You'll find half the voting population is aligned with the capital against that. So I don't think that will fly until the situation becomes quite dire.
That's true, but not so dire that they are motivated to act, besides, they are too gullible to even properly register how far they've been duped to act against their own interests. I used to have some kind of delusion about how democracy was 'good enough' because of my implicit assumption that people on average were smart enough, educated enough and in general wise enough to realize when they're being played. That seems to have been a pretty serious mistake on my part.
I'm right there with you. Prior to 2016 I assumed that most people would "do the right thing" when it was made clear that it was the right thing to do.
But now it literally feels like a bad horror flick where there's a zombie mind-control virus that turns people into passive drones that can no longer have independent thought.
And while I used the word "stupid", there's plenty of otherwise intelligent people that have fallen prey to this and there's literally nothing one can say or do to have them reconsider their stance.
Not cool. Other users were perfectly able to respond to the parent with curious conversation. I'm not going to respond any further publicly. You can email us if you want to discuss further.
We are not him, he withdrew it immediately when he woke/sobered up, that was not Hacker News, and the guidelines apply no matter who is posting or what the topic.
Hi, I don't think tomhow or 'pocksuppet' meant me, I think that was a reference to the current CEO of YC misbehaving himself. I don't drink, so I don't have any handy excuses for posting here or anywhere else. See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39162499, contrary to Tom I don't think that being drunk excuses anything, alcohol serves to reduce inhibition and tends to reveal the real person more than that it inspires you to make death threats against politicians.
As for my comment: I really don't think I was glorifying violence or calling for violence for specific persons as both Thomas and Tom seem to be implying (and both of them have known me through my comments for more than a decade so I'm a bit surprised by them jumping to conclusions so badly).
I just answered a question and later followed it up with a longer explanation, we get taught about the French revolution and what led up to it in history class here and that is the - to me obvious - context. Tom has my email address, we've exchanged plenty of email over the years. If he was unclear about my intentions he could have simply checked up or asked in the thread but he choose to interpret the comment in the worst way possible and immediately acted accordingly. Which - ironically - is itself against the spirit of HN.
But I recognize this is his - and Dan's - website, that being a moderator is stressful at the best of times and that these are not the best of times and that they get to make the rules and call the shots, and all of us have to abide by their interpretation of those rules.
So right off the bat I'd like to say that jacquesm's one word comment is pretty blah and in my books that along is sufficient reason to flag but I didn't this time.
With that said HN is an international community, and it is important to respect the perspectives of people from around the world.
Is it inappropriate for people to call for the kidnapping and arrest of Maduro from Venezuala? Doesn't appear to be from recent conversations here.
Is it inappropriate for people to call for the overthrow of the Iranian government and the assassination of the Ayatollah? Doesn't appear to be from recent conversations here.
Is it inappropriate for people in Canada or Greenland to discuss the prospect of American civil war and how it could potentially benefit them personally by minimizing the threat of American aggression that results in the invasion and annexation of their countries? Certainly appears to me from your response and previous conversations on here.
As a non American it's conspicuous and frustrating to see how this discussion around what is and isn't acceptable speech about violence often lines up with whatever the current foreign policy of the American government happens to be. And that isn't to say that this site and others censor discussions that are critical of these policies, just that they seem to clamp down on discussions about violence when it's about domestic American violence even when it's being discussed by non-Americans like jacquesm?
Why is that? Why is it okay Americans to call for the assassination of the Ayatollah but people from outside of America can't talk about the prospect of civil war and political assassinations in America?
I'm a Canadian. The leader of your country has made many comments about annexing my country. It is quite likely that right-wing American interests are funding a separatist movement in my province. I consider this an overt threat to the well being of everyone in my community and my personal well being.[0][1]
While America is nominally a democracy I don't hold the American people responsible for this threat. Instead I hold the American oligarchs and the skilled professionals who enable the creation of their authoritarian machinations (Including the employees of Oracle and IBM as you helpfully pointed out in a recent comment) responsible for this bullshit that now threatens me.
So from that perspective why isn't it acceptable to acknowledge the necessity for the arrest of American oligarchs like Elon Musk, Sam Altman, and Larry Ellison? Why isn't it acceptable to call for the smuggling of weapons into America to facilitate revolutionary activities akin to what people were calling for the CIA to do in Iran?
Ideally I don't want anyone to come to harm. But I have to be real about this, the more fractured America is the better off I am in the short term. Our incentives have become misaligned through no fault of my own. So something has to give.
Blaupunkt (in the early 80s) had a similar system which was a lot more reliable also based on ultrasound, they used an encoding that was a bit less likely to show up in normal environmental sounds.
Doesn't / didn't Blaupunkt make hi-fidelity audio equipment? I would think the range of sounds output by its speakers would make finding distinct sounds difficult. Maybe their audio expertise came in handy.
Yes, they did, but this was on a TV set, a - for the time - large color TV. It was a pretty weird little box, I have been searching but can't find an image for it.
Not a chance. Drywall will absorb this like a sponge. These frequencies are really high and will reflect off hard or thin surfaces, drywall is relatively soft, more often than not has insulation packed into the center and is usually covered in some kind of stucco or grout. Zero chance of penetration.
Just stand on the other side of a drywall and see how well high pitched normally audible sounds get through vs the much lower frequency sounds. It sounds decidedly muffled because all the high has been absorbed.
So, in the true spirit of the HN dismissive comment, but this time I think it really does have its place.
Ultrasonic is DOA, sorry, but that just won't do. It's already a nuisance to have all these switching supplies that mess up your hearing (and some can be surprisingly loud), using it for power delivery is really a non-starter.
There was a company that planned on using ultrasonic for power delivery to smart phones, every engineer with some ultrasonic experience said it wasn't going to work and they just kept going until they - predictably - went out of business.
Just wishing it exists does not mean it is possible or practical, that's right up there with Theranos (and I think Theranos actually had a better chance of working even though that chance was extremely slim).
There are interesting start-ups around the theme of energy scavenging though, that's a far more realistic but still extremely challenging proposition.
You may have misunderstood. Ultrasound is not being used here to deliver power to these 'sensors'. The devices give off distinctive ultrasound noises when they are bashed by things, like little cymbals. They are not really sensors - they transduce a mechanical input to a high-frequency mechanical output. To be used as a sensor you need a microphone and (typically) an AtoD as well.
Since it's just a little signal, there's very little power in it, so while your pet might hear it, and maybe it'll cause your noise-canceling headphone to squawk, it's not going to have enough energy to hurt anything.
I think both Elsevier and the people that appropriate IP for training commercially deployed AIs purpose without the consent of the author(s) should be legal.
reply