burrows

31 ms·

301.
by burrows 6y ago
First, I dig your meditation on Forth and the Dao that won’t be named. > what is your motive in asking this question? To provoke OP into debugging me.
302.
by burrows 6y ago
What does “public” mean in this context? And if you want this thing, why don’t you make it?
303.
by burrows 6y ago
> I’m not sure why you’re fixated on price. I’m responding to OP. >> there is so much vc money sloshing about that one is constantly fighting competitors who operate at a loss to try to build monopolies He’s claiming that VC compan
304.
by burrows 6y ago
They provide the service at a lower price and would be profitable if they weren’t aggressively expanding? That’s just a better company.
305.
by burrows 6y ago
> Things look quite different to many small, non vc-funded, profitable businesses: there is so much vc money sloshing about that one is constantly fighting competitors who operate at a loss to try to build monopolies whereas in more typi
306.
by burrows 6y ago
> The economy was going to be shut one way or another. That might be true. But there is an ethical difference between choosing to sleep at 9pm and an 8.30pm government enforced Ambien.
307.
by burrows 6y ago
> In 2020, the economy is shutting down because we shut it down. “We” didn’t shut the economy down. Governments used (threats of) violence to shut it down.
308.
by burrows 6y ago
> I strive to treat all frameworks skeptically (aside from the meta-framework of logical consistency). Agreed. Describe your thought process for deciding whether someone’s natural rights have been violated. > I see two notions of &#x2
309.
by burrows 6y ago
Yes. > Personally I think we should draw a clear line between these two types of actions. When we don't do that, we weaken legitimate free speech. Refers to the free speech natural right. > You are in confusion, there is no free
310.
by burrows 6y ago
> Threatening a person with death is not the only way to violate a natural right. I agree. Discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22873029 What is your framework for analyzing natural rights violations?
311.
by burrows 6y ago
Assume the land was stolen. The people who stole the land are dead. The people who were stolen from are dead. The point is moot.
312.
by burrows 6y ago
Does the union have special privileges granted by the state, or is it simply a group freely contracted between laborers?
313.
by burrows 6y ago
Ok. I am not happy with my definition of coercion. I think it should mostly include things that physically alter or arrest man’s body or property. Punching someone is coercion. Advertising is not coercion. Threatening to punch someone is m
314.
by burrows 6y ago
It’s analogous to a stranger tackling me and pinning me until I starve to death. The use of wood and nails is immaterial. You go to a “friend’s” house. You go to the bathroom, but it’s actually a soundproofed room with a door that locks f
315.
by burrows 6y ago
> Negotiating that into a contract is not something a significant number of people can do. Most people will have to make major concessions to negotiate a clause like this into their contract. I am fine with this. Do I think a hypothetic
316.
by burrows 6y ago
> That seems oddly narrow. As a contrived example (I like stress-testing ethical intuitions) would you consider barricading the doors and windows of someone's home and waiting for them to starve to death to qualify as physical viole
317.
by burrows 6y ago
Government ought to have a force monopoly. Government ought to be “small” (functionally and structurally limited). Government ought to defend the natural rights of its citizens from physical force initiated by criminals and international ag
318.
by burrows 6y ago
> I don't know of a single employer that would be interested in hiring someone who insisted on including a list of nonfirable offenses which included making public statements which paint the company in a bad light. 1. Work for a com
319.
by burrows 6y ago
Amazon isn’t threatening the men with guns, so their natural right to free speech isn’t violated.
320.
by burrows 6y ago
“meaningful negotiation” doesn’t mean anything to me. Either men with guns coerce the market participant or they don’t. Freemen should rationally allocate free time, family time and work time. A man isn’t guaranteed everything he wants, o
321.
by burrows 6y ago
I agree, man should never coerce man. The coercer’s group affiliation and reasons are irrelevant. I define coercion as initiating physical violence against another man. * And I am suspicious of market cartels (wage collusion, price fixing,
322.
by burrows 6y ago
And the state shouldn’t prevent companies from discriminating against laborers in labor unions. Unless the union has a private contract with the company.
323.
by burrows 6y ago
That’s exactly what should happen in a free market. Company makes offer, laborer counters, then company counters or holds. If the company holds, the laborer should seek work at a different company. Just because the “value” of a man’s labor
324.
by burrows 6y ago
Is the labor market free from cartels? If so, then employees can negotiate. Obviously they won’t get everything they want, but that’s the nature of negotiation.
325.
by burrows 6y ago
The employee should negotiate “fireable offenses” into his contract. There’s no reason to increase state involvement with new laws.
326.
by burrows 6y ago
> 3. I'm sure people of all ages think their life is very valuable, and very few people consider themselves candidates for sacrifice. Certainly not for privacy concerns. This guy also brought us, “childfuckers bad, no crypto for you
327.
by burrows 7y ago
Really inspiring stuff. If I commit fraud (but don’t know it’s fraud) to win the Super Bowl, do I succeed or no?
328.
by burrows 7y ago
Is there a set of people between “Casino might have a point and certainly it’s their right to pursue the issue in court” and “Ivey found a loophole in your system, suck it up you cry babies.”?
329.
by burrows 7y ago
Where do you fall on the Phil Ivey edge sorting incident?
330.
by burrows 7y ago
It’s not free. The price/payment operations are hidden. “Free” is a magical-marketing-mind-control-incantation.

More ›