GarrisonPrime

6 ms·

1.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
I agree that is an issue, and should be discussed. I didn’t mean to imply Twitter’s decision was plainly correct.
2.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
That’s worthy of discussion. I’m not siding with or against Twitter here. Just saying the issue isn’t as one-sided as many might like to believe it is.
3.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
Yet they didn’t suspend him for the specific example provided. Also, I don’t think it’s so clear that threatening a defensive act could be called “inciting violence”. If a group of criminals were parading through a neighborhood performing h
4.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
>Speculation and accusations are distinctly unhelpful. Unless you are the one making them, apparently. I’m not trolling. And I made no “accusations”. I have no objection to Twitter’s decision. Sorry I didn’t make that clear.
5.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
A fair enough opinion, and a worthy discussion. But this particular issue of Trump’s Twitter suspension is clearly about not giving delusional lunatics more fodder for their actions, rather than silencing Trump. Edit: I’m not siding with or
6.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
Clearly, the comment meant baseless violence. Violence to protect the helpless from violence is acceptable.
7.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
I agree that Trump’s banning from Twitter is concerning, and that he did not incite violence. But that isn’t the underlying issue behind the suspension. The problem is that a small but very eager group of fanatics have latched on to Trump’s
8.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
People also tend to give trucks a wider berth, or at least notice you more and respond more readily to your actions. I’ve only ever owned small cars, and in the handful of times I’ve needed to drive a U-haul truck or similar the trip starte
9.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
The only reason they’re finally banning him is because his worth runs out in 12 days. Dumping him now allows Twitter to virtue signal and avoid looking like an enabler of literal violence, all while giving up virtually nothing in return. Ki
10.
Ask HN: What web database should a newbie learn first?
9 points by GarrisonPrime 6y ago|8 comments
11.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
Pretty good regulation already in place. Don't like it? Don't buy it.
12.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
The idea was for the shelf scanning robots to send messages when they found a low stock item or a mess, and then a human could just load up a cart with stock from the back room and head directly to the problem areas. This would be in contra
13.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
This virus cannot be eradicated. You'd have to force everyone on the planet to isolate for 2 weeks. Simply impossible.
14.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
It also creates jobs (the sorters, packagers, sellers, etc.). Gotta keep the pleebs occupied.
15.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
Relevant video: "Death to Pennies", by CGP Grey https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5UT04p5f7U
16.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
Not necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes, resistance to boom growth is wise.
17.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if this was an intentional back door (...) that Grindr was required to create and let foreign authorities know about in exchange for being allowed to market the app in their country.
18.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
Tinfoil theory: This was a test of their kill-switch.
19.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
I can understand that concern. But it leaves price changes in the future open (including perhaps making it free at some point) without having to delete and upload an edited video.
20.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
Fair enough, but the argument could be made that even human-level intelligence is just an advanced degree of pattern matching.
21.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
The holes in the ground appear to have been caused by air pressure (expanding methane gas), so perhaps the bubble analogy is apt.
22.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
Perhaps because it's caused by an eruption of methane gas. Perhaps the bubble analogy is apt.
23.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
Spoken like someone who has never run a business. Why do you think the government is handing money over to corporations? Hint: It's not just to give their big business friends some moolah.
24.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
Considering about 20% of mail-in ballots have already been disqualified for one reason or another, a drastic change could be exactly what's needed.
25.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
No, actually.
26.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
More words are written, but many of them are worthless drivel.
27.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
I don’t think the length of time one pays attention to something is a good indicator of its quality.
28.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
Based on the drop in cases, ludicrously low infection and death rates, the need to balance healthcare system burden with a speedy development of herd immunity,and the economic devastation. People can’t just say “it’s worth it if we save jus
29.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
And how do you propose we enforce your vision of fairness? By gunpoint? Your phrasing suggests so.
30.
by GarrisonPrime 6y ago
This seems like an attempt to justify iron-fist regulation. “For our own good”, of course. It seems like a fallacy, this law. The bad is only able to survive at the expense of the system. Meanwhile, the good that was driven out is busy maki

More ›