rosser

56 ms·

481.
by rosser 8y ago
A potential victim's ignorance of their risk doesn't mean they aren't at risk. Because I'm not specifically aware there's a cross-town bus with my name on it, I'm somehow not about to get pancaked?
482.
by rosser 8y ago
Tu quoque . See also: "Ayn Rand collected Social Security benefits." (And I abhor her oeuvre and "movement".)
483.
by rosser 8y ago
I don't "owe" a business I interact with "clean" data on how well their marketing campaigns are working. The extent of my obligation to J. Random Web Business, vis à vis my interactions with them, is to give them
484.
by rosser 8y ago
The concern seems to be less about creating barriers to entry than it is about entrenching incumbents. A legal regime that does the former without doing the latter? Sign me up. One that does both? Well, I guess I do still get privacy laws
485.
by rosser 8y ago
Well, that's a substantive criticism.
486.
by rosser 8y ago
I think the money quote in eBay v Newmark is more like: "Throughout this dispute, I have repeatedly read and listened to what look and sound like breach of contract arguments, which eBay uses not to prove Jim and Craig breached a con
487.
by rosser 8y ago
eBay v Newmark hinges very much on the specifics of the contract, and how it was structured to create this sort of duty on Craigslist's part to eBay, rather than being some general bit of case law that codifies the tired — and wro
488.
by rosser 8y ago
> The essay is conflating 2 different concepts of "null." I'd take it a step further, and posit that The Fine Article's rage comes from its author not grokking the distinction, or even recognizing there is one. Of c
489.
by rosser 8y ago
Risk management and predation are categorically different things. If that's not an intuitively obvious notion, I'm not sure what more dialogue will accomplish.
490.
by rosser 8y ago
And I'm saying that, in my experience, that position seems to be more an article of faith for people of a certain ideological bent, than a demonstrable reality. Maybe my premises and categories blind me to that risk in some way; I&#x27
491.
by rosser 8y ago
The government which we're "stuck" with, and which we shouldn't trust because it's actively dangerous to our freedoms, is what's supposed to protect those freedoms from predatory companies? How's that work
492.
by rosser 8y ago
It has been repeatedly demonstrated that machine learning can reliably predict when, for example, a bipolar person is going to enter a manic phase. Should ad companies be able to model someone's mental illness and show them ads for gam
493.
by rosser 8y ago
Even when those usurious, predatory rates are disproportionately charged to poorer people, who can afford to bear them less? Because that's how it works: price discrimination against the people least able to bear it. But, hey. Why shou
494.
by rosser 8y ago
How does that square with it being an implicit goal of most companies to own their entire market, eliminating that choice? When there isn't meaningful competition in a market, it's specious to point to the abstract possibility of
495.
by rosser 8y ago
I regularly travel to Peru. For years now, it has been the policy of the Peruvian aviation authority that you may not board flights to the US with bottles of water purchased after the security checkpoint. They have queues set up at the ga
496.
by rosser 8y ago
I'd actually already read it, but thanks for linking to it; it had been many years! That said, I'm not the one painting the hard and bright distinction between "right" and "wrong". I know the dude who thinks
497.
by rosser 8y ago
> the age of a belief is not a valid measure of its correctness. Exactly. Its correctness is. The "general position" I'm seeing is that if a piece of knowledge wasn't premised on a contemporary understanding of the
498.
by rosser 8y ago
Do you have any idea how many "folk" remedies — specifically including leeching — have subsequently been validated, in at least some contexts, by modern medicine? How many plants the daft old witch in the forest used in ancient ti
499.
by rosser 8y ago
If management are idiots enough to foist something like that on their staff, particularly if they can ill-afford to, that is entirely about them and their narratives, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the efficacy of meditation, the h
500.
by rosser 8y ago
> the willingness of regulators to enforce existing rules, or people being willing and able to sue in court... Regulatory capture and mandatory arbitration agreements buried in the click-wrap. Our "corporate overlords" have
501.
by rosser 8y ago
Exactly how meaningfully are you at risk of being subject to gentrification, account that is four minutes older than its only comment? I'm pretty sure you'd sing an entirely different tune if you were.
502.
by rosser 8y ago
And now your position is that people who disagree with you are insane . Yeah, this dialogue is going places...
503.
by rosser 8y ago
No, you're being casually dismissive. "It's all bullshit and without wisdom", emphasis added; you don't make a distinction between woo and otherwise — and not all spirituality, or even religion, is woo, I promise
504.
by rosser 8y ago
Because you totally have to choose between those things, and may only ever avail yourself of one of them.
505.
by rosser 8y ago
Yes it does. A broadly better-educated citizenry makes for a richer, more robust economy. Reducing or eliminating poverty, the same. "A rising tide lifts all boats," as they say. If you actively think that's not somehow fund
506.
by rosser 8y ago
You aren't wrong, but most people's threat model doesn't include defense against state-level actors — because for most people there isn't a defense against state-level actors . Apparently, though, people whose threat mo
507.
by rosser 9y ago
...and we're already pretty far down the rabbit hole of how zoning gets so complex. There are always exceptions. There are always circumstances. There are always NIMBYs. AFAICT, you cannot regulate how land is used — which isn&
508.
by rosser 9y ago
How professional technologists are treated by their giant tech employer is utterly orthogonal to how lower-skilled, hourly warehouse workers are treated by the same company. Why do technologists reliably chime in with completely irrelevant
509.
by rosser 9y ago
> The field itself is inherently destructive to all participants. This is the language of moralizing, not of problem solving. You aren't interested in making anything better; you're interested in making sure everyone knows ho
510.
by rosser 9y ago
Not all of them. Some women (and some men!) consciously and specifically choose to engage in sex work. The way we're trying to "protect" the people being trafficked into sex work is putting them, and the ones who do it volunt

More ›