shripadk

28 ms·

151.
by shripadk 6y ago
> Any proofs, incidents, facts, figures to support your accusations? They have none. Just arm-chair conspiracy theorists.
152.
by shripadk 6y ago
> There are two things Modi is known for: 1. 2002 massacre of Muslims in Gujarat 2. Being friends with crony capitalists. > This is not an exaggeration. You can read about what he did in his state when he was the chief minister. Not p
153.
by shripadk 6y ago
> What if tomorrow some change of parameters makes my business impossible? I'll go out of business. That's always an option. Yes and no one can sue you for going out of business. But you can be sued for violating a law while yo
154.
by shripadk 6y ago
You don't need to hire a blind person to be compliant with regulations. What if you are building consumer facing products? Can you pick who your consumer will be? What stops a blind person from using your product? And what if the user
155.
by shripadk 6y ago
The Print is a Congress party affiliated publication with many of its writers having affiliation in some form with the Indian National Congress. What you posted are just allegations/innuendos against Modi. Nothing more. As far as Modi
156.
by shripadk 6y ago
The world did not have trillion dollar companies and billion dollar startups form within a span of few years either. Nor did small and medium businesses have the reach they do now. You can literally sell goods to people all over the World f
157.
by shripadk 6y ago
> You're acting like there is only one alternative, but what about blocking ads? That's win-win for everyone but the advertiser. And really that makes it win-win-win, unless you work in advertising or for Facebook/Google.
158.
by shripadk 6y ago
> I find advertising repugnant You can't do business without advertising. Are you for shutting down small and medium businesses? If you are employed find out how your company gets clients and acquires customers. It is mostly through
159.
by shripadk 6y ago
Exactly! There is a reason why personalized ads are a thing. You are not shown stuff that you have no interest in! Removing targeting is basically asking for watching ads that don't align with your interests at all! I rather give my mi
160.
by shripadk 6y ago
> targeted advertising is not as valuable as everyone believes > privacy nightmares and ethical issues like allowing targeting alcoholics with alcohol ads These two statements are diametrically opposing each other. Either targeted adv
161.
by shripadk 6y ago
By saying what you said, you just proved why the people were dissenting the idea of UBI in the first place. If people do exactly what you did, there would be no innovation and progress. People will end up living off of the ones who do the a
162.
by shripadk 6y ago
https://www.coursera.org/learn/uva-darden-financial-accounti... University of Virginia Financial Accounting Fundamentals! This is the only one that you need to get started. Luann J. Lynch is a fantastic teacher. She gu
163.
by shripadk 6y ago
> Yet nobody can build another Saturn V today with these blueprints. Any complex product is much more than just a set of blueprints. It's an organized process that depends on a certain team of people, supply chain, existing infrastr
164.
by shripadk 6y ago
If we all did, there won't be any small companies or startups. The only ones that will survive will be the big guys who will scoop up small players as much as possible. You will be rendered jobless along with many of your colleagues. W
165.
by shripadk 6y ago
> Companies dont have a God given right to exist, nor to intrude upon me with ads, targeted or not, nor are they entitled to my attention. I could not possibly care less what the company wants. Good for you. Use an ad blocker. > The o
166.
by shripadk 6y ago
I agree with all your points. I would prefer more control over what ads are shown rather than blanket ad ban. There is no alternative way for companies to reach customers. Supporting Content Creators is not the same though. It just benefits
167.
by shripadk 6y ago
> If I want to support a content creator, I do so by donating to them directly, not by allowing a massive and (in my personal opinion) evil company to profit both of my and their backs. Not to mention that both seeing ads and using the o
168.
by shripadk 6y ago
> On the mainland if you are a leading expert in this field or that, or belong to specific establishments (such as public security or state security) you cannot exit the country without permission from higher up the food chain. Why don&#
169.
by shripadk 6y ago
> there is already an Enemy Property Act, 1968 to more or less support grabbing Chinese investments No. The Enemy Property Act, 1968 is specifically made for Pakistani Nationals after the 1965 Indo-Pak War. It is not generic. To declare
170.
by shripadk 6y ago
If you see a billion being used it is usually the Western style. So when you say someone is a billionaire it is in USD. If you want an Indian take on it, it would be: Lakhpati and Crorepati.
171.
by shripadk 6y ago
You are confusing military bases with expansion. Having a military base is not the same as claiming territory. This is the maritime boundary claimed by China: https://i2.wp.com/thegeopolitics.com/wp-content/uploads
172.
by shripadk 6y ago
> seems better organized over there Until the cracks start opening up. What you see is just them showing their best side all the time. This is not "organization". This is theatrics. You should differentiate between the two!
173.
by shripadk 6y ago
China is the bully here. Just see what they are doing at the borders with India at Galwan Valley! I don't see how you can come to that conclusion! US is doing the right thing!
174.
by shripadk 6y ago
> If the US government has proof that this is a security risk, they need to be public and transparent with their proof. Anything short of that and I'm not on board with "a ban". You don't need proof when the CCP is it
175.
by shripadk 6y ago
> Why are you so eager to have the US copy the ideals of the CCP? There are no "ideals" in supporting something that is obviously stealing your data and handing it over to a totalitarian regime. Should you not be asking why thi
176.
by shripadk 6y ago
"Controlled by them". This is so wrong! If the US Government controls FB and Twitter you wouldn't have FB censoring Trump ads and Twitter attaching its own fact check opinions on Trump's tweets. By all evidence you have
177.
by shripadk 6y ago
So you will allow an app whose company is tied to a "totalitarian state built on the backbone of censorship and information control" to steal your data? You cannot have a company in China without agreeing to the terms and conditio
178.
by shripadk 6y ago
Gen Z was addicted to Vine before it. And it will be addicted to anything else that comes after it. No addiction is greater than national security. And the US Government is not obligated to TikTok in any way, shape or form. It can ban witho
179.
by shripadk 6y ago
> Please try and understand that things are different in the USA. Look at the mass shootings over the past several years and the ideologies behind them. Look at how Sandy Hook parents were caused to be harassed by Alex Jones. What has an
180.
by shripadk 6y ago
I am not a US Citizen so I cannot push for changes to the law. But please try and understand that Twitter operates in well over 100+ countries. Section 230's jurisdiction only applies to the US. It doesn't extend to other nations.

More ›