ovibos

In the same way that Tumblr is like blogging but with shittier content, or YouTube is like cinema production but with shittier content

You're sort of attacking a straw man here - just because someone is against the war on drugs doesn't mean they are for indiscriminate legalization. The biggest criticisms of the war on drugs in this thread are that it A) attacks people who are no threat to anyone else or themselves (e.g., cannibas and psychedelic users, "responsible" users in general) because of public misconceptions of these drugs pushed by the powers that be, and that B) it attacks people who are very much in need of help, such as addicts of more dangerous/addictive drugs, by punishing them for what is effectively a disease.

Opinions of HN users may vary on how exactly to fix these problems, but I think it's safe to say that neither the system we have now (villainizing and condemning users) nor complete and total deregulation are solutions.

Sure, but I think that the self imposed barriers the author talks about may be more common in ivy league graduates.

Money is just a stand-in for resources and labor, and if automation makes labor very very cheap, the rich will only need the natural resources the poor sit on, not anything from the poor themselves.

This point of view is addressed in 6.3

Why does "disabled" have the connotation of being unable to be productive, and the phrase "people with disabilities" not? Surely, if we use the phrase "people with disabilities" as we would have used "disabled", it will gain similar connotations, no?

Sorry if i come off as confrontational, I'm legitimately curious

Sort of like how bitcoin uses hashes to demonstrate value, things like diamonds and dyes are a social "proof-of-work" - meaningful only because the cost they imply.

IMO scraping is only abusive if the site explicitly asks to not be scraped (via the site's robots.txt)

The corrupting aspect of power is nonpartisan. It affects the right, and it affects the left.

I don't know if it was necessarily that they "couldn't be bothered to show up and vote". My father decided not to vote on the grounds that he couldn't justify voting for either major candidate, and many other people who voted for Obama in the previous election cycle probably felt the same way.

> I have no idea what actually happened to cause a shutdown

Their servers were raided by the French authorities.

What makes you think wikileaks doesn't vet their information before they publish it?

> they never did match the (encrypted) files

The pre-commitment hashes have always matched the encrypted files, up to this point.

Wikileaks are not "spreading misinformation", they verify everything that they get before they leak it. This is why people take what they leak so seriously - any jackass with an internet connection can spread information, but wikileaks has a reputation for thouroughly vetting the information they recieve.

There hasn't been a proof-of-life from Julian himself in some time, and there was recently insurance files released that didn't have matching hashes.

No hard evidence, but it is worrying, especially when there are so many parties that would benefit from wikileak's infiltration/de-legitimization.

Regardless of how (in)significant you think the material they release is, there's no such thing as too much transparency.

How? In what way does preferentiality damage the transparency or validity of the information?

On my machine (Intel Celeron, 8g RAM) it's noticeably slower than TST even with only 50 or so tabs

What's wrong with `firefox -P`?

The thing is, people who create drama tend to be much more visible than those who suffer quietly (for better or for worse).