apcragg

But why? I understand that the content creators whose videos I enjoy need to earn a living. I understand that in video advertisements offer more stable income. I'm not expecting a free lunch when it comes to these videos that require lots of time, money, and skills. Sure, people used to make and still do make videos out of a passion for the subject but there is far more content now than there used to be. Some creators use Patreon, and I support the ones I really like using that platform but I can't do that for everyone. I think listening to an ad for a VPN service or for the new Intel products is reasonable to access the content I'm not otherwise paying for.

I replied to the original email you sent me with some thoughts. I want to note here that I like the idea of Pathrise but was just a bit put off by the initial email.

I'd recommend saying so in your emails. I think your service does have value but I was turned off by the cold email. Our .edu emails get tons of messages from companies saying they are impressed by our skills when in reality they sent the email to the entire listserv. If you really are personally evaluating candidates, say so. Honestly, that would be a big plus in my eyes and I'm sure many others. Little things like that make all the difference.

I would advise them to not cold-email students about 'Engineering fellowships' which upon further inspection are just resumed workshops and interview prep. If you want students to take your company and service seriously, don't send out disingenuous emails about 'impressive backgrounds'. It makes your company look like one of those pay-to-join academic honor societies whose emails everybody[1] ignores.

[1] Obvious not everybody or there wouldn't be a business.

Yes. I got an email from them a few weeks ago. They were calling it an 'Engineering fellowship' which felt dishonest. They also said the email was based on 'an impressive background at [University]' which led me to ignore it based on the fact that they had no way of knowing my academic performance.

> (when in doubt about any particular UI solution, check how it has been done in a certain proprietary app that is very popular among OSHW folks and do exactly opposite).

This is currently listed on the CERN roadmap for KiCad. Given all the complaints about the UX here I thought it might be relevant.

If it was going to take them 10 hours to manually route that small board, I think the real problem is just that they are really bad at pcb design.

Optimal route or optimized route? I was under the impression that calculating an optimal route was NP-Hard and not feasible to do at scale.

That seems... Really bad for the environment? Nobody said launching rockets was environmentally friendly but that sounds particularly egregious.

Then don't go places you can't afford to pay the externality for. It doesn't screw the poor, its allocating finite resources in a market-based economy. If we want to socialize the cost of infrastructure (which I agree with) then taxes need to be levied. Virginians aren't paying Manhattan property tax so why is it so outrageous to tax people entering over an expensive and congested bridge?

The silver line will to IAD will be open by the time HQ2 is being built. That puts it ~35mins by Metro when leaving the city. IAD is a huge international airport as well and has much smoother infrastructure than National Airport.

An Amazon HQ2 in Northern Virginia would cripple the already strained road infrastructure, especially given Metro's existing difficulties. Dulles seems like an obvious choice given the tech corridor and proximity to IA but 28 and the toll road are incredibly crowded as it is.

The counter point to that is that the Foxconn being there costs the state money in infrastructure and other non-fixed costs compared to not being there at all.

I can't believe this person is honestly advocating for eugenics. That should have died in 1945.

If it is so well known why has it taken 20 years to be discovered?

Is that a bad thing though? Are they just pricing in the externalities of gas powered cars?

The dollar is essentially backed by oil and the fact that it's needed to trade with the largest economy in the world, not to mention the country with the largest military.

Why would the ACLU care? It's a private entity doing a private thing. It's not like it's the TSA, a government agency, gate keeping a public form of travel.

> You buried the lede -- your whole post is really dressing up why we shouldn't resist a societal decision you personally heavily agree with, while not giving real credence to people who disagree with you.

That is a fair criticism. A counterpoint to my own post would be that pushing what is acceptable and questioning the norm is what has always driven progress, be it abolishing slavery, accepting other sexualities, religions, scientific views, etc. My point was rather that rights like expression are not absolute by the nature of the social contract. Requiring that they be unimpeachable is not compatible with living in a social structure.

> These are also things on which many people radically disagree with you. Stating them as facts are just begging the question.

There are people that disagree for sure. The point isn't that those, in particular, are universally agreed upon but that there exist limits to absolute freedom.

It isn't the government that is doing that. It is society as a group that has decided that "no slurs" is the norm. If you want to use slurs, use them in a subgroup that for whatever reasons deem them acceptable. Don't use them around society as a whole as it has decided that there are social consequences for using them. Again, if you don't like it either campaign to change it or exclude yourself from society but don't conflate the social contract with government authoritarianism.

It isn't a binary decision and it is incredibly dishonest for you to frame it like it is. Freedom of expression is not foundational. Certainly inciting violence, advocating genocide, or engaging in targeted and repeated harassment does not fall under the auspice of an unalienable and foundational right. In consenting to governance and inclusion in society one forfeits some absolute freedom that society has deemed unacceptable. That is the nature of society. The argument should lie in what and how society deems things acceptable because there is certainly a debate to be had there. Concerns about oppressive governments or censorship of thought are valid and just but do not and should not require declaring expression limitless. Society has deemed some expression harmful and participating in society requires accepting that. I believe it is a good thing that there are things society has deemed unacceptable and acknowledge that I give up some of my absolute freedoms to live in such a society.