We Could Fix Everything, We Just Don't • Hacker News Board

Re: We Could Fix Everything, We Just Don't

#361

Post by tptacek » Tue, Jan 02, 2024, 10:25 PM UTC

nolongerthere wrote: post #358

johnnyworker wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're a fig leaf and asset [1] for those who use them as an excuse for collective punishment and genocide. With predictable and predicted [2] results. [1] Smotrich: "In the context of delegitimization, Hamas is an asset and the authority is a burden" -- https://twitter.com/pgosh_MTP/status/1741169302051402195 [2] https://twitter.com/Rachael_Swindon/status/17417897483670733...

[flagged]

Bazelel Smotrich is a fringe right-wing character, reviled by a significant fraction of Israelis and even more so by Jewish people in the US. Along with Itamar Ben-Gvir, he found his way into Netanyahu's cabinet after Netanyahu lost support from a significant chunk of conservative Israelis in the wake of legal scandals, which included a recently-repudiated attempt to disempower Israeli courts in an effort that was in part designed to keep him out of prison owing to an unusually strong corruption case against him. Netanyahu clung to power by building a coalition of lunatics like Smotrich and Ben-Gvir.

The US State Department just today issued a statement saying that the Israeli government, and Netanyahu himself, have repeatedly reassured the US that Smotrich and Ben-Gvir aren't speaking for Israel.

Neither Smotrich nor Ben-Gvir were in power in 2005 (Smotrich might still have been in school), when Sharon disengaged from Gaza, and dispossessed Israeli Gazan settlers. Nor were they in power in years where Netanyahu was recorded saying Hamas was his preferred partner in Palestine. Put simply: Smotrich isn't the reason Hamas rules Gaza.

Regardless: Hamas took power in Gaza in 2006, in a combination of coercive force and a public election. It has not allowed elections since then. Until recently, Hamas was the dominant security force in Gaza, and the governing authority.

Re: We Could Fix Everything, We Just Don't

#362

Post by prometheus76 » Tue, Jan 02, 2024, 10:26 PM UTC

croes wrote: post #300

prometheus76 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people aren't afraid of dying even after they lose loved ones. Not everyone lives in fear.

Avoiding an unnecessary death isn't living in fear, it's living by common sense.

And I should have clarified sooner: "it's living by common sense" is true if you are a humanist, which I am not. I am a Christian, so going to church to worship God is more important than staying home to stay alive.

Re: We Could Fix Everything, We Just Don't

#363

Post by manx » Tue, Jan 02, 2024, 10:31 PM UTC

czierleyn wrote: post #294

By the way, the idea of the ‘Tragedy of the commons’ has been thoroughly debunked and should, in my opinion, not be used anymore in an argument as if it has any value.

Do you have a good link to read about that?

Re: We Could Fix Everything, We Just Don't

#364

Post by OkayPhysicist » Tue, Jan 02, 2024, 10:52 PM UTC

me_me_me wrote: post #263

fifticon wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think he was blaming it on the two-party system. He was just explaining how the two-party system is one of those obviously broken mechanisms that effectively blocks against replacing it with one of the better alternatives. The general category of issues he highlights, should be well known to people who have lived in and observed our real world and society for a while. It is possible to produce USB-C cables th…

> He was just explaining how the two-party system is one of those obviously broken mechanisms that effectively blocks against replacing it with one of the better alternatives I think this is self evident. How the hell US is heading to next Biden vs Trump. Again? How can anyone claim its that those are the best possible choices - or good choices? Trump is a fraud clearly claiming he is one and biden is barely capable…

The key issue in US politics is that the Democrats have achieved a monopoly on reasonable governance. The right has completely abandoned moderation in favor of active malice. That means it doesn't matter who the Democrats put up for election. A fucking golden retriever would get my vote, because the GOP is committed to overt evil.

That's not to say the Democrats are saints, or even not also evil. Most of them are in it to line their own pockets. But at least they're doing that without actively trying to make things worse. So they're approximately adequate.

Voting third party introduces massive risk that the mustache-twirling, overtly fascist sympathizing party takes power, which isn't acceptable to most reasonable people. Which is why we need to get rid of first-past-the-post voting, but unfortunately those same parties that are currently entrenched in power are the only ones with the power to make that reform.

