All correct until this bit. They in fact want to shift it back to congress, who should do a better job in specifying what power they delegate to unelected heads of executive branch agencies.

To your point though, a good example of that kind of thing is the idiocy of Republican states who passed years of anti-abortion "trigger laws" in case Roe/Casey were ever overturned. They all assumed those precedence would never be overturned, and so they could be as extreme as they wanted.

Now they are reckoning with their posturing.

*I'd argue that most people in either party do _want_ to govern. But each one is being hijacked by loud minorities who would rather perform.

They know it won't become law. The point is to rile up the media, get hits on cable news, fund raise, and generally be useless as a governing body. This is what both parties do when they are out of power, and I would say is what they _prefer_ to do. It's easier than governing, makes them money, gets them media attention, etc.

Both parties here in the US _want_ to be minority parties so that they can behave this way and assume no actual responsibility for anything.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34052415

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28986389

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28851703

Points: 4

# Comments: 0

Private entities can be swayed by their customer's demands. Not saying that YT _will_ be swayed, just that this sort of creator outrage has a place in the market system, and "throwing a tantrum" over their bad behavior doesn't always have to be met with "private entities can do whatever they want!"

I never imagined that this story would be on the front page of HN. It's like seeing two of my worlds collide out of nowhere.

This is addressed in the panel. The argument is that there is some "privacy mixing" because owner of the authoritative server only sees a highly-trafficked resolver as the source, and not your home network resolver.

I filed a bug a couple years ago but it still isn’t fixed. Luckily it’s a seldom used feature, and I haven’t seen anyone affected yet.

I understand that it's difficult to control for various factors when doing large scale studies of health and behavior, but my perception as a layman is that there is some willful ignorance or absence of rigor. I realize this is perhaps too harsh a statement; I'm just trying get my point across.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17313073

Points: 44

# Comments: 75