I would've put it in the title but it won't fit.
Could you describe more about the relation of Practical concordance with free speech laws in Germany? I'm not too familiar. And what does free speech conflict with?
Also, she's former Danish PM.
281 karma · joined December 31, 2016
Could you describe more about the relation of Practical concordance with free speech laws in Germany? I'm not too familiar. And what does free speech conflict with?
Also, she's former Danish PM.
> The number of people in crypto who believe in a libertarian, anarcho-capitalist world are on the order of 0.01%
Where do you get your numbers?
> And that’s because that is how crypto is actually marketed to the masses.
Again, I don't see anyone "marketing" for it. People should understand what they're working with before selling their houses and "investing it" in bitcoin ffs. If they do that then they're dumb!
- Business and work in general makes rich people richer. Remember that rich is very relative. You are a very wealthy person compared to a random person in some countryside in China.
- Considering the previous point, are you saying that people who have some money should not do anything to make more money? Should they stay the same, or should they become poorer? What do you advocate to do this? Prevent them from working? Take money from them forcefully?
All I hear from people in the crypto world is that you SHOULDN'T invest if you don't have money you're willing to lose. Crypto investment is a dream only for delusional people who want to get rich quick. If you do that then lose your money, you don't get to complain. You're free to choose, if you choose wrong, lose, and then not take responsibility for your choice and blame others, then you're truly a loser.
You're not building an app to fight climate change. You're trying to cash in on a trend to fill your pocket and ego, to feel like you did something while doing absolutely nothing of value.
And stop spamming.
Twitter management is synonymous with incompetence.
Why do you say it's on the rise? Have you considered that there's lot more people, or that that the internet and various "communities" on the web just gave extra amplification to all sort of ideas? This is exactly why nothing should be banned. If you want wrong ideas to be corrected, you let them be discussed in the open. If you start pulling down videos that talk about flat earth you're gonna end up with grouping all people who think like that in a community where they only get exposed to ideas that affirm their erroneous belief.
> and already it seems as though cracks are starting to form.
again, provide examples or evidence for how and where you see this.
I don't think it's been "debunked" as you say. Provide evidence. A few examples is not evidence to make such a blanket statement.
> The best ideas arent the ones that win out, it's the loudest ones and the ones that appeal to our most base emotions that win.
Again, very much disagree with this. If you look short term that may be true, but long term historically speaking at least that has not been the truth.
If anything, this shows the zombies that the people are. Anything TV says is truth. A stupid short report from an online magazine made some late show host make a short skit about it and boom, like wild fire. I call total bs on that whole thing. This entire COVID response has been political from DAY 1. Western countries response has not only been shameful, but absolutely reprehensibly.
But the new and very different point that you're making, which is "removing bad actors improves the quality of information on social networks", is also very disputable and shaky.
- First link is "Reddit says that the rules Reddit made helped Reddit." is not exactly impartial, so forgive me to mistrust it.
- Felt bad opening a Vox link (since so very obviously biased, but whatever, opened it for a laugh). The say: "misinformation slowed, the research indicates online discussion around the topics that motivated the Capitol riot has also diminished" if you don't see it (or if it doesn't happen online) it doesn't mean it diminished overall. The whole article is full of bias honestly. Sad that you feel it's worthy enough to source.
That's a misconception, and basically what the whole trolley problem is all about. Doing nothing is not the same as doing something. Each have their own ethical consequences and it's not as easy as you think to spurt out the "right" answer. Sure, you might have a preference that's difficult for others to argue against or for, but others also have the right to reach a different conclusion.
With that being said, may I ask you what you know about vaccination? Are you using information from articles you've read online from "authorized" sources, or are you an expert on the matter? Again my point here is not to say that you're wrong or right, you're absolutely free to reach whatever conclusion you desire, but it's really difficult even for actual experts in the medical field to know what's going on currently, who's motivated by altruism, greed, selfishness, or cronyism. Taking up these stands and pretending it's "science" is an insult to science, because "science" is ever evolving and there's no such thing as consensus in the scientific process.
On some level, we have to acknowledge that whoever is running the shitshow at youtube and twitter are actually responsible as well, in that they believe they know enough to literally dictate what everyone in the world should see and read.
