It addresses the first point quite well, multiple times (it's even one of the first things discussed in the story, one of Hitler's coalition partners was bound to lose from elections).
> The installation/setup process is completely bespoke for each different app
For the majority of them, there's a docker container, often with example configs. It's not that far removed from installing a mobile app and then having a wizard ask you how you want stuff configured.
There isn't any mention of socialism, or anything related to it in your link.
It sounds like a classic balance of payments issue (importing too much compared to exports/tourism/other revenues) being hit with an exploding in price critical import (oil). Sri Lanka had the same issues just a few years back, was it "socialism" too?
What a shittily written article, staining the Adam Smith name.
Nationalising a bunch of critical industries isn't "socialism" and the article utterly fails to explain how it is or why it's related. Historical UK, and modern France, Russia, UAE, Saudi Arabia also had multiple crucial industries which were fully nationally owned. Were they socialist too?
Private companies needed to obtain license [0] from the govt to start or to expand.
Some companies were even prosecuted for producing more than what was allowed. This was at least Nehru's (first Prime Minister) version of Democratic Socialism.
That's still not what socialism means. Absurdly tight government control over the economy, and the existence of a private market economy, doesn't mean that workers owned the means of production.
> As the article points out, the IOC makes an absolute fuckton of money from Olympic broadcast rights and sponsors, essentially none of which flows back to the actual athletes.
A lot of it flows back into the Olympic Committees of each country, who are in charge of spreading it, investing into infrastructure, youth development, etc.
> athletes can participate in other competitions besides the Olympics
They can, but almost none of them are even remotely as popular as the Olympics. The only exceptions are in massive sports (football, in the US american football, hockey, basketball; in countries like India cricket; tennis, F1). For every other sport, the Olympics are the pinnacle and nothing is even remotely comparable.
> Teams automatically creates a chat group for every Teams calendar event. This can include external attendees
Great, so each conversation is spread out and siloed. Thankfully Teams has good search and you can find stuff, right? Right?
> Teams is useful for chat & meetings, but Teams spaces are hugely helpful as document repositories, too, and it's additionally easy to add things like Gantt charts and other enriched content types through add-ins
Slack Canvas kind of does this. I'm not convinced having all your documentation in your chat/meeting app makes sense, but it could be useful.
> The ability to seamlessly transfer a Teams meeting connection between arbitrary devices (laptop -> desktop, phone -> laptop, etc).
Zoom does this too, and has for years. I think I've seen Slack huddles offer the same option too.
> if there was a cover up, both the US and China have massive incentives to cover it up.
China saving face, that one is clear (although unlikely to survive, remember that doctor who risked his career and life to expose that the Chinese government was downplaying Covid? Why do you think nobody would expose a cover-up?). What incentive was there for the US, or any other impacted country?
Especially the Trump White House… they repeatedly exaggerated the available evidence to insinuate a lab leak… it would’ve been a huge political boon if they had any actual proof of malfeasance.
Social distancing has been a proven method to combat the spread of ilnesses, including respiratory viruses, for centuries. And it still works, and it did work for Covid.
A good example for that is France that did 3 lockdowns, each time when the main factor optimised for, % of hospital beds occupied, started to go up dagenrously. And in each one, the number of confirmed cases went down, and hospital tension eased (after ~1-2 weeks). Are you stating that this was some sort of... mass placebo? Something completely unrelated? What actually is your claim?
You'll see that there's no high-quality evidence supporting basically any of it. It's either based on bad data [1], confounded studies, or worse.
...but to be clear, you have to define "social distancing" more specifically. If you define it as "hiding it in your basement to avoid colds", then the answer is going to be different than, say, "standing on spots in the elevator", or (more to my original point) "doing alternate day in-person education because teachers want fewer students in the classroom".
I'd still argue that we need a shred of decent evidence for any of it, but we should at least start by being specific about our claims.
> Social distancing has been a proven method to combat the spread of ilnesses, including respiratory viruses, for centuries. And it still works, and it did work for Covid.
It's pretty funny how you demand sources from other people, but then just make stuff up.
[1] Classic example: asking people if they "social distanced", then asking those same people if they remember getting sick. There are so many "studies" like this in public health "science", and if you exclude them from meta-analysis on the grounds that they're total bullshit, partisans start accusing you of "cherry-picking", because that's often the full extent of the affirmative evidence for whatever thing they're advocating.
reply