cogman10

That is not the context of the discussion. The context is "what should world leaders have done differently".

And, I never said that the war was either avoidable or that Israel was wrong to use force after Oct 7.

What I am saying is that the war could have ended years ago and that Israel has committed genocide. I'm also saying that the pretext that it was about "getting the hostages home" was false.

And with that context, yes there are things world leaders should have done to stop Israel from committing genocide.

A ceasefire is a concession. And my point, which I think is clear, is there's a pretty wide gap between "They have to accept all hamas concessions" and "they have to negotiate".

It's pretty hard for you to argue against the fact that there are, in fact, reasonable concessions that aren't "suicidal".

> Yes it would have been insane to accept any concessions.

Any? Like even a temporary ceasefire? That's a suicidal position?

Notice how you had to change from "all" to "any".

You said.

> What he means is they could have been traded for all of the concessions Hamas wanted in exchange for them.

Where in my writing did I say that Israel needed to accept all concessions. Please quote me.

Do you think it's unreasonable or "insane" for Israel to have accepted some concessions for the safe return of hostages?

I tend to agree. The US bears a pretty large amount of blame here and I don't think Israel would have continued their aggression had the US withdrawn aid (or threatened to). But if they had continued, then that's where UN peacekeepers should have been deployed.

> They reached out to israel to try and return hostages and were ignored. They reached out to the US to return hostages and were ignored.

That Hamas was open extremely early on in the conflict to negotiations for returning hostages and Israel and the US knew this while they waged a bombing campaign and pretended like Hamas wasn't trying or willing to return hostages.

Negotiations weren't happening because Israel didn't want those negotiations, not because they weren't available.

And, I don't know if you are aware, but negotiations involve give and take. Israel didn't need to "traded for all of the concessions Hamas wanted in exchange for them".

The reason the hostages weren't returned sooner is because Israel didn't want them. In 2024 Hamas accepted all of Israel's terms multiple times only for Israel to change terms. Israel knew they'd have fewer justifications for their genocide if they got the hostages back.

That's my point.

Only if you think Israel is entirely correct in their assessment that every single civilian building actually houses dangerous hamas terrorists. I don't think that assessment is correct so I don't think the UN peacekeepers would be behaving exactly like Israel and the IDF has behaved in Gaza. Nor do I think the UN would put the same restrictions on aid coming into Gaza. They wouldn't stop peanut butter and baby formula from entering.

No it wouldn't? We are talking hypotheticals. When talking about what world leaders should do I include the US in world leaders.

I wasn't engaging in what's likely, just what should be. Biden and Trump should have been on board with deploying peace keepers. They were not.

This is an uncharitable reading of my point and not what I meant.

Make it make sense. The question is what should have happened. You say I answered what should have happened. But you also say "that's not how the answer was phrased".

How is my "should have" happened not a direct answer to the question?

You are mixing Chomsky (the subreddit) up with Norm (the book author). Norm was friends with Chomsky but not Epstein or Bannon. I'm unaware of him having transphobic views.

Iran would WELCOME UN peace keepers in gaza, are you kidding? Hell, I think even Hamas would welcome their presence. UN peace keepers would mean the likes of UNRA could operate once again in Gaza to deliver aid. It would also mean that Israel would have to stop it's aggression.

> Iran is helping Russia

lol, no, other way around. Though the Russia hasn't really been involved with Iran since Ukraine started. It's actually China that's the biggest Iranian trade partner.

The only party that'd be upset over UN peace keepers in Gaza is Israel.

> Lie. It was a deal to get complete immunity for a massacre. Also, 'Civilian' per Hamas is anyone over 60. 'Let Hamas murder and keep nearly all hostages' was not in Israel's playbook.

You are making stuff up. Nobody reports that Hamas was shooting for a "get out pillaging free" card. And the fact still remains that they tried to return 3 hostages to show good faith who the IDF proceeded to kill.

