In hindsight, yes. But there was no indiciation ahead of time that this situation would happen or was likely to happen. In fact, there was no more reason to believe a free ccTLD was any more likely than a paid ccTLD to cause a problem. The problem arises because a ccTLD's host country can choose to remove any domain it wants, paid or not. One could argue that using a ccTLD at all was a mistake, but you'd have to look at precedent for ccTLD's country's doing this and see if it happens often or not.
If a condition is worsening (a "fall") "tumble" applies just fine. Indeed, "tumble" is just a way to say "falling rapidly" in this context.
The reason "tumble" (and its notion of "fall") is applicable is because the situation is worsening. If it was rapidly improving, nobody would say "tumble"; it's not simply that it is occurring rapidly.
It's a tough situation.
One could argue that if they don't have the resources to test drugs they produce then they shouldn't produce them. But that's a very privileged statement: if it doesn't have the resources to test what it's making it likely doesn't have the resources to import drugs either. By making drugs for domestic consumption they're able to help more people than they would otherwise. The issue, obviously, comes from bad actors in the supply chain. If there's money to be made, people will do bad things, and I'm not sure how to prevent that. You can punish after the fact, but when people's (especially kids') lives are lost before you can put a stop to it, that's hardly an acceptable solution.
A global average of 17c doesn't even mean it's necessarily 17c anywhere in the world. That's not how averages work. It could be 0c in half the world, and 34c in half the world, and the global average would be 17c (and yet it would be 17c nowhere).
The point of global averages is to identify trends, which are not isolated to a particular region.
Water is a "chemical solvent". So is alcohol (ethanol), which is in nearly every cough syrup.
In fact, the solvent they used is extremely closely related to commonly used and acceptable solvents, namely propylene glycol (and polyethylene glycol), which you likely consume often. The issue is that (di)ethylene glycol has most of the useful chemical properties here, while generally being cheaper. This has happened often in the past in fact: products meant for human consumption that called for propylene glycol have had that replaced by (di)ethylene glycol as a cost cutting measure and that has lead to cases similar to this.
The real problem is cost cutting without safety checks and oversight, not "chemicals". The article even says as much:
It advised regulatory agencies to increase surveillance and diligence within the supply chains of countries and regions likely to be affected by the products.
I don't think Google engineers are living paycheck to paycheck,
The median total compensation for a Google employee in 2022 was $279,802. The highest-paid software engineers can make up to $718,000 a year in base salary, although most reported making between $100,000 to $375,000 in base salary. They can also receive bonuses of up to $605,000. This would put them in the top 1% of earners in the country.
Google Software Engineer Salaries, average compensation by level:
| Level | Total |
|---|---|
| L3 (Entry Level) | $192K |
| L4 | $268K |
| L5 | $372K |
| L6 | $543K |
It's not just Java. It supports a few other languages as well. I am pretty sure it supports Rust, HTML, JavaScript and maybe a couple others. It doesn't support Python, Go, PHP, C/C++, or Ruby (as they have separate products for those).
That's a weirdly reductive and frankly useless way to frame the situation.
First, a paid firefighter and paid social worker are making the world better, just as much as a volunteer firefighter and charity worker. I'm not sure why you made the distinction.
Second, it's not a dichotomy between making the world better and worse. There are things that obviously are bad, and there are things that obviously are good. But there are also things that are almost entirely neutral, or somewhere in between. It's not an all-or-nothing situation: things can be degrees of good and bad.
If you insist on making it relative: these people are currently doing something more bad than what they were doing before. Whether you think what they were doing before was good or bad doesn't really matter. What matters is that this new thing is bad. And that's the problem.
I find the defense of someone doing active harm under the guise of "their job" to be shameful.
Bro it’s their job
Do you put any blame on the people who came up with this idea? With executives who steer and determine what is going to be implemented? It's also just their job. My point was (and is) that doing bad things because it's your job is not different than doing bad things that aren't part of your job. And the point I made and I'll reiterate is: ideas are just ideas; its the engineers who are implementing the ideas and making them reality. No one at the company is innocent, and that includes engineers.
If my job was asking me to do evil things, I'd not be comfortable working that job. It's the same nonsense with Facebook: you know you're working for an evil company, which is destroying the social fabric around the world, and yet you don't judge yourself for contributing to evil because it's your job. It's inexcusable.
a lot of your food is just really unhealthy. I know from the keto subs that many basic ingredients have added sugar for no good reason, and that’s not even going into that whole HFC thing.
That is true. It is possible to eat only healthy options if you make a concerted effort to, but if you casually just eat what's convenient, or eat at restaurants, you will be consuming astronomical portions and really wacky macro ratios.
People in the USA make the "well unhealthy food is cheap" argument which is only partially true; the more accurate claim is "convenient food is unhealthy". I spend significantly less money on healthy ingredients and make my own food than someone who is buying convenient microwavable and prepared meals; but, it takes me a decent amount of time each day to cook versus a minute watching a microwave. I think cultural aspects of being overworked sneak in to this situation as well: when you have so little free time, and have worn yourself out at work, unless you really enjoy the act of cooking, you are likely to just reach for convenience rather than putting in effort to cook something healthy. Then, you have the interaction of eating unhealthy foods to self-soothe as a method of coping with the reality of being overworked.
There are a lot of moving pieces but, all else being equal (that is, the population eats the same things and keeps the same activity level): the healthcare system in the USA could have a lot less waste and overhead (read: siphoned profits) and thus be a lot less costly to interact with.
The engineers are writing up the spec, implementing the prototype, and will eventually be responsible for the rollout. The engineers are as much at fault as whoever thought up the idea. Without the engineers being complacent, the idea would be nothing more than an idea.
"Just following orders" has never been a good excuse for doing bad things.
Reading your comment history, it seems it would benefit you greatly to read history. The simple reaction you just had to the parent comment was born out of historical ignorance: you don't know the history of the region, so when you see a claim that you don't like the sound of (despite it being true), your reaction is to assume the other person is divorced from reality. In actuality, by nature of not knowing history, you are detached from reality.