Category Archives: Future of Education

What does Traditional Linguistics inform to Data Science and Policy?

Society chose to trust social media. The problem, over a decade after its mass adoption and with no need to list the transformations in the sector — from within the industry and outside, according to public perception — seems to be that we never really understood media or social movements. Maybe we didn’t like those. You’ll hear politicians talk about the media like some inherently corrupt system of rewards and distribution of misinformation. What’s less spoken about is the origin of the word, something that traditional Linguistics helps explain, as well as a multitude of other debates over which common people and powerful corporations have shown intense interest with a comparable set of intentions.

Nobody wants to known or be schooled about the printing press, but at the same time, we live by the sanctimonious and spread ideas that are known to date from thousands of years ago. The Greeks believed there was divine inspiration for producing art, and that had connections with power. Philosophy, on the other hand, benefited all of society and still doesn’t have the same kind of attention. We’re supposed to know what a platonic relationship is, but it seems we’re more interested in the apocalypse. As a reader and writer, I don’t exactly place myself in a neutral point. It is a duty I have to say that we must not dream of a better society without fighting for it, and sometimes lose so often that we’d rather keep things as they are. I just think there’s a difference, which is very clear, between attacking and defending. The powerful would love to see their challenges turned into mythologies, epic battles, a showcase of weaponry. The powerless seek to understand what is and why. Their challenge, very frequently, is to stay alive to tell the story; but there’s no time for a story, because real life has more objective principles, not the making of a hero. And so the rest of us seek for the outstanding and the pitiful, the wonderful and the repulsive. What drives this is Ethics, which in turn is what drives Justice. And the laws are made to preserve this beautiful concept, with little to no attention to its logical opposite: for everything that’s legal, there’s something illegal; from everything that’s just, there’s something unjust.

Society is organized by laws, rules, norms, culture and habit. The latter could be associated with the smallest things we don’t think about: “what made me click on that link?” From that alone, we can’t establish relationships between all other listed elements. Data analysis claims to be able to. Clicking on a link has no grand merit, but if you’re the one who gets clicks, you’ll get a few grand. How that mechanism operates is what everyone needs to be aware of, and it seems like a challenge that, again, interests many groups of people. Now, in terms of which side you’re on when investing your time in deciding what’s legitimate and what is not; what’s authentic and what is not; what’s true and what is not, observe the shades. Morphology is the recognition of patterns. So is data science. There’s a clear difference between “legitimate” and “legal”. I could steal someone’s identity, claim to have the documents that are indeed legitimate, and if nobody spotted me, I’d be right; but that’s illegal. And it seems like identity is a concept we’re struggling with, in a world where appearances matter more than most things we can recognize in our environment.

Corrupt and abrupt are associated by their morphology, but different in their syntax and their meaning: one can be a process; the other can be an event. Both are precisely associations, but only one of them can be a verb. To corrupt is to disturb as a mode of turning the aspect of something. This could be a process and an event. An illegal action, not illegal activity, could turn someone corrupt. Abruptly? It depends. It also depends of your involvement, which turns to social elements that the media will surely explore. But how did social media make its ways into our subconscious? Was it in a sudden manner? Or was it in a complex arrangement of situations that entangled opportunity, ambition, ego, motives, paybacks and a desire for creating a mechanism of power? Nobody’s judging: many of us have used the power of social media. But how has social media used us — and deprived us of our power? Maybe another area of traditional Linguistics might explain: Phonology. In practice, an alveolar, voiced fricative can turn what’s “just” into “dust”, but in theory, it’s the other way around. Sometimes it’s plosive, others not, depending on the language. But language has its intricacies, and so does its context, so adequately tied to identity.

