The protesters should adopt this tactic widely: sit on the ground, link arms, and force the hand of the police: "pepper spray me, I dare you". The police are entitled, indeed obligated to arrest them, after all.
First off, "obligated" isn't a word. The word is "obliged".
Secondly, what do you mean "they should"? They already do. It's the number one move in the left-wing activist's playbook -- provoke the police until they use force, and then go play the victim card to the media.
Blame for the widespread nature of this tactic belongs partly with the protestors, and partly with the media who go along with it. Sensible people should reject this game, because it just makes life worse for everybody.
You got pepper-sprayed? Diddums, mate, that's exactly what you wanted to happen.
The Tea Party proved that you can have a mass protest movement that doesn't get in the way of others, and doesn't break the law. Unfortunately it also proved that a nonviolent protest needs to be ten times larger than a violent protest in order to get the same amount of media attention.
Lubos Motl is a smart guy, but he's known for having his own somewhat strongly-held opinions on quantum mechanics. I don't believe his assertion that it's a "crackpot paper", but am sympathetic to his argument that Nature is over-hyping the paper.
I would really need to sit down and read the paper carefully (as well as Motl's rebuttal) before I can have a more informed opinion than that, though.
I don't mind the bit which calls people cunts (and I apologize for the fact that I deleted that particular bit in favour of a pithier bit while you were writing your own comment), it's everything else.
That's an interesting example. But if an opportunity exists in the market for somebody to come in undercutting me and selling cotton balls for a mere 500% markup, then I think it's still okay.
It's not a question of whether it's interesting, it's a question of whether it's on-topic. Certain things are off-topic, because they have a tendency to invite bad comments which drive out good discussion.
I'm interested in pictures of cute cats and big tits, as well, but they're not suitable subjects for this site either.
If you're in a situation where a police officer is entitled to arrest you, but he physically can't arrest you because you're sitting on the ground with your arms linked with somebody else, then the police officer is entitled to use reasonable force in order to arrest you. Pepper spray is the least dangerous way (to you) to do this -- all other possibilities run the risk of breaking your arms.
I'm really sick of this game, though. The game where protestors deliberately work as hard as they possibly can in order to provoke a police response, and then whine about the police response. This is a game the police can't possibly win, and the protestors know it; that's why they play it. If the police don't respond, then the protestors will just escalate their douchiness until they do.
I know this game, it's the game I used to play with my older brother. Harass him until he hits me, and then go whine to my parents. It was pretty douchey of me, but hey, I was a kid. These kids are supposed to be grown up, what's their excuse?
Indeed it is. That's a tech story, of direct relevance to the core topic here, since it's an important milestone in the internet and entertainment industry. Netflix has never before exclusively acquired a show, particularly not a popular one, for streaming purposes. The story generated an interesting discussion about the future of these two industries.
This story, on the other hand, is not just a political story but political activism, and needs to be nuked off the face of HN with extreme prejudice, because they're like weeds and have a tendency to take over.
The distinction is that people submit and upvote stories like these not because they think they're intellectually interesting, but because they're trying to make something happen politically.
This might be an interesting subject worthy of a proper treatment. I was somewhat put off by the fact that there were giant tangentially-related pictures between every paragraph, though.
The answer is: "Depends". Though if your business model is immoral when applied to poor folks, it's still immoral when applied to rich folks.
Aw geez folks, are we getting so offended nowadays over a flippant piece of exaggeration?
No, not all poor people are pumping out a dozen crack babies. But they do seem to find it possible to have children in rather inauspicious circumstances while those of us further up the social food chain bite our nails and prevaricate about breeding under any circumstances other than perfect. And that's not a good thing on either end.
My new year's resolution: no more commenting on things on the internet. Bye bye, everybody!