"knowledge is good" is such a naive take. Trivial example: You only have knowledge of crimes committed by immigrants but zero knowledge of crimes committed by citizens. How is that good?

So, continue this train of thought - If only partial data is available, then no data should be available because the partial data might induce incorrect assumptions in the general populace.

Apply this to:

Vaccination / disease management

Housing availability ("if they only know of these areas, will those areas become swamped and drive up prices?")

Price of drugs / medical services, or even medical test results (how many more suicides "might" occur if someone gets a possible cancer diagnosis)

Climate change

or anything else.

I think you'll find you're quickly concentrating knowledge dissemination into a central authority who decides what is "right" and that is much more dangerous than incomplete information.

We're not talking about "partial data." We're talking about tendentious data that propagates existing known bias, produced by brutal problematic low quality policing. At the very least, people making apps based on crime location data need to acknowledge and flag such problems and inform their users of the dubiousness of LAPD and LASD data.

Surveillance tech and cop tech generally don't contribute to society because of these problems.

If you wouldn't trust RFK Jr. about vaccines, you should also be skeptical about what many PDs tell you. LAPD is just a particularly notorious example.

> We're not talking about "partial data."

You might change the subject away from partial data, but the comment I replied to _was_ talking about partial data, and my rebuttal _is_ about partial data and the judgement of whether that partial data is worth releasing based soley on how we imaging people might react to it. Have you read "The Unthinkable"?

I wouldn't trust RFK Jr. about vaccines if I didn't trust his data. But establishing a body that was in charge of disseminating data about vaccines is in high likelihood going to be taken over by RFK Jr types. Such a body shouldn't exist. Such a body would write "Turtles all the way down."

> "knowledge is good" is such a naive take. Trivial example: You only have knowledge of crimes committed by immigrants but zero knowledge of crimes committed by citizens. How is that good?

That counter-logic is so fundamentally flawed b/c it rests exclusively on the prejudgement of others and prediction of their use of the data while "I", the good thinker, can determine that it is bad for "them" to have access to this data. That is just a very bad way to think and is precisely what RFK-types do all the time.

It's still extremely corrupt, and done to benefit a very small group of people. Dismissing the criticism like this is directly against the rules and spirit of hackernews to assume good faith

You're using the word corruption without any solid evidence. The decision for the rule change has been clearly explained.

i'm imagining this, and don't see how it has any relation to the discussion

I like this perspective. I was thinking in terms of enjoyment I derived from switch 1 vs steam deck. For me, the Deck has already unlocked way more fun!

And when you don't need the Steam Deck for gaming anymore, it is still useful as a home server.

The span of control for the CEO of my company is more or less 1000 people. His number of direct reports is 5

Do you realize you're fighting a strawman or do you actually think this is a compelling argument?

This is 100% going to be the boot lickiest comment I read all day

As an american i feel it. have you ever visited China? it's sad man, in more and more industries america is only able to compete by banning china from even contesting the market

Not just on dumping or price, actual product quality, innovation and value. It's impossible to visit a Huawei store in Beijing and not feel it in your bones

> As an american i feel it

How do we have a productive discussion about our feelings on a tech site?

You start with a non-sequitur on China using coal to generate electricity.

Because that, too, is feelings. In this case, insecurity.

This site is fascinating place for me, especially comment section. Sometimes, visibly smart folks end up shooting their own feet with things like oversized egos, unwillingness to entertain any idea contrary to their already-held beliefs and many others. Makes me more humble and lowers my expectations of humanity, while in the same time giving me more hope for the future.

Bizzare mix, but pretty fun with controversial topics

This feels like subtweeting (vaguely referencing bad behaviors in this thread without naming anything or anyone) so I'm curious what you're going for with this comment.

> Another example: massive growth in Chinese renewables while the US opens up national parks for drilling and cancels solar/wind projects. You occasionally see a heartwarming post: “California adds solar panels over a canal” and it just looks cute and kind of sad compared to the massive, ambitious, and technologically superior build out of Chinese renewables.

EDIT: thanks I didn't realize I forgot to add the context of my original reply to the post. Edited it to add context.

maybe engage with it because we're all humans with feelings and they're incredibly powerful computational shortcuts? thinking it's virtuous to be an emotionless automaton is ideology (kinda like feelings!)

So nothing about the last 3 years has caused you to update your beliefs on this stuff? feels like bitter cope