> The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, often called the "bank bailout of 2008", was proposed by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, passed by the 110th United States Congress, and signed into law by President George W. Bush.
I'm sure the fact that Obama supported bipartisan legislation is why you blamed the result on "democrat Obama administration" when there was no Obama administration at the time, you made no mention of W, and mentioned only democrats.
Your comment here is a bannable offense. Referencing violence to another user and then mock-walking it back with a personal insult is obviously unacceptable.
I'm not going to ban you right now, but if you keep posting this way, we're going to have to. We've already had to warn you more than once about breaking HN's rules.
I literally was using it as a rhetorical device, but that’s fine for you to think not. Too bad misinformation isn’t treated as importantly as “violence” here.
I realize you were using it as a rhetorical device, but ending on a nasty insult as you did crosses way over the line, and also made the violence part a little more ambiguous than just "rhetoric".
As for misinformation, everyone has a different definition of that word based on what they personally believe to be true or false. That's not a meaningful basis for moderation. It's for the community to hash out what's true and what's false, not moderators to impose their views (or your views, or any other user's views) on everyone else.
This user literally attributed the bailouts to the wrong President for malicious reasons (see the political posts they make elsewhere). That seems like misinformation to me.
I appreciate you walking the line here, you have a hard job, but I just can’t be here watching evil people try and warp reality with actual lies while “nothing can be done”.
Meanwhile his lie is still up there and my tiny insult and fake violence is missing. I guess we care more about feels than reals here?
No, that doesn't follow. What follows is that you should avoid low blows, so-called "tiny insults"*, and castigating "evil people" on HN—such perceptions are notoriously unreliable, and mostly result in reverse flames from people functioning the same way, just from the opposite point of view.
Instead, what you should do is respond to wrong information with correct information, neutrally and in a way that the rest of us can learn something from. Then you've contributed something good to the community. If you can't do that or don't want to, the other option is to simply not post.
Responding aggressively doesn't help—it only makes things worse. Nor is it in your interests, because to the extent that the audience is persuadable, aggressive comments like what you posted will sway them against your own position. If you happen to be right, that means that you've discredited the truth, which hurts everyone (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...).
* Everyone always underestimates the badness of their own infractions (e.g. "tiny") and overestimates the badness of others' (e.g. "evil"). If one weights each of those biases at 10x, that's a 100x distortion. No conversation can endure that sort of communication gap. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
It looks like your account is using HN primarily for ideological battle. That's also a line at which we ban accounts, regardless of what they're battling for or against. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for, so please don't do that.
n=1 is a bad sample size. I've been on there 10 years and nothing of the sort has happened to me. If you don't like reddit then you should leave and find a better platform for you. I highly doubt reddit is going anywhere for a while because there is no easy alternative like there was when Digg died.
Personally I feel like the media inhibiting freedom of speech when they're pushing their list of OK things to think down people's throat and stigmatize even discussing certain topics.
Worldcoin predates the gpt kickass, maybe it’s akin to Elon making rockets and wrecking social startups, but my hunch is this smart human is gonna win on multiple playing fields.
Remember, crypto money is the only money AI can move easily...
APIs only send banks information and ask them to move money if they choose to. Crypto transactions actually move money permissionlessly. It's obvious which one an AI would prefer.
Banks need identity, crypto can work without it, thus making it easier to script money, though this conflicts with Worldcoin's PoV as they want to identify everyone.
My 80+ mom still doesn't get hamburger menus in e.g. bank apps even though I've explained them a few times. They are obviously a discoverability fail.
Meanwhile she's surprisingly proficent at using Google and the mobile web non-logged in/preview version of Facebook to read gossip from the village she lives in, sometimes in very creative ways due to limitations FB put up for anonymous browsers. (She refuses to get a Facebook account.)
No undiscoverable hamburger menus involved in the navigation sequence above. I think Google and FB get it.
I really thought HN was smarter than that french anti-nuclear college kid trying so very hard to appear super vague/undecided... but still clearly anti. Guess not.
What is the problem with current disposal plans? My understanding is that there's rough consensus around just encasing and burying it as being safe enough.
"I am not against nuclear power" - this is litterally the calling card of a tactical hit, forum-wise. It very obviously means the opposite of what it says.
I generally look at how people perceive things like this as an IQ test. At the moment the HN visitors upvoting/downvoting things in this thread have failed my baseline IQ test.
How I wish all presumably well-intentioned but badly informed and ill-educated people who very often seem to have.. let's say, bad luck when thinking would just stop trying to spread their gospel via forums in this destructive way. Looking at you, vaguely-informed "friends of the planet".
It is difficult to be well informed about these issues. Even without nuclear you need to think about the grid, environmental impact, economics, supply chains, financing. And nuclear adds complex science and engineering that would take several lifetimes to learn. People want to reduce the problem to one or two easily understood dimensions. We are all insufficently educated.
:( no really I try to stay open-minded and found contradictory answers interesting, if only because they are well documented. My reply is also to the initial article, which is on the contrary way too optimistic. Nuclear energy is not black or white, I think sharing personal experience as someone living near a plant, in a country relying mostly on nuclear energy, is relevant.
My first 18 years: I lived 45 km from a nuclear power plant.
It helped me getting interested in physics because of some in hindsight exceptionally well performed guest lectures from a physicist working there, in grades 7-8.
I am sorry for your friend, but not for him losing out on his rent seeker plans.