HN user

maallooc

-20 karma
Posts0
Comments139
View on HN
No posts found.

Okay, and that must include the expensive price and environmental concerns of maintaining ESS to ensure energy continuity, the price to run fossil fuel plants to prepare for cloudy days, expanding the power grid to remote solar locations, disposing used solar panels and inverters, chemicals and water to clean the panels, and many other hidden fees to make solar viable, right?

"I don't like Black people drinking from this fountain because they tend to be dirty." was the White's excuse. "I don't like Asians enrolling because they tend to be smart." is their excuse now.

Oh yeah, let's give benefits to Blacks because color. Just like we gave benefits to Whites because color. Because equality, diversity, history, and else. Oh yeah, Asians were in fact the victims by White slave traders but we don’t care because it’s more cool and hip to promote black victimhood.

What is it with the West and their racism? “Let’s defeat racism and social injustice by racial discrimination”? Now that’s worth a chill down your spine!

Why move beyond? I've just had 350g of juicy flat iron steak, produced 7 kilos of co2 and happy about it.

Don't try to boss people around because I'm not buying. Thanks to people like you, I can finally enjoy beef without guilt. Keep up the good work.

It's a difference on how you view human rights. There are people that think not allowed access to the Internet human rights violation. I think not being allowed to post on twitter because you have an unpopular opinion is a violation of free speech.

A law can be added to protect this right like the right to be forgotten. We didn't think the right to be forgotten was even a right that is valuable to protect but here we are.

I don't treat control of the speech that does cross the lines of the first amendment censorship because if it's not protected by the first amendment it's a violation of the law thus it's an act of justice.

Similarly we don't call stopping robbery and murder censorship of our acts.

It is. The supreme court saw that banning nudity in theaters, thus banning specific portion of speech in specific places is not infringing first amendment.

You have your freedom to enjoy nude in your home but not in theaters due to city regulations. That doesn't mean that the city is censoring.