rjknight

37 ms·

301.
by rjknight 13y ago
I don't get it. Let's take your software engineer example. Software engineers often do complain about spam from recruiters, in cases where the recruiters: a) Plainly have not taken your skills or location or pay grade into cons
302.
by rjknight 13y ago
And Dropbox. And less than they gave Twitter.
303.
by rjknight 13y ago
It's not the court's job to favour the person who asked for the restraining order, beyond issuing it in the first place and enforcing it afterwards. Enforcement is a matter of justice, not a matter of taking sides, and if the p
304.
by rjknight 13y ago
If it sounds unlikely, then there's probably more to the story. We don't know what happened between them that caused a judge to believe the order to be necessary, but I presume that such orders are not given lightly.
305.
by rjknight 13y ago
There is no "with the victim" here though. I mean, morally speaking, we are all with the victim - human decency alone demands that we have sympathy for their predicament, which is why we have things like restraining orders in the
306.
by rjknight 13y ago
I disagree. A restraining order is precisely meant to bar all forms of communication so that we don't need to decide on a case-by-case basis which communications violate the order, which would lead to highly unequal enforcement with
307.
by rjknight 13y ago
You think Steve Jobs (insert other tech CEO if you prefer) wouldn't demand answers from finance specialists or lawyers, and wouldn't be equally dismissive of them if they replied with obfuscatory jargon?
308.
by rjknight 13y ago
If IT is this important then maybe it would be a good idea for the firms affected to have people who understand it on the board, rather than relying on Dennis.
309.
by rjknight 13y ago
God forbid that anyone on an internet forum [mostly] about startup businesses might try to draw attention to themselves.
310.
by rjknight 13y ago
You are entirely wrong. It is a good idea that will never work.
311.
by rjknight 13y ago
That was my thought too. The RG statement strongly implies that Google are helping them to "resolve" an "issue", which makes the whole thing sound like some technical glitch that Google and RG are coordinating as equals
312.
by rjknight 13y ago
I found this article to be very interesting. Does anyone have any pointers to similar writing about organisational politics in relation to agile development, lean or UCD?
313.
by rjknight 13y ago
I think this is a very good point, and I think it suggests a resolution to the "antagonism" between developers and UCD practitioners suggested in the OP. In designing a system, the developers are the ones with the best grasp of wh
314.
by rjknight 13y ago
If they have fewer kids then where's the harm?
315.
UK could build 50 new nuclear plants(theguardian.com)
2 points by rjknight 13y ago|1 comments
316.
by rjknight 13y ago
The Selfish Gene is one of those books that has an uncanny ability to provoke truly awful criticism, both from people who should know better and people who quite evidently never will. To be fair to him, David Dobbs is merely in the former
317.
by rjknight 13y ago
Ah, but to hell with rationality! You think it's rational for someone to reply to all of your tweets with mindless abuse, and to encourage other people to do the same? For better or worse (I think it's for worse, which is why I d
318.
by rjknight 13y ago
I think that's a rather 'meta' example. A better one would be that if someone can reply to your tweets or mention your username, they can make it appear that you're (rudely) refusing to engage them in legitimate convers
319.
by rjknight 13y ago
I see your point, but you're bringing your own assumptions about public and private here, and Twitter doesn't have to obey those assumptions (for clarity: I share your assumptions about public and private). From another perspectiv
320.
by rjknight 13y ago
That's one answer, but it's not a very good one. Can we think of no better option than for people who are being harassed to 'decide whether they should be posting publicly'?
321.
by rjknight 13y ago
I think the point is that some people had come to expect that blocking works a certain way, and they're not happy that it has changed. In particular, it seems that people were using blocking as a way of having a pseudo-private status
322.
by rjknight 13y ago
I'd be interested to know more about the rationale behind this. As I see it, the change means: 1) The blocked person doesn't know that they're blocked, so they cannot be certain as to whether their tweets are being seen 2) Th
323.
by rjknight 13y ago
I think you're dismissing the perfectly good responses that this thread has received. I know we have this big narrative about how any discussion of feminism on HN has to be a horror show, but it's in danger of becoming a self-ful
324.
by rjknight 13y ago
My reading of the situation is this: In the beginning, feminists were concerned with how women were being directly oppressed by men. They fought against this, and laws were changed and social norms were changed, and now things are better t
325.
by rjknight 13y ago
I think there's a confusion here, but it's a very interesting one. This article raises the question: 'where do our ideas about what programming languages should be like come from?' The genesis of functional programming
326.
by rjknight 13y ago
Wow, what a cunt.
327.
Not From the Onion-NROL 39(marginalrevolution.com)
3 points by rjknight 13y ago|0 comments
328.
by rjknight 13y ago
Or "do bears shit in the woods?"
329.
by rjknight 13y ago
I think this is a good point, but it runs into some particular problems when dealing with software, in particular open source software, where there is no direct relationship between the person creating the software and the person using
330.
by rjknight 13y ago
There's a good argument to be made about this kind of thing. This isn't it. The author starts out critiquing people who see connections between their own politics and technology where no such connection exists, then proceeds to r

More ›