Or at least, that's the logical consequence of that line of reasoning. If that's incorrect, where's the error in the reasoning?

The system there is entirely hierarchical. Think organized Mafia as seen in movies, but but much wider both vertically and horizontally.

In that system, as an individual, you have only two path in life: poverty no matter your educational level and talent, or having a patron within the corrupt hierarchy.

If you get a patron, your life is going to be good as long as you remain in his good graces, and he remains on the good grades of his patron, and so on, all the way up to Putin. If any link in the chain above you breaks, you're back to poverty. So you now have a whole set of duties toward your entire "clan", starting with your patron and going all the way up.

There's no justice or fairness anywhere in this system, only loyalty, and the ocasional disloyalty disputes as the upper layers fight for domination.

And there's no private property either. All property is Putin's, who grants access to slices of it to his immediate underlings, who in turn grant access to theirs, and so on, until you too get yours. That grant can be revoked at any time, for any reason whatsoever.

Compared to that, corruption in normal countries is extremely simple, generally having one layer or two, not being so comprehensive that it encompasses the whole of society, and not structured in such a way that your life depends on it, to the point that in most countries you can rise and prosper in society without taking part in corruption, even if it's harder to do so.

In Russia and its satellites this simply isn't the case.

Mega corps have access to guaranteed bailout by governments as they're considered National Security concern, plus massive lobbying departments to buy all the laws they need to favor themselves over most potential competitors both external and internal, plus massive legal departments with experts at twisting the laws they didn't manage to buy yet into meaning whatever they want them to mean.

And after all that socialism-for-the-rich, any remaining risk is transferred directly to their employees in the form of lay offs, coupled with non-compete clauses that forbid the most competent, for months to years, from working at their core area of expertize, plus arbitration clauses that forbid them from seeking relief at the actual courts. Clauses that are enforced by the courts due to the aforementioned lobbying and purchased laws.

Are gated free speech zones a thing, and do Americans obey that? If no, what are the news talking about when they show those? If yes, why do Americans submit to this?

And is carrying guns into protests allowed? If not, why aren't all gun carriers arrested on the spot? If yes, how does it make sense to allow them, but not fireworks, and how are fireworks more dangerous than loaded guns, and worthy of jailing, prosecution and imprisonment, while guns aren't?

This sounds to me _exactly_ as weird as when I watch on TV those little gated "free speech zones" American cities have been implementing and, even worse, protesters obediently limiting their protest to within he gated area, "conveniently" placed several blocks away from where the protest would be effective.

Weird. Very, very weird.

As for explosives, the defendants say it was fireworks. Carrying fireworks at protests is common.

That's what prevents most people on those countries from having a dumb phone, and forces even the most illiterate of 90yo great-grandmothers to learn how to navigate around Android or iOS, all the while placing uncountable many calls to their great-grandchildren because they opened up some random app by accident and don't remember how to get back to the only thing that matters: WhatsApp (talking from experience here).

A WhatsApp-capable quasi-dumb-phone would be a godsend for such places, provided it's cheap enough. At $500 this one definitely isn't, not when an ultra-cheap Android smartphone capable of running WhatsApp costs $90. But if this one sells well, cheaper ones may become viable down the line due to economies of scale. I surely hope that happens.

You also need society to have local cultures, as well as the culture at large, that actively oppose such behavior as immoral and/or shameful, with enforcement by peers. This I say based on two well-proven models, the sociological typology of societies as guilt, shame, or fear-based, and the psychological model of the six stages (level of complexity) of moral reasoning, that shows that up to 85% of the adult population worldwide derive their values from group-affiliation.

Atop that, individuals themselves need hope in the future, meaning the perspective of improving upon the baseline that those pre-requisites provide, since a baseline is emotionally neutral. The perspective of remaining at exactly that same baseline year after year after decade isn't sufficient.

With all of the above provided, petty crime is minimized to the point only people with severe personality disorders commit them. There's no way to fix this, but it becomes so low we're now talking of Japan levels of per-capita crimes, if not less.

Their main advantage is providing access to all e-reading apps available on the Google Play Store, including Amazon's own Kindle app, as well as sideloaded ones such as KOReader.

On the downside, the battery life on those isn't as good as that of dedicated Kindles, Kobos, or other lightweight e-readers, but they still hold a charge for four or five days if one turns off their antennas, which is plenty of time to recharge them.

As for the ebooks themselves, I switched to purchasing from Kobo and other ebook stores. Some sell DRM-less ePubs, which is nice, while those that come with DRM can be easily liberated. And for the occasional Kindle-exclusive that is struck with (temporarily) unbreakable DRM, the Kindle app, although annoying, works well enough.

I also checked Google Trends for the last 3 months, comparing LibreOffice vs OpenOffice. The first is searched on average 4.7 times more than the latter, which tracks with weekly download numbers.

From those numbers, I'd say it's pretty clear the name "LibreOffice" won quite decisively over "OpenOffice". OpenOffice is still used a lot, but nowhere close to LibreOffice, especially when we add Linux distributions counts.

Too bad most everyone is lost in the artificially engineered "culture war" to notice they have a common enemy, one who benefits from the proles fighting each other rather than uniting against them.

There'd be a shortage of buses at first, but I also suppose it'd relatively easy to adapt current North American car manufacturing plants to start manufacturing buses.

But that's just an uninformed guess. Am I too much off base in this?