jshevek

9 ms·

31.
by jshevek 6y ago
> There is no free speech analogy to countries with a different constitution You use the phrase "free speech" as if it referred only to a legal requirement, and not also an ethical principle.
32.
by jshevek 6y ago
The prior history of the word is irrelevant to the point that was made about its recent usage.
33.
by jshevek 6y ago
> "If you flag..." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
34.
by jshevek 6y ago
All three of the comments you've made are thoughtful, well considered, and informative. HN suffers, at times, from a cliquishness that degrades the quality of discourse.
35.
by jshevek 6y ago
While it is unfortunate that you are being shamed for pointing out a common misunderstanding among developers who don't understand why they get fired, you can delete your comment rather than replacing it a slash.
36.
by jshevek 6y ago
The first sentence adds nothing of value to your response. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
37.
by jshevek 6y ago
I read the statement as "consider an alternative" or "consider this alternative". With this reading, the line of reasoning implied is correct and relevant. Typos happen (and this is an international community including p
38.
by jshevek 6y ago
There are numerous simultaneous biases. IMO you are both correct.
39.
by jshevek 6y ago
Revising my statement: mentioning the probability of your comment being downvoted can bring more downvotes, independently of other biases.
40.
by jshevek 6y ago
I cannot reply to the dead comment, so I'm replying to Jose's. Adventure: if you have any evidence I'd like to see it.
41.
by jshevek 6y ago
You may be correct, but complaining that you will be down voted often leads to additional downvotes.
42.
by jshevek 6y ago
> If [criteria], then mass pardoning is an act of justice and not someone becoming the arbiter of law. I dont understand your comment. Are you thinking that acts of justice, by definition, cannot also be the product of a person becoming
43.
by jshevek 6y ago
The literal meaning of any political slogan rarely reflects the meaning that various people ascribe to the phrase, both among supporters and detractors. Is it your position that there are no authoritarian agendas represented in the movemen
44.
by jshevek 6y ago
The problem is that there is not a single, universal correct answer. Answering this question requires that we uncover built-in assumptions, and make them explicit.
45.
by jshevek 6y ago
I am opposed to censorship, and I disagree with your claim. This qualifies as "hate speech". It's derogatory, its directed at a specific group of people, and it can foster animosity. That the group is a political party is n
46.
by jshevek 6y ago
I'm not sure if this list of banned words is treated the same way as "共匪" in all cases, but "共匪" is on this list: https://en.greatfire.org/blog/2012/jun/all-blocked-keywords-...
47.
by jshevek 6y ago
>* They looked like they were creating conflict-free environments* No, they did not. They looked they were creating environments in which inevitable conflict was common, and in which the discussion of that conflict sometimes lead to hel
48.
by jshevek 6y ago
That is a bigger issue for our society, yes. But it's also understandable that people might be very interested in alleged problems that strike closer to home for them. In this case, if there is an issue worth considering at HN, explo
49.
by jshevek 6y ago
I have posted a link to a list elsewhere in the thread. (Not sure if it would be spam to repost it in this reply, sorry for the inconvenience.)
50.
by jshevek 6y ago
Yes. I believe some topics get removed by sufficient community flagging alone, no intervention by mods. If true, then this feature can be abused by users with agendas.
51.
by jshevek 6y ago
Viral noticing is fed by widespread predispositions, which change over time like fashion. There is a critical mass of people paying attention to censorship in general, and recently a critical mass of people attentive to the evils of the CCP
52.
by jshevek 6y ago
I'm not sure how reliable the following site is, but it looks like this has been banned at least since 2012, along with a long list of words that I find shockingly restrictive. https://en.greatfire.org/blog/2012&#x
53.
by jshevek 6y ago
I agree that you describe a trend in our society, but I believe in this case you are misapplying a heuristic. You don't have enough information to declare that this is the intent in this specific case.
54.
by jshevek 6y ago
If your question is influenced by the apparent popularity of this post, in proportion to it's content, the author is a well known long time contributor to HN. The likely future content of this blog may have more to do with the signal b
55.
by jshevek 6y ago
Two anecdotes in support of your last sentence: I once paid cash up front for a procedure, charged at 25% of the insurance rate. This was put in writing as the total cost of the procedure. Afterwards, they billed me as if I owed 75% of the
56.
by jshevek 6y ago
Regarding the sentence you quoted, the author is trying to summarize Brandon's views and I am not confident they are doing so in the most clear manner. I would go to source, Brandon, to really understand. That said, I believe (could
57.
by jshevek 6y ago
I'm sure there is a selection bias at play for what the daily wire chooses to report on. And I'm sure there is confirmation bias informing the opinions being reported on, there always is. But how would the fact that the daily wi
58.
by jshevek 6y ago
No, this is a misapplication of the fallacy. In a NTS fallacy, there is an existing definition accepted by all involved. A claim is made of an intrinsic characteristic, contrary evidence presented, then the definition is changed to discou
59.
by jshevek 6y ago
Several subcultures adopted this word in the US decades ago, leading to it being commonly used by people who had never heard of the book.
60.
by jshevek 6y ago
Not the best immediate source, but it identifies a study which you can look up if this isn't satisfactory: https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_59fcc5fbe4b0d467d4c224b3

More ›