It does not strike me as a legitimate case to strip people of their human right to free agency and will by forcing people to do things they don't want to or may even be dangerous to their health and safety. It should be anyone's right to refuse going to dangerous neighborhoods, just like forcing drivers to drive out into nowhere where they have to spend their own money/resources to get back to the network, should be compensated by Uber if they want that feature.
It's rather abusive and tyrannical to force people to do things against their will or safety. But I am guessing you live in a dangerous neighborhood because you did not "discriminate" and are paying really low rents since you don't discriminate. Right? … exactly!
> It does not strike me as a legitimate case to strip people of their human right to free agency and will by forcing people to do things they don't want to or may even be dangerous
But in a normal employer-employee relationship, this is totally typical. You can't sign up to be a firefighter but then refuse to go into burning buildings that you find too scary. You can't get a job as a developer and then refuse JIRA tickets you find boring, claiming that's your "human right."
In those cases, and with Uber as well, your free agency is that you can quit the job if you don't like it. But you have no fundamental right to be retained as an employee or contractor while refusing to do parts of the job you'd signed onto. The employer has their own right to terminate you if so.
You still have free agency. As an Uber driver, you can accept a ride, pick up the rider, get the destination, decide you don't want to go there, and then kick the rider out of your car.
Then, Uber can decide that they no longer want you to be a driver on their platform.
You realize its OK to decline trips, and also to stop using a ridehailing service that mandates a policy like this?
>should be compensated by Uber if they want that feature.
Do you really think Uber has not gone through these thoughts millions of time in the past? I can personally tell you that these are things that are constantly discussed and evluated, with the primer driver of everything being the growth of the service.
I thought we were all about equality? Are we now not about equality? I can't keep up.
And if a woman for some sexist reason can refuse a fare, why can't a man refuse a fare if, e.g., he does not like the destination area because it is riddled with crime and he is exponentially more likely to be robbed?
Jesus, no. The entire point of a taxi system is a supplement to mass transit to not require private car ownership. Once you start denying the service to the people who need it the most, you're eliminating the reason for its existence.
The point of a Taxi system is to heavily regulate it into a monopoly where owners get to gouge riders and drivers have to pickup riders wherever they are told, no matter how unsafe.
We're not. Everyone just likes to pretend that they are. Every white girl likes to virtue signal about how awesome they are but the reality is that white people have the lowest [0] miscegenation rate. The reality is that those who most claim to be against bigotry are often those who most perpetuate it.
I find that claim rather ironic, because I feel like the primary reason that PDFs are "unfit for human consumption" is a formatting issue, not as much a technical or practical issue. The reason they are unfit to read on line is that they are formatted using past formatting standards that are meant for print … not inline reading.
There are of course some technical limitations to PDF that would prevent them from being mad "digital first", but even just changing page layout and adjusting margins and spacing and font for horizontal display (as most of our screens are) vs vertical layout as one would read a printed sheet of paper, would make huge differences.
I for one actually compensate for that in that I have a dedicated monitor that is vertically oriented in order to read PDF documents. Better yet if you can do it on a very high dpi screen. But even that is not ideal because although I actually like print formats, standards, and conventions (like margins, spacing, and structure), it's simply not relevant or applicable in digital until we get A4/Letter formatted tablets or desktop screens that emulate physical paper … albeit even that, inadequately. Nothing can really replace the advantages of paper, at least not until we get paper thin displays that have zero measurable response times on pen inputs … i.e., likely never.
I don't find it shocking at all, when you consider just how much farther advanced Apple is in so many different ways including disability accessibility (please let me know if you have ever seen a blind person that uses anything but an iPhone), inter-device sharing/airdrop, configuration sync across devices, etc.
(not disagreeing) It's been this way for decades. Learning to use a computer growing up, it was almost immediately apparent to me how widespread, useful, and discoverable Apple's keyboard shortcuts were on OS 8 or 9, especially when compared to Windows 3/3.1/95.
It is curious how something like this gets published with inaccuracies like that Command-L will create an alias in Finder, when it is actually Control-Command-A.
I emailed Greg Joswiak about this (it’s cool how some of their leadership will respond to strangers’ emails: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24055149) and he said the command had previously changed. It’ll be fixed soon on the site.
Although it does not surprise me one bit that you express such a sentiment as it is likely the most common one from that perspective; it is the result of the whole tech industry and even economy that is and has long been a kind of extreme mania of permissiveness and pillage, with next to no push back that would have possibly moderated such behavior, both on a systemic and the personal level that this is an example of. I know that being faced with such a reality will both be instinctually rejected by many as it is a threat to their frame of mind and causes cognitive dissonance just even hearing it, and some will simply not even have the ability to integrate it at all.
