Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | thrance's commentslogin

Just more vice signaling from this awful company. Like with the white genocide or mechahitler "controversies", they're doing it to pander to the mentally ill edgelord demographic who thinks saying "heil hitler" is the coolest shit. And it's working, they're all worshipping Musk like he isn't the pathetic excuse of a human being he is.

When you could tell teens to kill thmeselves over nothing? That's what you're musing over? Get some help.

Oh, its you again.

Yes, exactly. Where teens could not only laugh at such a comment, but either retaliate with something far worse or/and dismiss it as being nothing.

No need for the likes of you to come to the rescue, you and your kind have ruined things.


Not hackers, more like mentally ill trolls that fought for the right to say racial slurs on github issues.

lol, github wasn't even a thing back then.

Not trolls, people who didn't let words hurt their fee-fees. See Linus's response where he literally told someone to kill themselves.

It was a better time.


What was a better time? When injunctions to suicide were socially acceptable?

Why is it that you "fuck your feelings" trolls are always the ones who get their panties in a bunch when somebody else fucks YOUR feelings?

huh?

Trump and his administration harassing the Fed and Powell over interest rates is like a swarm of locust salivating at ripened wheat fields. They want a quick feast at the expense of everything and everyone else, including themselves over the long term.

Trump knows that the next POTUS can just reverse his decisions much like he's done in both of his at bats. Only thing is there is no next at bat for Trump (without major changes that would be quite devastating), so he's got to get them in now. The sooner the better to take as much advantage of being in control.

The left is almost completely unanimous in their support for lowering interest rates, and have been screaming about it for years, since the first moment they started being raised again. And for the same reasons that Trump wants it, except without the negative connotations for some reason.

Recently, I've heard many left wingers, as a response to Trump's tariffs, start 1) railing about taxes being too high, and that tariffs are taxes so they're bad, and 2) saying that the US trade deficit is actually wonderful because it gives us all this free money for nothing.

I know all of these are opposite positions to every one of the central views of the left of 30 years ago, but politics is a video game now. Lefties are going out of their way to repeat the old progressive refrain:

> "The way that Trump is doing it is all wrong, is a sign of mental instability, is cunning psychopathic genius and will resurrect Russia's Third Reich, but in a twisted way he has blundered into something resembling a point..."

"...the Fed shouldn't be independent and they should lower interest rates now."


Who cares? Even if it were true, why is your first reflex to point the finger at progressives when they're absolutely irrelevant to the current government?

I have not heard a single left wing pundit demand interest rates go down

Elizabeth Warren has gone on several talk shows insisting interest rates should be lowered. If you look at video from the last time Powell was being questioned by Congress there were many other Democratic congress-people asking him why he wouldn't lower rates.

Personally I trust Jerome Powell more than any other part of the government at the moment. The man is made of steel.


Jerome Powell belongs on Mt Rushmore if you ask me

He's entirely too cozy with big banks. He's one of their biggest advocates when it comes to policy. I think Elizabeth Warren had a point here[0]

[0]: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-07-03/senator-w...


Coziness with banks can certainly be an issue, I don't know specifics and that article is pay walled for me, but it sounds very believable to me.

That doesn't really change what I said regarding interest rates though.


People are upset at the tariffs as taxes because they hurt poorer people more. That’s how it works when everyone pays the same amt of taxes

You are everything wrong with America, uttering yet more threats at their "allies" because they refuse to bend the knee to your pedophile president.

Just scroll to the bottom of this page and look at the idiots bragging about making swastika fishes. HN nurtures this community of mentally ill edgelords that we could very well do without.

At my prior work we had this garage where we could wash our cars. But once the sponge was in the wrong place and the responsible foreman shut the whole thing down. "This is why we can't have nice things" he said.

Just ignore the trolls and wait for the fish mods to ban them.


More importantly, do we need to reach for aliens everytime something slightly out of the ordinary happens in the night sky? (No, we do not).

How is pretentiousness more important?

Just make your tinfoil hat a few light-years thick.

You could also wear a black hole as a helmet!

The authors suggest black foamboard with cloth and a laser safety curtain is sufficient. Better safe than sorry though.

  To prevent light from reaching the detector from sources other than light 
  transmitted through the head, the experiment was performed in a light-tight 
  enclosure that surrounded the head. The enclosure was built using black 
  foamboard and covered with two layers of black cloth and a laser safety 
  curtain. 
https://doi.org/10.1117/1.NPh.12.2.025014

Not for neutrinos it isn't

Sometimes I wonder about the far future. Just looking at how hard it is to fight the urge by some to fell those trees for a quick buck, and seeing how preventing that requires a constant fight that comes back every 10 years and needs to be restarted all over again... It seems inevitable that at some point the stars will align and they will get their way.

I wonder, after 500 years, after 1000 years of industrialization, what will be left of Earth?


> I wonder, after 500 years, after 1000 years of industrialization, what will be left of Earth?

In the last 150 years we went from almost zero protected areas to 26 million sq km of nature preserve, or a fifth of the Earth’s total landmass (excluding Antarctica, which is also protected). Out of the ~106 million sq km of habitable land, half of it is unprotected forest (37%) and shrubland. Only about a third of that forest is used for lumber so there’s room to protect about thrice as much as is already protected.