> Lie. There was repeated negotiations for two years after, with plenty of Hamas demands for the hostages. It was totally public too.

Hamas, on multiple occasions, agreed to all the terms only for Israel to reject the agreement and change the terms. That was all public. It's why the hostage families became really mad at the government.

> Literally not relevant. The US has much bigger errors in the current conflict.

Two wrongs don't make a right and yes, it's relevant when the IDF explodes clearly marked aid vehicles rendering aid. There's no reason to do that.

> Snort. Look at how successful they were in Lebanon. Peace keepers need to be willing to fight to keep the peace, and in this case, it meant fighting both sides. LOL.

Does that really matter? The question wasn't "how effective will this be" it's "What world leaders should have done". That's what world leaders should have done.

> I suggest looking at the far bigger Qatari and Saudi expenditures (didn't they just grant an entire 747?). It's more that US politicians recall the war on terror, and know all this nonsense will one day be sent back at them with much greater force (wasn't it 4 million deaths or so?), they have no wish for the precedent to be set and deployed at them.

These are weaker lobbies because of US laws. The likes of AIPAC and CUFI get around campaign finance restrictions because they are operated by US citizens (in behest of Israel). No other nation has that sort of organizations in the US. The closet you can find is things like the weirdo Shen Yun cult.

This allowed them to spend $60M in a democrat primary. You won't find that sort of direct spending from Qatar or the Saudis (barring the clear bribe in the Jet. They aren't exactly giving away jets to every primary run).

The question was

> What do you think world leaders should've done differently?

Members should have voted in the UN to deploy peace keeping troops. The UN does have that power if it's voted for. This isn't a question of the current realities but a question of what the right actions are.

Quote exactly where I even implied that.

A lot.

Literally on Oct 7, Hamas tried to return civilian hostages, who the IDF killed. This is why Hamas changed policies to only give up hostages through 3rd parties. They reached out to israel to try and return hostages and were ignored. They reached out to the US to return hostages and were ignored. [1]

So for starters, the US could have pressured Israel to negotiate with Hamas to return the hostages.

As Israel started to show genocidal intent (for example, killing aide workers multiple times). The US could have at a minimum threaten to withhold aide. In fact, there are laws on the books that a country such as Israel committing war crimes is ineligible for aide.

Finally, the UN should have deployed peace keepers to gaza specifically to stop the genocide.

Actions could have been taken, but they weren't because our politicians are so bribed by Israeli lobby money as to turn a complete blind eye to it's misdeeds.

[1] https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israel-politics/2026-09-...

They are saying that this is genocidal destruction. In a war sometimes civilian infrastructure is hit as collateral. But here, all infrastructure is destroyed and it's clear this wasn't done by 1 or 2 errant bombs but rather because of direct targeting. It can't be argued to be an accident because in farmland you see no bombs which hit the farmland by mistake. In other-words, this is entirely purposeful.

Malcom in the middle ran into this, it didn't have DVDs for years.

And I'm pretty sure the ones that got released were based on pirates when they were released.

It's basically a walkie talkie with people who really care about enforcing HOA rules.

Technically this is something the FTC could get involved in as it's illegal to advertise without making it clear you are.

A few years back a bunch of influencers were fined for doing just that.

I think that reddit's recent change to allow hiding comment history is exactly to help support shilling.

It makes it hard to see what's a bot and what's a legitimate account.

The power of this mode of work is that after you deconstruct the task into smaller subtasks, it's a lot easier to use cheaper models to implement that task.

I get a long way using models like Opus to make a plan of action and a bunch of tasks, and then using Deepseek to implement that plan of action. Saves a bunch of money and is fast.

> if you can instead ask the AI to complete the task directly?

Going to entirely depend on the nature of the task and where AI pricing goes in the future.

Would you like to spend $0.10 on every task or would you like to spend $1.00 to make an app that does it free for you forever?

