cheeky78

So back to my first point: instead of making it easier for entities like the Russian government to subvert our Democracy, why not just make it easier for the Elderly to get IDs?

I also don't think that there are that many people that don't have IDs. I have seen absolutely no statistics on the topic, but I have seen multiple groups survey different parts of various cities and nobody had issues getting an ID. It's pretty much needed in almost any aspect of life.

You can't even get welfare or government assistance without some form of ID, so you can't tell me you can't get one to vote.

My point still stands.

Exactly point point. My problem is that certain political groups are pushing for no voter ID laws, which just makes it easier to fake votes.

Why would anyone be for this if not to subvert our Democracy?

If we are so interested in fair results, why not have voter ID laws? Instead of fighting these laws, why not make it easier for everyone to get an ID?

"One of my biggest disappointments with normies is the way they use technology. Rather than exploring the wonderful resources we have on the internet, they have allowed themselves to become internet cattle corralled into Facebook."

It's possible that 'normies' as you say just aren't capable of doing the things you mention, due to a lack of intelligence or the necessary skills that were never taught or never learned during important developmental years.

It's because he doesn't silence opposing opinions, he welcomes them. More news organizations and websites should learn from this strategy.

Do you really not see the liberal bias with pretty much every single mainstream news organization in the US?

We are also no seeing a bias online because many sites will secretly shadow ban inconvenient comments that show disagreement with the current narrative...HN included.

yes, and many times, it's wrong.

This is why getting low-pay and equity at a startup is a pipe dream. The investors or founders will find a way to squeeze you out while using your skills to make them rich.

Can't we just admit that Google has a left-leaning bias? It's so obvious in cases like this.

This is the scary part: if there is right-leaning bias, people are protesting in the streets. left-leaning bias? crickets and business as usual with many people even denying that this is even a problem.

All unions bully large corporations to advance their own interests. The auto unions, for instance, had leaders that were getting multi-million dollar bonuses for decades..and probably still to this day.

"If you run a business and your solvency depends on the existence of another, larger business, you're not as independent as the title of 'business owner' alludes."

My point is that Youtubers can start their own sites and go elsewhere if they get tired of a large company controlling their content.

Unionization usually means they will now need to be paid a 'fair wage' and benefits..and your relationship changes to more of an employee..with more restrictions on what you can do.

Youtube also won't pay everyone as an employee and less people will be able to actually make money on the platform due to these restrictions.

"I like seeing alternative viewpoints"

This is is kind of crazy when you think about it: Independent business is now considered an 'alternative viewpoint' here on HN..a site dedicated to hackers, startups, and the tech business.

My guess is that the majority here work for large companies and really don't care about (or have even tried) running a business/startup.

"Since you're for retaliation against a bunch of people who dare try and organize around their shared pain points. I just can't do it this time!"

I'm not for retaliation, I'm just pointing out the unintended consequences.

"Fighting against a power that exploits you without representation? That's boston-tea-party as shit"

Everything isn't deserving of a 'revolution'. If so, I would have started a revolution against HN years ago. I can't even have intellectual discussions, without scared users down voting my comments..because someone might be convinced of a different view point.

If that's the case, 99% will be booted off the platform and they will have to meet certain numbers of visitors and engagement every month, or lose their job..which is what unionizing means.

If I were google, I would also get control of their users (they would now be the companys) and youtubers will no longer be able move to any other platform while working for Google.

You can't expect the freedom of running your own business with none of the restrictions of a job.

I never understood the need to take away the ability for someone to truly run their own business and have freedoms and restrict it down to a corporate job, by law.

I had daily standups at my last job and I dreaded them every day. It was mostly pointless.

The main problem is that I would have to take time out of my day, many times in the middle of a coding session, to have a 30/1 hour meeting where we could have mostly given the same information in the form of a simple slack message.

Since these standups were in the middle of the afternoon, I almost never actually got back into coding the rest of the day.

Now, I have no regularly scheduled meetings. Everything is as-needed and it's great.

I also noticed that business people love early morning standups and developers love mid-afternoon standups.

It might be as an indirect result of climate risks, but the main reason is because they fear government regulation.

..it's ironic that a conference about having the freedom to explore and tinker censors a video they don't like.

If it's a scam, I want to see it for myself.

Because we didn't have the technology and ability to lookup DNA as cheaply or easily 20+ years ago. I expect unsolved crime to continue to go down as our technology gets better.

8chan didn't cause the incident. The shooter did. If we find out that the shooter played a specific video game that a previous shooter played..should it be banned as well?

I'm old enough to remember all of the court cases that involved distressed parents blaming hard rock/metal bands for influencing their children's suicides.

