axlprose

23 ms·

121.
by axlprose 10y ago
> make the usual assumptions I have no idea what this is supposed to mean or imply in this context, but it seems to be a classic HN response asking people to judge a book by it's cover instead of its contents/arguments, which
122.
by axlprose 10y ago
This video was linked in the article: https://youtu.be/b2hBDKtm-y0 The person recording clearly believes he's captured evidence of spys tracking him, yet the footage seems to show an ordinary trip to the subway with fe
123.
by axlprose 10y ago
Yikes. When I read your first post, I just assumed this to have happened in some rural area in a less popular state or something, certainly not in silicon valley of all places. That hits a bit too close to home for comfort to say the least.
124.
by axlprose 10y ago
A comment from the link that seems relevant: > Seed control is another interesting thing about sugarbeet. Monsanto doesn’t own any sugarbeet germplasm, meaning they don’t sell or control sugarbeet seed. They certainly make money from Ro
125.
by axlprose 10y ago
On the one hand, I completely agree with you about having some degree of compassion towards everybody regardless of what they've done, but on the other hand, I'm not exactly sure what it would change, or if I could remotely justif
126.
by axlprose 11y ago
How or why does something being "interesting" automatically imply that it's "OK"? Interest is nothing more than a human behavioral response to a stimulus, it typically has little to do with what people think is &quo
127.
by axlprose 11y ago
As a hispanic person, I always hate it when people see me as some poker chip that should be used to fulfill some arbitrary quota. We have preferences for where we want to work like everybody else, and our backgrounds/cultures definitel
128.
by axlprose 11y ago
I always wonder why people want everything helpful to be the result of some purely altruistic action, when there's at least as much help to be gained from mutually beneficial partnerships. Symbiotic relationships not only require less
129.
by axlprose 11y ago
You know the dogma is bad when even an innocent comment like this gets downvoted. While I think the term 'pseudoscience' gets thrown around way too loosely these days, it's no secret that the science surrounding nutrition is
130.
by axlprose 11y ago
Do you know if you get that with other sweeteners like sucralose or stevia? Because if not, you might just be sensitive to the phenylalanine in aspartame. It can have psychoactive effects in large enough quantities, and can cause adverse re
131.
by axlprose 11y ago
I did admit wrong on the orwell part, but you seem to be taking this quite personally to be releasing that kind of frustration out so needlessly without even addressing any of my points. If anything, that shows you have clear bias there, bu
132.
by axlprose 11y ago
The only thing I am saying, is that even mentioning negative events such as gamergate, triggers in readers the negative connotations associated with them, and it is a common tactic to sully opponent's arguments for that reason. So when
133.
by axlprose 11y ago
I don't know, where I'm from "disgusted" is a much stronger term than "offended". It's like a visceral repulsion that triggers something bordering on mild rage. I don't know how the OP intended it, bu
134.
by axlprose 11y ago
It's really not as obvious as you're making it sound. According to google, the most concrete definition of "misogyny" is: "an ingrained prejudice against women ." So immediately there are 2 problems here: 1
135.
by axlprose 11y ago
It seems you missed what I tried to convey. I explicitly stated that the issue is objectiveness, and subjective terms, by definition cannot be objective. You can gather all the data in the world about reddit users and their mannerisms, but
136.
by axlprose 11y ago
The comment was intending to cast doubt about a critique of the news article posted here. This article has nothing to do with gamergate, and the critique had nothing to do with gamergate. The comment could've elaborated on the parallel
137.
by axlprose 11y ago
Critical thinking just involves analysis of arguments presented. If my arguments were fallacious, then I apologize, but you haven't exactly clarified how exactly I exaggerated the OP's claims, as opposed to just summarized them. I
138.
by axlprose 11y ago
> I am a commenter on HN and a redditor and am in no way related to the "clickbait media", so how are my contributions to this thread "explained through the lens of questionable media"? Herein lies the problem: ther
139.
by axlprose 11y ago
The 4th option would be to just not assign a moral value to their comments, and chose for yourself as an individual to not let yourself be offended by them. It doesn't mean the co-workers were right, but it doesn't penalize them i
140.
by axlprose 11y ago
There's no reason why my comments shouldn't be analyzed critically either. So if you feel up to it, please do so. But the comment I responded to did not exhibit any logical analyses, nor any reminders to remain analytical.
141.
by axlprose 11y ago
The point isn't whether it's "true" or "false", because that will vary depending on who you ask. Yes, even people you find disgusting are legitimate human beings with opinions too. Who are any of us to decide w
142.
by axlprose 11y ago
> This was a pretty minor story even in the tech blogs, let alone major news outlets. This is currently the #1 post on HN. It might not be the biggest community, but it is influential, and many people bypass visiting blogs/sites and
143.
by axlprose 11y ago
> And really, you're on HN, this is not the place where you need to fly the "don't trust the media" flag with such earnestness. I doubt many people here do, certainly not me. This is another common trope that happen
144.
by axlprose 11y ago
One person's "freedom fighter" is another person's "terrorist". For matters like these, it's better if we stick to the few objective observations we can make, such as deconstructing how arguments are mad
145.
by axlprose 11y ago
> What is the linked article supposed to be an example of? It's an example of exactly what the book talks about: subtle, lightly filtered "news". > Would we be having a different conversation if the thread linked to
146.
by axlprose 11y ago
You do realize you're commenting on a HN thread for a New York Times piece, right? A piece that casually included terms such as "racist" and "misogynistic" as if they were describing the weather. If those terms do s
147.
by axlprose 11y ago
Did you even follow the original parent's argument? He didn't just bring up "clickbait media" as a non-sequitur while defending reddit comments. He highlighted how everything in this whole mess so far can be explained t
148.
by axlprose 11y ago
Basically, the nature of the internet and how it enables individuals to have much louder voices, has significant implications for the integrity and expectations of what we used to consider "news". The point being that the old idea
149.
by axlprose 11y ago
So questioning ethics in any kind of journalism anywhere is automatically BS now because of some random highly-opinionated internet drama? Way to discourage critical thinking. Orwell and Huxley would be proud.
150.
by axlprose 11y ago
> I mean, seriously, what on earth are you addressing here? Who are you talking to? For anyone that's equally confused, I highly recommend reading the book "Trust Me, I'm Lying": http://www.amazon.com&#x2

More ›