mikeq101101

And that is a good thing.

Succinct data structures are used in bioinformatics (e.g., in combination with FM-Index).

Thank you for your service.

Yeah, keep repeating those neocon talking points. The war machine is proud of you.

Assange is what actual journalist looks like. Mass media are there just to repeat the "intelligence community consensus", not to tell people the truth.

After Lusitania, Gulf of Tonkin, babies out of incubators, WMDs, Russiagate, they still wonder why no one takes them seriously, and why are people looking for alternatives.

The comments here disgust me. People here used to have some principles, now there's so many people just repeating establishment talking points.

>In a democracy you get the state you vote for.

That is a lie. I didn't vote for the current state, and neither did majority of citizens.

>these guys are blatantly fighting the law in order to continue being shady

As much as I hate Facebook, your initial assumption is wrong. The fact that the state deeds something illegal doesn't mean it's wrong, and vice versa. The state is a terrible arbiter of morality.

>losing the benefits of such diversity we currently have

Could you describe some of these benefits?

Sorry, I misread OP. People treat "should do" and "should be able to do" frequently as the same thing in these cases (Twitter and "free speech" is another such case).

Of course they should be able to, but that's not what OP asked.

>One thing is for sure: if it hasn’t happened yet, it’s only a matter of time.

Please don't use fallacies like this in serious discussions. You can use this to support every side of every argument, without the need to provide any evidence or even logic behind it.

There has been a huge fearmongering campaign behind net neutrality, partially funded by companies that profit from net neutrality.

Net neutrality is a classic case of regulatory capture, the very thing people think it will suppress. If you think Google and Netflix are supporting NN because it's a right thing to do, instead of their profit motive, you're extremely naive.

You are forced to pay taxes under the threat of violence.

I just can't see using violence against peaceful people, for whatever cause, as heartwarming.

People being forced to pay for someone's healthcare is more heartwarming to you than people voluntarily paying for someone's healthcare?

You are exploiting your workers then, good job you capitalist bastard.

Well, you should have said "we own a company", not "I own a company", if you're running a co-op.

How have I reversed how payroll works?

>I own a company. Thanks to my direct experience, I know very well where value comes from: labor alone.

If that is actually true, you also know that: 1) You had to invest in the company, unlike the employees. 2) You carry far more risk than the employees. 3) Your employees get their money immediately and they are sure to get the money, while you have to wait for profit, and there might not be any.

But you know that, there's no point discussing labor theory of value in 2019, it has been debunked many times. We can discuss the flat earth theory next if this is the standard.

Oof, argumenting by labor theory of value in 2019. Try reading more than one book.

Yeah, so what you defined is a crony capitalism. We should move as far away from that as possible.

It's not moral people are forced to pay for these things.

Can you list a few sectors of the economy that are driven entirely by taxpayer money through the government?

Fighting against fake news by spreading fake news, good job.

>The Pope endorses Bernie Sanders

If it was only things like these, no one would have a problem.

But in practice, anything other than "Hillary Clinton is completely healthy" and "Trump is a Russian puppet" is categorized as fake news.

This push against fake news is just the elites trying to hold onto the power of controlling the narrative.

>Right, because tax money, once collected, simply vanishes into thin air and never, ever shows up as the income of private companies, nor drives entire sectors of the economy.

What are you trying to argue? Taxes are good, because some part of them is redistributed back to private companies?

Part of freedom is responsibility.

If you want to be intellectually consistent, you would never trust MSM. They lied about every war, their body count is far far higher than that of some YouTube channels.

Who decides what is a "proven source of disinformation"?

The media that are currently paraded as trustworthy were all in on things like "babies out of incubators", "weapons of mass destruction", Libya, etc. And everyone who tried to go against them was smeared as conspiracy theorist.

I can not trust the media that was integral in lying about and manufacturing consent for endless wars, when they have not learned from their mistakes and are still beating their drums.

Giving the elites power to decide what is a "proven source of disinformation" sounds like a really bad idea.

That is at least a controversial statement, not a fact as you put it.

Teachers, road workers, and federal law enforcement do a terrible job, because of the incentives in the government jobs.

The soldiers and the endless wars are the worst examples of what the government can do.

People having voluntary interactions instead of being forced, what a bleak world.