Case 1: information known is incomplete, but sufficient.
Case 2: information known is complete, and sufficient.
Case 3: see case 1.
Yes, those cases are easy to handle, even on the spectrum.
Hard cases are where information is insufficient, and consequences of the decision are serious.
Neurotypicals (& ADDers) facing genuinely insufficient information often prefer a decision regardless - instead of admitting they cannot yet make a sound one. They prioritise impatience over correctness; short-term over long-term.
That bias is a factor in much social, environmental, and economic harm.
Fair point. Alphabet may even have decided it was a cost-effective way to generate publicity for Google Earth, which has been out of the headlines for a decade or more.
The article says, "unverified apps will only be easily installable in the sanctioned countries where verification doesn’t exist."
So even if you used a VPN to trick Google into thinking you live in a sanctioned country, you wouldn't be able to distribute apps to those countries without breaking sanctions.
it'd be like saying we should disarm Ukraine, 'cause then Russia doesn't have a reason to invade them
Putin's All-Russia People's Front's policies toward Ukraine have many similarities to Netanyahu's Likud party's policies toward Gaza. Both sets of policies are tragic, causing many innocent people's deaths.
Nevertheless, Ukraine and Gaza are different enough for one to reasonably reach different conclusions about how best peace can be achieved in each place:
Ukraine's weapons are protecting Ukraine against Russian attacks and invasion attempts. Therefore, it is in Ukraine's interests to have them. Hamas's weapons are not protecting Gaza against Israeli attacks or invasion. There is no obvious benefit from Hamas having them.
Servant of the People, and Ukraine, do recognise Russia, and have not seriously proposed eliminating it. Hamas does not officially recognise Israel, and has seriously proposed eliminating it.
Argentina, Australia, Canada, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Honduras, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, Paraguay, Philippines, Switzerland, Trinidad and Tobago, the UK, the USA, the EU, and the Organization of American States, all designate Hamas a terrorist organisation. This reduces the aid Gaza receives. They seem unlikely to reverse the designation unless Hamas disarms. None of them designate Servant of the People, or Ukraine, a terrorist organisation.
Those points lead me to believe Hamas should disarm.
I also believe countries giving aid to Israel should make it formally contingent on Israel withdrawing from Gaza and the West Bank, to pre-1967 borders, and recognising Palestinian statehood. However, it looks like the US is going to stop aid to Israel regardless.
Trust isn't really the point. Everyone knows Israel and Hamas don't trust each other. I'm more concerned with whether the violent conflict can be reduced, and a stable peace achieved.
Are Hamas's arms doing Gaza any favours? Not that I can see.
AFAICT, if Hamas disarmed:
Israel's only(?) excuse for mass military action in Gaza would disappear.
International support (already shaky) for Israeli military presence in Gaza would decrease.
One or more of Australia, Canada, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Honduras, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, Paraguay, Trinidad and Tobago, the United Kingdom, the United States, or the European Union might end their designation of Hamas as a terrorist organisation, which could in turn increase the aid and other international support available to Gaza.
Your list of cases can be paraphrased thus:
Yes, those cases are easy to handle, even on the spectrum.
Hard cases are where information is insufficient, and consequences of the decision are serious.
Neurotypicals (& ADDers) facing genuinely insufficient information often prefer a decision regardless - instead of admitting they cannot yet make a sound one. They prioritise impatience over correctness; short-term over long-term.
That bias is a factor in much social, environmental, and economic harm.