hsod

HN has become a forum largely devoted to media criticism. We should change the motto to “ethics in journalism”

Works great on Apple TV

The individual who did the hacking was criminally prosecuted and pled guilty to a CFAA violation https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.439451...

Israeli dual citizens volunteered their passports to the Mossad

> 1) The First Amendment says nothing about which content companies must produce, promote, or allow with their resources and on their platforms.

It's not just that it says nothing about these things. It says the opposite of these things.

Any legal or social norm that attempts to enforce what content is produced, promoted, or allowed on private resources and platforms is fundamentally authoritarian. This includes the "principle of free speech" from your 2nd statement. The first amendment is a protection against authoritarianism. Using the ideas behind it to coerce private parties into hosting or promoting content they don't want to is a bit perverse.

Businesses are made up of people, who have rights

“Banning books” use to refer to banning them from libraries. You seem to be using it differently, since this article is about a school district choosing not to include a book in a curriculum. So maybe progressives have changed, but so have the definitions of words at issue

why would you get downvoted for expressing the dominant opinion of HN on this matter? have you ever read a CoC thread on here?

what is frightening about it?

Greenwald's version is basically attacking all his co-workers as democratic partisans and contains no actual evidence, so I'm not sure what line you're drawing here

From what i can tell there was no punishment, he opted out of the process before the "next steps" phase. Or in other words, the process itself was the punishment-- being called in front of a tribunal and scolded by strangers.

I have a different theory. I think in a world of mass communication and social media there are a large number of people who feel grey, flat, anonymous, just another face in the crowd. They want to stand out. Being right isn't as important as being interesting.

I honestly don't understand why this made you angry. Is it because they are wasting wood?

Was this just now? Verified accounts weren’t showing up in search during the hack

Calling them dangerous and a pox on society seems in the same ballpark of moral outrage as calling someone racist.

how is that ironic?

Interesting. I've been reading The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich and the author makes the opposite case: the German people, due to their founding mythology and geopolitical history, were susceptible to ideas of authoritarianism and racial superiority. Hegel and Nietszche provided a popular philosophical backing for the supremacy of the state and the view of individuals as primarily agents of the state rather than free actors in their own right.

Hitler saw this and built a political movement around it.

seattle schools has disaffiliated with SPD in large part due to the protests that led up to CHAZ

she also said they were extorting businesses and later when asked for clarification said she heard about it on social media

There are no perfect whistleblowers. If you're looking for something that destroys their credibility, you'll always be able to find one. Your particular complaint here is purely aesthetic and I think we'd all be better off focusing on the substance rather than going ten rounds about word choice and tone.

It seems true to me. There was a team dedicated to pandemic response and now there isn’t. The fact that some of the members of the team were reassigned to a broader focus area that included pandemic response doesn’t make that false.

This graph shows total mortality in NY state https://twitter.com/JDVance1/status/1247728338484985857?s=20

Im in the same boat as OP and this advice just seems totally alien to me. i don’t optimize my productivity like this, I’m just a guy that understands how computers work. I think there are a lot of people like me

Campaign finance violations (his personal lawyer is currently sitting in jail for an illegal campaign contribution he carried out at the direction of Donald trump). Obstruction of justice is pretty well documented in the mueller report. Those are just the obvious ones

The public presently has very little information about Trump’s personal financials. He has refused to release his tax returns despite long precedent and intense political pressure. His excuses for this have been very weak.

The idea is that the reason for this secrecy is that he is hiding something which would be politically damaging, such as the long-rumored (and denied) financial links to Russian oligarchs

My company with low 5-digit users hosts an hour-long monthly webinar about product updates. The iPhone is one of the most popular consumer items in the world, I think it’s reasonable for Apple to spend 1.5 hours/year talking about what’s changing

no? it's not social media, and it's not fear-based.

"free speech" has become a wedge issue, a cudgel used by crypto-fascists to induce well-meaning centrists to actively fight for their cause. All you need is the thinnest veneer of respectability covering your bigotry and a stampede of individuals who nominally hate what you stand for will fight relentlessly for your interests.

In the world of the free speech absolutist, we are all obligated to sit politely on the sidelines listening to white nationalists recruit and further their cause, cheered by the health of the marketplace of ideas.

Thin gruel.

Isn't this still true? What shows can you not buy on Amazon or iTunes?

You can buy shows and movies a la carte on iTunes and Amazon Video if you want. Perhaps a company should create a $9/month streaming service where each customer gets to choose their catalog personally.