Sam713

I very much disagree. Overweight starts at 25 BMI, and obese at 30. Most regular gym goers in my social circles maintain <20% body fat, and are classified as overweight based on BMI. In the US weightlifting is quite popular, and it’s not hard to gain enough muscle mass to classify as overweight. I’ve been “overweight” at 27 BMI going on >10 years now, with actual body fat fluctuating ~12-18%. I’ve had doctors tell me I need to lose weight because my BMI is too high, while I had visible abs. It’s a common theme among other casual weightlifters I know. I don’t think BMI is particularly useful for anyone that has done more than a year of basic barbell strength training cycle.

I think its poignant to point out that Trump is listening to experts he appointed, who by objective standards do not have the experience or maturity necessary to guide the ship.

Cui bono? On an objective valuation, Trump family, plus others in or adjacent to the administration, have done fairly well monetarily.

Maybe not directly from this conflict, but it’s becoming hard to differentiate the actions taken by this administration from solely that of seeking personal gain.

Siri is quite bad though. Personally, I would get a lot of value out of a more accurate Siri that could function as a device/personal assistant. Right now, if I prompt Siri to “search calendar app for flights scheduled this month”, it just straight up fails. That should be a relatively simple contextual search; just asking it to pull existing data. Siri/Apple Intelligence is overhyped because it can’t even perform basic functions effectively, or takes more time than just doing the same function manually.

I absolutely disagree. Renting a room in a single family home vastly limits the number of people you have to share those intimate spaces like a kitchen or bathroom with. You also get the option to interview and pick who you’re sharing those spaces with. I lived with housemates for many years, and in dorms during university, and dorms are not even remotely the same from a social safety and privacy perspective.

Genuine question, who would actually want to share an intimate space like a kitchen or bathroom with dozens of other strangers on a daily basis? This is obviously a common setup in college dorms or prison, but that is specifically because it’s a temporary (and extreme) cost saving measure, or because you’ve lost the right to participate in society (i.e. prison, which is viewed by some societies to be cruel and inhumane). I lived with housemates for many years to save money and afford housing, but I could at least choose the few housemates with whom I shared those spaces.

This links to a synchronized amalgamation of multiple video angles: https://streamable.com/udofq5

It clearly shows that Alex Pretti never drew a weapon, and his (legally owned and carried) CCW was removed by one of the agents from its holster seconds prior to other agents shooting Alex in the back. Agents are visibly using pepper spray, pistol whipping his head, and even though it’s 5+ vs one, don’t even appear to be attempting to handcuff or properly restrain.

Another video from a VFX editor showing position of hands during the incident: https://www.reddit.com/user/AriFeblowitzVFX/comments/1qmf89x...

Unfortunately not. Federal law in this circumstance supersedes state authority.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_Clause

True, but I was replying to the linked article that implied that NB recent resurgence in popularity was due to their new marketing strategy. A fun thought exercise: Which comes first, social trends that generate market demand, followed by marketing tactics catered to those trends. Or marketing projects that that influence social trends, creating market demand? At the root of consumer demand is generally a unique mix of status, social signals, and aesthetics, but also base utility and functionality.

If you watch the close up video from the 7 o’clock angle, you can clearly see that the tires don’t spin out by looking at the speed of the rims. Furthermore, imagine yourself in a situation where an aggressive, masked, armored, and armed person is trying to pull your door open while screaming in your face. You’re in full fight or flight mode, tunnel vision, scared, and confused. At this same time, unbeknownst to the driver, another agent had circled around counterclockwise behind the rear of the vehicle, up the right side in the vehicle’s blind spot, and across the front of the vehicle. Driver is still focused on the other ICE agent trying to yank her door open. Driver decides on the flight option, as obviously fight would be insane, and tries to leave the scene. Driver clearly turns to the right, trying to AVOID the agent that had crept around to the front while her back was turned. The driver isn’t a person with a violent criminal past and felony warrant. There is absolutely no reason for this level of aggression, corralling tactics, or escalation of force. This is not an appropriate way for law enforcement to interact with civilians in any sane society. The shooter immediately draws his weapon at the first sign of vehicle movement, while also placing his body at a 45° angle to the front corner of the vehicle. As the driver attempts to turn away at a relatively slow speed, the shooter brings weapon up, pushing shooting stance forward into the vehicle, even though he has an easy step away from the vehicles path. Even if he did get bumped by the vehicle, by the time the first shot is fired, he’s already positioned to the side of front quarter panel, out of the vehicles path (you can clearly see this not only in the video, but also in photos of the angle and placement of the bullet hole in the windshield). The threat of serious bodily injury or death is literally already passed, yet the shooter fires two more rounds point blank through the driver’s side window. It is after these final two rounds are fired that the vehicle actually accelerates. I speculate that the driver was likely already dead or incapacitated at this point, and lack of motor control caused weight of their leg to push into accelerator. It doesn’t matter if this person was protesting ICE, or blocking traffic. This is not justified self defense (the threat of death or serious bodily injury had already passed), there was no threat to anyone else, and this is not an appropriate way for law enforcement to interact with general civilian population. At a minimum this is a reckless disregard for public safety, manslaughter, and lack of professional discipline.

