Boulder, Co is no longer affordable. Most likely the reason it is no longer on this list. The average house price is $668,000 and the average rent $2,600. I used to pay the same in rent while living on Wall Street in NYC for a one bedroom corner unit apartment.
Every time I see his posts I think about the book The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying. I would recommend reading it for anyone who might be having the discussion or dealing with death in their life.
Yes, it happened in the 80's. I was in Berkeley, CA from 1980 through the end of that decade and the uptick in mentally ill people in Berkeley was staggering. The place was politically friendly and has nice weather, so it was a magnet for people just having been released from institutions, when they didn't have somewhere else to go.
And, of course, police departments all over the country have been sending their homeless and mentally ill to CA and Berkeley for decades, as well.
...and with Margaret Thatcher. In the UK it was called `care in the community`. This also coincided with lots of heroin filling our streets, presumably sold to keep the mercenaries branded mujahadeen paid in Afghanistan.
Seems that we have some horrible drugs on our streets these days so rinse and repeat. Happy days.
If you need to do things off the books one of the best ways to do that is through illegal operations, something made easier when you can do these things with almost zero legal ramifications.
Just like every other political issue, mental health, is complicated and there isn't one reason or person for the way things are.
Blaming Reagan ignores the dact that new antipsychotics were developed that allowed patients that were previous confinded to institutions to be released to the community.
Also, the ACLU along with the supreme court changed the laws and made it much tougher to confine people for mental health issues. One of the biggest challenges in treating mental health is compliance. Having a mental illness often takes away the ability to see what's best for yourself. Ask a mental patient if they want to go to the hospital, they'll often say no. And based on current laws, there isn't anything we can do about it.
What specifically do you disagree with in the linked timeline?
> mental health, is complicated and there isn't one reason or person for the way things are...
Blaming Reagan ignores the dact that new antipsychotics were developed that allowed patients that were previous confinded to institutions to be released to the community.
The linked timeline mentions these and doesn't "blame Reagan for everything". However the current context of this discussion is slashed budgets for mental health inpatient care and comparisons to the Reagan administration are both obvious and relevant.
It would be nice to know what that bias might be. For example, "bias towards truth" is different than "bias towards restoring the US to British monarchy."
Mother Jones is of course a politically progressive magazine, so there's a bias in the topics they cover. But that sort of bias says nothing about the quality of the coverage. The Economist is also 'incredibly biased' in what it cover, and they do good job of it as well.
Similarly, Mother Jones wins awards, like the National Magazine Awards.
> We report from all side of an issue. We do investigations into things that people on the left or the Democrats wish we wouldn’t. And all of our journalism is fact-checked, sourced, and linked through. Facts are what we do, and statistical data analysis journalism is a big part of what we do. So I don’t see that part either. And we don’t really lace our reporting with opinion. It’s more, we’re a shop that cares about the little guy and inequality. So that informs some, but by no means all, of our story selection.
I have never, ever, seen Mother Jones do "an investigation into things that people on the left or the Democrats wish we wouldn't." Maybe there was a time that they were more extremist than the Democrats, and that's what they are referring to. They are basically Fox News, but on the left. Both Fox and MJ make you less informed than before because they leave out facts and stories that don't fit their preconceived viewpoint. They seldom straight-up lie, but the way they frame the stories and what they leave out gives you a distorted picture.
You have TONS of more reputable news sources to choose from like the Atlantic, New Yorker, NYT, Economist, etc. With MJ you're just reading straight-up propaganda and it's very distasteful.
In the case of mental health, a lot of things would have to happen before we could get those mentally ill people off the streets. And Mother Jones would oppose many of those things. For example, we would have to be able to commit more people to institutions against their will. We would have to make it harder to sue mental health professionals or else the government would be bankrupted. To really get a lot of them back to work, we'd have to lower the minimum wage to the point that businesses were actually willing to pay for their time rather than use a robot or an outsourced Indian. But that's a lot more complex than hurr hurr Regan was teh Satan, so you won't find that discussed by MJ.
I am confused by your positioning Mother Jones as no more extremist than the Democrats while also saying "They are basically Fox News, but on the left".
I can't tell from that if you mean that the Democratic party is an extremist party, or if you mean that that Fox News is as moderate towards the right as the Democrats are towards the left, or both.
I thought 'Democracy Now' was more like the left-extreme version of right-extreme Fox News, only much less influential. In any cases, shouldn't your comparison be more to one of the conservative print sources? Is Mother Jones more like the National Review or The American Conservative for the left?