Re: We Could Fix Everything, We Just Don't

#365

Post by OkayPhysicist » Tue, Jan 02, 2024, 10:58 PM UTC

ydnaclementine wrote: post #330

me_me_me wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He was just explaining how the two-party system is one of those obviously broken mechanisms that effectively blocks against replacing it with one of the better alternatives I think this is self evident. How the hell US is heading to next Biden vs Trump. Again? How can anyone claim its that those are the best possible choices - or good choices? Trump is a fraud clearly claiming he is one and biden is barely capable…

Probably not a new take, but it would make an extremely interesting election night if Trump were to run as an independent. Could potentially see states turn yellow This election year in general is going to be insane to watch

It would almost certainly result in a massive spoiler effect, handing the Democrats a landslide victory, unless the Republicans managed to completely and utterly drop the ball in putting forward a candidate that could beat Trump in at least a few states. That latter scenario would mark the death knell of the Republican party as an institution, leaving a power vacuum that Trump-aligned fascists would fill with an even further right party.

First-past-the-post voting makes the 2 party system inevitable.

Re: We Could Fix Everything, We Just Don't

#366

Post by zmgsabst » Tue, Jan 02, 2024, 11:24 PM UTC

croes wrote: post #325

zmgsabst wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Francis Collins has already admitted the policies were myopic and didn’t account for QALY — they were malpractice that focused on a particular disease while ignoring the holistic situation. Literally failed at basic medicine. Again, you’re portraying people as “dumb and emotional” without addressing the substance of their concerns or reasons. You’re also refusing to ponder if that’s how you reached your conclusions.…

>now admits those people were right the whole time Those people for sure aren't the anti-vaxers and anti maskers. It's about the consequences of the lockdown, school closings and operation postponings and it's pretty easy to point at that consequences if you can't compare them to the consequences without these measures. In Sweden they had similar admissions that their initial measures were wrong and they didn't have…

Yes — obviously Francis Collins, former director of NIH, just did the comparison wrong.

And obviously the people you’re stereotyping were just “anti-vax” and “anti-mask”, not people who objected based on principle and were right.

You’re a crank who can’t admit he was wrong.

Re: We Could Fix Everything, We Just Don't

#367

Post by zmgsabst » Tue, Jan 02, 2024, 11:25 PM UTC

croes wrote: post #316

zmgsabst wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Francis Collins has already admitted the policies were myopic and didn’t account for QALY — they were malpractice that focused on a particular disease while ignoring the holistic situation.

Hindsight is 20/20. Look what happened in Sweden, they say the same about their intial measures and lost more people in the first year of the pandemic than any other scandinavian country.

What’s their total mortality by comparison, now?

Re: We Could Fix Everything, We Just Don't

#368

Post by ip26 » Tue, Jan 02, 2024, 11:32 PM UTC

michaelmrose wrote: post #187

ip26 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some small towns have started building fiber to every home that want it, as a public utility. It has confirmed cost is the only question that voters care about. In one example it cost something like $200M for a population of 150,000. That’s $1.3k per person. Good luck getting the taxpayer to sign up for that without a clear revenue model. It’s being done, but not as some kind of blind “hey you know what would be grea…

Wouldn't the revenue model be something like $50-$100 per household for the next 20 years to cover principle and interest? Assuming 50k households and 85% uptake and 50 per month is 510M 100 is about a billion.

Exactly, they worked out the numbers just like you did here, and showed it would cover principal in a reasonable timeframe. Instead of blindly building it without thinking about revenue and return on investment. It wouldn’t have been built otherwise.

Re: We Could Fix Everything, We Just Don't

#369

Post by ip26 » Tue, Jan 02, 2024, 11:34 PM UTC

quickthrower2 wrote: post #267

ip26 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Subsidize - with taxpayer dollars.

Yes, but they get that back later on with all the productivity increases. Or to put it another way - think of how much the government could save in taxes if it built no infrastructure at all. You want electricity? Get a generator. You want roads? Pay a new toll every 1km as you go through various private lands.

You have to (attempt to) quantify those productivity increases. There are an unlimited number of nice things government could spend on, but limited budget. It happens that fiber passed muster. Other things don’t.

(The productivity value of fiber can be estimated with a revenue model based on subscriber fees)

Re: We Could Fix Everything, We Just Don't

#370

Post by nolongerthere » Tue, Jan 02, 2024, 11:53 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #361

nolongerthere wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Bazelel Smotrich is a fringe right-wing character, reviled by a significant fraction of Israelis and even more so by Jewish people in the US. Along with Itamar Ben-Gvir, he found his way into Netanyahu's cabinet after Netanyahu lost support from a significant chunk of conservative Israelis in the wake of legal scandals, which included a recently-repudiated attempt to disempower Israeli courts in an effort that was in…

I appreciate your context but not really sure what it adds. I know who all the players are and I know how many left-leaning Americans and secular Jews feel about religious people, I think you are presenting a very one sided view of things, but that's not really relevant. I was interested in what johnnyworker was really trying to say, as it's not really coherent at the moment.