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

Nowhere is safe

steveblank.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 329 posts

Re: Nowhere is safe

#191

Post by abletonlive »

CodingJeebus wrote: post #42
brianjlogan wrote: post #15

Hmm... Interestingly one does not look at the solutions to de-escalate conflict. Despite the proxy wars we've had a relatively peaceful world since WW1/WW2. Please humor me here, I'm not saying the world is horror free. The emphasis I would hope would also be for improved negotiation tactics, better resource sharing and goal alignment between groups of people. Why is it that we can dream up more conflict but not peac…

> Why is it that we can dream up more conflict but not peaceful scenarios? Sadly, war is often a driver of economic growth. WWII pulled the US economy out the Great Depression and transformed it into one of the most prosperous in human history. I'd argue that the proxy wars the US has been waging largely exist to satiate a military industrial complex that is focused on growth. Hard to grow when your business is war i…

> but we somehow can't find the political courage to improve healthcare or hunger here at home.

Sounds like you're buying into reddit propaganda. The US spends more on social programs than it does on war, so apparently we have and can definitely find the courage to improve healthcare and hunger.

In fact, hunger is mostly not an issue in the united states.

Re: Nowhere is safe

#192

Post by cryptonector »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #172
cryptonector wrote: post #162

Imagine the cost of a shahed drone being as low as $5,000, or less. Imagine the cartels south of the U.S. having tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of them. It could get painful fast. That's one thing this war is showing.

Those supply chains are highly visible and relatively limited. Building a vast number of Shahed-level drones is going to be noticed long before you actually build them.

Sure hope so. But what if it's a partnership with parts of the Mexican army or something?

Re: Nowhere is safe

#193

Post by sidewndr46 »

cladopa wrote: post #120
brianjlogan wrote: post #15

Hmm... Interestingly one does not look at the solutions to de-escalate conflict. Despite the proxy wars we've had a relatively peaceful world since WW1/WW2. Please humor me here, I'm not saying the world is horror free. The emphasis I would hope would also be for improved negotiation tactics, better resource sharing and goal alignment between groups of people. Why is it that we can dream up more conflict but not peac…

Are you American? Because if you are from the country that dominated the world since WWII it feels different than being from the rest of the world. Bretton Woods gave the Americans an "exorbitant privilege" that basically meant the US could live extracting wealth continuously from the rest of the world. Then later the petrodollar system was established. People needed oil, the US would protect the Arabs with its immen…

Given the immense capabilities of the United States government, I don't think there is going to be a war inside the US. Or at least not one that lasts any amount of time.

Re: Nowhere is safe

#194

Post by kelnos »

brianjlogan wrote: post #15

Hmm... Interestingly one does not look at the solutions to de-escalate conflict. Despite the proxy wars we've had a relatively peaceful world since WW1/WW2. Please humor me here, I'm not saying the world is horror free. The emphasis I would hope would also be for improved negotiation tactics, better resource sharing and goal alignment between groups of people. Why is it that we can dream up more conflict but not peac…

I would agree, except that de-escalation generally assumes there's a rational reason for conflict. That is, both sides want or need something that makes sense, and the failing to come to some sort of terms is what leads to war.

In the case of both Russia/Ukraine and US/Iran, there's nothing rational here. You can't de-escalate in these cases, because the aggressors (Putin and Trump) are making war for ideological or ego reasons. Putin wants glory and more territory for the Russian Empi-- oops, I mean Federation. Trump wants to distract from Epstein and other problems at home (which hasn't worked as well as most manufactured wars often do), and is in general just someone who likes to break things.

Re: Nowhere is safe

#195

Post by srj »

We have the prospect of AI destroying humanity and living life underground. It's more like The Matrix every day.

