ManFromUranus

His reaction didn't just fall out of the sky, one does not interact with somebody in good faith and then get a reaction like that immediately. That is the response of somebody who's sick and tired of liberals.

> I hope society never succumbs to their desires and normalizes denigrating speech

This is already happened, you can denigrate conservatives or anybody to the right of you easily, look at all the histrionics surrounding Trump. People are saying he's hitler UNIRONICALLY. We've blown by your line in the sand a long time ago.

I think Black Mirror is a terrible ham-fisted show. The assertion by the article that real life is coming close to the worlds of black mirror is ridiculous.

The US has diverse ethnic groups that homogeneously live in little enclaves. You have "white" areas and "latino" areas and so on. This is how diversity actually happens in the west.

High minimum wage is what prompted this automation in the first place. UBI will solve some problems and create new ones. So we will likely have the same amount of problems or possibly more after UBI as before. How UBI will be funded is another matter, also how much $$$ will it provide? What is a necessity anymore, internet in my home? A cellphone? What a can of worms UBI is.

This is why I come to the comments first. Thanks for saving me some time.

Why does nobody make this argument about Nursing, or Teaching, or Social Work, or Psychology, or any of the "Female dominated" fields? When men don't go into a field, they find a way to blame men for it, when women don't go into a field, they find a way to blame men for it. Don't women have any agency? Are they dumb robots that only do what men tell them? Maybe they don't WANT to be in STEM fields...

This is probably a precursor to "Sponsored Tweets" appearing in whatever view you are looking at (I don't have a twitter account, so I don't know much about it). So this is the run-up to injecting advertising, similar to how gmail does it. That is my guess as to the purpose of this.

>We'll be a radically different species in just 200 to 300 years, through self-controlled evolution that has already begun

We are essentially already doing this. We are selecting for cancer and other disease processes when we cure cancer and other diseases in children who would otherwise have died who then survive to reproduce. It's not polite to say this, but that is what is happening.

>>One of the primary purposes of nations and governments is (or ought to be anyway) to protect the poor and powerless from the excesses of the rich and powerful

That is not the primary purpose of government at all, nor should it be I would argue. Government primary purpose is to be the enforcer of laws and rules ( as well as the entity responsible for the maintenance of the existing code of law).

That's EXACTLY what it is, I believe that was the actual design philosophy behind the thing, you are stating this like they messed up or didn't understand what they were building. Whereas it's much more likely (by the sounds of it) that you didn't need a PC that can be a tablet, you needed an iPad. So I think they built the thing correctly, you probably should have just bought an iPad instead of Surface Pro.

>which turned out to be a load of crap when Windows 10 came out

How did it turn out to be a load of crap? They changed the UI to cater to user preferences. What was missing for you?

> mostly because the microsoft product were so unpolished that were terrible to use

Unpolished compared to what? Open office? Apples offerings? Surely you are joking. MS Office is probably the most polished and feature rich office suite out there. For me nothing else compares, the only factor that was off-putting about using office was the cost. The cost deterrent has largely gone away, so for me there's almost no reason to use anything else, other than to investigate future alternatives.

From the article:

* SoftLayer is their cloud provider, bare metal machines, fairly isolated within the network, dual datacenter configuration

Softlayer is an IBM Company, so ultimately it DOES require an IBM scale company to run this ( at some point in the chain).

Could I realistically state any justifiable criticism of anything related to black people and not be racist in your book? I am leaning toward no.

Pure hyperbole, and incorrect at that, and it's equally clear where you stand.

In case you are still reading: The poster I was replying to didn't commit a subtle act of prejudice, they made an overtly racist statement about white men. Then claimed that white men can't envision a future of black liberation. That's literally what they said, I responded to that comment.

I am saying that instead of futurism (and other cultural works), the focus of a lot of black people and their effort seems to be civil rights activities. These civil rights activities have an opportunity cost, while you're doing die-ins at the mall you may not have time to write about the future. So therefore we don't have as much of a black vision of the future because they (black people) aren't spending their effort on that.

My comment was about fighting prejudice, prejudice against white people. That sort of behavior is totally kosher on the internet and in the mainstream media and it's very PC and fashionable to bash "white people" and their culture (when it's admitted that they even have a culture). I have gotten pretty sick of it.

