3 ms·

This was flagged dead. I vouched for it. There is nothing in here that is beyond discussion imo and we are still well into a situation in the US that requires d

by Grimm1 6y ago

This was flagged dead. I vouched for it. There is nothing in here that is beyond discussion imo and we are still well into a situation in the US that requires discussion like this and this is a sufficiently nuanced take.

sol_invictus 6y ago
There is nothing new nor particularly insightful about this article. It's the same tired self-inflated story about how Trump supporters are idiots and if only we could somehow educate them how our POV is right, this would all go away. If anyone was truly interested in resolving this conflict the talk would be about how to reach consensus and peace between the extremes. But no, it's this constant self-congratulatory stream of "news" and opinion pieces as if they've invented something completely novel. Notice I said the extremes. The radical postmodernists are just dangerous as gun-yielding rednecks.
- Grimm1 6y ago
  You're reading of it doesn't line up. Not only is he sympathetic towards people who fell for Trump's bullshit he aligns with the thought that larger tech companies should be more scrutinized and regulated.
- mcguire 6y ago
  Reaching "consensus" with anti-vaxxers is unlikely to result in a valid science-based policy. Seeking peace with people who want, and are willing to say anything to get, to destroy society is a losing strategy. Picture this: it's the 80s and you're arguing for consensus between the extremes of creationism and science. But no, those scientists keep trotting out those "self-congratulatory stream of "[facts]" and opinion pieces as if they've invented something completely novel.” (As far as I know, radical postmodernists have never attempted to attack the US Capitol.)
  - sol_invictus 6y ago
    A software developer writing guesswork on an infinitely complex social issue is hardly comparable to a scientist examining vaccines.
dang 6y ago
It may not be beyond discussion in principle but when something has been discussed many times, there's a power-law dropoff in how interesting it is, in HN's sense of the word. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20repetition%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=%22significant%20new%20information%22%20by%3Adang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=follow-up%20by%3Adang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... From that perspective the flags are understandable.
- Grimm1 6y ago
  Fair point Dang, and it seems it's been flagged twice so the community has spoken and I'm fine to abide by that. :)

by Grimm1 6y ago

sol_invictus 6y ago

There is nothing new nor particularly insightful about this article. It's the same tired self-inflated story about how Trump supporters are idiots and if only we could somehow educate them how our POV is right, this would all go away. If anyone was truly interested in resolving this conflict the talk would be about how to reach consensus and peace between the extremes. But no, it's this constant self-congratulatory stream of "news" and opinion pieces as if they've invented something completely novel. Notice I said the extremes. The radical postmodernists are just dangerous as gun-yielding rednecks.

Grimm1 6y ago
You're reading of it doesn't line up. Not only is he sympathetic towards people who fell for Trump's bullshit he aligns with the thought that larger tech companies should be more scrutinized and regulated.
mcguire 6y ago
Reaching "consensus" with anti-vaxxers is unlikely to result in a valid science-based policy. Seeking peace with people who want, and are willing to say anything to get, to destroy society is a losing strategy. Picture this: it's the 80s and you're arguing for consensus between the extremes of creationism and science. But no, those scientists keep trotting out those "self-congratulatory stream of "[facts]" and opinion pieces as if they've invented something completely novel.” (As far as I know, radical postmodernists have never attempted to attack the US Capitol.)
- sol_invictus 6y ago
  A software developer writing guesswork on an infinitely complex social issue is hardly comparable to a scientist examining vaccines.

dang 6y ago

It may not be beyond discussion in principle but when something has been discussed many times, there's a power-law dropoff in how interesting it is, in HN's sense of the word. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20repetition%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=%22significant%20new%20information%22%20by%3Adang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=follow-up%20by%3Adang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... From that perspective the flags are understandable.

Grimm1 6y ago
Fair point Dang, and it seems it's been flagged twice so the community has spoken and I'm fine to abide by that. :)