upvote

points

by Avicebron6 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby otterley6 hours ago|
[-]
If there’s no product or service to be consumed, there’s no value produced either. That’s the point: it’s harmful to eliminate the incentive to produce.
reply
upvoteby Avicebron6 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
People will _always_ need things. There are very few things that will eliminate people's need for things and producers will of course adapt to the environment.

What we need is an environment that does not give the producers asymmetric power over consumers and the products will naturally align with that.

reply
upvoteby inigyou6 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
What if only the incentive to produce bad things is eliminated
reply
upvoteby monkpit6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
* definition of bad is subjective and may vary depending upon which lobby group has the most cash to throw around
reply
upvoteby inigyou6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
no, I referred to actual bad things
reply
upvoteby otterley5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
The point is still correct. People often disagree on what is good and what is bad. It’s a judgement, not an indisputable fact.
reply
upvoteby readread5 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Oh good, nothing's possible then, we should give up on regulating bad things because hitmen think murder isn't bad when they do it.
reply
upvoteby otterley5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
How did you arrive at that conclusion? Laws are the result of debate between sides and the prevailing opinion. The fact that laws aren’t identical in every jurisdiction worldwide reflects that there isn’t universal agreement on every question.

Also, sarcasm isn’t welcome here. Please read the HN guidelines.

reply
upvoteby readread5 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
> Also, sarcasm isn’t welcome here. Please read the HN guidelines.

Ah yes, I didn't couch my post in any of the various, rampant HN-friendly versions of shitposting. I'll try to follow your example from here on out. Excellent touch citing the guidelines at me after your role in this thread, A+.

Re-reads this thread, taking notes

reply
upvoteby Y_Y4 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
You can hardly expect a greenname to have mastered such a subtle art.
reply
upvoteby readread3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I abandon accounts when they get way into the hundreds of karma, generally, or a couple times I’ve let it get a ways into the thousands before destroying the password. I prefer not to become attached to it, and find the minor clout of recognition (upvoted comments that probably ought not have been…) kinda gross.
reply
upvoteby Fraterkes3 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Your condescension is also obviously unhelpful here. Do better.
reply
upvoteby otterley40 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
What precisely did I say that is condescending?

HN is supposed to have higher than typical standards for participation than most internet fora and is largely self policing. It’s not condescending to tell people when they are misbehaving. Nor is it condescending to explain to people the law and how things work, provided you’re not insulting them in the process. Which I’m not doing.

I find much more concerning people’s certainty of their mistaken understandings and beliefs, combined with the most ludicrous possible interpretation of other’s positions.

reply
upvoteby inigyou4 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
so why do anything if it's impossible to tell what's good and what's bad?
reply
upvoteby otterley4 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
See my sibling comment.
reply