johnjj257

No that's just govt. Censorship vs regular censorship. Moderation is the exact same thing they can both do it. Just because it isn't the government doesn't mean they aren't censoring.

Censorship is NOT just government action.

You should get out more lol

Yea and if it can't it's essentially dead...

What architecture are YOU building aren't you a lawyer?

Consider using the royal we especially around the real architects

It is very odd to call it gaslighting when it's a giant movement, attributing something like that to a young group of people with a wide ranging message looks very odd and because you don't look below the surface at all you have no understanding of the deeper meanings or you choose to ignore them. And it is very odd to expect a group of young activists to have a perfectly crafted message for you to understand... you're not realistic at all

"It's not on me or anyone to go decypher what a movement is trying to be. Yes, messaging is hard, but if you're a movement without a message, all you are is a bunch of angry people in the street occasionally causing riots.

If you're hanging around in a protest where folks are advocating killing federal marshals (protestors can't always spell very well) you aren't exactly... not endorsing that message"

This is a truly bizarre perspective to have... you're saying that someone is basically endorsing everything at a demonstration when all they are doing is listening to what is going on... THE DEFINITION OF HAVING AN OPEN MIND you think is a bad position to take... You sound very close minded and you mix rioters and demonstrators with another wave of your hand, yikes! Try going out into your community with an open mind. I'm not saying I would run up beside a banner that says that and be all buddy buddy, because thats a crazy statement, but it would behoove you to not just lump in an entire legitimate movement with one crazy person, because also like I said there's no way those people actually advocate killing people... thats so obvious!!! You found one crazy person or someone looking to stir shit up that's all.

You seem to have a really skewed perspective of this and on top of that are resorting to childish arguments like spelling errors... get real you don't know anything about me or most of these protestors (I won a spelling bee bitch but go ahead flex some more). I said I went to one demonstration and you have a slew of ideas and prejudgments.

Ok sure complain about the phrase if you want I get that, whatever it just feels like an odd complaint given the situation. It's kind of hard to organize a giant movement and this is what you get.

Yes it's a muddled mix but two things jump out quickly. One you're not going to get attention marching with notepads and whispering. And two they don't need to cater their message to anyone's ideas but their own you are asking a totally different generation to appeal to another. Yes it might be a better political idea, but this is a young emotional movement. I don't know how people can expect a sophisticated perfect message and a completely unified front... It's just not realistic

I'm not saying you have to go to demonstrations if you dont want to, but if you want to find out the truth though you probably should it is worlds away from what you are describing you just said your only experience is through news and online forums. Yes there will be some messaging like that. Obviously I don't agree with that, or lots of other ideas and sentiments, but I still listen to everything they have to say. There will be a few extremes and colorful language but do all those folks really want to kill marshalls? Highly doubt it. Again it's getting attention and people are pissed off... These are young activists not campaign managers

You keep jumping to singular examples when I just explained yes, you can find extreme outliers, but you are ignoring the large majority of people and their intent. And you keep pointing to op eds and sensationalized news stories OF COURSE those will find the extremes and put them on a pedestal.

Look a little deeper and actually go to an event or talk to some real people and you find out what real people believe, I promise you the phrase doesn't mean no police anymore for most people in most places. YES it's a massive movement with outliers.. the two things can and do exist at the same time, lumping them all together or saying it's an even distribution is either intellectually lazy or dishonest

That is a very straw manned interpretation of the phrase. I don't particularly love the phrase myself but this is a dishonest interpretation. Of course a few people probably believe that but it's a giant movement and the large majority do not seem to think that way at all... Maybe take more opinions than a couple op eds.

Have you even spoken to anyone or gone to an event? I live in a city with a lot of demonstrations and you quickly learn that isn't the phrases intent or ideology for nearly everyone except extreme outliers and agitators.

