Of course it should be legal to reverse engineer software you own, but you have to actually have access to the software to reverse engineer it.

The vast majority including I, only ever used guest additions (GPL).

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20238651

Points: 289

# Comments: 206

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18595215

Points: 8

# Comments: 0

https://www.wsj.com/articles/latest-threat-to-u-s-oil-drille...

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WPS1321

Moreover, if a algorithm enforces bias to the detriment of inoccents, it's a bad algorithm

It's not remotely racist to stay away from white businesses when there is a certain possibility of service refusal, and a possibility that you might be assulted and killed. Hence the necessity of this book.

To say that his family was racist for not trusting white people with the books info, is to be totally ignorant (Tulsa is one example).

You have an extremely weird idea of racism that is not grounded in reality.

Wouldn't the cache HAVE to be flushed as it fills up at some point to maintain coherence.

1) Anti-Free trade. Bernie and Trump both were very popular with working class individuals who are out of work. Trade deals have definitely caused job loss for many workers. Many anti-NAFTA people blame it on causing the immigration from Mexico

2) Anti-Immigration. Job loss and racial identity are both at play here. Lack of homogeny in the country. Too much diversity etc.

3) Disgust with career politicians. They like how brash he is.

4) Lower taxes

etc.

FWIW, this is exactly the kind of post that shouldn't be on hacker news.

There is nothing legally binding Trump

Holmes (the supreme court justice you are quoting) said this with respect to this case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States where they prosecuted Schenck for anti-war pamphlets. This is something that would be protected by the constitution today. This quote is a pretty lousy excuse for suppressing free expression considering Holmes's track record of dismissing free speech.

With regards to Facebook removing posts, why should there be a "due process" for a (specific) company to remove posts. What sense does this make?

Never visited the discussion boards on NPR. But it seems like a far better solution than "infinite comments" or the fragmented social media discussion.

The rat tumor study is also not convincing (to scientists). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A9ralini_affair

As far as I've seen, there have been quite a few studies on GMOs. Though, it seems like an odd classification to study since GMOs are all very different.

There's alot of FUD in this post

I would disregard what the author has to say about Dylan even though it seems to be author's primary example. Dylan wrote a ton of songs and encompassed a couple different personas through his career. He's not one thing.

The simulated conversation image is a great example. After seeing those responses, the response 'aww so cute' or 'Love the daisy' are about about the same or better than what I can or would care to think of in a text conversation. Is there really a better way to think answer that and why should I waste the time to do so?

With regards to the applet manager, that seems to be an issue with customer friction less so than being too hard. While "crypto nerds" would be fine, business applications could be affected.