> While the writing group was relatively small, it reportedly began in a "remote work advocates" Slack channel with about 2,800 members. If so, it might reflect the concerns of a significant number of Apple's non-retail employees.
I’m at a different tech company where employees penned a letter to leadership on another matter, which was picked up by news outlets.
And that group wasn’t influential at all - they just happened to be the loudest people. If anything, the news media made the issue appear to be orders of magnitude more significant than it really was. Quite frankly, most people didn’t care.
IMO there’s really no “news” here. This is clickbait. There are differences in opinions on what office vs remote work looks like in a post COVID world, and that applies to pretty much every company including my own.
The slack channel has 2800 people? How is that relevant?
Most of the top comments are saying how Lambda is half baked. It might very well be, but it’s funny to see the one comment so far that is positive about Lambda get downvoted and the poster singled out for not providing a clear solution to ops problem. The HN hive mind disapproves of your experience!
Why prohibit my kid from doing something when I can abdicate my responsibility to the child completely and rely on mass hysteria or government intervention to do my job for me? That’s basically the argument against what you’re saying.
Cigarettes destroy your mouth, lungs, and cause cancer. And they’re so bad we passed laws that you cannot sell them to minors. I’m no fan of Instagram, but if you don’t want your kid on social media, don’t let them go on social media. Should we also ban porn sites, Internet forums? Since search engines can be used to find inappropriate websites or set the wrong expectation about body image, sex, etc - should that all be banned?
I don’t care for social media but I certainly can’t get behind all this unnecessary cancel culture.
I don’t necessarily believe Instagram or any social media for children is a good idea, but these kinds of headlines “the modern Bond villain” are a bit hard to take seriously.
We had BLM protests in my city. I’m all for the message behind it, but they smashed up mine and my husbands car windows. Should have taken advantage of the lax work from home policy and should have stayed home I guess? I’m no fan of the actual “organization” or the people behind it though, and it’s sad FB is actively censuring information.
Nobody disagree with the message: of course, all lives matter.
Everyone is also fine with the peaceful protesting (I mean actual peaceful protesting, not CNN's meaning of peaceful, which already became a meme).
Whoever seek to loot, destroy and coerce people into stupid acts needs to be condemned. BLM leaders didn't condemn the violence, which make the BLM movement just a bunch of terrorists, same as Antifa.
It doesn't matter how cute or righteous the name of your organisation, actions speak louder.
That's just a politicisation of the message to create further division among people who are not racist. Same thing as calling people nazi (so you can feel entitled to punch them).
I think that philosophically most people agree that all lives matter and behave accordingly. Who doesn't is definitely a problem, albeit they're a minority.
> Nobody disagree with the message: of course, all lives matter.
People do, in fact, disagree with the message, both on the level of the slogan, and on the level of the substance (which is not merely “Black lives matter at all”, but “Black lives matter much more than thet are treated as mattering by status-quo systems, necessitating urgent and immediate reform.”) Both the “All Lives Matter” as a dismissive generic, and the “Blue Lives Matter” inversion of the argument on who is undervalued, at least in the police vs. Black context which is the most common focal event of BLM protests, reflect.
I mean, some Republicans in Congress just founded a fairly overtly White nationalist caucus, which they wouldn’t do if they weren’t secure in the idea that White nationalism was a winning position with their base and donors. White racism is deeply ingrained in American society and institutions, and plenty of peple see that as a feature not a bug, and plenty more see it as a non-urgent concern that doesn’t touch their interest even though it is abstractly suboptimal.
> Hopefully this caused you to do more research on the message.
Well, they've gone underground with many of their goals due to public outcry. You'll have to use archive.org to see their true goals for our society. They've pulled most of them off their website.
What research do I need to do? We paid to fix one of the vehicles out of pocket but had to file an insurance claim on the other, and our premiums went up because every window was smashed, including one of the mirrors.
This is a bad faith response, and I’m going to assume you’re a troll and not engage any further. Good luck!
All the righteousness of "self defense" goes out the window when you start casually throwing around things like "make a colander out of worthless idiot".
Self-defense is important, and I'm so sick and tired of seeing people only bring it up when their own internal bloodlust flares up.
