dimino

32 ms·

301.
by dimino 10y ago
It's not a claim, it's a fact. This isn't a matter of opinion, this is objectively true. https://www.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/3sbrro/accou...
302.
by dimino 10y ago
I'm sorry, but the salient point here is that shadowbanning isn't what you're claiming. End of story. I don't know how many ways to make this clearer.
303.
by dimino 10y ago
> that's not what the reddit community thinks is happening, leading to the current social climate on reddit. I... don't care? I guess you're making some kind of assumption that this conversation needs to know what you t
304.
by dimino 10y ago
Anyone who is currently shadowbanned and not as a result of bot-spamming can request a removal of the shadowban from the admins and they will happily comply. The fact that people have been shadowbanned is not evidence that it was intentiona
305.
by dimino 10y ago
One question this article doesn't attempt to answer is why doesn't this "everybody lies" narrative work in an infinite loop? Putin makes a lie, his opponents call out the lie, Putin says "but everybody lies"..
306.
by dimino 10y ago
Please follow HN rules when commenting.
307.
by dimino 10y ago
The admins of Reddit have said over and over again that shadowbanning is for spammers, and if non-spammers are getting shadowbanned, it's due to a bug. It was never and is not currently used to silence humans, only robots.
308.
by dimino 10y ago
> There is no privacy online and no alternatives to Skype that we can get anyone to use. WhatsApp is used by 1 billion people worldwide, so no, this is completely false.
309.
by dimino 10y ago
That research does not exist, because it's astoundingly narrow and this topic is immensely difficult to research, in general, let alone compound some kind of review or whatever it is you're looking for. Have you tried Googling?
310.
by dimino 10y ago
In the general, yes, we're talking about privacy, but specifically, no, it's not what we're talking about -- we're specifically talking about Skype's need to be completely private, and how if it's not, we&#
311.
by dimino 10y ago
Sorry, but a) that's not what I'm talking about, and b) there is no precedent for the Internet.
312.
by dimino 10y ago
What are Snowden's technical credentials? It's never been clear to me that he was more than "competent" in this area. I always assumed it was his moral compass that was unique about him, more than anything else. What d
313.
by dimino 10y ago
Considering some of the more recent research that's come out pointing at diversity as a successful business tactic, I'd be concerned about working for any company with Thiel attached to it in an advisory capacity, if only for fear
314.
by dimino 10y ago
I was hoping you'd prove that most people consider Skype to be secure, for A, because that's what you claimed. As for B, there are many other options, I don't really know what you mean by "they would be able to trust
315.
by dimino 10y ago
That isn't what's at stake here, however, so the hyperbole is unneeded.
316.
by dimino 10y ago
> The problem is: most of people need it to be safer, and there is no real option. You'll have to elaborate on how this is A) true, and B) there are no options. I can think of a dozen better options than Skype.
317.
by dimino 10y ago
"I don't need free speech all the time."
318.
by dimino 10y ago
> Everyone needs security, and privacy I'm so tired of this, no I don't, at least not as much as so many people think I need. No, I don't care if my Netflix password is easily crackable, and no I don't care if the US
319.
by dimino 10y ago
Simply stating "Unclear wording" is not going to work very well if you want answers, and is mildly antagonistic.
320.
by dimino 10y ago
Fair, but it's worth remembering how hard it is to convey sarcasm via text.
321.
by dimino 10y ago
Hey, this isn't about me, it's about making future comment threads you participate in not suck.
322.
by dimino 10y ago
Have you read "Outliers"? He talks endlessly about deliberate practice. He is not saying "practice a lot and you'll get good".
323.
by dimino 10y ago
No it's not, it's a succinct summary of the article that's eye-catching as well as informative as to the topic of the article itself. It's actually a great headline, and is in no way misleading.
324.
by dimino 10y ago
You didn't read the article, did you?
325.
by dimino 10y ago
This is not true, Gladwell readily admits that the literal value of 10,000 was not meant to be taken literally.
326.
by dimino 10y ago
Yeah, Gladwell talks endlessly about this on basically every podcast that asks him on, and he tries very hard to clarify that his "10,000 rule" was illustrative, not to be taken literally, as in "9,999... 10,000! Okay I&#x27
327.
by dimino 10y ago
It's not about balance, it's about you willing to make guesses regarding the bad things Tesla has done, and not make guesses about the potential good things. This isn't a "let's give 50% time to the creationists
328.
by dimino 10y ago
It sounds like you're willing to speculate/entertain assumptions (e.g. regarding miles of "relatable" road usage) when it harms Tesla, but not when it might help them.
329.
by dimino 10y ago
Who the hell expected zero crashes? Please, raise your hand and explain why you think any system could be released that drives a car would ever be able to do so at a rate of 100%?
330.
by dimino 10y ago
What the hell is happening in this comment thread? Do we not all realize that, per-mile-driven, Tesla's auto pilot is much safer than human driving? I thought we were prepared to deal with the inevitable crashes, but based on the

More ›