Every now and then I get the suspicion hacker news is used to practice sophistry for the workplace without the risk of making yourself look like a jackass at work.

Of course it would break the rules about civility here to directly accuse someone of that. Which makes me want to joke that it's an intentional feature of the site and explains why a VC firm wants to run a tech watering hole.

Sometimes I think people are so into libertarian views as almost to be a religion that they see anything a government would do an ethically evil act, so it appears they have no morals/ethics of their own when they share those thoughts.

> Where did we go wrong

Driving character out of the software world. Spotify couldn't whip the llama's ass even if it wanted to. And it doesn't want to. Spotify is a boring office worker that we're professionally cordial with only because they run the stockroom.

If you looked at 'old' software companies that existed at 2000, they were boring companies like IBM. Really what most people don't want to admit is most of the software world grew up and got old.

>What a horrible thing to do. So sorry I wasted my own personal time on this. People like you drive others out of open source.

Pot, meet kettle.

I think you're on to something about bad categorization. Sentiment analysis as practiced is almost always pseudoscience. (And that's a hedge. I've never seen it done right but I'm not outright discounting the possibility.)

>Even if you hate it, the vibe of that is completely different.

It's so mealymouthed my internal sentiment analysis grades it as insanely toxic.

Nobody actually talks like this. And if they do they have a terrible office culture.

Come to think of it, AI Stans do remind me of people bending over backwards to justify how their Soylent farts made them more skilled at living life.

>I used to work for an ad tech company (which I know already makes me the devil to some around here)

everyone sets the bar below what they do

>even I think that they crossed a line with this

everyone sets the bar below what they do

>I would genuinely like to know what the engineers thought when doing design reviews for a "selective stand down" feature. There doesn't seem to be a legit way to spin it.

everyone sets the bar below what they do

Don't ask Hacker News. One of the biggest challenges in life is building a set of contacts worth listening to about life. HN can only intermittently put proper context and nuance around statements regarding software. Forget about anything else.

>If it's actually a mental health crisis

If?

The institution you use to socialize your youth results in some attempting to murder their co-participants.

Even if you took away the guns so they couldn't follow-through, why are your schools fucking up child rearing so badly in the first place?

Okay how do you want to solve that? If it's by making the schools better I'm all for it. Why is it that the people who love guns vote to defund the schools though?

For anyone unaware, that is nearly[1] the entirety of the text of the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution from 1865. This exception is rather (in)famous. I remember being quizzed on it in an elementary or middle school history or social studies class.

[1] the only excluded bit is the followup "Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation." Without this, the power to enforce the 13th Amendment would be left up to the states due to the 10th Amendment ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."), which would have slightly useless given the whole war that had just been fought over some states wanting to keep slavery.