pesus

Maybe you should direct this comment towards the person I responded to and their litany of comments, because this applies far more there. I am far less concerned about hand wringing over being slightly impolite to people advocating for violent violation of people protesting the police state.

Edit: this comment officially got me shadow banned and I can no longer comment. The irony and hypocrisy is off the charts. Don't offend the mods or their friends, people. Only they are allowed to get "emotional" and advocate for violence.

Those are likely the same people who want to unconsensually force Flock and other mass surveillance on people. Most well socially adjusted people greatly appreciate those protections.

Please engage in good faith and write comments that contribute, rather than taking away, from the conversation.

To be clear, you think someone being loud in a public meeting deserves to be violently dragged from the room because you're offended by it? What other speech do you find violent removal worthy?

Edit: I was shadow banned for my comments in this thread. You have been warned - no dissent against Flock (YC17) allowed.

I get forced to use it While using CarPlay. I don't particularly want it, though, considering it still regularly fails at basic tasks like adding the currently playing song to a playlist.

Agreed. I hate the fact that going in public requires accepting that you can be filmed by anyone and broadcast to the world without your consent, and there's nothing you can do to stop it.

I'd also love to move past the inevitable "you have no expectation of privacy whatsoever in public!" comments that get regurgitated every time this topic comes up. Yes, that's the issue in the first place.

If you go back 15 years or so, you hear the exact same "concerns" about gay people pretty much word for word. Now that they're no longer an acceptable target for most people, they've moved on to regurgitating the same baseless fear mongering but targeted towards trans people. If society manages to progress further, they'll eventually come up with another group to serve as the "other" that they can blame everything on.

That still prevents it from happening again, no? Still seems like a success.

It's been getting noticeably worse with every update. iOS 26 was a significant step down from whatever version was before that.

This is a ridiculous and incoherent belief. Ensuring children have enough food to survive isn't making life "too comfortable". Letting millions of children starve and/or never get an education because you don't like the vibes of it is sociopathic and is what will actually break society. We should not tolerate child abuse just because you think intervening makes society too soft.

I'm sure you wouldn't feel the same way if you were that starving child or grew up with imperfect parents or in an environment that had actual hardships. This lack of basic empathy and introspection can only occur from someone who has been completely isolated from much of the real world their entire life. You are not arguing against perfect being the enemy of good, you are arguing against having any sort of good in the world at all, and it's obviously coming from a place of extreme comfort and luxury.

There's no chance you'd be saying anything like this if you had ever experienced anything close to poverty and starvation. Ironically, it appears having an upbringing that is too comfortable is what causes these beliefs in the first place.

It's baffling how oblivious these people appear to be. I still can't tell if it's an act or not. If it is, what benefit do they get from playing dumb? If not, how did we let people who don't understand basic cause and effect or basic human emotion become in charge of the future of the world?

Fair enough, but I wish the blatantly racist comments got the same response. Maybe they get flagged more quickly.

As I am strongly against that as well.

Being non-white isn't a bad thing, that's why.

People born in the country are illegal migrants? That's a first.

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

What does this mean? Be specific.

> "They will also be forced to leave, even if they are born in Sweden, because they have no natural connection to Sweden. They are not Swedish."

- Markus Allard

Is that so? Instead of throwing a fit and insulting people, you could've just spent 30 seconds googling to see what the party leader himself says:

> In a podcast segment about immigration and deportations Allard stated his opinion and said that "They will also be forced to leave, even if they are born in Sweden, because they have no natural connection to Sweden. They are not Swedish."

Or is the party leader lying about his own party? How deep does this conspiracy go?

Maybe we can start with not supporting companies that have cofounders that directly financially support ethnic cleansing.

What? That's what the party is in favor of, and the thing you said every single left wing party from the 90s supported. Why can't you back up what you say? Is it because the Democratic Party did not support ethnic cleansing in the 90s?

It's not a "witch hunt" to be against ethnic cleansing and not want to financially support that.

Apparently that's asking too much of people these days, if the not at all suspicious flood of comments defending ethnic cleansing is any indication.

Source that every single left wing party in the 90s wanted to get rid of every single person of a non-white background?

You don't think there's a difference between a founder and a random employee?

It's pretty clear you didn't get beyond the very basics of music production or house music if you think this. I'd love to hear your masterfully produced house track to prove me wrong, though.

Currently, it's the US government, who is very opposed to renewable energy sources and very in favor of data centers/AI.

It wasn't directed at you personally, but I think the fact that you dismiss opposition to data centers/AI as "fears, anxieties, and hardships" [...] "being exploited by demagogues attempting to consolidate their power" does reinforce my point. So does dismissing people's concerns as an "emotional frenzy". Ironically, that applies far more towards what the AI companies are working towards.

Thanks for the response, but unfortunately "common sense" is not a source.

And unfortunately, these aren't actual examples of medical progress being made. AI in some capacity is absolutely going to be helpful for medical research, but I'm still very skeptical LLMs are what is going to do it. I also do not think all the other BS coming with the current LLM wave outweighs the benefits. I think the reaction would be much different if these things weren't conflated, and if the focus of AI was towards things like medical research. As it stands, it comes off more as a coping mechanism / excuse that I do not think is convincing for most people when they see the majority of AI is used for garbage (to put it lightly).

> All the technological innovations since humanity has had this characteristic and I don't see why AI would be different.

Then you should have no problem pointing to concrete examples of how it's actually improved life for the average person.

> I think it is convenient to put oneself in the non-elite bucket to justify anger at the "true" elites - the ones just above you. This is actually a well studied phenomena and almost all revolutions followed the same pattern. As an example, Soviet revolution was largely coordinated by the intellectual elite by overthrowing the Tsar who was the literal elite.

If you want to describe anyone with any education as an "elite", go ahead, but it's not convincing and is pretty anti-intellectual.

I sure am glad I'm apparently an elite and didn't know it, though! Who knew being an elite means you're barely able to make rent, will never be able to afford having children, have to forgo medical care due to the costs involved, and would be homeless within a few months if you got laid off?