Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Re: Obama on Fetishizing Our Phones

jonathanmh.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 337 posts

Re: Re: Obama on Fetishizing Our Phones

#271

Post by 1024core »

I hate it when leaders get all upset when the balance is shifted away from them, and yet are perfectly fine when the balance tilts in their favor.

FTA: "then that I think does not strike the kind of balance that we have lived with for 200, 300 years."

200 years ago, it was not possible to cast a dragnet and catch everyone who was doing Something Bad(tm). The government had to get a warrant to open mail; today, the NSA can sift through billions of messages (metadata, they say) in a second.

Even considering US Mail: you could not keep track of who was sending whom mail, at scale. But today, every letter that is mailed has its front and back scanned (for reading the address); but more importantly, these images are saved for future use.

All of this is possible thanks to technology. And when the balance was tilting in their favor, the Establishment was quite happy. But when the balance tilts the other way, suddenly they're crying like a spoiled child whose toys have been taken away.

You can't just throw tantrums when things don't go your way. If the technology permits E2E encryption, they'll just have to live with it and find other ways to catch criminals.

Re: Re: Obama on Fetishizing Our Phones

#272

Post by MicroBerto »

mikeash wrote: post #270
MicroBerto wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many people have you hired in your life?

How is that remotely relevant?

Clearly it's easy, right?

If you've never give through the experience of hiring good people, you have absolutely no clue how difficult it is.

So convenient to drive from the back seat though, yeah? I never said Trump was "right". I said he's been a step ahead every time, which he has.

But it's easy to trivialize things and call him an asshole because it fits your narrative.

Walk a mile in those shoes and then tell me how simple it is. You have no clue. Empires are not built from shell scripts. If only it were that easy.

Re: Re: Obama on Fetishizing Our Phones

#273

Post by jqm »

willholloway wrote: post #165
jordanb wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Washington has changed Obama more than Obama changed Washington. He's spent seven years in the craziest bubble in America surrounded by people being paid millions to distort his worldview one way or another. A while back he advised some kids in College to never type anything into a computer if they want it to remain private. For him, it probably seems completely reasonable. I doubt he's touched a keyboard sin…

Let's take a moment of deep appreciation for President Obama's decision to not panic after the San Bernadino shooting, reinstate color terror alert codes, spark a ground invasion of Syria, or in any other way overreact. For a brief interlude in American history, we had a president that didn't capitalize on terror attacks politically, or generally set a tone of paranoia and fear. We won't always be this lucky.

I suppose we should also be appreciative he hasn't instituted gulags... that we know of anyway. But that's really beside the point for this discussion.

Re: Re: Obama on Fetishizing Our Phones

#274

Post by coliveira »

MicroBerto wrote: post #202
hawkice wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read this so many times I am starting to think this makes sense to the people saying it: "Trump may be [insert whatever], and [policy X] is ridiculous, and [statement Y] went over the line. But [X] won't ever happen, so I don't have to worry about it." Don't get me wrong, using policy and public statements to judge fitness for public office isn't perfect, but it seems in this case we are substituting policy and…

You act like his entire life hasn't been "executing a complex and demanding job"? Running a small business is hard enough, I can't even imagine running an empire. Trump has been one step ahead of every last person this entire election cycle. It's been fascinating to watch and I'm done doubting him, underestimating him, or second-guessing why he does or says anything. Now I'm simply at the point where I'm just trying…

If what you're trying to learn is how to manipulate people, then I agree, he is a master. There is a name for this type of people, they're called con men. Trump is a sales person. He has trained himself to sell anything, and he is just selling a quick solution for people that feel disenfranchise by the current political system.

Re: Re: Obama on Fetishizing Our Phones

#275

Post by MicroBerto »

coliveira wrote: post #274
MicroBerto wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You act like his entire life hasn't been "executing a complex and demanding job"? Running a small business is hard enough, I can't even imagine running an empire. Trump has been one step ahead of every last person this entire election cycle. It's been fascinating to watch and I'm done doubting him, underestimating him, or second-guessing why he does or says anything. Now I'm simply at the point where I'm just trying…

If what you're trying to learn is how to manipulate people, then I agree, he is a master. There is a name for this type of people, they're called con men. Trump is a sales person. He has trained himself to sell anything, and he is just selling a quick solution for people that feel disenfranchise by the current political system.

He is selling exactly what a serious amount of people in this country want. If you don't know that then you don't understand America. Go work in a factory for a year.

Re: Re: Obama on Fetishizing Our Phones

#276

Post by coliveira »

krapp wrote: post #200
MicroBerto wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The good news about Trump is that he's not bought or sold. He is what he is, which from my viewpoint is better than the unknown that we currently have.