Edit: bellingcat did a video sketching overhead reenactment of the event. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DTPraD7DGZh/

Except, NB (at least their classic casual models) is actually a pretty decent value on quality/price spectrum compared to other brands. Despite being an “old man” vibe, the classic pair I have is better materials, way more comfortable, and often less expensive than competing classic sneakers. They also still have a few made-in-USA models. Their popularity also increased as retro aesthetics has made a come back among Gen Z and younger millennials, who tend to value form AND function, and personal taste, over louder mass market status brands. Maybe NB marketing strategy was more of a response to an existing shift in consumer demand, but the value proposition was already there.

The success of a Netflix>WBD acquisition would consolidate a third of US streaming markets under one roof, which should receive anti-trust scrutiny. Despite this, there is still a strong appearance of conflict of interest in Trump’s public remarks regarding denying Netflix acquisition the necessary regulatory approval, in conjunction with his son-in-law Jared Kushner being one of the financial backers for Paramount’s cash bid.

(1)https://www.cnbc.com/2025/12/08/trump-netflix-wbd-paramount.... (2)https://www.techradar.com/streaming/netflix/trump-says-the-b...

Same thing happened in south Texas last year. Years of deferred maintenance on transmission lines resulted in almost two weeks of power outages from two major storms, that could have largely been avoided. The utility provider is mostly allowed to regulate itself (while donating to the campaigns of the dominant political party), and allowed to keep excess profits/return dividends to shareholders, rather than re-invest in infrastructure. There is very little regulatory structure or checks in place to ensure the grid is being maintained. And there have essentially been no consequences, other than an apology and excuses, with an attempt to raise delivery rates even higher. As a home owner, its on me to bear the additional cost of a backup generator, because I can’t rely on the state to regulate the utility to provide the service I’m forced to pay them for.

I don’t think a rational person can deny the value of skilled immigration, but the context in which immigration exists in the US is not a simple dichotomy between net benefit/loss.

Wealth inequality has followed a trend of concentrating towards the top over many decades. (https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/01/09/trends-...), exacerbated by events such as 2008 recession and Covid. Even with increased productivity, salaries have not always kept pace with inflation or cost of living in many US cities (https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_r...).

Not only do US workers already have to compete with offshoring (https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2024/10/15/the-global...) which is now impacting formerly safe white collar jobs like accounting and engineering, education costs in the US are also some of the highest in the world, raising the barrier to entry and putting domestic workers at a competitive disadvantage against global markets (https://www.statista.com/statistics/238733/expenditure-on-ed... ).

HN obviously tends to skew towards tech and Silicon Valley; an industry and location that has been somewhat insulated from these effects, but its a very real struggle for many people throughout the US across varied fields from finance and accounting, to medicine and engineering.

It is in this environment in which the current H1B debate exists. While there may be a net benefit to the US economy overall from skilled immigration, much of that benefit (similar to higher productivity) tends to increasingly be enjoyed at the top socioeconomic level. The “layers of indirection” are in many cases owned and controlled by corporations through IP law, patents, copyright, non-compete and NDAs, and other legal mechanisms, which can delay their benefit to society at large, and create further perverse incentives if not regulated fairly.

And while globalization as a root cause might be inevitable, it can certainly be managed through regulation in a way that more equitably distributes the benefits. It can also be manipulated by regulatory capture to enable corporations to lower costs and increase profits at the expense of US labor. There are many examples of this occurring before now. Any sound policy change regarding the H1B visa program needs to take all benefits/risks into account, and I personally would like to see a little more nuance from the incoming executive administration in this regard. Folks like Musk and Ramaswamy have a lot of profit to gain from importing cheaper skilled labor, with a higher degree of control over domestic employees vs those located overseas. I also have a hard time believing any corporate executives would have predominately altruistic intentions, and there is an obvious conflict of interest in them being involved in any policy decisions that impact their balance sheets. I realize this doesn’t negate a net positive benefit, but when that benefit is largely realized by a select few through regulatory capture, and is easily abused, it’s not anti-immigrant to criticize policy implementation.

Just curious, why would you want to shield them from reality? At 13 they’re only a few years from becoming a full fledged adult. Unsheltered life is coming at them fast. I don’t have children yet, so maybe my perspective would change if I did, but (while I would not intentionally expose them to harsher realities) I would never shield my kids. Instead, I would want them to be curious and ask questions while I still had a large influence in their lives, so that I could help guide them and give them tools and strategies to navigate a complex world. I experienced a fairly sheltered (religious/conservative) upbringing socially, but we had a subscription to US News & World report during the height of the GWOT which I read cover to cover. I understood geopolitics before I understood how to make friends. My transition to adult life was tough socially, but I at least had a decent understanding of how the world worked on a macro scale. If children are not sheltered socially, then they’re already encountering pretty much everything through their social circles. And with the internet, 10x+ that.

The last few times flying back from EU through CDG, security funnels all US passports (and Brazil and South Korea maybe?) through a face ID gate for passport control. There was no signage communicating an opt out policy, although it’s my understanding that opting out is allowed. Flight connections have always been fairly tight though, so I didn’t press the issue unfortunately, and was unsure of the rules at the time. I opt out domestically, although it seems this is so infrequent they just have the camera scanner running as soon as you walk up, before you can even get close enough to request normal screening.

The financial crime alleged was insider trading: https://www.crainsnewyork.com/health-care/unitedhealth-chair...

You are cherry picking text out of the report, and removing it from the overall context. The UN investigators visited multiple locations, some of which did not contain evidence, and some of which did. See sections 58/60/61/66/68.

The conclusion of the report itself reads: “Overall, based on the totality of information gathered from multiple and independent sources at the different locations, there are reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred at several locations across the Gaza periphery, including in the form of rape and gang rape, during the 7 October 2023 attacks. Credible circumstantial information, which may be indicative of some forms of sexual violence, including genital mutilation, sexualized torture, or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, was also gathered.”

At this point I don’t see any further point in discussing this subject. I’m only replying in case someone reads these comments, and doesn’t dig deeper into the report. I find it concerning that you glossed over those sections and the conclusion of the report, while only presenting text that supports your viewpoint. It’s bad enough that ~700-800 civilians were murdered in the first place, and it’s horrible that civilians continue to die in Gaza through the present. Please have a good day.

From the article:

“The United Nations and other organizations have presented credible evidence that Hamas militants committed sexual assault during their rampage. The prosecutor for the International Criminal Court, Karim Khan, said Monday he had reason to believe that three key Hamas leaders bore responsibility for “rape and other acts of sexual violence as crimes against humanity.”

I’m not going to dig up and post links to videos showing Hamas parading female captives with blood on their pants, or partially disrobed bodies. Videos which were filmed by Hamas members themselves I might add. Here is an article instead from BBC with testimony from survivors: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67629181.amp

I don’t want to assume that you are arguing in bad faith, but there are numerous reputable sources showing that other atrocities occurred beyond the murder of civilians. It’s bad enough that Hamas directly targeted and killed over 700 civilians.

I think many people also forget the second intifada suicide bombings, and numerous rocket barrages over the proceeding decades after, to which Hamas was a major belligerent. Despite the more primitive designs of these rockets, without modern defense systems there would likely be more Israeli civilian deaths. I see this context missing from a lot of the discussions of the current iteration of this conflict. Israeli civilians have faced decades of risk (which I think also benefits the right wing of Israeli politics), and this is not a new conflict. October 7th comes on the heels of many other direct and indirect attacks on Israeli civilians. I cant help but think that the current military response might fall under a “never let a crisis go to waste” strategy by Netanyahu’s coalition, which had recently been receiving less support.