If you sick and tired, go talk to a doctor and take a rest.
You either can protect yourself or not. Legal ability of citizens to protect themselves against worthless idiots is important part of keeping our streets and cities clean.
I wish same right will be given to business owners.
Then all these self-righteous corrupted criminal movements of "almost peaceful protesters" will cease to exist.
If you are in a car and are attack you have the same self defense rights as if you were at your house. Something similar happened at a BLM protest in texas with predictable results.
So you could conveniently drive around in a bubble of ‘right to self defense’
This guy you’re referencing here had a violent past and it’s possible that he was looking for confrontation. Believe what you may but a young man is no longer with us. I don’t buy this self defense blanket
>So you could conveniently drive around in a bubble of ‘right to self defense’
Yes that is how self defense works.
The driver was an Uber driver who made a wrong turn and was mobbed by people, one of who pulled an ak-47 and pointed at him.
In most states you are allowed to use deadly force if you reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to yourself or another.
Situations like this are exactly what these laws are written for.
Doesn't matter how many priors you have. Even here in Norway - where you're barely allowed to look at a gun - if some random person points an AK47 at you, then you're allowed to defend yourself with a "reasonable response". Tell me, what do you consider a "reasonable response" to being threatened with an AK47? Yeah, that's what I thought!
Hell, it doesn't even matter if you're in a car or not. Or would you be ok with someone randomly pointing an AK47 at you? Would you refrain from using deadly force against someone like that, just because you had priors?
There is no evidence pointing the victim pointed the gun at the suspect. At the moment you choose to take their word which indicates your bias. I lean on the victim’s side though I respect your right to believe what you want.
> At the moment you choose to take their word which indicates your bias.
No, not really. I'm talking about principles.
If a guy acts threatening towards you, then you're allowed to defend yourself.
If a guy holds a gun, and throws aggressive slurs at you while approaching, do you agree that it's a really threatening thing to do? Would you wait for the obviously threatening guy to raise his gun, or just shoot him before he ever gets to that point?
> There is no evidence pointing the victim pointed the gun at the suspect.
Is there evidence that he didn't?
Honestly, does it even matter? When some guy starts acting threatening while holding a gun, are you going to wait until he points it at you before defending yourself? Cuz you won't get a second chance, mate. You either make him a "victim" of your right to self defene, or you die. I'd rather survive to spend some time in jail, or die because of poorly thought out ideas about victimhood.
If you reasonably believe it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to yourself or another.
Killing some random grandma for showing you middle finger does not really qualify.
However killing threatening idiot armed with something and facing you is totally different. To note - if idiot hits you and then runs away - sending bullet to catch him is not a good idea and not going to work (unfortunately).
On a final note - in a state with good CCW laws people typically are more polite and well behaving.
Flipping a bird to random asshole might backfire and it won't matter to you whether he knows the laws or not.
Laws vary between areas but the general approach is that you can only respond to force with equal force. It's obviously more complex than that but that's what most laws are based on.
I am completely against BLM and I am also completely against public police - and comment on both issues.
I'm against public police because they do a terrible job (in a lot of ways, from racing to just being incompetent, to persecuting victimless crimes) and I wish we had private police.
The only positive thing that could have come out of BLM was a discussion on this topic, instead they completely lacked the philosophical and political skills to do something about this.
Defunding the police without having an alternative was obviously a terrible idea and it wrecked havoc wherever it was implemented.
I'm against BLM because they damaged and stole people's property for no reason, without condemning the actions of their violent members.
> they smashed up mine and my husbands car windows
Who are "they"? I'm serious in this question.
Do you have the idea that these demonstrations are somehow carefully organized and that BLM upper management gave the instructions to break your windows specifically?
It is not the case.
The police kill some Black American in some particularly awful or gratuitous way.
It enrages a lot of people, as you would expect.
Many angry people take to the streets. They are not organized, for the most part. The vast majority are completely peaceful. Some of them aren't as is always the case.
Some of them hold signs saying, "Black Lives Matter".
Someone broke your window during these demonstrations. If I had to bet, it would be some young, angry person. Black Lives Matter did not make this happen, and if they didn't exist, people would still take to the streets when one of their own is murdered publicly by the authorities.