In a context where data science informs us that the tendency is for hikes in interactions to be observed, it might be useful to remember Martha’s Vineyard’s lesson: quality and quantity are not easily measured or separated. Context, however, a focus of Discourse Analysis (and we won’t have the time to address Linguistics as it is used today, by artificial inteligence and programming tools, with the “legitimate” cause of preserving interaction quality), informs that this location has been on the news for being a destination of immigrants in the United States of America. Just sent there. Like the immigrants of Ukraine found Poland, or the South American continent found its way in between Portuguese and Spanish: so many similarities, but quite a few differences. For an illegal alien working at a restaurant, maybe “muy guapo” or “hermosa” would sound different than “hot”, in case they exchanged messages with someone on social media; and while Portuguese speakers might hear gender opposing “gostosa” or “gostoso”, their lives would still be connected to the restaurant (and you’re smart enough to notice who’s to lose), not a home they own, sometimes counting with protection. But you see, this protection was granted because if laws, without a capital letter, hadn’t been passed to ensure the citizen (not the illegal alien) had the right to protect him or herself, some would call this protection a “regression”; they would say it’s “legitimate”; others would call it “illegal”. What traditional Linguistics has to offer is not what tradition has always presented us. We have to reimagine language. We have to look at communication in a movement of desire — desire to communicate, but much more than that. At the same time, we have to separate desire from intention, and those from action. So far, we’ve been walking towards the opposite direction, because of how “modern” Applied Linguistics can be. We talk to the wind, but they want a gag rule. Context will tell you: the wind will be stored somewhere, and there will be a storm, eventually.

The “woke” agenda: our King is MLK

In a linguistic aberration not often talked about from a linguist’s perspective, the internet (with prevalence of first-language speakers to legitimately set new rules) started using a term to describe those who are very much aware of things — so aware that it feels like everybody else is just sleeping, and they don’t seem to catch up. In another interpretation, they see reality and they fight their daily struggles; others dream and often believe stories about their futures that are not true at all, holding onto the slightest chance of an eyeball meeting their digital existence or even to be spotted on the street and not just called pretty or handsome (instead of “babe”), but also offered a contract job. These are the “woke” people. But they’re supposed to be “awaken”, or “awakened”. “Awake”, by the way, is an interesting album from Japanese band L’arc en ciel, which has a line in English in the song “Existence“: “you will not be able to sleep, so why don’t you just stay awake?” It’s also a spelling mistake, a verb form inconsistency or misplaced adjective. “Awake” is an adjective, “awaken” is the past participle of “wake”, “woke” is the simple past of the same irregular verb, but “woke” as an adjective is an invention,. See? The mistake was intentional, just like people say “bitches be crazy”.

But nobody speaks Japanese. And as an English teacher actually living in Brazil (and it seems people struggle to understand that or pretend it’s not a relevant fact at all — or worse: they minimize the role of culture bridging and curating for literacy goals) I have to say English is just “a” language, not “the” language that everyone speaks. The latter part is undeniable. Recently, Slate published a podcast talking about YouTube’s derailing or demise, but saying they’ve managed to stay immune from criticism, despite other platforms being roasted. Later, the same vehicle said that Senators in Congressional hearings are asking more difficult questions to tech leaders, as if it’s a good sign, and we’re not struggling to catch up as ordinary citizens. We are. That’s the whole point of being “woke“. The definition should be: “someone in society that sees themselves in a position of inferiority for a series of reasons that they seek to understand to find who’s responsible for such situations and then try to change it”. They just created another word for activist, but this time, more combative — and their response is literally to say: “shut the fuck up, you’re annoying”. Of all things, annoying. No wonder, they came for the LGBT. Acceptance is not in their vocabulary. My own dad says he’s okay with gay people, but not with “the media” constantly pushing gay narratives for children to watch. He’s receiving the govenment fund for financial assistence to the poor (which is what we call people who haven’t figured out the factors in COVID that left us here), but still votes for the Trump agenda in Brazilian fashion. Not that knowing about Brazil makes you woke, but for example, you have to know real estate being bought in live cash is a problem, insulting journalists and also having such a difficult to conceive rhethoric on rape: at one point he said a congresswoman (Maria do Rosário, from the Worker’s Party) did not “deserve” to be raped. Not to mention the case where he posed for with hydroxychloroquine next to a bunch of rheas, animals people don’t usually see unless they’re looking at the farmgirl’s videos (but notice that the word for “rhea” is “ema” in Brazil).

