sd8f9iu

Yes, torture is a pretty cut and dry moral issue. That does not mean the people/groups you listed are "for torture" based on the small sample of reactions you listed. I would not describe the Obama administration as being "for torture" just for going against the report (can you source that by the way? I can't find it). Maybe they genuinely thought unrest in its aftermath would pose a security risk? I don't think this is really what they thought, hence, the report was released. Likewise, perhaps the Republican party views the report as inaccurate, but not that torture is justified in general (given past members' support for the programs, I doubt this too, but still).

>"The Republicans have issued a rebuttal. I assume this means they support torture."

>"Clapper has issued a rebuttal, claiming that the report isn't neutral. I assume he also supports torture."

>"The White House attempted to keep this report from coming out...I assume that the White House supports torture..."

Politics is a dirty, complex game. If you treat every news event as black and white like this, you will form many extremist positions very quickly. Obama, for example, banned torture via executive order when he took office. Did you cry that he was "against torture" when that came out?

The internet has been decimating traditional news journalism's profits – whether online or offline – for more than a decade now. What do you mean they weren't "pushing ad revenue into the information age?" What were they supposed to do differently? The only news providers I hear about doing remotely well off of online advertising are ones with click-bait headlines and viral content, quite a different style from the NYT.

And how are they "crying that it's everyone else's fault they are losing money?"

I recommend reading what Paul Krugman has to say on the FT piece:

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/24/is-piketty-all-w...

I think Apple started the trend of large graphics alongside big marketing text. The pages look similar to this: http://www.apple.com/ipad-mini/

What if the same evolutionary forces that made humans what we are affect machines? What if we make a machine that can create more of itself? Then overtime, via natural selection, won't the machine best suited to survival – i.e. the most selfish one – survive?

This feature has been available for quite some time, so no. Plenty of people don't know about it though.

The balance between advantages to existing firms and advantages to startups is very much set by political and regulatory choices (like this). Given how much other legislation and regulation there already is affecting the balance, this is only one variable in the mix, and I'm hesitant to believe it shifts the balance in the right direction (where "right" is what's best for society).

Furthermore, ISPs seem to me to be a far cry from the "free market" (I have very few options for my ISP), so I don't believe simply reducing regulation will lead to the best outcome.

Which statistic are you interpreting this from? The Bureau of Labor Statistics' publications? In glancing at their unemployment rate estimates, it looks like the overall trend throughout 2012 and continuing into 2014 is negative, with some noise in between. Though the methods used to calculate unemployment statistics are frequently discussed (such as their inclusion or exclusion of workers who give up searching for a job), it seems like you are interpreting the noise for some mischievous activity (ironically, in a way similar to what this post discusses), for which you provide no evidence.

Can you explain your comment more, in the context of this article?

Andy Borowitz rights satirical news stories for the New Yorker, so yes.

I had the same issue, and after isolating the problem to iOS clients like the author did, I had some success by having iMessage users remove and re-add me as a contact. Obviously not a good general solution, but it's better than having them delete every message chain.

Interesting, thanks. I would consider the plight of the poor and inequality in the US to be of larger concern than the terrible, terrible effects Occupy and these protests are having on the fragile rich.

I don't think Tom Perkins was thinking of the San Francisco protests in his letter, and if he was, then he is delusional as to the current state of class relations in the US. Protests in one city over problems that are not endemic to the entire country (skyrocketing housing prices, for example) are not a rational justification for accusing the opposition of Nazi attitudes. Protests aside, inequality is a major problem in the US right now, and Perkins' response is out of touch with reality.

I added mouse support to Terminal via MouseTerm: https://bitheap.org/mouseterm/. Works like a charm with Vim.

What road are you talking about that leads to Gizmodo and TMZ? The one I described (ranking by upvotes) is used by HN and Reddit.

And if not the ranking, what part of HN, Reddit, etc. are you praising over NYT?

Do you like just the listing, without the ranking? I think the latter follows from the former. I don't like listing, because it orders articles and artificially gives the higher up ones more importance. NYT headlines instead assign things to levels and categories, based on page location and headline size. Also, in many of the sub-sections, news is organized roughly as its added (newest-oldest), and its assumed that it's important enough to read if it's in the NYT.

Or do you just like the plain text presentation? Fair enough, but I like having more context on the home page.

It may seem messy at first, but as a long-time reader, I love the NYT site for its rich and informational presentation (and content).

I don't always want my news ranked in a list by upvotes and an algorithm, thank you very much. I find sites that rely on user input to rank stories are prone to spreading rumors and emotional, link-bait news. I trust the New York Times to present to me a variety of stories in what they think is the best way. What is it with this obsession with the idea that the view of the mob must be the best way?

Perhaps I am misunderstanding your comment – what does this have to do with how great the US is?

Snowden grew up in the US. Having the US after him means he is excluded from traveling to a large part of the Western world due to fears of extradition (even making it out of Russia, due to flight connections and such, might be hard).

Perhaps he is happy living in Russia for the rest of his life (though I doubt it), but since when does a desire for clemency indicate he (or anyone) views the US as the "greatest country on earth?"

I didn't realize at first that we had basically accomplished video-phones via Skype, Hangouts, and the internet. Seeing video chat was not very surprising for me, perhaps because it was such an obvious extension of the internet. It's funny how something that I had dreamed of as a kid, and always imagined as a dedicated hardware unit, became completely trivialized and overshadowed by the internet.

The article states that most doctors and researchers acknowledge that ADHD is a legitimate disease (as yours seems to be), and that some people should take medication. But they are protesting the vast over-diagnosis of the condition, and the push for medication to fix symptoms that are common in most people.

Also, though you might not notice any side effects, the article discusses that the side effects can be substantial (trouble sleeping, loss of appetite, sometimes suicidal thoughts), and that they are typically vastly understated in advertisements. The drug can be addictive too.

This sounds like something to make a big fuss about. If the opposition is to be believed (and I think it is), children are being vastly over-medicated with strong drugs based on bad science and misleading advertising.