Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | joeypickles's commentslogin

I wish there was an article on the oral history of comic chat.

I agree, it’s dumb. I never call those things popovers (is that a regional term?) so the whole time the word was a bit jarring. Also, at first I thought this was a riff on combovers, and imagined some weird male Medusa creature with a thinning head of dicks, and it was so disappointing when that turned out to be wrong.


It randomizes slices of the sample and begins to play the slices in the random order. Meanwhile it begins the bubble sort algorithm at a pace that matches the tempo, sorting the slices into their chronological order. Throughout, it only plays the unsorted slices. (I was kinda hoping it would play the sorted sample at the end.)


I actually wanted it to play them as it went, so that it would be <unsorted><sorted> each time through, with the former shrinking and the latter growing.


Seems appropriate here: https://genius.com/Moondog-enough-about-human-rights-lyrics

In other words, why do we have to make something a person in order to give it rights?


Because it's much simpler to inherit laws than to craft a whole new set. Once an entity is declared a person, the rather complex web of existing legislation that applies to personhood automatically takes effect.


Simpler in the short run, but creates tech debt I think.


We don't have to, that's just the way we chose to do it (specifically for groups of humans acting in a commercial context).


To be clear, it's not the way WE chose to do it, it's how CORPORATIONS chose to do it, because it benefits them greatly: corporations can get all the rights that a human can get while being immune to most consequences such as imprisonment and the death penalty.

Corporations benefit from this, we humans don't.


Corporations are neither agents nor beneficiaries. They don't take decisions. (That metaphorical abstraction is sometimes useful: here, it is not.) Some people are deciding to do things this way, and are benefiting from it, and those people are humans.


Reminds me of the lawsuit brought against South Park by Brownmark Films over the recreation of their infamous video, also done in a faithful “side by side” manner. Interesting that the courts decided the opposite in that case.


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

Search: