7 ms·

Hey, does anyone remember the BBS game my dad wrote? It was called Buccaneer ...

47 points by ColinWright 3y ago

ruined 3y ago
this is a mastodon post summarizing a reddit thread archived original reddit thread https://archive.is/bQMmn https://archive.is/bQMmn
- ColinWright 3y ago
  Yes it is, but personally, I find it really useful to have a summary before trying to dive into a reddit post/thread. I find reddit nearly impossible to follow, so having an initial summary helps me. That's why I posted this, which does contain a link to the original for those who want to chase it further. Think of it more as an introduction.
  - yorwba 3y ago
    HN policy is to submit the original and put summaries, paywall bypass, further reading etc. in a comment. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html "Please submit the original source. If a post reports on something found on another site, submit the latter."
    - ColinWright 3y ago
      Yes ... yes it is. And being here since 2009 (with this account, longer with some previous accounts) I do know that. Clearly people agree with you, as the story has now been flagged into oblivion. But it's a guideline. I was guided by it, but made an independent decision. On this occasion I had a good reason for doing other than follow that guideline, and I will do so again in the future if I have what I deem to be good enough reasons.
  - ruined 3y ago
    sure. i posted the archive link because i simply want fewer people to visit reddit :)
dcow 3y ago
[flagged]
- rightsareinh 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - boxed 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - Cacti 3y ago
      llm spam
    - Dracophoenix 3y ago
      Rights aren't achieved by consensus. There is no democratic vote on the laws of Nature and what derives from it. Society is not a creature of Nature and thus does not exist. It's an abstract notion derived from the collective schizophrenia of its individual constituents. It has no life of its own, nor is it worthy of one. Only the living have rights.
      - boxed 3y ago
        > Rights aren't achieved by consensus. In the best case they are. The alternative is that rights are achieved by benevolent dictators, and that leads to bad places fast when the dictator is replaced. > There is no democratic vote on the laws of Nature and what derives from it. Eh, ok? What does "what derives from it" mean here? > Society is not a creature of Nature and thus does not exist. Well that was just not true. Society exists in reality. That's like saying thoughts do not exist because there are only single neurons. Or seas do not exist, there are only single H2O molecules. > Only the living have rights. There we agree at least. Although I should say not "have" but "should have". We should have rights. In many parts of the world though the collective consensus is that they should not, like in Taliban Afghanistan.
    - 3y ago
nhggfu 3y ago
yep.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

47 points by ColinWright 3y ago

this is a mastodon post summarizing a reddit thread archived original reddit thread https://archive.is/bQMmn https://archive.is/bQMmn

ColinWright 3y ago
Yes it is, but personally, I find it really useful to have a summary before trying to dive into a reddit post/thread. I find reddit nearly impossible to follow, so having an initial summary helps me. That's why I posted this, which does contain a link to the original for those who want to chase it further. Think of it more as an introduction.
- yorwba 3y ago
  HN policy is to submit the original and put summaries, paywall bypass, further reading etc. in a comment. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html "Please submit the original source. If a post reports on something found on another site, submit the latter."
  - ColinWright 3y ago
    Yes ... yes it is. And being here since 2009 (with this account, longer with some previous accounts) I do know that. Clearly people agree with you, as the story has now been flagged into oblivion. But it's a guideline. I was guided by it, but made an independent decision. On this occasion I had a good reason for doing other than follow that guideline, and I will do so again in the future if I have what I deem to be good enough reasons.
- ruined 3y ago
  sure. i posted the archive link because i simply want fewer people to visit reddit :)

dcow 3y ago

[flagged]

rightsareinh 3y ago
[flagged]
- boxed 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - Cacti 3y ago
    llm spam
  - Dracophoenix 3y ago
    Rights aren't achieved by consensus. There is no democratic vote on the laws of Nature and what derives from it. Society is not a creature of Nature and thus does not exist. It's an abstract notion derived from the collective schizophrenia of its individual constituents. It has no life of its own, nor is it worthy of one. Only the living have rights.
    - boxed 3y ago
      > Rights aren't achieved by consensus. In the best case they are. The alternative is that rights are achieved by benevolent dictators, and that leads to bad places fast when the dictator is replaced. > There is no democratic vote on the laws of Nature and what derives from it. Eh, ok? What does "what derives from it" mean here? > Society is not a creature of Nature and thus does not exist. Well that was just not true. Society exists in reality. That's like saying thoughts do not exist because there are only single neurons. Or seas do not exist, there are only single H2O molecules. > Only the living have rights. There we agree at least. Although I should say not "have" but "should have". We should have rights. In many parts of the world though the collective consensus is that they should not, like in Taliban Afghanistan.
  - 3y ago

nhggfu 3y ago

yep.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]