Comments by "" (@timogul) on "Vox" channel.

  1. This is why Netflix is winning, because they mix their shows to play on actual TVs. What they should do is keep dialogue on a completely separate track from other sounds, and allow viewers to raise or lower the volume of it separately to their own tastes.
    421
  2. Which is a fair point. The one place where I could see a role for affirmative action would be in removing legacy advantage entirely. The thing to keep in mind, however, is that let's say a school does include Legacy admissions, and that means that out of 100 slots, 20 slots are automatically off the table, and they go to white children of white parents. does that mean that it would be fair to offer 20 offsetting slots to non-white students, since those 20 white students got a free pass? Of course not, because if there were 5 white students applying that would be deserving of those slots in a fair contest, they are in no way benefiting from the fact that the 20 legacy students got in, so why should they be punished for the color of their skin? That's the problem when you consider race as a factor, the result will inevitably be racist, even if the goal is to balance out inequality. Deliberate race-based "balancing" only makes sense when you are considering race as some sort of a war, where races are winning and losing based on collective gains. In the actual world, it's all just individuals, one white person gains little due to another white person's achievement, so if ten white people do very well, that's no reason to knock a different white person back a peg to "balance things out." If the problem is certain white people gaining an advantage, then you correct that advantage, you don't try to take away from different people of that same skin color.
    25
  3. Well, you can reverse it, just with a lot less people. What the video is proposing is that they just eliminate the surplus population to achieve the "sustainable culture" they had before colonialism. I can't condone such a massive loss of life, but if that's the message Vox wants to advocate, then that is their business.
    15
  4. @Zaydan Alfariz Unfortunately, in the real world, that would not work, because they have already done everything they can do, and this is the result. Any sort of "scaling back" would mean a reduction in output. They could make Pakistan fair and sustainable again, just with 1/10th the surviving population. China tried that in the middle of the 20th Century.
    6
  5.  @kcs529  Yeah, some streaming services mix their audio differently than normal TV, so everything is basically "twice as quiet."
    3
  6.  @ChristopherWoods  That's pretty awesome, I hope to see more like that.
    2
  7. Every country was stolen from someone.
    1
  8.  @casinoroyal93  Because the items don't belong to them, they belong to the museum.
    1
  9.  @heypachuco1991  No, America won those states in war, just as the Mexicans won them from Spain, Spain won them from the Aztecs, and the Aztecs won them from other tribes in the area. If Mexico wants them back, they know where to find us. It'd be nice to pick up Cancun and Baja.
    1
  10. Why don't they just drop the emergency oxygen masks at the beginning of the flight? If everyone has a self-contained air flow, they shouldn't be spreading the virus to anyone.
    1
  11. If the assertion is that without affirmative action, colleges would just "go back to being all white," then that implies that white people are naturally more qualified than non-white, which is a flatly racist argument to make. This is not a complicated situation, admissions should be based entirely on merit. Period. White and non-white students would gain entry entirely on the merits of their achievements and potential. If a school is found to not be admitting students based on merit, if, say, they give unfair consideration to white students, then that would be grounds for a legal fight over discrimination.
    1
  12. This seems kinda one sided. I mean, yeah, there were some negative problems, but they are still WAY ahead of where they were before the changes. I mean, there are hundreds of additional people alive today for every death that could be blamed on the canal systems. Do their lives have no value? They should obviously take steps to compensate for the problems, but just "returning everything back to how it was" is not an option, because then what would you do with the millions of people that the country could no longer support?
    1
  13. "Ai have a hard time drawing hands" Professional artists: "Same."
    1
  14. You would think that once all the people who were alive when the item was taken are long dead, the statute of limitations would have passed. Items cannot "belong" to a given region indefinitely. They belong to whoever has them.
    1
  15. The problem seems to have nothing to do with cars, but with pedestrians. Don't cross the street! That's for cars!
    1
  16.  @moth5799  Well, what if your destination is on the other side of a gator-filled river, would your answer be "swim anyway?" No, you go to the nearest safe bridge and cross there. If people choose to cut across, then they are putting themselves at risk. These roadways are not built for pedestrians, and that's ok.
    1
  17. @Null Pointer Pedestrians are jumping off buildings and blaming the ground for hitting them.
    1
  18. There should be a consumer protection rule that a company cannot list an item's "regular price" as a value unless it has spent at least half the time on the market at that price. They can charge whatever they want, but the "regular price" should always be a price it usually is.
    1