AlecSchueler

> Vagrancy is a crime in many places.

It is. The Romani aren't vagrants and they're doing nothing illegal. Calling them vagrants is charged and misleading.

> Vagrants and transients are often dangerous and mentally ill.

That can be true. Again the Romani aren't vagrants and using the word to describe then implies a level of danger and/or mental health issues that isn't evidenced.

> It is reasonable to use state violence to suppress crimes.

No-one has asserted otherwise.

> the control of dangerous animals being similar to the control of dangerous people is not extreme.

It's generally accepted the dehumanising a people or culture is extreme, I'm not sure how you can argue otherwise. There are any number of alternative metaphors that could have been used (not to mention that the argument could have been built on its own weight) that wouldn't have involved comparing an entire people to a pest that needs to be controlled with lethal force.

You asked if it was immoral, not if it was a crime.

> Cue the gypsies in Copenhagen, and their increasingly brazen behavior, after the city legalized overnight sleeping in parks and other green areas last year. Because "it shouldn't be illegal to be homeless" ...

> This has predictably led to these foreign vagrants setting up camp ...

> Copenhagen is the Danish capital. It's repeatedly been named the safest city in the world in recent years. Partly because it didn't tolerate vagrants ...

It would be easier to ask how this is a normal way of speaking? Gypsies is already a derogatory word, vagrant implies something criminal rather than cultural about their behaviours, and he's making an issue of them not being local vagrants (what?). The decisions he's incredulous about came about democratically and the debates involved were carried out by public representatives and are publicly actually. The incredulity is just rhetoric and the implication that they're dangerous because they're foreign or live transiently surely has no place in a modern society.

> When wolves get out of control, you shoot them.

How is this in any way a non-extreme metaphor to use?

We've been harming children for even longer

ICCs? Internal combustion cigarettes

> the same stories orally for 40,000 years

How is this confirmed without records?

What are you trying to say with this?

> I don't think you get to abdicate responsibilty

I made no such suggestion, only that China isn't solely responsible for the future of humanity, which was the claim I responded to.

> i don't accept arguments in the form of B

Feel free to share why not. At the end of the China is still part of a global system dominated by capitalism and they have to play the markets game in order to survive.

They could easily fully do things their own way but that would mean, for example, chance of private intellectual property, which would mean no WTO membership, which would mean massively reduced capacity for trade, which would put them at such a disadvantage they'd inevitably collapse.

> NATO, police forces and intelligence agencies use it

Is there anywhere to read more about this?

By "modern art" they mean things like abstract expressionism.

The bad news is we're all reliant on global supply chains. And even ignoring the human side your ecosystem is probably reliant in some way on things like the migrations of birds and fish etc etc

> I am glad that I live far away from the effects

I've heard it said that we'll all be watching a series of disasters play out on our phones until it comes time to see one play out through our windows.

The top 5%/over 60s. The overlap is almost total.

Because "why not?" Do we understand that humanity includes Chinese people? Do we also understand A) the steps they're already taking to reduce emissions and B) how much of their emissions historically and today are in service of Western consumers?

> there is generally widespread support for liberal social ideas

I'd encourage you to look at any HN discussion about women's issues.

> there's other places to discuss political news

There are, that's why we discuss most political news elsewhere. But there's no more informed place to discuss tech news, that's why we want to discuss crossover topics here.

The painful thing is that there's a non tech related political item on the front page at least every other day, so it's very clear that certain topics are just too close to home for some people here.

> N02 is a very hazardous air pollutant which doesn’t get a ton of attention. The main sources are combustion engines and gas stoves. Asthma looks to be mostly caused by gas stoves

That makes sense but the unverified claim is that gas stoves are the main contributors to asthma.

> What's the difference of the vast rare books in private collections

There's little difference and I would suggest there's a pity in knowledge being hoarded by collectors.

If we were getting into the differences, though, it would be that is now happening en masse in order for a handful of corporations to monopolise knowledge, history and ideas from books that were until recently available somewhere to the public.

I also doubt that many collectors are buying rare books with the intention of destroying them.

If you take the only remaining copy of book X and take it home to digitally scan it, then destroy the book and never share the scan, what has been lost?

When did the WFP eradicate famine?

Talking with other humans actually has real world effects.

Exactly. Sad to see them falling behind on this because it's exactly why I chose to use Claude initially.

That is, a high impact action, not mid-tier. You provided your own research.

Having clothes removed to the point of wearing a bikini is "being undressed" and I feel you're choosing not to understand the impact of being publicly sexualised in a bikini can have.

Grok is directly tied to Twitter in a way that other models don't have, so the use of Grok to do this stuff is inherently more public and traumatising for the targets.

You're right that people hate Elon and that they have good reason to do so, but you might be falling for the trap of underestimating the legitimate and unique concerns about Grok because it's easy to assign them just to "Elon hate."

But still within the "one of the highest impact actions" bracket which is what you're arguing against.

Also I already don't own a car at all and I haven't taken a plane in a little over a decade.

What if I unknowingly read content written by Claude in various articles and it influences my own writing style?

> This is progress in the same way that a man climbing a tree is making progress toward reaching the moon.

That is, an essential step?

Yes, to find missing backports. The hand rolled aspects are still there and haven't been replaced by slop.

Where "winning" means surviving in relative comfort until global society disintegrates into a constant state of famine and war and you run out of local resources.

> Give me...

Who's going to give you any of this in time?