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

Pushing the whole company into the past on purpose

rachelbythebay.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 139 posts

Re: Pushing the whole company into the past on purpose

#41

Post by thenaturalist »

gred wrote: post #30
singleshot_ wrote: post #5

I’m not sure I get the fifty years bit at the very end. Anyone care to explain?

[flagged]

Like any freedom in an interconnected society, freedom of speech and expression is not absolute, but limited when it infringes on other rights: right not to be insulted or discriminated against.

It's really a rather simple concept entirely void of cencorship.

In case of more interest, Kant is a good source for educating oneself:

> Kant holds in contrast that there is no innate right to unlimited freedom but only an innate right to freedom “insofar as it can coexist with the freedom of every other in accordance with universal law” (6:237).

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-social-political/

Re: Pushing the whole company into the past on purpose

#42

Post by KittenInABox »

pessimizer wrote: post #36
sunshowers wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact checking is the tip of the iceberg — it's what the marketing machine led with because it's the least objectionable. Far far worse is letting queer people like myself be called mentally ill, though not any other group (e.g. religious people). Yes, it's part of the common discourse, but the common discourse is objectively morally abhorrent. I worked at FB for a decade, and I now am rooting for its complete des…

If wanting to kill yourself over your sex isn't mental illness, I have no idea why insurance or the state should be concerned about it. We're not collectively paying for flat-chested women to get breast implants, or ugly men to get nose jobs, although they both may be upset about their bodies. We're also not labeling it as "life-saving." I don't understand how we can insist that these conditions are both the worst me…

> We're not collectively paying for flat-chested women to get breast implants, or ugly men to get nose jobs, although they both may be upset about their bodies.

Umm...We actually do pay for breast implants/breast reductions in the case of medical need which can vary from reconstruction to hormone imbalances, the latter of which makes sense to consider being transgender under since hormones do quite a bit to help with the illness.

Re: Pushing the whole company into the past on purpose

#43

Post by Diggsey »

thenaturalist wrote: post #41
gred wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Like any freedom in an interconnected society, freedom of speech and expression is not absolute, but limited when it infringes on other rights: right not to be insulted or discriminated against. It's really a rather simple concept entirely void of cencorship. In case of more interest, Kant is a good source for educating oneself: > Kant holds in contrast that there is no innate right to unlimited freedom but only an i…

The "right to not be insulted" is literally censorship.

Re: Pushing the whole company into the past on purpose

#45

Post by aikinai »

vlovich123 wrote: post #37
llm_trw wrote: post #35

That policy change reads like a more liberal version of Obama's first term compaign platform on social issues. Lets not pretend that the current climate in SF isn't both way outside the Overton window for most of rest of the US and most of California until ten years ago.

Wtf is this comment in relation to? Certainly not the article which is about a strictly technical issue or how to deploy time smearing for the first time.

Read to the end. The time smearing article was just a clever ruse to set up her political jab.

Re: Pushing the whole company into the past on purpose

#46

Post by sunshowers »

pessimizer wrote: post #36
sunshowers wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact checking is the tip of the iceberg — it's what the marketing machine led with because it's the least objectionable. Far far worse is letting queer people like myself be called mentally ill, though not any other group (e.g. religious people). Yes, it's part of the common discourse, but the common discourse is objectively morally abhorrent. I worked at FB for a decade, and I now am rooting for its complete des…

If wanting to kill yourself over your sex isn't mental illness, I have no idea why insurance or the state should be concerned about it. We're not collectively paying for flat-chested women to get breast implants, or ugly men to get nose jobs, although they both may be upset about their bodies. We're also not labeling it as "life-saving." I don't understand how we can insist that these conditions are both the worst me…

Is pregnancy an illness, mental or otherwise? Should insurance or the state not cover the medical costs of pregnancy?

What are your credentials, anyway? Why do you think you know more than decades of in depth research and millennia of anthropological evidence?

Re: Pushing the whole company into the past on purpose

#47

Post by llm_trw »

thenaturalist wrote: post #41
gred wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Like any freedom in an interconnected society, freedom of speech and expression is not absolute, but limited when it infringes on other rights: right not to be insulted or discriminated against. It's really a rather simple concept entirely void of cencorship. In case of more interest, Kant is a good source for educating oneself: > Kant holds in contrast that there is no innate right to unlimited freedom but only an i…

So when are we locking up everyone that's insulted Trump?

Re: Pushing the whole company into the past on purpose

#48

Post by bdangubic »

thenaturalist wrote: post #41
gred wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Like any freedom in an interconnected society, freedom of speech and expression is not absolute, but limited when it infringes on other rights: right not to be insulted or discriminated against. It's really a rather simple concept entirely void of cencorship. In case of more interest, Kant is a good source for educating oneself: > Kant holds in contrast that there is no innate right to unlimited freedom but only an i…

(un)fortunately Kant is not one of the Founding Fathers :)

Re: Pushing the whole company into the past on purpose

#49

Post by brooke2k »

pessimizer wrote: post #36
sunshowers wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact checking is the tip of the iceberg — it's what the marketing machine led with because it's the least objectionable. Far far worse is letting queer people like myself be called mentally ill, though not any other group (e.g. religious people). Yes, it's part of the common discourse, but the common discourse is objectively morally abhorrent. I worked at FB for a decade, and I now am rooting for its complete des…

If wanting to kill yourself over your sex isn't mental illness, I have no idea why insurance or the state should be concerned about it. We're not collectively paying for flat-chested women to get breast implants, or ugly men to get nose jobs, although they both may be upset about their bodies. We're also not labeling it as "life-saving." I don't understand how we can insist that these conditions are both the worst me…

Gender dysphoria is a potential cause of mental illness, not a mental illness in itself. If someone has a job they hate or an unhealthy relationship which is causing them to be severely depressed, the best treatment is simply to quit that job or that relationship and work towards something better.

It's just the same for transgender people. Growing up feeling that you're in the wrong body can cause a lot of mental distress, and the best and most universally effective option for fixing that distress is to simply transition to living as another gender.

Not all people who are transgender experience severe enough dysphoria to cause serious mental health issues, and yet they still decide to transition and report being happier afterwards. [1] However, many transgender people do experience distress over it, and a proportion of that population are even suicidal over it.

This is why I consider it to be a cause of mental illness, not a mental illness in and of itself. And it's important to note that, even for the group that experience suicidality, transitioning is still an effective treatment. [2] [3]

Plastic surgery, on the other hand, is not even close to universally effective for people who are depressed about being "flat-chested" or "ugly." Cosmetic surgery such as breast enhancement has been shown to have a much, much higher rate of regret than transgender surgeries. [4]

In short, the reason that gender-affirming care is considered a treatment for gender dysphoria, whereas breast enhancement and rhinoplasty are not considered treatments for body dysmorphia, is simply that the former is effective and the latter is not.

1. https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbtq/transgender-people-gender-i...

2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10925986/

3. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7869522/

4. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38688814/

Re: Pushing the whole company into the past on purpose

#50

Post by gortok »

llm_trw wrote: post #35

That policy change reads like a more liberal version of Obama's first term compaign platform on social issues. Lets not pretend that the current climate in SF isn't both way outside the Overton window for most of rest of the US and most of California until ten years ago.

With this comment you seem to be putting the Overton window farther right than I’ve seen it in recent memory —- outside of very rural areas.
Post reply on HN