deadpannini

6 ms·

1.
by deadpannini 2mo ago
Damn you, Poe's law!
2.
by deadpannini 1y ago
If they hate Lina Khan, it's because she's liable to make demands on them without knowing anything about their business. In the worst case, her office turns outright extortionist, as the current administration is bent on demonstra
3.
by deadpannini 3y ago
They won't always be (prohibitive).
4.
by deadpannini 4y ago
The opening qualifies as sarcastic: > I am so happy not to live in an American small town. Because whenever I'm shown some small town in the States it is populated with all kinds of monsters among whom flesh hungry zombies, evil ali
5.
by deadpannini 4y ago
> I mean, look at it this way: when you ask a crew to paint your house, you specify the colors upfront. You don't iterate with them on after every room, or every wall. This isn't a useful analogy - more often, it's like as
6.
by deadpannini 4y ago
The standard you've laid out proposes that any statement about a man's experience in a relationship is by definition misogynistic, because it's centers the man (and, of course, erases women). Do you stand by that? Additional
7.
by deadpannini 4y ago
I'd agree that they are "dominant", and that legal authorities should watch Amazon closely for specific violations, but they only control 35-40% of the online consumer retail market (by most estimates circa 2022).
8.
by deadpannini 4y ago
What is Amazon's Monopoly? I don't mean this as a gotcha question: I really don't understand what people are claiming when they say this. All three of those companies are now large conglomerates with a lot of power (perhaps t
9.
by deadpannini 4y ago
I agree that the enterprise market does not value usability very much, and I would even agree that the enterprise vendors made the right choice to deliver anything at all, in the early stages of ERP (even the first two decades). None of t
10.
by deadpannini 4y ago
What you say is true, but these companies aren't successful because their products are usable. They succeeded because of their first-mover advantage, lack of alternatives, and compliance requirements that raise the cost of competition.
11.
by deadpannini 4y ago
Don't worry, there's plenty of room for conformity in society too!
12.
by deadpannini 4y ago
Reading this comment (which is correct, I think) gives me the urgent desire to log off HN.
13.
by deadpannini 4y ago
Orwell, from "Politics and the English Language" [0]: > Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way. That is, the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows his hearer to think he means
14.
by deadpannini 4y ago
> I'm merely pointing out a fact. "The Hunter Biden story is insignificant" is a judgement, not a fact, it's a judgement. I'd say that calling it "misinformation" is bizarre, except that most prominent
15.
by deadpannini 4y ago
I mean, read the comment chain you were responding to? How about this: you don't get to decide what's remotely important to people in the context of the election?
16.
by deadpannini 4y ago
The FBI doesn't get to decide what's "important in the context of an election." The contents of Hunter's laptop didn't stop me from voting for Biden, but that's because I'm a cynical jerk that already
17.
by deadpannini 4y ago
No, "Orwellian" means almost the opposite: Winston and Julia are perfectly capable of thinking dissident thoughts, despite being immersed in Ingsoc. "Orwellian" refers to dominating people to the degree that you can forc
18.
by deadpannini 4y ago
"Blurred Lines" versus "Got to Give it Up"? > On March 10, 2015, a jury found Thicke and Williams, but not T.I., liable for copyright infringement. The unanimous jury awarded Gaye's family US$7.4 million in damag
19.
by deadpannini 4y ago
Why is this a special concern about GPT-3? I cannot think of an institution, entity, or tool about which those statements are not true. Replace "GPT-3" with "Hacker News posters" "Wikipedia", or "News broa
20.
by deadpannini 4y ago
Will any downvoters comment? I think democracy is the best option we have, but ignoring its weaknesses and checkered history isn't constructive. The current democracy-worship afoot in the US ignores the fact that almost every progressi
21.
by deadpannini 4y ago
> people who wouldn’t otherwise have had them reinforced. You mean people without access to niche communities / echo chambers? I grant there are people ready to embrace destructive ideas, but the fraction of them that don't alr
22.
by deadpannini 4y ago
That isn't what anyone means by "echo chamber". You're talking about manners, not different viewpoints.
23.
by deadpannini 4y ago
No, but it is _very_ dangerous to Jews for those people to be isolated, never have their ideas challenged, and miss out on the moderating influence of other viewpoints
24.
by deadpannini 4y ago
This has some internal logic, but every experience I've had contradicts your proposition. For example, I'm in my late forties. When I was growing up, it was rare to encounter (out) gay people outside of major cities, and people wo
25.
by deadpannini 4y ago
I'm in favor of letting people pursue their preferences, but echo chambers are antithetical to civil society - much more dangerous than so-called misinformation (indeed, they are environments in which errors and lies are more likely to
26.
by deadpannini 4y ago
Yes, and I agree that it's always important to keep that possibility in mind. I am generally keenly aware of uncertainty normally shy away from bad bets (predictions). But taken too far, that principle leads to abdicating our responsib
27.
by deadpannini 4y ago
I think you should perhaps cool down. 1) I am admitting that I was wrong and updated. That includes updating on my thought process, just like you are so ardently suggesting. 2) Ninety percent of your assumptions about me are wrong. I'm
28.
by deadpannini 4y ago
This is all beside the point at hand, but I suppose it's still about epistemology, so I'd like to stand up for my old position, even though I understand it looks foolish in retrospect. The fact that so much was unknown was part of
29.
by deadpannini 4y ago
I don't understand what you're suggesting - that changing your mind only counts if there's no evidence? Even now, I can think of ways to argue that testing could still drive COVID nearly to zero in the US, most of which revol
30.
by deadpannini 4y ago
This turns into "no true Scotsman" pretty quickly. I was a (relative) loudmouth about my position for over a year, since we didn't have access to home tests in the US until 2022. It was a very heated topic, since I often prop

More ›