bbrree66

Maybe he was missing a couple things, but it's not far off. Go to college for a major that has high economic value. Continue building your skills after college. Live below your means. I'd like to see data on people who do all of those things and how they end up.

When all you have is a hammer....

It's all about incentives! They make money on ads, the more the better.

Thanks for the response! This really shows the lack of clarity in your thinking. We can review each item quickly:

1. He could honor people doing racial justice work - Does not doing this make someone a racist? Silly. Also, here is a direct quote from February 2020 (see how I use actual evidence) "We’re here with some of the black leaders of our country and — people that are highly respected and people that have done a fantastic job and, for the most part, have been working on this whole situation with me right from the beginning." Does that sound like something a racist would say?

2. He could stop stoking fear of immigrants - This is not a specific example.

3. He could insist on full investigations of police violence toward black people - This isn't the responsibility of the president. If he got involved in police business people would say he is overreaching. This is again a subjective thing you "feel" he could do. The agencies that are supposed to be involved are.

I try to stick with concrete facts to base my opinions on. This has been a great example where you really want to think he's racist because of what you see in the media but have so far provided 0 objective evidence for your claim.

That's literally exactly what happened. Why even ask? What response could you have possibly gotten that would have changed your mind?

I have seen a ton of examples where people think trump is being racist, then I see them, and he's clearly not. I am 100% open to changing my mind, racism is terrible. Please provide specific and clear examples. Calling everything racism really weakens the argument.

You also provide another example of your clouded judgement: "and a handful of examples of him saying the words when a reporter presses him." This type of thinking shows that you just want to confirm your pre-existing idea that he is a racist. When he then says he is not, you say "oh he really is, he was just saying that because he had to". That means there is no possible thing he can do to change your mind.

As I said above, if someone can provide specific examples, and not just of behaviors they don't like but of how they are actually racist, I am more than happy to denounce him. Also, in case you missed it, under Trump (pre-Covid), black unemployment was at an all time low.

See this is what I'm talking about. Can you not see your confirmation bias?

1. Ask for proof 2. Get proof 3. Call it "lip service"

This means that no matter what Trump says, you will say its disingenuous. Do you see how that can be problematic?

Yikes.

This is the real question :) Of course it will be by some far left leaning person. Zuckerberg said they have content moderation and consult with many many groups and the interviewer asked for ONE example of a conservative group they consult with, he had no answer.

Well said :) This is exactly it.

98% of programming these days is scripting

LOL. What a silly comment.

Get as many internships as possible. All that matters.

It's a good question. By garbage here I mean their entire existence is based on wasting people's time and then making money by showing Ads. Their entire incentive structure is to get people as addicted as possible. They are not trying to add value to the world. Also, most people aren't aware of the trade-off they are making (data being sold), or how they are being manipulated, which makes it doubly terrible. Or that there are armies of behavior psychologists trying to get them to spend as much time as possible on the site.

"Good" is a sliding scale here, we each have our own subjective definition. I try to define it as "Is the world a better place because this company exists?" I personally would answer Yes for the companies you listed.

How is that the company's problem?

...... what? This is an example that capitalism does work. If someone wants to live in Random City A then Facebook will still have to compete with the local wages there to get people to work for them. The labor market is supply and demand driven. And of course Facebook decides the wages of their employees, how else would it work? The employment agreement is two sided, if people don't like the offer they can go work somewhere else.

Massive caveat: Facebook is an absolutely garbage company and the world would be better off if they didn't exist. But paying less based on location is reasonable.

+1. All the snowflakes will cry about "unfair" whine whine. And ignore reality. As per usual! There is no logical reason why they wouldn't pay based on location.

"should". Why? Their job is to be as profitable as possible.

Your pay is a function of supply and demand here, not value provided. Working for a company is an opt-in choice, so it's not theft. If you want a better agreement go work somewhere else. And when enough people do that, pay will go up to compete for those people. But if a company can get away with paying less, they will. And arguably, they have a fiduciary responsibility to do so.

My response that got flagged was "This is the only reasonable response in this entire post." Clearly it was being flagged for disagreement to the HN echo chamber. There is nothing offensive or personal in that statement.

You'd have to define that, but I think it's a great and practical solution. As more people find out about factory farming and think through the implications of their purchases, they will continue to switch over.

Please show me the ad hominem. I said I think you may be purposefully misunderstanding, that is not ad hominem

Where did I avoid the fact that people eat meat? And where did I avoid the fact that there are rough deaths in the wild? I addressed it specifically with "let's focus on the suffering that is CAUSED by us."

Stop eating meat is the recommendation because that is the simple solution. That is the rational argument. There is no ethical way to eat meat. I've seen zero counter arguments to that point. How can there be more of a solution? Yes there are logistics involved in getting there but that is the simple and clear solution. Accepting that is step 1, logistics of doing it is step 2. What more do you need than a simple solution?

It's also interesting that you accuse me of avoiding points then write an entire response that completely ignores the factually accurate points I have made.

Stop eating meat.

This is a red herring. Let's start with the suffering that we are purposely creating, in mass. The numbers of factory-farmed animals dying dwarfs anything else.

I'm not sure if you're purposely trying to miss the point or not. Yes, there are no good options for the bad situation we are now in. My point is that we can avoid situations like this in the future. I hope your snarky comment about time travel made you feel super smart! It made me think so.

Yes, I am speaking generally that we can avoid situations like this going forward by not doing it in the first place.

Let's start with the human-created suffering then we can discuss this question.

I'm not sure if you're purposely being silly or what.... But I will spell it out. If people stopped demanding meat, then factory farms wouldn't breed these animals, and the suffering for them would end.

Animals in the wild are not animals that we created. Your argument is irrelevant.

That is illogical. That's like saying: I chopped someone's arm off so the only humane thing is to shoot them. Maybe don't do the terrible thing in the first place (breeding them to be slaughtered), and you won't have this issue.

This is a crazy thought so please keep an open mind........ if we didn't mass produce animals to kill and eat them.... we wouldn't have this issue in the first place.

Please define humane. Killing an animal that doesn't want to die is not humane.