Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

921–930 of 996 posts

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#921

Post by prepend »

pygy_ wrote: post #284
prepend wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Flashing it surrounded by notorious racists after the 4chan hoax leaves no doubt about the intended meaning. Trolling is a meaning. I think in that situation it’s even more ambiguous since the “troll power” is so much greater then. I think it’s unambiguous that the user is a shit-stirrer certainly, probably an asshole. But not necessarily racist. Or no more so than your average run of the mill “everyone is racist s…

Even if it is meant as a troll, it is still a way to signal kinship, among folks whose views are not exactly a secret. Haha, only serious... Hence, ultimately, a racist (if layered) symbol in this context. It's not been flashed as a joke by non-racist people.

It can signal kinship with troll-clan. So it’s used by non-racist trolls. And racist trolls. And racists. And just normal people who aren’t up on current events (eg, elementary school).

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#922

Post by blacksmith_tb »

thinkingemote wrote: post #454
vmception wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pay attention to that list, each pardon has a list of people who supported each pardon. Nobody from the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU is on that list. We are wasting our time and energy caring about either of those organizations. Let them stick to filing Amicus Briefs in courts, but they clearly have no pull or influence or backchannel despite our tech scene thinking they do.

How many were on Obamas list?

Looks like he pardoned 66 people at the end of his second term[1], no names leapt out at me.

1: https://www.justice.gov/pardon/obama-pardons

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#923

Post by stephen82 » 

     Trump: Hey Tony, you know...they are kicking me out and I'm going broke; I need a favor from you.
   Anthony: what can I do for you mr. President?
     Trump: I will pardon you in one condition.
    Antony: what that would be?
     Trump: I will need some "financial assistance" from you.
    Antony: ...say no more!

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#924

Post by dionidium »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #726
dionidium wrote: post #677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The downvoters are thrashing a straw man. Obviously nobody believes you're supposed to recreate society every 20 years ex nihilo. What I'm arguing is that the case for reading history has been overstated. Specifically, I was reacting to the claim that, "Human behavior seems to be notoriously consistent across centuries." I agree. It is. Human beings react to the same emotions and incentives they always have and there…

Fine, but by your own argument, reading history gives you some insight into how the humans of today will react to certain situations. You can read history to find out what humans actually are like, not what theory says they're like.

I like this framing quite a bit :)

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#925

Post by paul7986 »

VikingCoder wrote: post #894
paul7986 wrote: post #819

Earlier quoted context omitted.

karma .... which is how it should be no? You do bad ..no matter what you do it will come back at you!

I'm confused how you can watch the actions of human people, and ascribe the outcomes to "karma."

Definition of Karma .. which im sure you may already know...

"Karma means action, work, or deed. The term also refers to the spiritual principle of cause and effect, often descriptively called the principle of karma, wherein intent and actions of an individual influence the future of that individual: good intent and good deeds contribute to good karma and happier rebirths, while bad intent and bad deeds contribute to bad karma and bad rebirths."

You can choose to always do good actions or do bad actions against others for the sake of greed/power/etc. Everyone has a choice of how to live and it's pretty clear what's the right way to live especially karma will be bat down your door soon, next year or years from now.

I guess you are here defending Google's actions and this engineer's actions that both actions are good?

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#926

Post by saagarjha »

briandear wrote: post #434
pokot0 wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might want to look at the electoral vote and how 1 vote in Wyoming accounts as much as roughly 4 votes in Texas and California. Pretty serious bug that is enabling the far right to be over represented imo.

The federal government is the government of the individual states. A state is a sovereign entity. Each vote in the United Nations general assembly is identical regardless of the size of the country voting. Ireland’s vote is just as valuable as India’s. That’s the point of the United States — it’s a republic, not a democracy. As far as 1 WY vote being worth 4 Texas votes, that’s also irrelevant because the president i…

> A state is a sovereign entity.

