other uses for petrochemicals, plastics especially, but the Middle East's stranglehold on the world economy would have been well and truly broken. Looking back at the history of the last half century, including the environmental impact of continued fossil fuel use, it's pretty obvious Carter was right.

Excellent point!

Imagine where the US would be today if politicians had been just a little less greedy and corrupt in the 1970s, and embraced Jimmy Carter's commitment to renewable energy. Probably not a wholesale conversion, but during times like these, all of us across the Free World could just sit back with zero f^cks given and a bag of popcorn, and watch a bunch of religious fanatics burn the whole Middle East to the ground.

Everybody wins.

Why not contract out program development to some of those Iranian hackers who seem to have drones flying at will over US military bases? It might not be a perfect solution, but it would probably be cheaper and better than the clusterf^ck they've had going on for the best part of a decade.

There's no mystery here. The officer alleged to have verified the decision wasn't doing their job. You can frame this any way you like...the officer is overworked and couldn't keep up with the number of applications they're supposed to verify, or the officer is lazy, or the officer is incompetent, or perhaps the scientist's name identified their ancestry and the officer is a racist.

In my opinion (backed by some experience) the most likely explanation is the department relies on the fact that many applicants who are rejected won't have the means to appeal a decision, and the spokesperson is simply lying when they claim AI isn't used to recommend or make a decision.

There's obviously a few paid pro-Israel trolls still out and about. Just based on what I've read here, US and Israeli propaganda is swamping Slashdot. There's openly pro-Israel and Anonymous Coward pro-Israel. If you want to be anti-Israel, though, you'd better post as an AC, or you're going to be labeled "anti-Semitic" faster than you can blink.

Go fuck yourself, troll.

Since they say it's safe, and have acted, I believe the word is "vigorously", to conceal evidence that glyphosphate causes cancer, it would be nice if board members of Monsanto and Bayer, and their families, had it sprinkled on their food for a few years.

You have to look around, but you may still have some options. My girlfriend wanted a mechanical parking brake because she had trouble with one of the electronic ones. That led her to a Suzuki S-Cross she absolutely loves.

I hope you find what you're looking for. I'm still hanging on with an older Nissan that has all kinds of bells and whistles, but absolutely no desire to "phone home".