Better yet, comply and get your privacy/data management chops together so that you're comfortably able to navigate a world where this type of legislation is likely to become more and more common. Not to mention the fact that there's an increase in interest/awareness about these matters amongst the general public.
It depends. When Canada's anti-spam law was introduced in 2014, the intent was to allow a private right of action effective July 1, 2017. This would theoretically mean US/foreign companies could be dragged into class-action lawsuits in Canada. This private right of action was delayed and is currently under review, but nevertheless anyone marketing to Canadians is subject to CASL laws, regardless of where their business is located. We'll see what happens, but if/when the private right of action is implemented it could potentially be a big deal.
IANAL but I can imagine a similar situation happening with GDPR.
I have a sneaking suspicion that in the not-too-distant future there will be a very significant cultural backlash against all of this noise, all of this hyper-connectedness.
My prediction would be gradually the hyper connectedness becomes the norm while the last generations who remember “quiet” die. Of course there would likely always be small fractions of the population who look to the past and practice mindfulness, almost like how people re-enact the civil war battles. But I would guess largely highly saturated connectedness becomes who we are, in spite of a vocal minority who long for a different way of living.
Can't speak for the OP, but on my part, it's less thinking, and more a feeling. The unthinking and uncritical wonder is gone. We're looking at all things technological with a more and more critical eye. More and more people are publicly speaking out about the idea that social media and hyperconnectivity are actively harming us.
It feels different than most old ideas that I've seen die before. Yes, of course there's always an inevitable "good old times" moment, but this one... There's something lurking behind it. It's not just nostalgia, it has the roots of a fight seeded in it.
We'll see. Maybe I'm now just old enough that this time, it feels different. But it does not feel like what happened to VHS, or the CD, or land lines, or any number of things that we've declared outdated in the last few decades.
Of course this depends. There's no guarantee people growing up in a hyper-connected world will fully embrace every aspect. It only takes a festering distaste in enough individuals plus a unifying voice to trigger a backlash.
> Disconnect a country from the Internet (or filter the traffic) and you're forking the chain.
Is this necessarily true? Forgive my ignorance but if we're talking Bitcoin, wouldn't the rest of the remaining miners around the world be able to account for this? And would the situation be meaningfully different in the country in question were China (or another of similar size/mining power)?
I think you're replying to the wrong comment but to try and answer your question if a region is completely isolated from the rest of the bitcoin network one of two things can happen:
- If the region doesn't have a significant hash power (the case in most places in the world really) then the block rate will effectively go to zero, meaning that bitcoin will effectively "pause" here and be unusable until fresh blocks can be retrieved from the outside and new transactions broadcasted to the external miners.
- If the region has enough hash power to mine new blocks regularly the region will fork its chain. If it has more than 50% of the global hash rate this new chain will be the "real" one and will take over as soon as it's reunited with the rest of the network (invalidating the "outside" blockchain and all its transactions since the fork). If it has less than 50% hashrate then the opposite happens, as soon as the longer outside chain is received it'll invalidate the fork.
In both these situations bitcoin is effectively unusable in the minority fork since you know for a fact that the chain will be erased as soon as the network is reunited.
Frankly I'd be surprised if she had never been harassed in some way. I know a grand total of zero women a decade into their careers who have literally never experienced some kind of harassment. Without being able to speak for her, I can surmise that maybe she just doesn't feel it needs to define her.
Of course every survey may be flawed or mistaken, and we need to read carefully how they define harassment, etc. But based on that survey and others, and my own anecdotal experiences, I don't think we should be surprised when a woman says she never experienced sexual harassment.
This is a large industry, with lots of different cultures and experiences.
> Frankly I'd be surprised if she had never been harassed in some way.
1. She grew up in Denmark
2. She works in the UK
From what I've heard, both are far more progressive and egalitarian than the US. If the people you know are based in the US, that could be the distinction.
That was my take on it too. It's also why I think her post missed the mark for me; she simply doesn't have experience with what she's writing about, because she's living a different society that doesn't experience the problem on the same scale, so her proposed solutions don't carry much weight to workers in Silicon Valley.
Depends how you define results. As a "woman in tech," I don't actively participate in these movements that much, but I certainly benefit from the extra visibility they give to women who are succeeding in this industry. I often think one of the biggest hurdles is finding relatable role models that can serve as a template for your own success and career path. When I first started out, there were a couple of obvious examples, but it was hard for me to picture what a female 'leader' should look like, aside from the old stereotype of a ball-busting corporate woman who acts like a man. That has meaningfully changed in the last few years. I now know -- and see -- a lot more examples of women who I can relate to, who are finding lots of success in this field. I realize this is anecdotal but in terms of my own career development, it feels significant. I tend to think it will benefit other women as well, and perhaps serve to normalize the idea of women succeeding in what was traditionally a male-dominated field, thereby attracting more young women to the field.
That said, I definitely recoil at the idea of being selected for any role or being treated differently simply because I'm female, since I would put my own abilities up against my male peers without hesitation. Special treatment feels condescending.
I didn't interpret that comment as a suggestion that you have an interest in suppressing women and minorities. But you might have a subconscious interest in maintaining your own worldview, wherein you're part of a group of people that 'gets' or 'finds value in' tech, and others aren't.
The subconscious forces that shape the way people think about these issues are the most pernicious.
I'm all for flexible work arrangements for people, no matter what their gender. But I have to say I disagree with you. Many roles are not necessarily customer facing but require a lot of interaction with a team. In the startup world the pace at which you have to operate is relentless, and in many roles it's critical that numerous people work together on a variety of projects. Yes, you can dial someone in. You can try to schedule meetings around their particular schedule. But ultimately it is SO much easier to get things done if you're all in the same place (the office) for relatively similar core hours day-in and day-out. Ideas arise out of conversations. People end up becoming privvy to information and conversations that are perhaps only tangentially related to their role. Or they end up joining new projects rather informally and organically. Which is exactly what often leads to (and prepares you for) more senior roles.
There are trade-offs that have to be made to work remotely or to have less face-to-face interaction with your teammates than others. In many cases these negatively impact your ability to move up, to succeed or to function well with a team. This is of course not true for every role or company, but it's true for many.
