matt4077

69 ms·

661.
by matt4077 8y ago
If the WP has been getting worse by the day, you're in luck! Because the article is from 2013, and must therefore be excellent.
662.
by matt4077 8y ago
I don't quite get what the argument is supposed to be. Possibly that the charges should be dropped because so much time has passed. Because there is just no logical reason why an accused should have the option of getting all charges dr
663.
by matt4077 8y ago
There's a big difference in that Soros spends his money on causes , as an actual food for hungry people and actual teachers to teach actual students. Whereas the Kochs are far more focussed on US domestic politics. Soros has become so
664.
by matt4077 8y ago
Leaving is strictly better that organising, because at a first approximation they could just make you leave if it were different. Which they would never do. The argument about others just replacing you is, of course, best known from chess,
665.
by matt4077 8y ago
Nah, just leave. Tomorrow morning. Unless you need a few days to download a few internal documents that you believe the world should see. If you work at Facebook, I'm reasonably certain you (including family) won't starve. By dela
666.
by matt4077 8y ago
He does not advocate "open borders". He does humanitarian aid for refugees. In Europe, he supports many pro-European groups. That means open borders by extension, because the EU has abolished borders. But it's not a specific
667.
by matt4077 8y ago
What you're calling "rational" is just more conspiracy theories. But nice try to appear impartial there in the beginning. Soros started by funding most of the opposition in Poland in the 1980s, making him a key factor in the
668.
by matt4077 8y ago
I feel it's a bit unfair to criticise changes in a product at the leading edge of the most dynamic field of software. It's also slightly ungrateful for such a valuable addition to OSS–and I say that even though I tend to consider
669.
by matt4077 8y ago
> What you are misunderstanding: being patronizing does not make you convincing. At least they had arguments... Being patronizing while making good arguments should be just as convincing as good arguments alone. Unless you're lettin
670.
by matt4077 8y ago
archive.org actually has a form for "archive it now", right there on https://archive.org/web/ . They also address using their data in court proceedings in the FAQ. So I think they do have that use case in mind
671.
by matt4077 8y ago
I'm also in Europe, using GCP, know many others who do, and have actually never heard criticism of GCP with regard to data security. Yes, there are lots of people criticising Google. But for a business using GCP, my impression is that
672.
by matt4077 8y ago
> every month we have a new product/service of Google being deprecated Indeed! Just ~~~last month~~~ 62 months ago they shut down Reader. (I see that you're hedging with the reference to Maps. But I'd love if this time, we
673.
by matt4077 8y ago
The shotgun clause has its problems even in contracts among equals. Those are even more relevant here. Specifically, this would link a town's ability to raise taxes dependent on its existing financial situation: A poor town that would
674.
by matt4077 8y ago
> Most people would be apathetic to those issues Is this hypothetical supposed to be something positive? Because I actually agree apathy to these issues, and most others, would be the logical result of not having the media report on them
675.
by matt4077 8y ago
The logical conclusion happily isn't always at the bottom of a slippery slope. Here, it would be enough to stop these bespoke, one-company deals. Because no state could afford giving such rates to all companies, the practice would end.
676.
by matt4077 8y ago
If only there were some company that provides access to all sorts of data regarding public companies. It would be a BLOOMing landscape, like an iceBERG of knowledge. People would just look it up, instead of rhetorically musing aloud in thei
677.
by matt4077 8y ago
Ruinous is not "the quality of having led to the ruin of a specific entity". Rather, it is defined as follows: disastrous or destructive: a ruinous effect on the environment. • costing far more than can be afforded: the cost of t
678.
by matt4077 8y ago
It's baffling to see such comments not giving any indication of grasping the rather basic mechanism behind the idea of restricting such race-to-the-bottom competition. The number of jobs and investment are fixed. For the nation as a wh
679.
by matt4077 8y ago
Can't really do that because it would be called a "cartel". But otherwise: yes, please! It would be perfectly legitimate for federal rules restricting ruinous competitions such as these. There are, in fact, many examples: Min
680.
by matt4077 8y ago
The issue isn't wether or not these incentives are net positive for the location that wins. The problem is the prisoner's dilemma of the situation, forcing jurisdiction into a race-to-the-bottom competition. That's because Am
681.
by matt4077 8y ago
Why? Did anybody think it was technically impossible for youtube to delete content before? Do you also believe that when you, just once, move a large branch that had fallen from a tree you suddenly become responsible for the safety of all t
682.
by matt4077 8y ago
> going beyond the "good samaritan" allowance of section 230 the way they are currently being performed. These experts of yours must be illiterate, because the law couldn't be clearer. Quote: No provider or user of an int
683.
by matt4077 8y ago
I'm opposed to this EU proposal, but maybe not quite as strongly as many others... The general sense I get is that people are completely indifferent (at best) to the interests of creators. This leads, unfortunately, to rather shallow
684.
by matt4077 8y ago
Since someone else went to the trouble to explain to you why that argument is neither the law, nor logic[0], I’ll spare us the repetition and just assume you are arguing in bad faith. 0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=
685.
by matt4077 8y ago
Sure. If everyone hates your opinion, the obvious step is to start comparing yourself with Galileo. Of course you would get the exact same pushback if you were wrong, or your ideas potentially harmful. So the two possibilities can't re
686.
by matt4077 8y ago
While their rates are low, the issue was about additional, individual deals that lead to effective tax rates around .5% (instead of the official 12.5%, I believe). I think the EU has done a pretty good job to find a balance here: when Irela
687.
by matt4077 8y ago
> No-one wants to live in a block of flats unless they're too poor to afford a house. I live in an apartment and wouldn't move to house even if I got it for free. That's mostly due simply to the different environment where
688.
by matt4077 8y ago
"Whataboutism" is really more of a moral concept that doesn't quite fit here. It's probably easier to see when going back to the original word, which (for reasons that must have included either weed or a stroke) was repl
689.
by matt4077 8y ago
I don't think being a bit kinky on the side in any way legitimises the tired old biologistic narratives. The problem here isn't just that they (in the best case) mix up what is (was) and what aught to be. It's just that your
690.
by matt4077 8y ago
As a tall but very thin man, I am convinced the clothes of a random northern European women would tend to be a better fit for me than those of a random US man, with something like 80%+ probability. That's partly because pants that are

More ›