normalnorm

11 ms·

91.
by normalnorm 7y ago
Joke's on you Immanuel Kant, we have a real philosopher in here!
92.
by normalnorm 7y ago
It's just a tech business language mannerism. People use it for the same reasons they use "price point" instead of "price", or "usecase" instead of "use", or "form factor" instead of &q
93.
by normalnorm 7y ago
> onboard onto Another way to say this is: "learn".
94.
by normalnorm 7y ago
Exactly, but most people here are unwilling to listen to any of this, because their salaries are funded by the very thing that has ruined the web - advertisement.
95.
by normalnorm 7y ago
> It has solutions, like Google voicing out the contents, instead of doing a webpage that is so scrappable that screenreaders can parse it. The real solution is to find a business model, or a way to organize society, that does not depend
96.
by normalnorm 7y ago
The grammar of the English language does not forbid one to write in Greek, but if you choose to write in Greek only, you will compromise on a lot of people being able to understand you. The same with standards, and you are misunderstanding
97.
by normalnorm 7y ago
Perhaps, but in this case Google would just have to comply with the standards, which are not niche at all.
98.
by normalnorm 7y ago
Defaulting to simple HTML allows one to support all incredibly niche browser. That is the beauty of protocols and standards. This is particularly relevant when it comes to accessibility. Google search results are literally lists of web li
99.
by normalnorm 7y ago
> What does internet infrastructure have to do with ads? It is the medium that makes the ads possible, and it is payed by you and me. > We're talking about content, and ads are the subsidy that lets billions consume for free. And
100.
by normalnorm 7y ago
> No there wasn't. Yes there was. Go to archive.org and check for yourself. > The commercial internet is a trillion times bigger than anything that came before and services billions of users around the world, many for free, paid
101.
by normalnorm 7y ago
> Without ads there would be basically no free content online, and those who cannot afford content would simply go without. There was plenty of free content online before ads, in fact I claim that the web was better before ads arrived, a
102.
by normalnorm 7y ago
That is fucked up. We are human beings, not some machine to be measured by how productive we are.
103.
by normalnorm 7y ago
Fair enough. I would just argue that they don't try to manipulate you at scale ...
104.
by normalnorm 7y ago
> most apple users here would disagree > plus i m not sure if you re aware how extreme your position is Wait, aren't you the person who just wrote "think different"? I'm confused. > Most of our beautiful classic
105.
by normalnorm 7y ago
All of it is designed hijack your attention against your own interests. What you call "positive emotional response" is only positive from the point of view of the advertiser. From the point of view of the victims, it as intrusion
106.
by normalnorm 7y ago
> Plus, the reason teens are not considered adults is not that their IQ would be low. The reason is impulsivity and similar considerations. Maybe what we call "impulsivity" is just an healthy reaction against absurd constraints
107.
by normalnorm 7y ago
Yes, yes. There is always some legal reason with you guys. Somehow we manage here in Europe. Go figure...
108.
by normalnorm 7y ago
> Expecting to have the same rights as if using your own devices when using someone else’s device that they are paying you to perform work on qualifies as an indignity to me. Every single second that you are working, you know that your e
109.
by normalnorm 7y ago
> No one has a feeling of their privacy being violated, because there's no expectation of privacy when using someone else's (the company's) property. Excellent. Now you only have to remove the expectation of privacy in any
110.
by normalnorm 7y ago
Asking for clarification is one thing, immediately providing a counter-example to the most literal interpretation is another.
111.
by normalnorm 7y ago
The easiest way to miss a point (on purpose or not), is to take a metaphor literally. I see a lot of this here on HN, and I think it is a common vice among people with strong knowledge in the hard sciences but with a rather narrow scope of
112.
by normalnorm 7y ago
I think you are taking the title a bit to literally. By "dopamine fast", what is meant is abstaining from activities that give you "cheap" dopamine hits, such as participating in social media and receiving likes in your
113.
by normalnorm 7y ago
Ok, but consider the following: do you feel that current scientific knowledge includes things that we know not to make sense, but we just accept them because we have no better alternatives? If the answer is no, this should give you pause. A
114.
by normalnorm 7y ago
> If you value freedom above all else, Google being an independent entity, should have the freedom to ban / veto whomever they want. Not so if you value freedom of human beings above all else, and even less so if you would wish to
115.
by normalnorm 7y ago
> This line of argument is utterly insane. That is just name calling, and doesn't really improve the quality of the discussion. > Inasmuch as the intent of war is effecting political change (as Clausewitz put it, "the contin
116.
by normalnorm 7y ago
Then these companies must be stopped by democratic processes, least we lose democracy itself.