culot

Don't the police already use kid gloves to handle most of the situations? I've been watching livestreams of these for a solid year now and that seems to be a common theme: the police are in general far nicer and accommodating than they could be or even should be.

The dramatic brush you're painting this with is extremely unrealistic.

There have been many cases of rioters claiming press credentials in attempts to bypass responsibility for criminal activity. "I'm not with mob of rioters attempting to burn down that courthouse, I'm a journalist. See, look on my helmet - P R E S S."

I think that was common in Portland over the last year.

I had previously referenced the Washington Post's police shootings database, but that is now paywalled. I was referring to that stats stating that of the roughly 1000 police killings in 2019, something like 50 involved unarmed suspects. Of those 50, almost all of them involved those suspects attacking the police and lethal force being justified.

The Botham Jeans and Daniel Shavers, as horrifically egregious as those cases are, are relatively rare.

- Define 'structural racism' and why it forces blacks to be far more criminal and violent than the rest of the population.

- Can poverty explain, for example, why blacks in Wisconsin commit 2/3 of all violent crime while they are only 7% of the state's population? There are wholly White and Native American cities in Wisconsin that are dirt poor - the poorest - and yet they are not committing insanely high levels of crime.

>A better term for it might be “Police Lynching”.

No, it wouldn't. That is unnecessary hyperbole. Unjustified police killings, instances where the police were at fault, are a rarity. The big problem here is not lack of police training nor overreach, but violent, uncooperative suspects.

>failing to show the correct level of subservience

While there are some grotesque examples of that, like with Daniel Shaver, most police killings, the overwhelming majority of them, are due to them being attacked by someone or being confronted with an armed suspect who refuses to disarm.

>Not saying all of them are racist, but to some police, everyone is the wrong color (not blue).

Are there any actual instances of racism being the driving impetus for police killings at any time in recent decades? I cannot think of any offhand.

>They run propaganda in prime time every single night.

All major news outlets run propaganda - not just in prime time, but all of the time. That is their job. The NY Times does have the privilege of being one of the primary establishment press outfits, resulting in their main aim being setting the tone for propaganda outfits around the nation and throughout much of the western world.

If you want to know which way the wind is blowing inside the FBI or CIA, the NY Times is where you go.

To compare them to Fox is pointless, as Fox does little to no print journalism. NY Times excels in [often overly-]lengthy, well-written articles, whereas I don't think Fox has ever done much more than briefs and blurbs.

This made-for-TV change of heart might indicate he'll be joining the league of superwealthy philanthropists like Bill Gates and George Soros who leave their lengthy, extraordinarily and unforgivably damaging lives of evil behind to become a power for good. I mean, surely that is exactly what this means.

>Hopefully peoples' memories aren't so short

Who has time for thinking when Marvel Megahero Show #34 has 3000 new episodes to binge? Besides, he's donating to or even directing all the Right Causes now! He's like a real life superhero.

Azimuth is a Unit 8200 shop, just as Cellebrite is. So, yes, still an Israeli outfit.

I don't think there's any indication that mask requirement will abate anytime soon. All posturing from western leadership point to precisely the opposite. The notion that the mask requirement will disappear in as early as 1-2 years is farcically optimistic.

Your snarky, condescending post most definitely goes against HN rules. You did not attempt engage the parent, you did not address the content of their post whatsoever, instead, in a sarcastic tone, resorted to preaching a total aside.

Once that is accomplished you'd be living in a land of warlord fiefdoms. No women or children would ever be safe unless protected by strongmen. Society would stagnate into a dark age. You might as well move to Afghanistan.

So if you don't detain them you do what then? Let them roam free? Considering the amount of fraud related to asylum claims, with entire legal entities dedicated to coaching aliens to provide fake testimony, letting them roam free is a definite risk for citizens. Especially as they are coming from one of the most violent warlord-controlled warzones in the hemisphere.

How else would you handle masses of criminal aliens? Would diffuse holding facilities of small size be smarter? Of course not. Facilities to concentrate the population of criminals until they can be processed are going to be necessary, that is the inevitable result of porous borders.

You seem to be confusing concentration camp - you know, any holding facility whatsoever - with death camps. They are not synonymous.

The Slippery Slope is often more truism than fallacy. In this situation it is spot-on.

