Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by Apreche | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Apreche

Finally. Someone else who gets it. They want to hurt people on purpose.

View on HN

It’s been clear since last year that this administration is a government specifically designed to hurt people.

How long will we tap on our keyboards before we take action? Yes, we are comfortable, but for how long??

Sit down and ask yourself this question.

At what point will I stop going to your job, if you have one, and take to the streets instead? What has to happen for you to do that?

Come up with a serious answer. Write down the answer. Put it on an index card or other prominent place so you will be constantly reminded of it.

Now read the news every day. If the thing on your index card happens, take to the streets. Even if you are the only one, do it anyway.

I already don't have a full time job. I've used a bit of that job search time to participate in protests and call my reps.

>Even if you are the only one, do it anyway.

It'd be useless. What we lack in power we have in numbers. Protests only work as a collective action.a collective action that can kick out bad reps and replace them with ones who will do their jobs.

Any suggestions? Seems that some of my triggers may be happening already. Perhaps we can go with: 1. Global economic collapse 2. WW III 3. Major Pandemic 4. Martial Law declared (might be too late) 5. Elections cancelled 6. All of the above.

Don't put down to stupidity anything that could be proscribed as malice (or something to that effect...)

The actual quote is the other way around. What evidence does the parent have for intentions to harm instead of just making stupid cuts, completely inline with their well documented history of simplistic, sledgehammer solutioneering ?

It's hard to take a war on public health measures, public-interest science institutions like NOAA, and public education as evidence of good faith.

It's not as if they're starting where the obvious bloat is (defence, fossil fuel subsidies...) and working back to the rounding errors.

It's entirely predictable supremacism - the doctrine that wealth and skin colour define virtue, and government in the public interest, which interferes with the "freedom" to abuse and exploit inferiors for profit, is an unnatural abomination.

> The actual quote is the other way around.

I am well aware.

> What evidence does the parent have for intentions to harm

Just watch/read the news since 2016. Too much to list.

In addition Elon is seen as a captain of industry. PayPal. Tesla. Space X. So it can be that Elon is inept.

Simplistic, sledgehammer solutioneering is an intention to harm. Randomly firing entire teams whose director feels they are "the 'gold standard' of civic technologists" produces immediate and knowable damage. Nobody who wanted government technology to function well would do such a thing.

Is it possible that they have some other, important objective which can only be achieved by degrading the quality of government technology? In principle. But I haven't seen any explanation of what that objective could possibly be, and I have seen people with arguments for why they think it should not be easy to get access to NOAA weather data and it should not be easy to file your taxes with the IRS.

>What evidence does the parent have for intentions to harm instead of just making stupid cuts, completely inline with their well documented history of simplistic, sledgehammer solutioneering ?

Their own words:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/10/who-is-russe...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com