world_peace42

6 ms·

1.
by world_peace42 5y ago
Fivethirtyeight is not even remotely bipartisan. It’s hard to forget Nate’s role in spreading propaganda polls last election cycle and his reaction afterwards when it was clear they were all fake.
2.
by world_peace42 5y ago
Totally agree about peeping toms. But, if a company gets to spy on you via their devices with impunity, your politicians representing you get pay bumps.
3.
by world_peace42 5y ago
Nothing is bigotry if there are enough bigots. And, as everyone knows, HN is a one-party site, so I'm not expecting many upvotes.
4.
by world_peace42 5y ago
I remember last year when believing COVID may have come out of a lab made one a crank. It was only on certain news channels or specific papers. Of course, let's also assume there are no widespread liberal beliefs (the world is going to
5.
by world_peace42 5y ago
How can anyone read and conclude that the US is anything other than dying and on life support? Our government is ran by corporations, and it is not going to change. Not to say that we have some cyberpunk future ahead of us - that looks a bi
6.
by world_peace42 5y ago
I think this post was fair in 2009, where there was no serious discussions (specifically in the US, certainly many parallels in Europe) over a second civil war or balkanization, a growing Marxist movement, etc. But, times have changed drama
7.
by world_peace42 5y ago
I’m sure many peasant farmers living in feudal lands share the same perspective as you on what resources are scarce.
8.
by world_peace42 5y ago
Just wait until smart home/HAR devices become more popular in ~10-20 years. We'll have grids of radar in our homes whose explicit purpose is to track our movements.
9.
by world_peace42 5y ago
It's completely bonkers to claim that "rule of law" in the US protects our privacy from any type of digital intrusion. "cope" might be the right word if you mean "completely ignore/obseqiuously accept our
10.
by world_peace42 5y ago
I’m a bit speechless at this point. I’ve written about 5 posts so far stating that they have a bias, the actual one definitely not clearly articulated, including several you’ve responded to. No offense, I think what I’ve written is clear, b
11.
by world_peace42 5y ago
That’s great, and I’m a sea otter because it is so written. Send me a link to the portfolio of everyone who has influence over what gets written and I’ll show you how they decide what to publish.
12.
by world_peace42 5y ago
George’s ideas are interesting to ponder now and then. I’d definitely want to be a billionaire in that system, though, you’d pay pennies on your penthouses split with everyone living below you. If only taxes were that easy to figure out.
13.
by world_peace42 5y ago
Wouldn’t that exacerbate the tech giant problem? Currently their war chests only get opened to vulture up fledgling companies. I’m not saying it can be instantaneously transmuted into gold if the government tried to take more, but I can’t s
14.
by world_peace42 5y ago
Yes, I'm familiar. Based on the drivel that comes out of the Economist on a regular basis, I've long made the conclusion that "they" and whomever their close friends are/they vacation with are the "editors&quot
15.
by world_peace42 5y ago
Who do you believe "their" and "they" specify in regards to the opinions presented?
16.
by world_peace42 5y ago
Yes, I read the article. I'm confused; is this supposed to constitute a rebuttal?
17.
by world_peace42 5y ago
And it’s usually trying to push an agenda, to boot.
18.
by world_peace42 5y ago
I'm most certainly not "taking the position that the actions of some people who follow some version of a religion to be defining for it", and I'm perplexed as to how you reached that conclusion. That's quite a ridic
19.
by world_peace42 5y ago
Then go have a chat with Jimmy Wales about diversifying the political beliefs of his editors. And good luck.
20.
by world_peace42 5y ago
I don't know Antonio García Martínez's ethnicity, but he looks and sounds very much like a straight white male, so I would not consider that a counterexample. Also, certainly there are no absolute laws of who is always targeted an
21.
by world_peace42 5y ago
Great, now also link me to a cacophony of Twitter activists who've defined it the same way, I am proven wrong. But, and of course it's a silly request, can you provide any objective large-scale studies as to who (their demograph
22.
by world_peace42 5y ago
That definition is neither empirical, nor is it collectively defined. It is selectively assigned and selectively enforced. And here we are, in a thread where the top level post provides an obvious example.
23.
by world_peace42 5y ago
Cancel culture is not about canceling people who say racist, misogynist, homophobic, etc things. It is about canceling (read: disenfranchising and taking revenge on) straight white males, who are at the bottom (top? intersection? whichever)
24.
by world_peace42 5y ago
Which charitable person would conclude that was a typo? I have a feeling people like you would say the same thing if he wrote “I hate Jews” in capital letters.
25.
by world_peace42 5y ago
You are terribly correct. It reminds me of the left claiming Islam is a peaceful religion because only a ~third (whatever the numbers they allege) support violence and a much smaller fraction perpetrate it. Unfortunately, your claim is unqu
26.
by world_peace42 5y ago
Understood, Jews are bad and Communism is great. Good luck with that.
27.
by world_peace42 5y ago
And Facebook will choose which of those voices get to be heard more often than others. And I wonder if the people steering the algorithms are or are not overwhelmingly against Modi (they hate him). So really, this issue does not look that c
28.
by world_peace42 5y ago
Then my apologies, although Israel is an apartheid state just as much as the US is a "Nazi state" with "concentration camps". Makes total sense to a certain group of super bright people.
29.
by world_peace42 5y ago
There are active calls by many Democrats for state censorship of websites like Breitbart, which, although I'm not a huge fan, do not call for violence of any sort. Also, I don't think it's fair to simply draw the line at &quo
30.
by world_peace42 5y ago
All other points aside, do you think Facebook constitutes free expression? Because, it looks like to me that it's a place where censorship is rampant and executives select regimes or political parties to back and affect sentiment on. &

More ›