michaelgrosner2

I believe it is Haidt himself who said bringing phones is analogous to a kid in the 90s bringing in a portable TV and putting on a show during class, and no one thinking that it is out of place. Of course it is! As a society we've made the determination that personal TVs and music players are unacceptable in the classroom, but phones, the single most addictive device ever made, is OK?!

My oldest is only 7 right now but I'm also seriously considering middle and high school options for him that severely restrict phone use. We play Minecraft on the weekends, he does MakeCode Arcade coding tutorials, and occasionally gets (heavily supervised) YouTube time. I don't think he's missing out on opportunities to become skilled with computers.

I'm not sure what world you're living in but we've been shooting missiles at Chinese military objects and restricting their access to semiconductors. I have little doubt that if the CIA or FBI had information it was actually a Chinese plot they would have released it by now.

American media

Huh? The previous President of the US frequently called it the "China Virus".

GOP conspiracy to bring down Biden

Biden wasn't President for the first year of the pandemic, not sure how that works out.

Are American progressives so fragile in their identity that they avoid agreeing with conservatives for fear of guilt by association?

I personally don't care whether the virus was man-made or natural. It bares next to zero importance on my life. At the end of the day what are we really arguing about? Lab practices in China? The Chinese should be better about lab safety and wet markets. But there was a pandemic which has killed millions of people. It seems like the people most invested in this question are also the ones most invested in downplaying the pandemic, which is just evil.

It's better to have a terrible 5-6 years dealing with diapers and strollers in your 30s than spend 30 years in your 50s to 80s alone.

I literally only hear that Google search is bad from HN. No one else in my daily life - my family, friends, people out at my gym or grocery store - ever complain that Google search is bad. In fact, Google is still the default for looking up information anywhere. It's sentiments like this that make you realize how much of a bubble HN exists in.

OTOH, people have trouble using GMail, google home, or ban YouTube in their house for their kids. Next to no one uses Android, etc.

You blame journalists of all people? How about him, does he have agency? How about the GOP (I suppose not, putting up con artists seems par for the course)? How about the NY Democratic party for doing zero opposition research?

Not to mention there were quite prominent journalists like Josh Marshall raising red flags about this guy all last year. https://twitter.com/joshtpm

Why is that gross? It's their speech to decide what they want to promote or not promote. Why are you anti-free speech?

"New Twitter policy is freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach.

Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted & demonetized, so no ads or other revenue to Twitter.

You won’t find the tweet unless you specifically seek it out, which is no different from rest of Internet."

How is this any different than Elon's stated goals from 3 weeks ago?

Where does it say he suppressed information? Elon only says he had a “possible role in suppression”. They do say he vetted the information before it was public. For Twitter's sake I hope a lawyer did vet it!

I too love remembering to file a 8949 for all my coffee purchases

so if you have any integrity you'd stand on the side of the right to create some equality/justice

On the one hand, the leading Presidential candidate on the right has within the last 24 hours said he wants to suspend the Constitution and be reinstated President by dictate on social media. On the other hand, some people were constantly posting he was saying mean things, and some executives at a social media company tried to handle some things.

Totally gotta stand on the side of balance!

Step back and think how your position is anti-free speech

This one specifically is pretty strong IMO

That was from October 2020. Biden was not in government then.

It’s not important because it’s not important

None, because the government shouldn’t be interfering in speech.

The Boring Company is not a failure. It's actually a major success, for Tesla. It successfully led a generation of politicians and journalists think that there's no need for public transportation, that Elon Musk will solve all our infrastructure needs. It's a modern day GM Streetcar.

Where’s the consideration for CFs speech? If management doesn’t want to help serve filth, they shouldn’t be compelled to. They’re a private company. It doesn’t even have to be consistent.

You don't even need to toggle any buttons. All those things can be tied to your key, or your phone if you use bluetooth as your key. Climate and A/C is also a preset, just set it to 70 on Auto and never think about it again.

Totally agree. There is so much less interaction required with the controls (whether hardware or software) with a Tesla. I also have a relatively recent Audi Q7 in addition to my Tesla and holy crap the physical dials and buttons are horrible to use in the Q7 compared to the Tesla M3. With the Tesla, all my settings such as my last listened to Spotify station, seat position, auto wiper/lights preferences, etc is saved and I never really have to interact with the screen unless I need to enter in a map destination.

FINRA Series 57, not only because I learned a whole lot or because it’s useful outside of my industry (derivatives trading development) but because it was a regulatory requirement of employment :-). But seriously, I did learn a lot about the wider finance world outside of the little bubble I sit in. It was also quite hard, it covered a wide range of topics that I had no prior knowledge of.

It doesn't matter until the incumbent uses that delay to his advantage by declaring themselves the winner and trying to lead their followers into believing votes counted after that declaration are fraudulent.

Seconded. I live in NJ, too, so any trip to a gas station usually involves waiting quite a bit for a human attendant to pump my gas. At least I don't need an attendant to charge my EV! I don't need to swipe a credit card, I don't need to wait for a pump spot to open, and I don't need to listen to ads playing on a tiny speaker. The EV charging routine is so much better in every way than ICE. Another consideration is that I always have a full 'tank' in my EV, almost every single time I drive. There is no consideration I'll run out of juice during my commute or errands.

In a way I sympathize with RH. If they were truthful that they didn't have enough money, they would have had to publicly admit they couldn't cover the purchases, which could have led to a run on them and everyone pulling out of Robinhood at once. In some ways, pulling the buy button was the best option they had. Too bad they didn't account for the fact that it would spawn a thousand conspiracy theories.

Twitter does not have a free speech problem. Twitter is not the US government, it's a private organization, and has no obligation to allow any speech it does not want on its platform. If it serves the political agenda of some people, that is entirely within it's own free speech right and we should celebrate its ability to, or found new organizations to compete its free speech.

Maybe this is off topic to your comment but every time I see a16z mentioned anywhere near crypto I have to laugh because I remember how big of a deal the "It's Time To Build" essay was only 2 years ago. Instead of building anything of actual use, they pour money into Ponzi schemes.

solve a worthy problem: proof of personhood for crypto

This is a problem? Like I have a SSN, a drivers license, and a birth certificate. These are tools developed already by my local and national government to prove personhood. They are used in a legal context, often. I have never once wished my identity could be involved in a cryptocurrency for any reason.

You realize you're being as misleading and unfair as 'the media' you wanted to criticize, right?

Can you cite an example? A quick google search for 'NPR "the livestock medication Ivermectin"' leads to https://www.npr.org/2021/08/23/1030208101/mississippi-livest... which explicitly states it's a version -formulated- for livestock.

Can you define who "the media" is in your complaints? A quick search for "ivermectin horse paste covid" brings up a bunch of articles from 'mainstream' outlets such as the Washington Post, FDA, and Guardian about how horse owners are frustrated because they cannot find any supply, it's not FDA approved for COVID, and that people have been hospitalized for using it. But nothing about them ridiculing people for taking it calling them horses.

Anyone blaming "the media" automatically gets an eyeroll from me these days. It's really the laziest form of criticism available. People desperately want there to be some left-leaning media consensus that they can bash but in reality usually the person criticizing hasn't been personally spoon fed the information that they are arguing against. The biggest media outlets by industry include Fox News for TV, Joe Rogan for podcasting, Ben Shapiro and Dan Bongino for text media according to Facebook so no there is no monolithic left leaning "media" consensus.