HN user
Race is one of those meaningless divisions that the globalist elites want people to think about at all times. As much as the "progressives" claim to be "anti-racist", it's they who turn every single interaction into a lecture about race.
It's obvious why they want to suppress the idea that disregarding race is a positive thing. How else would they be able to continue their race grifting?
I will make it a point to use all of the "harmful language" in that article as much as possible from now on.
I will not blindly follow these nonsensical rules. They're so lame. I may start a fatwa against them. I will only bury the hatchet if they agree to scrap these rules and never speak of them again.
Also, I'd like to visit the Philippine Islands someday soon.
Too many parents have basically abdicated their responsibility towards their children these days. I don't know when it started, but it has really made out society so much worse.
They are afraid to exercise actual control over their children. They are afraid to pass on their values for fear of 'suppressing' their child's individuality. They turn their children over to government schools without even a moment's concern to see what is being taught (more like indoctrinated) to their children. And then, even when they recognize that something is wrong, so many of them are more concerned with how they will look to the outside world if they react the way any rational person would react.
They're doing so much harm to their children by shirking their duty to protect and guide their children.
I'm not really sure what the issue is. Advertising of any kind is notorious for having to suspend disbelief.
Also, I don't know if he thinks that people will see the ad and then go buy a kayak and jump in the water without having done any research or gotten any guidance about kayaking. I'm pretty sure the first brochure or article you read about 'kayaking for beginners' is going to include the safety information that he thinks is lacking in the ad.
In short, it's an advertisement. It's not a how-to.
I've read all of the Frank Herbert Dune books. I've been meaning to start on the remaining Dune books.
I think the thinking machines will find a way to send a machine back through time to stop the uprising. An Eliminator, so to speak...
Yes, but when I tried, it was kind buggy. May have improved since then.
I've been using FreeTube for quite a while now. It's great for subscribing to channels that you don't necessarily want to infect your regular YouTube feed and recommendations.
"In fact, in terms of avoiding misinformation, Pool is as inadequate for the task as citing Ben Shapiro or Alex Jones."
Or any of the numerous corporate media (MSNBC, NY TIMES, CNN, FOX NEWS, etc.) that have clearly been spreading misinformation for donkey's years.
I'm not criticizing for calling 911 for help, but wouldn't have calling another local hospital been a better option? The fire chief sending over his staff potentially leaves him short staffed. I can't imagine that a local fire department has that many people to spare.
You don't have to destroy it, per se, just, in the immortal words of...somebody, make it small enough so that you can drown it in a bathtub.
There are places to go. For replacing Google products/services there is Nextcloud. For search there is Brave search, among others. For Android there is plain AOSP which many privacy ROMs use.
Ian Crossland is that you?
There is a considerable backlog of civil court cases throughout the country due to a mysterious virus of unknown origin.
I'm not "trying to discredit", I'm pointing out the hypocrisy.
A man can't own a company because he's a "sexual harasser", but I'm sure many of you did/would vote for Bill Clinton, Joe Biden, or Andrew Cuomo. All "sexual harassers". Just shows how much this is actually about Elon Musk's morals as opposed to just hating him because he said that censorship is bad.
You know how a little old grandma will have a Trump yard sign out front of her house and anyone on the left who sees it will say "she must be a transphobic bigot"?
It's that level of evidence.
"he allies himself with other problematic people like Joe Rogan"
He what?! There should be a law against allying with problematic people (and, by problematic, I of course mean someone who does nothing more than ask questions that should never be allowed to be asked).
I think the comments here should tell you all you need to know. The reaction to Musk is your typical virtue signaling.
Mind you, 90% of the people complaining about Musk for things like "spreading conspiracy theories", "misinformation" or being a "sexual harrasser" have almost certainly voted people into political office who have all done the same thing.
Preemptive lawsuit's. To further tie up an already overburdened legal system.
I like how you think, my man.
"Musk has a history of not complying with legal obligations unless forced to..."
In that case, Musk sounds very much like every government, business, politician, friend, family member and neighbor I've ever known.
