deadringerr

This article was captivating. Not the normal HN experience but I'm so glad it was posted here.

Cool idea - Having to work with sensitive data, it'd be great to have this functionality without importing/uploading to the internet.

Absolutely! Children of Men is one of my all-time favourite movies.

Instagram, you say? Go on...

I think it's when they first enter the building and droplets of water get on the camera lens but are quickly removed in the next couple of frames.

Personal anecdote: I've been living without a personal car for 4 years now thanks to my city's dedication to public transportation, choosing to live close to where I work, and using literally every car share service available when the need arises. The only part of driving itself I consistently enjoy is listening to my music louder than normal. If I buy a car in the future it will absolutely be entirely electric and have autonomous functionality.

I agree with you, phone companies have developed a planned obsolesce model that is very frustrating. I actually just went through the same process in the opposite direction - I switched from having iPhones to Android. I've heard tales of iPhones staying capable and functional for many years but my experience was that after a year or two there'd be an update that drastically reduced the performance (or rendered it basically unusable which happened 3 times). I suppose the grass is greener on the other side but I'm pleased so far with my switch. Good luck.

I wouldn't say totally unfamiliar, but I suppose I'm biased to my own understanding.

Correct, Republican appointees did support and continue to reaffirm constitutional protections for abortion rights. However, it is not clear to me that the Republicans making those appointments made a clear statement vowing that they would appoint those who would be in favor of removing Roe v Wade [0]. The seat currently open will be unlikely to overturn Roe v Wade regardless of who was appointed. However, should Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Kennedy, or Stephen Breyer leave the court (All >=78yrs) [1] and be replaced by Trump's appointees. I understand it's not an immediate ability with the appointment of one justice in that favour, but there's still reason for concern.

[0] http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/19/trump-ill-appoint-supreme-cou...

[1] http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-trump-supreme-court-2016...

Right. I think we can agree here that fewer actual /discussions/ take place in support of shouting matches and veiled spite. I don't think that is constructive for anyone and, in my opinion, this is a technique cultivated by the fringes of the political spectrum made popular as well as easier than ever before.

If opinions are voiced in a respectful manner with the goal of achieving an understanding between those who think differently rather than a victory then the responses you receive are absolutely unacceptable, at least to me. I do hope you'll understand how someone can be wary to unquestionably validate generalizations about anyone, including liberals, without being provided much insight to the specific statements or situations that have preceded them. I personally respond well to self-reflection, as I find it important to keep mental context for my own emotions and motivations. From our conversation, allow me to offer some: I don't make the negative statements you've experienced but I have not dismayed them, not seeing them as equal to pain evoked from other derogatory statements like ethnic/gay slurs. Part of this is because my experience includes those derogatory statements coming from the mouths of those rural Americans so there is some "logical" motivation behind the statements being thrown back in their direction. Respect was not received, respect is not provided, and now here we are, worse off than before. Now aware of this, I will not enable a platform for those comments to be made regardless of the situation.

Right, I was supporting your argument by providing one historically consistent potential reason for endorsement from that segment of the population.

Yes, the number of followers for Trump on various social media were substantial but might not be reliable figures [0] due to bots. I'm sure Trump isn't alone with the use of bots, but so far analysis shows that many bots were being utilized as part of his campaign.

[0] http://www.wired.co.uk/article/twitter-bots-democracy-usa-el...

This is probably true, and why Oregon just passed Outdoor School for All [0]. It's not exactly the same as scouts and guides but it is a guaranteed week-long outdoor education to every student in Oregon.

[0] http://www.outdoorschoolforall.org/

In my opinion, hypocrisy is like cherry-picking data. It exists to validate your potentially false claims or misguide those viewing your results. Sometimes it's intentional and other times it is innocent. Sure, the results of the election shows that perhaps hypocrisy, at least the kind shown about the email servers, wasn't a deciding factor this time; however, should the hypocrisy turn into distinct lies and reveal any intended misguidance, I do hope it regains importance.

I'm sorry, I wasn't clear - You've had in person arguments with self-proclaimed liberals (strangers, friends, or otherwise) that all resulted in calling you names rather than continuing a civil discussion? And you have additionally not seen self-proclaimed republicans do similar?

I'm making the distinction of in-person discussions only because I do think sweeping negative statements have been made on both sides incessantly for years, but nowhere nearly as toxic or shameless as from the safety of anonymity. If that's the major source of "seeing both sides" for the public majority, seeing venomous Tweets and dismissive Facebook posts, it's no wonder that we're dealing with such a schism of understanding and fundamental respect.

I see your point, but, based on your portrayal of your opponents, you appear to be arguing primarily on the internet. Or are you seeing similar short-sighted arguments in person with friends, strangers, family?

There's plenty of software engineering roles available to in the energy efficiency industry and more to come.

I was thinking about this as well. I just learned about the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact[0], which would at least cover situations (like this election) where electoral vote results that don't jive with the popular vote.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Intersta...

This is probably my biggest frustration with Trump. Based on his campaign, I don't anticipate him being receptive to any form of accountability.

Okay, this was the first time I laughed today. Thank you.

They didn't try at all. Unfortunately, someone has to do it. I'm still working up the strength, too.

The Hispanic population is still overwhelmingly Catholic[0]. There will always be sway when abortion is on the table.

[0] http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/08/upshot/even-as-hispanics-l...

Interesting - This is opposite my experience. The conservative party on social issues has been almost synonymous with Christian beliefs as long as I've been alive. Many discussions around modern social issues (abortion, same-sex marriage) have boiled down to being called a "sinner", which I consider name calling, and a fundamentally impossible to argue with and actually entirely based on emotion (faith). This is not a situation I have faced with all or even most Republicans, but when I have faced the situation, it was with a Republican.

I'm with you word for word. And on top of all this self-doubt and soul-searching, I can't help but think that, should the roles have been reversed, we wouldn't be given the same level of credit we're affording to the "angry, illogical right". As long as we're the ones who are trying our best to support all of humanity, I think our heads and hearts are in the right place - Our expression of these ideas could use work.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I believe you misunderstood the parent post. They were pointing out the hypocrisy of caring about unprotected email servers now while not caring when it was done by a member of the same party. I don't believe the parent comment was saying that unprotected email servers are a-okay, just voicing frustration at the hypocrisy of the Republican party on that particular issue. It's possible that it is not hypocrisy, that an entirely different set of people were Republicans during Bush than those who are upset at Clinton's email controversy now; however, I don't believe that is the case.

You're right, my comment was hyperbolic and too tongue-in-cheek to not be called out. TV shows do employ people, that's certainly inarguable and, the season ends with employment of the winner, regardless of how inaccurate the job description. I personally don't find any reality TV shows constructive other than propping up their own market.

Yes, this is interesting. I'd like to see some version of this (or range voting as referred to in another comment) implemented in a state and the reactions of the population - if voters felt like this more properly reflected their opinion.

No problem, I understood what you meant. :)

He had an entire TV show about firing people. He appears to prefer to destroy rather than create.

I think I see what you're saying, though you might have meant that those who voted "for" Clinton would have rather voted "against" Trump. It's true, all variations would see votes and I think that would speak better to who actually had a larger base of people truly voting "for" the message of a candidate.

You're correct - I am directly negatively affected by Supreme Court nominations that favour the removal of Roe v Wade, legal same-sex marriage, and the Affordable Care act. I will not be laid back.