senior_james

It was a rhetorical question. If He wrote about Islam, he would get death threats.

My point is that the current trend is to shit on Christianity and praise Islam.

You really don't need to be a passionate programmer. However, passion will bring you much further when you have to work on something that's boring, tedious, or has no real end in sight.

1000% this. I've had multiple co-founders over the years that love the idea of being part of a startup, but were unwilling to sacrifice any free time and accomplish anything.

If you've had more than 3 meetings with no commitment of time, walk away.

Why focus on just Christianity? Islam started as an 'obscure cult', like most religions.

I actually hope we can loosen the restrictions from the FDA. One of the main reasons our drugs in the US are so expensive is because it can take $100 million and a decade of clinical trials to actually get something approved.

This broken model creates an environment where a few companies own most drugs and consumer prices skyrocket.

If it brings more competition ad reduces our prices? I'm all in.

"Users were apparently willing to tolerate a degree of advertising (which, BTW, is a loooong way from any kind of a pact), but after a point they'll turn the tap off if there are tools available to do so."

The issue is that it's no longer in the hands of the users. It's in the hands of the creators of the Adblock software. They decide what is actually displayed and they even have a white list where a company can pay to get onto it.

This will backfire on the people rejoicing, however. Instead of advertisements on sites, we will see entire advertisements disguised as actual content (which can't be blocked).

Real journalism costs money. Plain and simple. When you take that out of the equation (because Adblock has destroyed many revenue streams), you get articles written on speculation that can be done from the comfort of an office chair.

Online advertisements are one of the only ways a person without a big company can actually make a living. I've never really understood this massive push against it from Hacker news, which is supposed to be about startups and the startup community.

I guess an actual path to profitability is never factored into the equation.

Mysterious deaths surrounding the Hillary/Podesta leaks: a conspiracy theory.

Mysterious deaths surrounding Russia and the DNC email leaks that showed us that they have been colluding with the media to destroy all political opinions: news.

The swamp did need to be drained. We forget so quickly (or bury) all of the damning emails from the DNC. The collusion with the press to destroy Bernie Sanders and all of Hillary's enemies, the fake protesters they hired, the racist and sexist terms they used throughout different party communications while at the same time excoriating anyone that they think is racist or sexist.

We also can't forget all of the blood money HRC and her husband have received from the financial industry over the years for their speeches and favors. And in her own words, HRC was also against marijuana in all forms (this can be found in her emails).

The Russian hack scandal, which really had no conclusive proof, was just a distraction away from the message (the corrupt and horrible DNC) and towards the messenger (the 90s called).

What shocked me was that seemingly intelligent people in the IT and security fields came to the conclusion that because a person has a Russian IP address, they must be physically located in Russia or working for Putin. I've been on a computer since I was 12 and know that this is bullshit. It's trivial for someone to: obtain a Russian IP address, use the Russian language to type out a message or email, and make references to Russian political figures and history (this was all the 'conclusive' evidence).

I also find it ironic that my local station (and many other news organizations) for weeks were showing a ballot box and implying that the Russians hacked the election through some sort of voter fraud. Yet, when Trump wants to investigate voter fraud, those same news organizations said there is absolutely none.

..and then I have to ask the question: Why are we listening to the same assholes that colluded with the DNC (the mainstream media) to destroy Bernie Sanders again?

I find no problem with temporarily banning immigrants from those countries until we have a better vetting system in place. It's actually one of the more intelligent things Trump has suggested.

Obama, for instance, put a temporary ban on citizens from Iraq (many other presidents have done the same thing). The difference is that he was seen as a god and the press wouldn't dare write something that would disparage him. Most people probably didn't even know about the ban.

However, I do have a problem with banning green card holders and travelers coming back to the US. There also needs to be some time to think things through and figure everything out with Homeland Security.

If this ever actually came to fruition, it would be a disaster.

No Federal funding from the United States, The Republicans would pretty much win any future US election because the Democrats are losing major electoral college votes, and there would be a mass exodus of business owners and anyone with considerable wealth.

Within a few years, it would become a country not unlike Mexico.

You can also add the huffington post and salon to your list.

What happened was that the newspaper/media industry was gutted when social media became popular. Most people, especially under 40, are unwilling to pay for news that they can just get from a Tweet.

Because of this, they can't pay to send a journalist overseas anymore. Most news has become conjecture, rumors, and anything that can be done in the comfort of a nice office.

Nearly all large, independent news organizations (Breitbart, Huffpo) were started by wealthy individuals with a political axe to grind. The rest have been grandfathered in from before the days of social media (CNN/Foxnews) and can survive based on pure momentum.

We need real journalism again.

"In 2015, according to PSZ, the richest 1% of people in America received 20.2% of all the income in the nation. Ten points of that 20.2% came from equity income, net interest, housing rents, and the capital component of mixed income. "

How can you possibly equate this to UBI? Everything listed here is money earned through risk/work. UBI is a free check from the government.

I'm not surprised.

