jtdev

13 ms·

211.
by jtdev 6y ago
Bill Gates thinks he's saving the world - presumably his ego and idea of a personal legacy are wrapped up in this.
212.
by jtdev 6y ago
There’s zero hard evidence that red meat consumption leads to bad health outcomes. It’s all epidemiological fud. Why are people so comfortable with billionaires telling them how to live?
213.
by jtdev 6y ago
"Epidemiological study supports assertions of those funding the study" Does that not seem problematic to you?
214.
by jtdev 6y ago
Oh hey, look who funds Wellcome: https://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Gran...
215.
by jtdev 6y ago
Studies like this are published for political reasons, not scientific reasons. I wouldn't be surprised if the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation is behind this study.
216.
by jtdev 6y ago
Somehow 60 million bison wandered the prairie for millenia without the world ending... shall we kill all of the wild ungulats? Cap the volcanoes? At what point should humans just commit mass self sacrifice in the interest of saving the eart
217.
by jtdev 6y ago
> “we still need to farm grains for feed, more than we would have to otherwise. Reducing animal agriculture will have a positive impact on wildlife, reducing deforestation, etc.” Uh, where do you think Vegan friendly foods are grown? Do
218.
by jtdev 6y ago
That study doesn’t say what you think it says. Show me one single study that finds an actual link between red meat consumption and bad health outcomes... Not some epidemiological bullshit - a real study with real findings.
219.
by jtdev 6y ago
Just because you believe this doesn’t make it true. Do you think a pack of coyotes tearing apart a newborn deer is unethical too? Do you think farming grains and vegetables is without impact on wildlife?
220.
by jtdev 6y ago
Wow, that does not sound like something I want to eat.
221.
by jtdev 6y ago
Why wasn’t Stratton Oakmont v Prodigy Services overturned on 1A grounds? “... if they are neutral platforms, they should have immunity from litigation. If they are publishers making editorial choices, then they should relinquish this valuab
222.
by jtdev 6y ago
...and there we have it. If you want to selectively censor lawful content, you should be treated as a publisher.
223.
by jtdev 6y ago
Oakmont, Inc. v. Prodigy Services Co. was in my mind and many others greatly preferred to the current mess we see caused by 230. Please tell me how your 1A hypothetical works out. Genuinely interested in hearing how you think 1A and SCOTUS
224.
by jtdev 6y ago
This is modern American corporate culture after all. Lie, cheat, steal, win at all costs and if you lose blame someone at the bottom of the ladder.
225.
by jtdev 6y ago
That depends. Are these organizations acting in “good faith”?
226.
by jtdev 6y ago
Those haven’t been used by the cancel culture mobs, so no. It seems that the WHOIS abuse process is unbiased and not rife with conflicts of interest.
227.
by jtdev 6y ago
You’re presenting a false dichotomy... 230 needs to be updated, not thrown out; 230 clearly has important aspects that must remain, and other aspects that are clearly being abused by big tech.
228.
by jtdev 6y ago
Yes, I have considered that. But, no, that’s not my “problem”; I understand that this is not covered by the constitution. I believe that Section 230 should be updated and the clearly vague “otherwise objectionable” language should be remove
229.
by jtdev 6y ago
Section 230 is woefully naive and written for a bygone era. Censorship of speech by a small group of kleptocrat mega corporations on the greatest communication medium ever known to mankind is antithetical to everything America stands for.
230.
by jtdev 6y ago
“Their platform” has become the public square. If you think allowing unfettered control of such a utility by a small number of mega corporations - with political biases that change to suit their bottom line - is a good thing then I’m not su
231.
by jtdev 6y ago
I think you’re downplaying the “Other” category, which literally gives DO carte blanche in cancelling those they don’t approve of, or worse who the mob pressures DO to cancel. Do you not see how problematic this is? I agree with all of the
232.
by jtdev 6y ago
I'm glad these youths are loved and cared for. I'm also troubled by our recent cultural obsession with asking youths to question their gender and sexual preferences.
233.
by jtdev 6y ago
I was really considering moving from AWS to DO until I noticed this: https://www.digitalocean.com/company/contact/#abuse So anyone who's offended by content you might host on DO can report your site and some
234.
by jtdev 6y ago
This seems to summarize my experience with software sales processes and interactions in general. I’m hopeful that software sales culture is beginning to evolve into something other than the pack of hyenas on a carcass that it is today. I pe
235.
by jtdev 6y ago
I’ve encountered offshore devs that are actually quite good... they are by far the exception, but they also charge much more than the run of the mill folks that you’re likely to encounter.
236.
by jtdev 6y ago
I’ve worked with many offshore devs over the last decade and really do have a great deal of respect for these folks. That said, in my experience you get maybe 1/10th of the useful output from cheap offshore devs as compared to mid-leve
237.
by jtdev 6y ago
You get what you pay for.
238.
by jtdev 6y ago
Interesting, sounds like a very unique use case. Is containerizing not a possible solution?
239.
by jtdev 6y ago
> “if you don't want to use pip” Why wouldn’t you want to use pip?
240.
by jtdev 6y ago
They also ferment a great deal of the soy they consume.

More ›