Just recently all of the search projects seem to have gotten significantly worse. Image search has been crippled with removal of the size options. Web search seems like a parody or cheap imitation anymore, presenting even worse result than usual, and instead of being able to customize the search to fix that, you end up with Bing-like results giving you crap you explicitly tried to exclude.

Then there's all those silly, frivolous overly-rounded corners mucking up the GUI.

On the up side: I do look forward to competitors stepping forward to fill the space that Google used to fill. That is inevitable.

It's probably more related to the geekier and/or generally more technically productive people that peopled the internet in the pre-smartphone age. It used to be that you had to learn and practice and exercise skills to become proficient to use the internet, now its basically as mindless as television for [probably] most people.

That's one of my favorite Directory Opus features. Especially since you can make it on demand, in case you don't want to always have directory sizes calculated while browsing.

Don't you think you could get your point across without being obtuse and patronizing?

"It's not like individual employees are reading your mail, its just an algorithm that handles it automatically."

That could have been a cooler move.

Depends on the component or product probably. Some is, some isn't.

I think its unfair to argue that just because their viewpoints are in part shared with other groups that some consider undesirable that they should abandon or be ashamed of those viewpoints simply because any advancement in those areas would possibly benefit aforementioned undesirable groups as well.

Groups with wildly different goals can share similar viewpoints, that does not make them allies. The reasoning behind their platforms are not identical, and the desired outcome is unlikely to be identical, even though there is similarity in some aspects of their positions.

Let's say there's Group A:

    - Advocates for abortion rights
    - Ethically and medically opposed to carnivorous diets
    - Requires wearing of a fez and monocle when out in public at all times

Group B:

    - Advocates against abortion
    - Opposed to carnivorous diets because eating the souls animals may increase the chance of spontaneous combustion
    - Condemns the fez as an abomination against all mankind; doesn't know what a monocle is, still considering boycott for symmetry's sake

Those two groups are at odds in many respects, but do share a dislike for flesh mongers.

What if a member of as yet defined Group C tries to persuade a member of Group A to abandon as aspect of their platform by saying, "I suspect you have little in common with those Antifez jerks in any other way. So why would you want to fight this particular battle along side them?"

That seems like an unnecessarily combative stance to take. Comparing Catherine MacKinnon to Islamic extremists or to unreasonably homophobic Russians is for sure hyperbolic.

Journalists make up a minority of those being tracked in that operation. Most of those tracked are involved in organizations that encourage and assist illegal immigration, like Pueblos Sin Fronteras and Border Angels. Founders of both of those organizations explicitly encourage illegal immigration, and have been organizing migrant caravans for some 15+ years.

I've been unable to find a transcription of his speech. What hatred was he espousing?

This is an accurate and concise summary of the incident:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSkpPaiUF8s

Basically: the kid was entirely blameless, preyed upon by a racist native activist specifically because he was wearing a MAGA hat.

I usually can't stand to watch the videos, but the discussions on mortality and the precarious fragility of life in general I've found valuable. Because of that sub I am more careful in many situations and do value life much more.

I think most commenters here are missing the point of this op-ed: it's not to convince people to pay for news content, it is to promote legislation that allows the author's News Media Alliance to form a cartel that is exempted from anti-trust regulations, so they can try to force Facebook and Google to pay them directly. His organization spends of a lot of time over these past couple of years railing against Google and Facebook, and take note that the true target of this article is not consumers of news, but Facebook and Google.

The author of the article, David Chavern, since he took over the reins of the News Media Alliance, has argued that media cross-ownership rules are antiquated, that greater consolidation of news firms would be beneficial to citizens.

"A new op-ed from trade association News Media Alliance’s president and CEO David Chavern dismisses the contributions of leading tech services and argues publishers should form a cartel and extract rents by implementing controversial new regulations. In reality, though, leading tech services have taken great steps to empower publishers in the Internet Age, while the “cartel solution” would do little to bolster innovation."

link: https://springboardccia.com/2019/02/01/nmas-cartel-solution-...

Isn't it precisely their fault for choosing that name and branding? They are not blameless for the title they chose.

Oh wow! I consider myself a fan of his but had not seen most of these. Great finds!

Removing the _d provides the full res image:

https://i.imgur.com/jKFFTyB.jpg

I think it is meaningful distinction in this context. The responsibility for the inclusion of these apps lies solely on the OEMs and carriers. If there's beef to had then it has to be laid at the feet of the OEMs and carriers.

Oh! I did not know that, I assumed they were equally specced.