Medium is just a glorified blog site. Online newspapers have a near impossible time breaking even, and medium is no different.

Not to mention the fact that most of its clientele probably uses ad-blockers.

It would be better to turn Medium into a sales funnel for their own premium products and ditch the ads. They have massive amounts of traffic, there are plenty of creative ways to utilize this and turn it into an actual business.

But, it might already be too late to save it.

Why does this article keep getting flagged?

No, it didn't work. The idea of cutting the hours was that overall, there would be a savings because the nurses would take less sick leave and it would improve patient care.

While there was some improvement, it didn't actually save any money and now costs more money from the government and to hire more staff to cover the work that needs to be done.

Money is finite. They can't just get it out of thin air. If the goal was to save money and that didn't happen, they didn't reach their goal.

My cousin in almost in your position exactly (and is a software developer).

Stage 2 colon cancer, has a tumor, they couldn't remove it and is now undergoing chemotherapy.

This all happened 3 years ago. His tumor is still there and he's on his second round of chemo.

I visited him many times and some weeks are better than others. Sometimes he's great and can work a few days a week. Other times, he's so sick from the chemo, he's bed-ridden for weeks at a time.

"Nah. Trump gamed the process in more ways than one through the electoral college"

The electoral college is now considered 'gamed'? This has pretty much been how a president is elected since the United States was founded. If Hillary or Bernie were actually trying to get the popular vote, their campaign trails would have looked much different. They were trying to 'game' the system too (but failed).

"and actively encouraging foreign intervention in our election."

Hillary had 30,000 missing emails and Trump made a joke about Russia. Jokes aren't supposed to be taken seriously. We also still have no proof Russia hacked anything. I have access to IP addresses in Russia. It doesn't mean I'm in Russia or Russian. I will believe it when I see the proof.

"I don't recall any other candidates doing anything remotely similar to what he's done."

You mean like when Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton blame both the wealthy and white people for all of our country's problems?

"Bigotry is different than dissuading others from supporting Trump(who is a bigot)."

Trump isn't a bigot. Many of the 'bigoted' things that you see in the mainstream media were completely taken out of context or were outright lies. I watched his live speeches and then saw the resulting media coverage. It was ridiculously bad.

Is Trump going to be a good president? Only time will tell. He's not even in power yet.

I'm glad you feel it's okay to be bigoted against a person as long as it's not on the list of protected classes.

Many on HN love to smoke weed. Would it be okay, in your opinion, if all companies got together and had mandatory, monthly, drug tests, and fired anyone that had any level of THC in their system?

After all, the government can only give you the freedom of speech, right? (this is the argument I keep hearing when someone wants to be bigoted against another (usually on the left) after the Trump election)

When you start to encourage the singling out (and generalizing) of people based on things such as political opinions, it creates a world where you lose your freedoms and the only people that come out on top are the wealthy and those in power.

This is like trying to beat up your dad because you don't like what he has to say..even though he is paying all of your bills and feeding/clothing you.

Funny how so many people are against bigotry on HN (I constantly see articles about it). Yet, it's perfectly fine to be bigoted against someone that goes against your political beliefs.

Generalization and bigotry will only bring us 8 years of Trump. This sort of behavior is exactly why people voted Trump into power in the first place: instead of actually having civil conversations and understanding the opposition, you attempt to silence and destroy your opponents through passive-aggressive tactics, shaming, lying, and laws.

Learn from your mistakes and we might have better leaders in the future.

I just added 2FA through Google Authenticator on my centos 7 box. It's not that straight forward and I had to compile everything from multiple github repos, but it works pretty well.

Fantastic. Let's arrest the victims of crimes and give the thieves a medal.

"They see how meaningless their lives are, and how they try to use the markers of status and prestige to pretend otherwise."

How are millennials any different? Social media is mostly used my millennials to show off to others and to make themselves feel important.

Baby boomers aren't trying to become Youtube stars.

"Millennials want to be a part of something they find meaningful. Their work needs to matter, both to them and to the world."

The problem with this mindset is that they want something that will immediately matter. When you are 20 and with virtually no experience, you will not be given this sort of responsibility and achieving it yourself is next to impossible.

"In 2011 alone, almost 30% of entrepreneurs were Millennials"

So, 70% weren't? Am I reading this statistic correctly?

"Millennials build companies they find meaningful, and are only fulfilled when they believe they’re adding value to the world, not just making the rich richer."

This is actually a reason why many founders fail. Money is the life blood of any company and will allow you to keep creating great things that can help the world. This money has to come from somewhere. If your company can't sustain itself, you are presumably getting money from non-millennial investors.

"Study something you don’t care about in college, because it looks good on a resume."

Most boomers I know gave me the same advice: study something in college that you enjoy, but also make sure you can get a job doing it. If you don't enjoy it, you won't last very long in the work force. If you study something that you are passionate about, but you will never actually be able to pay it back, you are taking a huge gamble (and will be saddled with debt for many years).

"Apply for a safe job with a career path that is clear and structured."