You don't become a billionaire without having deeply entrenched political and business connections. Donald Trump may be "self funded" but I don't believe for an instant that his persona is any less calculated than that of any other politician, or that his agenda is entirely his own. Because he is a politician, and by definition a very successful one. Just because he wears a red baseball cap and is willing to use vulg…

There is a large segment of the population (in every country) that responds very well to power figures. The same reason why people in Russia like Putin, and so many other dictators have been quite popular at times. Trump is trying to reach those people by acting like the power person in the race. On the other hand, a big part of the population is also adverse to power figures, myself included. I would never vote for an authoritarian figure and there are many others like me.

Re: Re: Obama on Fetishizing Our Phones

#277

Post by coliveira »

MicroBerto wrote: post #275
coliveira wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If what you're trying to learn is how to manipulate people, then I agree, he is a master. There is a name for this type of people, they're called con men. Trump is a sales person. He has trained himself to sell anything, and he is just selling a quick solution for people that feel disenfranchise by the current political system.

He is selling exactly what a serious amount of people in this country want. If you don't know that then you don't understand America. Go work in a factory for a year.

Except that he cannot provide it. Most of his proposals would require to overturn centuries of laws and other American traditions. Promising that is akin to trying to sell the statue of liberty.

Re: Re: Obama on Fetishizing Our Phones

#278

Post by over »

MicroBerto wrote: post #272
mikeash wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that remotely relevant?

Clearly it's easy, right? If you've never give through the experience of hiring good people, you have absolutely no clue how difficult it is. So convenient to drive from the back seat though, yeah? I never said Trump was "right". I said he's been a step ahead every time, which he has. But it's easy to trivialize things and call him an asshole because it fits your narrative. Walk a mile in those shoes and then tell me…

Being a crazy asshole is Trump's strongest suit. Hatred is a powerful motivator.

Re: Re: Obama on Fetishizing Our Phones

#279

Post by mikeash »

MicroBerto wrote: post #272
mikeash wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that remotely relevant?

Clearly it's easy, right? If you've never give through the experience of hiring good people, you have absolutely no clue how difficult it is. So convenient to drive from the back seat though, yeah? I never said Trump was "right". I said he's been a step ahead every time, which he has. But it's easy to trivialize things and call him an asshole because it fits your narrative. Walk a mile in those shoes and then tell me…

I'm sure it's hard to do well. My point is that Trump hasn't done well. The fact that he built a not particularly successful business empire with inherited money doesn't say much about his skills or smarts.

Hiring good people is hard, for sure. Has Trump ever done it?

Re: Re: Obama on Fetishizing Our Phones

#280

Post by graycat »

coldtea wrote: post #170
graycat wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, come ON: It was plenty clear just what the heck Obama was well before and during the election. E.g., Bill Ayers, Reverend Wright, and his other buddies. Then, during the campaign where he was campaigning and on a stage with Hillary and Bill Richardson and the US National Anthem was playing, Hillery and Bill had their hands over their hearts and Obama had his hands together and below his belt. Then there was his "…

Actually all of these sound like excellent gestures. Not playing to BS patriotism and phony sentiment by having his hands "together and below his belt"? Daring to say "my muslim faith" (haven't heard of that, so I kinda doubt it, but still). Bowing in respect to heads of other nations, instead of playing the "greatest nation on earth"? All of these all excellent. It's all the OTHER stuff that's bad about what he did.

Nearly universally in the US, hand over heart during the playing of the US National Anthem is a biggie. A lot of highly patriotic US citizens could get all wound up about that. Each of Hillary and Richardson put their hand over their heart. It's a free country, so you are welcome to your opinion, but what Obama did would be telling to a huge fraction of US citizens and, thus, some telling background for someone asking the question I was responding to. Or, whatever you think about hand over heart, what Obama did correlates with some other things he did that were equally shocking to a lot of people, and that is, net, my point, independent of my opinion.

For the bowing, the Chinese example is at

http://arabiangazette.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Obama-B...

and I have links and personal copies of the other three. Just now I'm not going to the trouble to check if the other three URLs are current.

To a huge fraction of US citizens, bowing to a foreign leader is a biggie and part of why it was commonly said that Obama went on an "apology tour". Some people will conclude that he deliberately insulted the US in a way disloyal to the US.

Playing "greatest nation on earth" is irrelevant: No significant nation expects leaders of other nations to bow. Bowing is wildly inappropriate.

"My Muslim faith":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMUgNg7aD8M

Some people will look at that clip and conclude that Obama just misspoke or was repeating something McCain didn't say but might have, etc. Take it as you wish.

Some people are disappointed in Obama, and some of what I wrote is some of why they had what should have been for such people good advanced information and warning. There was plenty of warning -- we knew who he was.

Judging people is not an exact science, but it is very much a necessary activity, especially in selecting a POTUS.

Again, the US is a free country, so you are free to disagree. Still, there was a lot of definitely unusual information, commonly offensive to a lot of people, before Obama was elected.

Post reply on HN