The brain was not designed for this much bad news • Hacker News Board

Re: The brain was not designed for this much bad news

#161

Post by Hikikomori » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 10:30 AM UTC

qsera wrote: post #31

metabagel wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is close to correct. We should be aware of current events but not become too emotionally involved with them. They are mostly outside of our control, and we need to reserve most of our focus and emotional energy on what is front of us and our loved ones. However, we should still act on behalf of greater causes with the means at our disposal. Some examples... world in crisis - I donate to World Central Kitchen the…

>We should be aware of current events I have come to the conclusion that there is no way a layman understand the truth about current events. So it is best to not at all be aware of any current events as reported by the media or popular opinion. For example you say "fascism in America", and I wonder is this guy for real? Fascism? If this was true how are all the people who insult Trump on social media still alive or n…

So it can't be fascism or be close it it until we have fully operational death camps?

Re: The brain was not designed for this much bad news

#162

Post by inglor_cz » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 10:31 AM UTC

clort wrote: post #146

inglor_cz wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netanyahu could also simply retire, he has been in politics since the 1970s. But he would probably end up in jail on corruption charges, which is why he perseveres. At this moment I wonder if the entire region would be better off if the Knesset passed a law "Netanyahu is universally pardoned, but must GTFO of the country and leave politics entirely". Cynical, but maybe the result would be worth it. On a more positive…

The drones and missiles helped them to not lose the war, but they were significantly damaged by the initial strikes. A nuclear capability might have been sufficient deterrent to prevent those.

It also might not. Nuclear powers have lost a lot of "smaller wars" since 1945. Given that most wars are of the smaller variety, and that the threshold of nuke use is very high, it makes sense to think of the economy of the entire arsenal. Especially if your national economy is on the weaker side.

Too many people looked at Gaddafi's fall and Kim's endurance and made a short generalization "it pays to have nukes". But there is nuance in that contrast - if Libya was a friend of China and directly bordered it, no one would dare attack it the way it was attacked, nukes or not.

Iran's largest leverage is in controlling Hormuz and threatening Dubai, Qatar etc. with destruction of their oil and water infrastructure. All of this can be done cheaply with conventional weapons. If they ever use nukes, though, they can expect to be nuked in response.

Re: The brain was not designed for this much bad news

#163

Post by inglor_cz » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 10:36 AM UTC

kstenerud wrote: post #160

throwaway198846 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Eisenkot or Bennett take up the mantle, which is arguably worse. As far as I'm aware there is no reason to believe so

https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/politics-and-diplomacy/art...

I think the question was "in what sense are Eisenkot and Bennett worse"?

I remember Bennett's shuttle diplomacy between Russia in Ukraine in 2022 and he struck me like a person who values peace more than Netanyahu does.

Re: The brain was not designed for this much bad news

#164

Post by throwaway198846 » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 10:37 AM UTC

kstenerud wrote: post #160

throwaway198846 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Eisenkot or Bennett take up the mantle, which is arguably worse. As far as I'm aware there is no reason to believe so

https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/politics-and-diplomacy/art...

I meant the worse part

Re: The brain was not designed for this much bad news

#165

Post by lukan » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 10:42 AM UTC

retired wrote: post #153

lukan wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you claiming owning a cargo bike is a bigger privilege than owning a car? Problem with cargo bikes are, if you are living in a flat where you cannot "park" them, you mean this?

The lifestyle I refer to is living in a bike friendly city, being able to afford a multi-thousand euro cargo bike and having secure storage for it. OP also appears to live in a house with a yard on top of that. That lifestyle is reserved for very high earners. Edit, reply to Lukan as I am rate limited with my comments: I’m sure that those people you saw in Leipzig and Berlin are global 5% earners, maybe even 1%-ers.…

"Edit, reply to Lukan as I am rate limited with my comments: I’m sure that those people you saw in Leipzig and Berlin are global 5% earners, maybe even 1%-ers. That is a very luxurious lifestyle that not many can achieve."

I am pretty sure they are not, I don't just see them, but also speak with them. But normal approach is not compare "global 5% earners", as probably all of germany would fall into that bucket, but compare locally. So can a normal german household afford them?

