181–190 of 317 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The EU is so regulated its hard to do anything nowadays. What are you referring to here, specifically? Something that is a net-positive for society, and that would be legal in the US but is illegal in Europe or EU?
Starting the next Google or OpenAI. Not illegal, just not possible.
And OpenAI just burns money, maybe we should wait if it will survive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not invisible, nor is it much of a secret. Nor does it "control" anything in particular. Much of the coordination against trump by NGOs funded through USAID, publicly, is just online -- you can just go watch recordings of the conferences. It's just an institutional consensus about Trump's style of populism which gave profound motivation to a large number of groups, to organise against his perceived threat. The i…
The CIA has done a ton of bad shit - especially in other countries - over the past 50 years, but that’s a completely separate matter from a “deep state” controlling things and trying to prevent Trump’s election.
The mechanism of anti-trump coordination has yet really to be briefed out, and wikiepedia will be dragged kicking and screaming before there's an article on it. Give it a decade, perhaps.
For now, if you want examples here's the atlantic council (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Council) -- training journalists to treat emerging rightwing politics as disinformation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSAz0agYEeI
And ... there we go - flagged by Musk's tech bros again. HN is starting to feel like X -- I've deleted my X account, and might have to do the same here. I've now switched my primary HN link from the home page to /active, where, thankfully, flagged posts still show up.
> I've now switched my primary HN link from the home page to /active, where, thankfully, flagged posts still show up. Great tip, thanks!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Making drastic changes to a party because you narrowly lost an election with a candidate that never won a primary is dumb. That depends on who you lose to .
How is a candidate that didn't win a primary _narrowly_ losing to a candidate that won a primary a big deal? Like if Democrats decided to run Ron DeSantis how huge do you think Trump's lead would've been?
If you're a marathon runner, and you lose to a toddler, that's probably not.
The Dems fought an eminently beatable candidate and lost, and they continue to struggle with messaging now (stop putting Schumer up there to deliver it!). They flubbed the response to Dobbs, the consultant class nixed the Harris campaign parts that were working (weird etc.) in favor of things that don't (Cheney endorsements). etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Consider how egreious it would be for the US gov to lie about funding healthcare, but instead to use that as a guise for one of your "impossible, movie plot lines..." Sorry, what part of the CIA hatching hare-brained schemes is incredulous? (You should have linked to acoustakitty.)
People like to pretend the intelligence agencies don't operate this way today, and this was some past insanity. I mean, even more relevant would be the leaked recording of state department officials discussing who to replace the elected president of ukraine with in 2013. I just chose the HIV thing, since it's relevant how we interpret USAID's programmes -- in particular, ones which fund the NGOs that run censorship c…
Who? How do you think soft power works?
> how this has become turned inward on the USA itself
The CIA isn’t conducting political campaigns at home. To the extent we have intelligence operations running amok in our bureaucracy, it’s DOGE.
Honestly, this edginess-seeking behaviour reminds me of students in New York and San Francisco convinced they’re being silenced. No, the truth is nobody cares.
Why does everything D0G3 get flagged?
Yeah it's a pattern for sure. Lotta folks seem to not want other people to talk about this kind of thing. Same goes for most other Trump administration articles. I get not wanting to read it, but that's not what flagging is for IMO...
You'll see every single article criticizing DOGE has been flagged by users, in order to try to bury it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People like to pretend the intelligence agencies don't operate this way today, and this was some past insanity. I mean, even more relevant would be the leaked recording of state department officials discussing who to replace the elected president of ukraine with in 2013. I just chose the HIV thing, since it's relevant how we interpret USAID's programmes -- in particular, ones which fund the NGOs that run censorship c…
> People like to pretend the intelligence agencies don't operate this way today Who? How do you think soft power works? > how this has become turned inward on the USA itself The CIA isn’t conducting political campaigns at home. To the extent we have intelligence operations running amok in our bureaucracy, it’s DOGE. Honestly, this edginess-seeking behaviour reminds me of students in New York and San Francisco convinc…
...oops, the law preventing that was amended under obama, to allow it. Drat.
(cf. the original Smith-Mundt act preventing it, and the Modernization Act of 2012 allowing it again. The original, of course, created because law makers were terrified of what would happen if this was turned inward.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A no-vote is simply a lazy vote for the winner.
These weren't no-votes; they aren't counted in the stat. 49.80% for Trump, 48.32% for Harris, 1.89% for others (Stein, Kennedy, etc.).
And ... there we go - flagged by Musk's tech bros again. HN is starting to feel like X -- I've deleted my X account, and might have to do the same here. I've now switched my primary HN link from the home page to /active, where, thankfully, flagged posts still show up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These weren't no-votes; they aren't counted in the stat. 49.80% for Trump, 48.32% for Harris, 1.89% for others (Stein, Kennedy, etc.).
My point is: If one doesn't vote, it's an implicit vote for the winner. Not voting means you're saying "I am supportive of whoever wins" So including those, most presidential elections really aren't that close.
A majority did not vote for Trump. A very narrow plurality did.
Tens of millions didn't vote at all, but they're in a different bucket.