---
There is no "they" there. I recommend a broader and more nuanced view of the situation.
“They” is BLM. These people held BLM signs. And I never heard or saw any BLM leader come out and condemn these terrorists. You know it’s really interesting that you post these mental gymnastics to shift the blame away from the criminals, trying to tell me, the victim, that I’m in the wrong.
Seattle has a lot of unnecessary problems and the government is convinced the only solution is more taxes. I’ve seen this city regressive massively in the past 10 years. I honestly have no idea what they do with public money. The council members have openly called for nationalizing big companies and adopting a communist model - something my immigrant parents fled from.
Seattle has one of the best mass transit systems I've seen for the size, it has a very walkable and livable city, tons of parks, and very good government transparency.
This is what I'm saying, people hate on this city but if you've ever lived in LA, Chicago, NYC...oh boy are you in for a shock if you're not a fan of "I honestly have no idea what they do with public money."
Please, move to Chicago then come back to this thread.
I haven’t lived in LA, Chicago, or NY. But please help me understand — why does another city being worse off (whether that’s true or not is besides the point) makes it okay for Seattle to regress?
And why would I move from my city to Chicago? I was born here and lived here my whole life. Chicago is worse so I should be thankful it’s not as bad as Chicago? I mean, should I be happy it’s not as bad in Seattle as Mexico City, or the pollution isn’t as bad as New Delhi? I’m genuinely interested in where you’re going with this.
Quite frankly Seattle is quickly fading from being a livable city. My children go to a school that has homeless people shooting up heroine and throwing needles on the school grounds. But sure, Chicago is worse in your opinion, and so I should pay taxes to city of Seattle while law enforcement becomes a joke.
Oh we know where the money goes here, it's just ridiculous. Pensions and under table deals that make politicians and their friends wealthy. Want to get something done? Bribe, I mean contribute, to the local alderman.
Modern software development is a convoluted mess of poor abstractions, new frameworks and flavors of the week, and essentially a million different ways of solving the same problem.
I work with some of the most brilliant people in the world (in my opinion) and the problems we are working on are how to grab peoples attention and show them relevant ads. And we don’t call them “ads” but recommendations.
Sorry I’m working right now and wondering what I’m doing with my life.
What’s the criteria for a “bad comment”? And how do you objectively evaluate it?
I lurk and post once in a while. What I’ve noticed is that rarely is something downvoted for being factually incorrect (relatively speaking). You just have to offer a perspective that doesn’t conform with the hive mind and the downvoting essentially amounts to censorship of opinions.
When I see heated back-and-forth discussion chains I'll often find myself downvoting several comments and upvoting none of them, because sarcastic quippy retorts to bad comments are also bad comments.
I'll also downvote comments for factual inaccuracy, particularly if I don't have the time to patiently correct them. This only partially mitigates the damage and doesn't really help the original author to learn. When someone writes a comment with just a single big mistake, and they don't seem to have a history of willfully repeating it, that's when I am most likely to write a lengthy reply with explanation and citations.
I'd appreciate some examples. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but in my experience downvoted comments tend to have something beyond a counterpoint or difference of opinion; their content is usually irrelevant or unnecessarily snarky or somehow hostile.
I don't really have the time to go digging around for examples, but it's common enough that one of the site rules is to not complain about downvotes because it frequently happens for no reason.
The comment author may think there was no reason but almost every time I see a comment complaining about being downvoted, I see a reason among those I listed above.
I once made a post that criticized the Anglocentric perspective of an article. — it was initially upvoted, but then became downvoted when UTC+2 went to sleep, and then upvoted again when UTC+2 woke up. — one can take a particular guess as to why.
I’m at a different tech company where employees penned a letter to leadership on another matter, which was picked up by news outlets.
And that group wasn’t influential at all - they just happened to be the loudest people. If anything, the news media made the issue appear to be orders of magnitude more significant than it really was. Quite frankly, most people didn’t care.
IMO there’s really no “news” here. This is clickbait. There are differences in opinions on what office vs remote work looks like in a post COVID world, and that applies to pretty much every company including my own.
The slack channel has 2800 people? How is that relevant?