Non it's not a non-sequitur as I am not replying to the article but to another poster. My reply is relevant to theirs. The point of the article is that we get cultural changes wrong or don't account for changes in culture the way we anticipate changes in technology. The comment I am replying to makes racist generalizations about white people and what the white people and western world are able to imagine. I imagine if one goes to Thailand you would find media and cultural creations that relate to Thai people and their future, or in China the same thing, Chinese people and their future. Would the parent poster make a similar stupid comment about Chinese men can't imagine the future of women or black liberation?

Name some of them then. I haven't read any content by black futurists (that I was aware of).

People also have a responsibility to Society, they should not steal murder, or any number of other criminal actions.

>Society has a responsibility to reintegrate and readjust those it has failed

Where is the accountability in your world? If I pistol whip somebody in the face and take their wallet, then it sounds like (by your logic) that society has failed that person, rather than that person failed to abide by the shared social contract (to not engage in criminal behavior).

>Our judicial system is for chewing up poor people

Hyperbolic statement with absolutely no details about this situation? Seems legit.

I wonder if the queue could be caused by hundreds of refugees and asylum coming to the US every day...

He's not attacking his person and it's not ad-hominem, he's saying the guy is basically a moral hazard, he is advocating for policies here that he won't have to suffer the consequences of.

> the backlash from people calling this "unbridled Socialism."

It depends on the CEO's reasoning for paying the employees more. If he paid them more for economic reasons, reducing turnover, or incentive pay for increased performance, or a retention bonus or something like that then it's capitalism. If he paid them more because he's moralising about society, or out of pity, or fear of some kind of social backlash, then I would say it's socialism that motivated it.

Okay after reading the article, I would agree with Rush's take on calling it socialism.

You were always free to not use new MS operating systems. Nobody forced you to make any MS accounts or use Window 8,10 or whatever, so if you installed Windows 8 and didn't like it, that doesn't make MS evil, just don't use it. Anyone who inclined to use CentOS as their daily driver probably was never going to like MS OS's anyway. You probably only ever installed it just to find out what you hate about it.

If they censor too much it's "problematic" because they're overreaching and deciding for the people. If they don't censor enough then it's "problematic" because they're culturally insensitive to the local sense of decency, they're imposing western standards or somesuch. They're damned if they do, damned if they don't.

I'm not OP but my guess is that without the revenue generated by the proprietary algorithm, there wouldn't be enough money or incentive to keep improving it.

With an open source google algorithm there would be possibly 1000's of lesser google's (lesser as in inferior search) the lesser googles might even get eclipsed by Bing or some other proprietary search which has the resources to improve it's search.

There is no question that this is the case. This video a guy articulates this, be warned I suspect that his conservative opinions and religiousness may rub some HN users the wrong way. However I think his point is persuasive and well made nevertheless.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zcs1K7Gi9Pg

>In a culture without that, if someone comes into my office, any favoritism will be based on their ability to offer me favoritism

So your first point is: one hand washes the other. I will show favoritism to people who can be of some benefit to me. Sounds like merit based favoritism. So for example could I show favoritism to a guy that works really hard? Is that corruption? Or I show favoritism to a guy who can invest in my company because his family has money? Is that corruption? (probably more so than the first example but I'm not sure).

The second point favoritism among the powerful is worse than the familial sort, because of your first point.

If anything it seems that the opposite is true because according to your logic the favoritism here is more merit based.

What if that system also fosters corruption and nepotism? Need to hire somebody for a job? family first (you owe them remember?), tender a contract (family first) the list goes on. You are a public servant, someone comes to your office to get you to do the job that you were hired to do, but they're not your family, you don't owe them anything... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_India

Yeah that system is better because it fosters closer family ties.

Your argument is simply ad hominem. Either the ideas themselves are wrong, or they're not. It doesn't matter where the information came from. If Hitler told me about gravity that doesn't mean there is no gravity just because I learned about it from him.

>The Medium piece conflates social justice and legal justice

>we changed the laws, but the cultural change had to happen first

>This is not a legal argument about what standards we should use in the courts; it’s a moral one, about what happens outside the legal system

So basically you are describing the very means that will be used to change the laws to remove due process. "Morality" will be used change the legal environment.