HN user
Let me choose. This common point seems more like a rationalization for the default behavior of hyperscalers. AWS isn't avoiding prepaid due to concern about my site's virality, just that prepaid = less money.
Everybody who believes civil violence is a productive solution to any problems we have in 2026 is wrong.
Hilarious joke, Mr. Fukuyama. You have masked goons running around, detaining and even killing people without probable cause. If the results of the 2026 midterms are not to the liking of the current POTUS, it isn't unthinkable that he would try to overturn them, even by force. Would you be hand-wringing on HN about how violence is always bad, then?
But I digress. Firebombing Sam Altman is very bad; there is a multitude of good points against it, from the moral to the pragmatic. "Violence is fundamentally evil" is just a lazy and evidently false argument that does you a disservice.
Their point is that empathy is a (very useful) emotional response. It doesn't give you a correct model of the other persons mind.
Someone could be extremely proficient in disciplines that are associated with 'raw' intelligence, and yet utterly fail at theory of mind. Anyone that has been in a college campus probably has seen examples e.g, Classmate might click instantly with real analysis but will routinely perplexed about why their girlfriend is mad, or why they are seen as abrasive.
To be clear, in my experience it wasn't even a case of being on the spectrum or other neurodivergence. They simply had a bad model of other people's thoughts and emotions. Of course this isn't DnD, I've met people a order of magnitude smarter than me in the usual academics and with a deeper understanding of people.
You might not like the terminology, but it's a real thing and can be independent from what we usually call intelligence.
Chilean here, totally understandable by paying attention. I didn't even know Brazil was under dictatorship in '77. The whole point of the secret agent framing is that it works better if you don't know much about the setting.
Are you sure your opinion isn't being colored by culture war bullshit?
One of the boring and meaningless movies I ever seen. No arc, no coherent story, (almost) no humor, no development, no intrigue, nothing.
I understand finding the movie too long or difficult to follow without historical context, or even just not feeling it. But if this is your conclusion after the last scene, you either didn't watch it or are being contrarian.
Not really familiar with Brazil (although I am with military juntas) but I think the spy misdirect helps a lot. If you are slightly observant you will get the gist by the middle of the movie. The spy thriller aspect avoids making the uncertainty frustrating until then.
Obviously by judging the comments it doesn't work for everyone, specially the leg scene confusing a lot people, which I didn't expect tbh. Gay bashing cops isn't a dictatorship only thing.
Yeah yeah, it isn't arthouse but, is it a less of a thinker than Pulp Fiction? I have the suspicion that GP would find IMDb Top movies agreeable and they aren't all deeply introspective films, which isn't a bad thing.
I think it's just survivorship bias, we don't remember the pre-2000 schlock because it's schlock. The two real "things used to be better before" situations IMO are:
- The loss of DVD revenue killed mid-budget productions, in the US the options are mostly indie darling or outrageous budget blockbuster.
- Big productions look flatter than before due to VFX crew exploitation. The VFX must be reworked 100 times with minimal time because planning is for suckers. No complex lighting for you and only crunch for the non-unionized Korean.
Well... they weren't immigrants, they were annexed. Why should they speak English?
Are you really telling me you wouldn't pay any amount of money to do menial housework? If not, why not?
This is called having a live-in maid or a cleaning service. Even in the first-world, where there isn't a disfranchised rural population to provide cheap labor to the middle class (e.g. Philippines, most of LATAM 20 years ago) the service will be cheaper than the price of a vaporware bot [0]. Now, you might say the droid is cheaper if you want a live-in maid in HCOL area, but have in mind that this thing barely can fold clothes and fill a dishwasher (an actual domestic bot). Also it sometimes is actually a dude controlling it remotely.
We would need bots of the level of that awful I Robot movie with Will Smith.
Just be rich (in debt) like Americans seems like a bad plan for a global brand. Poorer countries outside NA and the EU buy stuff too, y'know.
Uber, lyft, regular taxis
Waymo is already there, just needs to scale and they are already cooperating with Uber.
public transit
Unless Musk develops the shrink ray it will never compete with actual high throughput public transit, for the same reason if jets flew themselves we wouldn't commute by air. The cost of drivers per fare is less than in a private car, so the benefits for a bus are lesser. Modern metros are already autonomous.
I would posit that the human brain is complex, and adding senses is simpler than replicating an aspect of the mind more accurately.
