Suburbs are highly subsidized.
The quality of life only seems to outcompete cities because the quality of life in cities is lowered by the car centric culture.
If you want to know how good the QoL in a city can be, you need to visit a European city that is not car centric.
Cars are generally not a mode of transport that makes sense in a city. There are some exceptions, but the vast majority of transportation in a city should be by foot, bicycle or public transport.
That is the case, but banning it just for a few weeks will change that without much disruption.
Most people are aware that Signal exist and switch the moment WhatsApp stops working.
That was unexpected and unannounced. Saying "WhatsApp will go offline from the 1st of next month" would be very different.
Especially because WhatsApp _uses phone numbers as identifiers_. Switching to Signal or Telegram, which also use phone numbers, would be completely feasible: recreating the same groups would be the biggest annoyance, but you have all your contacts as soon as they install the app.
People will of course be very bothered by losing their chat histories (can you decrypt the backups it creates in Google Drive?), but it won't be an actual show-stopper. And it will teach a valuable lesson on relying on cloud.
… how disconnected from reality must you be to think this is an okay thing to impose on hundreds of millions of people who rely on a specific communication channel to talk to their loved ones? "Oh they'll figure it out and install another app" -- wtf?
I agree it's not great that this is all controlled by Meta but this is what it is now. It will take a long time, or some heavy nationalization, to fix the situation. This mentality of "let's break it and people will figure their shit out" is i.n.s.a.n.e.. You know that "move fast and break things" is a BAD thing when you're affecting the lives of so many, right?
At what point did I say that people would have to figure it out on their own?
For the sake of this argument, assume the premises that (a) Meta, a foreign corporation, controlling the private conversation of hundreds of millions of citizens is not simply "not great" but unacceptable, and (b) that it is necessary to put WhatsApp permanently offline (as opposed to making it somehow safer).
Steps to a post-WA transition:
(1) Publicly gather a list of messaging services that can be verified to satisfy the requirement to act as WA replacements:
- E2E encryption
- Interoperable under the Digital Services Act (critical)
- Phone number-based IDs
- Fully hosted in the EU and controlled by European companies
- Sufficient operational resources to serve > X number of users
(2) Mass send the message to all WA users "Due to new European privacy rules, WhatsApp will shut down on ${today + X months}. You will be able to continue talking with all your contacts through any of the following apps: [ list apps sorted by capacity, click to install ]. You will need to recreate any groups of which you are currently the admin.". Plaster the same message everywhere, send SMSs, etc.
Compared to switching to a whole new currency, or moving a shitload of bureaucracy fully online during Covid, this seems a very reasonable task for a European government.
That is not intentional in case of GP [0]. But this disrespectful perspective towards other animals is rooted within us culturally. As example some religions: there is heaven free from other animals, because they are not worth it.
[0] Which was probably just take against nihilism that sometimes occurs in current AI discourse.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/gdp-per-capita-worldbank?...