Woke people can even be called schizophrenic. They can’t sleep because of the problems of the world, and the fact that them wanting to change things makes them targets of serial attacks, increasingly effective. I, for example, have developed sleep disorders. Nights watching Bloomberg and going to sleep after the B3 opening were a constant, with CNN’s prime time right after dad went to the bedroom. I knew it would make me feel better knowing that some people talked about what needed to be talked about, including finance and tech, which pleased me. The response wasn’t so popular. And about schizophrenia: we hear the word “smoking”, and we might think about a “king”, and then, for some reason, associate it with the January 6 events (it’s the day of Kings here in Brazil, didn’t you know?) then everything would make sense. Except it doesn’t, and we have to organize. Especially considering that we don’t live in the United Kingdom, but we might make songs talking about the act of the pound, if you’ll excuse the promotion.

For the common sense agenda: ESG, energy, inflation, cost of living, food, worker’s rights, healthcare, women’s rights, sexual freedoms, technology protections, better technology platform laws, better education, better entertainment and support to culture: these are things I care about, personally. If anyone has a plan to remanage the national debt and distribute investments in between those categories, amazing. Projects like FUNDEB are supposed to guarantee the money, but norms like the Common Core are scarcely debated. So even if we do get the money, the effectiveness of those initiatives is simply not there. The same goes for web policy, and we don’t talk about crypto in this blog, only things that exist. Is that being woke? Then maybe Tucker Carlson is sleeping, contrary to popular belief and to some of his invited commenters.

We seem to forget that there were people fighting for social justice (Rachael, a friend who I remember dearly for the contact she gave me with what I saw as “real English”, used to say she hated the term) were gunned down, as was Martin Luther king. And the guy was a reverend. Not even him escaped the hatred from powerful American elites (he was even listed in the FBI’s list of most wanted people). About the institutions? There’s little to say, but a lot to unpack. The Supreme Court should exist — Brazilian society recently signed a letter on the adherence and respect of the Rule of Law, contrary to the current and hopefully last-days president Jair Bolsonaro’s argument that the Judiciary is corrupt and should be banished. The thing about studying the Law is that you learn about morals. Catch some Hegel. Read Habermas (just maybe skip his Wikipedia, as you might find he had connections with Nazis). And if you go for the Bible, don’t support Jesus with a gun, ready to serve bullets instead of bread. Because in case anyone’s wondering what the answer to the question “where we all fall asleep, where do we go?”, the answer might be soon revealed with contrasting definitions, from the concept of Random Access Memory to REM sleep and biometrics used by the companies that tell you both “what’s happening” and “what’s on your mind”. For more on that, read my Substack.

To remind everyone, there’s a button for donations on the menu of the site. It redirects you to my PayPal account. Support this initiative, and let’s keep people updated and make better sense of the world, which should welcome conversations and not just the interests of wealthy investors, which, as Scott Galloway pointed out, seem to be finding rich men attractive women. You can see my video on the following link about the prevalence of dating apps.

The unspoken benefits of neutrality

In Brazil, as of September 2022, talking about politics will make people fear for the upcoming months, days and hours; or it will produce a contagious exhilaration around the prospects of winning or losing a battle that this or that side might have chosen. Maybe you’ll notice relative apathy in other situations, not particularly here; but some people stayed on the job during this now predominantly controlled pandemic, with vaccinated people who took at least 3 shots in their arm, like myself, and in some cases go out in the street still rarely, but with tranquility. We think that going out is safe again, but the reasons are related to public health and what’s not so often discussed: instead of working from home, living your life in front of a computer or staring at your phone, at home. You go out, everyone has a different thing to do, and you think that’s fine, but who are they, completely unaware that you’ve started fights with 30 different businesses in the past 2 hours, retweeted journalistic vehicles of great and historical circulation, making acid comments and ironic, often insensitive and disrespectuful remarks on credibility and people’s assumed character? Why aren’t they all doing the same, to fight the power and take it back, and you seem to be the only one concerned with the battle for winning the internet debate, elected medium and modus operandi of the attention economy? And now you can watch candidates debate on the internet, and that is literal; but everyone else is already commenting, and you’ve lost on this one, because it doesn’t matter what you have to say. The frontline is the frontline. Fireworks at midnight, no big deal — there’s soccer every day. Neighbors turned crowds of possible perpetrators of property damage, and subtweetibg in real life, in the form of shouts. It seems pressing to ask: “what the hell is happening?”

