45 Matching Annotations
  1. Apr 2017
    1. Julian Assange has no First Amendment freedoms. He's sitting in an Embassy in London. He's not a US citizen

      By this logic, Assange is not subject to US laws, anyway.

    2. shocked by the number of leaks

      Maybe the number of leaks is proportional to the amount of shenanigans being played by the government?

    3. gone beyond anything I'm aware of

      That doesn't actually make sense...

    4. harbor

      Word choice is intentionally belligerent. How hard did they have to work to write this paragraph without using the word "asylum."

    5. holed up

      No. He's been granted asylum.

    6. US

      US government view. The US is a nation of citizens. We do not have a singular view.

    7. but now believe they have found a way to move forward

      The subtext feels almost celebratory.

    8. stolen

      Do we call whistleblowers thieves?

      Different question: can a US citizen steal information from the US government? It feels like a reversal of the modus operandi of our legal system and its underpinning documents.

  2. Jan 2017
  3. Aug 2016
    1. On the other hand, 59 percent of young adults overall say they think owning a gun does more to protect a person from being a crime victim, including nearly two-thirds of young whites, almost 6 in 10 Latinos and a slim majority of African-Americans.

      But, they're wrong. And the fact the reporter did not include the information that this is factually inaccurate is irresponsible.

  4. May 2016
    1. Crank up the detail to 1440p Ultra or 4K High/Ultra, and the margin grows to 40 percent.

      No, that's 34%.

    2. The GTX 1080 beats the reference GTX 980 Ti by over 35 percent…at our 1080p Ultra settings

      Not according to your own graph...

  5. Apr 2016
    1. we welcome transgender team members and guests to use the restroom or fitting room facility that corresponds with their gender identity.

      For the record, that doesn't mean that men can walk into women's restrooms or vice-versa. The argument that it does emerges from a misunderstanding of what gender constitutes.

    1. But be careful: co-editing a book with a senior colleague may help them get the book done, but it won’t help you much at tenure time because it won’t provide much information about your own abilities.

      Apparently, editorial ability is not valued. Which is sad, since good editorship in academic writing seems to be flagging.

    1. Except that everyone is unhappy.

      Except that studies of overall happiness and satisfaction with life consistently show that the happiest people on earth live in Democratic Socialist countries...

    2. What matters is that everyone is the same

      Even the quoted portions of the story can't be read this way. The focus of the story is clearly on the joy gleaned from being generous. In a way diametrically opposed to the assertions of socialist overtones made in this piece, the story focuses not on the other fish or their happiness but on the rainbow fish and its happiness. The story is not about the collective but the individual.

    3. have been brought down

      This phrasing steals the rainbow fish's agency. The rainbow fish gave it's scales away, they weren't taken.

    4. In the end, everybody looks exactly the same.

      I thought it was a "rainbow fish" and "his scales were every shade of blue and green and purple, with sparkling silver scales among them."

      How could giving away such scales make everybody look exactly the same?

  6. Mar 2016
    1. Sanders sharpens attacks for N.Y. showdown that may dash Clinton’s unity hopes

      Not one single attack by Sanders is quoted in this piece. The closest it comes is vague reference to Sanders pointing out the differences between he and Clinton on fracking and Wall Street. That's not an attack, it's a matter of record.

    2. damage caused by Sanders

      I think the NYT meant "caused by a heated New York primary campaign." It's not like they won't both play hard.

    3. New Yorkers do not want to see him go on the attack against Hillary when Democrats should be focused on the big threat we face from Donald Trump.

      We'll get to Trump or Cruz or whoever the Republicans end up with (Sanders crushes all of them anyway), but for now there's a Democratic nominee to choose, in case they've forgotten. This is what's called a "primary." If the Clinton campaign doesn't want to compete in one, it can drop out.

    4. the left is still aggravated against her.

      The left will never stop being "aggravated against her." Though, "singularly disgusted by one of the biggest sell-out politicians in American history" would be more accurate phraseology.

    5. but I’m really not here to plug my boss!

      "Please clap."

    6. Donald Trump

      A nugget of insight amid this barren wasteland.

    7. Democrats

      Flawed reasoning. Young people and independents AREN'T Democrats. It's not going to be about endorsements. It's going to be about what Clinton will promise to do for us. Think of it as a labor negotiation.

    8. to ensure that they don’t sit out the November election altogether

      We'd rather vote for Jill Stein. And we don't believe the myth of the thrown away vote. The establishment has lost that argument by delivering us a nothing for decades. We don't like them because even when they had both houses of Congress and the Executive they still got almost nothing done.

    9. stays on course to secure the nomination

      She hasn't been on course for a week and a half now.

    10. Podesta noted that Sanders took a more negative turn in the Midwestern states that voted on March 15 — Illinois, Ohio and Missouri

      Nice try, but that had nothing to do with it.

    11. Senator Sanders is going to have to make up his mind about what he wants to do and what kind of campaign he wants to run.

      No dice. The Clinton camp can sleep in the bed their candidate made.

    12. eager

      *over eager. There I fixed that for you.

    13. rationale

      You don't really need a rationale when your campaign is doing well enough to win, regardless. To be clear, New York will probably decide the race. But, if Sanders wins it will no matter what the margin, while Clinton will need to win convincingly to really shut down the Sanders campaign.

    1. No, Not Trump, Not Ever

      What's amazing is how many elitist conservatives are coming out to say, in the most high-brow terms possible, that Brooks is spot on and they agree with every word. It's incredible how out of touch they are. Trump supporters will only be more aroused to back him after seeing this.

    2. David Brooks is still shocked—shocked!—his #GOP is rallying around a childish racist demagogue who knows nothing


    1. a lesson that I have to change the way I do my job if I’m going to report accurately on this country.

      But, not now? Why not talk to some of them? Why not try to write something the way they understand the world? From what I have observed, Trump supporters do not so much revile education as the trappings of education. They despise the uppityness of educated elites. This piece drips with the language of elitism.

    2. But Trump himself? No, not Trump, not ever.

      At least he got this part right. The only problem is that legitimization can take the form of opposition. The news legitimized him, fostered the possibility of respect growing around him, by providing an outlet for his vile rhetoric to reach people. He's too good for ratings to pass up, but in covering his every malicious spewing they created this monster.

    3. make an extra effort to put on decency, graciousness, patience and humility, to seek a purity of heart that is stable and everlasting

      It's been tried. It doesn't work. His supporters feed off his forcefulness, his brinkmanship, his unrelenting aggression. While we can't become demagogues ourselves, we are going to have to confront him and them with a similar ferocity. "Decency, graciousness, patience and humility" will get us nowhere.

    4. one every five minutes

      Slow day.

    1. That meta moment when you comment in hypothes.is on a comment in Disqus about internet commentary systems in which you use hypothes.is as an example of evolving comment systems.