maeil

> Although Western states are very pro Israel.

They're not, you're simply misinformed. The US and Germany have been. Countries like Ireland, Spain and Scotland have not. A lot of others have been somewhere inbetween, often as weakly-held beliefs. It's been very low on the list of priorities for people in country like Belgium, they might have been nominally pro-Irsael, but without caring particularly much. Now that Israel has been genociding for a year, except for those first two almost every Western state is largely pro-Palestine.

Unless you're purely talking about governments instead of the populace, but that makes no sense in this context of talking about social media.

That this gets downvoted shows that people have still not learned a single thing. You're spot on, it's tragic that so very few people understand this, based on how incredibly little I see it voiced online. In fact, you're the first I've seen voice it in ages.

E.g. if Harris (another, at best, incredibly mediocre candidate) would've won, the post-Harris Rep presidency would've been even worse than the current one. Until there's a competent non-Rep president, every single subsequent Rep government will be worse, until there will be no more fairish elections - and likely we're already there. Someone like AOC - not policywise, people don't vote on policy, it doesn't matter. Attitude-wise. It's abundantly clear the DNC hasn't learned (or more likely, doesn't want to learn), so the next president will be another Hillary/Biden/Harris candidate who will either lose or make the next Rep win even more decisive.

Thank you! Very disappointing news.

Please give us a source as this does not seem publically verifiable.

> - They claim openness but are actively hostile to linux distributions and f-droid.

Yet take zero action against TeleMessage.

> Also, the often-mentioned US-EU trade deficit is not that big if you count in services. Which I think should be done in the 21st century. Large parts of the US economy are focused on digital high-value services, and they are "exported" worldwide.

This is why, in case of reciprocal tarriffs on physical goods, the US ends up the big winner - they don't apply to digital services, which are a huge part of US exports.

Now the world had slowly been catching onto this fact that they'd been getting absolutely rinsed by the FAANGs who have gotten their populace addicted to their opium and made trillions off of them without contributing anything meaningful back. For the first time, we were seeing digital services taxes - a decade overdue. Brazil now has one in place - great on them. The EU was also planning one, but then the tarriffs came, and suddenly voices are saying they might abandon it. If the current US gov was any other US gov, the obvious conclusion would be that they're using tarriffs as a pawn to prevent the rise of digital service taxes.

Obviously, in the current timeline this wasn't the main reason. But there's no way Mark, Satya, Jeff and Tim haven't been whispering into big leader's ear just how "unfair" these DSTs are.

GP nowhere indicated to be looking for a strategic perespective answer, they're saying they want to know the legal reasoning.

They don't want to, and that's been clear for at least a decade.

Yep, it does! However the net benefit to society at large - and being public transit, to the less privileged in particular - is still gigantic compared to any of the alternatives, and this is blatantly obvious if you've been in multiple countries/locations that use this system, as well as ones that don't use it. The job is generally still better than driving for e.g. Amazon, as well as honestly a whole load of 3D jobs[1] that we rather forget exist and people carry out every day, including in "wealthy" countries.

Perfect is the enemy of good. This is the #1 thing other progressives need to learn. Everything is a tradeoff.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty,_dangerous_and_demeaning

The US won't have an issue with it. You haven't realized what the US has become.

To get bros and oligarchs, and get to the state the US is in, you mean? Very true.

Sonnet 3.7 non-reasoning is better on its own. In fact even Sonnet 3.5-v2 is, and that was released 6 months ago. Now to be fair, they're close enough that there will be usecases - especially non-coding - where 4.1 beats it consistently. Also, 4.1 is quite a lot cheaper and faster. Still, OpenAI is clearly behind.

It isn't.

That would be great, but I don't see it. HN has already been obviously violating GDPR and all other right-to-forget laws since forever by not allowong for account deletion, and everytime this has been brought up, dang has pretty much confirmed they don't care ("it would look bad if there were deleted comments [and that's more important than these laws]").

"The lawnmower just mows the lawn, you stick your hand in there and it'll chop it off, the end. You don't think 'oh, the lawnmower hates me' -- lawnmower doesn't give a shit about you, lawnmower can't hate you."

> So the only correct thing to do is vote for Republicans?

How could this possibly be the conclusion to someone saying the Dems are what led us to Trump?

You're seeing things that aren't there, I wouldn't suggest anything of the sort.

And this is exactly this what has got us here. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

You know the Larry Ellison lawnmower one, right? That's what you're doing with the GOP, and really, with voters. Actions have consequences. Both in 2016, and 2024, if the Dems wanted to win, they could've. If they wanted to stop Trump, they could've. They didn't. They had the power and intelligence to do so. Whether people vote or not vote is a consequence of the last 20 years of history. It's a few billion parameter model. Given the parameters, the outcome is set. The Dems for decades provided inputs to these parameters that were always going to lead to this outcome.

For what it's worth, I was being a bit provocative. As it's not the Dems who got us Trump - it's the Dems and the Reps who got us Trump.

Which was made inevitable by the Dems.

This isn't just a US phenomenon. Similar in Europe with far-right authoritarian parties' rise having been made inevitable by their "labour" parties. Though the Dems case is significantly worse, hence why Trump is worse than anything we've seen in Western-Europe.

