lcnPylGDnU4H9OF

4 ms·

1.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 29d ago
> We'll make up more games. This reminded me of something. https://www.sbnation.com/a/17776-football
2.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1mo ago
That could alternatively be seen as a reason we should make employment less hostile to workers and encourage less car-centric city designs.
3.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1mo ago
No clue what OP's intention was but I'll note that the software on object recognition cameras typically makes use of a vision model.
4.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1mo ago
Not that surveillance capitalism is needed by society, but that surveillance capitalism needs privacy violations in order to thrive.
5.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1mo ago
I believe what parent commenter is suggesting is that it would be ridiculous for lawmakers to call it a crime to die, say without verifying you are of the legal age to do so. It would be like declaring that breathing is legal: why does that
6.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1mo ago
> Explain how a privacy that protects you and me will somehow not protect a pedophile. I think that it will, and that's okay. The US Bill of Rights necessarily protects criminals as well as innocents. "The optimal amount of [cr
7.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1mo ago
> For whatever reason, I can't reply to your comment further down. In case you happen to read this, that is (presumably) due to an anti-flamewar feature on HN, which hides the reply button for the first few minutes of posts in deep
8.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1mo ago
This is a perfect example of a psychological projection. Your comment describes itself.
9.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1mo ago
I see what you're saying but it strikes me as naive to suggest that a felony and misdemeanor are different merely in magnitude. I suppose that was my mistake given my initial examples. In practical terms, one is a means of voter disenf
10.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1mo ago
Then you don't see why stealing $10 is a misdemeanor and stealing $1000 is a felony (depending on jurisdiction, but whatever you get the point). Not saying you should see why, just that many clearly do for it to be public policy. But i
11.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1mo ago
This "they did bad stuff so we have to do worse stuff" idea strips the people doing the second bad thing of their agency. That's false; they have agency, and can choose to do better.
12.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1mo ago
As long as we're making things up, there's no reason the web search can't be locally deployed as a copy of Google's index and search algorithm circa 2026 on your unbelievably powerful 2050s home server.
13.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1mo ago
> perjurative Just nitpicking, the word is "pejorative". Kind of a funny mix-up in context, though. (Perjurative would be related to lying under oath.)
14.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
That is not inconsistent with a belief that violence against a person is worse than violence against property. It is odd to compare kidnapping a person with destroying their home security cameras.
15.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
> Police in Union Township, a Cincinnati suburb, accused Cody Morelock of disassembling the camera, its support pole and solar panel on June 13. To add to this, it stood out to me that the headline uses "destroy" but the articl
16.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
> or that someone who would not authorize something like this would literally not be allowed to show up on the ballot? I'm surprised that you've never encountered this persepective before, it seems a very common one to me. The
17.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
> "Censorship of government websites" is an oxymoron. > The government choosing not to engage in or endorse certain speech does not suppress others engaging in that speech. The second sentence is not related to what I'm
18.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
Another alternative could be implementing reasonable and toothy checks on corporate malfeasance like price fixing, rent-seeking, wage theft, and wage suppression such that the lower class can actually afford to live in society.
19.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
Your refusal to look up "censor" in a dictionary doesn't make you right. Some people are actually trying to have a reasoned discussion about the downsides of what the administration is doing, in particular the censorship, whi
20.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
That's why it's mind boggling that you are insisting something so dubious is obvious. The certainty with which you believe this conclusion speaks more to your personal biases than what can be objectively observed in the video.
21.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
It's possible both things occurred, first one, then the other.
22.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
Yeah, I get it but always prefer to give it a shot. I know the person I'm replying to is not the only one who will read my comments. Cheers.
23.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
> Use of non-sequitur doesn't apply It does, in precisely the way I described. Your comment was not engaging with the point they brought up. > The flaw in the premise is that you need Facebook or a government fun Facebook to do a
24.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
To add to this, government-run services can't absolve themselves of all wrongdoing with Terms of Service they can change on a whim. Censorship within government-run social media is subject to the restrictions placed on the government&#
25.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
The point you are raising is a non sequitur to theirs. The fact that you can do these things without Facebook is not mutually exclusive with others using Facebook with the same intentions.
26.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
First, pay people for the "engagement" their content generates, then aggressively promote the most "engaging" content. At the same time, such content is known to have certain characteristics. This is the Facebook ( et al
27.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
Rage-bait invented the "culture war" you're talking about.
28.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
This is a really funny way to describe Facebook's (and Youtube's, and TikTok's, and...) entire business model. It's long been known that they aggressively promote ahem "engaging" content. How do they incentiv
29.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
This comment doesn't make sense. > If you're at the point where you're getting upset about ads pretending to be something else Please. Nobody is ever pushed to "the point where they get upset about [willful deceptions
30.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2mo ago
> Additionally, the visual gap between advertised burgers and actual burgers raises separate false advertising issues Meanwhile, the very clear and obvious false advertising they actually perform is getting hardly any attention. Here&#x2

More ›