You can spell out Hitler and North Korea here. Meta has no power here.

Incorrect. Users are running autoflag bots.

Every day you make comments that are downvoted (and probably flagged) by several people... I think it's quite possible that the real issue is not "other people."

Usually people who feel (or are) targeted are not 100% innocent.

There's a clear pattern where comments containing certain words are flagged much more often than comments containing mildly cens-red versions of those words. Could be HN itself but if we assume HN isn't lying about how its algorithm works (a big assumption) then it must be user flag bots.

It's not just my comments - you see something similar with headlines on the front page that contain certain names like El-n M-sk. They will accumulate hundreds of points and comments and then be cens-red.

This would have the opposite effect on me. I can get unreasonably mad about slow / sluggish internet connections. This would keep me wake for a long time.

Same here. I can already feel the adrenaline increasing ... :-P

Exactly. I elaborated on this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46599477

I am really puzzled that this topic is not present in the public discourse.

Politicians look at best at next term, CEOs look at next quarter. Climate changes took decades to manifest effects. And those 2 groups produce most news "worthy" messages. Journalism is quite close to being dead (with local reporting already being buried), as rephrasing PR statements is cheapest and fastest way to produce "content". Who is supposed to nudge public discourse in that direction, "influencers"?

> Climate changes took decades to manifest effects.

*centuries, it was first predicted in the 19th century when Britain was burning increasingly massive amounts of coal.

Yeah, this short sighted leadership looks like a systematic problem in western society to me.

I'm puzzled why you think it isn't.

Not sure, but I have heard that more than plenty in public discourse (NL / W-Eur) and even the repeated blatant lies about the 2015 wave of migration to be due to climate change.

Climate change was likely a factor in 2015.

https://www.dw.com/en/how-climate-change-paved-the-way-to-wa...

> even the repeated blatant lies

It is difficult to have a reasonable discourse when starting with such overkill positions. The topic is way too nuanced. The civil war in Syria had many reasons, political, economic, religious, but also environmental.

Climate change massively increases the risk on water supply and harvesting yields, and if that risk manifests in a situation where people are already unhappy due to other reasons, it can be the trigger for large-scale reactions.

With all that having many factors, you'll rarely be able to point to one thing as "the" cause. That does not make it less relevant, though.

I have Aphantasia and SDAM, so how I experience memories is vastly different from most others. But even for me music helps me to recall memories otherwise lost. I also discovered this trick and use it to get reminded of certain memories or people.

I would be interested how this was done as well. She mentioned the was using a free tier from Google, so maybe the data is not protected.

Looks like she might publish it: https://laurenleek.substack.com/p/how-google-maps-quietly-al...

Did you notice that it includes a shout-out to Bruno Simon?

Yeah, all credibility was immediately lost when I read that. I just closed the tab and put it away as ad piece.

The issue I see is that companies have limited liability. If they mess up, they can just go bankrupt and sometimes pass the cleanup costs on to society.

Therefore, I think it’s fair that society wants to have a say in what gets done and what doesn’t.

Maybe a way around this would be companies operating without limited liability. Would you be willing to put your entire fortune on the line in exchange for a fast track through regulations?

Edit: to clarify: I’m not arguing that all companies should lose limited liability. I’m suggesting the introduction of a new type of company structure.

> If they mess up, they can just go bankrupt and sometimes pass the cleanup costs on to society.

Or as Dupont, Dow, the Ethyl Corporation et al have shown, don't even go bankrupt and still pass on the cleanup costs on to society.

> whose sole reason for existence is to cut pollution by >90%, and which has demonstrably done so across nearly 100,000 miles of testing and operations

Then it should be easy to answer that request? Where does the $27M price tag come from?