harrumph

21 ms·

151.
by harrumph 10y ago
Wow. These downvotes aren't doing a damn thing to contradict the popular notion of tech workers as brutally lacking in human empathy.
152.
by harrumph 10y ago
>then they can follow along those delivering the care. I don't doubt your intent is good, and I like to promote literacy in care as well, but I really really think the notion that supervising one's own care is a good idea is co
153.
by harrumph 10y ago
It looks like they pulled their product claims directly out of Theranos.
154.
by harrumph 11y ago
>It's a massive distinction. I'm sure that is your wish, but we can all read.
155.
by harrumph 11y ago
>GP is referring to the cronies in charge when they say "people". Not the people of Venezuela. Distinction without difference fallacy.
156.
by harrumph 11y ago
>This soup of loosely related keywords betrays your thought process Yeah, I'd change the subject too if I had nothing.
157.
by harrumph 11y ago
>It's probably not worth engaging with you Oh, don't worry about me. Worry instead about the dumb, ahistorical position you've staked out here. 1) You claimed VZ's oil industry was "incompetent" and that it
158.
by harrumph 11y ago
>In your eyes, "public ownership is ineffective" = "they're too dumb"? Yeah, no. The former is corporate-speak annual-report, think-tank framing, the latter is paternalistic, cigars-on-the-golf-course framing, bu
159.
by harrumph 11y ago
Congrats: you've echoed the same argument against people owning their resources that boardrooms have been using against populations since Iran in 1953. "They're far too dumb to survey, drill and pump their own oil." Ye
160.
by harrumph 11y ago
>Seems like they've ran out of other people's money indeed. No, the nationalized oil wells are still owned by the Venezuelan people. What they ran out of is the era of high oil prices. Most of their economy hinges on oil prices
161.
by harrumph 11y ago
>Probably because your replies have an undercurrent of condescension in them. I think I know better than you do what I mean with I've written, thanks. You DO like long commutes and you DON'T like being near neighbors. Why not o
162.
by harrumph 11y ago
>OP's comparison isn't that far off. No, it's actually ridiculous. Again: you like suburbs and necessarily the long commutes that go with them.
163.
by harrumph 11y ago
>We also know better than you what we prefer! Not sure where you think I've claimed to know better than you or anybody on that matter. You like long commutes and exurbs and aren't so hot on having close neighbors. Great. Call i
164.
by harrumph 11y ago
If I had to guess, what we're seeing in the post above is almost certainly someone who grew up in wealthier suburban enclaves and whose comfort level is forever pegged to those enclaves. How else might one mistake downtown Chicago for
165.
by harrumph 11y ago
Wait, you lived in downtown Chicago -- not a community by any stretch, but instead a commercial and tourism district that rolls up its sidewalks by 7PM -- and you call that "living in the city" and imagine that area descriptive of
166.
by harrumph 11y ago
Interesting stuff indeed, and it comes with a giant implication that few want to face. In the US, a country that so embarrassingly struggles with the finance of health care, preferring to insert inessential insurance and bloated pharma indu
167.
by harrumph 11y ago
She LIVES on the road. There is no "choice" to drive in her case. And with municipalities steadily losing revenue (see corporate tax avoidance above) signage is commonly foregone, making it far from a settled issue as to knowledge
168.
by harrumph 11y ago
The cost of going 8MPH over the speed limit being pegged at a week's income is not anything any person chooses. It is imposed, as well as being brutal. These backdoor taxes on the poor exist for only one reason: concentrations of wealt
169.
by harrumph 11y ago
>What kind of society lets a mentally ill man roam the streets, deteriorating, instead of institutionalising him and helping him recover? A society pathologically obsessed with markets, blind to the priceless.
170.
by harrumph 11y ago
>First, they are probably good at something, and therefore are likely not poor. The wider world is not a meritocracy. The United States isn't even remotely a meritocracy. There is a prevailing ideology that depends upon this presump
171.
by harrumph 11y ago
Does anybody know the specific purpose of defeating the pollution control? I never see this addressed. What positive user experience is produced? The car has faster pickup or better gas mileage or something else?
172.
by harrumph 11y ago
I mean Apple, Microsoft, Google, et al.
173.
by harrumph 11y ago
Agreeing "for once"? Hardly. Apple and Microsoft are already on record as agreeing to fix wages, creating a cartel affecting a million tech workers. https://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed-apple-and-go
174.
by harrumph 11y ago
Not an improvement in the multicolor "G" icon - the weakest color (yellow) effectively bisects the G vertically at a hot point along the horizontal axis - hot because it's the very leftmost spot that most eyes will encounter
175.
by harrumph 11y ago
>Okay, great so what? Should we not have either? We should not have starving people. But there is over 20% child poverty in the US. The only reason we have this, the only excuse for it, is the same market ethos that justifies intense we
176.
by harrumph 11y ago
Purchased -- and I'm in love. Thanks very much for writing!
177.
by harrumph 11y ago
I remember this. Re-reading the Dennis Ritchie-penned "anti-foreword" is awesome. Dennis was such a giant.
178.
by harrumph 11y ago
> With the exception of whatever tiny number of Greek citizens have steadfastly and publicly refused to support their government's choices That is exactly who the current Greek Government is.
179.
by harrumph 11y ago
Amen. Once you've had ack, you never go back.
180.
by harrumph 11y ago
>In some sense yes, but not in a way relevant to most jobs Not relevant to most purely technical jobs, that's true. But these are few and far between, because working means working with people .

More ›