ceol · HackerTrans

12 年前議論

If you wanted to prove someone has talent, you would point to them pushing out noteworthy things on a consistent basis. Sure, someone can be very talented but have only a single thing to their name, but it's just as likely they got lucky.

ceol

12 年前議論

That wasn't a blog post. It was an About page for a product. It's essentially the product's description.

ceol

12 年前議論

> Minecraft was grown out of the way Notch works.

I'd say Minecraft was grown in spite of the way Notch works. The way he works has been the bane of a lot of modders, who are (arguably) the reason his game is so successful.

> In my opinion the important part is that you are doing something meaningful to you as an individual. [...] ...the world would be so much better off if we just had everyone doing this.

You can't separate yourself from humanity as a whole. That's like saying your liver should do something meaningful for itself as an organ, and if it ends up helping your body, all the better. We don't work individually. Humans require other humans, and all of our motivations and desires are influenced by this requirement.

Notch may not have begun Minecraft with the larger gaming community in mind, but he certainly continued development in some small part because of it.

ceol

12 年前議論

Wouldn't Tramadol be classified as a psychotropic just by virtue of it inhibiting your central nervous system?

As someone who takes Tramadol for pain, it does have an odd effect when I'm tired: I find I become less tired, as if the Tramadol is making me ignore my fatigue. Oxycodone, on the other hand, causes me to be more drowsy. This might be what the farmers are talking about.

ceol

12 年前議論

I'm not sure if you're joking, but opiates are grown from opium poppy plants, so that would be a good place to start if you actually wanted an abundance to feed to animals. Tramadol, however, is an opioid, which is a term that encompasses both opiates and synthetic opiate-like drugs -- of which Tramadol falls in the latter.

ceol

12 年前議論

> This is a case where two people did something unusual in a work environment and garnered the attention of their coworkers. That's expected.

Did this ever say it was in their office? All it said was they were hula-hooping to some music and the response from the bench-full of male employees was embarrassing. If it were outdoors, it wouldn't be unusual.

Either way, in what world do you see something out of the ordinary — but not strange — happening at work and line up to gawk at it?

> It's unexpected that you think it necessarily implies sexual objectification.

It's certainly possible for a bench-full of 20-something programmers to sexually objectify someone. Julie was made to feel uncomfortable, and since she's the best eye witness to the event we've got, there's no reason to doubt her testimony.

Not everything needs to be picked apart. Sometimes, if a bunch of guys are gawking at women, that's what they're doing. You don't need to stick up for them.

ceol

12 年前議論

> GitHub's response neither confirms nor denies any part of the story.

Well, they do say:

    We know we have to take action and have begun a full 
    investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective   
    immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, 
    as has the referenced GitHub engineer. The founder’s wife 
    discussed in the media reports has never had hiring or 
    firing power at GitHub and will no longer be permitted in 
    the office.

So it's not like they're completely silent. They said both the referenced founder and employee have been put on leave and the wife, who apparently was allowed in the office before this, is no longer. They didn't flat-out admit to anything, but it's not like they're totally silent.

ceol

12 年前議論

That's unfair to the beanie baby industry. They were actually producing something.

ceol

12 年前議論

You mean like how we made a profit from them?[0]

[0]: http://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list

ceol

12 年前議論

That would be a good analogy if we couldn't transfer money online. But, you know, we can.

The whole point of Bitcoin that's been touted in pretty much every thread, hoisted up by Libertarians like a giant flag, is that it's unregulated. And now, they're all discovering why we regulated in the first place.

ceol

12 年前議論

Yes, all six of the people who use the Windows Store.

ceol

12 年前議論

That really does nothing to disprove my point that people who can't afford movies (either purchasing, or importing, or renting in iTunes) are also extremely unlikely to be able to afford broadband internet and a modern computer and be knowledgeable enough to handle a cloud-based torrent client.

ceol

12 年前議論

If a $20 DVD isn't affordable, $20/mo internet isn't. (I'm also fairly skeptical that your average DVD movie is $20, as though that's the absolute lowest you'll ever pay.) Movies aren't a God-given right, so it's not like you deserve a set amount of movies per month.

Even then, while that situation is certainly more excusable, you're still the minority. That site isn't made for the Eastern European lower class who can't afford to buy a DVD. It's made for folks who have the money (which means they can purchase and maintain a computer as well as a monthly internet connection) but who don't feel like spending it.

Plus, I'm fairly sure iTunes has movie rentals in most Eastern European countries.[0]

[0]: http://support.apple.com/kb/ts3599

ceol

12 年前議論

Yes, it is important, which is why affluent first worlders shouldn't hold them up as poster children for their pet cause of not wanting to purchase things.

ceol

12 年前議論

Let's not delude ourselves into thinking the people who are in group (b) are the ones who have enough money to afford a high-bandwidth internet connection, a modern computer, and the knowledge to know what torrents and the accompanying technology are.

The vast majority of people will be using this to watch movies they don't feel like paying for. There might be a handful who genuinely can't access it, who have no way to legally pay for it outside of handing over a substantial amount of their small wealth, and they paradoxically also have access to an internet connection strong enough and a computer powerful enough that can handle streaming these movies. However, they do not represent the vast, vast, vast majority of users.

ceol

12 年前議論

Because people want to see them. People (as in the general public) really don't care about yet-another Snowden interview, so news outlets aren't going to shell out the big bucks.

ceol

12 年前議論

It's far more likely they're not running it because no one cares. Seriously, the general public really doesn't care. Why would they report on something that's going to make their viewers change the channel?

ceol

13 年前議論

I'm not trolling. I responded to the person sticking up for others and let them know they aren't alone. You should stop claiming anyone who disagrees with you is a troll, Chris; it really doesn't make you look too good.

Likewise, characterizing me as "hateful" because I pointed out how skewed your priorities are is really quite juvenile. You apparently thought it pertinent to grace me with not one but two replies when the other commenter left something objectively more hateful. That says something about yourself. You should take some time to examine why my comment deserved such protest.

ceol

13 年前議論

rds2000 is literally saying that being a man is pitiful and should be shamed, and then argues elsewhere in this very thread that the real problem with our industry are the feminists.

Me thinks he doesn't read what he types.

ceol

13 年前議論

"Credibility"? It's an argument. You either agree with it or you don't.

That was most certainly an ad hominem. It was an attempt to counter a point by attacking the messenger, not the argument. Textbook, really.

コメント