Strang

Keep in mind that in the US, the Federal Government is not the only game in town. The EPA as currently constituted is not the only possible way for our society to protect our environment.

It seems to me that conservatives often make the case that "The Federal Government should not do <foo>," but others instead hear, "we as a society don't need to do <foo>."

A naïve application of supply and demand isn't always right, but it often is.

That's not "begging the question," it's "raising the question."

https://afterdeadline.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/25/begging-t...

I remain an enthusiastic reader of National Review after ~17 years. What do you think has become of it?

It doesn't just "lean conservative," it is an explicitly conservative opinion journal, and an excellent one. Even if you are not a conservative, it's a great source for understanding conservative thought.

I for one absolutely believe that Hacker News should be welcoming of viewpoints that _some would perceive as_ racist or misogynist.

For example, a perennial topic around here is a lack of diversity in the software industry. My personal opinion is that a) for a variety of reasons, men and women have had different levels of interest in developing software, and b) these differences in of themselves are not a cause for concern.

I'm well aware that some consider this view misogynist. But what is the point of discussing a topic such as diversity if only "approved" viewpoints are welcomed? That would turn Hacker News into an echo chamber.

I believe he meant that trucks need access to the business so the business can receive its stock

My point about copying files is more literal than that. I'm not trying to theoretically devalue the creative or economic worth of the work. I'm saying that nowadays those works are delivered as files, which are literally free to copy. They can be encumbered with DRM, but DRM is also free to remove.

This is a drastic change from the days of printing presses, vinyl records, etc. The idea that these industries should be allowed to ignore this reality by punishing those who make use of it is ludicrous, in my opinion.

My alternative to copyright is nothing. Let society figure out how to remunerate artists without coercion.

I think your conflating my position with another. I understand that eliminating copyright would be a massive upheaval. I do understand that many companies, industries, and career paths would be drastically affected negatively.

I just don't think that maintaining the status quo justifies the current policing of personal computer and internet usage.

Nowadays, film and music are just files, and can be freely copied at will. The creative industries have refused to acknowledge this reality. I don't think any individuals should be jailed or bankrupted to maintain this illusion any longer.

When the dust settles, society will still have art and entertainment. It will just be different from what we are used to.

I don't understand your reasoning. There are people that risk these penalties, therefore the penalties are just?

I agree that the current creative industries would probably go bankrupt. Goodbye to the "summer blockbuster", pop megastars, etc. Is that really such a vital societal good that we need to take civil and criminal action against individuals that threaten these industries?

I disagree entirely that there would be "nothing". Art and entertainment would just look different. The budgets would probably be lower, and the payment and distribution channels would be entirely different. Kickstarter/Patreon vs. Netflix/retail.

Well, I fell for the clickbait headline. This is a puff piece about a minor experiment extrapolated to a ludicrous conclusion. At times like these I'm glad I block ads.

I work for a great company and I'm happy with my job. They also happen to censor my internet (very mildly, I should add). In fact, there are plenty of sectors where all viable positions would include internet blacklisting. And finally, plenty of people can't be so picky about their jobs to make litmus tests out of relatively minor factors like this.

I see people complain about waving at a four-way stop all the time, and I really don't get it. I wave people through at four-way stops all the time, for the simple reason that it can be hard to tell who arrived first. Especially with rolling stops and the like.

So rather than assume that the other drivers have come to the same conclusion that I have, I make it explicit by waving. Sometimes it's a little confusing if they try to wave you at the same time, but that's life.

That's an oddly aggressive response.

No, I was not referring to the Articles of Confederation. I was instead referring to the system of limited government defined by the Constitution.

Speaking as an anti-government American, I'm against the current form of American government because it has strayed so far from the limited government principles on which this country was founded. It's literally impossible for a government this large to be representative.

The concept of "privilege" is not a reality, it's one subjective way of looking at reality; one that most people don't subscribe to. This is an important distinction that is all too often forgotten.

This may be wildly off-topic, but I think this kind of disconnect is caused by a modern conflation of the concepts of "society" and "government". I think society should be against these businesses. I think government should leave them be.

"Immigrants coming here to freeload" and "immigrants coming to work industriously" are not mutually exclusive. The general concern is that immigrants work largely under the table. They therefore benefit from the welfare state without contributing taxes. In that sense they are "freeloading".

In other words, they contribute labor to the economy, but largely freeload when it comes to any government-provided benefits.

Unfortunately it's not as simple as that. There is a lot of gray area between lobbying and corruption. And lobbying has a bad connotation, but people and corporations both must be able to speak to their representatives and advocate for legislative outcomes.

I definitely do not have as much of a voice as, say, Arthur Sulzberger, publisher of the New York Times. And I never will.

My most realistic option for making my voice heard would be to contribute money to a person, campaign, corporation, whatever, that accepts money from other like-minded people and uses that money to advance our shared position.

However, I would be quite hesitant to do that if I couldn't do it anonymously. Aside from the chilling effects of the Brandon Eich debacle, there is also the practical consideration that volunteering contact information in this day and age is an invitation to incessant harassment from entities that operate under loopholes in do-no-call legislation.

I believe my voice is diminished by any political funding legislation that disallows anonymous donation.

You are discussing subjective matters. You can't convince anyone by asserting your personal beliefs as truth.

And calling someone's good-faith comment a "tiresome excuse" is rather rude.

Neither site is "beautiful." They are both just websites, and rather functional ones at that.

Your game has far too many ads. I played a few levels and was irritated that I had to close a fullscreen ad after every other level. I uninstalled the game when the first video ad was presented.

I don't pretend to know much about the iphone game market, but I can't imagine that these ads will help your position much.

Your point is technically true, but you can consider it an idiom for either "maximally free market" or "sufficiently free market".

"Zealotry" is an unnecessarily inflammatory term. And do you really believe that every business owner has a responsibility to run his business as successfully as possible, even if it violates his own conscience? And do you believe that a former business owner should accept responsibility for the actions of the buyer after selling the business?

edit: I do definitely agree with you that a story about the decline of the two businesses would have been much more interesting. And a story of the mini-comeback, in the case of Little Caesar's.

Speaking as an industry outsider, I don't agree with the assumption that fresh-faced app programmers have the capability to solve any real world problems.

Why ignore the possibility that writing apps, new web frameworks, and "pivoting" is in fact the best possible use of this talent?

I think it's a polite way of requesting that emails not use garish fonts and colors. Just imagine how many submissions he must get in illegible "handwriting" fonts.

I'm not sure why you assume that removing the union will result in all pilots making a pittance. I am not in a union, yet I make more than $16,000.

I have a very specific question about starting out on SICP. A few months back, I worked through roughly half the exercises in the book. I got stuck on 2.2.4 (a picture language)[1] and was unable to run any of the examples or test any of the exercises.

Is there some prerequisite library for these exercises? Or am I missing the point and these are not actually intended to be run?

1. http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/book/book-Z-H-15.html...