patient_zero

The article is short on details but I can't see this as anything other than a sad joke. If Santa Cruz is anything like a typical college town then there are buildings on campus or nearby that could be repurposed for this problem. Certainly there is money somewhere that could be used to purchase space (even though real-estate is at a premium) for this problem. After all, the University will have far more access to funds or loans.

However, that would come at a cost of the profits.

How myopic for them to even consider professors housing students to be an option.

You have a family, a job you like, and a a work\home balance that allows time for videogames? sounds like you've won at life, friend. people have ambitions to get where you ARE.

I have been forced to sit in company meetings where they help drive the anti-union message home every time there is the slightest talk about organizing. Have you had one? I am curious how wide the practice is.

I used to work in healthcare, which could really use some representation too.

Rooting for this idea's death, personally.

i suppose I'm not surprised, but i had hoped things would be different.

currently. I hope for the sake of the investors that it stays so, but I have a feeling it will not.

(This feeling is not at all informed by my bitterness at not buying in when 1BTC was 20 bucks.)

EDIT: Thank you both

cold, i'm about 55wpm. I am comfortable with this.

cheers and thanks for the explanation.

That being said, you are coming off a bit aggressively. Perhaps I'm reading you wrong, but I'm asking a honest question and you are (it seems) just calling me selfish and thoughtless. These questions are not rhetorical, if that was unclear.

Can you tell me please how you use facebook in your daily life personally and professionally? It may not have bearing on the greater discussion but I do want to know, as someone who hasn't used it in years.

Isn't the doxxing the problem then? It seems like the focus is in the wrong place.

Don't we already have laws on the books to stop harrassement? Don't we have laws to stop from inciting violence? If we need to strenghen them then that's an opportunity for discussion. Do we need to talk about our free speech laws? I frankly think it's time to have that discussion, and not quite because of the reason you may think.

Neither of those discussions is this discussion though, and that's my issue here. Facebook is (as another more eloquent commenter said) a megaphone. Why are we blaming the megaphone?

Well, I don't really see it as winning and losing. After all, you simply cannot win against crazy people. What's the old saying? About never getting in an argument with an idiot?

My point I suppose (assuming I even have one) is why they would feel the need to stay, rather than just leaving. It didn't impact my life at all to delete my account, and I'm asking whether there were some development since that makes one NEED to stay. I know loads of people have accounts with FB, but the question I asked, and think they should be asking themselves is "why?"

The biggest problem I have with Facebook is how it evolved from a great place for me to keep up with my more distant friends and family to... whatever it is now. I know I'm an outlier, but I quit Facebook around 2010 or so when I noticed it was being too aggressive in pushing my account to be more public; increasing my curated circle of interest to include friends of friends, and their friends too.

When I found I was spending more time negotiating the byzantine system of settings to keep my page private than actually using the site, I knew it was time to go.

Is it really such an important website that it must change to suit these folks rather than them finding another way to network with their contacts? It's 2018, and there are options.

Perhaps I'm wrong and having a Facebook account is more important in society than I realize?

rather, i was trying to guess the motivations behind your downvoters, based on my own reasoning, a hazardous proposition at best. i meant to distance myself from any critique/judgement of your position but my own opinion was made clear, wasn't it? oops.

you've guessed it, i don't wish to discuss your question at all, no offense. i believe it's a distraction and of little importance. This belief, though i am confident it is a product of my incredible intellect¹, more likely comes mostly from my distaste the US government due to the things I've read in the leaks, and my belief that the US government would do anything to bury wikileaks, up to and including slander and libel.

¹clearly sarcasm, for those invisible down voters

My comment mostly reflects how interesting I find it that people can justify anything they like based on their previous beliefs, cherry-picking facts that suit what they'd prefer to believe.

I am guilty of this too, we all are. I try to attack my own beliefs by reading and attempting to understand other points of view, but I'm not super-human, I have blind spots.

One thing I'm somewhat good at is seeing how language can frame things in such a way to make the counter-argument more difficult. Its all about perception, because language is so imprecise.

For example, You said

>...Wikileaks was part of Russias plan to influence US politics

That is likely true! But your point could be taken to mean that Wikileaks was complicit in this plan. It could be taken to mean a whole lot of things, and while we're debating the veracity of those things we don't even get to debate on other things, such as the content of the leaks, and about the US government's persistent attack on whistleblowers.

Indeed, it frames the mind in such a way as to ponder whether the US's desire to prosecute Assange is proper given the circumstances.

Do you see what I'm trying to say? I may be pretty good at picking up on the nuances of speech but I'm piss poor at explaing myself.

As you say, this whole thread is pretty heavy. Not really in a thoughtful way, sadly. That said, I love your "literally literally". Is it meant to help the reader understand that you mean "literally" in its original form rather than its recently updated definition? :)

Cheers

We can go around and around about who's at fault for this shooting and America's gun violence problem, (and we certainly do here in the states) but it seems the hotel the gunman shot from would be pretty low on that list, and their move to limit their liability strikes me as a smart, if cynical move.

There is a more cynical view, and you should definitely take it. Less doctor involvement means more people taking prescription drugs (the pharma companies hope).

As an aside, I cannot tell you how angry our direct-to-consumer drug advertisements make me. Especially the ones that are marketed to people with terminal diseases offering them hope (but in the small print offering perhaps 3 months longer life, not guaranteed).

Everyone involved in the process should be ashamed of themselves.

This paragraph makes clear that many of the points the author makes here are predicated on the notion that racism is over.

Whatever one makes of the rest of his points, My own life experiences have assured me that he is quite wrong. Blacks aren't living under the consequences of past injustice, judged vicariously through the lenses of history. To even make that assertion is to be blind to the point of absurdity.

Then he trots out this ol' chestnut

Can we speak honestly, for instance, about the fact that blacks make up 14 percent of the population but commit 52 percent of the homicides?

That one made me blink, since there are a lot of other studies that attempt to make sense of this phenomenon, coming up with answers such as income inequality and joblessness, which disproportionately affect blacks.

I actually had to take a step back to consider the website this opinion piece was posted to. I encourage anyone else doubting the veracity of his claims to do the same as part of their conclusion making process.

Thanks in advance for your hard and thankless work.

the worst part being the loophole around minimum wage is that it incentivizes the widespread practice of tip pooling by restaurant owners.

nowadays when you tip your waiter you're also tipping the busser, foodrunner, hostess (and with the recent law change allowing it, the line cook).

it is too easily used as a tool to skirt wage laws by making every employee a tipped one.