ysv2

5 ms·

1.
by ysv2 8y ago
> No-one (left or right) would have found a word-fight between evenly-wrong grey characters very interesting if that was the story in the first place. That you would rank the Covington kids as "evenly-wrong" with their racist (
2.
by ysv2 8y ago
Yes, some "sides" of some issues are objectively false. But the problem is that even where facts are not in dispute, the mainstream press's strong left-bias influences the facts it chooses to emphasize and the narratives it p
3.
by ysv2 8y ago
I agree that cutting the stream was the best thing to do in this situation. But if you want to troll people about lacking reading comprehension, try fixing your grammar and punctuation first?
4.
by ysv2 9y ago
The reaction to this ad is predictably absurd. The far left's constant push to draw increasingly unremarkable positions like "US jobs should go to US workers" as beyond the pale is why we're stuck with Trump. For my part
5.
by ysv2 9y ago
Nervous? Not at all. My point is, it isn't my responsibility to ban them or take any other action on my end. That's a problem to be resolved between the EU's governments and its citizens.
6.
by ysv2 9y ago
No, if I want to have a physical presence in the EU I have to follow EU law. But if I'm residing entirely in another country, and EU citizens want to do business with me over the internet, I could care less what EU law says. And no amo
7.
by ysv2 9y ago
> You might just wake up one morning with your bank accounts frozen and your credit cards revoked if you violate the GDPR. Please, spare me. I'm no more worried about EU laws than I am about China seizing my accounts for mentioning
8.
by ysv2 9y ago
I would continue to do nothing special to support the EU's provincial laws. If EU citizens want to send me money, fine. If the EU decides to block its citizens from doing so, that's also fine. But I will take no actions on my end
9.
by ysv2 9y ago
I have no business assets connected to any EU countries, and I don't have any desire to cross any EU borders. So I will continue to enjoy life in my home country and ignore your provincial laws.
10.
by ysv2 9y ago
Exactly, that's the distinction.
11.
by ysv2 9y ago
No, you're confused. Google has a physical presence and business partners in Europe; I do not. (Profiting from EU citizens is beside the point.)
12.
by ysv2 9y ago
> the EU is saying "You can't do these things to our citizens without their explicit consent, and we will punish you if you do, regardless of where you host your website." The EU has neither the right nor the ability to de
13.
by ysv2 9y ago
Right, hypothetically if I were to physically enter the EU I could expect trouble, and that's the EU's right. But in the meanwhile, if EU citizens wanted to do business with me, that's not my problem. I basically agree with y
14.
by ysv2 9y ago
A lot of the GDPR's provisions are admirable, and fundamentally good for citizens. I'd like (some) similar rules in my country. I just wish they'd drop the absurd pretense that the EU is somehow capable of imposing their prov
15.
by ysv2 9y ago
What makes you imagine your government has any jurisdiction over me? EU citizens can choose to use services offered under other countries' laws, or not. The EU can choose to implement their own Great Firewall to block such services, or
16.
by ysv2 9y ago
Yet it is fundamentally incorrect. I'm not an EU citizen, so I have zero reason to care about their laws. I will simply ignore them, and the EU has no recourse, other than possibly mandating that their ISPs block me or something. Which
17.
by ysv2 9y ago
It isn't my responsibility to block them, or to take any action whatsoever to comply with another country's laws.
18.
by ysv2 9y ago
> This regulation is not limited to companies based in the EU—it applies to any service anywhere in the world that can be used by citizens of the EU. That's fundamentally incorrect. As a non-EU citizen, I reject the notion that a fo
19.
by ysv2 9y ago
Widening our spheres of empathy means we can't predicate empathy on finding a label that fits people into an orthodox feminist understanding of privilege. The key takeaway from Farrell's book is that men also suffer. We need to be
20.
by ysv2 10y ago
Companies will always comply with valid warrants for data in their possession, and it would be ridiculous to expect them to do otherwise. What made this case different was that it was not about a simple warrant for data held by Apple.
21.
by ysv2 11y ago
Thanks for the explanation.
22.
by ysv2 11y ago
Am I missing something here, or is there no reason the FBI couldn't desolder the 5C's Toshiba NAND flash chip, read its encrypted contents, and perform the desired offline brute-force attack themselves? The key derivation function
23.
by ysv2 11y ago
It seems the Justice Department admits that Apple's reputation for privacy and security is of great value to the company. I wonder how it intends to argue, then, that forcing Apple to create a corrupted build of iOS which harms that se
24.
by ysv2 11y ago
> It is none of my business how other people lead their lives, even if I disagree with their lifestyle, as long as their actions do not harm me or the society as a whole. Willful deceit and endangering your spouse is not a "lifestyl
25.
by ysv2 11y ago
I haven't done a ton of reading on the movement, but I can point to Warren Farrell as a thoughtful author who has important things to say about men's issues.
26.
by ysv2 11y ago
One of the most obvious problems with this argument is that the National Organization for Women has stood in the way of alimony reform ( http://www.flnow.org/press%20release%202013-4%20alimony.docx ) and supports the Obama ad