imgabe

49 ms·

751.
by imgabe 4y ago
You have no ethical obligation to provide accurate personal information to an untrusted party.
752.
by imgabe 4y ago
Not really. Anyway, I’m sure Meta is terribly worried about whether some people on the Internet think they’re hypocritical or not.
753.
by imgabe 4y ago
If part of the rules of the game are that you’re allowed to sue people and lobby to change the rules, then no it’s very much not.
754.
by imgabe 4y ago
I don't consider this hypocritical at all. It's like getting mad at a soccer team. "Hey they were trying to score goals, but at the same time, preventing the other team from scoring goals! Hypocrites!"
755.
by imgabe 4y ago
If you can fit it all in the subject line, even better
756.
by imgabe 4y ago
Import controls of foreign goods are well within the jurisdiction of government.
757.
by imgabe 4y ago
This was bound to happen as the percentage of people who have podcasts approached 100.
758.
by imgabe 4y ago
An artist keeping their work out of AI models will be like one from previous generations keeping their work out of museums. It will be a great way to ensure your work is forgotten by history and has no influence on the next generation of ar
759.
by imgabe 4y ago
Damn, 100 shares of MSFT from 1991 would be worth about $1.7 million today. Not bad if they hung on to them! https://microsoft.gcs-web.com/investment-calculator?4b5195df...
760.
by imgabe 4y ago
They had a compliant system that stopped working, that's not the same. If you didn't design it to comply in the first place you wouldn't get a building permit.
761.
by imgabe 4y ago
You literally can’t. Some form of automatic lighting control is required by code in most commercial or public buildings.
762.
by imgabe 4y ago
Yeah but that won’t get you points for LEED, or comply with the energy codes for that matter.
763.
by imgabe 4y ago
Every time you post an image on the Internet, you grant a license for people to make copies of it. Facebook, Instagram, I'm sure DeviantArt and any other site that hosts images has language to this effect in their terms and conditions.
764.
by imgabe 4y ago
Well good news, the government already takes a portion of everyone's wealth, especially Brin, via capital gains, income, property and other taxes. The Great Society happened just fine without a wealth tax and the government collects fa
765.
by imgabe 4y ago
Making rich people poorer doesn’t do anything to help people who are poor. We could instead work on ways to make poor people richer, which would actually make their lives better instead of making someone else life worse, and would also redu
766.
by imgabe 4y ago
> Why in the world should I continue to allow a billionaire to profiteer, at the cost of immense civic damage? 1. Because creating a valuable company that provides a useful service is not profiteering. 2. Because creating a company did n
767.
by imgabe 4y ago
Hundreds of thousands of Google employees who aren't homeless. Millions of people who make a living with AdSense, preventing them from becoming homeless. Millions more who make a living consulting on SEO, optimizing ad campaigns who ar
768.
by imgabe 4y ago
And the solution to the problems is to give more and more money to the government that already spent trillions of dollars and didn't solve the problem. You don't see a problem with that? You don't think that maybe we should
769.
by imgabe 4y ago
Then you just want to take people's stuff for fun, not to solve any problem? Is that supposed to be better?
770.
by imgabe 4y ago
The cool thing about property rights is that when you legally obtain something it belongs to you and you don't have to justify your ownership of it to random strangers in order to continue owning it.
771.
by imgabe 4y ago
No, not ours, not yet, unless the faction that thinks stealing someone else's stuff will solve all our problems gets their way.
772.
by imgabe 4y ago
Many things that make intuitive sense to most people are wildly wrong. Reorganizing society to accommodate the grab bag of misunderstandings and prejudices that make up the intuitive sense of most people is usually a mistake. Indeed, every
773.
by imgabe 4y ago
Please detail exactly how the $100 billion should be spent to end homelessness.
774.
by imgabe 4y ago
That's not the point. The comment implies all it would take to "house the poor" is to spend $100 billion. The government spends that amount many times over. Spending $100 billion is not a big deal. If that were sufficient to
775.
by imgabe 4y ago
The Us government budget is over 4 trillion dollars. Why not use $100 billion of that to house the poor?
776.
by imgabe 4y ago
The assumption here is that the speed caused the deaths and that’s not necessarily true. We have better safety practices now like hi-vis vests, tie-offs, etc. They don’t slow things that much. I think we could build just as fast without dea
777.
by imgabe 4y ago
That's not the point. There's still a difference between arguing in the abstract "my interpretation of the doctrine says this is permitted" and "I support and advocate doing this". Even the 13th Amendment permi
778.
by imgabe 4y ago
The views of Catholics in general are irrelevant. The church doctrine either says something or it doesn't. He's arguing that the doctrine says that and always has. I think taking someone's words out of context and twisting it
779.
by imgabe 4y ago
What he's actually saying in the Reddit thread linked in the sibling comment is that the Catholic church condones slavery in some circumstances (I'd have to take his word about that, I don't know anything about church doctrin
780.
by imgabe 4y ago
It's in a subreddit called "DebateReligion". Just because someone takes a position in a debate doesn't mean that it's their personal belief.

More ›