Re: Nowhere is safe

#196

Post by kelnos »

llbbdd wrote: post #163
roncesvalles wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The emphasis I would hope would also be for improved negotiation tactics, better resource sharing and goal alignment between groups of people. The fallacy in the line of thinking that "why don't we all just shake hands, say something nice, and get along with each other" comes from the erroneous belief that everyone in the world just wants peace and material prosperity for themselves and their people. This isn't the…

Of all things there's a relevant Tumblr post from nearly a decade ago that I often think everyone should consider (in agreement BTW): "If your solution to some problem relies on “If everyone would just…” then you do not have a solution. Everyone is not going to just. At not time in the history of the universe has everyone just, and they’re not going to start now."

That's a reflection/continuation of a very old meme (from before we called them memes). "Why your idea won't work" checklists were passed around USENET and other forums, and one of the checklist items was almost always something like "your idea requires immediate total cooperation from everyone at once".

This is formally known as a "collective action problem", and CAPs always make achieving a solution damn-near impossible.

Re: Nowhere is safe

#197

Post by kelnos »

nradov wrote: post #187
mikestorrent wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the reasons for this is that the financial system - which is supposed to serve as a mechanism for representing value in a fungible way - does not assign value to many forms of structured, engineered creation. For instance, a high-performing team within an organization has value, held in the agreements and trusts between the people; organizations will destroy this in a second if it suits them because there is n…

Capitalism offers a means of dealing with the problem. Workers are free to start their own companies. People can just do things and don't need permission. Henry Ford himself started from nothing.

Your "just" there is doing a lot of work. Don't trivialize the difficulty of starting a company. Most people who start companies and are successful either have some financial backing or reserves already, or they have very little in the way of other responsibilities (like a spouse, children, or elderly family members) to cause them to think twice about living on ramen for years.

Yes, there are exceptions, as with everything, but this isn't a path to be taken lightly. Your average worker who lost their job due to globalization ends up scrambling to find a job, any job, immediately, or else risk their family living on the street.

Re: Nowhere is safe

#198

Post by sidewndr46 »

krisoft wrote: post #83

> what if the Army could cut and cover 100 meters of precast tunnel segments in a day If you have the precast tunnel segments to do that why wouldn’t you just plop them down on the ground? What benefit does cutting and covering provide? Also how would you protect your construction crew and construction supply chain as they are slowly plodding along 100m a day? Once built, could this cut and cover tunnel be disabled b…

The suggestion from the author sounds like someone early in WWI suggesting the problem with the war effort was a lack of entrenchments to conduct infantry charges from

Re: Nowhere is safe

#199

Post by kelnos »

ErroneousBosh wrote: post #41
Apes wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The theory behind the US having a large military is that it acts as a sort of fleet in being - that the US prefers other methods of engaging with countries, and having a stronger military precludes other countries from engaging militarily. In turn, having stable global relations and protected global trade provides the US with a huge economic boon to fund its large military. That's the theory anyway - our Idiot King a…

> the US prefers other methods of engaging with countries, and having a stronger military precludes other countries from engaging militarily If the US has such a strong military why are they always begging European countries to help them with their various totally-not-a-war "actions", like most recently in Iran? Last time the UK got into something in the Middle East with the US we lost more people to "friendly fire"…

Because the US doesn't want sole responsibility or complicity for the wars it starts. It looks a lot better if everyone is involved.

And besides, even if you have a large, capable military, why not spread the cost (in lives and materiel) around?

Re: Nowhere is safe

#200

Post by fortran77 »

throw310822 wrote: post #49
stavros wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who did the US bomb before 9/11? Iraq, during the Gulf War. > Who did the US bomb before Pearl Harbor? Japan, though the US didn't bomb them, it instituted an oil embargo and asset freeze. > Who did the US bomb before its embassies in East Africa were attacked Iraq, during the Gulf War. > Who did the US bomb before https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103 ? Tripoli and Benghazi, Iran Air Flight 655. I don't…

The US are also the major enabler of Israel's colonial expansion and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. This was clearly expressed by Bin Laden himself as one of the motives behind the 9/11 attacks. > Were you thinking the US was just minding its own business and some bad guys came and attacked it As I remember, this was exactly the way the US explained 9/11: "they hate us for our freedom".

[flagged]
Post reply on HN