Tesla is leading and succeeding. People have faith in Musk as a leader. Nobody trusts CCP EVs, just like nobody trusts Huawei or Xiaomi phones.
That sounds literally like a religious mantra. Do rational investors have 'faith' in the Costco CEO? Do they even know his name on top of their head?
Yeah sure, all those Brazilian and Ugandan 65 year olds that are emigrating to the US for the Medicare. It's not like you need critically need nurses or tax generating young people in general.
I don't know, FIFA is a den of villainy, but what happens if I dunno... half the Brazilian team ends up on an ICE camp? It wouldn't be during airport customs, but what if Agent Cletus sees the team bus and thinks that he can get a nice bonus.
FIFA will ignore unlimited human suffering but if matches don't happen it might be a problem.
Because to a certain group of HN regulars everything that gives them a tingle in the conscience is "offtopic" and "politics". Another quieter group believe themselves to be the rational Übermensch and cannot wait for the vagrants and the spooky pinky haired leftists to be put on camps.
Trump is not long for this world, MAGA might crumble or more probably fall under the control of one of the possible successors in the WH. Establishing diplomatic ties with his wranglers pre heart attack is smart.
As for how this is seen internally for Danes, at least in my part of the world the US admin has already achieved crackhead with a knife status. I suspect that trying the dog whisperer shtick (like Mamdani) will not be seen negatively.
More datapoints in USD (Chile) from checking various companies:
150GB-200GB ~15 USD
400GB-450GB ~19-20 USD
Unlimited (without throttling) ~21-27 USD
This is the price after the new client ~20% discount expires (generally 6 months). The unlimited and higher tier usually include stuff like Amazon Prime Videos subscriptions, local IPTV or roaming gigs. All plans obviously include calls and texting.
Is it? It was (as far we know) a mild shitpost of a public figure like from a decade ago. Photoshopping someones head over the Pepe Silva meme is not nice, but its hardly harassment. To me the "worst" thing was registering the domain, which he gave to Torrone and apologized quite well in my opinion https://gist.github.com/NPoole/d9aab9dfa2a18f4141039f7ce3505....
Sure, if this was a pattern of behavior it would be ridiculous to play the victim, but there isn't as far we know. 9 years later, Torrone starts Mullenweg-posting because some random criticized him for AI stuff. He posts their private email taken from a receipt and when blocked he continues with sock-puppets. Sparkfun guy gives a (quite measured) opinion colored by the fact that Torrone is still is doing this shit to random people. Torreone acusses the Sparkfun guy of being his personal Moriarty.
The most unhinged (and cowardly) thing to me is bringing up his partner and his newborn at every turn in his Twitter shitflinging, when any "slights" just seem only directed at him.
(Dude, if you are reading this just log off, this might literally just sleep deprivation. Take focus on caring of your child instead of fighting on the internet)
While Reddit always has someone celebrating / inciting everything from the benign to the macabre, this is just cope.
Kirk was in a process of sanctification by the right as a knight for debate and reason, as if he wasn't gleeful about Paul Pelosi almost being pulped to death with a hammer. People not dropping everything to make him MLK is not celebrating his murder. As for Brian Thompson, he was the modern equivalent of a British tax man in the Irish Famine, people being indifferent to his death is expected. If Mangione was more palatable in his politics to MAGA (instead of just being a RFK fan) and Thompson had photos with Pelosi or something, he would've been a perfect Trump pardon candidate.
As far my recollection goes Voat was actually pretty nice content wise until /r/fatpeoplehate got banned. After that it became the dumping ground for every shithole community that was too awful for Reddit, quite an achievement TBH. It was inevitable with 20/20 hindsight, but I would've loved if it had had more breathing room to actually develop as healthier alternative.
Even if it failed the same way it could've influenced the redesign to implement RES-style QoL changes instead of the clusterfuck that New Reddit still is.
Finally, Schizophrenia as a Service (SaaS).
Yes, you're right. It just that the comparison with Ukraine (invaded for no rational reason) + 'wiping out' made me think sejje was making a stronger (?) hypothetical.
I think we're have strayed too far from the point of ´might makes right' is bad, actually. GP very clearly chose Italy as an example because it's less polemic than the obvious option with a enormous manufacturing base and nukes.
Beyond the other replies to your 'point', fent has nothing to do with Venezuela⁰. It's pretty obvious if you think about it for 5 seconds, it's a dense synthetic opioid. Is there incredible chemistry knowhow in the quite far off Venezuela? No. It makes as much sense as making meth on the Peruvian jungle.
