wissler

42 ms·

151.
by wissler 13y ago
Associating "introverted" with "immoral"?
152.
by wissler 13y ago
I think you should ask some 29 year olds if they'd like that kind of fame. I think the vast majority would say: No Way.
153.
by wissler 13y ago
The fact is that what another person chooses to take is none of your business. You use fearmongering as an irrational pretext to usurp someone's right to choose what they do with their own body, and sadly, that fearmongering works. It
154.
by wissler 13y ago
If you're too foolish to do some vetting of what you take, you shouldn't compound that foolishness by stripping away others' right to take novel drugs that might, say, cure their cancer, etc.
155.
by wissler 13y ago
Get rid of corporate entitlements like patents, obscenely long copyrights, the FDA (yes, it's an entitlement -- see how hard it is for a little guy to compete when the hurdles are so high), etc. etc. and then see how it shakes out.
156.
by wissler 13y ago
"According to Snowden, the NSA has engaged in more than 61,000 hacking operations worldwide, including hundreds aimed at Chinese targets. Among the targets were universities, businesses and public officials." So a tiny fraction ar
157.
by wissler 13y ago
Your understanding is wrong. It is a very good thing to both go after the legislators and those who actually tactically implement injustice. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_at_Nuremberg
158.
by wissler 13y ago
http://theoatmeal.com/blog/tesla_response
159.
by wissler 13y ago
Unfortunately that just makes a bigger target of the smaller businesses who can't afford such a vigorous defense.
160.
by wissler 13y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
161.
by wissler 13y ago
I wish this kind of problem were only limited to HN...
162.
by wissler 13y ago
One person can get out of the way more easily than 10. Of course, abstract hypothetical questions don't answer what one would do under real circumstances, e.g. there's a difference between seeing an athletic, aware guy on one track who yo
163.
by wissler 14y ago
The more and crappier the better, since it discredits and bogs down an intrinsically broken system, which we can only hope would lead to its demise.
164.
by wissler 14y ago
Specifically: just because you thought of an idea, does not give you any moral prerogative to go stealing other people's real property because 1) you got to the government bureaucrat first and 2) they happened to think of it too. Patents ar
165.
by wissler 14y ago
If you ask why this happens and go as deep as you can, I think you'll find that the root of the problem is not per se management, but politics/government/regulations/legislation.
166.
by wissler 14y ago
Carte Blanche power of redaction combined with "openness"? This is Orwellian double-speak. If they want to reasonably redact, that's fine to an extent, so long as there's an uninterested third party review.
167.
by wissler 14y ago
Heaven forbid that the mere peons have some kind of freedom in investing and creating things. We neo-feudalists can't have that now can we.
168.
by wissler 14y ago
Speak for yourself, cynic.
169.
by wissler 14y ago
As I said in a different comment, doctors can be exceedingly sloppy. There are no consequences. There's no clear evidentiary trail pointing back to the doctor (there could be -- but hospitals have no interest in that). And the worst thing i
170.
by wissler 14y ago
If a doctor didn't follow proper procedures and ended up spreading MSRA to your mother, then in effect that was negligent homicide. I think this happens all the time. I've seen it happen myself, where a doctor touches an open wound without
171.
by wissler 14y ago
Ideally look at the kinds of problems that are difficult and important and that we have a long way to go in, such as nanotech, biotech, and materials science. Compensation ought to be more or less irrelevant, you just want to do something w
172.
by wissler 14y ago
So this guy thinks he knows the full range of ideas, and that it's not possible that someone has thought of something he hasn't, that might just be good enough to warrant investment. "I must confess that a man is guilty of unpardonable arro
173.
by wissler 14y ago
Lack of basic physics knowledge. Shameful really.
174.
by wissler 14y ago
It's interesting how many HN'ers think it's just fine that the actual first inventor gets screwed for not using the patent system.
175.
by wissler 14y ago
As in how you just stated as self evident your ideology that one must always provide reason and justification? What's unnecessary bullshit is your own wild-eyed hypocrisy.
176.
by wissler 14y ago
You can't escape having an ideology, so no that's not the problem. The problem is with hypocritical, contradictory ideologies, e.g. your anti-ideology ideology.
177.
by wissler 14y ago
You attack his doing so purely for ideological reasons.
178.
by wissler 14y ago
It's impossible to compute the number of treatments that weren't even invented because the inventor saw the FDA barrier as too much trouble for him to manage. The real question is the unpopular one: by what right does the FDA insert itself
179.
by wissler 14y ago
The reason it's difficult is that in principle, there's nothing wrong per se with a company giving you something with terms like this. The problem is that our political environment is corrupt and these big businesses are operating to large
180.
by wissler 14y ago
Why do you suppose that there's a proper one? You clearly need to read more history.

More ›