I'm trying to wrap my head around this as well. Do these people want "punching the police and lighting things on fire" to be a freely permitted form of free speech?

If so, should anyone be legally allowed to destroy any amount of stuff, for any reason they feel unhappy about? Or is this a case of "blowing stuff up should only be permitted for causes I like, not for causes I dislike"?

If not, do they see the irony in endorsing behaviors that they simultaneously believe should not be legalized?

With all due respect, you are not responsible for covering every single thing the Trump administration is doing and ensuring they are held accountable. While simultaneously satisfying customers who are used to getting endless content for free, and sniff their noses at paying $2/month.

The journalism business is a hard business. I may not agree with everything NYT does, they are most certainly not perfect, but they are operating in good faith and trying their best. Give them a break

> Our client didn’t deny he was packaging cocaine at his kitchen table, but he insisted that he was not doing it brazenly in the open; that not only had he covered his windows with taped-up sheets and garbage bags, but he had closed and locked his door, as you might expect for someone engaged in illegal activities. We went to the CHA management offices, where they had records of giving Deuce citations for repeatedly covering up windows. We also talked to the maintenance man who had been assigned to repair Deuce’s door after his arrest. The maintenance crew had taken pictures that clearly showed damage to the doorjamb, backing up Deuce’s claim that the door had been kicked in.

> We proved that the search and arrest were done in violation of the Constitution, and so the evidence collected during the arrest could not be used at trial. The charges had to be dropped.

TLDR: our client was guilty as sin. He admitted it. He was caught red-handed. He still got off scot-free.

Not arguing against any of the above. But this example hilariously contradicts the claim that "the system is stacked against the accused"

Our value isn't predicated on our utility. The simple fact that we are sentient beings, capable of joy and suffering, gives us value. This is why we continue to support and care for the elderly and the disabled - we value them regardless of any practical utility we may derive from them.

If you go through life believing that your value depends on your practical utility, then things like AI are an incredibly scary existential threat. But denial is not a healthy way to cope with this threat. The solution is to recognize the value inherent in us as humans, and to demand public policies that reflect this fact.

Full proof: https://outlookzen.com/2017/04/03/philosophical-proof-for-th...

Who exactly has a vested interest in starting a worldwide conspiracy to ban social media for kids?

FWIW as an adult in my 30s, social media has caused me far greater harm than even binge drinking. I can't even imagine growing up as a teenager under the social media microscope

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47440491

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47439204

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47391642

Points: 6

# Comments: 2

> Once they were in hand, Fargo police met with him and Lipps at the Cass County jail on Dec. 19. She had already been in jail for more than five months. It was the first time police interviewed her.

How is this the fault of AI? It flagged a possible match. A live human detective confirmed it. And the criminal justice system, for reasons that have nothing to do with AI, let this woman sit in jail for 5 months before doing even interviewing her or doing any due diligence.

There's a reason why we don't let AI autonomously jail people. Instead of scapegoating an AI bogeyman, maybe we should look instead at the professional human-in-the-loop who shirked all responsibility, and a criminal justice system that thinks it is okay to jail people for 5 months before even starting to assess their guilt.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47292673

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47240201

Points: 4

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47209948

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47200520

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47188358

Points: 1

# Comments: 0