As usual, another HN thread that perfectly exemplifies victim blaming and a collective burying of heads in the sand. There's a few people on here who seem to get it, but most don't. I'm sick of it. Goodbye, Hacker News.
2,514 karma · joined July 9, 2011
When it comes to food we should remember that the Bay Area is a total bubble. Some of the finest food in the world is produced here and some very innovate and ground-breaking work in the various food movements came from here.
Sorry, but Hershey's gets me worked up.
Good stuff should be above 57% cocoa. If it's less than that, buy high-quality milk chocolate.
That said, other commenters on this thread are correct that it's not too hard to find good chocolate if you just know what to shop for.
My all time favorite is Valrhona. It's by far the best chocolate of them all. Obviously that's personal preference.
We're lucky that we have at least two awesome local brands in the Bay Area. Recchiuti chocolate is awesome, the only location I know of is in the ferry building. Tcho chocolate is the other one and I've been told that they do some interesting stuff with analytics to create the ultimate chocolately goodness.
I care little for Ghirardelli. I went to Ghirardelli Square as a kid and it was fun, but it's just not my thing now.
It's not even that it's bad for there to be differences between the sexes; what's bad is that some people will inevitable take these studies as justification for their sexist views and attitudes.
[EDIT: Apparently some people on HN have not seen 'Cool Runnings'.]
I think the general assumption for women promoting these types of events is that while this statement may be true, it's not because of an inherent difference in women and men. The difference is due to social and cultural conditioning, not because of any biological difference.
The example: when the Abu Ghraib scandal broke, and US media were saying that the "alleged photos might not be possible to obtain" I saw them a full 3 days early on Danish media before I could find them anywhere on US news.
[EDIT: My UCSC roots will really show here - check out "Manufacturing Consent" by Noam Chomsky for one perspective. And yes, it's Chomsky, so YMMV.]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States...
A simplistic example that comes to mind is a calculator module with a well-defined interface (interface in the Java sense of the term). Maybe there are a few different implementations of the interface available in the codebase.
Both implementations are reusable in the sense that I can plug one implementation in many places wherever the interface is supported. When I need something else, I plug in a different implementation. The module that has a dependency on the calculator module should be none the wiser since all it does is call out to a certain interface.
Am I missing something here? Maybe I didn't understand the OP's point well enough.
I feel like this point is really kind of secondary to the discussion, or at least, it seems like there's an assumption in here that I don't share. For some reason, I feel like maybe there's an assumption that Joe has other options? Maybe I'm missing something.
So...who will you work for then?
I really doubt any of this would have been different if we'd had a Republican for President. Granted, healthcare.gov wouldn't have happened, but I doubt any of the other items would have looked any different. All US presidents have done things that I consider unethical or illegal. So to castigate one party vs. the other seems shortsighted.
Unless, of course, he has a huge contract offer from the GOP. Then it makes sense. In politics, money is the great decider.
I feel like many Danes who work in the service sector project this attitude that they're really above the work and that the customers are a complete imposition on their time and energy. That's why I'm always so impressed when I get a really nice waiter in CPH or just shopping at a grocery store like Irma.
I think you're right about the high-end places -- I've only been to one fancy place one (cause, yikes! the prices) and they did act very differently because it was so expensive. But by and large, yes, I agree, they tend to see it more as a "job" than "service."
In a way, this sort of proves that not having a servant IS an option in India. If laws pass that push people not to hire help they can't afford, they will stop hiring. I know that's not the point you're trying to make, but it's worth considering.
That said, I'm curious: why you do you think people in India won't go without hired help? Is it a cultural/historical thing? Or something else? (I ask this not knowing your background).
Also, what's being touched on is a notion of entitlement. For instance, I hire somebody to periodically come and clean my house every few weeks. I pay well, way above what they asked for - both because they do a good job and because I know it's a hard way to make a living. When I made less money, I cleaned my house myself, and I never felt a sense of entitlement or right to that help.
By far one of the most notorious offenders are the "Black Bloc" anarchist groups. One of their codewords during protests is "direct action" which means "break stuff, smash windows." I can't say anything about their political views, but it's a fact that they attract a greater and potentially more violent police presence.
"There’s something just intrinsically rewarding about turning around a corner and shooting at something."
Do others feel this way? I've played shooter games when I was a kid, but I don't know that I feel intrinsically rewarded by shooting at stuff.