Straight up... straight down. No orbit. Nothing to see other than "tourist" flights for people who want to see what space is like but without weightlessness.

I think it’s a little bit more complicated (and perhaps more “authentic” too) than you’re making it out to be. Labels definitely have strong influence in what gets played on the radio, but in your Cardi B example, Bodak Yellow was extremely popular on SoundCloud before it got any radio plays.

For your other questions, you can see in the credits of a song how many people are involved in radio hits. Labels invest money in creating hits so they can make money. The involvement and talent of artists varies from label to label and artist to artist but it’s generally not the organic process you seem to be hopeful about. At the end of the day, these artists have to perform not only in the studio but while touring, so they can’t be talentless hacks since some talent is required to be a profitable artist.

All: please don't re-fight the Russian Revolution here. HN is a place for intellectual curiosity, not rageful reactivation.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I know this is a joke (although only partly), but blocklists are honestly part of the problem.

People got to this ridiculous level of childlike annoyance at the mere existence of dissent through group effects alone, but compounding it by literally removing any form of conflict seems like the worst solution possible.

The solution to people acting terribly on the public square shouldn't be to remove it.

I cannot believe that Elon Musk has accused Vern Unsworth, one of the British rescue divers, of being a pedophile on Twitter, all because his idea of using a mini-submarine to rescue the boys was rejected[1].

It's absolutely disgusting behaviour on his part and completely uncalled for. It's one thing to professionally disagree with the best method for rescue (although Elon is not a cave rescue expert by any measure), but it's another to libel a man and accuse him of being a pedophile.

He's lost any goodwill he gained from offering to help. In my mind, he's lost all good will. You can't just go around accusing people of being pedophiles because they live in Thailand. He's as bad as Donald Trump accusing Joe Scarborough of murdering his constituent-services director.

[1] https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/15/elon-musk-tweets-hell-bet-...

Isn’t kinda the point of her statement that she isn’t unidentified? She was made famous by somebody else without her knowledge and consent.

When a production crew wants to use footage of you in a show they have to get you to sign a release. There probably needs to be some form of this for online exposure as well. What form that would take is a difficult question.

It depends on the jurisdiction (2 party consent vs. 1 party, etc.). It depends if there was an "expectation of privacy." It depends if the image or video is being used for a commercial purpose like advertising. [ADDED: I'm mostly discussing the US here.]

This case is probably questionable but, to your point, if I take a picture of you canoodling in a public park I'm perfectly within my rights to publish that image so long as it's not for marketing or advertising purposes (if people are recognizable).

This is disturbing for the following reasons: 1. It alerts us to the possibility of fake political adverts. Do I (hypothetically)see an ad purporting to be a Tory ad promising something that will damage me, placed by a non-Tory actor? 2. Are unknown actors placing adverts which cause discord and dislike? 3. How do we solve this problem? Where FB is not regulated it will be impossible to knowingly audit the materials on its platform. 4. Given FB’s lobbying power, is regulation even possible?