bill_joy_fanboy

You said something interesting: "... modern life requires accidents like this."

This is a completely baseless claim. It is entirely possible to have both a technologically advanced civilization and simultaneously one that doesn't have catastrophic industrial mistakes like this.

This whole thing is bizarre.

I don't fully understand the details of the case, but if someone were to kill a family member of mine in a fit of road rage, I would be furious if the sentence was a paltry 10.5 years.

Victims or victims' families pleading for leniency always puzzled me. Where is your iron?

Saying that labor in America doesn't have a right to protect itself from undercutting by foreign labor pools is classist and eliteist.

Don't you want working Americans to be able to afford the cost of living without having their employment/wages undercut by programs designed to benefit big business?

YOU should look in the mirror.

When I see a comment like this, all I can say is that I don't believe you. You are a liar.

Of course, full accountability belongs on the man for the failure of the parenting partnership.

The assumption that being a father is easy denies the lived experience of fathers. How would she know whether being a father is easy or not? She's never been one.

I just love how you assume being a father is easy. Grass is always greener and what not.

Being a father comes with its own responsibilities and subjection to judgment by the community. The phrase "deadbeat dad" is in the common vernacular, but you rarely hear about "deadbeat moms" (trust me, they exist).

> full brunt of the responsibility and expectation once the baby is born

This is simply not true. If this were true, child support laws and requirements would not exist.

You actually don't have full responsibility once the child is born. Even then, you can give the child up for adoption.

You do have something that men don't have, which is full control over whether a birth happens in the first place. Men don't have this.

UK has public/socialized healthcare.

If you are a smoker, you are much more likely to be a burden on this system.

Makes sense to ban these types of activities if the costs of them are socialized rather than individualized.

Yep. A bunch of unemployed and "unempowered" men sitting around leads to them thinking things like: "Maybe we shouldn't be so cooperative anymore."

No one believes anything the NYT says.

As if "policy makers" in the U.S. care about anything other than getting re-elected and continuing to deceive and scam the public.

Yeah, like how does the collective mental health and well-being of society affect you in any way, bro? Mind your own biz... /s

the word you're looking for isn't "panic"; it's "indignation" ;)

LOL! As if human-generated news content is any more honest or accurate...

In this day an age, if you are a Western man defending a Western country's leading power structure, you are a fool.

The idea of being drafted to defend my country that sells me out at every opportunity is laughable.

> What a nihilistic perspective and empty life.

Equally nihilistic are owners, managers, and leaders who think they will replace developers with LLMs.

Why care about, support, defend, or help such people? Why would I do that?

Like any shrewd businessman, I negotiate to receive the highest price possible for the minimum cost on my end. This is how business is done.

Which is why quiet quitting is the logical thing.

Managers and business owners shouldn't take it personally that I do as little as possible and minimize the amount of labor I provide for the money I receive.

Hey, it's just business.

I've noticed the same thing with regards to actually attending college. People still go; they just complain about it more.

The only change is that there is a much more cynical feeling about the experience. School spirit is out. People see it as "a ripoff I must endure to get a decent job and be taken seriously."

I graduated years ago. When my college (major state uni) called asking for a donation, I laughed the guy off the phone. The idea of "school spirit" seems like a joke to me, as it does for many students these days.

The new cope is to see if you can't do it as cheaply as possible, lop off a year, get scholarships, do a bunch of AP courses prior, etc.

Basically, a lot of students see the process as a box to check as if they were standing in line at the DMV to get their diploma.

If a discovery is good, someone else will want to steal the credit for it. That would apply to discoveries made by men or women. I highly doubt that there is any proof of a sexist conspiracy to steal the limelight from women specifically.

STEM is mostly dominated by men, so there is both more men to make discoveries and more men to swoop in and steal credit for a discovery.

> You're not a doctor, you're not qualified to tell the difference, you're not trained on cancers, you're not even in the medical field. The monopoly is held for exactly this reason.

The idea that a position of authority means ~anything~ anymore is completely ridiculous.

What did the medical field do to earn such credibility with you? Any intelligent person should have developed a high degree of skepticism regarding the operations of the medical field as of 2025.

Sick burn. Now, do you have any ~good~ arguments that prove me wrong?

Because you feel like it should apply?

> “Freedom of speech and of the press is accorded aliens residing in this country.”

Unless this quote is directly from the constitution, it's totally worthless to support your argument.

This is just a tired old emotional argument. It won't phase anyone who sees the results of modern immigration practices.

And I'm reviving it.

Citizenship in this country is not a right. Why is it important that we allow more people in from these other nations? Why is that a good thing?

What exactly does "stagnate culturally" mean?

As far as I can tell, America has rapidly become a cultural cesspit, and yet immigration has never been higher.

Not sure I follow...

Citizenship in the United States is not a right.

> The problem with the "war on drugs" is that it treats "supply" as the problem.

Well, that's because supply _is_ the actual problem.

The real issue is that our government isn't attacking the supply side hard enough. Believe me, if we wanted dealers and cartels to "go away permanently", we could make it happen.

The issue is whether or not we have the will to make this kind of thing happen.