toolz · HackerTrans

2 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

I would say it's most people. Just look at how many genuine comments (of course I've seen non-genuine comments as well) getting downvoted here. There are far too many people who deem it unacceptable to state certain opinions and I wouldn't be surprised if people on both sides of the political spectrum read this and confidently presume it's the opinions on the other side that are at fault.

toolz

3 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

I'm not a lawyer, but wouldn't anything you or anyone else developed on company time at another company be owned by that company and thus proprietary?

In practice I can't imagine the spirit of any law would be violated by doing an architecture diagram, but it seems likely (to me, at least) the word of the law would be violated.

toolz

4 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

or more protection, depending on your perspective. I'd think russians wanting to interface with US services right now would find crypto offers more protection than fiat.

Further, I know a few small businesses that have had large sums of money locked up by services like paypal without any communication. Crypto also provides far more protection from issues like that.

toolz

5 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

look at any objective statistical trends worldwide and you'd likely come to the same conclusions I've come to.

violence trends down

life expectancy trends up

poverty and hunger trends down

child labor is in decline

leisure time is increasing

nuclear weaponry is on the decline

migration is trending up

I'm not sure which objective metrics I could look at would imply anything other than what I've concluded.

toolz

5 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

I don't intend to portray anger as I couldn't be farther from angry. I just think solutions are easier to find when you tackle problems directly rather than assume malice exists lurking in the shadows every time a situation presents itself. The world isn't angry, nor is it racist, nor is it violent. The world is full of complexity and misunderstanding far more than it's full of malice. If you go looking for malice with the assumption it exists all over the place, you'll have no trouble confirming your bias just as someone might believe rather emotionless writings portray anger if they go into a discussion believing anyone with differing values must only hold to those values emotionally.

toolz

5 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

There are an incredible number of topics that are deeply entwined with culture and issues of many kinds, that doesn't mean it's useful to turn a local law concerning garage mechanics into something about race. Would allowing only minorities to work on their vehicles at home solve the problem? It seems obvious (to me, at least) that it wouldn't, so why would race need to be brought into the equation when it's so much easier to communicate about the core issue rather than discuss things in the context of a more complex issue of race and equality?

The likelihood that it disproportionately hurts members of a certain race wouldn't matter if the issue was solved in a way that benefits everyone.

toolz

5 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

Why does it seem like people feel the need to make anything they can about race? (Maybe I'm just overly sensitive and it doesn't happen as much as I perceive, to be fair) I don't agree with the law, but literally every race owns vehicles. Why complicate the issue with racism if there doesn't need to be any complication? Seems like a clear cut issue that people can unite over that instead is being made into a minority only issue for no reason.

toolz

5 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

I find that most people don't realize they are always betting. Keeping your wealth tucked under your mattress in USD is still a bet. Everything is a bet and everything has different risk profiles.

If someone sees that shorts in GME are over leveraged, well in hindsight they were absolutely right to buy in to this "gambling".

I find the most irrational actors with regards to investing are the people who only do "safe" bets and feel like that carries zero risk profile.

toolz

6 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

What is the point, _you're_ trying to make? If you're trying to show women are financially burdened you can cherry-pick wage gap data to show that, sure, or you can take a more holistic view of society and what do you see? You see women with significantly more purchasing power than men. So are women disadvantaged or is there no incentive to be high earners? For me it's fairly obvious. There will be men and women who become high earners. There will be men and women who are overlooked based on gender. What I see with the wage gap can be fully explained by lack of necessity to earn for women. Think about that for a minute - they earn less than men, but they spend vastly more money than men. Exactly where is the incentive to earn more for women? Should they continue to work and earn more until they make up 90% of consumer spending? 95%?

It's beyond me how anyone can claim a group that represents 85% of consumer spending is somehow financially burdened and suffers from inequality. It's almost unfathomable, but here we are.

toolz

6 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

What you're arguing for is equity, not equality. We already have equal opportunity. As for the gender wage gap, if women are so disadvantaged - exactly how do they make up 85% of consumer spending?