And the answer is yes. But if the household also needs a SUV and a garage for that, then maybe not.

But I was talking about people who cannot afford their own house. And they could afford a cheap car - or a cargo bike.

Re: The brain was not designed for this much bad news

#166

Post by inglor_cz » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 10:50 AM UTC

kstenerud wrote: post #142

inglor_cz wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netanyahu could also simply retire, he has been in politics since the 1970s. But he would probably end up in jail on corruption charges, which is why he perseveres. At this moment I wonder if the entire region would be better off if the Knesset passed a law "Netanyahu is universally pardoned, but must GTFO of the country and leave politics entirely". Cynical, but maybe the result would be worth it. On a more positive…

I Netanyahu retires, Eisenkot or Bennett take up the mantle, which is arguably worse. But he's got no reason to retire, given how he's polling now. Iran isn't going to drop their nuclear program. They know full well that IF this deal actually works out (it won't, but just for the sake of argument...), they can go back to their clandestine enrichment program and nobody will actually look very hard (just like before).…

If you are right about Russia losing the war of attrition (I am not certain, though I certainly hope so), this will result in some internal unrest. The Muslim part of the Caucasus may well secede, places like Dagestan have negligible ethnic Russian population anyway. The next leader will have a lot of work on his hands just to keep the federation intact and Russian politics at least a bit independent on China.

Ultimately, a younger Russian leader who does not live in the past like Putin does may realize that Russia now has fewer people than Bangladesh or Indonesia and cannot afford old-style wars of conquest anymore.

Re: The brain was not designed for this much bad news

#167

Post by XorNot » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 10:51 AM UTC

Gud wrote: post #65

weregiraffe wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it doesn't. Your contribution is statistically insignificant. It was purely a symbolic gesture.

Even so, an electric car is not particularly good for the environment. Bicycles and public transportation.

This is literally oil industry propaganda.

Re: The brain was not designed for this much bad news

#168

Post by cineticdaffodil » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 10:54 AM UTC

spking wrote: post #3

Neil Postman called this the “Peekaboo World”. “What steps do you plan to take to reduce the conflict in the Middle East? Or the rates of inflation, crime and unemployment? What are your plans for preserving the environment or reducing the risk of nuclear war? What do you plan to do about NATO, OPEC, the CIA, affirmative action, and the monstrous treatment of the Baha’is in Iran? I shall take the liberty of answering…

I plan to be informed about causality and effect - and im voting accordingly to put an end to causes that affect me negatively. So understanding something, not mythologizing or idealizing anything, is a absolutly necessary pre-requisit to voting.

Re: The brain was not designed for this much bad news

#169

Post by cindyllm » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 10:57 AM UTC

cineticdaffodil wrote: post #168

spking wrote: post #3

Neil Postman called this the “Peekaboo World”. “What steps do you plan to take to reduce the conflict in the Middle East? Or the rates of inflation, crime and unemployment? What are your plans for preserving the environment or reducing the risk of nuclear war? What do you plan to do about NATO, OPEC, the CIA, affirmative action, and the monstrous treatment of the Baha’is in Iran? I shall take the liberty of answering…

I plan to be informed about causality and effect - and im voting accordingly to put an end to causes that affect me negatively. So understanding something, not mythologizing or idealizing anything, is a absolutly necessary pre-requisit to voting.

[dead]

Re: The brain was not designed for this much bad news

#170

Post by constantius » Sun, Jun 21, 2026, 10:58 AM UTC

joshrw wrote: post #72

applfanboysbgon wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a weird quote. It reeks of pretentious pseudo-intellectualism. People vote for a government that does something very tangible about all of those things. The media influenced how Americans voted in the US election, and they voted for a guy that predictably started a major new war in the Middle East. That is a real thing that happened and has impacted billions of people globally with second-order economic effec…

It wasn’t predictable that he would start a war. He presented himself as the anti-war candidate and then betrayed his electorate.

I agree with this. What was certain and predictable was that Harris was a war candidate (the Democrats presided over the first year of genocide and were intending to continue).

MAGA was going to be bad in some way, but the Democrats were very bad in very known ways, so voting for whoever was at least saying they were against war was the rational decision for anyone who cared about not having genociders at the helm of the state.