kjdndisneinj

That's a pretty simple regulatory change to cap HOA fees as a percentage of rent for affordable units though.

Obviously the developers will fight this, and the rich tenants will never exercise or swim near poor people, but conceptually it's easy enough to solve.

The free market will always distort regulation to suit the elites that profit from those distortions. Either through government or monopolistic corporations.

As long as private property is enforced through the threat of violence these problems are not tractable. The only solution to regulatory distortion is the complete abolition of capital.

In the case of healthcare, nationalized single-payer system gets far enough for something so critical to our existence without requiring a complete restructuring of the economy.

What does that have to do with anything? If anything it should be cheaper because the risk pool is much larger and the population density is much higher. A big part of Canada's healthcare cost is due to the huge geographic distribution of the population.

The truth is American elites systemically abuse poor people and feed them propaganda to make sure they don't question their terrible conditions. You're repeating that propaganda.

You've got some interesting points here, but it definitely reads more like conspiratorial thinking. What realistic difference is there between "The States" and the federal government? In the end you're still going to have a government enforcing these things, unless you depart radically from our current societal structure.

It sounds like you're just skeptical of a powerful centralized state, and it's coming out through the lens of historical American federation/republicanism. That isn't wrong, but it's as much a history of competing factions as it is an strong intellectual basis.

You're not the only one skeptical of a powerful, centralized state. Try reading Kropotkin or Luxemburg. You might find the ideas resonate with you. Those authors have a coherent ideological basis, and suggest paths to decentralized democracy that has been realized in various forms in recent history, but is radically different to the current American government.

It's cultural appropriation, and it's understandable you feel it's silly or offensive. Part of what makes it uncomfortable is the appropriation of culture for little more than vapid monetary gain. Like you said, it's not contributing to Americans' understanding of Italian culture---if anything it's hurting it with silly stereotypes.

Interestingly, if someone was criticizing the appropriation of an indigenous or asian culture, there is little chance it would be this highly upvoted on HN. I think this is a worthwhile lesson for the community.

> The point of socializing healthcare is making other people pay.

Yes. Especially you personally. Honestly, I don't even care about socialized healthcare as long as your tax rate is > 90%. Think of it as a "stupid libertarian tax".

I think most people will be in support of this measure, as hopefully it will force you to work so hard you don't have time to make inane internet comments.

So now not only do I have to spend several days on the phone each year with my insurance company, on top of figuring out which plan I want every new job, but I also need to watch a bunch of videos about kidney-replacement options for when I get in a car accident? And what heart attack care is available? And how many $1000 Ti screws they should put in my leg when I shatter it rock climbing? And somehow the collective time-wasting is going to be somehow cheaper for all of us?

I always wonder if you libertarians are doing a bit, because it sure seems like it.

Luck isn't involved as long as you can ensure your sampling noise is uncorrelated with the incoming wave, either by direct insertion of dither or characterization of environmental noise. Regardless, your point still stands, just a fun tidbit.

The boots of the oppressive global capital class.

> I didn't make a single value judgement in favor of one system or the other!

You asserted that the abolition of capitalism would result in depravation of freedom.

That is a value judgement.

It is also not true. It is a rephrasing of a line that anti-socialsts have been using for over 100 years. Therefore, propaganda.

I don't care that you're trying to hide the structural violence of capitalism under a veil of civility.

This is absolutely not true, and is a fundamental misunderstanding of socialist systems of government. There are even variants of socialism that embrace markets and competition, and almost all allow ownership of _personal_ means of production... That is, acquiring enough capital to run a personal business. What is not allowed is owning collective means of production, and the consequential rent-seeking and extraction of surplus value that business owners and landlords engage in.

Your comment is obviously propaganda, so I doubt this will help, but I strongly recommend reading some anarchist literature before making claims like that. The Conquest of Bread is a good starting point, but a bit outdated at this point.

Nothing about abolishing capitalism implies that people will not be free. Arguably they could be more free. Not every socialist state needs to (or should) emulate the USSR.

You should try reading The Conquest of Bread.

It's a ton of work to start a union, one that can and has absolutely cost people their jobs, both historically and recently. It seems unlikely that it's just "lefty political signalling". Perhaps you can point to specific reasons why you think this is the case?

Furthermore, articles published on this topic indicate that their motivations included well-established and reasonable on-call hours, slightly more vacation days, and more collaborative decision making with management. All of those are real, tangible benefits that most of us would value and enjoy.

It would be valuable to provide some sources for your claim, because as-is this reads like propaganda.

Perhaps the causation is reversed, and industries with terrible working conditions and low raises tend to attract unions to empower the workers to change those conditions?

Along those lines, "The Conquest of Bread" by Kropotkin exposed me to a new way of thinking about liberty and political self-determination.

It's quite telling of HN that this perfectly reasonable comment is the most downvoted.

I also enjoy the ignorant response implying governments are responsible for worker protections, not the organized labour that pushed for those regulations in the first place. The same meager protections that the current anti-labour government would love to roll back.

> quickly reducing the implicit bargaining power that we've enjoyed for the last 10 years.

Why not codify that bargaining power into a series of employee-owned organizations that are able to negotiate for salaries in line with that cost of living?

There might be some growing pains, but it would certainly be better than the current trend of a few CEOs, VCs, and upper managers hoarding capital for little more than artificially expensive Bay Area real estate.

A single resistor is seriously not challenging to get right. If they can't do that they sure as hell shouldn't be making a cable.

That's fair.

I'm quite liking KiCAD for personal projects these days. Feels like the good parts of Cadence (unix-y, super scriptable) without the cruft and bizarre UX. Sadly it's not nearly powerful enough for 'real' work. Also still a tad buggy, in true open-source fashion :).

The 330V is for sure a misprint. It doesn't look like they have the insulation for a high voltage motor, so my guess would be 30/33V @15A. Reading the linked spec sheet confirms it's in the range. That would put it much closer to a cordless drill motor. (450W, not 5kW, which is obviously impossible on 120VAC/15A)

Totally agreed. His rants are usually fairly superficial as well, and he tends to get a lot wrong. It's fine to get stuff wrong, and it's fine to rant, but doing both at the same time is tacky.

I think it's because he had a lot of success with his early rants, which were generally pretty on-point. As time went on they get more and more salty and inaccurate as he ran out of good ideas.

TheSignalPath is a great EE channel as well.

It's pretty easy to avoid Atmel Studio by using the gcc tool chain. It builds the same binaries as Studio, so you shouldn't have compatibility issues.

Oh man. Hate to say this, but Altium is a blessing. Spend a few days in the Cadence or Mentor EDA suites...

I'm glad you brought it back to my original point so I didn't have to:

> are you actually comparing Nazi symbolism to the LGBT flag?

Again, you're comparing a symbol for a culture/organization that committed _genocide_, to the symbol of a group that was a victim of that genocide. Then you have the audacity to say they could be similarly offensive?

Take your thinly-veiled fascism elsewhere.

They didn't ban political symbols, they ban bullying and acting disrespectfully. The swastika fits that, the LGBT flag doesn't.

This might not be the case, but it feels like you're acting naive to further an agenda.

I'm sorry, but are you actually comparing Nazi symbolism to the LGBT flag?

This has to be sarcastic, no?

They probably confused l/100km with km/l. 8l/100km is quite a common fuel consumption figure (~30mpg).

I don't know how they didn't notice this though, because most people have a general idea of how often they fill their car and how much it costs.