Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack • Hacker News Board

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#141

Post by shooly » Mon, Apr 13, 2026, 1:51 AM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #36

d3ff wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> the sentiment for many is that 'we don't care we have nothing to lose anyway' Everyone says this before they learn what they didn’t value. Peace, for example. > Its easy for you to say, all perched up as a VC It’s easy to say for anyone who has read the history of political violence. When that comes on the table, universally [1], the people with power also have the power to raise armies. The people who stand to ben…

> It’s easy to say for anyone who has read the history of political violence

Reading and understanding do not always go along, though.

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#142

Post by __MatrixMan__ » Mon, Apr 13, 2026, 1:54 AM UTC

samrus wrote: post #94

avaer wrote: post #7

In case someone reading this is thinking similar thoughts: there's no version of reality where doing this will solve any problem. Don't.

Interesting way to put it. If it did solve problems, you would be ok with it happening?

Not gp, but if they were exceptionally large problems... Yeah.

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#143

Post by ivewonyoung » Mon, Apr 13, 2026, 1:54 AM UTC

WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #100

drivingmenuts wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it did solve a problem, it's possible it would be legal.

> If it did solve a problem, it's possible it would be legal. FL crafted a law to help safeguard someone who gets sued for running over a protestor. I think this illustrates how a law can protect problems rather than solving them.

[flagged]

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#144

Post by hax0ron3 » Mon, Apr 13, 2026, 1:55 AM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #12

echelon wrote: post #5

I have a few predictions for this year: 1. Violent attacks against AI CEOs, researchers, and engineers is going to begin. This is due to widespread negative press that AI receives and as well as a pervasive feeling of economic uncertainty and doom in the population. Some of this being caused by the current administration's leadership, but much of it attributed to AI taking jobs and destroying opportunity. 2. Violent…

If violent attacks start metastasizing, it legitimately justifies a police crackdown. Most of the population will be for that. The pro-Palestinian activists set their cause back a year by overplaying their hands in Columbia at the start of the war. If we want to ensure zero AI legislation for the next 2 years, I couldn’t think of a better way to ensure that than to start potting randos in the streets.

It depends on what kind of violent attacks they are exactly. I believe that most of the population would either not care about people of the Altman and Zuckerberg wealth level getting killed or would be happy about it.

I think the general population is much more likely to feel joy about it than want a police crackdown.

If we're talking about attacks against average software engineers and obscure founders, fewer people would be happy about it, but a great number still would be. There is a lot of envy toward software engineers and founders.

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#145

Post by eudamoniac » Mon, Apr 13, 2026, 1:56 AM UTC

avaer wrote: post #7

In case someone reading this is thinking similar thoughts: there's no version of reality where doing this will solve any problem. Don't.

[flagged]

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#146

Post by infamouscow » Mon, Apr 13, 2026, 1:57 AM UTC

granzymes wrote: post #10

Political violence is not acceptable in a democracy. Full stop, no "but". That's all that needs to be said on this thread.

An election is two (or more) armies going to the ballot box to see who has more numbers. Nothing more.

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#147

Post by afpx » Mon, Apr 13, 2026, 1:58 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #130

afpx wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I meant more that we wouldn't have the Bill of Rights if it wasn't for Patrick Henry.

There is a super interesting and complicated discussion to have about the pragmatics and morality of concerted military action versus stochastic civil violence. Unfortunately, thread conditions on HN aren't conducive to it; the discussion will instantly devolve (via people joining in) to valence arguments about the cause of this or that campaign of violence. I genuinely think you'd need a moderation regime designed f…

Honestly, it's not really that complicated. Americans (at least Pennsylvanians) born before, say 2000 were explicitly taught that violence is ok if it's against tyranny. Apparently, they stopped teaching that after 2010, so we're now in a post-natural-rights era.

I went to high school in Pennsylvania.

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#148

Post by tptacek » Mon, Apr 13, 2026, 2:00 AM UTC

afpx wrote: post #147

tptacek wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a super interesting and complicated discussion to have about the pragmatics and morality of concerted military action versus stochastic civil violence. Unfortunately, thread conditions on HN aren't conducive to it; the discussion will instantly devolve (via people joining in) to valence arguments about the cause of this or that campaign of violence. I genuinely think you'd need a moderation regime designed f…

Honestly, it's not really that complicated. Americans (at least Pennsylvanians) born before, say 2000 were explicitly taught that violence is ok if it's against tyranny. Apparently, they stopped teaching that after 2010, so we're now in a post-natural-rights era. I went to high school in Pennsylvania.

We went to different high schools in the 1990s, because that isn't at all what I was taught.

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#149

Post by treetalker » Mon, Apr 13, 2026, 2:03 AM UTC

ivewonyoung wrote: post #143

WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If it did solve a problem, it's possible it would be legal. FL crafted a law to help safeguard someone who gets sued for running over a protestor. I think this illustrates how a law can protect problems rather than solving them.

[flagged]

The truth is somewhere in the middle. Overview: https://eu.tallahassee.com/story/news/politics/2025/06/13/fl...

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#150

Post by infamouscow » Mon, Apr 13, 2026, 2:07 AM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #12

echelon wrote: post #5

I have a few predictions for this year: 1. Violent attacks against AI CEOs, researchers, and engineers is going to begin. This is due to widespread negative press that AI receives and as well as a pervasive feeling of economic uncertainty and doom in the population. Some of this being caused by the current administration's leadership, but much of it attributed to AI taking jobs and destroying opportunity. 2. Violent…

If violent attacks start metastasizing, it legitimately justifies a police crackdown. Most of the population will be for that. The pro-Palestinian activists set their cause back a year by overplaying their hands in Columbia at the start of the war. If we want to ensure zero AI legislation for the next 2 years, I couldn’t think of a better way to ensure that than to start potting randos in the streets.

DAs can refuse to prosecute.

But even if the DA prosecutes, the jury can nullify the charges, which is a risk. What happens when a jury finds the accused not guilty?

The masses will only tolerate so much before the elite start dying. See all of human history.