... of course this is so redundant but urinals are an obvious solution for half the population and already in place... Like I said there would be a massive cost this is nowhere near trivial like someone stated. I also mentioned there may be other solutions (like redistributing the resources in another way, while probably similarly expensive for little utility imo). unisex bathrooms is a separate idea. Most of the time there aren't huge discrepancies anyway it's not like men's bathrooms are always idle while women's are always out of control so the efficiency isn't really an issue 99% of the time. If we are just moving urinals inside a shared area why are we doing it at all? We're just making one big line. It's nice that you don't mind waiting for your partner but try selling that to the guy who takes 15 seconds and has to go to the back of this new line. It doesn't make any sense

Intelligent building would forecast demographics and optimize for the future I guess if you really just want "max efficiency" I assume this is already being done to an extent, but changing things already built sounds expensive af for little to no value in my opinion.

Haha, ok you can believe any "expert" you want if it makes you feel better. I have no idea who that is and I dont care. Try looking at the idea logically and within a body of science not out of context and cherry picked =)

You shouldn't believe me you should believe science. I'm not arguing any of that go read about it yourself.

It's nothing formal just saying an assumption based on an assumption keeps having lower chances of being correct the further you take it.

You're on 3rd order assumptions at this point

This is full of false information about sex, it is most certainly NOT just a spectrum of traits that is one shallow dimension that you focused on for the benfit of your agenda and the least scientific approach.

You won't easily find support for that on hacker news =)

Ok...What are you talking about? Don't they already? How does changing that help anything? It would certainly still be a massive slowdown for half the population and certainly not "trivial" to change them all

Huh? I dunno, but I do believe no guy wants to wait 4x as long to be politically correct or for whatever marginal perceived benefit there may be for some tiny population. Nevermind the cost

Your example is way off because they are not equal processing tasks obviously and resources may not be mostly idle you just made that all up

And even if there is an inefficiency or inequality that doesn't mean the answer is unisex bathrooms I could come up with an equally contrived example for how inefficient that is

Exactly why make everyone wait in one line when half the group goes way faster?

I doubt that's coming anytime soon. Would be big dumb and have no real support

This is so not the point lol

Still super creepy and psycho

ROFL NO. The entire sentiment is a kids argument and you sound like a crying kid and a hater.

No one's gonna refute the ""arguments"" because it's a fucking long dipshit statement of epic proportions. Who wants to argue with a 5 year old?

Rofl wow man you can trash anything must be nice to just shit on geniune development and call it crap.

The issue is the article actually had a tired argument, your broken attempt to reframe electric cars as useless is really bizarre and not fitting at all to the sentiment it just points out how shallow and negative you are being

So... Gdpr doesn't apply to individuals or a person who happens to use a random social media app to find out such freely available info

Those threads don't show anything interesting, some just bash the org for spending any of the money they receive in a way someone doesn't like from years and years ago. This is silly

No. That would be making an incorrect assumption, that the best of the best want to work as a civil servant...

Cool but there's tons of game outlets on pc, not on iphone

Even further, just because you benefited indirectly through a parent, someone who doesn't have children is still receiving less benefit than someone with children. They are getting the benefit twice. Whereas a childless person gets it once and indirectly.

>Clearly it doesn't suck to be them, if the only inconvenience they have had is to support their colleagues during times they have needed it

How does it not suck that they are getting the short end of the stick? They are the ones covering and picking up slack for others in this situation so I don't even get your point. You have no idea what the rest of their life is like they may in fact work far harder than any parents do, it's just your assumption they dont?

Also if we're assuming peoples states of mind CONVERSELY clearly it doesn't suck to get bailed out for making a bad decision. For people to have children who lack the time and resources to do so, and in some situations put an unfair onus on people who chose not to or for whatever reason don't have kids.

There's no lack of parents or children so none of these points seems to matter anyway. Overpopulation is actually more of an issue.

> Everyone needs parents around, even if they aren't one themselves.

No, children need adults around. Everyone does not need parents around. This is all far off base from what my comments stated and just your opinions about parents.

Again of course, but it still excludes people without kids. You're repeating the same thing in a different way.

How so? The typo? Everyone uses the school so everyone should not complain. Everyone is not a parent so the analogy breaks down.

Of course? So what? Many of those children will not have children of their own, so that puts them in a different class than their parents. Which is why that is different then going to school.