What’s happening is that people are put to a test every four years in the majority of the countries of the world. But hang on: our most important elections are in a month, and Britain just changed the Prime Minister. The American elections are held in the midterm of Brazilian elections, for example. The selection for governors happens right before, and I should say that between Charlie Crist and Ron deSantis, at least the latter is able to fulfill his agenda; he’s just lame, while the other candidate is partnering with a “god-fearing” woman (as per Twitter bio) who’s supposed to change the deSantis program against gender ideology and critical race theory, all the while banning masks in schools because it has never required them in the first place — which is way too hard to believe, but seems to be the truth. DeSantis calls his opposers “The Woke Party”. Nobody told him that maybe Florida isn’t a dream, and we know Trump properties are being targets of investigation. I would go further, talk about Disney and Miami, mention Orlando, basketball, soccer and a Netflix series called Startup. I would tell personal stories, and give a shoutout to my old colleague now living in Auburn, not Jacksonville, saying “how’s your hacker friend and the gay gossip column guy?” But we’ve heard some of these things before. One day, on LinkedIn, I saw an old student of mine repost a video saying that Disney knows how to “enchant” like nobody else, and then you had an intervention in some kind of commercial center where people were interacting with the shadows of Disney characters who mimicked them, behind a panel. For each person in front of the screen, a specific character would show up as a sort of reflection of them. At the end, they’d reveal themselves and everyone would applaud. But in college, some other facts came to my knowledge, like work exploitation and a friend who dreamed of working there, but was the first person I met to be following Bloomberg. I won’t get into detail, because that involved another niche: the foreign music exoticness judges and who they give praise to. For the average Brazilian, does any of that matter?

In your family, you learn to suck it up. You stay quiet to avoid conflict. But sometimes, you do pick up a fight. An uncle is never going to be actually phisically aggressive with a nephew, is he? Sorry to break it to all, but my personal history tells otherwise, very clearly. And so do my conversations with teenagers, who report abuse in the family with a certain frequency. And the answer doesn’t seem to be a short story that does not mention this fact at all. It’s like posting fake news — because the narrative has been manipulated from the very starting point, not as of yesterday. You’re just a dummy. To wrap it up, and I refuse to talk about Europe: if you don’t take a stand on the internet, you have a chance to take a stand in real life. How does that sound to you? Because, to me, it sounds like a good plan. Except I know what Brazil would say: “Elogio é caridade”. Care to translate? Of course you don’t. And that’s fine. But maybe we should focus on the good instead of the bad, and real life sucks, while the internet can lead you to a better place. Are we voting on that?

They don’t make children’s shows like before. But what are actual children doing?

Representation matters. That’s why the BBC made a TV show with main characters resembling babies: the parents weren’t there even to say hi to their children, so they had to project the sun into a screen, with a baby face in it, so they could learn that it was really fun to interact with their peers and stuff. Multi color, super progressive. Except if you fast forward to 2022, you’ll see the NYT reporting on tweens having 5 hours of screen time. And these are not “kids”. It seems, though, that for every hint of maturity that you may want to inject into a teenager’s mind and behavior, they either abandon the notion of living in society, often dispelling the morals they’ve learned on sped up edited videos on YouTube (try to talk to them and you’ll see they don’t have a lot to say), or they’ll come to you with the classic “I’m a minor”. The importance of music is not to be understated, because it might be good for your “child” to learn what major and minor notes and chords are. The ability to interpret art is counterposed by the ability is pretend you understand it, just because it rhymed (and I’m not conservative at all, just realistic, when needed). The teens? They listen to music, for sure, but overall spend 8 hours behind the screen (on average!) and that should be the conversation we’re having. But we’re not. And the adults are wondering what Meta is trying to do, suddenly very puzzled.

Maybe marketing will refocus. With these age groups in mind (particularly tweens) and the result of their products’ maturing process (I think the teenager who vapes and snaps doesn’t give a damn about the avatar emoji, but maybe it’s to remind them they’re still young and not on LinkedIn), we’re going to see not just more Disney Plus, but edutainment. My bets are here, and that’s part of what I try to do with this blog, breaking away from “traditional blog writing”: watching an informative video, while consuming YouTube specific formats (fast cuts, heavy editing, informal text read out loud to save time, bloopers and so on), may serve a bigger purpose, which is repurposing the media. That is not our job alone, but then we have to talk about what we’ve learned (including from TikTok, which is a work in progress); and if you can’t admit that a teenager spending 8 hours behind the screen instead of talking to you, as a parent, is a sign of the times, then either take the careful approach or the libertarian approach: watch over them or let them do what they want. It’s particularly hard to say this, but I personally believe you’ve got to have conversations about the internet more often that don’t involve what the parents want to show you (I’m 33 now, but I absolutely disdain my dad’s favorite YouTube channels), but what the “kids” want to show you; and if they have a new relationship and they feel like sharing with you is gonna help, congrats, you’re doing a good job. Otherwise, you’re probably not, and that’s the entire role of the person in the family who asks, during Sunday lunch, when someone younger is gonna get married, or the Brazilian uncle who says “what about those little girlfriends, huh?” — between siblings, there’s competition to see who’s doing a better job, and when that involves how you raise a child, you might finally learn why kids are called kids and adults are what they are: nosey, arrogant and self-righteous by nature. But babies? Babies wanna cuddle! Look at Teletubbies.

Perspectives: what to expect from a connected society in 2022

I’m going to show you a video. It’s a man who taught me that language is much more than words (and you can play the song too, make the class fun and all, but if you’re here for info, sit tight). A Semiotician, he investigated what elements made meaning in the world of media, especially. In an interview, he says Linguistics as a field of study couldn’t contemplate the multiplicity of meanings associated, for example, with image. Now, stop right there. Do you want to contribute with this, get informed, or are you searching for a smartass reply? There are separate lines for each group. Let’s even make subtitles for all of them. But here’s the video:

Gunther Kress was a student of Michael Halliday. They’ve both recently passed away. It’s hard when you’re away from your University’s library, so let’s look at what the Wikipedia entry emphasizes in Halliday’s work: “linguistic structure is the realization of social structure, actively symbolizing it in a process of mutual creativity. Because it stands as a metaphor for society, language has the property of not only transmitting the social order but also maintaining and potentially modifying it” (you can click this Amazon link to get the original “Language and Society: Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday”, from Continuum’s 2007 edition). Now, about the audiences… there are, of course, many people to whom the study of language would make productive discussions, trainings, roundtables, policies, educational practice, workplace culture updates, media programs, social media trends and so on. But let’s just point out a few things, because reality is nobody’s even going to click the video and buy the book. We work with a 1% mindset, just to be told that it’s actually 0.1% — and if you’re on Spotify, less than that for a listen, not for comprehension of your story. Why do people connect? It seems like connectivity is an issue worth debating, considering how media approaches have treated people and vice-versa.

1) Do you want to connect out of boredom?

In this group, you can find people who are genuinely looking for a distraction, but these groups merge with other kinds of interests (for the entrepreneur or the person just experimenting with labels). The big narrative is lost, and smaller pieces of interaction seem to be important at first, or interesting at first, but soon are faded in relevance and give way to what’s really happening inside platforms and whose decisions made our experience good or bad. Notice how this happens in these niches:

  • gaming industry
  • dating industry
  • social media networking
  • marketing

2) Do you want to connect to understand people?

