sol_invictus

”I don’t need your fantasy women!”

- William T. Riker

I’ve been a gym rat for 15 years and the regulars I know will champion hardest for the people attempting a change.

Sorry you had foul experiences, but I’ll stick to 2% of the people being in that bucket.

Literally never seen this happen. 98% guarantee the stigma is in the obese person’s own head more than anything.

It’s just easier to transfer the responsibility to ”an unfriendly environment” than taking responsibility & control of your own feelings and actions

How is it a wide range of options if you forced to say either viewpoint A or B is true, when in reality any semicomplex issue will have truth in viewpoint C, D, ∃!xP etc.

Complex societal issues will not be solved within the scope of a 30 second video.

Assuming any issue can only have 2 viewpoints is extremely fallacious

I went through my last comments page and maybe one of them involved ”race.” Why dont you go spread your disinformation elsewhere

I can't see how this can affect the echo chamber issue in any way. Turning the "disklike" button into "respect, but dislike" hardly does anything to the substance of the general conversation topics. People are still socially afraid of presenting viewpoints and trying to make people do so with their own name and face will produce worse results VS twitter. Unless a monochamber is what you're shooting for.

To be fair to you, I hardly see any technological solution within humanity's current capabilities as a solution for the problem.

Good article. Would also add polarisation & political extremism is a major catalyst in converting people of good faith into people of bad faith through questionable narratives, false statistics and all the other means of propaganda available.

This is the main reason why the political forcefeeding we are experiencing right now is highly dangerous.

So the problem is not that Basecamp doesn't allow political opinions, it's just that they don't allow the right political opinions. Why am I not surprised... This whole American thought police experiment is going to end in a massive dumpster fire in the not-too-distant future.

Lets try it the other way around - convince me that the issue at hand isn’t way overblown. I promise to try to be as objective as possible.

Of course they would and they should, much like I would tell someone asking me to denounce white supremacy to f-off despite me being white.

The hordes going around asking you to "denouce white supremacism" isn't anything to do with white supremacy, it's a power play to subvert. Again, it helps to reverse the roles here to see how idiotic this is: imagine someone going into a black neighbourhood asking regular people to denounce gang violence.

It's quite the opposite - it's a fool's errand harboring fragile employees who are willing to make such a show about a email containing juvenile name calling. You cannot build a solid baseline on an employee who can implode any second on the most miniscule issue.

This will hurt Basecamp in the immediate term but over time they will be better off.

Tl,dr: helps executives transfer risk

Tthe opposite of not wanting selection via cowardice isn't "select more white people", as many seem to misunderstand. It's simply wanting selection based on the criteria at hand.

As long as a mob force exists that alters that equation, you'll have at least minor distortion.

It could well be that without the mob the award candidates would've been exactly the same, but we won't know.

Then the equation is even more simple.

> There’s a HN rule against complaining that HN is becoming like Reddit. This comment is in the same genre - it was better in the good ole days.

So called "refiniment culture" is very much a real phenomenom, and is driven by the wave of data sciences injected into all categories of life: https://paulskallas.substack.com/p/refinement-culture

This is why everything seems calculated & homogenic. There is very little room for "happy accidents" today, because the data analysts will tell you how to make the biggest ROI with a given set of circumstances.

If you have a sizable populace willing to garrote you if your award nominations do not include a large enough representation of minority populaces, regardless of how movies, actors, directors, screenwriters, and anyone else actually performs in any given category (which, I believe, is the main point of an award), the incentive for including an equalized representation across all award categories far outweighs the benefit of awarding based on merit.

That is the evidence you asked for, you're welcome. It's not a white / non-white question at all, as you can see.

People also try to ignore that Spotify did exactly what everybody thought they would do - started watering down the guests and removing so-called controversial episodes.

A big part of the Rogan show charm was the fringe guests, and his audience doesnt care the least for the kind of corporate virtue signalling Spotify is eminating.

In effect, it went from offering somewhat novel things to being plain boring - like everything else you’d expect from a Spotify podcast. I dont find Rogan particularly charismatic as a host either so why listen anymore?

Even most ”normal” people (= people who dont care for partisan hackery) have lost trust, interest and willigness to consume modern agenda journalism. Where can you turn to for information in that case?

The only surprise here is that ONLY half of republicans actually believe these accounts.

This already exists. Remove them from being connections. It's exactly the same outcome - what do you think these people will think when they see one of your posts and notice you've barred them from commenting?

I would just remove the connection instantly in that scenario.

Why exactly is it a problem if people are CHOOSING to do something on their own accord? Other than the political gestapo having to swallow their pride, I don't see freedom of career choice as a negative.

As someone also from a small country with no power or stakes in this equation: everybody is equally being played and if you're dualistic with your side-picking you're getting burned one way or another.

Lets not pretend there are hordes of people on Twitter ready to doxx, harass, publicly shame and do god knows what other things if you’re against the woke mob.

I’m always willing to listen to a factual counterargument but you’re not presenting one.

So it’s OK that someone died, because your political framework is aligned with some ethereal goal of CHOP. Based on the definitions stated in this thread, you support terrorism.

This has been the left’s rhetoric for eons. They always excuse their actions because of their ”noble” goals. Same regarding policy - its the stated goal that matters, not the end results and real-world consequences of their policies.

Having a convicted terrorist as a director of their beloved BLM movement means nothing. Lofty ideals matter.

Invading a city block means nothing. Lofty ideals matter.

If you don’t think the people who did CHOP and Capitol are equally dangerous to society, you’re wilfully turning a blind eye.

As the right flirts with nazism, the left flirts with communism. I dont think its particularly surprising and doesnt require deeper meta-analysis as youre trying to propose.

A software developer writing guesswork on an infinitely complex social issue is hardly comparable to a scientist examining vaccines.

Correct. Now if we could only treat modern communists with the same zeal.

A friendly reminder: communism has killed, by some accounts, at least 65 million people during the last century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_...