SeeTheTruth

7 ms·

1.
by SeeTheTruth 6y ago
They want to dump on platforms for taking action against hate speech and instigating violence because "someone else censored political activism". It's a disgusting point of view.
2.
The New Rules for Playing in Microsoft's Open Source Sandbox(aaronstannard.com)
2 points by SeeTheTruth 6y ago|0 comments
3.
by SeeTheTruth 6y ago
For working on the languages themselves for sure. But thankfully working with functional languages helps with outcomes and commercial viability. If only languages like Clojure, F#, OCaml, Kotlin, and many more enjoyed more popularity and su
4.
by SeeTheTruth 6y ago
You're worried about free speech - but what happens when an elected official calls for violence against a group of people? What happens when those calls for violence are answered and people die? There is a reason yelling fire in a crow
5.
by SeeTheTruth 6y ago
Some people want to feel good about not wearing a mask, damn the consequences, damn the people hurt. If 80% of Americans wore masks infections would plummet https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05/masks-covid-
6.
by SeeTheTruth 6y ago
So it's not worth it. Why be less careful than companies in the hope they will be good citizens, when it's easier to be careful and not have to hope?
7.
by SeeTheTruth 6y ago
I wonder what the author would think of F Sharp.
8.
by SeeTheTruth 6y ago
It will have to come from the community then. A community has no inherent right to a service - or to the time and effort of the people who build and maintain it. So maybe alternative won't arise - because spending hours building a prod
9.
by SeeTheTruth 6y ago
The fear of death due to infection by a pandemic is new. The need for PPE and lack thereof is new. Firing whitleblowers in the face of a pandemic and meeting to smear them (with public proof thanks to a leak) is new. We didn't think Am
10.
by SeeTheTruth 6y ago
NO. You risk spreading it, young and healthy people are still dying or having severe outcomes - we still don't know enough to predict how it will go. And we still don't know if catching one strain once confers immunity, or for how
11.
by SeeTheTruth 6y ago
Thank you for everything you said. The reality is more nuanced and depends on the specifics. The "law" being zealously cited here isn't a rule. Nor is the thought an approach is wrong if a big organization failed at it.
12.
by SeeTheTruth 6y ago
Because "consumer choice" isn't a practical and full response to corporate abuse of power. Regulation is complete - if it's a well written regulation it works. "Nobody is forcing you" misses the point.
13.
by SeeTheTruth 6y ago
Some on this site seem to be ruthlessly selfish. They do not care about those who are at risk - and would rather rush back to the way things were. It's ethically vile, and deserves nothing but spit. That anyone will die should be reaso