361–370 of 517 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you name one?
Trans people Gay people Doctors that provide abortions Doctors that provide gender affirming care Students protesting against Israel Just to name a few
Perhaps, given you provided said categories, you'll be able to drill down and name a natural born citizen from them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Someone else raised a similar point in another thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43524589 Can you name any cases in recent history where someone was "disappeared" or similar by the government (the only part of this we can objectively prove afaik) and then no evidence or other proof of the person's wrongdoing ever came about, and people just forgot about it? I could be mistaken (and please correct me if I'm…
In what now seems like test runs, we can look back to the summer of 2020 in the Northwest US where there were armed people in camouflage and armor putting people into unmarked vans and taking them somewhere else for a non-zero amount of time. (not charged with anything nor the masked people's government identities revealed.) I am not saying there is a conspiracy going on, simply pointing out a case that appears to ha…
https://www.npr.org/2020/07/17/892277592/federal-officers-us...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where in the world did you get that unemployment rate? And some of the things you're listing are similar in scale while others are orders of magnitude different. A giant list like that is a mess.
> Where in the world did you get that unemployment rate? SGS, Shadow Government Stats. Their estimates include the "long-term discouraged worker" which was officially defined out of existence in 1994, which was coupled with the short-term discouraged worker (U6) from BLS to get a real unemployment rate. https://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-char... Its followed reality far closer than the watered do…
Overall labor force participation seems fine. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/US_Labor...
And labor force participation is only down, what, 4% from 2000? Why does that correspond to a 14% increase in unemployment?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a point where "benefit of the doubt" is not appropriate though. Personal opinion is that point is past.
There is never a time where it's appropriate to give up benefit of the doubt in general toward an entity. If your starting position is that they most likely did any and every bad thing you can think of, you quickly reach absurdity.
Decision-making, and its related presumptions change when the threat becomes existential.
Deceivers with resources who abuse the public trust and its presumptions towards individuals, take advantage of societies understanding, towards destructive ends, and continue doing so regardless. They corrupt the systems meant to protect and keep destructive outcome dynamics in check usually for personal or political benefit.
The entities are not entitled to the same benefit of the doubt when they have a history of malfeasance, and lack of credibility.
This is true of anti-trust, government corruption, and government in general when you consider the many other things like Tuskegee, or what happened to the Inuit women who were involuntarily sterilized following eugenics programs in the late 60s early 70s, along with other indigenous peoples under the guise of beneficial programs promoting public health.
You can see just how well fines do in curbing corruption like JPM's silver manipulation over a decade, or Egg price fixing over the past 10 years, or medical equipment providers who have defects that kill patients, and then claim they fix them falsely (in bad faith).
There is a point where you cannot presume innocence, especially with regards to non-person entities (like corporations), who will pay the fine and continue business as usual passing the cost on.
Eventually you hit a critical saturation point where the presumption and benefit of the doubt must necessarily flip.
When related systems break enough, there is a point where people realize the rule of law has failed, and consider alternatives like the brass verdict, and act on it.
These are not good things, but they happen when the dynamics to correct fail as a whole. When people start objectively finding foundational violations, it becomes and is a societal existential threat and should be treated as such.
Failure to react from that point forward then becomes opting out of continued survival, which is well beyond any considered point of absurdity.
Evil is blind to the natural destructive consequences it creates, and sometimes evil needs killing just as it did with the Nazi's.
When the rule of law can no longer fulfill the obligations under social contract, and act as a non-violent conflict resolution, the alternative is natural law and chaos, and it is something that no good person would wish on anyone.