In other words, that's how the world generally works.
I'm generally in camps 1 and 2. I don't think I'll ever get to the point where I just don't vote.
"Hunter Biden's laptop isn't news. It is a US-centric celebrity story."
Hunter Biden's businesses dealings are not "U.S. centric" and Hunter Biden is not a celebrity (except maybe in addiction recover centers). They involve allegations that the son of a sitting VP (at the time), who had absolutely no experience in the energy sector, used his father's influence to obtain hundreds of millions of dollars in business dealings with Chinese and Ukrainian energy firms. That involves allegations of international corruption. Including having a prosecutor removed who was investigating one of the businesses tied to Hunter Biden (you know, the famous Joe Biden story about how he told Ukraine to fire the prosecutor or they would not receive a billion dollars in U.S. aid).
"Thus all reporting on it was tabloid style sensationalism."
Except the reporting was not tabloid style sensationalism. It was actual investigative reporting that the media tried to CONVINCE people was "tabloid style sensationalism".
If you'd like to see how the media worked to convince you that the whole story was just "sensationalism", take a look at how the NY Times repeatedly dismissed everything that was being said before the election (when they called the laptop "unsubstantiated"), but then earlier this year (when it could no longer hurt Biden's chances) finally admitted that at least some of the allegations are likely to be true: https://nypost.com/2022/03/17/the-times-finally-admits-hunte...
But my suspicion is, you really wouldn't care in the slightest if Joe and Hunter Biden are actually corrupt.
"Most western media (Murdock/Berlusconi type oligarch media aside) is fairly factual. It doesn't have 'spin' or 'agenda' in the sense that the journalists conspire to mislead..."
I have a hard time believing that anyone can be this naive. We're you paying attention the last two years?
When journalists lied, suppressed and told everyone that Hunter Biden's laptop from hell was 'Russian disinformation" and refused to even investigate whether the claims that it had been verified by people with actual knowledge of Biden's dealings were true, how is that not journalists conspiring to mislead?
"...and everyone really good is leaving the company."
Then all of those people should have absolutely no problem finding another job.
As for Musk and Twitter, it's been such a cesspool and a biased bubble of groupthink that I think many outsiders (i.e. your average user) is willing to give Musk a chance at doing what he thinks needs to be done.
"People are completely within their rights to be intolerant up to the point where their intolerance does harm to others."
We're talking about speech. Speech is not "harm". Nobody cares about your hurt feelings.
The limitations on speech in the U.S. occur when the speech directly results in ACTUAL harm (again, not just hurt feelings). That's why the U.S. has the most expansive speech protection of any country in the world. I can deny the Holocaust as much as I want. I can call mock "trans" people as much as I want. Because, again, your hurt feelings don't matter when you're talking about protecting speech.
"So again, a proper independent judicial instance whose mission is to examinate evidences and make a choice after a fair trial."
So if an "independent judicial instance" decided that you or your organization should not be allowed to criticize an election result or election process because doing so would be "a threat to a free and democratic society", you would accept that?
I don't see why you think that everyone should be blamed for what a handful of others do. Their crimes are not my crimes. That's not the way a free society works.
Also, mocking "trans" people is not a gateway to murder. I mock "trans" people all the time and I've never murdered one or even thought about doing so.
I agree. The marketplace of ideas and opinions should be protected to the greatest extent possible. Restrictions should be limited to things such as actual threats, doxxing of private information, and illegal content.
Otherwise, allow people to use the block, mute, and unfollow buttons as they see fit as a form of personal moderation.
"I’m pretty sure trans people are a protected minority in most jurisdictions. So you are wrong. The judicial system has evaluated that—for some valid reason; according to our laws—mocking trans people is worse then mocking cis people."
lol I don't know what "jurisdiction" you're living in, but "mocking trans people" is in no way a legal matter in the U.S. I can mock "trans" people as much as I want and there's not a damn thing you or the government can do about it as long as I am doing it on my own dime and on my own time.
Lots of people are publicly mocked on Twitter everyday. What makes "trans" people so special?