In my opinion it could be solved by simply making it more attractive to have children, but it would require more equality and redistribution of wealth to cover the costs. There would still be billionaires, but the number of ultra-rich may be reduced.
Women wants careers and equal opportunities. That means they wait longer and longer before they get children because they want to make sure they have a career to go back to. That is the single most important problem that we need to solve.
1. Provide a decent parental leave (1 year minimum) with full pay.
2. Women often end up as the primary care giver who has to take care of the child when it is sick or attend parental meetings. This often hurts their career. We should incentivise men to take an equal part in raising a child, so that this is more accepted in work situations.
3. Provide free child care and health care. Many simply can't afford the additional financial burden of a child.
4. Provide free education including University. (see point 3)
5. Reduce the financial risk by creating a good safety net. If one or both of the parents are not able to cover their part, the government needs to provide enough support.
Simply put, the choice of having a child should not hurt families financially, or hurt their careers. Humans are "programmed" to want to reproduce, so if we remove the financial barriers
Yes, this will be expensive but it will be less expensive than a future without enough young people to take care of the old.
You are free to ask "Why should my money go to others", but then you don't get to complain when you are 90 years old and only get to shower once a month because they don't have enough people to help you.
Norway is close to providing all of what you describe and still seeing well below replacement fertility rates. It maybe be a start, and it produces a far more pleasant society, but it's not enough.
There are other concerns as well related to cost of living.
Even though we would like people to live outside the cities, cities attract a lot of potential parents. They end up in a situation where they have a long education and start their careers late and don't have the financial capability to get a decent family friendly apartment in the city. Many wait until it's almost too late, and having more than 1 or 2 is definitely not something most wants
The average age of first-time mothers is over 30 years old. A single child may be something the family can handle, but more than 1 or 2 forces the families to move outside the cities to be able to afford a house in addition to hurting the mother's career.
Tldr:
- Cost of living in the cities are too high
- If a second (or third) child forces them to move out of the city, many increasingly choose the cities
- Having more than one child after 30 will have a negative impact on the career as they simply can't work as many hours and has to spend long periods away from work
I think you can simplify that: Standards rise as living standards rise. People want more both for themselves and their children when they see that as realistic, and opting for fewer children is a way to make that happen.
Yes, I think that covers everything in a concise way.
If we want to go back to a sustainable birth rate, we need a wide range of actions. Some may require to reduce the financial risks, while others require encouraging cultural changes.
Reminds me of the anti virus software at work many years ago that did not allow me to download a password encoding library, because the filename contained the word "password"
I've also experienced automatic security reports that complain that the configuration file contains the word "password" (as in "database.password="). I had to argue with them that we did not actually store passwords in Git as they could clearly see, but that it was set using a environment variable by a secrets manager when actually running in a container. Next time we had a similar use case we would just give it a different name to avoid this complication
It's possible to connect repositories / organizations to an external SSO. At my work place I have to re-authenticate several times a day. Luckily it usually doesn't require me to login at my work account each time and just redirects back automatically, but it adds an extra layer of protection. If someone gained access to my Github session either physically or externally it would not be enough to access my work.
I have these layers of protection between the web page and the actual code.
1. Github password
2. Github MFA
3. SSO password
4. SSO MFA
If an attacker wants to be successful, they probably need to actually use my machine as I suspect that both Github and the auth solution at work checks ip-addresses and other things that they would also need to get hold of. In that case they probably have complete control of my machine anyway and can do what they want.
Another scenario is a large office. If a user leaves their desk to get a coffee, an attacker could walk up and get access. Of course, in that case they could also install key loggers, MTM software etc. so they will get access to anything they want.
One difference is that Slack would not work if it logged out automatically after 15 minutes of inactivity. They would lose most of their customers. The only realistic risk to the user from Slack's point of view is that when the user walks away without locking the computer, someone might read or write Slack messages.
Sensitive applications still lock after X minutes of inactivity even on desktop, because the impact of someone else using your computer carries too much risk. One example of this is password managers, where they sometimes require a password or a biometric to unlock after a short period of inactivity.
You'll see the same pattern in web applications. I haven't used the web version of Slack in a while, but I remember that it didn't force me to login that often.
I think one of the reasons why many choose to have a short session expiration time is that they either can't or don't dare to do a proper risk assessment and just does what their competition seems to do.
There may be technical reasons too. Web applications do have a higher risk of accidentally leaking passwords through low security and hostile actors. Reducing the TTL may not fix the issue, but it will at least reduce the window where an attacker can make use of a stolen token. It may not matter much if you have a dedicated attacker, but it at least adds some resistance.
Creating a secure application takes time (acceptance from business) and experience (junior developers) and many don't have either.
Women wants careers and equal opportunities. That means they wait longer and longer before they get children because they want to make sure they have a career to go back to. That is the single most important problem that we need to solve.
1. Provide a decent parental leave (1 year minimum) with full pay.
2. Women often end up as the primary care giver who has to take care of the child when it is sick or attend parental meetings. This often hurts their career. We should incentivise men to take an equal part in raising a child, so that this is more accepted in work situations.
3. Provide free child care and health care. Many simply can't afford the additional financial burden of a child.
4. Provide free education including University. (see point 3)
5. Reduce the financial risk by creating a good safety net. If one or both of the parents are not able to cover their part, the government needs to provide enough support.
Simply put, the choice of having a child should not hurt families financially, or hurt their careers. Humans are "programmed" to want to reproduce, so if we remove the financial barriers
Yes, this will be expensive but it will be less expensive than a future without enough young people to take care of the old.
You are free to ask "Why should my money go to others", but then you don't get to complain when you are 90 years old and only get to shower once a month because they don't have enough people to help you.