banned1
banned1 on Hacker News
I'm sorry! Was that an attack? I figured if you are into telling others how they should spend their money or live their lives or be taxed by government in freedom-restricting ways, then that maybe you would be intellectually honest and not be bothered if I TOLD YOU what to do with some element of your life. How is that an ATTACK?
A latte is $3.65. If you made your own cup at home, you would spend $0.05. Starbucks is 73x. I believe you need to stop buying lattes from Starbucks and start making your own coffee at home like I do. Stop being such an elitist. Get to work.
If you are fabulously wealthy that you can [have a latte each morning], let alone [buy it at Starbucks], you can afford [an additional tax on your latte for the peasant that got the coffee beans.]
What did you mean by "the interpretive value of language"?
Evidently I am ignorant based on comments from people who are obviously better informed than me.
What is the field that is going to revolutionize curing diseases through genetics engineering etc?
If only citizens would show up to vote for their presumed slam-dunk candidates!
I thought biomedical engineering still has a lot of potential to offer?
But the counter protesters are free to organize their own speaker engagement. They ARE allowed to speak about their position. My point was that there is lack of civility in discourse. What's the point of interrupting another speaker? Let every speaker speak their mind, in an orderly manner, without interruption.
The problem is that some groups have defined "intolerance of intolerance" to be somewhat good, so then discourse stops.
"The community is better at self defense than the individual."
- Not sure what this means. My own experience comes from someone abusing someone at a bus. Nobody intervenes. Just a bunch of sheep until I have to say "Stop it". So while the community may be better defending, they don't, and it is up to the individual to secure his / her own protection.
If my family was murdered while I was out, then by definition I cannot defend them. The law system will take care of it presumably, but that is not "defense", it is post-fact "justice."
Unclear what your mutually destruction comment was.
Bingo! Think Antifa or the students protesting someone at school and not letting them speak.
The country was founded on the notion that all you have is the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. So I rather defend myself.
If you want to “happily pay for” your own protection, you should hire your own bodyguard. I don’t want my taxes to go to your protection just because you want the government to solve all your problems.
I think most hackers are concerned with public safety. The problem is subgroups of hackers differ on how to achieve it. Some hackers want to remove the rights of people not involved in a crime (like, me) to defend themselves and protect their families (interestingly, they also complain of clear plastic backpacks for kids in school, which I agree is equally ineffective in stopping crime). Other hackers want to preserve the right to defend themselves and their families from crime.
Therefore the debate is not about hacking. It’s about a different view of the world.
Therefore, there are other forums better suited for the debate, which really has nothing to do with hacking (with some exceptions).
Sorry. Yeah, that was “trolly.” Will tone it down now. Apologies.
It’s the same thing coming from anti-freedom folks trying to take guns away from law-abiding Americans.
“Assume we make it illegal to have guns, then there will
be no crime or school tragedies yeepee!”
"I think we should offer ... cheap transportation"
How many tickets do you want to purchase? I am collecting donations. Unless you are just talking...
And yet, here we are discussing what happens when we see Dad Government saving for me.
sighWe give all of our info to Facebook, then complain when "privacy".
We give all of our money to the Government or Union, then complain "it went broke."
Or better, give the money to the people and let them take care of their own retirement.
This is the sort of article that I keep coming back to HN for. It's not politics. It's pure and simple technical advice with reasonable back and forth opinions from the community (other than the "if you want to impress me" guy). And nobody wants to take my 2A right, sorry, my right to use 2FA!
If you want to impress me, go serverless.
The facts are here:
https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving
I’m just trying to point out how silly some point of views are in the current state of national discussions.
From the point of view of a 2A supporter, people are attempting to take away what is a RIGHT, while conveniently forgetting to address what is effectively a modern convenience (it is not a RIGHT to own an iPhone) that is factually more impactful on the presumed end goal.
But it makes for better TV ratings and yet another polarizing dividing issue (which is not, as there are high school kids trying to advocate for guns in schools, whose voices are being drowned out by the media and the kids “on the other side”
Imagine what it would be like if we had a march to take away the right to love the person you love, because some people who love like you do get more frequently sick of some disease.
This is a fair point. I guess it would be more like a car enthusiast. Regardless, both cars and iPhones kill more people than guns, but those facts are not as convenient to some groups of people.
But you don't have to get another one because you need it. You get another one because you can. It's just like getting
a new iPhone.