Do you really want to "culturally reconcile" with people who want to send the army to quell peaceful protests?

That is not a view that you can build a democracy on. To have democracy, you have to exclude certain ideologies and ideas. This has always been the case and will always remain the case. Some ideologies are antithetical to democracy, and that article espoused one of them.

> Apple also said they were not part of any spying program, until it was revealed they were part of PRISM.

This does not seem like an accurate statement. After the PRISM revelations, which named Apple, Apple said they were unaware of the program and were not giving them access. As far as I know, this is the way things still stand today. The leaks claim access to Apple, Apple says they are not providing access. This may be explained through either party lying, or by the FBI being able to access Apple without their cooperation.

> They also said their home button had a hardware problem and you had to buy a new phone, when it's been later demonstrated it could be fixed with software.

This also seems inaccurate. Apple has never claimed you need to buy a new phone if the home button breaks. The actual issue is that the home button is part of the security system of the phone, runs its own fingerprint detection and is paired with the mainboard, and thus cannot be replaced without updating this pairing, otherwise there would be a trivial security break for the fingerprint protection. As a result, only Apple have the required access to replace the button, and thus third-party replacements are impossible.

As far as I know this is also still the case.

> This does not seem like an accurate statement. After the PRISM revelations, which named Apple, Apple said they were unaware of the program and were not giving them access. As far as I know, this is the way things still stand today. The leaks claim access to Apple, Apple says they are not providing access. This may be explained through either party lying, or by the FBI being able to access Apple without their cooperation

Of course, gag orders (and PR common sense), prevent them from giving you this information.

But given what we know about the NSA and the context around it, I'm enclined to trust The Guardian and Snowden about it.

> This also seems inaccurate. Apple has never claimed you need to buy a new phone if the home button breaks. The actual issue is that the home button is part of the security system of the phone, runs its own fingerprint detection and is paired with the mainboard, and thus cannot be replaced without updating this pairing, otherwise there would be a trivial security break for the fingerprint protection. As a result, only Apple have the required access to replace the button, and thus third-party replacements are impossible.

No, the failure I'm refering to is of the iPhone 4 home button, which didn't have a fingerprint sensor yet.

> But given what we know about the NSA and the context around it, I'm enclined to trust The Guardian and Snowden about it.

None of my options suggested above required not trusting them. Either Apple lies about cooperating, the FBI lies about having access, or the FBI has access without Apple's knowledge.

Anyway, their statements on the matter go much further than what a gag order would require.

Dang, I'm keen to understand the process here on HN because I can see my reply is hidden, not flagged. It is only visible to me when I am logged in. Where can I read about your framework that you use to make decisions like this?

You're shadowbanned, usually because people have flagged your comments as nonconstructive in the past, and although I would personally think your other one is a bit ranty it's probably not worth being flagged, so I vouched for that one and this. If you're seeing this consistently I would email the moderators at hn@ycombinator.com; they'll be able to help.

> You're shadowbanned

saagarjha and dang - please could you give an answer to my previous question?

> You're shadowbanned

@dang @saagarjha - Does this mean all my comments will keep getting banned? I just wrote a comment, and it is blocked again. Where can I read the rules/process on shadowbanning? I am committed to trying to tone down my replies and focus on being accepting of others' realities, and being constructive.

Thanks

> but I just can't imagine the thought process behind 'and the bullets avoid white / asian NYT reporters and crew members and specifically target the ones with melanin above a certain level'.

Bullets don't fly on their own accord. Someone aims them.

That is a serious accusation. What evidence do you have that this hypothetical you are constructing has any bearing to reality? I remember a time when 'innocent until proven guilty' was a guiding principle of public conversation. These days we gleefully accuse people of hypothetical crimes. How about we stop doing that?

> I remember a time when 'innocent until proven guilty' was a guiding principle of public conversation

It's a guiding principle of jurisprudence, not conversation. Don't be so pompous as to think the level of your discourse rises to that of a court proceeding.

I did not make any accusation. I was clarifying the position of the people who's thought process you "couldn't imagine".

Now you can.

Yes it is. We can’t make up things that people did not say and get mad at them for it. That’s absurd.

Nobody's made anything up?

It was handled that way only after first handling it incredlby, horrendously badly. They were dragged kicking and screaming by their entire staff into handling it correctly only after a week of absolutely bungling it.

I subscribe to the Times for that staff. I skip over the clickbait of the Stephenses and Brookses and read Blow and Bouie.

That's the beauty of identity politics. No matter what you say, you are always going to encroach on someone's identity.

