181–190 of 503 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are definitely ideas that are not allowed here.
I can't think of any non-rulebreaking comments that would get you banned just for expressing a distasteful idea. Can you give some examples?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can't both be not wrong.
I disagree, but I can't agree either. Do we have a deal?
Two men disagree and they bring a local wise man to listen to them. He listens to the first guy making his case, and tells him:
- You're right.
The other guy protests: Hey, here my side too. So the wise man listens to his side of the story too, and then tells him:
- You're right.
A bystandander witnessing this scene then calls out to the wise man:
- They can't both be right!
And the wise man says:
- You're right, too!
> [TikTok]'s addiction-based advertising machine is probably close to the theoretical maximum of how many advertisements one can pour down somebody’s throat. Well put. It's interesting that we pivoted in my adult lifetime from: 1. Myspace's emphasis on sharing things on your own webpage, essentially a hosted blog 2. Facebook's evolution from "hosted blog" to "friend update aggregator" to "chat client" to "friend upda…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are ideas that are not allowed here. It would be more accurate to say that some ideas require more work here. The reasons why are open to debate.
If someone did a show HN, for their murder for hire app to connect assains to clients, i imagine it would (rightly) go over poorly. At least i would hope...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chat has not been around since the 90s, not in the form that is used today.
Now that I think about it, this is correct on at least one front: I can recall chat systems that existed in the 80s . What's the feature of today's chat systems makes them qualitatively different from those that are 30+ years old?
The level of technical knowledge required to connect to IRC or a BBS in the 80s was far higher, which meant that only a tiny fraction of people bothered.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I 100% disagree with your idea that you, or anyone for that matter, is just here to disagree with other people’s ideas. Nobody disagrees with stuff just for the sake of disagreement. Who would do such a thing? You must be new here.
Either that, or you are, having apparently missed the obvious irony (mostly in the sentence you didn't quote)...
When I think about what social medias are left, I can only think about LinkedIn. Interestingly, there seem to have been a recent surge of interest for that platform (especially all the cringe worthy posts that started to pop up). After reading this article, I am starting to wonder if people didn't simply migrate to LinkedIn because of the degradation of Facebook's quality as a Social Network and as they still feel th…
LinkedIn as a whole is quite cringe though. Even companies share cringe worthy posts, often merely virtue signaling, while individuals hopelessly or needlessly exaggerate the greatness of experiences or other people. Trying to judge any company, I would completely leave their LI posts or profile out if the picture, unless it shows things are bad on the inside. And then all those recruiters not knowing how to do their…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are ideas that are not allowed here. It would be more accurate to say that some ideas require more work here. The reasons why are open to debate.
If someone did a show HN, for their murder for hire app to connect assains to clients, i imagine it would (rightly) go over poorly. At least i would hope...