gameman144

44 ms·

481.
by gameman144 6y ago
Agreed that a lot of ads are useless, but I've personally seen a few that I wouldn't have otherwise known about. For instance, there's a really cool used technical bookstore near me that I only discovered because I saw an ad
482.
by gameman144 6y ago
One worry I have is regarding poorly handled legislation hobbling national companies more than intended and driving consumers to worse options (as opposed to just preventing them from doing creepy things.) One of the prime examples here is
483.
by gameman144 6y ago
> You live in your country with your values, please do not export them on us and we will do the same. This doesn't really work as an argument, though. If someone said "You believe murder is wrong, I don't, don't try t
484.
by gameman144 6y ago
That one seems like pretty common advice even for non-software fields. The work you love doesn't have to be software, too, but you should be working on something you enjoy (or if you get fulfillment from your job, that's just a bo
485.
by gameman144 6y ago
This is a great example, I think it exemplifies the problem well. Individually, farmers/distributors absolutely have (and in my mind, should have) the right to avoid shipping to areas which would actively lose them money. When every
486.
by gameman144 6y ago
Now consider the scenario where all the large agriculture firms and distributors cut off the Bay Area. Sure, the Bay Area could start their own farms to meet that need, but I could hardly imagine the whole population living there saying &qu
487.
by gameman144 6y ago
Is the irony that this cuts both ways not obvious? Seems very clear; the left thinks the right is intolerant and must be silenced, the right thinks the left is intolerant and must be hobbled. The twist is that both sides are absolutely corr
488.
by gameman144 6y ago
> I'm talking about confiscating property in a banal, rule based democracy sort of way, not by mobs. Banal, rules-based democracies still need a fundamental set of rights if they're to avoid instantly devolving to mob rule. I
489.
by gameman144 6y ago
I like the concept of this, but it seems like it'd be tough to validate that something was actually illegal from the individual actor's level. For instance, if management made clear that the hack here was illegal, the individual p
490.
by gameman144 6y ago
I hardly think the word "appropriated" describes business profits that return to the business, as that (at least in my mind) seems to connote taking something without consent. While there certainly do exist instances of labor wi
491.
by gameman144 6y ago
Makes sense, I think that setting aside the moral judgment, our disagreement might hinge on what denotes a "pro-employee" individual. I'd be curious what an example of that might look like in your view (genuinely curious, try
492.
by gameman144 6y ago
Being an advocate for someone does not mean that you extend to them everything you have. One can be an advocate for the homeless without letting them sleep in your bedroom; one can be an advocate for immigrants without wanting instant citiz
493.
by gameman144 6y ago
I think this is a better argument for proportional allocation of electoral votes per state instead of winner-take-all (a la Nebraska), rather than arguing against the electoral college itself. If you feel Trump voters' voices are muffl
494.
by gameman144 6y ago
Presumably because there was no significant advantage, or no sufficient incentive to do so. If the executive team is trying to raise the median salary of their employee base, however, there's now a strong incentive to outsource the low
495.
by gameman144 6y ago
I think this is the point; what we call search today is likely to be dominated by Google, but what we call search tomorrow could be dominated by a newcomer. For instance, map-based search is already a huge step above traditional Google sear
496.
by gameman144 6y ago
The First Amendment does protect that though. As long as the speech isn't intended to incite imminent lawless action , calling for murders is absolutely protected. E.g. "We should go harm X" is arguably illegal, since it&#
497.
by gameman144 6y ago
I'm confused as to the motivation here; taxing wealth as opposed to taxing income seems to disincentivize saving and investment as opposed to consumption. Some consumption is definitely necessary, but I'd argue that savings and in
498.
by gameman144 6y ago
I read it the same way, with the sentiment of "People will be more upset if you delay telling them bad news." e.g. "We got a letter for past-due rent yesterday, and I'm telling you now" vs. "We've been get
499.
by gameman144 6y ago
* What people would do with bounded windfall benefits (as opposed to lifetime benefits) * How spending/lifestyle habits of bounded windfall recipients compare with non-recipients * Whether receiving free money makes individuals happier
500.
by gameman144 6y ago
This makes total sense, but wouldn't a backyard school be a completely reasonable indictment of the local public education system in this case? In other words, it would seem that one wouldn't start a backyard school unless they th
501.
by gameman144 6y ago
"Masters of Doom" is a pretty demonstrative and entertaining bit of non-fiction that walks through the early days of id Software. Though not a manual or how-to, or anything like that, I'd recommend it to a non-technical found