throw16180339

I expect Musk to blame Ukraine and use this as an excuse for sanctions against them.

White supremacists worldwide recognized it as a Nazi salute (https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250121-musk-salute-a...).

SBF's money is just as good as anyone else's.

They'll just make something up that supports the desired conclusions.

Cisco Systems has had numerous successful acquisitions with integrated product lines.

Does JetBrains have sales people? I'm not sure how big the company is, but they've been around for 25 years and the founders are billionaires.

It is a kind of spiritual snobbery that makes people think they can be happy without money. - Albert Camus

Some people seemingly resent any functionality that wasn't part of V7.

This argument relies on false equivalence and a straw man. It compares accusations of being a "Russian agent" to U.S. alignments with Islamists, but the two are not analogous. It also presents a false dilemma by asking if the U.S. is "captured" by Islamists, ignoring more complex geopolitical factors. Additionally, it implies causation (U.S. involvement leading to Islamist takeovers) without considering other historical influences. While the argument raises a valid point about shifting alliances, it does so using misleading rhetorical techniques.

We charged the UK quite heavily for our support. Quoting from (https://yarchive.net/space/politics/lend_lease.html).

In a political sense, well, that's much more debatable. The problem there is that because the US itself did not feel threatened, US aid came with a price tag: the impoverishment of Britain and the demolition of the trade barriers around the British Commonwealth. US aid was on a cash-only basis until Britain had spent all its hard-currency reserves (both gold and negotiable securities). Then came the Lend-Lease agreement -- arguably the point where the US truly entered the war -- and its price tag was explicit, although unadvertised: the agreement itself contains a clause stipulating the removal of the Commonwealth's trade barriers.

Any story about Musk gets flagged, although sometimes dang restores them.

That's a slippery slope argument. Gambling fundamentally differs from crimes like burglary or fraud — gambling is a consensual activity that can be regulated and taxed, while burglary and fraud inherently harm unwilling victims.

State lotteries don't represent "state-run crime" but rather transform existing underground markets into legal, regulated alternatives. Illegal gambling operations have long existed, typically run by criminal organizations offering no consumer protections or public benefits. State lotteries provide transparency and channel revenue toward public services instead of organized crime.

Following your reasoning would suggest that legalizing and regulating alcohol or cannabis equates to "state burglary" or "state fraud" — clearly an absurd comparison. The objective isn't to convert crimes into government enterprises, but to acknowledge when prohibition is ineffective and provide a safer, regulated alternative.

It's a lot better than sendmail.cf, which I had to use in a previous job.

    # handle "from:<>" special case
    R$*<>$*                 $@@                    turn into magic token
    
    # basic textual canonicalization
    R<$*<@$+>>              $@$1<@$2>
    R$*<$+>$*               $2                     basic RFC822 parsing
    
    # make sure <@a,@b,@c:user@d> syntax is easy to parse -- undone later
    R@$+,$+:$+              @$1:$2:$3              change all "," to ":"
    R@$+:$+                 $@$>6<@$1>:$2          src route canonical
    
    R$+:$*;@$+              $@$1:$2;@$3            list syntax
    R$+@$+                  $:$1<@$2>              focus on domain
    R$+<$+@$+>              $1$2<@$3>              move gaze right
    R$+<@$+>                $@$>6$1<@$2>           already canonical

He's the J. Edgar Hoover of Wordpress.

Poor people bought tickets in the illegal numbers racket (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numbers_game) before state lotteries existed.

While I understand concerns about the lottery exploiting vulnerable people, one reason for having a state lottery is that it provides a legal alternative to illegal numbers rackets (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numbers_game), which were widespread before state lotteries became common. Criminal organizations profited from these underground games, often operating without oversight or consumer protections. A state-run lottery at least ensures transparency and directs revenue toward public services rather than illicit enterprises.

> Say India decided to relitigate the Islamic conquest of the subcontinent and take over Bangladesh. Say India keeps going into Pakistan. Does the U.S. get involved? Why should America care?

India and Pakistan both have nuclear weapons. If a conflict between them escalates, then even a limited nuclear exchange would lead to tens of millions of casualties, mass starvation, widespread electronic outages, and releasing millions of tons of black smoke into the atmosphere; crop yields worldwide would be severely reduced.

There have been a few studies on a nuclear war between India and Pakistan, although as you'd expect, they're mostly from antinuclear advocacy groups. There are many unknown factors and a wide range of estimates, so I'd take all numbers with a grain of salt.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31616796/

https://psr.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/two-billion-at-ri...

There's also an active National Academies study on the environmental effects of nuclear war (https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/independent-study...), although they haven't released anything yet.

> 2. 7.6% of americans are LGBTQ - that’s about 26 million people - does the government not serve them as well? Is the government only there to serve some of the people?

It's an explicit goal of Project 2025 to take rights away from queer people.

> To HN: Will you be quitting firefox over this change, or is there simply no better place to leave for?

It doesn't really concern me yet. I'll wait for the controversy to die down and examine it then.

Visa and Mastercard also have limits on what percentage of a bank's transactions can be adult.

IME sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn't.

Israel has had nuclear weapons for decades.

HN doesn't have callouts. If you want dang to see your comment, email hn@ycombinator.com.

He's taking orders from bad actors. That's reason enough to call him a bozo, although collaborator might be more appropriate.

There are reasons why the EU should support the Ukraine, but access to the Ukrainian market isn't one of them.

The Ukrainian GDP is 179 billion USD (https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/gdp?continent=euro...); they're a market smaller than Greece (244 billion USD) or Hungary (212 billion USD). If they succeed in driving the Russians out, they'll have to rebuild their country and will probably be in debt for decades.

Democracy in Russia is a pipe dream; they have nuclear weapons and Putin isn't about to give up power. I guess it's possible that his successor could hold elections, but that's highly unlikely at best.

Everyone who invades Afghanistan loses - the only winning move is not to play.

We charged the UK quite heavily for our support. Quoting from (https://yarchive.net/space/politics/lend_lease.html)

In a political sense, well, that's much more debatable. The problem there is that because the US itself did not feel threatened, US aid came with a price tag: the impoverishment of Britain and the demolition of the trade barriers around the British Commonwealth. US aid was on a cash-only basis until Britain had spent all its hard-currency reserves (both gold and negotiable securities). Then came the Lend-Lease agreement -- arguably the point where the US truly entered the war -- and its price tag was explicit, although unadvertised: the agreement itself contains a clause stipulating the removal of the Commonwealth's trade barriers.

Charles II of Spain (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_II_of_Spain)

HN doesn't have callouts. If you want dang to see your comment, email hn@ycombinator.com.

> Why would you not focus on writing OO code in an OO language for example? Would you start writing OO code in a functional language? No you wouldn't, because it would be pointless. There are programming paradigms for a reason

I'm paid for efficiently solving business problems with software, not using a particular paradigm. If an FP solution is more appropriate and the team can support it, then that's what I'll use.