9889095r3jh

>It's kind of unfair to chide them for being preoccupied with financial stability

The question is not about financial stability, but with "being very well off financially."

> Perhaps rather than rejecting helping others, every generation since the boomers has rejected the solipsism it takes for a college student to list "develop my philosophy" as their primary goal.

I'll give you that point. Younger generations may not be as materialistic as we think. But that doesn't invalidate my argument: It would still be shitty if they became more materialistic. That could happen if we tell 12 year olds they need to worry about their personal brand.

I had a different reaction. It felt very wrong. I don't like how our culture worships money. It's bad enough that more college students see 'being very well off financially' as a more important goal than helping others (compared to other generations) [1]. If children are getting these messages at an even younger age, that's disturbing. After all, children are more impressionable. I want the next generation of children to know there are more important things than money. I believe children will be happier their whole lives if they're raised with those values.

[1]https://www.thestreet.com/story/12791561/1/millennials-just-...

Saying "It exists, it's a part of our culture" is such a defeatist response. Culture is formed by all of us. You don't have to just let it happen. You can push back, and work to change culture for the better. That's why I like your last bit - we can engage with it and teach from it. I'd expand that to include: we can disapprove of it.

Why would the elites try to reign in social media? If I were an "elite" I'd want everyone to be on social media, except me. I'd want them revealing all the intimate details of their life, so I can better manipulate them with targted advertising.

You don't need a conspiracy theory to explain the recent uptick in articles about social media's negative effects. It's called a news cycle. People write stories about things people are talking about. All year, Social Media has been in the spotlight for privacy blunders and news that nation states spread propoganda with bots. So people like Cal Newport are talking about it.

Remember when lead was discovered in Flint, MI's water supply? And then there was an uptick in stories about lead poisoning? That's how news works, for better or worse.

Please don't distort the record. He committed a crime (defrauding investors) which carried potential prison time as a sentence. Prosecutors sought 15 years. The judge sentenced him to just 7. Considering he displayed disdain for the law and showed little hope for reform, putting him away for 7 years seemed reasonable to the judge, as he would have likely committed more crimes had he gotten off with a wrist slap.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/09/business/martin-shkreli-s...

It doesn't surprise me. It surprises me that people on HN try to defend their business model.

You're correct, and I should have made that clear. Unfortunately it's too late to edit my comment.

You're unfortunately correct. More people should be outraged at the expectations employers place on women to look "professional." It's enough that some employers mandate high heels and make up in their dress codes. Dying one's hair should be a personal choice, and no woman or man should feel required to do this for their employer. I hope this changes some day.

I do realize that ageism is not simple, or easy to fix. I'm currently helping my father, who is over 60, update his resume. He's extremely talented and knowledgeable in a field that currently lacks skilled workers. I'm helping him feature his experience as a selling point, and not as a disadvantage. I so realize ageism is widespread, and I understand if older workers feel like they have to take small steps to put employer's concerns to rest.

But when we're at the point when dying your hair is considered necessary to get a job, we should be upset. And I for one (as someone who went gray young) will not give in to this trend.

There's a big difference between wearing a suit and dying your gray hair. Dying your gray hair hides your age. Age is a protected class. It's illegal for employers to discriminate on the basis of age. It's not illegal for employers to discriminate on the basis of what suit you wear.

Can we all agree that nobody should have to dye their hair to get a job? The fact that people on this site act like this is normal is very disturbing.

> Personally, I think he is doing the right thing.

Right for who?

> fb should just stop communicating as that will give media less fodder

Oh I see. Right for Facebook's public image. Wrong for their customers which have a right to know what the hell Facebook has been doing with their data.

If he cared about my privacy, he wouldn't have invested in Facebook.

He cares about his own privacy. FYIGM

Nice try. The government already has your Facebook data. https://prod01-cdn07.cdn.firstlook.org/wp-uploads/sites/1/20...

Would you rather the media report on unsubstantiated rumors and assumptions, or would you rather they wait to report things until they have evidence, or a source who can verify the information?

Pen. Paper. Every time I see someone taking notes on a computer, they start typing whatever they hear, word for word. Pen forces you to slow down. Makes you organize the concepts, highlight the important things, summarize.

According to this article, there's evidence that you learn better that way. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-learning-secret...

But who knows. I just know it works for me. Plus, I hate lugging around a laptop everywhere I go. Composition book is lighter.

If you switch to pens, try gel pens. Less hand fatigue. I don't mess with fountain pens as they are more expensive, prone to failure, and just come across as pretentious IMO.

Na, creators are superior.

There's nothing wrong with kids playing dumb mobile games. But they gotta spend some time making something. I don't care if it's a video game, a short film, or a bird house. When you're making things, you're learning. And when you're passively consuming, you may not be.

With games like Minecraft, kids today have no excuse. They can be making things and playing a game at the same time.

After reading 'Thinking Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman, I'm not surprised people can't calculate their bill and determine change in line at the super market. Solving math problems like that requires deliberate focus and effort. Nobody has the time or energy to do that on line at the supermarket. Most probably estimate.

If I made a name for myself in journalism with honest indepth reporting that didn't skimp on the technical details, and someone said "that dudes awesome," I'd feel a little pissed.

If you saw me at a bar, forgot my name, and said "hey you're that dude from the other day" I wouldn't mind.

All about context. She's a professional and this is a professional context. "Chick" isn't a huge deal, and I'm sure you didn't mean to be offensive. But it reflects a level of informality that isn't appropriate for the situation.

> As a side note, I am conflicted if general interest stories like this should be on HN as they are too emotionally charged.

Of course this is relevant. The issues James Baldwin wrote about are still issues today, and tech companies are not free from blame.

https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-advertising-disc...

https://www.npr.org/2017/03/02/518087610/new-research-looks-...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-31/study-fin...

HN needs stories like these, and comments like yours.

I'd prefer to assess the ideas in this article on their merits. Not waste time criticizing the imperfect author.

>The internet developed without it. We've never really had it

We did have it. Defacto net neutrality, enforced by a competetive ISP market. It worked. And once we started to lose that, consumers absolutely did feel the impact. Remember when Comcast throttled bit torrent?

>If you're worried about centralization, net neutrality won't help much. Facebook and Google are large enough to crowd out other players with or without net neutrality.

Sure, they can still dominate under net neutrality. It's just significantly easier without it.

As a teacher, your job is to expose the student to a variety of programming topics early on. But when it's time to narrow the focus, their interests should be what guides their study.

If he shows no remorse, and he faced no consequences, why wouldn't he pull another scam? That makes him more of a danger.

No here's what actually happened.

1. Shkreli lied to investors. Regardless of whether the investors eventually made money, Shkreli put them needlessly at risk, and broke the law.

2. He could have gone away for 15 years, or walked away with a slap on the wrist. The judge sentenced him for 7 years in prison, given the fact that this guy showed no remorse, and thought it made him likely to reoffend, perhaps with more serious consequences.

"Nothing has changed over the centuries but the mechanisms by which propaganda is spread."

This is true. We now have digital platforms which reward propaganda by spreading it faster.

The speed and spread of false information has exponentially increased because social media distorts media coverage, rewarding sensational, emotionally charged content with greater reach in people's timelines and feeds.

Rumors used to spread from person to person, but the algorithms are giving them an edge. The algorithms are not neutral. They are designed to favor clickbait.

scroll to the bottom (corrections)