HN user

an_guy

42 karma
Posts2
Comments89
View on HN

It is a fact that the number of ballistic missiles Iran is capable of launching had fallen sharply

Yesterday night, Iran was able to hit multiple targets in Tel Aviv including rail infrastructure, a factory and a few buildings. They reportedly launched around 300 missiles almost on par with what they launched in Feb but with more direct hits.

Therefore even in the unlikely event of an Israeli interceptor crisis, the situation is rather favorable to Israel

Most of the missiles were destroyed by interceptors. If they run out, we will be looking at huge casualties and infra damage within few days.

What I have observed is, if you don't know what the issue is, llm would usually suggest something that is unnecessarily complex and not ideal.

It might work but the moment something fails, llm suggest hacks instead of solution.

US and Israel killed more civilians in war last year than Iran in decades. So by that logic, US and Israeli terrorists must be terminated?

In Tehran 6 months ago

Did you miss the part where they were not able to verify any of these claims?

Bank tellers are deterministic though. They have a set protocol for each cases and escalate unknown cases to a more deterministic point of contact.

It will be difficult to incorporate relative access or restrictions to features with respect to users current/known state or actions. Might as well write the entire web app at that point.

Why is it that whenever someone shares anecdotal evidence of their friend or family member being affected by a vaccine, the first response is mocking them for being against the medicine?

Suppose a commonly used drug caused severe reaction among a fringe group of people, you don't mock those people and call them anti-vax/unlucky. The pharma responsible for drug should look into the case and come up with guidelines for usage.

The pro-Israel lobby has spent roughly 10-15M per year... This is hardly enough to offset the billions of dollars spent in U.S. politics

Those $10-15 mil are given to politicians and the billions are spent from US tax payers money.

For this to be true it would also require Israel to "buy" presidents who acted against Israel's interests

You might want to look into campaign contributions made by AIPAC and similar isreli institutions to these presidents.

Most (75-90%) of U.S. Federal military aid to Israel is contingent on Israel buying from American companies.

Which effectively makes these weapons free for Israel. US is literally funding Israeli army.

$10-15/per day adds up real quick especially for people who travels to work daily.

If you’re poor you’ll use your brain and pay the $2.95 to ride the train

I hope you do understand this is only viable for people who live or travel near train stations.

Anyone who live far from rail network would have to rely on bus/cab/ride-share to complete their journey and end up spending almost as much as one would on a car but without the flexibility.

the cost of moving to the place in the first place, social connections, health (even worse for those with disabilities), emergency services, retirement, etc etc

Anyone moving to bay area for a higher income job would have most of these issues.

A forum full of people willing to migrate for better income and lifestyle should not be criticizing "cost of moving", "social connections", "health disabilities" and "retirement".

I love how all these European politicians wants US to send more money and weapons to Ukraine while thier own individual contributions are significantly lower.

If they want to fight so bad, why not spend more % of their own gdp, especially French and Germany who are close to the situation.

Germany's Merz seems to know whats going on, but is still trying to be veeeery diplomatic about it.

They literally have no other option. If they could continue war on thier own, they won't be "trying to be veeeery diplomatic about it"

1. Nuke doesn't guarantee anything in current situation. Russia might blow up the nuke moment it arrives in Ukr.

2. US France UK has made it very clear that they can occupy and establish military bases in non nuclear countries without repercussions, especially in Middle East and Africa.

3. Memorandum was signed by multiple nuclear countries and none of thier troops are deployed in Ukraine. Besides US was the largest supplier of weapons in Ukraine.

US is hardly affected by Ukr situation. For them to get involved, there should be something at stake. If they owned something in Ukr, they would have reason to defend it with US troops. Russia won't escalate by attacking US troops or resources.