Apathy? Not at all. Its simply a matter of established law, in the USA anyway. I can’t speak to the legal systems of the other 140+ countries on planet Earth.

Can you cite a law in the USA or in your own country where you have a right to privacy making photographing you simply standing in a public park an illegal act perpetrated by another person or government entity?

I think we’re aligned on the core issue but with nuanced perspectives. Regulatory capture is indeed the established academic term for the phenomenon you describe,

Its close, but I don’t think that’s correct for this situation.

precisely capturing how agencies meant to protect public interest end up advancing industry priorities through mechanisms like the revolving doorbetween Boeing and Congress.

You’re missing one key aspect of the definition of regulatory capture. NASA isn’t a regulatory body in the case with Boeing, its the customer.

For it to be regulator capture NASA would have to be acting as a regulatory body, and the corrupt company would have to have influence over policy that they benefit from outside of the regulator. An example of regulatory capture was what lead up to one aspect of the 2008 Financial Crisis. Banks have to have a US government regulatory that sets policy and policies the actions of the bank. Prior to 2008 banks could choose their regulator which their choices between the FDIC, Federal Reserve, or a little known regulator call Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS). It won’t surprise you to find out that the OTS was a tiny little shop which only had a few employees, and banks figured out they could write their own policy, get the OTS to approve it, and get away with actions the banks would normally be barred from doing. This lead to risky bank behavior, and the failure of banks and a large contributor to the Financial Crisis of 2008.

NASA wasn’t acting as a regulator to Boeing for Starliner. NASA wasn’t setting government regulations which Boeing had to follow for all vehicles Boeing produced for spaceflight. NASA was a customer giving specs to its contractor, but the contractor had corporate power over its customer, NASA. So yes this would be something like corporate capture but it wasn’t regulatory capture.

Where I’d argue the Starliner narrative: While Boeing’s participation provided political cover for Commercial Crew legislation,

We agree with this. This was my whole thesis in my original post.

SpaceX’s 2010 Falcon 9 debut and subsequent rapid repeatability fundamentally reset industry expectations.

Not really. It wasn’t SpaceX alone, and it wasn’t because SpaceX as rapid. It was because it was it was cheap. SpaceX wasn’t alone in this though. The other contract winner of Commercial Cargo contract, Orbital Sciences, was also cheap and had nothing to do with rapid repeatability. Both were, however, cheap, compared to the cost-plus contract providers that came before them.

The success of fixed-price cargo contracts demonstrated reusable rockets and rapid iteration were possible, proving cost-plus models weren’t inevitable. This technological inflection point–not Boeing’s involvement–created the political space for NASA to demand accountability in human spaceflight.

I disagree entirely. SpaceX reusabilty had zero impact on the success of the initial Commercial Cargo or Commercial Crew contract adoption. How do we know this? Four ways:

1. When SpaceX started flying cargo, reusuabilty wasn’t even a thing yet on Falcon 9. Reusability arrived later during the contract, but the fixed price contracts had already been signed and SpaceX received no extra money from the contract derived from reusability.

2. SpaceX wasn’t the only provider of Commercial Cargo. The other was Orbital Sciences (later OrbitalATK, later yet Northrop Grumman) with their completely disposable rocket and cargo module (Cygnus). Again, when Orbital signed their contract for Commercial Cargo the prices were set. Whether Orbital threw away their Antares rocket after launch (which they did) or not, had no bearing on the Commercial Cargo contracts.

3. No part of Starliner was reusable at the time of contact signing for Commercial Crew. Not the core stage, not the second stage, not the SRBs, not the crew vehicle. If reusabilty was so much of a factor for Commercial Crew how did Boeing, that had zero usability, not only win a Commercial Crew contract, but also was the highest paid of the two contact winners?

4. If reusabilty was such an important factor in Commercial Crew selection, why was Boeing, with zero reusabilty, chosen, but not Sierra Nevada Corporation’s (today known as Sierra Space) Dreamchaser vehicle NOT chose when it was a reusable crew vehicle from day 1?

Boeing’s Starliner struggles directly stem from its post-1997 merger culture shift,

We agree on all the reasons Boeing sucks today.

The breakthrough came not from Boeing’s inclusion but from SpaceX proving fixed-price development could work

That simply isn’t true. Again, SpaceX wasn’t the only Fixed Price space contractor. Orbital Sciences was too. Also, I remember pieces quotes from government hearings where SpaceX was criticized as not being up-to-the-task of handling human flight and that only a company with experience like Boeing would be able to deliver, and without a “sure thing” delivery contractor extending the concept of Fixed Price contracts from Commercial Cargo to Commercial Crew shouldn’t move forward unless a trusted company like Boeing was involved in Commercial Crew. This was also why Boeing was paid so much more than SpaceX for far fewer flights in the contract language.

Now if they can just notify you that some asshole is recording you on their cell phone instead of reading reddit.

If you’re out in public, always assume you’re on someone’s camera. That isn’t really new either.

before that it wasn’t always considered as big of a deal as you are referring to, idk pre 1970s or what.

