Yes, just like we accepted steroids in sports.

Wish I'd thought of this one, lol.

“The first AI platform created for professional journalists, communicators, and publishers.”

It’s quite ironic that he went on to cater to communicators after harassing bloggers.

Unable to titlemax due to HN maxtitle rules.

I don't post often or ever so don't remember, you can't change the title to be more reflective of what it is?

A shorter version may be

> A Vermont pharmacy chain's AI implementation led to delays, incorrect information and privacy concerns.

You can try, but then a different group of people might come around and say it's editorializing.

That's 102 characters, HN's limit is 80.

Vermont pharmacy AI rollout leads to delays, misinformation and privacy concerns

(Exactly 80 characters)

Or with the Oxford Comma:

Vermont pharmacy AI rollout brings delays, misinformation, and privacy concerns

(79 characters)

I think in this case - where an editorialized title is better representative of the article, but the published title is too long - it’s usually left to someone like you to give a suggestion, publicly, which is then seen by @dang or their kith, who can then actually make spot adjustments. I personally approve of your editorialization, but that’s worth naught but a canker in a hedge

Upvote to you if you understand the obsolete rationale why it’s 80.

Presumably to avoid having to line wrap for all the lynx users connecting to HN using DEC VT100 terminals.

Lets just break the lynx users for once, and see who complains. Change it to 81. Small enough to be invisible to most users, but when it breaks, someone will come up and shout. Better than going to 100, 132, 140 or 280.

Why 80 characters? Are they storing them on punch cards?

Oh yeah, uh, sure it's hate speech. It's wealthism. One of the worst forms of prejudice. The wealthy live in constant fear for something that's not even their fault... they didn't choose to be wealthy, they were just born that way.

If you're seeing this violent sentiment spill over to HN, just imagine how the general population is starting to feel about billionaires.

No, you're not.

And idk how people don't understand how "politeness" gets weaponized.

This video is an example

https://youtu.be/amSIcL3V5C4?is=hmlOx2t7dHg5j-lJ

Here, the only way this guy could've had a "good attitude" is if he had let the lady do whatever she wants with his service dog. This behavior is very common in situations where people feel entitled to something, but know the counterparty has the absolute right to refuse to cooperate. No matter how politely that information is conveyed, it's "rude" because they're being denied something they want.

The police don't like my attitude when I firmly say "no, sorry, I won't be unlocking my phone. I will only do what I am legally required to do."

People have a hard time understanding this because they are under the impression that they know how to be polite because they do what they think is polite. They are unaware that politeness is subjective and slippery and that people can and do use it to manipulate others into doing things they're uncomfortable with.

Yes, it would be interesting if the question was formulated like "we're gonna need a password" and this ends up being a lawyerdog situation. https://blogs.illinois.edu/view/25/574827

Did you try reading the Biological Invasions article they link to? --> https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10530-026-038...

It's way past my bedtime, so I will have to read it in the morning, but it already seems to address several of your questions.

There are a lot of people on HN who really don't like criticism of the police, but the surface-level reason will be "it's not technology-related".

More likely it’s because the title rule was broken. The original title was not used, and the new title is unclear.

They already did a trial which used the trendy buzzword to surveil the nurses. The nurses want to implement controls on that trendy buzzword before it is further misused by management to cause harm to patients (by way of making the nurses focus on meeting some arbitrary performance metric rather than focusing on patient care).

... They're aware that it's individuals in management, which is why they want to use their union contract to dictate how management can use AI.