Whoever promoted it, was a machiavellian genius. People can't rebel if they keep each other in check.

> That's the beauty of identity politics. No matter what you say, you are always going to encroach on someone's identity.

> Whoever promoted it, was a machiavellian genius. People can't rebel if they keep each other in check.

That is exactly what I wanted to say too but you said it better.

I'd point out that there are possible hundreds if not thousand other software that use the terminology. It doesn't offend me at all.

$> man -k slave grantpt (3) - grant access to the slave pseudoterminal grantpt (3p) - grant access to the slave pseudo-terminal device jack_netsource (1) - Netjack Master client for one slave kdeinit5 (8) - Launcher for applications built with kdeinit support, ... ptmx (4) - pseudoterminal master and slave pts (4) - pseudoterminal master and slave ptsname (3) - get the name of the slave pseudoterminal ptsname (3p) - get name of the slave pseudo-terminal device ptsname_r (3) - get the name of the slave pseudoterminal Tcl_CreateSlave (3) - manage multiple Tcl interpreters, aliases and hidden c... Tcl_GetSlave (3) - manage multiple Tcl interpreters, aliases and hidden c... unlockpt (3) - unlock a pseudoterminal master/slave pair unlockpt (3p) - unlock a pseudo-terminal master/slave pair

$> man -k master agentxtrap (1) - send an AgentX NotifyPDU to an AgentX master agent getpt (3) - open the pseudoterminal master (PTM) gnutls_session_ext_master_secret_status (3) - API function gnutls_session_get_master_secret (3) - API function gnutls_session_set_premaster (3) - API function jack_netsource (1) - Netjack Master client for one slave mmafm (1) - creates AFM font metrics for multiple master fonts mmpfb (1) - creates single-master fonts from multiple master fonts ptmx (4) - pseudoterminal master and slave pts (4) - pseudoterminal master and slave pulseaudio-ctl (1) - Control pulseaudio's basic functions such as the maste... RAND_DRBG_get0_master (3ssl) - get access to the global RAND_DRBG instances SSL_get_client_random (3ssl) - get internal TLS/SSL random values and get/set... SSL_get_extms_support (3ssl) - extended master secret support SSL_get_server_random (3ssl) - get internal TLS/SSL random values and get/set... SSL_SESSION_get_master_key (3ssl) - get internal TLS/SSL random values and ge... SSL_SESSION_set1_master_key (3ssl) - get internal TLS/SSL random values and g... Tcl_GetMaster (3) - manage multiple Tcl interpreters, aliases and hidden c... Tk_GetImageMasterData (3) - define new kind of image unlockpt (3) - unlock a pseudoterminal master/slave pair unlockpt (3p) - unlock a pseudo-terminal master/slave pair WildMidi_MasterVolume (3) - sets the overall audio level of the library. xapian-replicate (1) - Replicate a database from a master server to a local copy

I'd also say `man` from the unix manual <- yep, would you consider that to be the elephant in the room?

If I had to hazard a guess, we are all a bunch of technologists/engineers/tinkerers who deal with technical stuffs; not some societal driven definitions and constraints that supposedly define what `man` is in this context. We bloody well know what `man` is in this context - manual pages. For some odd $deity fore shaken reason, please don't try to bend the meaning of it.

> It doesn't offend me at all.

Which means this is NOT ABOUT YOU. The fact that something does not bother you has absolutely zero impact on how other people feel about that same thing.

I think it's 99.9% certain that GP was making a joke.

Very real issues, being it offends some minority, somewhere. Guess what, everything offends some minority somewhere.

In essence, I am against the policing of language to police the mind.

> Guess what, everything offends some minority somewhere.

No. It does not. It most definitely does not. This is a lame excuse, and also a blatant lie.

Would you please stop using this site for political and ideological flamewar? It destroys what it's supposed to be for.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

You've unfortunately been doing it a lot, and we've already had to ask you to stop.

Why are you asking me, and not the other guy?

Why is it me who is supposed to shut up, and not the other guy?

That sounds like taking a political stand to me.

Or are you going to try to claim that "oh those minorities are such whiners" is apolitical, but "no they are not" is not?

You allow lots of inflammatory and political opinions on the site. But you don't allow people to stand up to them or challenge them. That is pure hypocrisy.

Wind turbines do not make that kind of noise. It's always, every single time, people angry about their view or any kind of change at all.

Every single time.

No, it's a pretty safe bet that any of these complaints about wind turbines is just NIMBYism. It happens every single time.

Yes, you would be much better off doing that.