throwaway9324

Since I'm going to give up my HN activities after this I'll humor you with a response.

While the line between amateur and professional sports have been blurred there are still very real differences. Amateur athletes aren't well compensated, but they are protected from the world of contracts, agents, transfers etc.

People give golf or tennis as examples of professional sports where you can struggle as a professional, which is laughable for anyone who knows sports history. These are sports that because of their status has kept a lot of the original characteristics of amateurism in sports (which from the beginning is a status i.e. upper class thing). Countries which have adopted to a modern amateur approach (with government support, non-profit organisations etc) to those sports have also been punching above their weight.

So what is huge difference between e-sports and other professional sports? For one they don't actually own their sport. I'm not a huge intellectual property fan, but in the case of professional sports it's hugely important. It's the basis for most if not all professional sports organisations. Most of e-sports does not make any salary, if they do or even if the don't they are signed to a team which takes part winnings in tournaments. So you have a situation where it's hard to make a living like in amateur sports, but you don't have the support network or limits of the same. At the same time you have to deal with the contracts and incentives from professional sport, but you don't get the benefits of intellectual property deals and major leagues and therefor salaries.

To some degree this is changing, especially in Korea, but it's still more of a business than a sport. Sports at it's core is competition to find out who is the best. You do that by having fairly similar conditions over a longer time. That's what amateur and professional sport organisations do or, at least, should do.

That said I'm not even sure the discussion should be about if e-sports is a professional or amateur sport, but if it's organized enough to be either or for that matter even considered a sport at all. Is chess a sport? How about poker? Or day trading? Fashion modeling?

I find myself having a severe lack of motivation while writing this, but hopefully it made some sense.

College football is amateur i.e. not professional.

You can go down any sport and find divisions that aren't paid very well, likewise you can find obscure sports that consider themselves professional but aren't very well paid either. I find none of this particularly relevant to the discussion. There are huge differences between how e-sport works and how professional sports organisations work and I guess the people who don't believe that will just have to remain ignorant.

SV is already there to some degree. With angel type funding you will spend most of you salary on living expenses which won't return very good quality of life.

I've realized that this is pretty useless to discuss on HN, with downvotes and anecdotal evidence.

This is kind of an exception though when it comes to popular team sports and far as I know E-sport is still far from even those relatively bad pay and terms.

It's plenty of different from other pro sports. The "pro" part largely means getting paid more than it takes to sustain the activity. With some exceptions like pro boxing which isn't exactly a poster boy for ethical practices.

For reference the height restriction in Paris between 1977 and 2008 was 102 feet for the center and 121 feet further out.

I think you're missing one thing though. Recognition makes it possible for more people, which otherwise wouldn't or couldn't, to have that same experience.

I'm not sure how hard it is to say "[copyright claim] is not valid". It's kind of hard to discuss thing if you come up with your own meaning of things.

You guys make me feel old.

http://www.textfiles.com/phreak/BOXES/chrome

Correction, E-3 visa i.e. H-1B for Australians. E-2 is if you want to start a business. Not available to, as in the article, Russians though.

When it comes to visas everyone wants to be special. Unfortunately the international recognized way of being special is having a bachelors degree. If that wasn't a requirement it would probably be even harder skilled workers to get visas. It sounds like if you work a couple of more years you can apply for an E-2 visa and hopefully avoid the H1-B lottery. That is not a bad position to be in. Considering the outlook for someone wanting to immigrate to the US to drive a cab I wouldn't be very bothered by that either.

That isn't really about the "term of protection" though, but rather the validity of the copyright claim.

It's still a copyright issue. Despite what people like yourself say, copyright doesn't do a very good job of protecting creators.

"I just think that its term of protection is long since expired."

Why do you think that, it hasn't been 95 years since 1935, or is that a suggestion?

"I think things like literature, theater, and so on have considerable social utility and don't care for your restriction to industrial applications."

I get that you think that, but it has no basis in intellectual property law. It's entirely the opposite, the more utility something has the less protection it gets.