From what you wrote, it's hard for me to tell if your statement that the Mother Jones writing "gives you a distorted picture" is because you also have a distorted partisan view.
About the only times I read an article from Mother Jones is when it was submitted here on HN, which occurs a few times each week according to an HN search.
I looked now at several of their investigation pieces, at http://www.motherjones.com/topics/investigations?page=1 , I do not get the same feeling of being "less informed" that you described. To the contrary, pieces like "They Had Created This Remarkable System for Taking Every Last Dime From Their Customers" and "The World Bank Is Supposed to Help the Poor. So Why Is it Bankrolling Oligarchs?" seem like informative, well-written pieces that I would expect from those reputable sources you mentioned. They also link to primary resources, including SEC filings and court documents. That's not something I see from Fox News reports.
The web site lists only a small number of investigations, I can't find an investigation that the Democrats wish hadn't been reported. I instead looked for other long-form pieces.
The author of those piece is Keven Drum, who has continued with more recent articles like "Democrats Have Done Virtually Nothing for the Middle Class in 30 Years".
These do not appear to be something the Democratic Party would wish published.
My examination is only cursory, so while I don't see how you reached your conclusion, you have the longer experience with Mother Jones to be a better judge.
I believe that Mother Jones is to the left of the traditional Democrat party platform. I also believe that Fox News is to the right of the traditional Republican party platform. In that way, I think the two publications are similar.
Basically, I don't consider either publication a useful source of news. In general, both of them leave out the context that would be needed to understand what is going on in the world. For example, that Mother Jones article about "Why is [the world bank] Bankrolling Oligarchs" leaves out the context of what has been going on in Myanmar in the last few years. Myanmar has gone from being a completely military-run state, to allowing a limited democratic opposition to exist. The World Bank is making investments there partly as a kind of reward for that. If the World Bank left, other countries like China would step in and try to buy influence there with their own equivalent of the IMF (China Development Bank). It invests in bigger companies because it has to, because the managerial overhead of investing in tiny ones would be way too high.
All the same issues exist in our government's aid programs to poor countries. The money does indeed often get siphoned off to the rich and well-connected. But of course Mother Jones doesn't comment on this, becuase the narrative is government = good, World Bank = bad. If facts or context have to be left out to fit the narrative, they always will.
I could go on, but you get the idea. By leaving out facts and, most especially, context, biased news sources like these leave you less informed after you read them than before.
:-) I like both of those publications because they wear their bias on their sleeves. It's easier to extract information when you don't have to also try to reverse engineer the bias.
A Burglar’s Guide to the City is a good read. I have recommended it to a number of people. Two weeks ago while visiting San Fran I went to a security meetup and mentioned the book. One of the individuals pulled out the book and said he was reading it. Then he turned to a page that mentioned his name and noted his contribution to the book. Small world. One of my favorite subjects in the book is Nakatomi Space[1].
The technique goes quite a way back--it was used extensively in the urban fighting in WW II, and I believe that the US troops used it in Buena Vista during the Mexican War.
I'm not surprised. I think Apple underestimated the demand for the iphone SE 64 GB. Its been out of stock in most stores since it was released. Apple's shareholders should be asking why can't anyone buy it in a store? Also many people don't want wait two weeks to receive their phone when they buy it online.
People can't buy it in a store, because like pretty much every model that came before it, they're massively supply constrained.
They've gotten better about it, but there's only so much you can do when you're producing a high-tech item being purchased tens of millions of times per week globally.
Looks like the SE didn't matter. Interesting note from Apple conference call. "2:11 pm iPhone SE not included in these results, as it launched after the end of the quarter, but demand has been very strong. Demand exceeds supply, but we're working hard to meet demand. iPhone SE puts us in strategic plan to attract new customers."
Thank you for posting this. Its a great example of the power of community. Its kind of sad the police are not involved in these fights. Having off duty police officers as security would allow them to interact with their community.
As others have said it's mostly the desire to learn. A lot of the brightest reverse engineering I have met started off hacking video games. They started with a desire to either understand the game or create cheats. From there they dug into the code.
Reverse engineering has a very romantic view from the outside. In actuality a lot of it is learning esoteric topics and boring concepts to be able to apply it to a single task. It takes a certain mindset to stick with it.
The main pre-requisite is being able to read and understand assembly language. From there it's operating system fundamentals, memory layout, compilers, basic understanding C & C++ and Python is popular in the RE community.
The RE sub-reddit has a good introduction for beginners.
