exstudent2

> Really? You want media to be state-run in the US?

No, I just don't want tech companies "protecting" me from information. I'll read the direct words from people and process them for myself.

Twitter/FB/Apple/Google are not entities I would ever want choosing what I see and don't see.

[EDIT] Ironic that HN has chosen to censor my account. I guess what I said is too "dangerous" for you, the lowly user to read.

One of the reason people need to make new accounts when they post anti-censorship thoughts, is that censorship has reached into our industry and a sort of neo-McCarthy blacklisting can occur if you don't espouse neo-liberal talking points. If your pseudonym can be traced to your identity, you risk your career when you fight for individual liberty.

Ah classic dang! Abusing your mod powers to punish and down talk anyone who questions your narrative. The comment in question is absolutely on topic and relevant. You just don't like it so claim it's against "site policy". It's ridiculous that you don't allow debate on these topics.

And yes, I know I'm perma-banned for not being feminist enough for you. I just wanted to point out your systematic pushing of a political agenda to those who dare browse with show dead.

We're way off topic but again I support BLM and do feel economics play a role.

I'm not attacking BLM. I support it.

This list however I don't support because the members are from wealthy backgrounds and are being presented as needing extra help.

BLM is a group that represents economically disadvantaged people. This list is pulled from the upper most echelons of society. Do you think it's ok to represent the wealthy as somehow oppressed?

Please don't take my question as an attack, I'm genuinely curious how people who support these initiatives view wealth.

Yes they did 1/2 have of the work they could but I'm not complaining about getting more information. Someone else should leak the RNC. Or possibly it didn't contain as many bombshells? Either way, I'm happy to get more information than I had before.

Whoever released the emails did the American public a huge service. They pulled back the curtain and we got to see how the sausage is made. It doesn't matter who they are or why they did it. The end result was important whistle blowing. We should hope that information like this is leaked out as it helps balance the power between the public and corrupt politicians/media in a way nothing else can.

I also tire of seeing the repetitive "let's get more X into tech!". I've quoted the article not raised points out of thin air.

Well, I did support the moratorium on political posts but it got reversed and here we are again. As long as posts like this hit the front page you should expect people to point out inconsistencies in message.

I don't see how everyone is better off if the event doesn't even get held. Unless 50% of the applicants are women then a 50% participation quota _is_ arbitrary.

When you're viewing a source code file, there are links to Raw, Blame, History, Permalink... The Raw link is broken (for me). I can create an issue.

I don't understand how they can say "Ultimately, our goal is egalitarianism" and yet point #1 is "Make Women a Priority". Targets, arbitrary quotas, not holding events if 50% of the participants aren't female... does not sound like egalitarianism to me.

Great stuff! One thing that's been broken for me for a while now: Raw links. I just get an empty response. It's kind of an important feature for me (and I'm sure others) so would love to see it fixed.

> All government inefficient? Check. And wrong.

Can you name an efficient government program?

A question I've had about Signal is what is stopping Apple from modifying and rebuilding the source with a backdoor in it? Is this technically possible (seems like it would be since they control distribution of the binary to devices)? The article is correct in stating that web based chat is inherently insecure but it seems all iOS apps are also inherently insecure. I'm by no means an expert though so would love to hear from someone with more knowledge.

EDIT: Thank you for the responses! It pretty much confirms what I thought; Apple _could_ access your communication (either through keylogging at the OS level or backdooring Signal) but this solution is better than everyone use plain text communication. I personally would not trust Apple with my life if I needed that level of protection but maybe that's not the main use case for Signal.

More information available for the public to make an informed decision seems like it's always a good thing. What's good for Democrats != what's good for the public.

> CrowdStrike, which was hired by the DNC to investigate the intrusions

I can't think of anything that would lend less credibility to the findings than to be paid clients of the DNC.

It is in large part a cultural issue. I grew up in a rural town where a large portion of the population was drug addicted. Anti-intellectualism is rampant. I was literally the only person in town who had an interest in learning about computers. Everyone else thought they were for "nerds". The whole town was football crazy though.

The baby boomers also did an excellent job instilling sex, drugs and rock 'n roll as the core set of values in the west. Hedonism is glamorized, reading books not so much.

The infrastructure required to succeed in small towns exists. It's called the Internet and it's a one way ticket to success if you put the effort in to use it and have the strength to go against local culture.

The article states the indigenous people _did_ negotiate for themselves:

"Yolanda Cruz, one of the leaders of the village of Catua, said she signed the contract with Minera Exar but now regrets it. At the time, she valued the opportunity to create jobs for her village. But she now worries “we are going to be left with nothing,” she said."

Subtitle: "Indigenous people are left poor as tech world takes lithium from under their feet"

The article then goes on to say that the companies aren't "taking" anything. They've signed contracts with the government and tribes to rightfully mine lithium. Sure some people want a larger cut of the pie but the companies aren't doing anything unethical and the article is clearly biased from the get go.

They don't even have to be raising children or volunteering to benefit society. As long as they spend the money that's given to them, the market benefits.

> We now have families with both parents working all the time for the same home their parents had.

This is not true. Homes are much larger now than they were in the past: http://www.aei.org/publication/todays-new-homes-are-1000-squ...

Both parents working happened due to women _wanting_ to enter the workplace. It had nothing to do with Goldman Sachs.

> It's a huge misallocation of resources

These resources are self "allocated". No one was forced or coerced into joining Goldman Sachs. Did you ever think that maybe those people enjoy their job? Or that Goldman Sachs isn't the net negative harbinger of the apocalypse you claim it to be? One could even argue that the success of "the west" is due to availability of capital, of which GS has played a role.

There's nothing "disgusting" about people exercising their free will to take a job they enjoy and/or pays the bills. Is programming to serve ads better? Is being a dishwasher or delivery person?

It's become quite popular to whine about the career choices others make ("we need to _make_ more X become programmers). I think our industry as a whole would benefit from a heaping helping of "mind your own business".

That you're actively trying to stir up drama about this on Twitter demonstrates why HN may be best off leaving these discussions to other forums (and I say this as someone fairly active in the discussions in question).

It will be nice to see HN minus the outrage and Twitter/social media drama/witch-hunting.

Do you really think that this is needed? Are developers not operating within their own ethical guidelines? Seems weird to assume we/they aren't.

Thank you for your post (and Keybase!). I thought the example was a good one. Buying a book creates a permanent transaction record with the seller who's ethics you may not share. Humorous as well with the tongue and cheek reference to Atlas Shrugged :)

We're sadly living in a society where people search high and low for grievances to publicly virtual signal over. Hopefully the Twitter-sphere will realize there's value in your example and not just clutch pearls.

Prices were very high on day one due to an extremely limited supply and a lot of (warranted) attention. They've since normalized.

"After the first four years the ZEC created per ten minutes will drop to 25ⓩ, but after the first four years, 100% of it goes to the miners."

Seems like a good business model and a way to fund the innovation they've created.