"I suspect she started out with the thesis [...] are "oppressed""

The article wasn't about being oppressed, so much as being disempowered.

"But they really aren't."

Ok. So why aren't they disempowered in the situation described in the article?

"She mentions women foraging for tubers as a contrast"

What she really said was: "women who contribute to the group or family’s well-being are empowered relative to those in societies where women do not".

"And they don't get to be "empowered" somehow in the bargain."

So again, why don't they get to be empowered (relative to similar societies)?

People havn't been paying attention. This market isn't about selling an 8$ thing for 9, 12 or 15. It's about selling a 1$ thing for 10 and a 4$ thing for 40. Which they probably are with the accessories.

Or just don't live in a police state where cops randomly pull you over, bystanders do nothing and random people come up with excuses.

I fail to see how screening of healthy, relatively young, people would be "data driven".

I can't help thinking that his comments are seen as "channel-flooding" because he has been isolated. Not only is his comment frequently relegated to the bottom of the page, but people who share his opinions[0] either don't frequent HN[1] or end up hellbanned[2]. So before criticizing him for his comment, think about what kind of environment you provide for this conversation.

[0] Which is much more prevalent than reflected on HN and I meet a lot of hackers/makers/entrepreneurs. From Portland to Shenzhen. [1] From what I hear, HN definitely isn't seen as "a place for intellectual stimulation" or conversation outside the people who frequent it. [2] State something against the prevalent HN narrative in your first 10 comments and you most likely end up hellbanned.

What does that even mean? Every encryption system that works is "super-hard". Maybe everyone using SSH is a suspected agent now.

I find this unremarkable. It's good advice for sure and most people would casually agree with it, but it's not consistent with what YC is doing nor preaching. That doesn't give the advice much weight in my opinion.

If there's anything that is class-warfare it's not adopting the very proven model of municipality networks. Of course government doing something good doesn't sit right with 'those who can afford'.

I disagree. People who practice critical thinking, like at least some Humanities courses do, become better at it. I think the idea that things are equally good or bad everywhere in large stems from a lack of practice of/in critical thinking.

I also think people are confused what critical thinking means. It's much more about how you discuss something rather than what you are discussing or what position you take.

Plenty of Americans work without a work permit and overstay their visa.

If there's anything that's worrying it's how eager people are to misunderstand the article in favor of their own preconceived notions. This isn't about competing with SV as a startup hub, but about European companies being about compete with US companies in the local market. Which is a very real problem.

Europe (at least northern) is probably the easiest place in the world to start an Internet company. And we're also quite privileged in our opportunities in the US. If you're not doing one or the other (and want to of course) it's likely mostly your own fault.

"In reality, gentrification is short term bad, long term good."

I would say the opposite. Most of the good effects of gentrification happens in the beginning. Then time becomes a more important factor than gentrification itself. If you can't slow gentrification at that point the bad effects really starts kicking in and you're replacing rather than transforming.

All successful examples of gentrification I've seen is when you gentrify up to a point where regulation gets in the way and then because of that another area starts getting more popular, which then gentrifies up to a point etc...

If you must use an analogy it's a good idea to keep it close to the original act. In this case that could be "accessing the teachers office via keypad". House suggests another level of privacy.

I've always thought that the biggest unfairness in US computer law is that you're judged for what you could have done and not what you did. I think it's largely because those who made these laws where told how dangerous computers are and they couldn't imagine, as a factor of their age, why anyone would do something like this out of curiosity. So you ended up with every computer system being protected and a derogation of freedom at a scale unimaginable in the physical world. The double standard of course becomes very apparent when there's no equal punishment for the keeper of the computer system if a third-party has their data compromised as a result of mismanagement.

I think more of the business potential of these companies require bad things compared to other companies. Most companies have some sort of core business and the things that in part end up being bad for other are second to that. With DIFM companies those things, at least almost, ends up being the core business.

https://www.uber.com/jobs/list

(of course the sector of businesses we are talking about isn't very well defined)

Many of these companies aspire to things that are great for themselves, like controlling markets and integrating vertically, but not so great for everyone else.