These sorts of incidents are starting to remind me of the religious right's censorship crusade in the 90s...this time it's coming from the left.

Banning these sites will only push them underground. They aren't going away. The end result will be absolutely no way of knowing when and where a shooting may occur.

This is a great idea for people that don't have the money to pay their fair share of taxes.

Education can only bankrupt you if you choose to go to an expensive university. This is a complete choice and the overall price is known before you take out a loan. Community colleges are a fraction of the price.

"My experiences with social hospitals and doctors was much better than in the USA where it counts. Places weren't often as fancy looking, but the care was superb. Even the private systems in those countries was far more affordable. a few hundred for an MRI etc rather than a few thousand."

I pay for my own insurance in the US. I only pay a couple of hundred/month and most things are covered. My deductibles are very affordable.

There are plenty of option for low-income individuals and pre-existing conditions are no longer something that will prevent you from getting healthcare.

Even if you get a $100,000 bill, you can call the hospital up and negotiate it down to something you can actually pay.

"Whenever I see comments like yours I just get so upset realizing how it's an unwinnable battle in this country because of these ingrained beliefs."

I feel the same way about your comments. You have this ingrained believe that socialized healthcare is the best solution, when private care clearly has advantages.

The majority of people in the US are happy with their healthcare. There should be some additions, so people that can't afford care can get it, but without uprooting the entire system.

"But as this article demonstrates, if we care to use the inflammatory "death panels" label, we already have them."

It's not inflammatory when it's true. When the government runs our healthcare, choices are removed and someone else gets to decide if you should get surgery needed or not...and many times this is life or death.

At least now, if a cancer patient gets denied drugs, they can go to another doctor or get a second opinion.

All of my elderly relatives live in Canada and come over the border for any major surgery. This is mostly because the wait times are sometimes in the years..when they can just get private care in the US and get it done in a matter of weeks.

Doctors are also usually maxed out when it comes to patients, so individual care is lacking and they usually just want to try to push you out the door.

I also feel like I should have a say in someone's behavior, if I'm paying for their healthcare with my tax dollars: smoking, drinking, risky behavior, etc.

I've lived in countries with universal healthcare and the quality is sub-par compared to the US/private care. Sure private care can be improved, but it shouldn't be ripped out and replaced.

I completely agree with this. I'm nearing 40 and have been consulting remotely for the past 5 years and have a side business, that will eventually be my full-time income.

The problem is that it's impossible to rely on any one company until you retire. Although I've been keeping my skills updated to the latest technology and trends, if I suddenly lose my job at 50, it's going to be really tough to find another one.

So I'm supposed to believe that a certain party in the US wants to rip out all of our infrastructure reliant on oil and completely replace it with something new..because fossil fuels will destroy the world in 10 years.

Yet Norway, which is pumping out said oil and making billions of dollars in the process, is perfectly okay because they are using a fraction of it for renewable energy research?

Climate change has nothing to do with science and everything to do with politics if this is the case.

So because Norway is a bastion of liberal policies, they get a free pass when it comes to climate change?

This is why I know it has nothing to do with science or actually solving the problem.

Yes, but it's based on oil, which is contributing to climate change..and not 100% is not used for renewable energy, so it's a net negative.

It's strange to me that people aren't protesting and complaining about this fund, when it's a big issue for future.

Isn't this contributing to climate change? The economy everyone uses as an example to replace the current system in the US...

Socialism isn't going to help build the technology needed to help replace fossil fuels and curb climate change. This is why we need capitalism.

You can go to a community college for much less money and all kids aren't required to go to College to earn a good living.

This is just silly.

I'm a few years from 40 and have been a software developer since I graduated from college.

I hope I'm not a developer through my 40s. Why? Things don't seem to ever change for the better.

I've gone through death march projects, company politics turmoil, and business owners that seem to think Fooseball tables and a stocked fridge full of Red bull is equal compensation for spending unpaid extra hours on the latest product release.

Technology changes, but learning the latest framework du jour is not that difficult when you know the fundamentals.

I think some developers end up in management and others leave the industry entirely because they just don't want to deal with the bullshit anymore.

I've been consulting for the last 5 years and it has helped. I'm paid well and can work remotely from my own office or home.

I've also started my second side business that I hope will replace my consulting income. My first business lasted about 5 years before it became too difficult to maintain profitability.

All of these ridiculous regulations will only make it impossible for someone without deep pockets to start an online business.

It seems from this article, they are also the perpetrators. This seems to be a change of tune from all the articles I've seen over the years claiming men were the ones in the majority that are cyberbullying women.