tene80i

Yes I'm with you culturally speaking (British). I suppose the difference I see here is this is a forum for the exchange of ideas, not a social space where there are other, more important factors at play e.g. the maintenance of friendships, of having a pleasant evening etc. I think as with everything there has to be some judgment, but if someone brings up Grok, for example, I don't think Elon's politics are _irrelevant_ to the discussion, unless the discussion is literally "Let us all now turn to the question of memory architecture" or what have you. But if it's just sharing a link, then to me the implied discussion space is quite broad.

Well you wrote "forum/discussion". My apologies for not quoting you verbatim.

And I am not advocating for anything. I am pointing out the contradiction of the proposal to ban politics on topics that are politically charged. It is not a neutral act. You can still try to ban politics if you like! But everyone else also gets to decide that.

The guidelines do not say "do not discuss politics". They say no political or ideological battles.

And no-one is talking about inserting politics into every discussion. You have no idea how often the people mentioning it on this page are mentioning it elsewhere. The parent commenter is taking the more radical view, which is to ban it from the space entirely.

If there's a group to discuss ice cream, but they keep talking about Trump, it's not a "political act" to say "hey guys, aren't we here for ice cream?"

Depends who is selling the ice cream.

You're right about neutral/hopeless. I meant "happy" in the sense of "OK with / resigned to let exist". Not necessarily "this is great".

The meat-eating morality point I think is also an interesting example. It could affect you negatively, but they strongly believe it to be immoral and are witnessing you committing what they believe to be an immoral act, so should they be forced to be silent on the subject? Why? Whose beliefs and preferences win? If they're your friends, you reckon with the issue and ideally come to a space of agreement or cordially agree to disagree. Or your mind is changed! Or theirs! But if the groups dig in ("We can't let this go", "We just want to eat meat and not feel bad about it") then that's a friendship-ending juncture, isn't it? Or you agree not to share that sort of space/context any more. But it's also different with friends vs an open space, which this is.

No, the parallel would be an atheist saying "I don't want anyone in this room to mention God".

Telling people not to be political is a political act – specifically, one that accepts whatever comes, doesn't care about power, is happy with whoever rules whom and how justly. Those are your politics, or at least sufficiently so that you're happy to park those issues while discussing tech. They aren't everyone's. You can turn off the non-technical comments by ignoring them.

"Something went wrong." Long X posts seem to be totally inaccessible if you're not an X user.

You phrase this as if it’s absurd. Why should it be possible to offshore your future capital gains without paying an exit tax? You live in a country with a tax system that assumes people pay into it.

The ranking isn’t published by the newspaper - it’s by the research and insights B2B company of the overall group. Regardless of what assumptions you have about the newspaper (elite, yes, but I’m unclear on why you think fierce liberalism is likely to mean they don’t really value democracy), the B2B unit sells data - they’re as likely to skew this ranking as they are at which countries are better at rail infrastructure. Perhaps their definition of democracy is indeed flawed though - no need to speculate, go read their methodology.

The downvoters are welcome to offer actual counterarguments.

But the parent point was that no British media could be critical of government policy. Picking an example that isn’t, on one area, doesn’t prove their point.

[Edit] Granted though, the bbc isn’t merciless - that’s more the newspapers

Trivially true I suppose, but it doesn’t make my point irrelevant - do you think Britain is equivalent to China and Russia? If everyone does but us then yes my goodness they’ve done a good job controlling us, but that seems far fetched.

Why is it funny? You think British media can’t be critical of the British government? They are famously merciless.

Also, the economist is majority foreign owned, so try doing more than 1 second of research, or be more civil, or ideally both.

If you think Britain and Russia or China are equivalent in terms of government overreach, you need to find new sources of information.

They’re talking about British hate speech laws. They think other countries have universal free speech and they absolutely do not, but for some reason they think Britain goes too far. Although “think” is probably too generous - they’re parroting talking points.

Not sure we think of Banksy as being particularly subtle. Innovative and impactful, sure - but the message is usually quite clear, no?

It’s a peer reviewed study in one of the world’s top science journals. It’s not some random person on a podcast.

A lot of engineers find it difficult to conceive of product and design (and marketing, and management…) as actual skilled work. It’s all con artistry orbiting engineering.

Skills frameworks are great. Your mentee can rate themselves at different levels across different competencies. You can have a discussion about where you see them differently on any areas. You can agree, based on your experience and their ambitions, on what growth areas they ought to focus on in the coming months /year etc. The structure really helps, as does putting it partly on them. People are often not bad at rating themselves if there are clear skill level descriptions.

Ok great. I would frame your product in those terms. It’s not an abstract feature - it’s an improvement on job boards! Sounds like a promising idea.

True but what about existing job boards? They also mean you don’t have to go to every company website. Is this approach better than that?

The way to think about this is: what user (jobseeker) need does this solve, or make easier? What does the user currently do, and why is this better?

You’ll find that a pretty unpopular attitude around here (hence the downvoting on your comment, and I assume mine shortly), but you are right.

In the UK? Over 85% of people have a passport.

It looks retro! Seems spot on if that’s what you’re going for. Looks like a hand rolled forum from the 90s. No UI problems if that’s the vibe!

RSS is a useful interface, but: "Do most people just want direct alerts?" Yes, of course. RSS is beloved but niche. Depends who your target audience is. I personally would want an email, because that's how I get alerts about other things. RSS to me is for long form reading, not notifications I must notice. The answer to any product question like this totally depends on your audience and their normal routines.

NYT, BBC, Reuters.

How so? You mean businesses vs private individuals filming the street? Or police, for example?

That's quite an antagonistic way to request an explanation, particularly as it seems straightforward:

If you needed consent to film people in the street, security cameras (in public places) couldn't be used. They _are_ used. So it must not be the case that you need consent to film people in the street. Assuming there is not just widespread lawbreaking, I suppose.