Look, what you're saying is obviously true, but you've got to look at the bigger picture. Trump didn't show up out of nowhere, there's at least 2 decades of relevant US governments. You can't just ignore all of that context.

The Dems too, with very few exceptions (the Reps also used to have such exceptions pre-MAGA) only care about their own, individual power. 2016 says it all. If they were any better, they could've picked a hundred other candidates who'd have beaten Trump, and if he'd lost it's almost unthinkable the Reps would've nominated him again in 2020. They didn't, they knowingly picked one of the very few options who at the time would lose. They picked her for pure individual power structural reasons. Because that's what they do. 2024 all but confirmed that. They're only interested in image and optics to preserve their own standing, or they would've cut Biden far earlier.

In HN terms: Stop anthropomorphizing Larry Ellisson. He's been a lawnmower for decades. And the same goes for the Dems.

> How is this legal ?

Why do you keep asking this when these illegal acts have been happening every day for months? Genuinely, did you just awake out of a coma?

> Can I sue because of this as a non Twitter user ?

Good luck finding a lawyer, as they're almost certainly going to lose their job if the suit turns out remotely succesful.

Chris Krebs just yesterday had his security clearance revoked solely for saying the 2020 election was fair and not rigged.

His coworkers at SentinelOne (almost certainly most of who are citizens) also had their clearances revoked, despite never speaking out on the topic, purely as a North Korea style "punish the whole family" approach to strike fear into people of guilt by association, so that those who have spoken out in any shape or form become social pariahs.

Citizens having their career taken away for saying an election wasn't rigged, or for happening to work at the same place as someone who said this.

If you think the status quo hasn't yet changed to "In countries like China, Russia and the US, speaking out against the government puts both your livelihood and that of those in your vicinity at serious risk", you're dead wrong.

I can tell you that it's now the norm in many European institutions that are even remotely sensitive or deep technology related to spend much more effort on background checks for Chinese and Russian nationals than for those of other countries. That's not very welcome. Look past pure tourism.

Plenty of things can be done. None of them should be discussed on HN.

As a Swede who was around back then, it's completely different this time around. At that time despite animosity, there was no (anywhere remotely mainstream) talk of decoupling from the US, reducing dependence on them, seriously reevaluating the relationship. Now there is, and people are serious. More importantly, the way in which the US spoke about Europe back then was completely different. Currently, the US treats Europe as adversaries.

There are plenty of Russians who aren't politically engaged. I think you can see why they may still not be as welcome in Europe as, say, someone from Peru.

Are Chinese people still welcome in Europe? Yes, but with caveats, and more scrunity. So not as welcome as e.g. Japanese people. Americans are now part of the same group as Chinese people.

I still see many people here who, even now, still do not grasp that the country they're living in, on the government level, has joined the group of "China and Russia". It is no longer "China and Russia's imperialist authoritarianism are a danger to democracy across the globe, and we need to decouple from them.". It is now "China, Russia's, and the USA are a danger to democracy across the globe, and we need to decouple from them". For the first time in more than a century, we now have all of the geopolitical superpowers (of which there are currently 3), have very similar governments, based on a single paramount leader who holds in effect complete power and demands unconditional fealty from every single person in a position of power, subject to career-ending or soon much worse punishment. Not just to them, but to anyone in their vicinity, e.g. family or colleagues, to strike proper fear into them. See: non-Krebs SentinelOne employees having their security clearances revoked.

Let's take a look at this whitehouse.gov statement from the US.

> Yet in recent years, elitist leaders in Government have unlawfully censored speech and weaponized their undeserved influence to silence perceived political opponents and advance their preferred

For those desensitized, replace "elitist" in that sentence by "reactionary", "capitalist", "anti-revolutionist" or "intellectual", and re-read.

The earlier everyone faces the reality, the quicker something can be done about it. I propose at the very least, everyone starts saying "the USA" instead of "the US government" when talking about these topics, in line with how the overwhelming majority of the time, the actions of the Russian and Chinese governments are simply denoted by "Russia" and "China".

[1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/addr...

Wonder why this has been flagged.

> I find without the presence of external music I will have a song playing in my head instead. And generally the same song for hours (!).

I have this, but then for days. It's not fun. Sleeping a lot helps, to an extent.

I'd have hoped someone at Google would know this is a myth.

The idea that choosing a 1% strategic internal investment over a 4.5% T-bill constitutes actionable "financial malpractice" or a breach of fiduciary duty leading to successful lawsuits is incorrect. Courts recognize that running a business requires strategic choices and risk-taking, not just maximizing immediate, risk-free yield. A lawsuit would fail unless plaintiffs could show the decision was tainted by disloyalty, bad faith, or gross negligence in the decision-making process, none of which are implied by simply choosing a lower-yield strategic project.

Hence why no one ever gets sued for this. It doesn't happen. It lives in the minds of HNers and Redditors to provide a very convenient excuse for their employers, or in general companies, making abhorrent decisions purely based on feels and short-term next-quarter profits/stock price, regardless of the negative externalities they inflict on soeciety.

This is certainly a take when China has effectively been doing this for decades. Good luck winning and enforcing a copyright case as a US company in a Chinese court.