trfhuhg

I see that even criminals in Europe have manners. Until we figure how to replace domestic criminals with European ones, I'd prefer to keep 2A.

Without 2A, people like Breonna would have to rely on gentlemen like those that visited her apartment to defend themselves. For some reason I'm skeptical about this idea. Abolishing 2A would greatly increase safety for the rich, who will get to keep guns and armed guards regardless of any laws, and correspondingly reduce safety for the poor.

It wasn't a no knock warrant, though. They said they announced themselves. They obviously lied, but this lie exposed the truth that the raid was their own initiative for their own reasons. The lame warrant story is likely meant to hide the more nefarious truth that there are rogue cops roaming around and raiding random apartments as they see fit. Basically, police no longer needs to consult with courts.

Zero accountability -> zero regard.

I've had the same experience. What could help is a constraints-driven drawing, i.e. we could split the drawing space into an invisible grid and say that these nodes must be in cell 1, those nodes in cell 2 and so on.

The protests and the surprising violence from the PDs have actually shown the value of 2A. If anything, I'd vote for disarming police, except maybe a few special units, because most of them are emotionally unstable and can't be trusted with guns or any sort of power. If you think about who the most cops are, they are just a bunch of dudes that would normally be some retail workers, but with a few months of training they are given the license to kill. Obviously, most of them can't handle this level of responsibility.

That's very good sarcasm right there. Perhaps the many years in the corporate world have made me too cynical, but I'd expect all and every protestor to be captured on cameras, identified later with face recognition software (remember that Amazon's FaceRekognition had contracts with PDs?), matched with photos on driver licenses and over the next few months they would be quietly, but mercilessly punished for the dissent. The only real question is whether the FR software work when face is mostly covered with a mask and sunglasses? It technically can, because ears, hair, head shape and shoulders shape is a unique enough combination.

Does anyone know how a post with 200 comments and 230 upvotes published just 2 hours ago ends up on the 4th page?

Luckily, Linus is independently wealthy and doesn't need to play the corporate politics. I personally think his response is perfectly fine and may seem "too much" only by the distorted corporate standards.

It's apparently enough to have just a few people with visible power. I'm just saying, the reason we see so much snow everywhere is because it's the winter of the human civilization. And no, the winter won't end because some good minded folks issued a decree that from now on its summer.

It's a "toddler ego" that acts according to its naive idea of the world. Often, they aren't knowingly evil. It's known that kids are often cruel, but change as they grow. Same here.

Many comments here assuming that we can get out of this hole we've fallen into by changing laws or replacing the administration.

Perhaps things are falling apart because of the massive influx of underdeveloped evil egos: they've got a supermajority mostly everywhere and can ignore the few good people. This is what some Hindi manuscripts mean by kali-uga - the dark age.

With this skeptical view in mind, there isn't much we can do to reverse the flow. It's a flood and we can do our part to minimize the damage, but ultimately we have to wait when the weather changes.

Often, the driving force of such moves is not the founders, but investors: the company accepted a generous investment in past and had to sign a contract where the investor may wind up the company if the returns are low. In other words, it could be that Ammon was given a choice: triple profits by end of year or sell his share.

Regarding your question. Mistakes and apologies are words from the lexicon of normal emotional people. Companies, on the other hand, are soulless profit driven maniacs and their lexicon has words justifiable, plausible and profitable. When a company gives an apology, it's because it deems this combination of words the most efficient way to influence its user base and minimize damage (to profits) just done. People who run companies usually embrace this mindset if they want to get rich.

Nothing to see here. Ammon has tried a bold move to chase big money, used a few common tricks (release on Friday night, opt-out and other dark patterns), it didn't pan out and now he's doing damage control. When the dust settles, he'll give this idea another try.

This is all from a corporate playbook, but it seems Ammon hasn't read the entire book. There's a chapter there that tells how to systematically manufacture situations where all the blame flows downwards while all the rewards flow upwards, so when a bold move like this pans out, credit for it would go to the top, and if it fails, blame goes to the bottom. Basically, he should've created a clueless VP of business relations or something of that sort, manufacture the situation where the only way that VP can get a fat bonus is by implementing this shady move (the idea should be delivered via another channel to have plausible deniability later) and watch the action from his armchair. And when it's failed, blame that VP for too much eagerness and fire him with a golden parachute.

You can even rent a trailer in the Seattle area and hire lawyers to explain you how to game these rules in the most legal way. When 500k/year are at stake, employees will be very creative (and, afaik, they are hired precisely for their creativity and outstanding intelligence).