We have to remain vigilant but the global zeitgeist is very much on the side of preserving more nature rather than less. There will be more hickups but I wouldn’t be surprised if we double the amount of protected land in the next 100 years.


This is reading the past and forgetting the forces active since WW2 and the 1960s.

We do NOT live in those times, and the edifices propped up and successful in Europe and America, well and truly wish to undermine those protections.

It takes resources and it takes a middle class / working class for the collective will to matter. When those groups are under resourced, then it’s a question on whether nature appeals to some coterie of elites.


> some coterie of elites.

hate to break it to you but over the span of history, elites have been way better at natural preservation than the middle and working classes.


There was no overfishing when only the elite could eat fancy fish, there was no overturns when it cost 50k for a weekend in the Bahamas or Benidorm. Erosion isn’t a problem when it’s a couple of gamekeepers and the occasional hunting party on the moors. Litter isn’t an issue when the staff outnumber the tourists.

Individual wealth does not cause environmental damage, it mass wealth that does.


The elites have had power for the largest span of our history.

Correlation here is not causation. By that same criteria, elites have been responsible for the grandest acts of destruction and waste as well.

But I suppose someone may want to leave preservation efforts up to random chance and inheritance. Subjective preferences can’t be debated after all.


ok that's fine. I'll ignore the irrelevant whataboutism. as correlation is not causation what makes you think the elites would cease to preserve nature in the way they have? what is your mechanism for this shift in behaviour?

Elite doesn't need massive forests, they just need a little smaller forest that they can own themselves

I was just talking about protected land mass. Since the 1990s the focus has shifted to protecting marine environments with 28 million sq km of ocean protected since then. It’s only 7% of the ocean for the moment but its only been a few decades.

I am against this reading of hopefulness.

It creates a narrative of momentum, which is necessary to not be overwhelmed by the situations we face, but it’s no longer viable to ignore it.

As just one sign - Academics in environmental science and conversation have PTSD, because of how hopeless things are.

In that same 150 year period, more species have been wiped out by man than in history.

As a species we are a force of nature.

I can find common ground that some of us are changing and that efforts are being made.

I disagree that it is inevitable- it’s hard won and must continue to be fight for


I just don't think "protected surface" is a very meaningful metric when it comes to ecology. In those same 150 years, we (humans) have been responsible for the extinction of 83% of wild mammal and 50% of plants [1].

The global zeitgeist is very much not on the side of preservation, seeing how much irreversible damage has already been done, and how nothing is tried to prevent more from being done.

Let's not even talk of global warming, ocean acidification, ecosystem collapse...

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/may/21/human-ra...


It's funny that a movement can be so successful and not just underestimate it's success but completely misunderstood the directionality of the trend.

It was nice while it lasted, but the "shining city upon a hill" era is dead and gone. There's a Project 2025 effort to lift protections for nearly 60 million acres, and that's surely just the beginning unless the U.S. un-loses its mind. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/white-house-set-to-roll-ba...

[flagged]


Please don't push the conspiracy theory that "Project 2025 is a conspiracy theory". It's incredibly easy to validate that Project 2025 is a real thing, that it's policy, and that it is well underway. https://www.project2025.observer/en

Project 2025 is a roadmap that is actively being executed, not a 'theory'.

And given that it's not secret, it's not a conspiracy. All of its worst parts are being done right there in the open, and you're holding a fig leaf in front of it. Why are you doing that?


Can you be more specific? This sounds generic dismissive.

EDIT: so after quick googling this [1] wikipedia page looks completely different than wiki pages of 'conspiracy theories'

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025


They’ll pave paradise and put up a parking lot?

A sad eventuality, but perhaps at least an interesting game.

Just saw an trailer for an unreleased game: rollercoaster tycoon, but for parking lots.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/3031880/Car_Park_Capital/


I assumed it was being ironic?

The destroyers only have to win once. The preservers have to win every single time the destroyers make an attempt.

Jacques Ellul in full old testament prophet mode:

> The world that is being created by the accumulation of technical means is an artificial world and hence radically different from the natural world.

> It destroys, eliminates, or subordinates the natural world, and does not allow this world to restore itself or even to enter into a symbiotic relation with it. The two worlds obey different imperatives, different directives, and different laws which have nothing in common.

> Just as hydroelectric installations take waterfalls and lead them into conduits, so the technical milieu absorbs the natural. We are rapidly approaching the time when there will be no longer any natural environment at all. When we succeed in producing artificial aurorae boreales, night will disappear and perpetual day will reign over the planet.


Michigan was basically clear cut in the late 1800s. It's quite forested now.

We lost the majority of the old, large trees, but the forests came back.


> after 500 years

500 years sounds optimistic. Are we ignoring climate change here?


> However, until people would rather camp than stay at the $600/night hotel, and cook over a campfire rather than eat overpriced food, there will always be a lucrative opportunity in Yosemite Valley that is only available to the most politically-connected companies.

Blaming "people" accomplishes nothing.


Well, and no idea what it's like these days given ownership changes and time generally, but it used to be a very nice--albeit expensive--lodge, at least in the public areas including dining room.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: