Recent submissions

Comment · 8 years ago
for me, D2 is the better game in that it is fun and addictive to play, while D1 is much more atmospheric.
Comment · 9 years ago
Unless I'm misunderstanding your point, I think it still works out equitably regardless of the existence of a VAT system.
Comment · 9 years ago
According to the video, yes, in addition to online play.
Comment · 9 years ago
> In this case, China shouldn't have had any trouble getting Hong Kong authorities to arrest and extradite this person, so it doesn't seem like the same thing.

Given the current political situation in Hong Kong, this may not be a valid assumption.

Comment · 10 years ago
I'd be curious about Oil and Gas. I'm familiar with the other fields, but that one seems to require even less training for around the same amount of money. Or if you get into petroleum engineering - I remember in college that was known as the profession with the highest salary straight out of school.
Comment · 11 years ago
As an aside, what happened to makr.io? The URL seems to go to something completely different.
Comment · 11 years ago
Hah imagine taking over not just a house but the whole world!
Comment · 12 years ago
Comment · 12 years ago
Well they're literally occupying Central, the financial district, aka Hong Kong's Wall Street.
Comment · 12 years ago
Two thing come to mind as a starting point: Negotiation and focusing on building Hong Kong's economy.

Negotiation: The truth is, HK politics is very much like American politics. It consists of people blocking any progress on anything because the two sides are so deeply divided. Instead, I suggest making an honest effort to negotiate and take things step by step. For example, the central issue to the protests - the universal suffrage framework described in the Basic Law is strictly better than the current system. Accepting it while signaling that something even better is desired and will continue to be brought up would have been more productive. (Note that the whitepaper came out after the threat to occupy central).

Economy - One of the subtexts of the whole issue is Hong Kong's decreasing relevance in relation to China and indeed on the world stage. The stronger HK is, the more leverage HK has. Instead, real wages are barely increasing, rent continues to skyrocket, and there is basically no economy besides finance - and in that HK's competitive advantage shrinks every year. Instead of saying things like "we are willing to sacrifice the economy if it gives us true democracy", I think it should be accepted that destroying the economy is not likely going to get democrats what they want, and that a better economy would a) free up more people to be able to worry about politics rather than just putting food on the table, and b) make China think harder about killing the golden goose.

Occupy Wallstreet was a game of brinksmanship, but unfortunately that only works when both sides have something to lose. China has nothing to lose today.

Comment · 12 years ago
In my opinion, that's a very good question and one that demonstrators rarely think about. Frankly, and until somebody convinces me otherwise, I think that Occupy Central was and is a strategic failure if the end goal is gain a better form of democracy in Hong Kong. China has shown time and again that it will not back down when things get physical, and in for example, the case of Tiananmen square, the government got more paranoid.

So rationally, I don't think it's a good move by the pan-democrats, as it essentially shuts down any possibilities of negotiation - the pan-democrats have very little leverage now that they've already "done their worst".

On the other hand, protests are not about strategy and rationality. People strongly believe in their ideals and they want to do something rather than sit around waiting for negotiations that may or may not happen. I can understand that which is why I'm not as quick to criticize the protesters as many in HK would.

Comment · 12 years ago
Those really aren't examples of libertarian ideology.
Comment · 12 years ago
I was very surprised when I found this out. It makes sense though - just like in any negotiation, you don't start with what you're willing to settle for, you start with what you want.

In general, there are always two sides to the coin. Where from an American perspective you see Chinese aggression outwards, if you flip the arrows on the map around, you might notice that from a Chinese perspective, the US is aggressively boxing China in.

Comment · 12 years ago

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton