zarkov99

48 ms·

511.
by zarkov99 6y ago
The old ways of making sense of the world consisted, for the most part, of listening to institutions and people whose integrity, though not perfect, was far greater than it is today. CNN wasn't always the hyper-partisan POS it is today
512.
by zarkov99 6y ago
I look forward to the day when Trump leaves office for many reasons, not the least of which is the fact that, having lost their most perfect of scapegoats, left leaning people will finally have to acknowledge the dire state of the republic
513.
by zarkov99 6y ago
Seems like it should be possible for users to self-moderate, no? In the old and wild Usenet days there were plenty of popular, un-moderated forums with incredibly rich, thoughtful, vibrant discussion. Yes, you would get some unpleasantness
514.
by zarkov99 6y ago
We are in a bind. More than ever we need trustworthy authorities to help us navigate the world's information as no one, no matter how educated or smart, can be expected to parse through the ocean of information we now have access to ev
515.
by zarkov99 6y ago
I often find that those whose favorite rethorical tool is lying much prefer to slander their opponents rather than attempt to refute their points.
516.
by zarkov99 6y ago
You are right and I do not think you should waste a single thought on the easily offended. They suck. There is no hope for that kind of faked fragility. Somewhere will always claim to be offended by something you say or do, to the point tha
517.
by zarkov99 6y ago
> Damore wrote an essay basically arguing women and minorities should be incapable of joining the software profession based on their genetics. That is completely false and you should be ashamed if yourself for spreading such blatant lies
518.
by zarkov99 6y ago
Wouldn't it be better ti provide people the tools to create their own channels, through personalized filtering algorithms? The idea that a central authority gets to decide what is acceptable and what is not is, in my view, only accepta
519.
by zarkov99 6y ago
This is exactly right. You see the flashes of brilliance and the incredible untapped value in GDocs. But its slow, disorganized and stagnant. Google could be making its money the honest way, by providing genuine value, making people more pr
520.
by zarkov99 6y ago
I feel safer already. Thank you Reddit for protecting me from my bad opinions.
521.
by zarkov99 6y ago
So now they can have exactly the demographics they want. Those pesky objective criteria kept creating inequality.
522.
by zarkov99 6y ago
And it is destroying the country. The death of Floyd was no doubt a hideous crime, which should be punished harshly but the narrative of systemic and widespread police racism is unsupported by data and incredibly, irresponsibly manufactured
523.
by zarkov99 6y ago
I understand your sentiment but this isn't going to work. You cannot possibly curate the worlds information to the set you approve of as safe for other people. You will only drive this stuff underground and make people justifiably ang
524.
by zarkov99 6y ago
I do not care what the children's book store owner decides to publish. But Amazon is a near monopoly. Different rules apply.
525.
by zarkov99 6y ago
The reviews are not coming from peers. The are exclusively coming from a niche section of the population: urban, young, affluent and left leaning. Not that this it would be OK even if it was a "diverse" gang of censors.
526.
by zarkov99 6y ago
Yes, that is what they told Galileo. They were wrong of course, but we are so much wiser now, we could not possibly make the same mistakes.
527.
by zarkov99 6y ago
What do you mean the right to have an audience? People still need to buy the freaking thing, why does Amazon get to decide if they can or cannot? Different rules apply when you are a monopoly. Amazon refusing to sell a book is very differe
528.
by zarkov99 6y ago
No one is expecting perfection, as you say its a novel virus. But the implication is also that official sources cannot be trusted to the point where they get to censor the discussion around the virus. It would be wrong to do that even if th
529.
by zarkov99 6y ago
Also, go ahead and celebrate Chinese New Year in NY. Nothing to fear.
530.
by zarkov99 6y ago
I agree that "hide things I won't like" isn't going to work but I think that for people in good faith the proxies I mentioned would be good enough. That however would not afford FB or anyone else control over other'
531.
by zarkov99 6y ago
No it doesn't. The customization could be done based on the source (Always/never show government officials posts, for example) or the votes of a trusted entity (the WHO, The White House, CNN, your cool friend who knows what is goi
532.
by zarkov99 6y ago
That is not square one, its a far better place than where we are now.
533.
by zarkov99 6y ago
Of course. That is exactly what FB should be doing and its likely where Twitter is going as well. Nothing else is sustainable. What exactly gives a bunch of 20 to 30 year old privileged nerds the moral authority or wisdom to decide what inf
534.
by zarkov99 6y ago
Fair enough I suppose. He would like to work in a place that is willing to suppress the speech of the POTUS so as to avoid exciting the violent ignoramus. I am glad that isn't Facebook and I hope he finds a nice job as long as he is ne
535.
by zarkov99 6y ago
Its not about the mortality rate, its about the psychological toll which is unparalleled: cops commit suicide at higher rates than any other profession. On a daily basis they deal directly with more violence and horror then most of us are e
536.
by zarkov99 6y ago
Its a very large country. Bad stuff happens every day. For any group of people you can support any narrative by cherry picking the right events. Using that technique, you could "prove" anything you wish about any group and then pr
537.
by zarkov99 6y ago
Police in the small US college town I live in is pretty much part of the community. I personally know many of the officers - and they are fine people. Even so, they are still a target for antifa agit-prop tactics. The playbook is always the
538.
by zarkov99 6y ago
Annotating is fine as long as the user can choose what annotations they see and how those influence filtering. This idea that the stupid little people need the protection of the enlightened ones doing the censoring is profoundly un-american
539.
by zarkov99 6y ago
Because the British, like everyone else, want immigrants that will contribute to the country and it is very likely the people coming from HK will, given that they are educated and industrious. But you probably knew what.
540.
by zarkov99 6y ago
I don't think its the wrong problem. If we had perfect self-driving today it would still make sense to have all the things you mention, that is more remote work, etc, but you would also have safe long distance cargo hauling, safer roa

More ›