Why was it necessary to bring in pronouns to this discussion? It seems like a truly irrelevant dog whistle specifically in order to offend the identity of those that are non-binary. It has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand at all.
I thought hacker news strived to at least have some decorum in regards to discussion.
I 100% agree with this, and it’s why we see a lot of lucky billionaires looking to give back to society. What do you do when you’ve reached the pinnacle of achievement? How can you make yourself happier when you no longer have unmet needs?
You start looking for ways to improve life for everyone else, and focusing on what kind of impact you want to have on the world. What’s something that has caused you or someone you care about a lot of pain? Could you help prevent someone else from going through that, or make it easier somehow? Maybe you can’t achieve something grand like world peace, but you can use your skills to improve education in war torn areas to provide new options, etc.
Start to think of the world as an extension of yourself. After you’ve honed yourself, hone the world.
Did they? I’d argue that the next highest competitor that is competing legitimately would bring just as many eyeballs to the games. People are attracted by watching the best of the best compete — I don’t think the exact score is as important.
Unless you’re talking scandals, and then I guess so? There’s temporarily more eyes on the drama but it quickly drops off.
Yup same here. So many for Shoppers Drug Mart or other silliness. They’re very clearly fake and have all the tell-tale signs of spam that Google used to properly filter for me. I’m very surprised at the recent drop in quality and it’s had me looking at other providers.
Exactly. Most of my family and I cut ties with a family member as she went batshit insane and started thinking the secret police were after her. Started yelling and screaming at all of the family members that eventually cut contact, usually calling them at odd hours in the night. Nothing we did could convince her to get help, and there's no way to force her into care even though she's called the police constantly to report false crimes. (Such as the janitor breaking into her house and rearranging her furniture).
However, she's very cyclical and can act normal ~30% of the time. She's told everyone that we're all drug addicts, or child abusers. Lots of people believe her, and think we all abandoned her. I've had family members call me and reduce me to tears with insults, because of the things she's told them.
From what I've seen anecdotally in every single family where the child has cut contact: there's ALWAYS a (good) reason. It almost always boils down to a failure in respecting their children, and treating them with kindness and understanding.
Younger generations are growing up with better mental health care and social awareness (due to the pervasive nature of it these days with social networks) than previous generations. We grew up in an era of public PSAs and school videos on bullying and acceptable behaviour. We know what's "right", can recognize abuse, and prefer to associate with those that treat us well.
Yeah it's a brilliant game, and quickly became one of my all-time favourites. I've never felt so invested in my player character's personality. I loved it.
However, I'm also confused as to why it's on HN right now. The final edition was released a while ago now, and it doesn't look like there's any recent news.
On top of that, we currently have a grossly overburdened healthcare system that in no way could support this. This presents so many clear problems that I wonder if the people are thinking critically about the long term effects of an unregulated drug market.
1. Knowledge -> How will doctors possibly keep track of the knowledge of all of these new drugs? If they don't need to be verified beyond a claim, they could be getting thousands of options. How do they pick between one drug with no proof, and another drug with no proof -- especially if they all have negative side effects?
2. Data -> All of the data for these drugs will be extremely if not impossible to derive. This will probably result in it taking even longer for evidence of the drug's efficacy to be built.
3. Resources -> Hospitals across North America are understaffed and overworked. How could they possibly find time to not only learn the entire treatment path for new drugs and all the necessary information, but to do this countless times across all their patients? MRI machines are already backlogged quite a bit, do we really think they could weather the storm of an unregulated drug market?
4. Liability -> Whether we like it or not, this adds quite a bit of liability to a hospital. Insurance will absolutely be against this, and would likely greatly increase the number of people trying to sue the hospital.
5. Fallout/Complications -> Can you imagine the strain of the additional complications that arise out of allowing free use of untested drugs? Imagine how much more expensive a patient would be if they got a brain bleed from a medication that they would never have had previously. This isn't just like "I tried a drug and it did nothing", it's more like "I tried a drug that had the potential to kill me. I had severe complications that required me to be in the hospital for 2 months but the drug still did nothing to help my problem."
Effectively, we'd be breaking our own healthcare system by breaking down our regulations. Regulations are written in blood. They're there for a reason.
There's a lot of great arguments presented in the article for why we shouldn't go "balls to the wall on experimentation". The drug costs $56k a year, can cause some severe brain bleeding and swelling, and requires regular MRIs which can put quite a strain (and cost) on the system. These are some significant negatives for a drug that hasn't been proven to be effective at all.
Pretty sure tons of eyelids were batted very heavily at FB when that happened. They got fined, there was lots of news articles that you can still find now.
I don't know why you're trying to create a false narrative here. Collecting biometric data for a social media website is concerning regardless of which specific company it is. I'm not sure why you're trying to bring racism into this topic, when it's not involved.
What's even stranger, is that your position is that no one complained about Facebook. If anything, that's a globally shared activity.
I'd hope it would just be a simple button to "bookmark" the content or program the coordinates into your navigation. Otherwise this seems like the exact kind of distracted driving that most distracted driving laws are trying to prevent.
Honestly the ratings used to be brilliantly accurate. They've been making them less accurate ever since, to the point where I think there's next to no content-awareness going on and it's just purely fueled by marketing initiatives.
Moving is also extremely expensive and isolating. If you can't afford housing, you can't really afford moving either. They can either stay where they have social and charitable connections and maybe irregular work to a place where they have none of that with a much smaller job market. Plus, if you have no home, job or other creature comforts, it's kind of nice to at least be somewhere familiar. It's not surprising people get stuck where they are.
Honestly I'm not sure anyone has an end game here. Someone on UKpolitics posted a basic link to a recent news article and got banned. People are getting banned for mentioning her. This is what most of the controversy is about. They're stifling any discussion of what are quite serious issues, because they hired her. Posting a link to a public newspaper shouldn't be ban worthy. However now that Reddit has been grossly overstepping in their reaction, people are getting very upset about censorship and the perceived conflicts of interest.
I'd argue that it's not Reddit's aggressive moderation, but that Reddit is now so popular that the racist, illegal, fickle beast that can no longer stay on topic. If they weren't so aggressive, they'd have a much bigger problem of everyone thinking they're a cesspool of hatred.
I remember hearing about Jacquard years ago. Given I haven't heard or seen any applications of it gaining traction since the launch leads me to think it's just going to go into the endless cavern of Google Abandonware.
I thought hacker news strived to at least have some decorum in regards to discussion.