gonvaled

11 ms·

61.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Your logic is at fault, at least regarding atheists: atheists are expected to be tolerant of religious beliefs, but no religious person is expected to be tolerant of atheist (non-) beliefs.
62.
by gonvaled 8y ago
In other words, hot air. Something written, without the explicit goal of being enforced, or expected, whatsoever. He could have equally written: "We expect those participating in the SQLite project to murder at least three people by Su
63.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Nothing (not worse than this CoC at least). But the comments would be waaay different.
64.
by gonvaled 8y ago
strictly, the text does not permit any interpretation, since: > conduct themselves in a manner that honors the overarching spirit of the rule which is hot air.
65.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Well, it mentions Christ 4 times ...
66.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Great! I can't wait for another project adopting an Islamic CoC (not to be enforced!), and read the comments.
67.
by gonvaled 8y ago
And even if it were ... so what? Security is security. Either it is, or it isn't. No trust involved.
68.
by gonvaled 8y ago
If your threat model is "being attacked by a surveillance actor", the fact that "nobody else can get at your stuff" (which is something that you are in a position to at least theoretically defend) is not very reassurin
69.
by gonvaled 8y ago
> In my case, I learned to “delete the subject line” and add a small new one that clearly tells the recipient what I want them to know. It turns out that this type of practice (which I developed during my years at Deloitte) is a good rul
70.
by gonvaled 8y ago
later reflected on it ? Like, they were talking about it, but didn't realize what they were talking about? They just realize about it later? Look, I agree that we all do shitty things in life. And, most of the times, we know that we a
71.
by gonvaled 8y ago
He's not talking about lending money. He is talking about a friend and business partner cutting you short out of your equity because you happen to be ill. If your partner is not working, or working less, get the board to grant you a bo
72.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Isn't that what salaries are for?
73.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Yepp, I said that much some time ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18174532 Fairly downvoted, as expected. In my head I see the typical HNer as a scared American, being comforted by the powers that be, that they wil
74.
by gonvaled 8y ago
> The best you could say about HN is that it hosts a pro-China contingent and an anti-China contingent, each of which believes the site is biased towards the other. But the site itself and the userbase is too diverse to be accurately lab
75.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Maybe, but the article setting the tone of the discussion, the one with (currently) 70 points, is bashing China. A similar US-bashing political article would never get that much upvoted. Methinks.
76.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Ah, cool, China bashing in HN again. These kind of things usually drop out of the homepage in seconds, if it is US- or UK-related, with the usual off topic arguments. Let's call it as it is: HN is a political instrument for anglocentri
77.
by gonvaled 8y ago
What? We are talking percentages here, so number of people has no impact. Density could be a factor, but then you need to explain, on top, why Europe, being much more dense than the USA, has fewer relative police incidents.
78.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Do you have statistics for this? My feeling is that Americans would eat a gun much more frequently than others eat pills: easy, fast and non-revocable.
79.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Come on, we all know how the US has asserted itself internationally. Napster, Mega, the list is endless.
80.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Interesting, and related to the Iranian Oil Bourse [1], which was supposed to trade in Euros, among other currencies. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_oil_bourse
81.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Not only that: the trade dispute is also consequence of the rising vulnerability of the US in the capital markets. Once it is discarded as the "one and only option", once real alternatives emerge, once the US loses its dominance,
82.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Agree. I hope we also agree that this is extremely unfair, internationally speaking.
83.
by gonvaled 8y ago
US promoted free trade after WWII, when it was the last man standing and the only manufacturer. Free trade meant "we sell made in America all around the world". Leading by example meant opening their market, at no cost since nobod
84.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Trump is destroying international trade, with the goal of increasing an already tilted playing field even more in the US's interest. And it has found a good lever to push, so this will work in the medium term. Basically, he is discount
85.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Not from the US.
86.
by gonvaled 8y ago
> Where are you getting that from? From his mouth? Not that that would be a reliable source, I concede that ...
87.
by gonvaled 8y ago
As I said above, you are entitled to defend your interests. Simply do not claim it is somehow about fairness.
88.
by gonvaled 8y ago
The US has been cheating, bigger, better and longer. We seem to agree that this is not about fair trade, but that is what Trump is calling the whole thing.
89.
by gonvaled 8y ago
The IP laws have been written by the US, for the US, and its terms keep on changing to continue protecting US interests. The IP laws should be a trade-off: temporary protection of inventors / creators, so that progress happens and con
90.
by gonvaled 8y ago
Your whole argument comes down to "the dollar is overvalued". What does this mean? Bad things and good things for the US. You are not going to mention the good things, so I will. For starters, you are using worthless (overvalued)

More ›