We were proud of it given the circumstances. I'll edit the quote below to make that more clear.
"So, we shipped the product and introduced it at the show as planned. Despite a long list of warts and terrible performance, I thought it turned out well given the schedule and the circumstances. I continued to use it as my primary photo app, even though I’m not a hard-core professional. Others on the team were too bitter, such that they refused to use the final product."
Or perhaps concern with having to deal with 3rd party iMessage/Facetime clients while at the same time trying to maintain a high level of security. Apple doesn’t want anything to tarnish the security reputation of these products.
Then, a few years down the road, it’ll have slid down the slippery slope to include anything that could hurt someone’s feelings. This has been what’s happened to all of society over the past few decades and Facebook and Twitter will be no different.
People on Twitter and Facebook have already had temp bans for supporting Trump. That's no defense of Trump, but the minor things I've seen them being labeled as against Twitter/Facebook policy have been very minor. It's worrying to me as a free speech absolutist.
I used to agree with your basic sentiment. I'm still a strong believer in free speech, including speech that causes discomfort to those who hear it.
However, we live in a world that focuses violence on specific individuals, depending on their race, class, gender, religion, and a number of other factors. Our everyday actions are part of that system. Sometimes we help focus that violence, usually without realizing it. This is true of victims of violence as well as those who are not targeted.
What is our responsibility? Ignore the situation?
I'll tell you this: Feelings do get hurt, but the problem is not hurt feelings. The problem is the poverty & oppression baked into our system. A system that supports some people (definitely me) while making life incredibly hard for others.
Is removing hate speech going to stop these problems? Absolutely not.
Would I have any problem removing hate speech from the discussion community I run? Absolutely not.
Would the good people at Ycombinator have any issue removing hate speech from Hacker News? Absolutely not.
Each decision being made will be evaluated for its merits. "It's only a small change" doesn't actually work as rationale with this many people watching.
There is no slippery slope, it's a... grippy slope, because of all the... eyeballs.
What happened was he tried to get in and the one security guard told him he dad to be escorted by an employee, just as the sign said. Hundreds of people do this every day, thinking they will be able to see the campus on the inside. The only people that get escorted out are protestors who storm the lobby.
> Hundreds of people do this every day, thinking they will be able to see the campus on the inside.
During my time at Google, I had multiple people come up to me and ask me from where they could catch a guided tour of the campus. I always felt bad telling them there was none...
Related teams tend to sit close to each other in any case, so this is a worst case scenario. Which isn’t really that bad anyways. It’s good exercise and a rectangular building holding 14,000 people would also require a lot of walking. Sure, it could be many, many rectangular buildings which everyone else does, which would require even more walking. Not to mentain there’s a huge benefit in productivity for 14,000 people to all get abundant natural sunlight, which is available to only a fraction of the people in a standard campus. Vitamin D is deficient in many people and engineers typically don’t get out much. I’d say it’s a win-win for everyone. Finally, the campus is pretty compact, leading to a ton of open space, which, combined with natural light, will likely lead to greater productivity and also be a great attraction to new employees who value the look and feel of their work environment very highly.
"Plus, there are thorny issues like how to dispose of radioactive waste and how to decommission old plants."
The fact is, we're creating tremendous amounts of potentially dangerous waste and we have no long-term plan, much less the technology to pull it off. We don't know what the political situation will be in a country 500 years from now. If we put 1/100th of the money that we put into dangerous technologies and subsidizing fossil fuels and put them into renewables, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Germany is on track to be 100% renewable by 2020. Including solar. And they are not exactly known for their excess of sun.
"With wind and PV growing to 80 % of total power production in 2050, the study gives a lot of attention to how – and at what cost – the different regions can fill the gap when neither the wind nor the sun can meet the demand."
I don’t think we need this petition. The current and last administration have always honored and protected whistleblowers. It’s not like they would take their passports and run them out of the country or anything.
I think most people just don’t care about the personal life of a creator when evaluating its content. Even deplorable people can have good ideas. Why reject the ideas because of the source.
