What is right, and moral is I and we should have the ability to delete something I wrote 13 years ago. Not allowing users to delete past comments because the website fears they will lose value, is taking advantage of unpaid labor. I own my words, that's my value to give or take. What is right is offering a delete link to posts and accounts. Even Facebook does this. Facebook.
Under what theory are your comments personally identifying information and that they don't also fall into publicly provided information?
(2) “Personal information” does not include publicly available information or lawfully obtained, truthful information that is a matter of public concern. For purposes of this paragraph, “publicly available” means: information that is lawfully made available from federal, state, or local government records, or information that a business has a reasonable basis to believe is lawfully made available to the general public by the consumer or from widely distributed media; or information made available by a person to whom the consumer has disclosed the information if the consumer has not restricted the information to a specific audience. “Publicly available” does not mean biometric information collected by a business about a consumer without the consumer’s knowledge.
By uploading any User Content you hereby grant and will grant Y Combinator and its affiliated companies a nonexclusive, worldwide, royalty free, fully paid up, transferable, sublicensable, perpetual, irrevocable license to copy, display, upload, perform, distribute, store, modify and otherwise use your User Content for any Y Combinator-related purpose in any form, medium or technology now known or later developed.
Your ownership does of your words does not mean that you can revoke the license that you provided to Y Combinator to display the comments. Trying to do that would take significantly more legal effort than sending a request to randomize your account identifiers.
By that logic, anyone who's said something on TV or radio which they regret, or was recorded committing a crime, should also have a "right" to have it somehow wiped from the historical record.
If my comments are not handy, delete them. If they are handy then I deserve compensation. If I created it I can destroy it. If I created it and was not compensated then I maintain ownership and copyright control. Delete them now! This has been fought in courts and won.
The legal notes at https://www.ycombinator.com/legal/#tou say
"By uploading any User Content you hereby grant and will grant Y Combinator and its affiliated companies a nonexclusive, worldwide, royalty free, fully paid up, transferable, sublicensable, perpetual, irrevocable license to copy, display, upload, perform, distribute, store, modify and otherwise use your User Content for any Y Combinator-related purpose in any form, medium or technology now known or later developed. " .
If you do not wish your User Content to be displayed, I recommend that you do not upload it to the site.
[disclaimer to avoid any possible appearance of pretending to be affiliated with the site in any way beyond just being a user of it, goes here]
Most HN users are circumventing copyright restriction and paywalls to make content available to a wider audience. Weirdly enough they draw the line with citations, this is why so many projects are attributed to weird internet nicks.
Usually doxxing those nicks wouldn't result in financial compensation, but lots of legal trouble.
What you want is fringe and confusion to me, especially in this context. You control your nick and your comments are attributed to it.
If somebody else uses your comments for something useful, they can cite your nick.
Irrelevant to our concerns here. What other people do with other information is not my concern. What HN does with my information is of direct concern and legal consequence.
My job is not to facilitate someone else’s needs and wants. The problem here is a lack of a delete button. That is primus here. I don’t have to answer your question. You have to answer mine.
Then that’s a problem. If my content is worth something then I should be paid or is should have a delete button. This isn’t trivial. I’m well versed in copyright. I have copyrights and receive in software, and from record labels. Compensation or deletion, there is no middle ground. Period
OP here was also OP there. This looks like an issue clearly of concern to them, but there is some piece of the story we are missing if they repeat this question once a year or so while still participating on the site between asks.
You aren’t missing anything. Everything is public and I am an open book about this situation. I’m a privacy advocate, I delete accounts on social media from time to time, just not on HN, thus the posts. I have chatted with dang, posted, and emailed HN.
The problem started in the 80s when Jack welsh was CEO. He thought it would be fun to invest in all sorts of specialized debt. At the time it made GE‘s balance sheets look great. Then the debt obligations started to show up, that’s when things got bad. But not before Jack Welch retired with one of the biggest golden parachutes of all time.
A lot of people praised Welch back in the day. I don't understand all these but maybe he was not that shiny after all. So the trick to be a successful and loved CEO (or anything) is to take ownership of something, beautify the balance sheet and get out before it explodes.
