Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | more _rjlt's comments login

From my understanding, stunning is still done in the West for producing halal meat- you just have to be careful not to kill the animal, so usually lower-level shocks are used.


It looks like it varies between low voltage stunning and no stunning at all: http://www.theweek.co.uk/58447/halal-meat-what-does-it-invol...

Mind you, kosher slaughter is no better.


Got any recommendations?


Ward Mundy's nerdvittles blog had a recent overview of the SIP/VoIP market. [0] Looks like he currently recommends Vitelity, VoIP.ms, or CallCentric.

Ward's PBX in a Flash projects (business class features on a raspberry pi or in the cloud) are also fun if you really want to go down a rabbit hole.

[0] http://nerdvittles.com/?p=26128


I'm surprised this isn't being talked about more, given hostility to China from the current US administration.


My best guess is that the administration doesn't care because the people being "disappeared" are Muslim.


What did you switch out for Gmail?


Fastmail. Works great.


The Kickstarter has a postscript that says not to wear them while driving.


A bigger notice mentioning why you shouldn't would be better, though.


Do you mean "why" as in the science mentioned above, or some other clarification or the nature of the harm? What would you have it say?

I ask because it seems to me that the simplest possible warnings are the most effective for the average consumer.


"____ aren't intended for use while driving, because they can make road glare much more prominent than regular sunglasses."


Unfortunately, deleting facebook means losing captions on your photos. Most of my college memories are captioned, so I can't just delete my account :(


> These days, pretty much the only people who never have sex before marriage are religious extremists

That's an incredibly ignorant and inflammatory thing to say.


Nah, it's pretty much true, as someone from the bible belt even.

Hell, it was always true. The point of a diamond on the engagement ring was because it was assumed that you had kicked the tires on that part of the relationship, and the engagement fell through, then that woman had something she could sell as a nest egg for her new life as a forever alone spinster, being the 'broken woman' that she was.


I think this is assuming diamonds are a long held tradition. Pretty sure that is a rather heavy fabrication.


Well, all traditions are heavy fabrications.

As far as diamond engagement rings are concerned, it's about a century old tradition at this point, so four or five generations. That's a pretty long time for the purposes of this discussion.

And this comes form someone who didn't get their fiancée a diamond ring for various reasons.


Agreed to an extent. I posit they probably aren't 4/5 generations of actual traditional usage yet. Most folks great grandparents probably did not have diamond rings.

I should also have said this was more a side comment. I don't think it detracted from the overall point made earlier.


I really don't think it is, though I guess most religious extremists don't see themselves as such


"You shouldn't have sex before marriage" is an incredibly ignorant and inflammatory thing to say.


Not true, since Congress can limit how much a stamp costs.

Edit: Apparently there is a commission set up. It's part of the executive branch, but still, the USPS can't up and decide the price of a stamp: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Regulatory_Commission


Ok, but either way that's hardly relevant given the comment I responded to.


I was responding to your statement: "Think of them as a private business when it comes to financials." A private business would be able to set the cost of its services.


Right, you were responding to a statement which is somewhat inaccurate but if corrected would in no way change the argument I was making or its validity. That's my point.


I'm not challenging your first or second sentence. I'm challenging your third sentence. I'm not sure where you got the idea that I was challenging your whole comment, when mine referred exclusively to the price of USPS services.


>I'm not sure where you got the idea that I was challenging your whole comment

I don't, only saying that the bit you're commenting on is wholly irrelevant.


The rate is high enough that in two generations they'll go from 5% to 51%?


Doesn’t seem too far fetched.

If a Muslim family on avg has kids around early 20s and have about 3kids each vs avg European family starting in early 30s and having 1 kid on avg..

In 60 yrs - Muslim pop will have 8x while European population will be at 1.75x

If Muslims are at 5%, they will then turn to 25% of population vs 75% Germans after 60 years.

The population change is exponential.

A lot of things that change you won’t even notice until it’s too late.


> The population change is exponential.

That assumes that reproduction rate stays constant. Fact is: after the second generation, reproduction rate is only a tiny bit above the one of the "host country" (per http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/demografische-stud...).

The reason is that while first generation women usually stay at home and care for kids, second and following generation women go to universities and then into jobs which means delayed childbirth and less kids overall (because each kid means a drop in career). In addition, Germany has easy and cheap access to family planning - everything from pill and condoms over "plan b pill" to abortions - than typical "origin countries", further lowering the rate of unwanted pregnancies.

Altogether, the "Umvolkung" theory is utter bullshit spewed out especially by the Identitäre Bewegung neo nazis.


Also the birth rate of the source population (Syria) is 2.5x. Germany is 1.5x. It's not really that far apart. Between that and the drop in the birth rate after the first generation, and the conversion out of Islam that will start happening as later generations assimilate and intermarry with locals, I doubt if there will be a substantial change in the Muslim population over the long term.


The rich also don't want to pay taxes. I think they're okay with that outcome.


Consider applying for YC's W25 batch! Applications are open till Nov 12.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: