waps

100 ms·

691.
by waps 13y ago
The key here is to find out what the relation is between his "corrupted young" (ie. his students) and the thirty tyrants.
692.
by waps 13y ago
Exactly. Even in Paul Graham's own essay, some things are always forgotten. He's smart enough to question why the Church/Italian state attacked Galileo for repeating Copernicus' ideas, who was a celebrated hero of the ch
693.
by waps 13y ago
I am not saying it's equivalent. I'm just saying it's hypocritical in the extreme. When it comes to "automated process goes through my email to decide which soda to offer me" ... I am not pleased, but not very worri
694.
by waps 13y ago
It isn't. Especially not when they did this first : http://www.ibtimes.com/microsoft-rips-email-snooping-google-...
695.
by waps 13y ago
The problem is that the value of your own continued existence is Inf, not just because you don't want to die, but because you lose control after that fact, and thus all subsequent negative events are added to that cost. But aside from
696.
by waps 13y ago
The article is both right and very wrong. It's right in all "human" senses of that word : legally what it's advocating is right. Morally it is the right thing. From a societal stability point of view you're right. F
697.
by waps 13y ago
The problem is that the quality of books published on Amazon is definitely lower than books published by other publishers. Amazon is making publishing cheaper, meaning there is no longer any quality filter before books are made. So Amazon i
698.
by waps 13y ago
In AI this is a little bit known as the rationality paradox. People generally agree that the following formula is the definition of acting rationally : argmax(sum(probability_of_event * utility_of_event) given action) So do you open a door
699.
by waps 13y ago
Without funding these projects would not have happened, and the inventions would have died. Or at the very least would only have happened much, much slower. An example of this is that however one designs a working fusion reactior, one thing
700.
by waps 13y ago
It's not just piracy, it's fraud : you agreed to a contract that in no uncertain terms said you can't violate the service areas. They check whether you do this or not through DNS geolocking. Then you use technical means to de
701.
by waps 13y ago
And what would we not have if it wasn't for militaries ... and even war. Where to begin ? the Internet - hacker news, and of course your own comment Rockets - and of course space travel Nuclear power GPS Night vision Duct tape Jet engi
702.
by waps 13y ago
The real problem here is that legal protections for certain classes by themselves create a disincentive for hiring those people. Discrimination/racism protections especially suffer from this. I've had some experience with this as
703.
by waps 13y ago
Hey you can make the "fiscal obligation" argument here. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too. Choose : 1) defaulting as a strategy is not okay, but neither is giving out these loans without social responsability. In
704.
by waps 13y ago
Not at all. Much more likely is the desire of governments everywhere to ... how did the EU commission put it : "A review of conflicts between national laws or jurisdictions that will suggest possible remedies" [1] In case anyone d
705.
by waps 13y ago
Sadly, this probably is because your manager is "freelancing" on the mobile app on a shoe-string budget because it doesn't have support from most of management. The result is that it has to camouflage in some other budget. Th
706.
by waps 13y ago
It reminds me of the 6to4 translation for IPv4 connectivity for IPv6 hosts.
707.
by waps 13y ago
In order for any action to justify damages (under public law), one must indicate to the satisfaction of the judge : 1) that action was illegal (violated law, contract provisions, ...) 2) that damages were incurred 3) that there was a causal
708.
by waps 13y ago
Even if this argument holds water (and as a US citizen you're bound by US law whether or not you're in the US), you still agreed to a contract that you wouldn't do this. Now given that contract you agreed to with netflix, I t
709.
by waps 13y ago
I am arguing that you signed(/agreed) a contract with netflix. Second, in order to actually watch the content you have to licence it. This next bit is only 90% accurate, but will do for this discussion : that licence is another contrac
710.
by waps 13y ago
Well the party that's "getting hurt" is not so much netflix, but the copyright owner.
711.
by waps 13y ago
So simply analyse the situation a little bit. I am not a lawyer, and this is not a legal opinion, but I'm also not completely unaware of the law. 1) you are lying to netflix, which has you agree to a contract stating you will only watc
712.
by waps 13y ago
Easy. It's legalese and much more subtle than this, but the general principle is : "Either pay this or we instruct any bank with offices in Australia to refund all payments made to netflix at 150% retroactively for 10 years or cea
713.
by waps 13y ago
That is piracy. You're not following the conditions of the licence of the copyrighted material, nor your contract with netflix. That's just as much piracy as torrenting everything. Worse: if the purpose of the VPN is explicitly to
714.
by waps 13y ago
You are aware that watching netflix outside of it's service area is piracy, right ? Paying the wrong amount, or one way or the other not following the terms of a licence (such as watching netflix outside of the US), is just as much pir
715.
by waps 13y ago
To be fair, you can find the reverse as well : elders complaining their youth is too pious, too restrained, or won't touch alcohol (popular in the late Roman empire). Moreover you can also find large populations moving from atheism&#x2
716.
by waps 13y ago
EBITDA is already opportunistically adjusted, it's just that people more or less agree which "bad" numbers get excluded. I understand the argument though. EBITDA is somewhat closer to $income - $cost. Whereas actual earnings
717.
by waps 13y ago
I don't know about America, but in Europe, this is not how things are done. Rentors need those homes. Landlords, by definition, don't. You should always err on the side of rentors, which is exactly what European courts do. > No
718.
by waps 13y ago
Now that article reads like propaganda, almost panicking. I hear the reason is that London's financial centre is ~30% dependant on Russian oil money. If that were to stop, UK GDP would drop 5% or more.
719.
by waps 13y ago
People getting thrown out of their houses due to lack of money (and lack of earning capability) are complaining about other people spending massive amounts on frivolous uses ? I am amazed. Wait ... no I'm not. I'm even inclined to
720.
by waps 13y ago
I feel like I'm repeating the obvious here : these are actors. Sorry to repeat myself, but I get the distinct impression it's not getting through. > No one assumes that the actor believes the same thing as the character, but th

More ›