Skip to navigationSkip to content
Chris Forman

Chris Forman

Dr
5 Following5 Followers
  • If one of my neighbours came onto my property, and all my neighbours, and went through all our garbage cans everyday to get information about everyone on my street and sold it to some kind of information broker, despite having been told not to on numerous occasions you wouldn't think twice about having that guy thrown into prison. That's where these corporate thugs should go if they don't respect people's online privacy.

    We spend a lot of money to access content and acquire technology to help do

    If one of my neighbours came onto my property, and all my neighbours, and went through all our garbage cans everyday to get information about everyone on my street and sold it to some kind of information broker, despite having been told not to on numerous occasions you wouldn't think twice about having that guy thrown into prison. That's where these corporate thugs should go if they don't respect people's online privacy.

    We spend a lot of money to access content and acquire technology to help do that. That money should be enough to provide us with those services. The residual footprint of that information acquisition - the digital equivalent of store receipts or packaging in the trash can - should not be shared to the highest bidder without explicit, full and transparent consent.

    If all my neighbours came together and aggregated our data, selling it for ourselves - that would different! Then we might pick one guy to do the leg work and pay him ourselves.

    Sometimes money isn't the answer. I think the threat of prison or somehow being barred from board level positions would be more compelling.

    Maybe something like a corporate ethics score like a credit rating. Computed by aggregating an executive board's Individual score and publishing that on an index alongside share value.

  • I like the idea of a target income distribution for a population of N people.

    If it's a normal distribution then the variation in people's income is random - not systematic! It's systematic unfairness that we want tax to eliminate. A free world with no built-in unfairness to any one.

    If its normally distributed about some mean m then m*N is GDP. You want global GDP to be static and within the bounds that earth can support. (I'm thinking about whole world here - not just US). If someone starts to

    I like the idea of a target income distribution for a population of N people.

    If it's a normal distribution then the variation in people's income is random - not systematic! It's systematic unfairness that we want tax to eliminate. A free world with no built-in unfairness to any one.

    If its normally distributed about some mean m then m*N is GDP. You want global GDP to be static and within the bounds that earth can support. (I'm thinking about whole world here - not just US). If someone starts to earn too much more than their fair share you gradually, smoothly, increase tax to make it harder, and harder to get mega wealthy.

    I guess m should be around $150K and it should be as high as possible. You want the standard deviation to be about $50K so 68% of people earn between $100 and $200k, 94% between 50 and 250, and only .1% below 25k or above 300k. Might be better if it's slightly skewed. But you want to limit skewness. Ideally kurtosis is very low so that you don't have very heavy tails. No mega rich. No mega poor.

    This way there's still alot of incentive to get from 50k to 300k income but everyone is working for themselves. Not to make some rich bugger richer. You get a nice predictable tax revenue evenly and fairly shared.

    If the income distribution starts to skew you know that taxes aren't being spent fairly.

    Seems simple enough to me.

  • Could US balance trade deficit by reducing its imports (ie simply purchasing way less pointless junk from china). Might be preferable to china buying $trillion of junk from an ecological destructio. Pov.Just saying.

  • Are these FRBs unique to this one galaxy? Or are they found in all galaxies? Can't help thinking there's a mundane explanation.

  • If you unpack people's reasons for voting to leave - i mean really get to the bottom of why they wanted to leave - I think we will find that staying in the EU would better address their underlying concerns. I think a small group of people hijacked the Brexit referendum and took advantage of an ill informed and angry electorate to further their own agenda which is little more than a deliberate disruption in the status quo. Many people who voted leave did so as a kind of poke in the eye to the establishment

