Live data from Hacker News

Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

nytimes.com

421–430 of 435 posts

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#421
post #379
post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Nixon aide who allegedly said that quote died before it was published, so there is some reason to be uncertain about its veracity. It wasn't published until long, long after it was apparently said. I find it completely plausible and it's very much in line with my political leanings to believe it, but still.

Thanks, I have certainly seen that quote before and thought it actually had been thoroughly vetted. I was not aware that the man quoted was dead. I've been making a point in recent months to make particular note of things that confirm my own biases, as the last six months have suggested that everything I know is wrong, at least as far as people are concerned...

> as the last six months have suggested that everything I know is wrong, at least as far as people are concerned...

Well that sounds interesting. Mind expounding on that? :)

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always been kind of curious how the people who fill threads with quotes work. Do they have macro hot keys? A spreadsheet of quotes? (In some cases, the first google result for a quote is a page explaining that the quote is fake, so either they have some system that avoids google or they just ignore results they don't like.)

I have a Vim plugin: :Q find-relevant-Hacker-News-quote It then fetches the Hacker News URL, analyzes the text and finds a relevant quote that contrasts the average sentiment of the comments and then posts it. The plugin will even post this text. :Q post-explaination :)

Cool, but that's a far cry from `M-x butterfly`.

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't wikipedia. If someone is so concerned about sources, they can include it in the reply after the parent. Nobody likes people who complain but won't do anything about it. If the lack of citation bothers you so much, maybe you should include it yourself. Nobody else gives a shit in case you haven't noticed. The original comment had no citation yet it received upvotes, contrary to your view of HN. Everyone is…

> This isn't wikipedia. No, it's a forum where the norm is that if you are going to make factual assertions where you aren't the source, you should include the source. > If someone is so concerned about sources, they can include it in the reply after the parent. Which is just making everyone else do your work for you. It's fine, if you want to make assertions and not include sources, you'll either be ignored by some…

There is no norm or enforcement for citations. That is your personal preference. I don't want to spend time chasing down and writing citations. Fact checking is really up to the reader. There is no rule written that says all comments must have proper citations following APA formatting.

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This isn't wikipedia. No, it's a forum where the norm is that if you are going to make factual assertions where you aren't the source, you should include the source. > If someone is so concerned about sources, they can include it in the reply after the parent. Which is just making everyone else do your work for you. It's fine, if you want to make assertions and not include sources, you'll either be ignored by some…

There is no norm or enforcement for citations. That is your personal preference. I don't want to spend time chasing down and writing citations. Fact checking is really up to the reader. There is no rule written that says all comments must have proper citations following APA formatting.

> There is no norm or enforcement for citations.

Obviously there is a community norm. We both just experienced it. You were downvoted (although that could have been for presentation), and I was upvoted for noting that the reason you were downvoted could have been for not supplying sources. For better or worse, that's how it is here at this point in time.

> That is your personal preference.

It is my preference. I'll note that it's not my preference to the point that I'll generally downvote for it though, and I didn't in this case. Other people do though, and there seems to be a general support for requesting that people supply evidence for claims. That's what makes it a community norm.

> I don't want to spend time chasing down and writing citations.

And I don't want to either. And other readers don't want to either. As a trade-off between one person, who presumably already knows that the reference exists and has some idea where to find it and every other person who reads it, it's obvious that the efficient answer is for the person who is using it as evidence to also include a link to the source when they use it.

> There is no rule written that says all comments must have proper citations following APA formatting.

No, there isn't, which is why I asked nicely.

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This comment contains instructions on how to find the desired source of my original comment which was actually published and publicized in printed media. Then why is it so hard to include it yourself? It's poor form to make statements from sources and omit those sources. Unless you typed that from memory, you had one of those sources handy when you made the comment, so you could have included it easily, rather than…

This isn't wikipedia. If someone is so concerned about sources, they can include it in the reply after the parent. Nobody likes people who complain but won't do anything about it. If the lack of citation bothers you so much, maybe you should include it yourself. Nobody else gives a shit in case you haven't noticed. The original comment had no citation yet it received upvotes, contrary to your view of HN. Everyone is…

> This isn't wikipedia.

The norm that the person making claim bears the burden of persuasion in supporting that claim with appropriate evidence and/or reasoning (citations being a means of referencing pre-existing examples of the former) existed for centuries before Wikipedia.

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no idea what point you're trying to make with that link.

That fraud committed under cover of "news", "journalism", or other forms of reporting, remains fraud. Here committed by a "citizen journalist", interpreting the term very broadly. There's the Infowars / Alex (nutjob) Jones / Pizzagate case as well, where, under threat of a lawsuit, Jones has tried to walk back earlier reporting. (There's another Alex S. Jones, a serious journalist, associated with the Shorenstein Cen…

You're mixing apples and oranges here. There's a difference between committing fraud to get a true story and printing something the government decides isn't true.

