Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | sergioj97's comments login

The op talks about what the "next step" will be. And as it hasn't already been, it's clearly speculation and in no way "stating what happens".


Well there are certainly many freedoms that we restrict or completely deny just because of the potential to misuse them (e.g. freedom to own a gun).

I don't think this is the case though, and I agree with all of your second paragraph. But I do think (and it seems that) potential to misuse a freedom is sometimes enough to restrict it, even completely.


Just wanted to note that while in your county the deaths from covid haven't exceeded (yet) 1% of infected, the article you link to states that in Italy, 8% of the infected have died (even though it acknowledges that this is higher than in other countries).


I think some of those countries are usually referred to as Central America.

From Wikipedia's article on Central America:

"Central America consists of seven countries: Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama."


Central America isn't a continent. It's a political designation that simply exists for Americans to "other" neighbors. (When not meddling in their politics.)

Greenland is also part of NA.


There's no consistent definition of continent; if there were, Europe damn well wouldn't qualify as one.

So, is Asia only a distinct continent so Europeans can other Asians?


There are 7 continents: Asia, Africa, North America, South America, Antarctica, Europe, and Australia. Central America and the Caribbean are regions of North America.


EU stands for European Union.


> I certainly don't agree with it but it makes a great conversation.

Does it though? It seems like a fallacious comparation for reasons that other comments have already explained. And as such, it makes a confuse, meaningless conversation.


Yeah I guess that's fair. It's a fairly shallow attempt to evoke a response.

At the same time, I still enjoy it because it did create a lot of responses.

I find discussions these days end up being an echo chamber of the same opinion. Something different and something to argue against is more interest than everyone just confirming each other.


If you read the tweets, you're in for a big surprise!


I personally found that the things the article's author argues that Zuckerberg doesn't understand are being acknowledged and discussed by Zuckerberg itself in the leaked comments.


> there's no way to "point fingers" and say "Look at what this company is doing!"

What do you mean? The fact that different people may see different things in their feeds doesn't mean you can't point out differences in (for example) social network's policies (sometimes this is more of an unwritten policy) on media that depicts children's bodies.

I personally don't have TikTok but I have never found a single video of half naked children dancing on YouTube, Facebook or IG that wasn't a reposted TikTok video (I have read about videos like that being on YouTube, though). And I don't think it has much to do with the fact that I don't like to see this kind of videos in my feed. It also makes sense given the demographics of TikTok app.

I don't have any serious citations to give, this is of course anectodical as it's my personal experience and I don't even have TikTok, but anyway I don't think one can dismiss worries like this just by blaming the algorithm. Most of the time that content shouldn't be there for the algorithm to recommend it in the first place.


Do you have citations for that? I'm interested and couldn't find convincing sources


No, unfortunately I made this assertion based on unscientific anecdotes I've read previously.


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

Search: