yupper32

47 ms·

451.
by yupper32 5y ago
> McDonald's and similar jobs used to be an entry level job for teens and college students. When I was 16 I was happy to work there for minimum wage And who worked the day shift?
452.
by yupper32 5y ago
That's an extreme example that I'm not really referencing here. Of course I feel sad when something extreme happens, like a loved one dies. A lot of people romanticize the idea of men crying over smaller things. For example, someo
453.
by yupper32 5y ago
> Emotions are there, regardless like if we express them or not That's not completely true. There is an option to not have those negative emotions in the first place.
454.
by yupper32 5y ago
> Because you carry those bad emotions with you then as baggage instead of getting over them. That's only if you have those emotions to begin with. It's very reasonable to train yourself to not have those emotions and therefore
455.
by yupper32 5y ago
To be clear I'm not saying that if you've ever cried then you're not manly. And I'm not saying I've never cried. But the times I've cried are for some exceptionally emotional moments. Loss of my father, for exa
456.
by yupper32 5y ago
As a male who identifies with this trait, why? Most emotions seem to just hold you back. Why cry about a situation when you should more likely focus your energy into finding a solution? For me it's not that emotions are so much "s
457.
by yupper32 5y ago
Maybe, but at the same time, often when changes happen to a product at a large company, a large amount of the public gets pissed . It's often not "hey we have some feedback", it's "hey we're going to go shoot
458.
by yupper32 5y ago
The HN response here is a pretty good demo with regards to why large scale companies have a hard time trying out new things, IMO. And why smaller companies are able to bubble to the top on occasion. This is clearly a pet project of some sor
459.
by yupper32 5y ago
You're still avoiding taking all the blame by making excuses and being super defensive. You know damn well sitting in total silence was not my suggestion. I am also able to manage those things without taking my eyes off the road for mo
460.
by yupper32 5y ago
"it" did not very nearly cause 2 accidents. They're trying to avoid some of the blame, as if they're not 100% at fault.
461.
by yupper32 5y ago
> It's classic shoot-the-messenger. No it's not! I don't go around shooting people to advocate gun control laws. I don't go around stealing people's belongings in cars to advocate that people shouldn't leave
462.
by yupper32 5y ago
> I install a whiteboard on a public place You're already off. This was private property. > and say to everyone, "please have a test" then can you complain if someone draw something you don't like on it This would
463.
by yupper32 5y ago
> An artist got their home raided, Cambridge Analytica - which was manipulation on an industrial scale - barely got a slapped wrist. Please tell me your post is satire. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar&
464.
by yupper32 5y ago
Ah yes. When I let someone borrow my phone or computer I totally think they should be allowed to install whatever spyware they want. It's my fault I didn't have them accept a TOS.
465.
by yupper32 5y ago
> it’s the ‘installing software’ to do it that’s irrelevant No it's not! That's actually the main thing that's really really bad! What are you all not understanding? You're intentionally installing spyware on someone
466.
by yupper32 5y ago
Then you shouldn't do this kind of art! It's official, people have gone absolutely wild in this thread. You can't just do whatever you want in the name of "art". How you got that idea, I have no clue.
467.
by yupper32 5y ago
If I allow you into my home, are you allowed to install a secret camera? If I allow you into my coffee shop, are you allowed to install a secret camera? No. Always no. Am I "incompetent" because my home or coffee shop didn't
468.
by yupper32 5y ago
> more like a comedian being granted the liberty to push some boundaries No. Not at all. Freedom of speech is extremely strong in the US, and for good reason. Freedom to install software onto other people's computers is not. It&#x27
469.
by yupper32 5y ago
> Obviously installing spyware is wrong, ethically and legally. Why bother writing this post if this is your view? You know damn well there's a difference between a web browser preinstalled on a Macbook and someone installing their
470.
by yupper32 5y ago
> Yes. For starters, it's referencing a conversation that occurred a decade prior. Maybe your memory is better than mine, but I definitely can't remember anything except the absolute vaguest of details from conversations I had
471.
by yupper32 5y ago
For real. People here are treating them with whistleblower gloves. There's nothing of that sort going on here. Just unethical, horrible stuff.
472.
by yupper32 5y ago
> I don't see a major functional difference between installing the spyware and taking the pictures with an open browser tab, a Facetime call to yourself, or a long lens from outside the store. That's troubling. How would you re
473.
by yupper32 5y ago
If you come to my house, you'll get recorded on my Nest cam. Perfectly legal situation. If you come to my house and secretly installed a Nest cam to record me and my guests, that would be illegal. More to the point, if you come to my h
474.
by yupper32 5y ago
The law absolutely applies. They just decided it wasn't worth their time. Can you imagine a world where the law didn't apply here? I could just go into an Apple store and install whatever software I want on their computers without
475.
by yupper32 5y ago
> Very vague, yes. It's entirely plausible that the author deliberately hid details in that discussion, or just unintentionally communicated it poorly. But in the absence of any evidence towards that, I don't think it's un
476.
by yupper32 5y ago
Bull. Shit. "We got situated in the store, double checked with an employee that it was ok to shoot video" There was no consent to install software onto their computers. They just tried to find some consent loophole.
477.
by yupper32 5y ago
Not many are offended about taking pictures. What people should be offended by is that so many people on here think it's totally acceptable to install spyware onto computers without the owner's consent. This isn't some kind o
478.
by yupper32 5y ago
They installed spyware on someone else's computers. Of course that's illegal, regardless of whether or not the AG decided to go after them. Are people serious here? There's nothing ethical or legal going on with the blog post
479.
by yupper32 5y ago
If I took your computer and installed spyware without your consent, that would be legal? Absolutely incorrect. Where do you get this idea from?
480.
by yupper32 5y ago
I don't know NYC in 2003, but that was nearly 2 decades ago at this point. A lot has changed in 18 years. Hell, 2003 was the first time the subway systems stopped taking coins.

More ›