fuckpig

Flogging the old "European socialism is the best" dead horse again, I see.

Comparing radically different countries always yields good results, right? It's important to also note the French are bankrupt and have massive internal problems.

It's great they shifted all of their effort into health care. It will make a nice epitaph.

I know it's failed everywhere else in the world, but maybe Socialism/Communism will work for us!

Seems to be standard for the majority of the internet population, not just trolls.

Further, as Tycho points out:

> What this article describes I would simply call 'bullying' or anonymous bullying or in extreme cases harassment.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7242130

Trolling is about provoking your enemy into revealing himself. It's not just walking up to someone and saying something rude or stupid. But that's about the most the majority of people can handle.

People have different skills. We don't actually need that many programmers as web 3.0 winds down.

> IANAL but I'm reasonably confident that a restraining order he received as a minor would not be admissible as evidence in this case, and thus should be irrelevant to the prosecution.

And yet it might be relevant to the reason he was arrested, if the quotation in the message above yours (which is unsourced) is true.

Kid gets arrested for Facebook talk: "INJUSTICE!"

...but he had a previous restraining order for similar threats: "They might have a point."

What's ridiculous about this case is that they kept at it.

Europe is declining even faster than the USA. The worst part is that Europe is emulating the USA. Although I did find the recent Swiss immigration decision to be interesting.

The people are bloated on Big Macs and television.

I don't think it was a bad example. Are 911 dispatchers law enforcement officers? They seem like they're usually wrong in the advice they give.

> The whole idea that bicyclists somehow are above the law in terms of traffic signals needs to end. We need to start stopping at red lights and stop signs if we're ever to be taken seriously.

I would like this too. I've seen multiple accidents caused by selfish and arrogant bike riders, motorcyclists and pedestrians.

This is in addition to the single persons -- it's always just one in the vehicle -- who drive gigantic SUVs and assume that it's my job to stay out of their way, even when I have the right of way and am trying to do something like drive from point A to point B down the street. Silly me, I should be second-class to them because I didn't buy a giant SUV.

> White America welcome to black America.

Try living in a minority majority area.

Most of your cops are non-white too.

If you get your fingers broken, it's likely an Indian or Hispanic cop with a grudge.

The media hasn't caught up to that yet, but when do they ever?

> My opinion is that where there is no market mechanism to effectively communicate customer satisfaction, you will see abuse.

That's a great criticism of government in general.

> Trying to show you are "an upstanding citizen" in some way is an expression of privilege: the expectation that you can demonstrate membership of a group that is not automatically assumed to be guilty.

That doesn't exist any longer. Our elites are corrupt.

> Voting should be independent of opinion, should it not? Voting should reflect the merit of a post regardless of its popularity, right?

If that were the case, democracy would actually work.

> I love Reddit, but outside of certain subs it is not a productive place to discuss complex situations as the crowd naturally wants the story simplified.

That is the brutal truth. It's why the site favors memes over dissertations.

> If you see someone injured, CALL 911!

When the police arrive, stay out of their way. If they don't need a witness, go home.

There's a "Paramut Kaur" listed here:

http://sfpoa.org/journal_archives/POAJournal_Aug2012.pdf

> This is a perfect example of the disconnect between "hackers"

The people here aren't hackers. Hackers do not trust the system. These people want to manipulate the system for profit.

Unlike the author here, Trayvon Martin was an actual bad actor.

> There's some question as to whether he should've left the scene or not and I think there's some discussion to be had there

The question here is the same question we face with the TSA:

Separating actual threats from threats to someone's personal perception of their own authority.

The author wasn't a threat. The cop screwed up. Then again, you'll never get 100% good people, and so there are going to be some screwup cops. I wish I could say our office was 100% solid. But you always get a few.

Government is a parasite that protects its own interests. It defends itself against you, and to do that, must neutralize anyone who does not do exactly what it wants.

The solution is to overthrow government and replace it with organic power structures. Most people are afraid to do this however. It insults their sense of autonomy and uniqueness.

Thus for the sake of pretense, we continue with this idiocy.

Reminds me of what happened to Andrew Aurenheimer, only iterated a bit more.

I imagine there are some legal ways to do that.

So does this mean that NBC is fraudulent?

We should remember that... around the time of the next election.

Let's decentralize first by removing the centralized generic resources that consume too much of the traffic, like Facebook, Wikipedia, Amazon and Google.

Should be a sticky.

Great. I define social responsibility in Platonic terms:

Good to the good, bad to the bad.

"The real issue comes down to concentration of power in one subsection of the population."

Yeah... that sounds really good in conversation. But let's pick it apart.

Any political system is going to concentrate power because otherwise any act will require buy-in by vast numbers of people. Imagine a committee of 300 million and you'll see why democracy delegates power.

The problem then is more that these groups are the wrong people (selected badly) or that there's not a clear communication to them as to what they should be doing. I'd say both of these are huge problems in our society.

Thanks to both you and zonk for pointing this out. I feel my warez will soon be safer on a Hitachi drive.

The simple answer is that political systems aren't as varied as you might think. There's egalitarianism, which is either unsubsidized (libertarian) or subsidized (socialism). Then there's those who think that some order should come before the individual, and those are either royalist, paleoconservative, "social conservative" or some form of meso-conservative (incl. neoconservatives).

But, as you might guess, there's a catch. Any political system picks up inertia like a ball rolling downhill. Thus whatever direction you go in, you keep going in... and so unsubsidized egalitarianism usually becomes subsidized (as in the 1960s in USA and Europe) and moderate conservatism eventually gets more conservative as it did under Reagan. The reason for this is that, believe it or not, political systems aim at visions of society. The more power they get, the closer they get toward realizing that vision, which is actually what the people who believe in them want.

Conservatives and liberals, by the way, have radically different visions for what they want out of society:

http://www.volokh.com/2014/01/17/jonathan-haidt-psychology-p...

http://chronicle.com/article/Jonathan-Haidt-Decodes-the/1304...