worried4future

5 ms·

1.
by worried4future 3mo ago
I'm fine with that if we can remove the technical error rate and barriers to actually executing these people. If you're caught in a situation like this you should not be in jail on death row for twenty years waiting for your execu
2.
by worried4future 3mo ago
I do not seek perfection. We have a justice system which makes those determinations, its not about perfection, it never has been.
3.
by worried4future 3mo ago
Its not about vengeance or a desire for closure, I simply do not want these people to continue to exist. They offer no benefit to my society, they contribute nothing beneficial and never will, the sooner they are erased the better for socie
4.
by worried4future 3mo ago
Can you have compassion, love even, for someone who has been the victim of horrific acts? Honest question, what are your limits of compassion? Do you have compassion, love, or have you given a thought to the next victim of these criminals?
5.
by worried4future 3mo ago
> So you're ok with the state killing criminals? Yes. > What if they get the wrong person? Don't kill those.
6.
by worried4future 2y ago
> assuming he must be guilty of something awful He is. He is guilty of doing something his employer didn't like and they fired him for it.
7.
by worried4future 2y ago
Nonsense. If you read the original article it specifically says he sought out the protestors. > he went to the lounge on the 10th floor of Google’s New York City office around lunchtime to check out the protest. Is a single google cafete
8.
by worried4future 2y ago
His commentary isn't the exonerating statement you seem to think it is. By his own admission he sought to join the protestors (he went to the lounge on the 10th floor of Google’s New York City office around lunchtime to check out the p
9.
by worried4future 2y ago
And, as I pointed out in my original comment, google has massive information asymmetry here. They have video and email and message history and badge access times and maybe audio recording and maybe more, who knows. So far we only have this
10.
by worried4future 2y ago
I also don't think this counts as a strike, at least the actions taken do not fully fall within the protections of a strike even if they were striking for a reason for which strikes are permitted. Disruptive protest like what this was
11.
by worried4future 2y ago
> Google apparently fired some 20+ employees who either weren't involved the protest at all, or whose alleged participation remains unclear Maybe that's true, maybe it's not, but there is deep information asymmetry here an
12.
by worried4future 2y ago
The meat of it is here: > Google “retaliated against approximately 50 employees and interfered with their Section 7 rights by terminating and/or placing them on administrative leave in response to their protected concerted activity,
13.
by worried4future 2y ago
Apologies for calling it by it's historical name instead of the revisionist one the British gave it.
14.
by worried4future 2y ago
I'm not saying they aren't capable of committing war crimes or genocide or whatever other terms you want to use. Clearly Israel is eminently capable of simply flattening Gaza (and Judaea/Samaria if they wanted) and they are r
15.
by worried4future 2y ago
Because genocide definitionally requires intent. > Genocide is the intentional destruction of a people in whole or in part.. Wikipedia
16.
by worried4future 2y ago
For missiles? The government already decides that for you. You can only (and only somewhat) decide to not sell things the government says you can to people the government says you can. Aside from that? Jail.
17.
by worried4future 2y ago
Oh no. Jeff will have to make his next yacht 1 foot shorter. Seriously, I have a hard time caring about this.
18.
by worried4future 4y ago
where in the 5000 word article does it talk about compelled speech, I skimmed it and searched and I don't see anything.
19.
by worried4future 4y ago
This is barring them from saying specific things, not compelling them to say other things, do you have an example of any compelled speech?
20.
by worried4future 4y ago
he should be made to pay 1 billion million trillion dollars. his ability to pay my made up number is about on par with his ability to pay the courts made up number, at this point it's just political theatre and schadenfreude.
21.
by worried4future 4y ago
> Just because a project or budget is black doesn't necessarily mean it's useless or nefarious. Of course not, it does mean that we don't have the ability to know if it is useless or nefarious or not.
22.
by worried4future 4y ago
I'm not trying to debate the rightness or wrongness of Alex Berenson, I'm simply pointing to this as an example of the federal government strong-arming corporations into censoring people. Alex Berenson might be someone you disagre
23.
by worried4future 4y ago
If you seriously think that people in the federal government don't try to control the media narrative, you're ignoring a huge body of history where they have done exactly that. Most recently, look at the white house trying to pres
24.
by worried4future 4y ago
No, because, when you're paying for an education you can also get loans (at usurious rates) to cover cost of living expenses too! You won't pay now for that 10k/year required meal plan for cafeteria food and 20k/year for
25.
by worried4future 4y ago
Some people don't agree that the system is even broken.
26.
by worried4future 4y ago
> This isn't just paternalism, it's the gig workers themselves driving these changes. This isn't universal though. If you go to places where gig workers discuss these issues (say /r/UberDrivers) every post compla
27.
by worried4future 4y ago
> And when they starve or go homeless in the process of “learning the business”? These are effects of the fact that costs of living are dramatically out of control, you can't just infinitely raise the minimum wage to compensate as t
28.
by worried4future 4y ago
> academic consensus and empirical evidence I reject the "academic consensus" of people who are not a part of the real world.
29.
by worried4future 4y ago
> A worker is worth what a business can pay for the value they bring. I think this is a good point of view, but, it's important to remember that what the business can pay differs from what it's willing to pay and that larger em
30.
by worried4future 4y ago
> They would rather a young person take on mounds of debt, instead of say a low paid internship or apprenticeship. Current minimum wages ensure automation are going to win. Yes. Abolish the minimum wage. Higher minimum wage forces more p

More ›