This also applies for software engineering. Try to start a new project in some company, and you get the privilege of:
1. No need to maintain other shit mountain;
2. Get to start your own shit mountain;
3. Can come back as consult and win big bucks
4. Can speak at conferences about "How X is implemented in company Y"
This is an almost universal problem in any endeavor. Everyone loves heros and visionaries, few give any respect to diligent maintainers, so we have a world of shiny, fragile new things on top of crumbling older ones that haven't kept up. Whether its software, infrastructure, equipment or corporate structure or whatever, incentives make it always like this.
Yeah I believe it's just human nature. Can't do much with it except that in my career I'll pay more respect to the maintenance people and others who are sweating for someone else's glory. The glorious guys already get glory and big buck so they don't need anything else.
It’s really amazing that these companies can afford these kinds of compensation commitments and still make payroll and remain competitive in the marketplace. Wild how much of a competitive moat that size is.
Sorry. I glossed over reading your whiny complaints.
> Why does Jobs command such rabid adulation?
Why? Because he was interesting and strange. He tapped in to the zeitgeist and ran circles around all other tech hardware companies. He pushed his teams, other companies and society to bend to his influence. His company did things people didn’t think was possible. In fact, with the iPhone, the culmination of all of his projects, he made every other tech CEO look like complete assholes. All cellphones, all telcos, and everyone that didn’t have an iPhone all of the sudden looked slightly lame.
Your comment has ‘woke’ undertones, and I am So Over It
Not every historically significant person is nice or fair. Some of them were truly mean spirited, some did things in their past we now consider wrong. That doesn’t mean you get to cancel them from history. Stop trying to control everyone’s objectivity. I decide what is interesting, fascinating and bizarre for myself. Steve Jobs was interesting.
There is something truly awful in everyone’s past. It’s just a matter of if we found out about it before we decide to cancel you, too.
Flamewar comments like this are not cool, regardless of how bad someone else's comments are or you feel they are. If you'd please review the rules and stick to them, we'd appreciate it: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Note this one:
"Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead."
We ban accounts that post like that. I don't want to ban you, so please edit out any swipes, name-calling, and attacks that make it into your comments going forward. (You may find it helpful to set 'delay' in your profile to give you time to review them and edit them—that's what I do.)
Dang, you may remember I asked you to wipe out and delete my account months ago. [1] You didn't and wouldn't. Needless to say it left me disappointed in HN and you personally. You insist that a full deletion of my account would ruin the readability of HN, therefore you will not comply. This is my writing that you are reading. I should have the right to remove my creations if I so chose, or at least edit them one by one, including but not exclusive to name calling. I have no tolerance for garbage reasoning by some of the users you allow to exist here. I have no time for them either. My recent candor reflects that.
I have lost faith in NH because of your administration choices. My rhetoric reflects that lost of faith. If you ban me, fine. I sleep well at night, but I demand you delete my comments as well. I demand it! Once you delete my comment and account, ban me, please.
My words are mine. My comments are mine. If I chose to be forgotten and deleted, that should be and is my choice. My personal freedoms, my writing and my copyright are more important that your HN readability.
Good technology is transparent. If advancements are done right, you would notice much difference.
The truth is, not that much was different between 2000 and 2010 or 1990 and 2000. But 2010 and 2020? This last decade has marked such massive improvements in ways we aren't noticing, and in things we aren't using. Everything from cameras with resolutions and ISOs that are off the charts, OLED, LiPo Battery density, robotics with walking and flight, guidance, wireless transmission and encoding/decoding, Machine learning in everything including your phone, and our phones... they are amazing pieces of kit. Oh, reusable rockets that land themselves! Cars that literally drive themselves. Spot, the robot dog? Right in my office right now, ultra-thin laptops, compact high quality microphones, headphones with unbelievable noise-canceling, 3-axis gimbals, 10-bit n-log external recorders, wireless solar powered remote security cameras, drones with amazing stabilized video quality that you used to need a helicopter to shoot, and on and on and on. The last decade has been insane, turning future dream tech in to Walmart black-friday super sale items. You may not appreciate or even notice the tech advancements in the last 10 years but they have been monstrous compared to any other decade.
