Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | pseudalopex's commentslogin


> This feels a little excessively cynical, you still might hate it, but it's specifically for the 250th Anniversary of America.

> I don't know that "pledge" should be the right word, just maybe like encourage?

The article addressed this.

Although it’s described as voluntary, Carr said broadcasters can meet their public interest obligations by taking the pledge. This is notable because Carr has repeatedly threatened to punish broadcast stations for violating the public interest standard.

“If this were genuinely intended as voluntary, and genuinely about celebrating America, there is no reason to limit this to broadcasters,” Feld told Ars. “Cable operators are equally free to celebrate America, as are podcasters for that matter.”


The FCC has no jurisdiction over podcasters and no regulatory oversight on cable content.

Over the air content is something they have power over.

Oddly enough, this is the FCC staying on their lane… kind of


A request without power is a request. A request with power and context of threats may be a threat.


Your assumption they used their phone an average time was false probably.

> There are procedures to remove an unfit President, sure; but there's no requirement baked into the Constitution that requires those parties to act upon those procedures.

This would be enforced how?


Well, you can’t force people to follow the constitution in the first place, if too few agree with it.

>>This would be enforced how

Bingo. The flaw in the constitution. The Executive holds the only enforcement mechanism in government: the FBI, military and other police forces.

Having majored in political science as an undergrad and then being a trial attorney for 40+ years, I would argue that my use of the word 'flaw' is probably misplaced. 'Flaw' implies it could (should) have been created differently.

Alas, I am unaware of ever reading a workable way to 'fix' our constitutional 'flaw'.


> First, he published at least three hit pieces on the agent.

No.

> Second, he actually managed to get the agent shut down.

He asked crabby-rathbun's operator to stop its GitHub activity. This was so GitHub would not delete the account. This was to preserve records of what happened.[1] The operator could have chosen to continue running the agent more responsibly. And what was the proof the operator shut it down?

> the bot actually issued an apology for its behaviour.

This was meaningless. And the human issued not an apology for their behavior.

[1] https://github.com/crabby-rathbun/mjrathbun-website/issues/7...


We do not call inaccurate and misguided transparent confabulation trying one's best to do the right thing. And honestly and sincerely was a category mistake.

The HN guidelines said Don't be snarky.[1] You were snarky.

Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.[1]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html


Farewell, Rust for Web was a worse title. I thought it meant Rust ended WebAssembly support.

Send it to hn@ycombinator.com.[1]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html


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

Search: