Recent submissions

Comment · 5 years ago
So if all those people who hold problematic opinions would go and make their own privately owned website, everyone would be happy?
Comment · 5 years ago
>Two world wars later and we've decided that maybe Nationalism isn't such a great thing

The states that brought Germany down in both world wars were just as nationalistic at the time. Even the commies brought it back when they needed it the most - and it worked.

Also, since the country in question here is India - without nationalism, they would still be a colony.

Comment · 5 years ago
not possible anymore. a platform that has reddit-tier moderation policy from the get-go would never gain traction
Comment · 5 years ago
This is exactly what's going to happen, not just with PWAs but with all websites. The mechanism ("Google Safe Browsing") is in place, precedents are being set, the number of hysterical ideologues who will support that is growing.

But on the bright side, I think if it was Mozilla with 90% of the browser market and not Google, this would've happened already.

Comment · 6 years ago
The case for freedom of religion has never looked more questionable than it does right now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism_in_Europe

Trying to wave away this debate by just shouting “RACIST! NAZI!” contributes nothing meaningful to a debate that is sorely missing from society.

Edit: why is this controversial and the post I'm replying to not? We both advocate the exact same thing: to abolish a founding principle of western civilization because sometimes people die. Hell, there's even a quite large disparity between the number of deaths caused by those two principles - my argument has way more merit.

I'd really love to see why these two cases are totally different and incomparable. Three paragraphs of mental gymnastics or less though, please!

Comment · 6 years ago
I wholeheartedly agree. Private companies should be free of regulation and be free to do whatever they want, like refusing service to whoever they want - nazis, flat-earthers, homosexuals, anti-vaxxers, conspiracy theorists, blacks, etc.
Comment · 6 years ago
>36.6% Non-Hispanic White

>41.4% Non-Hispanic White

4.8%. that sure makes a world of difference.

I'm wondering if you're implying that there's something wrong with having such a preference though. You have provided some interesting statistics, would you mind if I did so as well?

Comment · 6 years ago
Oh reeeeeeeeeeally? You didn't think it was "needed"?

>Hate speech in the United States is not regulated due to the robust right to free speech found in the American Constitution.[1] The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that hate speech is legally protected free speech under the First Amendment. The most recent Supreme Court case on the issue was in 2017, when the justices unanimously reaffirmed that there is effectively no "hate speech" exception to the free speech rights protected by the First Amendment.

Comment · 6 years ago
It is a very widely accepted notion (among everyone who matters) that ethnostates have no place in the modern world. Hell, it is nearly as universally accepted that the very concept of "ethnicity" is problematic. So why should it not be applied in these cases? Why do some groups deserve their own land, but others don't? Either we all do or nobody does.
Comment · 6 years ago
>The overwhelming majority of young people (and people overall, though not by nearly the same margin) are left leaning or very left

for some reason that phenomena only manifests itself on heavily moderated platforms.

on unmoderated (chans) or barely moderated (youtube) platforms, you get a much more diversity of thought.

Comment · 6 years ago
you mean the same things we did to each other throughout our entire history and yet somehow our civilization had advanced past the stone age?

yeah, it is their own fault, lmao.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton