ss108

They post on Hacker News, yes.

Nice

Location(s): Los Angeles; NYC (depends on pay); SF/Bay; Orange County

Remote: Open to remote, hybrid, or on-site

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: React; Python; TypeScript; NodeJS; C#; SQL

CV: https://samier-saeed-cv.tiiny.site/

Email: samier_saeed@protonmail.com

I am a software engineer with a legal background who is jumping back into tech. I am not picky about industry or precise role, but if you are a legal tech company, that's a plus for both of us.

I don't understand why it needs "funding"--I was under the impression it was a subsidiary of whatever the Virgin parent company is, but I guess I was wrong.

Sorry to hear. Hope your kids enjoy his recording.

But yes, it would be weird to generate more stuff spoken by your father by using this technology. And beyond that, what's even the point? It's not your dad.

Do you think the reason why we don't have that is because of a lack of money, and not a lack of political will?

What?

To be clear, this doesn't affect subscriptions bought via Amazon that people read on the Kindle app on iPads and Android tablets?

There seem to be literally 0 pics of dogs on that webpage

That's something I did in 2015 and 2016. I was young and stupid.

? It isn't lol

Just Googling a bit reveals many options...

This just willfully tone deaf as to what was going on and being implied then. The other component of it was this kind of "blame China" attitude he was trying to engender to deflect blame, and that's another reason why the theory never caught on.

(Also to be clear, it's not even that the China stuff made him racist; he clearly established himself as a racist, and then he said that stuff, which I agree wasn't necessarily racist. But of course, he wasn't speaking in a vacuum, he was speaking in the context of himself and his whole presidency, which led everyone to naturally assume the worst of it.)

Because we had a racist president who said stuff like "China virus" in a stupid and demeaning way--i.e. what may have been a valid and reasonable argument or position had its credibility ruined by being taken up by Trump and his ilk for their own ends.

Well, as the poster said, it backfired on them lol

(I do not believe in the intentional malicious leak theory, to be clear)

People who work for political campaigns need to know, businesses and investors might like to plan, etc.

Why useless? People have to attempt to predict the outcomes of elections, and have to do their best.

Yeah. In 2016 when people were like "hurr durr experts suck, they predicted Hillary would win and she lost", it was exasperating. If a model predicted an outcome with 60-70% certainty, and the less likely scenario happens, model wasn't necessarily bad. That'd be true even if it was a 90/10 split.

It doesn't matter. "Every day employees" are not the ones who needed to do this.

It feels like using one computer to me. I have only used it since WSL2 came out--maybe that accounts for the difference?

With VSCode, it feels native to edit code on WSL.

I have used both Windows and Ubuntu, and now Windows only with WSL for dev. I don't get what dislike about Windows tbh. I've never truly used OSX, so maybe my opinion isn't useful.

I have had 0 issues with WSL thus far, am quite happy with it.

Jesus, I wish I could downvote this 50 times.

What do you expect a guy who forms an emotional relationship with a chatbot thing to accomplish with a dating app? Most likely would only induce further despair because he would get few, if any, likes.

np :)

Standing here would be about whether Wikimedia or their members is aggrieved or injured, etc. The poster to whom you replied is wondering how the org would meet the legal requirements.

Their counsel is irrelevant to the question of standing.

It is of course ironic you take a condescending tone while trying to convince me I am judgmental and condescending.

I don't engage with any social media, and I'm out there in the world plenty. I read the news, I've spoken with people. We can all hear what Trump says, we know his policies.

I have had Trump supporters say to my face that asylum seeking children getting separated from their parents and never seeing them again is A-ok and deserved because it was the parents fault for trying to escape their country and come here. Those are the people you're defending. You think speaking further with them would make me despise them less?

> You really think 42% of the US are bigots who will lynch blacks and firebomb lawyers?

Why do you think my hypothetical is about literally every single one of them engaging in those things? If the Proud Boys and such groups started getting more active and doing such things, do you think most Trump supporters would care? Or would they keep at it with their far-right politics and support for him?

> I guess I was thinking more in the sense that people follow parties instead of picking individual issues.

Yeah, we definitely have a problem in this country with limited options. I think a sizeable majority likely want at least one or two other parties in the mix.

It is good to see someone else doesn't believe that we should start moving moral goalposts just because society starts sliding into depravity.

What would all these people objecting to this do if they were in a time and place where some real shit was going down? Lynchings, genocides, etc? I guess they'd stand by and be ok with it and rationalize those things.

Who cares? I'm not making an argument as to what wins elections, I'm stating moral conclusions.

Really? Recognizing that people who vote out of bigotry and ignorance are trash is what led to that? Calling out people who openly and proudly believe in conspiracy theories is what led to that? Assuming you aren't a Trump supporter, what would they have to do in order for you to believe they are bad and need to be called out as such? Start lynching Blacks en masse? Firebombing the offices of lawyers who represent asylum seekers?

My impression from this thread is that you'd make an excuse even if they started doing those things.

> You'll get no argument from me on that front, but I think that's a pretty bipartisan failing.

Not really? Has there been any cult of personality like Trump's not only among Dems but also among Republicans, aside from him, in American politics within living memory? (awk phrasing, but I think you get the idea).

Maybe Reagan? But even then, it wasn't this level of incredibly personal devotion.

Think about it: we never used the terms "Obama supporter" or "Romney supporter" in 2012, or "Obama supporter" and "McCain supporter" in 2008. And people supporting those candidates didn't wave flags with candidate names on them, etc.