HN user

xkde

41 karma
Posts0
Comments41
View on HN
No posts found.

I think people have to get more serious about separating science as a procedure from scientism (that is, philosophical issues that are often discussed in tandem). When one uses the phrase, “science denier”, it often means, “you don’t agree with my philosophy/metaphysics/economic policy” rather than “you deny these particular facts”, which causes people to be rightly concerned. I’m not optimistic that this is going to change anytime soon, but this, I think, accounts for many of the issues in current discourse.

Dumping chemicals in shared rivers/air vs placing ads in a privately owned space that users have the option of visiting. Not comparable.

The fact that more people use Gmail than Protonmail / others is a testament to their willingness to trade their eyeballs on ads for a service they don't have to spend their monetary resources on.

It's also worth asking - what makes you so confident about an absence of malfeasance from the largest, unbreakable corporate entity (ie. the government)?

It’s real, but it doesn’t always take the form of dollars (probably the most popular misconception). Warren Buffet is a billionaire, but most of that wealth is locked up in businesses that are producing products. If he really wanted all of that cash, he’d have to find a buyer or liquidate those businesses (probably at a loss).

True, but it’s perfectly reasonable for Apple to come to the conclusion that, “we just don’t want to deal with the risk” and move on. If they’re not using either GPLed or proprietary stuff, the problem goes away.

Brave launches 1.0 7 years ago

Except the adjective in this case is sufficient as a noun on its own. Unless you want to bring capitalism in for ulterior motives.

Brave launches 1.0 7 years ago

I’m having a hard time trying to decide if people are trying to dirty capitalism with “surveillance” or surveillance with capitalism. Seems like the latter has become a dirty word over night for no apparent reason.

Because pensions aren’t portable. They lock you into a particular organization. 401k, stocks, savings accounts, etc, do not. Pensions (in the private sector, public ones are another ball of wax entirely) do not protect you against inflation. You have no control over what they’re invested in (which in some cases, is the pension manager’s retirement). There are much better options available.

4. Personal saving / investing. 5. Lean on family (super common, even in several non-American societies today)

It’s disingenuous to assert that the alternative to no pension is blood in the streets.

As a general rule, the returns are better in 401k, yes. This assumes that it’s invested in something with good growth potential (U.S. stock index funds, etc) and not money market funds or something highly speculative, of course.

What would you call 9 people in a group of ten voting to take away the tenth guy’s stuff because they wanted to? I call it what it is - stealing. Greed. Envy. Interestingly, it will probably lead to more equality; it just won’t be what you’re expecting and I don’t think you’ll like the result. At this point though, the people probably deserve to get what they want and get it good and hard.