    If you unpack people's reasons for voting to leave - i mean really get to the bottom of why they wanted to leave - I think we will find that staying in the EU would better address their underlying concerns. I think a small group of people hijacked the Brexit referendum and took advantage of an ill informed and angry electorate to further their own agenda which is little more than a deliberate disruption in the status quo. Many people who voted leave did so as a kind of poke in the eye to the establishment thinking their vote would not matter. Many people who voted have now died. Many people who couldn't vote at the time are now able to vote. The situation has changed. Some people say we should honour the referendum because a vote is a vote and it's democracy in action; to those people I say democracy and voting are not synonymous- votes are not necessarily democratic and democracy is more than just having the ability to vote. The quality of the process of deliberation prior to a referendum is critical for a vote to be democratic. I think a second referendum with a much higher quality deliberation would be far more democratic than the last referendum and would help unpack voters underlying reasons in the light of all the new information that is available. It's a wise thing to do - if only to confirm that we still wish to leave.

  • I would rather Walmart spent its billions by

    1) installing a refill system for detergents/consumables thus eliminating packaging

    2) paid its people properly

    3) sponsored research into converting to a circular economy.

    I think these policies would result in money better spent than by installing heart monitors to try to make customers spend more - a method that is unlikely to yield results.

    Although I'm sure such biometric data can be sold to 3rd parties.

    I would switch super market allegiance

    I would rather Walmart spent its billions by

    1) installing a refill system for detergents/consumables thus eliminating packaging

    2) paid its people properly

    3) sponsored research into converting to a circular economy.

    I think these policies would result in money better spent than by installing heart monitors to try to make customers spend more - a method that is unlikely to yield results.

    Although I'm sure such biometric data can be sold to 3rd parties.

    I would switch super market allegiance in a heartbeat to any store that arranged for it so I never had to buy a plastic container for shampoo, soap, toothpaste, detergent, fruit juice, milk, water, or cleaning products ever again.

  • Can I get a computer or a house this way? A dinner? How much is my data worth? Guess this will vary according to the individual. Access to find out what I'm worth is worth more than a cup of coffee.

    But unis are a place for learning. I'd like to see a change in emphasis away from "unis are where you go to train for a job".

    Acquisition of knowledge and ability to think is about what it means to be human. People seem to have forgotten that kindness to our planet and our future generations is more

    Can I get a computer or a house this way? A dinner? How much is my data worth? Guess this will vary according to the individual. Access to find out what I'm worth is worth more than a cup of coffee.

    But unis are a place for learning. I'd like to see a change in emphasis away from "unis are where you go to train for a job".

    Acquisition of knowledge and ability to think is about what it means to be human. People seem to have forgotten that kindness to our planet and our future generations is more important than corporate accessibility to potential employees.

    =Give the students free coffee.

  • I would love to see a general change in emphasis in society from "what is your job/career?" to "how do you contribute?". Companies could offer mandatory sabbaticals of one year every five so all employees can go and do something. Travel. Write a book. Run for office. Be a parent. Start a band. All these things will have an impact on the individual that will make them better employees. Could be a cool way of managing job sharing due to redundancy caused by increasing automation. If all workers were

    I would love to see a general change in emphasis in society from "what is your job/career?" to "how do you contribute?". Companies could offer mandatory sabbaticals of one year every five so all employees can go and do something. Travel. Write a book. Run for office. Be a parent. Start a band. All these things will have an impact on the individual that will make them better employees. Could be a cool way of managing job sharing due to redundancy caused by increasing automation. If all workers were paid partially in shares then their shares could give them dividends to help them get by on reduced pay during sabbatical. Add universal income to the mix and suddenly these policies massively transform quality of life. Allowing us time to *live* and time to reflect on our on-going priorities.

Want more conversations like this?

Join the Quartz community for all the intelligence, without the noise.

App Store BadgeGoogle Play Badge
Leaderboard Screenshot

A community of leaders, subject matter experts, and curious minds bringing nuance back to how we talk about the news.

Editors' Picks Screenshot

No content overload: our editors will curate the most notable and discussion-worthy pieces for you every day.

Share Screenshot

Don’t just read the story, tell it: contribute your ideas and experience to the dialogue.