For example banning Trump from Twitter is a great example of this. Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of his politics (or Biden's, or any of them, same shit different smell i say), but who the hell do Twitter people think they are that they feel confident enough to ban him? Not talking in the sense of a private company here, sure it's their business and they can do whatever the heck they want, but does anyone really think that by banning him they prevented whatever ideas of his that think should not be encouraged to stop? At best, this shows tremendous life inexperience, which I expect from kids who read a couple of books and think that they understand everything, the typical example of a tech company worker in a company like Twitter.
Edit: People continuously downvote my negative comments about lockdowns. I leave you with this before you downvote:
https://twitter.com/janesays22/status/1415354369126457346
> I turned 18 in Feb 2020. I lost my friends, my education, the first year of my adult life, my mental health, and 20lbs.
> I didn’t make sacrifices.
> I was sacrificed.
Look up: https://gbdeclaration.org/ - http://pandata.org/
Let's do Twitter while we're at it.
nope not true, only algorithm driven website. just because this post or comment made it to the top of HN doesn't mean people think it's valuable now, it just means like you said: it has buzz around it, and it should, because it's bullshit and should be exposed for the bullshit it is. Is that enough to get people to be more skeptical about what they read? I don't know, probably not though.
- Being common doesn't mean it's good or acceptable. In this case, it doesn't account for the effects of day of the week, or what sort of issues the person was having on that day specifically.
- n=258 is enough if it was sampled properly, and they provide no details to show that it was, so it wasn't. They provided nothing more than the engineers they surveyed were in the UK. Nothing on experience, age group distribution, family-size, years of work, company size, work change.
- As it stands, this provides 0 valuable information, and I can only assume it's intended for buzz.
I didn't claim to know everything there is to know about statistics and research in general, but I think I know enough to tell that this is not a study, but a marketing campaign for whatever this usehaystack thing is.
> First, they should have tried to poll around 400 people (and perhaps they did!),
If you had read the article, you would have known that that's not what they did.
> By typical polling standards (95% confidence interval, random sample from filtered population), we expect that 77-89% of UK software developers are actually burnt out. That is still three out of every four people in the industry!
Do I understand correctly that you've worked on this? That certainly explains the hostility, but nevertheless.
> we expect that 77-89% of UK software developers are actually burnt out.
That's not what the link/study says.
> That is still three out of every four people in the industry!
This is absolutely wrong, without a shred of a doubt.
I recommend that you read: How to lie with Statistics by Darrell Huff.
Yeah I'm gonna go on a limb and say this is a marketing campaign. It's an insult to science to call this a "study".
From the pdf:
> The fieldwork of this study was carried out at remarkable speed, from the 23rd to 24th of June 2021
Data was collected in 1 day. Is this a joke? No it's not!
> The population sampled included Software Engineers aged 18+ living in the United Kingdom. In total we surveyed 258 such people
Survation, the market research agency who did the actual work, interviewed 258 people only, I don't see any definition or criteria on what that means, years of experience, field, cultural-background, or any of the many other very important aspects that anyone would wonder about.
I really don't understand how they can do a half-assed data survey on 258 people only, and then have the gall to claim "83% of developers".
What's really sad about this is that there is indeed an increased workload I've heard people say that they've experienced, caused by the side-effects of the covid-response most governments took, from working from home for extended periods to mental health issues.
This kind of click-bait bullshit marketing campaigns is pretty harmful to the very real issue of burnout because it muddles the ground and dilutes the issue.
Don't get me wrong, reddit is very useful and nice. I absolutely hate Reddit the company but I still find some subs super interesting and useful. Remember, this has nothing to do with Reddit the company it self. Reddit the company it self is absolute garbage. The idea that they feel entitled enough to tell people who made the bulk of it what they should want (new design, block mobile browse, push app, and now ban download bots) is a comical.
People who work for reddit are wasting their talents, that is if they have any. I'm sure engineering wise there are talented people there, but business/design wise I'm almost certain that their value is abysmal. Reddit management is just a combination of entitled, dumb, and inexperienced.
Reddit's end is going to be like another 9gag site. At least 9gag acknowledges what they really are, but Reddit pretends as if they're fucking archive.org while they're 4chan's inferior brother but they just don't know it.
Seriously, trash company. Reddit the company and their management/strategy/design team should be a case taught in class. An exemplary case for Garbage-zero-valued-high-horse tech companies.
> I self-hosted a writefreely instance for a while but I found many features were proprietary and only available in the paid managed hosting (write.as). All features that I didn’t need that much and could workaround however it just made me feel quite dissatisfied with the project.