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#427
post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reply is correctly refuting an argument that I'm not making. If I was saying that the gun homicide rate anywhere in the EU & the US was comparable I'd be wrong, as you say it's off by orders of magnitude. What I am saying is that comparing homicides by weapon type ignores the big picture, which is who cares in the end whether you're killed by a gun, a knife, or bludgeoned to death? You're going to be just as dea…

Again you single out Lithuania, completely ignoring that most European countries have a homicide rate that is 2–4x lower than that in the US. Let's just check a few: France 1.2, Germany 0.9, UK 0.9, Italy 0.8, Spain 0.7, Poland 0.7, Austria 0.5, Switzerland 0.5, Netherlands 0.7, Belgium 1.8, United States 3.9. How do you look at this data and conclude "yup, the EU is just as bad as the US"? Instead you focus on the B…

I'm not concluding that "the EU is just as bad as the US", and really, I can't see how you could possibly come to that conclusion after reading my comments.

Yes, on average pretty much any part of the EU is better when it comes to homicide statistics. All I've been pointing out that from looking at the homicide & gun death statistics in the US you can't conclude that guns are important variable driving those statistics.

    > we're [..] not talking about suicides [...]
    > Stop injecting them into the discussion.
You're the one who started injecting suicides into the discussion. In your earlier comment[1] you said, in response to a graph[2] I posted that included non-suicide numbers, which is the part I was citing, that the "lowest groups are 2-7". Those numbers include gun suicides, whereas I wasn't talking about that at all but the other data on the page which shows gun homicide statistics similar to the Dutch 0.58.

But since you muddied the water by bringing up these unrelated suicide numbers, I started to itemize the suicide & the non-suicide you were conflating them with, and now a few comments later you're complaining about my discussing something you brought up in the first place.

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14034308

2. http://projects.oregonlive.com/ucc-shooting/gun-deaths

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Having actually looked it up, federal funding is only 13% of public education ie it would be absolutely trivial to require states to fund state green card immigrants. You're forgetting that the federal money goes disproportionately to schools in poorer areas, i.e. exactly the schools in question and the ones who can't afford to lose the money. > Likewise emergency healthcare isn't federally subsidized. Well that's…

Title 1 federal funding is $1000 per disadvantaged student. It's an insignificant amount of money compared to state funded education. Any state funding is totally irrelevant because the states will decide that problems. Likewise healthcare is funded inside states. You're confusing the issues. ACA premiums are a good point, as they do apply to permanent residents. Empirically this would result in decreases in costs du…

> Title 1 federal funding is $1000 per disadvantaged student. It's an insignificant amount of money compared to state funded education. Any state funding is totally irrelevant because the states will decide that problems.

Total education funding per student is north of $10,000/year. Regardless of what percentage was state vs. federal, without the federal funding the state is paying the whole $10,000. That's the state's problem, but that doesn't give the state a solution. If you add a new child whose parents don't own any property to pay local property tax on, where does the extra $10,000/year come from?

> ACA premiums are a good point, as they do apply to permanent residents. Empirically this would result in decreases in costs due to preventative treatment, but politically it is a sticking point. Medicaid (not medicare, which is for retirees) is not affected.

They're all affected. If someone goes to the emergency room without paying, the cost gets distributed across everyone who does pay, including Medicare and private insurance. It doesn't matter that the person who didn't pay wasn't a retiree; the retirees and Medicare pay the resulting higher costs the same as everybody else.

> Regardless, the point is not to engineer a perfect solution, its to make an improvement by moving the burden of illegal immigrants in red states to blue states. The burden is lowered more than would be otherwise be allowed. This would remove 90% of the burden.

Figuring out how to move the burden isn't the hard part, it's how to shoulder it. California would lose the federal money, but at the same time become more attractive for the immigrants who are currently in Arizona or Nevada, which will increase the amount of services they have to provide (the whole amount, not just the federal share) even before there is any new immigration into the country as a whole. Where do they get the money?

> The inflow of illegal immigrants is 25x smaller than the number of current illegal immigrants.

The total number is derived from the inflow. If you double the inflow the result over time is to double the total number.

> It is far more likely that this would be a minor attraction- the ability to get a social security card is a tiny improvement to your quality of life compared to escaping violence and poverty.

There are many places you can go to escape violence. People come here for higher pay, which is exactly what being able to legally work most affects.

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#429
post #390
post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are willfully missing the point. You cannot compare Dubai's "Safe" to other place's "Safe" because other places view things like woman being raped as "unsafe" and Dubai does not. Being an Indian construction worker, means being more likely to be killed institutionally. For example by ridiculous hazards at work that any other "Safe" place outlawed decades ago. It could also mean being arrested, harrassed a…

That's exactly the point. I am not including the government in my definition of safety. Rather, the focus is purely on safety from an illegal point of view (murder, rape, robbery, etc.).

This is not a very good way to look at things, because a place without any law and order would be "safe" by these standards. If rape is not illegal, women being raped is allowed. If murder is not illegal, people being stabbed or shot to death would be just the normal way of life.

Not my idea of "safe".

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#430
post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't Hong Kong pass over to China about a decade ago?

Hong Kong is still a SAR.

But slightly more and more in name only, with Beijing controlling it more, politically.
Post reply on HN