sergioj97

5 ms·

1.
by sergioj97 6y ago
The op talks about what the "next step" will be. And as it hasn't already been, it's clearly speculation and in no way "stating what happens".
2.
by sergioj97 6y ago
Well there are certainly many freedoms that we restrict or completely deny just because of the potential to misuse them (e.g. freedom to own a gun). I don't think this is the case though, and I agree with all of your second paragraph.
3.
by sergioj97 6y ago
Just wanted to note that while in your county the deaths from covid haven't exceeded (yet) 1% of infected, the article you link to states that in Italy, 8% of the infected have died (even though it acknowledges that this is higher than
4.
by sergioj97 7y ago
I think some of those countries are usually referred to as Central America. From Wikipedia's article on Central America: "Central America consists of seven countries: Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua
5.
by sergioj97 7y ago
EU stands for European Union.
6.
by sergioj97 7y ago
> I certainly don't agree with it but it makes a great conversation. Does it though? It seems like a fallacious comparation for reasons that other comments have already explained. And as such, it makes a confuse, meaningless convers
7.
by sergioj97 7y ago
If you read the tweets, you're in for a big surprise!
8.
by sergioj97 7y ago
I personally found that the things the article's author argues that Zuckerberg doesn't understand are being acknowledged and discussed by Zuckerberg itself in the leaked comments.
9.
by sergioj97 7y ago
> there's no way to "point fingers" and say "Look at what this company is doing!" What do you mean? The fact that different people may see different things in their feeds doesn't mean you can't point ou
10.
by sergioj97 7y ago
Do you have citations for that? I'm interested and couldn't find convincing sources
11.
by sergioj97 7y ago
I think right to be forgotten doesn't include public figures.
12.
by sergioj97 7y ago
Seems like a rant to me. What exactly are you criticizing about the way Google decides which results to show first, in this particular case?
13.
by sergioj97 7y ago
I think he commented that only because the OP said "even if it may not be the behavior we expect from our elected leaders".
14.
by sergioj97 7y ago
Having an intelligent strategy does not mean you are intelligent, specially in politics. Probably none of this was his idea, but some adviser's.
15.
by sergioj97 7y ago
Selam G wrote that Stallman considered that Minsky's victim was actually willing. That's not "planting evidence" in a legal sense because sure, that's not evidence at all. Mainly because it isn't true and it&#x
16.
by sergioj97 7y ago
I don't understand how what you've answered changes the fact that Stallman openly implied with his opinion that absence of consent (rape) makes a sexual relation unethical and bad. Stallman is against rape, and arguing that critic
17.
by sergioj97 7y ago
> Do you realize how many people -- not just men -- in CS, physics, mathematics are autistic, especially in places like MIT? Do you have any citations for that (for the fact that there's a significant proportion of autistic people w
18.
by sergioj97 7y ago
He stated that the absence of consent is what makes it harmful. He is against rape, independently of the victims age.
19.
by sergioj97 7y ago
You didn't just give an example of a leader who doesn't challenge things. You literally stated that if a follower disagrees with the leader, then "by definition" he/she is not a good leader. You are implying that th
20.
by sergioj97 7y ago
Reading your link, I don't find anything troubling. He says the term is too ambiguous and it makes it easy to (potentially maliciously) misrepresent someone's acts. If you find anything else he's said troubling please provide
21.
by sergioj97 7y ago
Stallman isn't pro-paedophilia. He stated years ago that he didn't see enough evidence to believe sexual relations with children are harmful for them if they are consensual. That's _not_ believing sexual relations with childr
22.
by sergioj97 7y ago
Keeping things in perspective, do you really believe what is happening now isn't going to ruin Stallman's life?
23.
by sergioj97 7y ago
At this point of the conversation, your rejectal to accept that "Paedophilia is sometimes not harmful to children" effectively means "Paedophilia isn't always wrong" or "Paedophilia is sometimes fine/ok&qu
24.
by sergioj97 7y ago
It would be technically correct if what he meant was that the problem would be solved in constant time. I bet it wasn't.
25.
by sergioj97 7y ago
I think there are health and quality issues unrelated to taste.
26.
by sergioj97 7y ago
If privileged people go down like this even without enough proof or contradictory claims (I don't think this is the case, but the user you are replying to seems to believe that), then you certainly should worry about it. It may well h
27.
by sergioj97 7y ago
> You apparently don't know a lot about homosexuality. What in the parent comment makes you think this way (besides being an awful way to introduce an opinion)? He's just stating that someone with homophobic parents will probab
28.
by sergioj97 7y ago
I'm pretty sure there is a lot of people who is interested to know if this is someone's fault, and I don't think it has anything to do with how media covers this issues. I think it's a good thing, in fact. This failure m
29.
by sergioj97 7y ago
In order to use Messages, you need to have an iPhone (which you need to buy from the same vendor who wants you to use and owns Messages). WhatsApp is just an app. I'm unsure of what do you mean when you say you see the same "vendo
30.
by sergioj97 7y ago
I had a similar experience being 13, but luckily for me it only involved my own highschool website and data. I found a blind sql injection and got access to the credentials of any user. I wasn't a particularly mature 13 y/o so I s

More ›