> leaving them on the street is not helping them. committing them would give them access to (force upon them) care, and is the more humane thing to do

> I'm not convinced that involuntary incarceration will actually fix the problem

> doesn't that pretty much "fix the problem"?

Which problem? Every misunderstanding is someone replying to someone else without knowing who was replying to whom

I dunno, at mag7 i see painful infra bugs sitting on the vine for years... maybe my bar is low, but that bug looks like a good response

Not that above commentator is meaning that.

But many "thought leaders" i.e. Jordan Petersen play around with similar motte-and-bailey - "hierarchies are natural" (examples with lobsters, apes, whatever) --> "existing hierarchies should be preserved" (not defended in the argument but implied).

Probably some downvoters are reacting to the structural similarity, although taken in good faith i think above commenter makes a fine point about the historical pattern of periods of equality being short lived and brought about by great intentional effort while sliding back to inequality seems to occur all of the time.

Most people consider the modern state, society, etc, to be an improvement. Many people also consider not questioning people's loyalties by their surnames, to be an improvement, even though I'm sure it was common sense for a long time.

If the people had Russian names instead and top commenter said:

>US Nationals

>

it's still racist, yes.

> I don’t think top commenter is racist.

I won't make any claims about the commenter. I'll criticize their implication that people with foreign sounding names are not "real Americans" though.

> claim: these people have Chinese names, are they REALLY Americans??

> response: suspecting "true allegiance" based on peoples names is racist and was used to justify atrocities like Japanese internment in our country's history

> rebuttal to response: "art of being a Good Person these days, is never admitting that you know or suspect this, even if you've seen & heard it yourself."

Instead of defending the claim you're just claiming you're being censored.

I was looking, thank you!

Isn't this the definition of FRAND which nearly the entire interview with the lawyer from the article is about?

TSA was created to accomplish a goal - security theater (mostly), preventing another 9/11 (maybe more in theory than in practice), etc.

The New Deal WPA, according to wikipedia, supplied about 3M jobs at its peak in 1938, when the population was ~130M.

2.3% of the population vs 0.017%.

Also empirically - if it was a jobs program, it would be way better staffed..

> At a March 3 hearing in Austin, a National Labor Relations Board attorney said the fired software engineer, Denise Unterwurzacher, had been acting in the spirit of Atlassian’s own stated “Open Company, No Bullshit” philosophy

I think if you have a "Open Company, No Bullshit" philosophy in your company handbook, then you can't claim "No, not like that..." when called on your BS.

If their company policy was "always obey legal orders from superiors" instead then I think they have a much clearer case at firing for cause.

So on a crowded bus you've normally got 1 or 2. Behavior is actually much better on airplanes, usually (maybe 1-2 in ~150 passenger plane), and I have never seen someone who did not silence their phone after being asked politely by the attendant.

- an austinite.