[vpribish]

You have to check out their incredible safety investigation videos on youtube. I don't know how well-organized or efficient they are but clearly their role needs to be played by someone - and as a taxpayer I appreciate that they are doing it in a way that educates and informs.

[andrewflnr]

They just put out an ad for themselves: https://youtu.be/2z7h5BOZ2Hk?si=n539-vOz-NhtDncT Pretty good value proposition.

[throw0101c]

> ?si=n539-vOz-NhtDncT

Meta: the si parameter is a form of tracking, as is pp. Considering trimming them from any copy-paste if you can.

[andrewflnr]

Woops, fair point. Here's the trimmed version: https://youtu.be/2z7h5BOZ2Hk

[jonahx]

Those videos are possibly my favorite thing on YouTube.

I can't think of another use of my tax dollars that I get as much direct pleasure from.

[Hawxy]

> I don't know how well-organized or efficient they are

They're 50 employees with an annual budget of $14.4 million. The cost/benefit ratio here is very good.

[hilbert42]

For that trivial amount this has to be anti-tech anti-science thinking at work.

What's this administration trying do, return the US to the Third World or the Dark Ages? Madness.

[immibis]

Well, yes, pretty much. It's an observed pattern among authoritarian states that actual facts are frequently in opposition to the authority, therefore, actual facts must be eliminated.

It's a silver lining in disguise, really. Such countries tend to collapse relatively quickly because it turns out facts are important for running a country - look at the USSR's fake food supply. Relatively quickly could still be a decade, though.

[FirmwareBurner]

China has been the exception that authoritarian states collapse quickly. It's what the western powers were banking on would happen after they had success with USSR. It didn't pan out the way they thought. Not even close.

[disgruntledphd2]

China is much more dispersed (because of it's size and some localisation/liberalisation) and they seem to understand at some level that reality exists and can't just be wished away.

It's an open question if they'll retain that with Xi now President for life.

[ethbr1]

Authoritarianism works... as long as leaders are effective.

The reason democracy historically wins out in the long run is not because it always picks better leaders, but because it picks fewer really bad ones. And checks/balances those it does.

For all his faults as a leader, Xi has also come down hard on actual corruption and malfeasance.

Imagine Trump in charge of China.

[FirmwareBurner]

> they seem to understand at some level that reality exists and can't just be wished away.

US and EU seem to have forgotten that, at least when you look at the decisions of their leadership.

[throw0101c]

> China has been the exception that authoritarian states collapse quickly.

China has been centralized / autocratic for centuries (if not millennia), and the current system is probably not that different than the Emperor's throne.

[hilbert42]

"China has been the exception that authoritarian states collapse quickly."

Why? Because if you check the CVs of most of Politburo members they have degrees in science and engineering. QED!

[FirmwareBurner]

And what's stopping the American people from voting smart people with engineering degrees to power instead of lying loud mouth conmen?

Maybe because modern American mainstream culture has people worshiping the "clever" conman who got rich quick by gaming the system and scamming others, as opposed to hard working nerd who put in the long time and effort for an honest enrichment.

Democratic societies get the leaders they deserve as they are a mirror of the people themselves.

[hilbert42]

As I replied to boringg, I should have been more specific. I was referring to China nowadays—since Mao's death and Deng Xiaoping's economic reforms.

See section Change from Charismatic Revolutionaries to Technocrats especially bullet points four and five in this link on Chinese leadership: https://factsanddetails.com/china/cat8/4sub1/item2247.html.

[boringg]

Some do many don’t collapse. How long were Mao, Saddam, Stalin in power? Could pull a longer list…

[hilbert42]

I should have been more specific but I thought it obvious. I was referring to China nowadays, specifically the time since Mao Zedong's death in 1976 and Deng Xiaoping's economic reforms which he instigated shorthly thereafter.

I suggest you read this link about Chinese leaders/leadership, especially the section headed Change from Charismatic Revolutionaries to Technocrats especially paragraph/bullet points four and five:

https://factsanddetails.com/china/cat8/4sub1/item2247.html

[dathinab]

what I would like to say:

yes,

specifically some modern form of feudalism I guess

where the new nobles (as in large companies because in US companies are people) can mostly do whatever they want and the rest of the population is struggling enough to just "get by" to find time to change anything

but given that Trump put since deniers and anti-vaccers into power it's probably a much more "dump" reason