In 1990, nobody had a cellphone. In 2000, everybody has one. This change alone has a massive influence on society.
For example, planning a trip together for, say, 30 people. It used to take weeks. Today, you can basically decide the day before to join or not.
The whole SMS thing, with minor messages delivered in seconds, changes peoples behaviour. Not being contactable in a few hours maximum is not normal today. It used to be. A small message to shop something on the way home did not exist.
The worldwide students against climate movement could not happen at that scale in the 1990's, the comm infra simply wasn' t there
.
Nobody remembers phone numbers anymore.
Now that's cellphones. Add internet and GPS, and your society is massively different in a decade.
Machine learning, cryptography and decentralized communications. That's about it. Nothing else really improved that much in the last 10 years, we can just make some 2010's technology cheaper.
And smartphones didn't improve much after Jobs died. 120hz display and wireless charging is all of the innovation in last 2 years. Smartphone is now just a fashion statement and not really a technology.
1990 had neither GUI nor sound nor network on consumer devices. 2000 consumer device did not have video input and could not playback video even of standard TV quality. 2010 basically had all that even on mobile but lacked fast cellular data.
Actually humans have cannabinoid receptors. They are components of the hormone transmission in all animals, sans-(insects and Protozoa). Ironically, aspirin interacts with the human cannabinoid system to produce most of its medical benefits.
> “ Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are COX-2 inhibitors that work, in part, by reducing the enzymatic degradation of the endocannabinoid anandamide ”
The human endocannabinoid system has vast and far-reaching implications regarding pain, inflammatory system and metobolic regulation.
> “ Studies at the National Institute on Drug Abuse in Bethesda, Maryland cloned the G-coupled protein receptor (GPCR) in 1990, which is the target for endogenous cannabinoid ligands, and named it, “Cannabinoid Receptor 1 (CB1 or CBR1). This receptor belongs to the Class A rhodopsin-like family of GPCRs [3]. A few years later, the second GPCR: “Cannabinoid Receptor 2” (CB2 or CBR2) was cloned [4]. The CB1 and the CB2 receptors participate in numerous essential biological processes [5]. Some of these are: Neuronal plasticity [6], pain [7], anxiety [8], inflammation [9], neuro-inflammation [10], immune function [11], metabolic regulation [12], and bone growth [13].”
This isn’t royalties, IP, or trolls. This is licensing and if you don’t like it you can take a hike cause licensing keeps people fair. Without it everyone could and would take everything and anything protected under copyright.
I have a right to control the works that I have made. I don’t care who you are, if you blatantly steal my work and claim it as your own you better lawyer up cause I’m coming after you! Just as any software developer would, open-source or not.
> This is licensing and if you don’t like it you can take a hike cause licensing keeps people fair. Without it everyone could and would take everything and anything protected under copyright.
Which is exactly what SCO were saying. How soon do we forget how much we hate it when the corporate interests take their turn at bat over licensing? If your license permits you to be "that guy", it's clearly not libre. Maybe no one ever claimed AGPL was libre but this is definitely a huge reminder that it's not.
Mind, I'm not arguing that they didn't violate the license. My issue is the ruthless animosity with which people suddenly seem to love aggressive software license enforcement. Maybe I'm too old and crusty, but I would hate to be in a position like this, and would hate to put others in the same position. Especially when all signs point to this being an accidental go-live.
Hopefully, the US will be willing and hungry to allow, and even prioritize, US tech companies to develop completing technology. DJI's Digital transmission and decoding, range, as well as their controllers, apps, and UI are superior to any of our consumer tech.
Meanwhile, all the local soccer moms have bent the ear of local politicians and parks & rec directors, marking public shared spaces with "No Drone" signs.
This is going to be tech that is needed and wanted for our beautiful futuristic future, or only other countries will have it... and with it they will have a major tech lead. Which is where we are now... :(
