Sounds like a brave plan indeed. Good luck to them!
Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup
441–450 of 580 posts
Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup
#442Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Do you support polygamous marriage? Two different things. Polygamy is prohibited based on the total number of individuals, gay marriage prohibition is based on the identity of the individuals; it's a critical distinction as far as the protection of individual rights are concerned. When you prohibit gay marriage you're saying "these types of people cannot be married" you must evaluate their individual identity to en…
Polygamy is prohibited based on the total number of individuals, gay marriage prohibition is based on the identity of the individuals; it's a critical distinction as far as the protection of individual rights are concerned. So then, it's not discrimination that you oppose. You just want to be the one to decide the target of the discrimination. Love is love, right? I am not projecting or setting up a strawman, I am he…
> So then, it's not discrimination that you oppose. You just want to be the one to decide the target of the discrimination. Love is love, right?
This response makes no sense. I didn't say anything about love or about wanting to decide the target of discrimination. If you pay close attention you can grasp my point. Once again, prohibition of polygamy says marriages that consist of more than two individuals are illegal, it doesn't matter who those individuals are, black, white, man, woman, gay, straight; the law applies evenly to all peoples regardless of who they are. Prohibition of gay marriage is the exact opposite, i.e. the identity of the individuals is the only determining factor with regard to whether or not the marriage is legal.
> None of which are among my justifications for my position.
Justifications which are also conveniently absent from the discussion. You keep bringing up who gets to decide, but we've already established and agreed that it is the role of the courts to determine if a law is constitutional and that's exactly what happened.
> It is also society's prerogative to overrule the courts via a constitutional amendment, if they so choose.
Which didn't happen. So to reiterate, you agree that it's the role of the courts to rule on the constitutionality of our laws, you've also failed to put forward any reasoning to rebut the court's determination that prohibition of gay marriage is unconstitutional (in fact, you stated you have no feelings either way) and you've further stated that the people could amend the constitution if they are so inclined... So where's the problem? Your use of the term 'judicial activism' implies that the judges are acting without regard for their duties as stewards of the constitution and are instead acting out of personal politics, but you haven't put forward any evidence to support that implication.
> Don't delude yourself. Everything is subject to the tyranny of the majority, if two thirds of the elected officials can be persuaded.
This isn't an argument, just a platitude; it's akin to saying "don't delude yourself, the 4th amendment won't protect you from unreasonable search and seizure if you piss off the wrong people". Well that's obvious, the point is that the intent of the constitution includes protection for the minority from the tyranny of the majority, claiming that this isn't true in practice doesn't add anything to a discussion about what judges should be doing.
Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup
#443"Brave is open source!"
Wow, new browser technology that is open source, this is good news. I'm hoping the development focus is flexible, remember flock? [0]
Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup
#444[deleted]
Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup
#445u
Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup
#446Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't adblock for privacy, security, or speed. Those are just nice-side effects. I adblock because I do not want to be manipulated into buying things I do not need. Interesting. I'm the opposite. I've yet to encounter an ad that has a hope in hell of manipulating me at all. I couldn't be more dismissive of them. And if I encounter one too often my dislike of the company starts to grow. "It's show time, and you've b…
Not all ads manipulate, and not all advertisers are evil people looking to manipulate their target audience. (Disclosure--I do digital media for a living) Case in point, I once had a vet clinic as a client. People were seeking out information on Google for certain pet symptoms that owners may not have realized warranted a vet visit, and we ran paid search ads against those terms. People were clicking them and then co…
Never try to get in the way of the HN anti-advertising hate train, especially with reasonable counter-examples.
Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup
#447Maybe this is a stupid question, but ... if ad blocking is such an issue for publishers, why don't they do the ad-serving logic on the server and display locally saved creative assets (from the same host)?
Also, an independent third party can't track such ads.
That's good, right?
Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup
#448Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I want to buy a card, I go to a shop named Cards Galore. I go there because the name makes me think that they sell cards. I know it exists because I pass it every day, and they have their name in big letters on the outside of their shop. Do you consider that I've been manipulated? More to the point, do you find anything unethical in this?
Manipulation, yes. Unethical, maybe? (when you look at its effect in aggregate) Honestly I just want all the advertising (be it physical (signage, billboards, smells, etc) or digital) to get out of my environment. It's almost always noise and it's ugly. There's no reason we couldn't build a hyper-connected system where if I'm looking for something, I can find it. I want socks? Ok, how many sock stores are local? Ok,…
Its ironic that your username is an ad for the addictive, manipulative game.
Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup
#449Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I write blog posts from time to time and I do it for pleasure because I enjoy writing about things that interest me and sharing it with others. I do the same thing, but I realized a while back there is a flaw in this model. It means the available creative works—which in turn effectively means the engine of culture—is determined almost entirely by people who are well-off enough to have the free time to do that. I do…
Which significant cultural works have been ad-funded?
Good question. The jury might still be out on this one though.
You could argue one way or another, as it depends on what is your definition if advertising. Advertising is not art but the industry used to have its share of regretful artists. Some artists in the 20th century, like Andy Warhol, made publicity the whole point of their art. It is common for film directors to raise money trying their hand at advertising before shooting features.
Despite the poor reputation of advertising in "art" circles, quite a few visual artists blurred the frontiers between the two. For craftsmen, it doesn't matter as long as they can use their skills to make something—and they need the money, too. I understand the bad rap advertising gets, especially online, and wonder why it is still seen as the dominant revenue model on the web. Still, I'd love to read cases of significant artists who used advertising to fund their art.
Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup
#450Its by the same guy who donated to causes doing their best to make sure two people in love can't get married due to their gender. Sociopathy has many forms and its obvious to me that Eich is just an untrustworthy guy with a lot of bad ideas. Low-rent projects like these is just further evidence that you need a founder/leader you can trust. Its clear he's exhausted his social capital and at age 54 is far away from his…
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10938818 and marked it off-topic.