richbell

63 ms·

841.
by richbell 4y ago
> What? The article talks specifically about his upper-crust background and his professor parents. It vaguely alludes to his parents being upper-class Stanford law professors. It does not specifically talk about SBF's father being
842.
by richbell 4y ago
> how SBF's (perceived) status as a white male impacted his trajectory. I don't think it's bait, when it's the thrust of the essay. It's provocative and dishonest for him to not once acknowledge SBF's privil
843.
by richbell 4y ago
> If you're not American, I can see why you wouldn't understand the cultural context that the article, and my response above, presumes intimate knowledge of. Where did I indicate that I didn't understand it? I have America
844.
by richbell 4y ago
On Android, the last frame of the ad that played before the video became glitched and stayed on screen. I could see some of the video "behind" the video box, however, it was tall instead of wide. https://imgur.com&#x2
845.
by richbell 4y ago
> In Pax Americana, it is verboten to suggest that the caste system is alive and well. If you are approaching this essay with that mentality and you aren’t interested in opening your mind, please stop reading here. If you’d prefer to con
846.
by richbell 4y ago
The title is saying "white boy" not that he's white and a boy. "White boy" can be a derogatory term.
847.
by richbell 4y ago
That doesn't make it not provocative. It also misses the mark, in my opinion, by failing to mention how insanely well-connected SBF is.
848.
by richbell 4y ago
I read the article, I'm just pointing out that asking someone who is provoked by an intentionally provocative article — even if just for clicks — is silly. Not to mention that "white" or "black" has different connot
849.
by richbell 4y ago
The title and article are intentionally provocative.
850.
by richbell 4y ago
> I'm not sure I buy the idea that someone is only super racist when they're having an episode, though. It's a fairly well-documented phenomenon that people suffering from things like dimensia or alzheimers will behave ina
851.
by richbell 4y ago
> It also appears DB(.)com has a lot of compromised employees which may have been used as the initial access to the company - see it here - Was it necessary to include this link? To anyone not familiar with HR, they've been spamming
852.
by richbell 4y ago
> The Cambridge Analytica thing probably didn't have a meaningful impact on the elections. That's a pretty big claim to make without evidence. At the very least I think we can agree that political parties wouldn't be inve
853.
by richbell 4y ago
They gave specific examples of negative things that Facebook has done. This is a pretty shallow dismissal of their criticism, even if their comment is a bit heavy-handed.
854.
by richbell 4y ago
Twitter employees were allegedly selling verification. Has any proof been provides or anyone else corroborated this?
855.
by richbell 4y ago
> Nothing suspicious about this at all. This type of low effort comment is generally frowned upon. Perhaps they didn't feel comfortable discussion controversial matters on their main account?
856.
by richbell 4y ago
That's rubbish. There were some grassroots efforts around 2015 to make the mod log public and transparent (so it'd say what was removed, by who, and optionally why), but it was unfortunately opt-in and never gained large adoption.
857.
by richbell 4y ago
> Mods shadow delete your post so you can still see it but no one else does. Mass taggers have historically been abused to ban or shadow-ban users who've posted in "bad" subreddits. If you argued with someone in r/the
858.
Tell HN: Flo Hiring scraping GitHub emails for recruiting spam
4 points by richbell 4y ago|0 comments
859.
by richbell 4y ago
> In many cases that's not even enough. Users rarely deviate from the established upvote/downvote patterns. In fact, I'd go as far as saying many users don't even read the comments before voting. When two users are ha
860.
by richbell 4y ago
> Well if you do leave it unmoderated for long, other users can appeal to admins to get control instead Historically the r/RedditRequest process only considered whether the moderator was completely inactive from Reddit. There could
861.
by richbell 4y ago
> Each sub-reddit has it's own moderation team that decides what's acceptable and then you opt-in. It's a great concept, though it's worth pointing out that there's considerable overlap of moderators between sub
862.
by richbell 4y ago
> These blocks can be circumvented, and so far they have been, but freedom is generally on the defensive here. This weakness has become especially apparent in recent years when governments react to civil unrest or protests by shutting of
863.
by richbell 4y ago
> That's not sarcasm. Regardless of the user's intent, I think it's at least misleading to claim that it represented the site as a whole. I personally believe that it's sarcastic considering Kiwi Farm's history w
864.
by richbell 4y ago
> On August 24, 2022, U.S. Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene stated in an interview with NewsMax that she was swatted twice by an individual claiming to be Kiwifarms moderator "AltisticRight". She demanded that the website
865.
by richbell 4y ago
IIRC a single user had a sarcastic "kill count" added to their profile description, which was then reported as the website itself having that.
866.
by richbell 4y ago
I was expecting something terrifying, like Saudi Arabian spies infiltrating Twitter to monitor dissidents[0], not losers saying bad words. https://techcrunch.com/2022/08/09/twitter-spy-convicted-saud...
867.
by richbell 4y ago
I'm sure Adobe will announce price reductions any day now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnrMhbWG0Pc
868.
by richbell 4y ago
Run by people who constantly make decisions that are contrary to what its community and supporters want?
869.
by richbell 4y ago
This is a meta-discussion, not a post about the account "meta". I.e., a post about HackerNews itself. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-discussion
870.
by richbell 4y ago
> Notice how we don’t see those ads anymore? It’s because winning Jeopardy has nothing to do with providing health care and energy. I thought it was because Watson was a marketing gimmick to make it seem like they had "AI", wh

More ›