A brief overview of various things from magazines not in any way related to the blockchain.
Growing consumerism in China is going to profoundly affect the global economy, reshaping the landscape of brands and stuff, and one of the leading economists and philosophers have studied this phenomenon, observing that it has its roots in a sentiment of "collective consumption" from China's communist past. Plus Chinese government and the Communist party sees growing consumption as a necessary condition for further China's development and stuff. So it's going to shape reality and stuff.
Something about the big collider and problems related to maintaining the security of the system that mostly uses Linux and some people are concerned about potential vulnerabilities and stuff. Although, all the information produced by the collider is publicly available on some site for anybody who can figure out, what to do with it.
Singapore is running a subsidized housing program for young people, especially if they are married and not gay. Which is kinda cool, but it raises concerns among those, who think that it's kinda paternalistic and encourages people to stick to some traditional ways of life, preserving consistently among generations, helping parents and stuff. But the housing thingy is kinda cool and really cheap. Although, for completely broke there is no solution, and there are some troubles with pension plans and stuff. Plus it's kinda unclear about the ownership of those apartments, like, it's a lifelong lease or something.
A popular philosopher argues that religion was an essential and important thing for the development of civilization and the formation of our human values and the way of life, especially regarding our sense of community and stuff. Like we don't need to take seriously whatever religion says about invisible beings and angels and things like that and focus instead on moral values, principles that contributed to the development of our societies and stuff.
There is a problem that presently we have very little time, and we work a lot, so some economists and sociologists took a look into this paradox. Because it might have been assumed that with automation, and technological gizmos and progress, we should've been able to work less, but it doesn't happen, which is kinda strange. So they came up with the conclusion that the problem is that since we got used to evaluating time in terms of how much money it can bring, we prefer to work more, and thus have less time for leisure. And even during leisure, we are concerned whether it's worth it, considering that the same amount of time spent working could bring more money. So this is a problem. Plus it's hard to get a job without an education, and overall market dynamics pressures people to work more and stuff.
Also, there's a problem of big corporations disrupting the lifestyle and well-being of poor rural communities in poor countries like Zimbabwe, taking over their land. So those people cannot sustain themselves anymore and are doomed to slide into depths of poverty. The problem is that there is no way to keep those corporations accountable because those are some shady companies, not related to any big brands, international investors, and stuff. So international organizations like UN and others who usually try to get involved in such issues and fix things cannot do anything. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that those firms collude with corrupt governments that take share in their profits. (or they are directly related to companies' management or whatever) Plus the chieftains of those rural agricultural communities, who are supposed to protect their interests, often play along with big corps instead and rip off their compatriots. Also, there is no solid legal basis, regarding land ownership in Africa and other troubles.
There was a makeshift camp of refugees near Calais in France (until it was dismantled), which helped immigrants to survive through cooperation and mutual support, and to move further to the UK and Sweden. And also it represented a unique mix and alloy of cultures, traditions, and languages, and overall it was a cultural hub (and there are some poetic descriptions and stuff), and it wasn't cool that it was destroyed because it somewhat trampled the right of people to move around freely and stuff. In any case, it was a controversial place without any clear rules, riddled with crime, poverty, social unrest, so it disappeared, and it was kinda inevitable.
There is a palpable tension between mainland China and Taiwan, stretching to past historical events that caused this split. The situation is that both parties each consider themselves a "true China" and don't see each other as legitimate states. So it comes down to some precarious balance, subtle rhetoric and the growing risk of escalation of this controversy into a conflict, especially considering the volatile political situation in the world. China keeps enough artillery near the border with Taiwan to quickly wipe out whatever military forces the island has. Plus there is growing dislike between mainland Chinese and Taiwanese and other scary shit. The only problem, it would be hard to organize full-scale invasion because it's an island and stuff. Also, if it won't be quick, other countries can get into the fray, and it'll become complicated. But the Communist party considers unification and stuff, so it's supposed to be kinda scary.