Not disputing general truthfulness of Israeli government, but specifically as to the latter two examples you listed: A) There is no direct evidence that Israeli government publicly stated that babies were beheaded. That claim came from a single journalist, spread like wildfire on social media (as did tons of videos and footage of the attacks), and was exacerbated by a statement Biden made.

B) there is very credible evidence that rape did occur as part of the atrocities Hamas committed on Oct. 7th attack. https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-sexual-violence-...

Just wanted to point that out, because regardless of the moral standing of either side, I think the facts do matter if there is ever going to be a resolution. Obviously the actions committed by Hamas do not absolve Israel from following ethical rules of war, and there are plenty of issues with how Israel is waging war in the current conflict as well; for example using machine learning algorithms to track targets with what appears to be a reckless disregard for non-combatants: https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/

Part of the reason Houston electricity is cheap is because a lot of power generation is from natural gas https://www.gridinfo.com/texas/houston, and Houston area is also a trading hub and hosts some of the largest nat gas refineries in the US. TDU charges are relatively fixed for utility providers in Texas, so transmission infrastructure tends to have less impact on rates than supply and trading.

Thanks for this. Centerpoint data appears to be inaccurate just FYI; power was restored at my house yesterday evening, but their map still shows a restoration date projection a few days from now.

The poster above misstated the cost. Its $2.5mil/mile. That number actually comes from PG&E in California, so its possibly not relevant to Houston. I couldn’t find that Centerpoint has actually done an analysis for Houston. Just to get an idea of scale, Centerpoint states on their website that they operate ~33,000 miles of above ground power lines.

Source: https://www.khou.com/article/news/news-explainers/the-why/ho...

Centerpoint website states that they currently operate ~33,000 miles of above ground distribution/transmission lines.

https://www.centerpointenergy.com/en-us/corporate/about-us/c...

I just got power back late last night (6th day of outage). This comes directly on the heels of a prior power outage that also lasted nearly a week from a severe storm back in May. CNP seems to have majorly dropped the ball on this one from a logistics and disaster preparedness standpoint (especially considering they had a trial run only 2 months ago). Unlike the storm in May, a) Beryl was forecasted to impact Houston at least 24 hrs beforehand, b) its hurricane season so CNP should be ready to go. They routinely seem to lag behind on electrical grid improvements and maintenance. From my personal observations, a lot of outages could have been prevented by better tree management. (Anecdotally, I had a tree catch fire behind my house last year due to limbs contacting lines; I called CNP to report and they did nothing; said to watch it and let it burn out. They haven’t trimmed trees on the line behind my house in the 4 years i’ve lived here). With Beryl, it has become painfully apparent that CNP was simply not logistically prepared to handle the impact of hurricanes, and did not prepare in advance, a major failure for a utility provider operating on the gulf coast. These are not black swan events.

Root cause seems to point towards prioritizing shareholder value over providing services, and lack of regulation enabled by Texas laissez-faire handling of utility providers.

A short timeline: In 2014 CNP reported ‘excess revenue’ but were allowed to keep it https://stateimpact.npr.org/texas/2014/10/20/texas-puc-leave....

In 2020 a major activist investor put a large stake in CNP https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2015/12/14/billiona.... The owner of that private equity group also happens to be a major donor to the political party of the current Texas governor, who appoints the commissioners who regulate public utilities (https://theintercept.com/2020/10/15/paul-singer-hedge-fund-r...).

Texas electric utilities are regulated in theory, but in practice this regulation seems lax or at least not proactive. This was readily apparent in the 2021 freeze (Uri): https://www.statesman.com/story/business/2021/10/21/texas-re...

And later in 2021 CNP also made direct political donations to Texas politicians: https://www.texastribune.org/2021/08/04/texas-energy-industr....

It doesn’t seem like Texas has done much to improve regulation since the 2021 failure. https://www.tpr.org/environment/2022-11-17/texas-lawmakers-a...

https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-the-southwest/why...

It’s hard to see how these apparent conflicts of interest (and lack of regulation or consequences) don’t create an environment where a state supported monopoly can abuse their position by putting short term profits first.