Here, we’re looking for specialists. People who navigate the web as a way to understand the world, and then carrying on their knowledge in order to prepare others for better experiences, better goals and results, better structure. Besides typical categories, you have third parties who have a glimpse of what we’re doing, then take a closer look and make both a casual prediction and a formal jurisdiction out of their nosey habits. Why would you want to understand people? They’re capital. Data is the new oil, didn’t you watch the documentary on Netflix? We just know they’re here:

  • teachers
  • data analysists
  • marketing strategists
  • parents

3) Do you want to connect to empower your message’s reach?

In this group, what matters is the message and its advocacy. The more people engage, the better the work. And so they look for strategies to make people talk, not necessarily with the best practices manual in their hands. If you can pay attention to health risks by watching an ad of a leader making fun of sick people, great; but what if you’re needing company, and a software suggests you add someone and start a conversation with them? These people have a lot in common:

  • Politicians
  • Activists
  • Companies
  • Scammers

4) Do you want to connect to criticize connectivity?

If you asked me where I see myself, I wouldn’t say it’s among the anti-surveillance geeks. I like capital, it makes me able to buy peanut butter (it’s been a while). But while my sense of belonging doesn’t come from the most united place in the world, it’s also a concept (there’s communities within communities, and I think that’s beautiful). What we have to watch for is when the criticism puts you on harm’s way, because of someone at the top. We’re all supposed to search for better ways to organize ourselves, and the power belongs to the people. If tech rules that it has rules in order to rule over people, maybe we just make a meme about their language and not get prosecuted for that, what do you think?

  • Privacy advocates
  • Anti-capitalist movements
  • Ill-supported communities
  • Targets of hate speech and others

Identifying who these people are, what their intentions may be and how people react to labelling might be useful for everyone, and navigating through contexts in which we’re taught to tolerate the influence of a divergence set of opinions and norms makes a difference in how our character is built, but also how much opportunity we’ll have in our lives.

Perspectivas: o que esperar do ensino médio

Em 2017, surgiu a Base Nacional Comum Curricular, um documento que buscava alinhar expectativas, demandas e projetos para o desenvolvimento de jovens em período escolar. É fácil de encontrar (todos conhecem o Google), mas os objetivos parecem difíceis de se alcançar, além de a preparação de professores ser completamente autônoma — e, diga-se de passagem, não-remunerada; isso quando são contratados com carteira assinada. Nesse cenário, e com todos os outros que as conexões da vida digital oferece (sem nunca esquecer das críticas), como aplicar uma atualização de temas abordados a fim de preparar jovens para o mundo, não somente para o mercado de trabalho? Propostas como a BNCC lançam previsões sobre a capacidade de pensar a sociedade criticamente e com responsabilidade; na prática, desigualdades socioeconômicas, raciais e de gênero ditam a regra das interações e da vida de jovens a também jovens adultos, com matrículas recentes em faculdades, públicas ou privadas. Quais seriam alguns dos pontos em que jovens deveriam se sair bem, mas não é o que encontramos quando analisamos com critério sua desenvoltura, e não apenas o desenvolvimento baseado em pontuações e notas de prova, em contato com o mundo remoto ou nas proximidades?