The precursors are made in legal-ish Chinese and Indian labs and shipped to the US and Mexico (y'know close where the users are). It's finished state-side or in Mexico where the DEA has less power. In fact one of the routes is:
China Lab -> Conventional Post -> Porch of a clueless gringo with a new 'online job'-> Smuggled to Mexico -> Mexican Lab -> Smuggled to the USA -> Distribution
[0] https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/files/2020-03/DEA_GOV_DIR-...
That would result in the obliteration of France?
To be clear, if we are talking about a salt-the-earth level conventional bombing for pure annexation / genocide of a EU nation the French would:
1. Remind the US via diplomatic means that they have nuclear subs and the will to use them.
2. If ignored, select some non-mainland territory (PR or Hawaii) and make a ultimatum. Mention that if the US does not desist they will wipe it, but will not launch attacks on the continental US.
3. Repeat 2 until they stop or escalate.
The French would absolutely do this, the thing you propose is so beyond the pale (even now) that the only conclusion is that the French would be next.
Wiping off Italy for no reason is enough to trigger a French nuclear response.
I find it very telling that most comments are supposedly seeing contempt for rural people in this piece, or that it classifies wood burning as primitive. I live in a country where wood still is the most common fuel, even in the urban areas sans the capital city. People do it because is cheaper, and that fact is the thrust of the piece, people normally buy it.
A food bank is a noble thing, but more people relying in it is obviously a sign of socio-economic decay. Food and heating in winter are literally the most basic humans needs, if you need free firewood you aren't doing well. It's not "cute" that grandma's pension doesn't cover food and a delivery of wood from a sawmill. People are nay-saying and flagging because realizing that your country is becoming poorer sucks ass, so "coastal elite" pearl clutching is easier.
I'm not acquainted with her work, but after reading the transcript your comment seems... highly moralistic and highly judgmental?
The whole interview reads as very sober, she mentions elements that are at odds with the pop culture understanding. She very explicitly takes head on this type of criticisms.
I think the question of how you judge these people is very tricky. People often write in to me and say, "I don't like the way that you do sometimes make judgments about X as a mass murderer, when they're 2000 years in the past. Surely, it's often said, "You should be judging them on their own terms, not on your terms."
I've got two responses to that. One is, quite often, these people were hostilely judged in antiquity itself, but we rather brush that under the carpet. Julius Caesar, for example, it's reckoned now that he may well have killed about a million Gauls in his campaign against Gaul, and there were people in Rome who said he was committing crimes against humanity. This is not a new invention that Caesar was a war criminal, there were people in Rome who said that. So I think we have to be very careful always to listen out for the discordant voices in antiquity itself. But I think perhaps more important is that the job of the historian, and this kind of explains I think why we sometimes find there's a flip flop here between one sort of judgment of Alexander the Great and another, you know, favorable or not favorable, same with Caesar, whatever, is that the job of the historian I think is to have stereoscopic vision. I think it is important to understand these characters in their own context, and in their own terms, and how people, by the standards of their time, yes, I think you should do that. But I think that the modern historian can't just leave their own moral values, you know, at the library door. I do at a certain point have to say I find the conquests of Alexander the Great, very, very uncomfortable, and I think what I particularly dislike in terms of our modern appropriation of them is the way we somehow seem to go along with approving of what they did. I might not want to disapprove of it, I might want to say, in part, that by the standards of their own time was okay, but I do have to say it's not the standards of ours, and we have to realize that there are moral issues and questions about what happened in antiquity that we shouldn't be afraid of bringing to the surface. I'm very happy to do that. I mean, I think it's quite interesting, I've chosen a group of men for my most influential Rome, I think I had no choice but to do that. I can also say, but I think there is something about the misogyny of the Roman Empire that I deplore. And you have to be able to hold those two views at the same time, I think.
That's not sneering, it's just not falling in to the trap that whitewashes the brutality of the past. Should future historians only consider our proclaimed ideals? Our notions of virtue? Will the War on Terror be seen just as a "cool" period, morally-neutral?
I think a rural farmer from 1925 can understand "I pay an immigrant to deliver me hot food via an exploitative middleman", if he's Indian maybe his cousin that went to the city is a dabbawalla.
Like you can do your hypothetical right now with a plane ticket and a 4x4 trip to the Colombian Andes. The peasant might call you a softie, but he's not gonna become Steve Pinker and tell you everything is A-OK.