Re:Ask HN: Will automation generate social massive protests?
by chinathrow on Sunday January 08, 2017 @10:53AM
(#13350211)
I assume you're from the U.S.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/2656f
"(2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;"
Rough words for a few Uber drives in France.
Re:Ask HN: Will automation generate social massive protests?
by yummyfajitas on Sunday January 08, 2017 @11:01AM
(#13350263)
I know it's confusing when white people are called "terrorist", but the definition clearly fits. If it helps you to understand, think about the Pune/Bombay examples I linked to above (where the perpetrators and victims are all brown).
Re:Ask HN: Will automation generate social massive protests?
by rocqua on Sunday January 08, 2017 @11:03AM
(#13350280)
I believe the strikers, not the uber taxi drivers, are the ones that are called 'terrorists' here.
Re:Ask HN: Will automation generate social massive protests?
by marcosdumay on Sunday January 08, 2017 @01:29PM
(#13351131)
Any army that ever participated in a war fit this.
I think there some "terror" missing from this definition. Anyway, it is a word that should just not be used today. There is no context where it clarifies anything anymore. The GP is correct in distrusting people that use it, and I add that some loss of trust should be automatic.
Re:Ask HN: Will automation generate social massive protests?
by yummyfajitas on Sunday January 08, 2017 @08:25PM
(#13353313)
Yes, I left out the requirement of being a non-state actor in my comment. I don't think my comment was misleading at all. My use of the word "terrorist" fit both my definition and chinathrow's.
Since you seem to think I'm being misleading, what do you think I'm misleading people about?
If you must know the answer, I feel like a person who's read a dictionary and knows that terrorists are people who use violence and intimidation to achieve their political goals.