hnmonkey

16 ms·

121.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
The party in power is not expected to lie, cheat, and steal to maintain their position. You're claiming that as if that is the righteous goal of any party. I would argue that's exactly what the founding fathers didn't want. T
122.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
You're not the only one. It seems like paranoia has taken on this new-ish meaning over the past few years of just being afraid of something that is totally valid. It seems the previous usage of it has kinda died out somewhat.
123.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
This is a pretty absurd connection that has zero evidence to back it up. It's an extraordinary claim so where's the actual evidence of it? Your NY Times story simply talks about the Chinese spies and doesn't actually prove wh
124.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
Just to be clear... paranoia is an irrational fear that people are out to get you. If you are actually being spied on by someone (you are) then that word doesn't apply since the fear of that spying is 100% rational.
125.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
I imagine that it will make it much easier to have face-to-face happy hours, dinners, lunches, and so on. It will also enable people lobbying on behalf of Amazon to do so closer to the mothership and include people from Amazon to further st
126.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
Your condescension only seems to grow and you continue to get more incivil while crying out that you're getting attacked (elsewhere in this thread saying I'm attacking the messenger). I think I'll call it quits in trying to h
127.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
When did 'western powers' invade China and drug a large percentage of their population between 1918 and 2018? What was the percentage of their population? What were the drugs? What was the purpose? Who did it? How did something th
128.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
This seems like a great neutral path forward that shouldn't upset anyone and doesn't paint the research as 100% factual and in-stone, yet. It leaves the door open to continue the work while rectifying the issues. However, it doesn
129.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
There really needs to be repercussions for this type of thing. Naming and shaming is a good first step towards that utopia. If those responsible for these types of unethical actions never get punished they'll just keep doing it to the
130.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
Your posts in this thread have continually grown more and more incivil and arrogant in defense of Chinese spying. Stating that you thought this audience HN was smart but now you realize you have to teach this audience on HN is incredibly co
131.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
All of his/her comments in this post are seemingly only there to stir up people. There's no evidence behind the things they're saying other than a hand-waving attempt at minimizing China's bad faith actions by saying oth
132.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
Can I see your evidence of this? Because what I stated actually has evidence. There's explicit proof of people in America moving to China. There's explicit proof of Chinese students coming to America to learn. There's explici
133.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
Can I have some of the verifiable evidence of your anti-Chinese propaganda from the last 10 years? You seem adamant that there's an abundance of it across the globe and that it's so pervasive over the past 200 years. I'd love
134.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
Technically, while I do think that those companies have moved to stronger encryption over the past few years (which is a general trend I think) for consumer facing stuff, at least one of the changes that came out of PRISM was that Google st
135.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
Is there a solid argument for not having more regulation on these organizations? We have so much regulation on slot machines and casinos for example because we know that a lot of money passes through there and there's high potential fo
136.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
Huh? The Cold War was not a conspiracy in the way you're implying at all. It was very publicly out there as you had kids under desks to avoid nuclear war and both countries saying how awful the other is. Westerners know plenty about Ch
137.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
Do you have proof that any of the news about China (from tons of different sources, including other countries that are not America) is propaganda or not accurate? You're implying a global conspiracy is afoot to besmirch the good Chines
138.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
Also, this person's argument is basically... we have proof that Huawei spies on behalf of the Chinese government/military but that's not as bad as a hypothetical where 2 major American corporations who spend tons of money on
139.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
What kind of transparency would you like to see from them? For some things, like active secret investigations how would you expect them to act transparently and publicly?
140.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
I want to pile on to the other commenters on this review of your takeaways and thank you. This detail and enumerating the specifics really provides a very clear (and relatively concise) picture of what benefits this book has in store for so
141.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
I would have to argue that your situation is a complete outlier and extremely unusual, especially in London which is one of the most expensive places on earth. You're also saying that you've excluded rent to get to your 10K a year
142.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
You are seemingly arguing that you have insider information that they are buying coins because you happen to know people 'with skin in the game.' That's a hard argument to buy with such a claim and no evidence. And don't
143.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
I would argue that they in fact are definitely a liability, but one which has been calculated to be worth it if you continue with the acquisition. Just because you buy a company doesn't mean their previous crimes should now magic-wande
144.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
This is not the same concern you're expressing unfortunately. You're arguing elsewhere that the government punishing outright fraud is manipulating the market and choosing winners and losers. I see nothing about that at your link
145.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
Again... you're injecting some sort of belief that they are manipulating markets and picking winners and losers when there is no such evidence of either of those statements being true including none in the article itself. You're s
146.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
It seems that if you don't punish them for the bad things the companies they acquired did then companies will just do bad things and then get acquired, even by another subsidiary or holding company just to evade the laws and regulation
147.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
It's not picking winners and losers in any sense of that phrase. They are literally punishing the bank for bad behavior and that's to be expected from what a regulator should be doing. If someone breaks the law and you send that p
148.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
Where have you seen that they've bought Bitcoin and are trying to buy more? It would be interesting to see the evidence of this I think. And as a note... other cryptocurrencies aren't 'fake cryptocurrencies' since they&#
149.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
Yeah it's a pretty odd article. It seems like things were working as they're supposed to and yet it implies that it's gonna be great now that the regulations have been lifted by the Trump admin. Unfortunately though, I'd
150.
by hnmonkey 8y ago
What's your definition of 'bonkers areas?' Can you show how 1 million net worth gets someone retirement? It seems to me that if you're retiring on 1 million dollars you're going to run out of money pretty easily unl

More ›