Also I wrote a song called Caves of Steel.

https://soundcloud.com/pudgene...

Hey! I was thinking about you but had no way to get in touch. Ping me somehow!

Sorry I’ll do better next time my bad

I don’t know if she did, and don’t care. She was great and we were sad to see her go.

I left because the company was bought, and the new owners laid off some of its more expensive long-tenured employees, since they were putting the site effectively into maintenance mode, trying to sell if off. They just wanted to keep ThinkGeek and didn’t care to improve the other properties. I was forced out, but I was there a long time, and it was good for me to move on when I did.

So you did not read the story. OK.

So the text contradicts the headline: it is not about climate change, but about criticizing the company in public.

This is a fake news headline. Please fix it.

(I worked with Maren briefly. She was great to work with. I also worked at Slashdot for many years, and this headline is trash.)

"Freedom can be dangerous, but that's the idea": Sure, but these aren't being sold with anything like the information and insight a normal person with reasonable intelligence would require to make a judgment about the relative degree of risk. They are, by design, dangerous. They are sold sometimes in unusable, potentially dangerous or deadly form (electrocution, for instance).

The "freedom" part here isn't "dangerous things should be banned," but rather, "risks should be fully disclosed and stuff shouldn't be sold without warnings to consumers in a form that appears to be safe from a consumer retailer."

These are defective by design. No one's fun is being ruined because they can be operated safely and some people aren't.

Yes, the popular model in that price range has numerous design flaws, documented in detail at hobbyists’ sites that, if you read even passingly, should make you not think, "I can make this safe," but, "I need to bury this 10 feet deep in sand far away from my house and loved ones."

A true believer in ... what?

No, it is not related to capitalism. Many Marxists share the view I am espousing, in fact.

I think it is fine to ban extremely graphic content, including sex and violence, as you described.

I think it is not fine to ban ideas.

So yes, allow cult recruiting, mentally ill people posting, anorexia promotion. All of that. Yes. Absolutely.

There is a potential difference between not-promotion, and censoring. There is definitely an expressed desire among some to censor, ban, block objectionable content like videos promoting pizzagate and other nonsense. I think that is insane.

But refusing to promote some content, that is a potentially different story, depending on how it is done.

I see no problem here (except with some employees who are complaining, who should probably be fired).