What, just from looking at all the massive and excessive fraud and graft and "disruption", aka, destruction, of the economy that we have just alone witnessed in our lifetime that is any different than what Levandowski thought he could maybe also get away with on an individual level. He just didn't realize he had to diffuse what he was doing and not make himself an individual and identifiable target.
Just alone China has been pillaging and stealing in every conceivable manner over just the last 25 years or so; from all out hacking, to buying up tech companies and IP, to placing engineers in our Universities Inc., to basic industrial espionage, to immigration to place industrial spies in our tech companies, and on and on and on … to little more than the muted chirp of crickets.
What would make Levandowski think that he could not have gotten away with what he was doing when we have witnessed nothing but the very same kinds of law and ethical and moral depravity all across the board from top to bottom, left to right, and front to back for decades now? Tech companies have perverted and sold out our whole society as a function of even deeper graft and corruption for many decades now, I am not at all surprised that Levandowski thought he too could get a piece of action; he just made the mistake of not running in a pack like in DC or on "Wall Street" on in the tech sector. He stood out and strayed from the pack in a noticeable manner so they needed to pick him off to avoid wider recognition of what is really going on as we careen off the rails.
To put a point on it, it is precisely the utterly permissive, corrupt, and rotten state of not only the whole tech industry; but our whole society and failed and inherently illegitimate government that are the cause of someone like him thinking he could get away with what he did. Because let's be frank, it was a solid bed that he would have gotten away with it considering what everyone else has gotten away with for many decades now.
Sure espionage happens, but there are half a dozen people in prison for spying for the Chinese already, and counting. In fact it’s precisely because people keep getting caught and thrown in prison that we know it keeps happening. Every few years a programmer at an investment bank gets sued or jailed for stealing code. There’s nothing new about people facing consequences for pulling this sort of crap.
You are being pedantic and a know-it-all. You know very well what was meant by that. Just consider the comment to apply to all the the monopolistic cartel technology world dominating corporate companies. They are all part of the same world dominating corporation system that colludes in Davos and through the various other secret groups, as much as they even collude in public to conspire against us all, regardless of whether one thinks one is in their good graces by doing their will.
My apologies if I came across as pedantic or a know-it-all. I was thinking that, of all of the big companies that could be buying a stake in ADT, this is actually one of the more competent ones, which is a good thing. Also, plenty of other big companies with even more of a record of bad behavior. So, it was intended as a face-value statement.
Because of their success these companies also get the most scrutiny (see house investigation/hearings last week). One foul step and its a PR disaster, impending regulations, boycotts, etc. Are you sure you'd prefer your convenience to come from smaller companies that garner less attention?
Ironically, the dynamic has shifted; we've all voluntarily installed microphones all throughout our houses and carry around tracking devices. They have no reason for you to leave and would prefer you stay at home where they can monitor you for any wrongthink you may verbalize. Best part, those people who refuse to bug and track themselves become interesting to additional scrutiny … because they clearly must be up to something.
You are fundamentally missing the point. That mentality though perfectly exemplifies the inherent and likely existential flaw in Mastodon or any other alternative technology that says "diversity" and "equality" and "inclusion" out of one side of their mouth, while out of the other side comes "your color and views are unacceptable and contrary facts are not allowed" … and it's all said, totally without even a shred of self-awareness of their tyrannical, let alone hypocritical nature.
I have been on the internet since the days when newsfroups ruled the earth, and it is my experience that unmoderated spaces claim to be havens for free speech, but usually end up being havens for people racing for the ethical bottom and recruiting each other into, at best, mass-trolling other sites; at worst, you’ll get people going from cosplaying nazis “for the lulz” to being actual neo-nazis.
"if you’re against witch-hunts, and you promise to found your own little utopian community where witch-hunts will never happen, your new society will end up consisting of approximately three principled civil libertarians and seven zillion witches. It will be a terrible place to live even if witch-hunts are genuinely wrong."
You are unfortunately describing things that are separate from any "social network", they are unhealthy and detrimental behaviors that have metastasized and are manifest in society today in general, mirrored and amplified online where people can find whatever pity party echo chamber they fall into, which will then only be amplified through self-reinforced "moderation", aka censorship.
It's actually precisely why we need free speech more than ever, because those who withdraw into self-censored echo chambers need to hear things that are not their favorite things to hear even more than those who demand free speech. Not doing so will only end poorly.
It's rather abusive and tyrannical to force people to do things against their will or safety. But I am guessing you live in a dangerous neighborhood because you did not "discriminate" and are paying really low rents since you don't discriminate. Right? … exactly!