clarky07

97 ms·

901.
by clarky07 14y ago
As for the suicides, who am I to say he shouldn't be doing it? He wants this to happen, so it shouldn't be included in any kind of gun control stats. It is not the thing we are trying to limit or stop. As for what I'd rather face, I'll turn
902.
by clarky07 14y ago
For those that like citing stats: Murder rate in 2011 Montana - 2.8 New Jersey - 4.3 http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-... Violent Crime rates - http://www.infoplease.com/us/statistics/crime-rate-state.htm... P
903.
by clarky07 14y ago
This is a bullshit article. Why are we trying to minimize "gun deaths?" What the article doesn't mention is that most of those are suicides that would just do it another way if they were less readily available. Violent crime in the UK is 4x
904.
by clarky07 14y ago
Oh the irony. Printing out records makes me laugh.
905.
by clarky07 14y ago
This isn't Facebooks money, it's Zucks money. It is roughly 5-7% of his entire net worth, so I'd say it is fairly material.
906.
by clarky07 14y ago
FB trades an average of ~63 million shares a day. It wouldn't be that hard to sell these in the normal course of business over say a few months without having much if any impact on the share price.
907.
by clarky07 14y ago
That seems unlikely. They're still using Facebook. A few thousand people are paying App.net $50 a year and a billion people are using Facebook. I suspect people would rather have a few ads in their Instagram feed than start paying Flickr. J
908.
by clarky07 14y ago
How does adding ads "insult, mislead, or deride their users"? This whole discussion is silly. 99% of the users will keep happily using the service with ads. They were smart enough to know they were coming eventually. A 1% very vocal minorit
909.
by clarky07 14y ago
There is no lie. They offer the service for free. Nobody said they would never ever add ads. That's just being silly. What possible reason could people have for being angry with someone adding ads to this thing they are giving away for free
910.
by clarky07 14y ago
You could characterize it that way, or you could assume that all of your users aren't complete fools and realize at some point they will have to make money to pay for the costs of running the service. They also know full-well that it isn'
911.
by clarky07 14y ago
Can I have a link for that stat? If I recall they are around 1 billion users. I'm quite certain they didn't make 36 billion last year... Actual numbers - 4.64B revenue. 400M profit. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=FB
912.
by clarky07 14y ago
I think a lot of people end up characterizing this poorly, and there is a lot of propaganda on both sides of this issue. For me, paying taxes isn't a problem. Even paying more taxes than people who pay less is perfectly fine. The problem is
913.
by clarky07 14y ago
As opposed to your theory of he should pay for the thing he wants and also be happy about paying for what everyone else wants?
914.
by clarky07 14y ago
And yet we spent around 3 trillion. You'd think that other 2 trillion could do some good too. There have been several people in this thread suggest that the government has been largely responsible for their success so they should be happy t
915.
by clarky07 14y ago
<rant> I really have no idea what people are complaining about. What are you putting in your Instagram photos? It's a cool service that lets you share pictures with friends. What is it that you think your pictures are worth? When yo
916.
by clarky07 14y ago
The users didn't help build anything. Instagram built a cool service, and the users used it. They didn't build anything. Now obviously network effects help something like this grow, but don't kid yourself. They aren't running a charity. The
917.
by clarky07 14y ago
>We also deserve to receive the service we signed up No you don't. They can shut the whole thing down and don't owe you a damn thing. If you don't like the new ToS, when they switch to them and an accept/decline option comes up in the a
918.
by clarky07 14y ago
2 things. 1. Australia isn't a reasonable comparison. "At the heart of the push was a massive buyback of more than 600,000 semi-automatic shotguns and rifles, or about one-fifth of all firearms in circulation in Australia." 600k was 20% of
919.
by clarky07 14y ago
No, your orignal comment - http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4928127 said that "only in the US do kids shoot other kids with automatic weapons" and "but can someone please explain why a school teacher would have three guns in her house,
920.
by clarky07 14y ago
Also, regarding the «expertise» comment. I'm not saying you can't have an opinion, I'm just suggesting you can't fix the problem without more knowledge about the subject matter. You can say you want Wall Street regulated, but unless you hav
921.
by clarky07 14y ago
I could be ok with this, but there is a significant cost associated with it. You can already do this through an FFL, but it generally ends up costing $25-$35 and most people don't want to do that. If you offer this as a service by the polic
922.
by clarky07 14y ago
Ha! Guns are the problem for crazy people in the US, but in places without guns and lots of gun control, it's then a "terrorist" that finds a gun and kills people.
923.
by clarky07 14y ago
See my other comment regarding weapon choice - http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4934021 http://listverse.com/2008/01/01/top-10-worst-school-massacre... fwiw - semi-auto rifles are actually only used in 3% of shootings. but lets not l
924.
by clarky07 14y ago
Let's replay this for a minute: You: get rid of automatic weapons Me: he didn't use an automatic weapon You: doesn't matter get rid of semi-automatic weapons then Me: He could do it with a revolver or bolt action gun just as easily You: No
925.
by clarky07 14y ago
The first video is decidedly not world class. also, no gun control in the US has talked about revolvers, bolt action, or lever action guns. Also, your comments around this whole thread have talked about how the semi-auto assault rifle was t
926.
by clarky07 14y ago
That's all reasonable. I think you have to consider that many of these knife attacks have wounded far more than 8, >20 just last week. If the person doing the wounding were using a knife more suited to the task, and was more competent a
927.
by clarky07 14y ago
As I said there are background checks and if you have any history of mental health issues you can't get one. I'm not sure what "test" we could or should give for buying them. Accuracy and knowledge of the law doesn't really come into play i
928.
by clarky07 14y ago
>It is more arguable that there imposition of restrictions is too much of a burden on freedom for the benefit but saying there is no benefit is pure denial. I'm not saying it isn't possible that there is some benefit, I am saying that a
929.
by clarky07 14y ago
>This is the option where I live (France). Well if it wasn't for the Americans and our guns you would be ruled by Nazi Germany. It might be a long time ago and off topic, but it really wasn't that long ago and it's not that far off topi
930.
by clarky07 14y ago
You clearly have no intimate knowledge of guns and how they work, so why do you keep posting as if you do? That's a great animation, but I know how a .223 AR-15 works because I own one and have shot it many times. As it happens, I also know

More ›