> We're not talking about US, Britain, Europe or any other country.
But you said "people of those nations"? Now you are backtracking?
> It's also not a prerequisite to be Chinese or Uyghur to discuss this topic. If someone learns and becomes educated on a topic they can discuss it.
I didn't say it was a prerequisite. My point is that the assertion that "we don't want dystopian surveillance" is absurd considering the amount of surveillance we already have. Okay? Considering the guy wrote for a western news outlet, I'm assuming by "we", he meant the western world.
> He's also not saying that Uyghurs want this. He's saying nobody wants this.
> Not sure about you but I don't have to put my government issued ID on my kitchen knives.
Neither do I. But that's because I love freedom.
What's the difference between ids on or for knives and ids on or for guns? It sounds ridiculous to us because our murders are by guns. But in china people kill each other with knives.
Do you know what some people in the US want? Fingerprinted "smart" guns. More government surveillance/registry/etc of gun owners. What's the difference?
If people in china are killing each other with knives, doesn't "smart" knives or knife registry make sense just like a gun registry?
> In simple terms they couldn't keep up with comment moderation and were not able or willing to invest in enough moderators.
Has nothing to do with that. It's because their comment section gets no activity to merit investment. Instead they are investing in "managing" social media via twitter, facebook, reddit, etc.
> So I have to give credit to HN to having one of the most civil comment sections on the internet.
It also has the worst and most biased comment section. It's why traffic is down and hardly anyone uses HN.
> So, keep it up, dang and sctb!
Only on "hacker" news would someone support censorship.
As long as the functionality is there, there will be initial outrage and then people will accept it. Having gone through a few redesigns of a major website, the first few weeks can be a nightmare though. People love to complain. But in the people's defense, we've had a few screw ups too.
Because you aren't a kid anymore? You are older and have a wife, children, nephews, nieces and responsibilities? Not only that you have friends from childhood, high school, college, work, etc and there are only 24 hours in a day?
It's called growing up. Are we supposed to stay naive children forever without responsibilities forever?
Is it possible to have a discussion about anything without someone bringing politics to it?
> He's my dad and I love him, but needless to say, when I see my partners going down the same path, it freaks me out.
Your dad is your partner?
> It seems impossible to have normal, non-political conversations with him anymore, he just doesn't have any knowledge or interest that doesn't come from TV.
And here you are doing the same thing. How about not making everything political? Things are toxic as it is. Do you need to bring toxic politics to HN?
> Nuclear power can (technically) easily replace all fossil fuel power.
It can replace fossil fuel power for electricity. Not all fossil fuel power.
> It would take a decade of serious dedication and leaving behind a "safety first" culture, but no major technical advances are needed.
Strangely enough, it's the clean energy lobby, not the fossil fuel lobby that is the biggest hurdle to nuclear energy. It's so strange to hear the solar, wind, etc advocates claiming they want to save the environment railing against nuclear power.
Maybe because it isn't quality journalism. Ultimately, something is worth what people are willing to pay for.
> The world will be a dark place if the only news sources left are blogs by self-proclaimed journalists.
It's just as dark a place with "quality journalism".