I don't think it'll be one or the other.

But also I don't see things like video games ever being replaced by 1 off AI. If for no other reason then the fact that a lot of games are fun because of multiplayer capabilities. That's not something you can do a 1 and done with AI (unless you only want to play games with family and close friends).

I never said it was worth $1M. But it's not infeasible that it's over $100k in value as just an couple of ounces of gold are $10k.

> That would be a phenomenally stupid and obvious violation of bribery law.

Nope, that's how crazy weak the US bribery laws are. The only time they really sort of kick in is when it's done on behalf of a foreign nation.

To be convicted of current US bribery laws, you essentially need a written note that says "I am giving you this so you can in an official capacity pass this piece of legislation". McDonnell v. United States gutted any sort of accountability for bribery.

But further, Trump v. United States (2022) has granted the president extra immunity so long as he's doing things in an "official capacity".

It's a violation of what bribery laws should be, but not what they actually are.

> And if Trump does keep it as a personal gift, it will be included in a financial disclosure report.

Or what? You think his personal lawyer who heads the DoJ is going to prosecute him?

They literally lined up to shower trump with gifts after the inauguration. Tim Cook gave trump a 24K gold bar with an easily detachable plaque so as to not have just given him a gold bar.

While I agree, I think it's a short sighted view.

My parents have just entered the era in their lives where they can no longer drive. Because where they live has 0 public transport, it means they have to rely on family for transport (which thankfully I have siblings living nearby).

Their individual mobility disappeared almost overnight (stroke, and my mom had a botched cataract surgery). Everyone is just one major health event away from losing that mobility.

Public transit, beyond just being better for the environment, is a public good and I can't overstate how amazing it is to live with good public transport. I lived in England for 2 years without a car and I didn't miss it for a day. I could get buses and trains anywhere I wanted to go and the layout of cities there are such that you usually just want to go to the town center and back any ways.

My main critique would be that I dislike the ORM.

I'd personally like my ORMs (if I'm going to use them) to be closer and more explicit about the queries that I'm writing. ORMs tend to add a lot of complexity for very little benefit. SQLx is much closer to my cup of tea than Toasty.

Underlying DBs have different characteristics, so trying to make an abstraction layer for multiple dbs (including no-sql in the docs) means you are going to run into limitations and abstraction leaks that are hard to square. Correctly using the likes of Dynamodb is very different from correctly using postgres, for example.

I come from Java, I disagree.

The majority of rust's ugliness is the fact that it's handling a different problem than Java does. Java relies heavily on a GC to simplify. Rust does not.

I think the only thing that I find ugly in rust is that memory leaks are considered memory safe. [1]

That, unfortunately, means that you can't 100% rely on the language to not leak memory. Though, it's possible to leak memory in Java as well (Use `Deflate` incorrectly and you'll quickly find a hard to catch memory leak).

[1] https://brson.github.io/rust-anthology/1/memory-leaks-are-me...

California is the perfect picture of neoliberalism. They've privatized as many government functions as possible and, shocker, the public-private partnership has ended up with a LOT of waste and fraud.

Without very strong oversight, you cannot trust these private companies to not simply suck down every single dollar the government is willing to offer. A private business whose only client is governments will never ever be cost effective. They'll always charge as much as possible while offering the most minimal quality possible. That's how they increase their profit margins.

> People expecting that the content companies were going to just accept lower revenue forever and not eventually get back to cable pricing were fooling themselves

Well that sort of happened for the music industry. I think people thought the video industry would follow a similar path where a few providers offer very large catalogs and then pay the media owners per play.

Instead these media owners got greedy and every media producing company decided it also needed to be a streaming company. But further, they licensed the media out exclusively to single streaming companies.

I'm also certain nobody expected that bought digital media would simply evaporate due to licensing.

Don't get me wrong, if the music industry could get away with the same move they would. But there's simply a lot more music and the ecosystem is too well established.