We’re agreeing with the reality that it wasn’t considered a crime or a big deal in generations past. Where we have a huge gulf of disagreement is if this was a problem or not. I am flabbergasted about the strong defense you’re putting up to be able to drink and drive.

May I ask if you or your family have ever been negatively affected by a drunk driver before?

I too am really interested about all these random Best Friendship’s occurring in the middle of the Tyrrhenian sea.

I digress though, no one thinks people should be driving drunk, I am just making the point, that .12 for generations was the standard, in some states.

And the standard before .12 was “no standard” where driving drunk wasn’t even a crime.

The larger problem is why we are completely reliant on vehicles, that we cannot even enjoy more than two drinks on the town and legally go home. There must be better ways, fuck cars.

Taxi cabs have exist since before the invention of cars. They were horse drawn carriages. Today we even have Uber and Lyft that are easier that hailing a cab.

Completely unrelated to the article: I would encourage any woman of child bearing age to obtain a passport now when there is no rush. Using the slow process it takes about 6-10 weeks of waiting to get your passport after you apply. For a full passport that can be used in any country the cost is $130. If you only want to go to Canada and/or Mexico, you only need a passport card, which can be had for only $30. Its the same form to get either the book or the card, you would just check a different box.

Also unrelated: Abortion pills are easily available in both Mexico and Canada.

Their alleged offense: defending themselves after a police chief, not in uniform, physically assaulted students. The police assault has provoked mass outrage in the community and throughout the country.

This wasn’t ICE agents cracking down. It was the out-of-uniform city police chief himself physically choking a student.

90 day max cert life strikes again. This will only get more frequent in the future when 47 day max cert life goes into effect in 2029.

I know, right? Save the cheerleader, save the world! /s

Don’t forget the controversy around Leo Trapeze before he was exiled.

Carl Mark is like the dollar store version. Everyone remembers when Carl Mark and Fred Angles wrote the Kommunist Metafisto.

“Mom can we have Communism?”
“We have Communism at home.”

Communism at home: Carl Mark

I had to read it three times to realize “mow” was “Mao” (Zedong).

Also I think reading it that many times has caused me to have a stroke.

Growing up, our household had a giant roll of butcher paper. It was 2 ft (60cm) wide and about 1000 feet (300m) long roll. I have no idea why we had it, but as kids we were allowed to use as much as we wanted for whatever we wanted. It turned into a childhood of projects, games, costumes, banners, signs, crafts, wrappings, pranks, etc. Close to the beginning as kids, we’d asked for art supplies like markers, paint, pens, pencils, charcoal, etc to transform that boring cheap paper into different universes. We became creative because it was available.

Something about having an unlimited supply of something and infinite permissions was an unexpected freedom.

sublemmy (whatever that thing is called, cant recall)?

Just FYI Lemmy Community, hence /c/

There could have been a better name of the term chosen, but this is what it is.

Uh huh, hey, why don’t these job numbers reports ever talk about whether these new jobs are keeping up with the cost of living? Seems like it’d be important to discern how many jobs are paying minimum wage and how many are paying enough to actually afford to survive longer than the next 24 fucking hours.

You’d get closer to that answer with a different report. Probably a combination of the Occupation Finder data showing wage ranges and the Employment Projections data which shows employment increase in number of jobs or declines in each sector.

The BLS used to be a gold standard for fantastic data collection, analysis, and sharing. However, I am not putting much confidence behind any data coming out of the trump administration.

I mean, I expect a hockey team to be in its locker room. Did they actively invite Patel, or did Patel just show up uninvited. I think its the latter, right?

I work in the cloud computing space. The lack of a full featured end-to-end cloud computing provider is really one of the biggest things holding the EU back from IT independence. Its not enough for a provider to provide VM servers or Kubernetes on the compute side, its all the ancillary services such as Advanced Visibility, microservices, advanced routing and load balancing, Enterprise grade HA solutions on both compute and DB side etc.

A number of EU providers have part of this kind of service offering, but to be a replacement for Azure, AWS, GCP, or OCI, there needs to be a complete solution to enable rapid deployment that can grow to a global solution.

Nuclear was was always an apocalypse that might happen.

I’m not sure if you know the history of how close we came to nuclear war in October 1962. It was the first time in history the USA ever went to Defcon 2. We had 25 nuclear bombers in the air with the rest of them on 15 minute standby.

Hitler was bad, but he didn’t have anything like the arsenal and intelligence networks available to Trump. We have the consentration camps, and the death camps too, although those are outsourced in other countries.

As bad as trump is, has he murdered 13 million innocent people yet? That’s Hitler’s number of murdered innocent people.

We have been at worse points in history than we are right now.

The world is in a bad place right now, but it was even worse of when we are right at the edge of global nuclear war in 1962 during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Before that the world was on the verge of falling in the early 1940s to fascist rule of Hitler and the Emperor of Japan with most of Europe occupied and concentration camps exterminating thousands of innocent people a day.

As bad as it is today, we’ve had worse, and we made it through it to better times. It won’t come without effort, but humanity will get through this too.