I run my own company. I was in the corporate world for almost 8 years before I quit and started my business. I think it's better to actually see how a successful corporation functions before attempting to create your own and make many unneeded mistakes.

"Give away your twenties, thirties, and forties grinding yourself into oblivion for your company"

How is making it on your own any different? As the old saying goes: I work 60+ hours a week, so I don't have to get a job working 40. Running your own company is more difficult and you will spend many more hours 'grinding'.

I have have found that many people (millennials included) love the idea of starting their own company, but either aren't willing to put in the work or don't realize how much work is actually involved. Unless you start out with lots of money, you will be doing all of the lower-level jobs yourself.

"Their success is 100% contingent upon how valuable they make themselves to their employer"

If you have investors, your value is 100% contingent on how valuable you make yourself to the investors.

If you have customers, your value is 100% contingent on how valuable you make yourself to your customers.

This idea of making yourself valuable doesn't change. It's pervasive throughout life and the most successful people bring a high level of value to the right people.

"They believe that young people should be queuing up for these soul crushing admin positions, because they WANT people beneath them."

Companies aren't out to get you. They hire you for a position where you can bring the most value, based on your experience and skill set.

Do you really think you can't learn ANYTHING from and admin job?

"Millennials are succeeding precisely BECAUSE they are rejecting the system that Boomers built their lives around."

I'm not sure why you think they are succeeding. Living with your parents at 35 with no career, business, or assets is not a success.

"getting in on the bottom of the ladder in the hopes of someone else rewarding you is the opposite of taking ownership"

What get-rich-quick scheme are you talking about? This is how life works. Nobody is going to just hand over power to you. You need to earn it.

"Ads disable the concept of people paying for something they consider valuable"

Nobody pays for news anymore, so sites are forced to get money through ads. The concept that everything needs to be free has also led to the abundance of advertisements.

"You only need facts and journalism to build trust with your customers so they might consider paying you directly."

In the past 5 years, many local, paid, newspapers have gone out of business. It nearly destroyed the entire industry. People don't pay for news anymore because of the Internet. It had the same shakeup the music industry had a decade ago.

I seriously doubt you would be happy paying a fee for every website you visit. This is what would need to happen if we get rid of advertising completely.

I feel like many people want it both ways: a quality product for $0 dollars and no advertisements of any kind. It's just not realistic.

'ghosting' happens because our world these days is way too litigious. Any type of rejection email or phone call could be used in a lawsuit against the company or recruiter.

People hate to be rejected for any reason and many just want the person/company rejecting them to suffer.

This isn't anything new. It's been happening for as long as I've been working (30+ years) and probably even before this.

Which companies are getting this 'extra money'? Certainly not the journalists or news organizations.

"but that in no way incentivizes them to do "real journalism""

Sure it does. If you actually have the money to send a journalist out and get a better story than the next person, you will. This is how it worked before the advent of severely diminished returns in the news industry.

In fact, most popular news sites today are owned or funded by extremely wealthy individuals that use it to push their own political agendas. This is because it's almost impossible to run a news business without this sort of capital. If there was a way for anyone to potentially make a decent living with advertising, this would change.

"Bullshit has better ROI than truth, and that's why there's so much of it."

I won't argue with you there. However, real journalism should have a competitive advantage. It doesn't because it's too difficult to make enough to pay real journalists. Our news landscape now consists of wealthy individuals that spew politically biased news (Breitbart, Huffington post), fake news sites, and the already established big players that don't need the funding because they already have decades of momentum.

Adblocking didn't teach the ad industry anything. It is a ham fisted approach that now only hurts the businesses that don't pay up:

http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/02/over-300-businesses-...

These extortionist tactics don't give me any confidence that ad blocking is even being done for the right reasons. It's just a roadblock setup to make the Adblock companies money through force.

Adblocking has indirectly created many of these fake news sites we see today and will only create a more cluttered and product-filled user experience.

Most news sites rely only on advertising for income. Real reporting and investigation costs money. Since their main money source is now drying up, news is starting to become hearsay, rumors, and things you see on Twitter (anything you can find from the comfort of an office chair). This quickly leads to a race to the most clicks, which may or may not be factual.

We also are now starting to see blogs and many other news sites switch from advertisements on the side or top (which can be blocked) to entirely sponsored articles written around a product or service. We've always had sponsored articles, but not as prevalent as it is now.

Real journalism costs money. When you remove the only way to fund it, we end up with what we have now: fake news passing as real journalism and fake articles which are actually advertisements.

What happened to the moratorium on political links on HN?

Mr. Robot may be technically correct, but I couldn't get past a few episodes of the first season.

Comically bad/cliche companies that are polluting the earth, killing innocent people, and robbing the poor. A closeted gay, masochist antagonist and a smug, patronizing protagonist that regularly demeans the people around him and feels they are less intelligent than himself. This was all in the first few episodes.

I assume the characters and plots have changed since the first season, but not by much.

I felt like the writers were ignored in high school and used the show as a way to passive-aggressively get back at their perceived enemies.