Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | abernard1's commentslogin

One of the things I love about this is while Alex Jones was definitely negligent in his case, this pretty much does exactly what he wanted.

One of the things I've discovered in my long career of people being wrong about everything is how strong the team sports dynamic of social politics really is. I was high school friends with a writer for the Daily Show and the thing I realized is how humor and dismissal was a way of creating social superiority and evasion of legitimate arguments.

Right now, the world is changing greatly. Lots of people are retreating into a shell of humor in order to avoid it. Mass cognitive dissonance about the nature of reality. But reality and life goes on.


I'm definitely not aware that the credibility of the US DOJ has been destroyed.

And I question why a 501c3 charity would need "field informants" and to launder money through shell corporations. Especially to leaders of these organizations who were (1) coordinating some of these rallies and (2) due to the materially dishonest treatment of the "fine people hoax" for years.

Is the SPLC an intelligence organization? Am I missing something?


What fine people hoax? Trump has been and is right now openly racist.

My sole comment is that people who use verbiage like this are mentally ill. Not "mentally ill" like I'm calling them an epithet. But like, actually mentally ill.

There are things that are simply not pedagogically useful in the limited instructional period in school. There are things that are simply not appropriate during early childhood development.

People who abuse and manipulate language like this are exactly why more traditional instruction is desired in certain school districts. Postmodernism is wrong. There are actually things that are true without the miasma of an artificial (and exhausting) social construction of reality.


Amazing that choice of curricula for elementary schoolchildren draws such a reaction.

Kids can read whatever they and their parents want. Schools don't have to teach it.


"antagonistic"

They are a theocratic regime which is not supported by 80% of its population. Being gay is punishable by death. They employ surveillance from China to ensure hijabs are worn by women at all times. They ban access to the internet. Chants of "Death to America" are their government's routine greeting for 50 years. They place military equipment in schools and hospitals deliberately, viewing US compassion as a weakness. They recruit child soldiers and have them publicly stationed at military targets.

There is definitely "antagonism," but to act as if the Iranian people would not bomb their own government if they could... it's a bit much.


Why does the US count Saudi Arabia as an ally but Iran as an enemy?

Do you know anyone who lives in Iran?

Here’s what an upper class Tehran neighborhood looks like: https://youtu.be/G2pJwUkXhBM

A popular bazaar: https://youtu.be/ly54F22dqJc


All of which is confirming my point. The Iranians are a beautiful people and a beautiful culture that is still run by maniacs.

The original person's implication that the "antagonism" towards the IRGC is novel to America is simply false.


> All of which is confirming my point. No. It refutes your point "They employ surveillance from China to ensure hijabs are worn by women at all times." In addition I would contest other aspects of your statement as well, but that isn't my main point.

> The original person's implication that the "antagonism" towards the IRGC is novel to America is simply false.

You seem to not have understood what my point. What is most determinative of a countries fate in the Middle East isn't domestic policy, but obedience to the United States. Iran's problems are due to the fact that it is an enemy of the United States and hence sanctioned heavily, leading to severe economic problems. There are many other nations headed by regimes that are some combination of socially regressive, highly unpopular, and politically repressive that are counted as US allies and don't face the same set of difficulties (e.g. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain).


Most likely motivational media for their new child recruits: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2026/04/iran-recruitm...


> When I think about the counterfactual me that grew up in a large American city, New York or L.A. instead of Toronto,

And just think, those are the American areas most common to Canada.

There are places in America where those counterfactuals do not exist, where the necessities aren't locked behind counters, where community is thriving, and where the normality of civic life is an expectation.

I expect no honors for those parts of the country. If Canada didn't have an air of superiority to comfort itself with, it would have nothing at all.


> If Canada didn't have an air of superiority to comfort itself with, it would have nothing at all.

Canada might be known for many things, but you're the first I've heard refer to an "air of superiority" that we carry around. "Nice" and "polite" maybe. Sorry you feel this way. Have a good day.


Canadians aren't crass enough to describe it as superiority, but it is true that the identity of English-speaking Canada is largely built on "not being America" and that the vast majority of the population is content as long as things are "better than in the USA".


They of course are "not better than in the USA." But one can hold that weight long past you're drowned in the ocean.


ah yes, the places where women can expect to die if they happen to need medical care while pregnant and where LGBTQ people are not treated the same as most citizens. Sounds lovely.


Whatever the epithets, the truth of the matter is those urban areas are closer to what Canada aspires to be (and currently is). Whereas the parts of Canada she cares about are alive and well in the US (and used to be more like what Canada was).

The question becomes: if you're traveling on a line, and you see the destination looks dark ahead of you, do you turn around or keep going?

Canada's notoriously polite deference led them to align with those powerful tech, marketing, and financial hubs in the US. A cheerleader on the sidelines. But everyone gets to pick. There's a lack of acknowledgement that there's even a choice; the dog that didn't bark one could say. But it's part and parcel of why modern Canada is the way it is.


This comment is nonsensical. The parts of Canada the author cares about are also alive and well in Canada and your entire premise is that they're not


> This ICE stuff is that scaled up to a multi-billion dollar federal agency with, apparently, no accountability for following the law at all.

It should be mentioned that "illegal" is a definitive word. There are definitely people not willing to follow the law, including political entities which are dependent on it. The moniker of privacy in this respect is a shield for illegality, because there is no reason that Medicaid data regarding SSNs should be shielded from the federal government.

To take this to its logical conclusion, Americans must concede that EU/UK systems of identity and social services are inherently immoral.


I have a hard time parsing your first paragraph, but there is no reason at all for any part of the US government that isn't CMMS to have any access to Medicaid data, writ large, at all. And even CMMS should only see de-identified data. It's absolutely absurd to think that law enforcement has any reason to see anything in any MC database.


> The "micro" in "microservice" doesn't refer to how it is deployed, it refers to how the service is "micro" in responsibility.

The "micro" in microservice was a marketing term to distinguish it from the bad taste of particular SOA technology implementations in the 2000s. A similar type of activity as crypto being a "year 3000 technology."

The irony is it was the common state that "services" weren't part of a distributed monolith. Services which were too big were still separately deployable. When services became nothing but an HTTP interface over a database entity, that's when things became complicated via orchestration; orchestration previously done by a service... not done to a service.


I remember when microservices were introduced and they were solving real problems around 1) independent technological decisions with languages, data stores, and scaling, and 2) separating team development processes. They came out of Amazon, eBay, Google and a host of successful tech titans that were definitely doing "engineering." The Bezos mandate for APIs in 2002 was the beginning of that era.

It was when the "microservices considered harmful" articles started popping up that microservices had become a fad. Most of the HN early-startup energy will continue to do monoliths because of team communication reasons. And I predict that if any of those startups are successful, they will have need for separate services for engineering reasons. If anything, the historical faddishness of HN shows that hackers pick the new and novel because that's who they are, for better or worse.


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: