Levitz

42 ms·

661.
by Levitz 3y ago
You can't shame someone for the worldview that women "Give up sex" in the same sentence you shame them for not managing to get sex as a man. It doesn't make sense.
662.
by Levitz 3y ago
I think it's just a "everything is bigger in the US" joke.
663.
by Levitz 3y ago
It's also a consequence of constant R&D improvements. We can make appliances that last for 20 years or more, sure, but then when 20 years pass you have an appliance that is 20 years old and doesn't have any of that new stuff t
664.
by Levitz 3y ago
Feigning ignorance? I am explicit in pointing how minorities tend to get a special deal when it comes to supremacist talk. I just don't condone it. I don't believe that glorification based on race is something you can keep to cert
665.
by Levitz 3y ago
Doesn't it? And I don't, by any measure, mean that all of it does , but nowadays we have luxuries we simply didn't have before, are these not fruits of that increased productivity?
666.
by Levitz 3y ago
>It’s literally just advocating for including the wide and varied history of algorithm development, in order to encourage readers from many different backgrounds to find ways to connect with the important topic. I'm at a loss of wor
667.
by Levitz 3y ago
>Do you think they should have to embrace austerity because they’ve asked for donations? "Not embracing austerity" is one thing, "asking for donations" is another thing, "what Wikimedia currently does" is so
668.
by Levitz 3y ago
My takeaway from this is that Wikimedia clearly has way, way too much money.
669.
by Levitz 3y ago
>Of course it is offensive. But so are all the "cops" who follow the Korpsgeist and keep their mouths shut when they see their colleagues openly break the law. I'm going to go out on a whim and say you wouldn't be com
670.
by Levitz 3y ago
It is so, so refreshing to actually get an answer straight up instead of 6 paragraphs about the context, and how the author came to learn it, and what confusion might be, and how other constants have other names etc.
671.
by Levitz 3y ago
> All the coverage about crunch, for instance, or sexual harassment scandals at big companies—-these are topics broken by games journos. Sorry to be blunt but, that's not games. That's games journalists who want to be activists
672.
by Levitz 3y ago
>I keep hearing this sentiment on HN and IRL. As a journalist I think it misses the mark somewhat by failing to account for the value of reporting. There is valor added by journalists in even niche sectors. A journalist that reports on c
673.
by Levitz 3y ago
Do you require examples of this library specifically or general examples of this happening? If you are ok with general, the cases of Monkeypox not that long ago are an evident example. The reality of the matter is that it affected almost ex
674.
by Levitz 3y ago
You know, I was going to argue that such an historical landmark has value beyond what is learned. Those who are inspired, those who believe in funding science, the sheer awe of what civilization can achieve and all. But it would seem the co
675.
by Levitz 3y ago
It seems to me that you are grasping at straws in order to paint a picture of oppression that doesn't match reality. I do believe that your convictions are good, but I don't think this helps them.
676.
by Levitz 3y ago
To who?
677.
by Levitz 3y ago
>You could have said this at least for the last 70 years. It doesn't change the systemic issues that enable prejudice against minorities. This means prejudice is still more mainstream than tolerance While I find it impossible to qua
678.
by Levitz 3y ago
So you would rather make unsubstantiated claims yourself, taking part in precisely the thing you took a few paragraphs to denounce, because you consider yourself to be right?
679.
by Levitz 3y ago
Telling this to other Europeans who comment stuff like "I can't believe they outlawed abortion in the US" just doesn't get old. From "Damned brutal patriarchy" to "Damned children murderers" in less t
680.
by Levitz 3y ago
I'm seeing this point repeatedly through the thread, and it's like there is an implied "And we wouldn't want to put barriers to that, would we?" And I'm thinking, maybe? Maybe if you can think of a medication t
681.
by Levitz 3y ago
>The opposition is just politically-religiously motivated concern trolling. Then why do European countries require a prescription too?
682.
by Levitz 3y ago
>This is really unsubstantiated and it would be nice if you didn't say things like this in the context of this conversation here unless you're going to provide a legitimate source. Condoms and the pill are the most used contrac
683.
by Levitz 3y ago
Your article talks about an annual report, then links another article written 3 years before the one you link, said article doesn't link to the report. So I search for the report itself: https://www.unfpa.org/sites&#x2F
684.
by Levitz 3y ago
>Remove this "free money guarantee" and watch how market corrects itself. While I agree, I can't imagine what it would be like for the first generation of students under such change. The reason they are government backed i
685.
by Levitz 3y ago
Not really. They can delete whatever they want.
686.
by Levitz 3y ago
EU can very well decide not to allow any product they please. There are products that can't be sold on the EU because of health concerns. Threads is no different.
687.
by Levitz 3y ago
I'm sorry to be callous but you just don't understand how any of this works. You can't just "not post those things". If we are on good terms I can literally just post "Saw you working the bakery this morning, d
688.
by Levitz 3y ago
People literally pay in order to escape advertising. Of course advertising is not worth it for the target. It's harmful more often than not.
689.
by Levitz 3y ago
What is the EU missing out on if Threads never enters it though? I don't believe Facebook, Instagram, Tik Tok or Twitter were net gains for people. I don't see how Threads might be. I do honestly believe that if all these services
690.
by Levitz 3y ago
Far from it, the point is that the lived experience of the individual matters, just not their race explicitly. The court recognizes the effects of race and recognizes them as valuable when considering a candidate, just not their race per se

More ›