Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It felt pretty clear in the article that he was talking about people who were frustrated, tired, perhaps depressed, not in duress or under threat of harm. Hedging every exception makes the article weaker; I think you can write an article about how going for a walk every day is healthy without having to add a paragraph about how obviously this won't work for paraplegics.


This is great point that demonstrates how to read ethically.


It's pretty clear he'd default to that advice for just about everyone who wasn't in physical danger or being abused in some way.




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

Search: