Hacker News Reader

Comment by rdtsc | Hacker News Reader

> The anarchist cells responsible for sabotaging rail systems across France, Italy, Germany, and the Netherlands in 2026, relied on A/I Collective tools and services to claim responsibility for the attacks

Hmm. So they are going by “A/I vets its users” and users sabotaged rail systems so therefore A/I is materially assisting terrorists? I wonder how this vetting works? Do users have to submit government issued documents, write essays? Do they make users sign non-violence agreement ToS. I mean heck, Facebook and Twitter has material supporting various things like that and US government is designated them as terrorists.

View on HN

I wonder why gun manufacturers aren't responsible for the behavior of their users, but this org is.

Because you don't apply to a gun company to buy a gun. (You actually apply to the government...chew on that one for a while.)

Didn't need to chew, I already know the government doesn't do enough to curb gun violence.

Well, in my state, you don't "apply" for a gun like you apply for a license. It is just document that you purchased it after the seller runs a background check.

The government isn't attesting to your capabilities - that is still on you as a citizen.

> you don't "apply" for a gun like you apply for a license.

>... background check

Who requires these background checks? Because the seller wouldn't do them unless obligated. Obviously the check and paperwork around it constitutes at least a de facto application to the government for permission to purchase the firearm.

But that's an outlier. In normal countries you apply for a license, THEN after you get it, you're allowed to purchase a firearm.

IIRC from the last A/I thread, there's actually a special law that basically says gun manufacturers are not liable for what people do with the guns, and says it specifically about guns, not any other industry.

No other industry needed that law. The PLCAA was put in place in 2005 because anti-gun specifically devised a plan to sue gun makers in lieu of any success in changing gun laws.

It is absolute nonsense to ignore why the law exists while you complain about it existing.

Why is it necessary to legislate it if it's nonsense? If there is no culpability, why would there be any threat?

It was necessary because a group of billionaires (Joyce Foundation) decided they were going to do a run around congress and engage in lawfare for their goals.

It’s nonsense to pretend it came out of no where for no reason.

By this logic services like Telegram or Signal would be designated "terrorist organizations". But the current admin is purely vibes-based, so we'll never know for sure

Telegram is openly supportive of cyber crime. I don't think it should be labelled as terrorist organization, but it's not far from that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com