This hasn't hit mainstream media yet. It should have by now. Disappearing people is not something the US government is allowed to do. Here's Xiaofeng Wang's bio on the Indiana University site.[1] Google Scholar.[2] Archived version of home page at Indiana University.[3] If anybody has a PACER account, please check there. [1] https://alliance.iu.edu/members/member/8580.html [2] https://scholar.google.com/citations?use…
We have no evidence that Wang "was" disappeared. We know that he's nowhere to be found, that the university put him on leave weeks ago [0], and that the FBI recently searched his home. Notably, the university put him on leave weeks before the FBI searched his home. That sequence is better explained by the hypothesis that Wang vanished himself suddenly and the university called in the FBI to investigate things that th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Where in the world did you get that unemployment rate? SGS, Shadow Government Stats. Their estimates include the "long-term discouraged worker" which was officially defined out of existence in 1994, which was coupled with the short-term discouraged worker (U6) from BLS to get a real unemployment rate. https://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-char... Its followed reality far closer than the watered do…
I don't see an explanation of where these numbers come from. Also I would say that even within U6, someone that's forced to work part-time should not count 1:1 with someone that has no job at all. Overall labor force participation seems fine. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/US_Labor... And labor force participation is only down, what, 4% from 2000? Why does that correspond to a 14% increase in une…
The alternative to no work is starving, and there are people where they have been starving and unable to find any gainful employment for years. The most common excuse is being overqualified.
I've a friend who was laid off about a year ago, more experienced than I in SRE, and has had no job offers and he's applied to everything available in and outside Tech.
You got signs everywhere saying "We're hiring", and force you to do a 1-2 hour LeetCode Interview or some other BS, and then within 20 minutes after completing it he'll get an automated reply through the portal saying they've gone with another candidate; they won't take the sign down though, and when he went in person they say "You're just too overqualified", or better yet "Not a good culture fit [pre-interview smacking of ageism]. There are also tax subsidies for businesses to hire discouraged workers, still it seems like no ones doing it.
You've got most places that say they need help when in fact they aren't hiring at all. If anything there are far more people who are not counted than those on just the U6. I wouldn't agree 1:1 shouldn't count.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trans people Gay people Doctors that provide abortions Doctors that provide gender affirming care Students protesting against Israel Just to name a few
Perhaps my question was unclear. I responded to "Even natural born citizens are now under threat." I asked to name one natural born citizen , not categories of people. Perhaps, given you provided said categories, you'll be able to drill down and name a natural born citizen from them?
https://www.npr.org/2025/03/14/nx-s1-5327552/trump-takes-bir...
https://immigrationimpact.com/2025/02/07/breaking-down-trump...
If it turns out that he was somehow repatriated to his home country under compulsion that would not be terribly surprising. Nor would it be surprising if he was a "spy" or even a double agent. The FBI raiding his home suggests that he was somehow implicated either as a foreign agent or as a compromised intelligence asset, and one side or the other wanted him back.
> Nor would it be surprising if he was a "spy" or even a double agent. It would be very surprising. How many spies and 'double agents' are there?
so in a rough estimate, if you have 10 chinese coworkers around you, there is over a 50% probability that CCP is watching you
Hard to say what's going on, but if he was a spy that is a plausible response. I've known ex-govvie infosec folks who get calls periodically from their contacts in government about Chinese state-sponsored spies embedded in big tech companies. It's a thing. If this was just another "let's screw over an immigrant for saying something we didn't like", we'd have some clue as to the professor's politics. But of course, an…
> It's a thing. so is China threatening, blackmailing and disappearing Chinese ethic people (and/or their children) even if the people in question have US citizenship and/or have not grown up in China at all like we can't really say much about this case without additional information
that's true, so be careful, the child of your chinese coworker is likely kidnapped by CCP so that the chinese coworker has no other choice but to work for the CCP
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wrapping your conspiracy theories into pseudo-science based on wild guesses doesn't make them more likely. There is a long series of scientists in the US that were secretly working for the Chinese government. It is simply the most likely explanation that this is another instance of that. It also doesn't make any sense that the US government would secretly "disappear", as you put it, this individual while they are ope…
I did say the likeliest explanation is no government involvement, but that USA involvement is still likelier than China‘s involvement given recent pattern of conduct. Chinese exfiltration is also a conspiracy theory. In fact chinese exfiltration requires a larger conspiracy than USA disappearance. If you want to apply Occam’s Razor (which you shouldn’t), you should actually favor disappearance over exfiltration (but…
Both the Chinese and USA governments engaged (or have been accused of engaging) in unlawful kidnapping of their own (and foreign) nationals from foreign countries over the last decades.
So I'm not sure how one can dismiss the possibility that this is indeed one of such cases.
