thwythwy

"If the Court follows the 10th Circuit, then the public has a chance to determine whether it wants to accept that result." The public already has that chance. This isn't helping. It's based on a flawed theory of change that court decisions provoke successful political backlashes that overturn the decisions. Being able to express yourself in a patrician cadence and couch your arguments in terms Courts understand does not make you a net-sum-positive political actor at the highest level of democratic power. This isn't the right time to bring this.

Got it, will make sure to wait until one comment that expressly does all of the things I mentioned, in an impolite and critical way, to make my point.

And Waymo got a deal from Arizona that waived all sales tax and provided for unlimited free gas?! That's outrageous!!

Alex needs to work way harder on this if he wants 130 bucks, LOL

The only way to please HN is to regulate every company in every industry the exact same way at the exact same time, and to ensure the press reports it all happening at the same time, in the same article, with a neutral headline, and without demonizing anyone. "Regulators Regulate Every Company Equally, Irrespective of Varying Justifications. Companies All Reportedly Good Faith Actors, Say Companies," reports Ars Technica.

who are you quoting and what is going on in your life that this is annoying you

this is sometimes referred to as "overcommunicating" and it's good to give yourself permission to do it. Thanks for sharing.

You get that the government is controlled by politics right? The FCC Chair is quite obviously a political appointment based on politics. ISPs get to dig in the public right of way. They have access to what is a natural monopoly of plugging into peoples' homes. Unprofitable infrastructure? How about the fact that these companies take all their cap-ex and throw it into CONTENT then beg the federal government to allow them to throttle their customers so they can charge for the content. Force indeed.

She also proposes to strike down state laws that prohibit municipal broadband options, and I'm shocked at this point that you're standing by your original comment that she's only regulating Big Tech. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/mbmjja/elizabeth-warren-p...

Long live Delaware! You otherins shant try to come on err land and regalate err corporate forms.

The system has a turnkey solution to this sort of thing. Say I'm sorry. Then reassure us in conclusory fashion you didn't do anything really bad (ignore his prior conviction). Formulaic apology that uses phrases like "allowed him to invest" and "funds were received with my permission" to distance from the problem. "Equivalent" future-facing commitment to fund-raise. Return exactly the amount of money that led to your personal benefit, don't mention any gains on the money. Use the word "again" to reiterate empty message. Ok, everyone, ready to move on?

She put out her broadband plan last week. The lack of competition in your area of the U.S. must have prevented you from loading this webpage: https://www.wired.com/story/elizabeth-warren-unveils-plan-ex...

There's no way you're paying attn to the news and believe she doesn't have plans specific to other industries.

Most people here will seize on Better Markets' phrasing rather than addressing the merits of this part of what Warren proposes: (1) "Right from the start . . . Amazon would have to separate its 'Basics' business, which sells products under a house brand, from the rest of Amazon," (2) Google’s advertising business and its search business would have to be split apart. (3) regulators can "undo many of the tech-industry mergers that have already happened, such as Amazon’s acquisition of Whole Foods and Zappos; Facebook’s takeover of Whatsapp and Instagram; and Google’s purchase of Waze, Nest, and DoubleClick."

Friendly reminder that (1) through (3) are the actual stakes of the policy, not what Vaheesan says to the reporter about forcing companies to "behave in more socially responsible ways." That editorializing will never, ever become law, and it is entirely secondary to the actual debate here.

The second sentence in your post is so alarmingly inappropriate that I can't focus on anything else.

Bureaucracy does moderate the effects of political leaders in exactly the ways the markets expected. It's extreme to ascribe a "worldview," no less a "naive" one, and it's a failure to appreciate context that you'd cite Bill Moyers' usage of the term when most people here know we're talking about Breitbart's usage. They each describe very different processes, institutional actors, etc., and yes, Breitbart's usage is often coterminous with the administrative state. Bureaucracy.

9th Circuit.

This reads like a mediocre college admissions essay full of breathless, overdramatic characterizations of minor, anodyne exchanges. I had to stop reading when a two word response from a user gave the author "a small rush of triumph." The tone and word choice is just nauseating. Examples abound: > "Commenters . . . . bickered about the word 'soul.'" > "Conversation spiralled, with users making arguments about Cartesian metaphysics and quoting Socrates."

The interesting aspects of this article could fill a tweet. "1/3 of HN users come from europe. It has mods. They have tatts. Check out @shit_hn_says"

Does not run the entirety of the script UNLESS it's the main program.

So if you're using the script as part of something else, it isn't main. It won't run. It'll instead be run through another script that references it.

will try thank you

I'm jealous if it wasn't apparent from my question

Does this play nice with Python youtube-dl? [1] [2]. I want to run a python script on my computer that captures youtube audio of certain government meetings without first having to dl the entire video and convert it (while doing a bunch of other stuff before and after automatically, all without me touching anything).

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/27473526/download-only-a...

[2] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/39665160/youtube-dl-pyth...

You forgot pay the opposition party to demagogue. Lobbying has a higher ROI and they can keep treating internet service as a luxury good instead of a commodity.

Comcast & AT&T cast SF's into oblivion: https://www.fastcompany.com/90319916/the-anti-competitive-fo...

Do . . . . do people in Montana really just meet each other on the Internet and get coffee?

I found this mega helpful in terms of a building walk through. Can you point me to any other python walk through (not the tutorials, like ATBS) that build core things like this method-by-method and explain each method in plain language.

If Facebook was turned off tomorrow, they'd be at the steps of the Supreme Court faster than you can say "due process." The FTC could barely enforce baseline info security reqs without the Third Circuit knocking that agency on its backside. With a pro-business SCOTUS and the type of leverage this company has on every Senate and House race in America, I really don't think you're using the word "power" the same way I was if you believe the government has enough to make this happen.

The notion that a cofounder has some secret sauce that gives the government the authority and power to do something like this is a great way to drive clicks. But it ain't gonna break up facebook.

Broad, new headline same as every other headline for past years, new quotes from unattributed Justice Department official sources. Fear.

How they get free pub for "considering" something. Consideration is for voters. Act or do not act. There is no consideration.