Uh, not fully…

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#927

Post by ganoushoreilly »

dgellow wrote: post #696
ganoushoreilly wrote: post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also leave out the fact that he had been reprimanded for his actions numerous times, to include being removed from roles and duties because of his negative actions. The fact that he moved from the CIA back to an NSA supported role without this being disclosed is ridiculous in of itself. Edward had a childish reaction to release documents that had nothing to do with Xkeyscore (of which the media claim as the reas…

> then fled there before moving on to Russia That’s just a lie. He was in a plane on his way to Ecuador when the US cancelled his passport, resulting in him being blocked in the Russian airport for a while. At some point the situation created such a mess for the airport that Russia accepted to let him enter the country. All of this has been documented at length, and anyone on this forum is likely old enough to rememb…

So you're saying he was never in China? He literally fled to Hong Kong first. So again, what did I state that was a lie?

I didn't say he wanted to be there, but he clearly wanted to be in Hong Kong, then move on... and ended up in Russia? Again, what part of this is false?

Did you know him? I did, he's a fucking tool. The information leaked was piecemeal. Take the bible, leak random pages and one will say live a joyous life, love each other.. where a different page might tell you to sacrifice your only child. Unless you've been privy to all of the information at the right scale, you've been sold a piece, a piece that paints a narrative.

The FISA courts weren't new. You have have to have a secure means to disclose data without risking release in a non classified environment. Obviously this concept is over your head.

Even if he was genuine in trying to blow a whistle on one program, that doesn't mean he has a right to do a smash and grab and release un-related materials. He took a spray and pray approach to retaliation and it just so happened he was able to form a "good guy" narrative around one piece of it.

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#928

Post by ganoushoreilly »

adolph wrote: post #903
ganoushoreilly wrote: post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also leave out the fact that he had been reprimanded for his actions numerous times, to include being removed from roles and duties because of his negative actions. The fact that he moved from the CIA back to an NSA supported role without this being disclosed is ridiculous in of itself. Edward had a childish reaction to release documents that had nothing to do with Xkeyscore (of which the media claim as the reas…

Would you say the same of Mark Felt? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Felt

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Felt

No I wouldn't. A, I don't have first hand knowledge of the situation, and B, it's a drastically different scenario. I'm not anti-whistleblower. I'm anti retaliation because you were told no.

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#929

Post by quantified »

freewilly1040 wrote: post #691
ISL wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I strongly disagree. A check and balance has been on great display in recent weeks. A President has stated, "the election was a fraud, I should get another term". Congress has stated, "the election was correct. Moreover, we may choose to prevent you from holding office ever again." The judiciary agrees. That Congress is likely to deadlock is arguably a feature, not a bug. (That voters don't demand better from their c…

> Is adding states too easy? There are three million US citizens in Puerto Rico without representation in Congress. "Statehood is too easy" is probably the wrong critique. The problem is that there is not clear enough guidelines for enforcing some criteria for what constitutes a new state. Thus we have a false positive like Wyoming, which shouldn't be a state with its minuscule population, and we a false negative in…

In 2012 PR voted AGAINST becoming a state, and in 2017 a vote on the issue was scotched because of anti-statehood boycotters. They just (Nov 3) narrowly voted to welcome statehood, easily lost in the recent noise, let's see what happens.

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#930

Post by dragonwriter »

quantified wrote: post #929
freewilly1040 wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is adding states too easy? There are three million US citizens in Puerto Rico without representation in Congress. "Statehood is too easy" is probably the wrong critique. The problem is that there is not clear enough guidelines for enforcing some criteria for what constitutes a new state. Thus we have a false positive like Wyoming, which shouldn't be a state with its minuscule population, and we a false negative in…

In 2012 PR voted AGAINST becoming a state, and in 2017 a vote on the issue was scotched because of anti-statehood boycotters. They just (Nov 3) narrowly voted to welcome statehood, easily lost in the recent noise, let's see what happens.

> In 2012 PR voted AGAINST becoming a state

No, it voted for becoming a state, under the terms set for the 2-question referendum.

Question 1: Should Puerto Rico continue its current territorial status?

Yes: 46%

No: 54% (Wins)

Question 2: Which non-territorial option do you prefer?

61.2% for statehood (Wins)

33.3% for free association

5.5% for independence

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Puerto_Rican_status_ref...

> and in 2017 a vote on the issue was scotched because of anti-statehood boycotters.

No, the vote was held, statehood won overwhelmingly, but the boycott by opponents was cited (by opponents!) as a reason to disregard the results.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Puerto_Rican_status_ref...

Post reply on HN