181–190 of 202 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To manipulate readers into realizing that industry doesn't pay their workers well?
HN is not an advocacy platform, so manipulative comments, like boringg's, and yours, are not appreciated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To make matters worse, when these ships come under attack or get hijacked, suddenly they want the full backing of Western military forces. Strange they don't call on Panema or Antigua's military forces, since that's where they are registered.
> [...], suddenly they want the full backing of Western military forces. Who is 'they'? Do you have records of the 'ships' (I assume their owners?), asking for that full backing directly?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Europeans don't like the working conditions of shipbreakers in India, and don't like the pollution it creates in India. Europeans can't directly tell the Indians what they can and cannot do. Instead, the parent post is proposing to use the state surveillance app aratus to go after and prosecute the f** out of people that sell ships to India. I said it seems like a lot of work to try to stop someone in another country…
But you know that it's a law to stop people doing something domestically which is exporting a ship. You know this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Europeans don't like the working conditions of shipbreakers in India, and don't like the pollution it creates in India. Europeans can't directly tell the Indians what they can and cannot do. Instead, the parent post is proposing to use the state surveillance app aratus to go after and prosecute the f** out of people that sell ships to India. I said it seems like a lot of work to try to stop someone in another country…
I don't disagree on the overall principle of avoiding the establishment of de-facto extraterritoriality, but it should be said that environmental pollution is not a localized problem. The Earth is a connected system, and what happens in India or China will eventually affect Europe and America (in the form of polluted air/water making its way here, or climate change provoked by emissions), and viceversa. Environmental…
Wow Ed Burtynsky on the front page of Hacker News! I worked on his film Anthropocene ( https://theanthropocene.org/film/ ). Also recommend the film Manufactured Landscapes by him, which he also gave a TED talk about ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2Dd4k63-zM&t=930s ).
I adore this movie as well as his other movie "Watermark"! Any anecdotes you are willing to share from the set?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but that standardisation on USB that we have already witnessed came about without any legal mandates, or did it? So it undermines the argument for them.
Standardization was an option, but it took laws to actually force the inevitable refuseniks (like Apple) to the table.
And, again, I don't see much benefit in the forced conversion of the refuseniks. Their refusal only hurts _them_; I mostly have Android devices, and I don't care one what chargers other people want to use. And evidently, they had made up their mind. And who are we to second-guess their choices?
What's next? Forcing people for their own good to accept the Divine Authority of the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
What went off in my mind was, wouldn’t it be interesting to see where these massive vessels will be taken apart. It would be a study of humanity and the skill it takes to dismantle these things. I looked upon the shipbreaking as the ultimate in recycling, in this case of the largest vessels ever made. It turned out that most of the dismantling was happening in India and Bangladesh so that's where I went.” — Edward Burtynsky
When you look at it, it’s just him. It could be totally different for someone else but it. Yes, these facts are true, but this is only his point of view.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> has enough maturity to recognize that human nature is part of nature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy
I literally didnt define it as good. Maybe read again. I said it isnt good or bad, its nature, its what it is. Ironic that while explaining why using "bad" to qualify nature is not appropriate you think im saying its good.
> Some people use the phrase, naturalistic fallacy or appeal to nature, in a different sense, to characterize inferences of the form "Something is natural; therefore, it is morally acceptable"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HN is not an advocacy platform, so manipulative comments, like boringg's, and yours, are not appreciated.
Your are out to lunch. I'm not sure what you think I'm advocating for or what I'm trying to be manipulative based on my short comment but you need to take a minute and think about how other people come to the conversation and that they don't come with some embedded agenda.
It's pretty clear that are are trying to manipulate readers through your suggestive use of "strange". You're not actually confused by it - you're trying to suggest something about labor laws or pay or something without actually making a point, through the use of suggestive language. People do not talk like that unless they're adding a subtext.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those industries don't pay well to anyone involved but are a global benefit. Such a strange world we live in.
"Paying well" is relative. There are lots of industries that are rightly considered exploitative from the western eye, but people who are working these jobs would otherwise be starving or relying on meager government handouts if they went away.
The rich often pay 0% tax but we're still doing nothing about it. We'll never do anything about it.