mfukar
mfukar on Hacker News
> I don't see how the presumption of innocence can prevail
That's alright. You're not in a position that requires you to.
..or did you want to find out?
> the root of the problems (of which there are many) are all cultural
Yes, thank you for restating the obvious. Research should be open, that is what we want. Off to do useful things now.
It's a very simple concept:
You are allowed to say things.
You are assuming responsibility for, i.e. accepting the consequences of, your right to say things.]
Society is then free to cast you out if you say hateful things. You say this society is not free. This is meaningless to this society, it has chosen to operate on assumptions which are fundamentally incompatible with your behaviour.
Well if you
hadn't stopped reading:
> “What we are finding is that they are not angry people. They’re not enjoying anger when they listen to the music, but they are in fact experiencing a range of positive emotions.”
Out of the 16700 populations tracked - spanning ~4k species - their average decline since 1970 is ~60%.
> You are going to be the only one of 20 people on the plane doing this, for jump after jump, no matter how experienced you become?
If they want to be safe they will. If they have a death wish, I'm not getting on a plane with them. I'm more than happy I've never encountered this sort of behaviour.
Yeah, of course. Wish I could say the same for other comments.
> it's totally 'not cool' for experienced jumpers to ask for a gear check
Yeah, that mentality will get someone killed. Literally one of the first 3 things to do in any dropzone I've been in is a gear check, and I don't jump without it (duh?). I think it's an extremely reckless thing to suggest.
I like how you emphasise the "IS" instead of the "if".
> it was "let's publicly disclose the vulnerability at the soonest opportunity".
> ...
> he has made it clear that he isn't interested in acting as a productive member of the community.
Don't project your opinions about disclosure to other people and their intentions.
If you substitute "the bugs" with "climate change", this gets a lot hotter.
Using SIGABRT gets you a stack trace in the same manner as a burnt house excuses you from sweeping the floors.
> This could have been written by a person with a grudge for all I am concerned.
So glad that you can judge his points regardless of that irrelevant information, then.
I'd use firefox despite its schizophrenic features, if it were at least as responsive as chrome, on my mostly-idle home desktop.
Maybe one day, mozilla. Maybe one day.
Interesting. I have the opposite experience. Searching to try and find _new_ content just presents me with videos/playlists I usually have already clicked/watched.
> Their point is to verify that the whole OS from kernel to userspace can't be modified by 3rd parties (such as you, the owner of the device).
Or, _perhaps_, someone who doesn't own the device.
Have you been in the position to receive criticism from Linus?
> My dumbass-self wonders about quantum entanglement or teleportation as means of communication we have yet to master;
We use lasers for quantum teleportation. There's no reason to believe it can be realised more efficiently without.
Your understanding is correct.
Sounds like you didn't read Andi's reply.
Then perhaps I'm biased. Where I was raised (eastern orthodox), preaching in favour of contraception and abortion
as divine mandate was/is seen as crazy. I certainly don't have numbers to compare.
Firstly, I think you're mistaking "pushing the wrong button" with "pushing a single button". Not that we know either to be true, but anyhow..
..that's not what I asked. The EAS, EBS, DEAS, etc. they've all had issues with false alarms and operator error before. What kind of provisions and procedures for case like this do you think have been made?
What sort of procedure do you imagine is in place for a 'false-alarm' type of situation like this?
You're talking about a very specific "Christian" society, which, you should bear in mind, has very few things in common with other Christian societies, like the orthodox for instance.
You're talking about rationalisations. The subjective ethical considerations depend on the context in which the decision is taken, and none of this discovery changes the context.
Not really, we're past requiring intercourse for reproduction.
What is the connection you've made between homosexuality, abortion, and celibacy? I fail to see it.
> But if parents started aborting because they were homosexual, would there be any sort of moral/ethical issue?
Not more so than terminating a pregnancy for any other reason.