am1988

5 ms·

1.
by am1988 9y ago
It's the obvious implication from stating that women are biologically prone to being inferior engineers, and that they should end diversity hiring programs.
2.
by am1988 9y ago
Maybe he should have thought about that before he posted it. The author of the medium article is right that the manifesto implies that a lot of coworkers are less capable. It's a grey area though.
3.
by am1988 9y ago
> If you don't see any other way to deal with OP's views than described in this belittling rant If that's how you read it then I feel like you missed the entire point. > This is a non-statement. Replace 'engineerin
4.
by am1988 9y ago
> Google engineer Oh, so basically scripture then.
5.
by am1988 9y ago
> Does that judgement come from you yes, and it applies to me.
6.
by am1988 9y ago
> Obviously false. Justify this. The funding is legislated into place in such a way that they are not subject to the whims of a new budget. Removing it would require actually changing the law, which ensures that a government trying to do
7.
by am1988 9y ago
In the US if you don't like your internet provider you can shut up and keep paying because the government helped them get a localized monopoly. Google can swing regulators from "anti-trust" to "it's all good they sa
8.
by am1988 9y ago
> Would we still use the "private companies" can do whatever they want argument? At some point I would think you would run into anti-discrimination laws, but short of that sure do what you want. I'm free to say to those us
9.
by am1988 9y ago
Except that people can just leave facebook and go use something else if they don't like it. Don't get me wrong, I am deeply disturbed by the level on control facebook (and google) exhibit over news, information, the internet. But
10.
by am1988 9y ago
If you don't like it then use a different site. Corporate entities have zero obligation to allow you to use their platform for whatever you want.
11.
by am1988 9y ago
The press still publishes the information and the government generally doesn't get to censor it. The government is free to try and stop leaks. That's not the same thing as censorship. The level of secrecy a government operates und
12.
by am1988 9y ago
Their money source is as protected from the government as it reasonably can be. Really, the alternative is you have them beholden to billionaire owners and advertisers. This is why I like the idea of a (properly funded) public news source,
13.
by am1988 9y ago
That's absolutely true, but if the DoJ is acting in good faith (they believe they have sufficient evidence of guilt by this person) then is this really a problem? There are good reasons to be cautious, but this particular case is far f
14.
by am1988 9y ago
That is purpose to your life though. I spend most of my time watching TV and playing games. That's a lack of purpose.
15.
by am1988 9y ago
and then what do the people inside do?
16.
by am1988 9y ago
I would think better?
17.
by am1988 9y ago
> I don't know how musk does it but he has access to levers of power to keep himself afloat. A well run PR machine that keeps the constant hype going. The right misdirection at the right times (we totally need to worry about the my
18.
by am1988 9y ago
No. How are they producing it?
19.
by am1988 9y ago
That makes sense. Loads of people, lots of area, gets really hot.
20.
by am1988 9y ago
> those who have chosen to subscribe to HBOGo Are cable subscribers. HBO Now is the standalone. Anyway, piracy is about as convenient for something like GoT. The back catalogue is great though. I also pretty much stopped pirating because
21.
by am1988 9y ago
It's the same obnoxious minute long ad before. At least it's only HBO shows.
22.
by am1988 9y ago
The reasons he is hated aren't the same as the reasons he is on trial.
23.
by am1988 9y ago
Of course they are legal. It doesn't make him any better as a person.
24.
by am1988 9y ago
Except those things have happened to other people and thus anyone who has done those things (that aren't necessarily immoral or even illegal in other places) should avoid the US.
25.
by am1988 9y ago
because that's so much better. They have fought background checks at various times in various places.
26.
by am1988 9y ago
I am using this account now. Lets be realistic, negative feelings about Musk aren't going to gain me much credibility on HN no matter where I post it from.
27.
by am1988 9y ago
> That’s why public relations and communications — propaganda by another time you mean like getting sycophants from thedrive.com to write articles that far longer than I'm willing to read to get to the point. I am so sick of the cul
28.
by am1988 9y ago
> FYI, if you've committed any form of cybercrime According to the US definition of cybercrime. So you could be totally innocent in your country, and have done nothing directly in the US.
29.
by am1988 9y ago
> "Weasel?" I can see this is going to be a constructive dialogue. If I had wanted to "weasel" I would have deleted the post last night when it passed under the negative point threshold. I wasn't going to accuse
30.
by am1988 9y ago
> It's unfortunate that so many people don't know what the word means When you're the one person in a conversation who has a totally different definition, you just might be wrong. You're wrong. Give it up.

More ›