to_bpr

>And yes, I am afraid of (some of) "these people."

I am far, far more afraid of you and those who share your viewpoint.

Google, Facebook, Twitter etc. have a pretty beefy track record in very selective censorship. Why would you expect anything else from them?

Outrage-driven censorship isn't anything new, unfortunately.

While I respect Google's rights to host whatever it wants as a private business, I can't help but feel these actions merely serve to prove certain groups right and embolden, or entrench, divisions even further.

>why are you then commenting on a story whose main source (the document) you haven't read?

Because they're outraged by what they've heard about it and demand that someone (almost without question) facilitate that outrage, correct or not.

calling out virtue signalling isn't really signalling in itself though, beyond an expression of disapproval obviously.

Many are becoming fatigued with the unrelenting virtue signalling that's going on these days.

I've a casual worry that $SNAP will hit the bricks and trigger something significant (and negative) within the industry in the near future.

Is this worry justifiable?

Is there any other professional industry as politically divided and toxic as tech has become?

Is there any other industry in which private companies shove their "values" down the throats of their employees in the manner we experience in tech?

It definitely is. It's a more thoughtfully written "haters gonna hate" status post.

That said, I do sympathize with her for the things she talks about having experienced. I'm not even successful by HN's standards, just a CS grad working their way up the tech ladder in some decent companies, but every time I've experienced any level of success along the way I've always been met with petty resentment from not just peers but some I, at times, thought of as friends. Some people are just bizarre.

That's what I'm thinking. The smartphone could be left home turned off, only to be brought out when I need the GPS or similar.

As such I love the thought. It's nothing a dumb phone can't offer right now, but the convenience of it being in watch form would just be fantastic.

Opportunities for new jobs as well as opportunities within your existing job.

>There is a reason he's known as the "most hated man in America".

Because that title sells clicks, much like every other piece of hyperbolic clickbait spewed onto the internet these days?

If he truly is the most hated man in America, by fact, then it's simply further proof that Americans, as a collective entity, are willingly at the highest extremes of ignorance.

Technology isn't the reason work-life balance is diminishing. People are the reason, technology has only enabled these people and the solution to problems with people will not lie in technology.

I'd invest the time in golang. I never hear of Elixir outside of HN but golang appears to be dramatically increasing in adoption and interest, so if I were to put my time into either it'd be Go simply because I feel as though there'll be more opportunities surrounding it.

Was anything made public over what happened on the 31st?

Snapchat's value prop has nothing to do with connecting with one another. It originally lay in its proclaimed transient nature and ability to communicate off the radar from parents/relatives which at the time had begun to "infest" other social media.

Very interested to see how he/they propose to expedite the boring process.

He's absolutely a hero, if only an accidental one. His actions thwarted a large scale cyber attack on some pretty crucial services, so he definitely deserves recognition for it.

Let us also not forget that these are allegations against him and until he is tried and found guilty, he is still an innocent person with only said good deeds to his name. If that changes, so be it, but let's not get ahead of ourselves until justice has ran its course.

If the current climate is anything to base predictions on, I would put my money on the answer lying in hard-coding them to adhere to that which is deemed politically correct.

No, the content between the covers is essentially irrelevant in the mind of the OP.

They're asking us to judge a book strictly by its cover, and to reject it should it not meet their strict criteria of having not been written by a white person or most especially not a white man.

It is 2017, after all.

Perhaps because virtue signalling has never been more popular?

In an industry where we all earn well, have similar qualities of life, similar careers, etc. virtue signalling (often wherever possible) appears to have become the perceived fertile soil for differentiating yourself, and "elevating" yourself.

The fact that the majority of refugees arriving to Europe these days seem to be pushing to get to Germany, Britain or Scandanavia despite being able to "survive" in Turkey, Greece or Italy seems to refute your point a little.

Disparaging certain demographics, namely white people and men, is trendy these days and there's no shortage of self-loathing people in Canada with an apparent eagerness to provide a platform to enable and facilitate that/those trend(s).

I keep reading this "Canada draws strength from diversity" line but I've never seen anything to substantiate it. Could you please give it a shot?

Because I'm an immigrant living in Toronto. The diversity here, while "nice", seems to be a significant weakness if anything - a highly fractured, multi-cultural society simply tolerating one another's existence with no real united identity, goals or vision for Canada's future.

>This reason alone he will never get my vote.

Would you like people to hold an off-the-cuff comment made at the age of 20 against you for the rest of your days?

I've many issues with FB, Zuckerberg and the rest of the cohort, but a comment made 13 years ago isn't one of them.

we've an extremely weak, hyper image-conscious liberal government... what are you expecting?

reddit.com/r/politics

What an incredibly toxic, and factually incorrect, mindset to hold.

I share your outlook on the future of society with regards to its relationship of the mass with technology and privacy. If anything the last decade has shown us, it's that the average person will readily sacrifice freedom and privacy for security and convenience at the earliest opportunity and almost entirely without question or protest.

With that being said, I've some feeling that the "consent" FB and Google have from its users to essentially bulk collect and analyze their data may largely stem from ignorance as to what is being collected and how it's being used i.e. the relationship between the content one produces in Gmail and the ads that same person receives.

That's a tightly coupled, straightforward relationship too. I've no doubt that the average person has zero idea what is involved when Google touts that it can now confidently track an ad being served/viewed online to an in-store, in-person purchase offline.

Then again, with the Snowden leaks and similar and the absolutely apathetic (at best) reaction from the public at large, maybe convenience merely trumps all and will forever more.

>The feed will include news stories from a variety of publishers, to avoid the so-called filter bubble effect, where people follow only content aligned with their pre-existing point of view.

>"To provide information from diverse perspectives, news stories may have multiple viewpoints from a variety of sources... and, when available, you'll be able to fact check," the company said in a blog post.

I'm growing increasingly uncomfortable with how Google, Facebook etc. are now positioning themselves in terms of what news and sources they believe we should and should not consume.

If this piece is true and this update isn't confined to the Google app then I think it may be the final nail in the coffin of my relationship with Google products.