1) Tolerância

Jovens aderiram desde sempre à cultura da zoeira. Chame de “trollagem” se quiser, ou aplique termos como assédio e difamação se tiver pais muito preocupados com a sua visibilidade. Nada é muito sério, e isso pode ser bom ou ruim. Ninguém tem terapia na escola. As redes de suporte não funcionam, e muita gente busca contato fora do ambiente escolar para conseguir suportar as tarefas obrigatórias. Negar essa possibilidade deveria resultar numa denúncia frente a organizações protetoras de Direitos Humanos (e se adolescentes tiverem um contato de fora?) ou mesmo reforçando o ECA (Estatuto da Criança e do Adolescente, pobremente implantado e nunca lido pela maioria de profissionais da Educação). Falta interpretação. O direito à brincadeira rende muitas conclusões, com mentes pensantes liderando a discussão, e não um bando de católicos punitivos e hipócritas (com reservas à boa moral cristã, que prega a ajuda a quem tem necessidades, mas não especifica quais), inclusive nas políticas de uso das plataformas digitais. Há brincadeiras de mau-gosto; há criminalidade organizada com influência na vida de jovens, e há também professores e professoras falando por aí que bandido bom é bandido morto. Na mesma medida, a escola católica não pensa jamais em integrar sedução e flerte nos letramentos, o que é, talvez não literalmente, mais certamente a mais crítica (e relevante, salvo as críticas que mal precisam ser feitas) falha em análise de dados. Adultos que não conhecem e nem se interessam pela realidade de filhos e filhas são menos tolerantes com os vizinhos, mas pode ser que os motivos sejam outros, e não a famosa necessidade de prover para a família. Sabemos discutir tolerância? Além disso, jovens aprendem o suficiente sobre o tema com experiências na internet? Creio que não, mas particularmente, não acho que professores no TikTok vão mudar alguma coisa.

2) Consciência

O som de uma guitarra amplificada pode ser de fato um convite à macumba do vizinho evangélico, que lhe considera adorador de Satanás. Mas não é só religião que dita as regras (só estamos presenciando uma potencialização desses debates, para a tristeza dos bons educadores e pensadores, e sem ter que flexibilizar os pronomes). Uma experiência com o aplicativo Happn seria legal, assim como o Snapchat, se todo mundo tivesse um plano em seu nome. Como você vai conseguir esse plano? Apresentando um comprovante de residência. E como você consegue um comprovante de residência? Apresentando holerites de seus últimos pagamentos com vínculo empregatício. Água, luz ou telefone. Acontece que muitos se utilizam da telefonia para fins, digamos, escusos. O comprovante pode vir porque você pagou com uma fintech. Não significa que a operadora e também a fintech não vão lhe causar danos, mas o comprovante vai chegar à sua casa (sim, um pedaço de papel). Como diria Michael Scott em The Office: “real business is made on paper”, mas aí inventaram o Pix. Acontece que o PayPal já existe desde 1998. Não é legal olhar ao seu redor? Não precisamos ficar no digital. Quando uma mulher grita por socorro e um homem fala alto na rua, sabemos que há um problema. Que não seja demérito fazer uma denúncia, muito menos ter que pagar pela denúncia que fez, quando a vítima nem está mais presente no cotidiano.

3) Mindset

Temos que ser alguém na vida. Escutamos isso desde muito cedo. Mas os exemplos viraram todos YouTubers. As meninas gostam do Twitch. O som da moda fala de sexo. As discussões sobre a tecnologia revolucionária que mudará o mundo força jovens a virarem investidores (vejam o caso do Robinhood). Mas pior do que o jovem fã do Elon Musk é o jovem hacker que ganha dinheiro ameaçando pessoas a acabar com reputações em troca de dinheiro. Parece que há um apelo contra a nudez, de um lado, e de outro um ganho que nunca se satisfaz e sempre acaba em punição ou segregação, guardadas as proporções. Não se ensina jovens a identificar problemas e atuar para solucioná-los, de fato. Podem fazer um fio no Twitter, se já acordaram para o monopólio do conglomerado Meta e tantos outros, mas não se somam as vozes, e se compete por atenção quando se deveriam unir esforços para direcionar debates e lutas para melhorias da sociedade. Os movimentos estudantis não são bobagem. São essas as mentes pensantes que farão do mundo um lugar melhor, e se preferirem ir numa manifestação ao invés de tomar uma cerveja importada, que bom. Já se não tomarem cerveja em ocasião nenhuma porque os pais não deixam, sinceramente, coitadinhos.