bjl

20 ms·

211.
by bjl 9y ago
I'm against a complete ban, but there should definitely be more restrictions than we have currently. Strict licensing requirements and a total ban on flying over private property (without explicit, written permission) seem like no-brai
212.
by bjl 9y ago
Its a little different here. He was clearly being exceedingly reckless, and power outages cost lives all the time. Jail is probably excessive, a very hefty fine and a ban from flying drones again seems more appropriate to me.
213.
by bjl 9y ago
Capitalism just means private ownership of the means of production. What you call corporo-fascist is just the natural end game of such an economic system.
214.
by bjl 9y ago
It should have been obvious to anyone with a modicum of sense that operating an unlicensed taxi service was illegal.
215.
by bjl 9y ago
> I realize that leaving a job isn't easy but an engineer that makes it to Uber is probably more than capable jumping ship. Who knows how long that will be the case. Nowadays, I imagine a prolonged employment at Uber is a serious bl
216.
by bjl 9y ago
At this point (and really, long before this point) any ethical engineer would have left this company. Those remaining are tacitly condoning this type of activity, and should take a long hard look at their priorities.
217.
by bjl 9y ago
Apple 'Genius' definitely falls in that category.
218.
by bjl 9y ago
First of all, where did I say anything about prison? Second, this was clearly antagonism directed against someone of a different race, and is therefore racist.
219.
by bjl 9y ago
Black humor can still be racist. Something being (ostensibly) a joke doesn't mean it can't be racist/sexist/whatever.
220.
by bjl 9y ago
Racism is not simply about belief, otherwise there could be no such thing as racist action. Personally, I couldn't care less what people believe, I care what people do . And in this case what they did was clearly racist.
221.
by bjl 9y ago
'Ironic' racism is still racism.
222.
by bjl 9y ago
>FB issue aside, I think people should be allowed to joke about whatever they want in private. They were allowed to post it, nothing stopped them. Its just that after they did Harvard made the (IMO reasonable) decision to revoke their
223.
by bjl 9y ago
Some of things they said went beyond just 'stupid posts'.
224.
by bjl 9y ago
Last I checked they weren't jailed for posting racist shit on FB.
225.
by bjl 9y ago
Nothing on FB is private, which these kids just learned the hard way. Can't say I feel too bad for them given the content of their posts.
226.
by bjl 9y ago
That's obviously nonsense. Killing 1M people is worse than killing 1.
227.
by bjl 9y ago
Nah, I'd be willing to pay more if it meant my fellow workers were all provided with the protections a union. There's more to life than just money.
228.
by bjl 9y ago
Union rules change all the time. Management just isn't usually willing to offer sufficient incentive during negotiations, since that would eat in to their profits.
229.
by bjl 9y ago
Why is it disingenuous. All they're providing is a stream of bytes, why should they get to dictate how those bytes are consumed.
230.
by bjl 9y ago
Good. Hotels and hostels are for tourists, apartments should be for residents.
231.
by bjl 9y ago
Right, businesses don't like unions because they decrease their power over employees. That's not a good argument against them, however. If anything, I'd say its a good argument for them.
232.
by bjl 9y ago
I strongly disagree that contributors aren't providing content 'for free'. I request a stream of bytes from them, they provide a stream of bytes free of charge. Its up to me how I want to display those bytes, and I'm not
233.
by bjl 9y ago
Yes. The chicken industry is the most egregious example, but all industrialised meat production suffers from abuse problems to some degree.
234.
by bjl 9y ago
That's not quite true. Curry-Howard only applies to constructivist mathematics, which is a very tiny subset of mathematics proper.
235.
by bjl 9y ago
I read this as 'A cont of type r a is a function that, given a function of type a to r, returns an r'.
236.
by bjl 9y ago
Manipulating people on a mass scale without their informed consent has always been considered unethical; its on you if you're trying to argue that its not. And you're 'but what if a person does it' arguments are irreleva
237.
by bjl 9y ago
The only way this could possibly be considered ethical is if you get informed consent from every single person the system is analysing. If you provided each person with a detailed explanation of what the data would be used for, and required
238.
by bjl 9y ago
Really? I find the single-letter version far easier to read.