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

Molotov cocktail is hurled at home of Sam Altman

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

691–700 of 715 posts

Re: Molotov cocktail is hurled at home of Sam Altman

#691

Post by zouhair »

Ferret7446 wrote: post #530
zouhair wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by violence? Do you consider someone building a monster of a server farm near your home and messing up with your drinking water, electricity and life in general violence? Why violence is only immediate physical one that counts?

All of that has presumably gone through the proper public approval process. Just because you might think the process is flawed, does not justify retaliatory violence in a civilized society

> retaliatory violence in a civilized society

Are you joking? What civilized society? A society that let people who can't afford insulin die? Let kids starve if they are from poor neighbourhoods? What civilized society are you talking about? The one bombing countries left and right and financing a genocide? What civilization is that? A society where people with full time jobs live paycheck to paycheck with no savings? A society where millions cannot afford shelter and where homelessness is a crime? What civilization is that? When is it OK for you to revolt?

Re: Molotov cocktail is hurled at home of Sam Altman

#692

Post by metalcrow »

ETH_start wrote: post #670
culi wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Intent is a key element in criminal culpability. There are plenty of illegalities based on neglect. > it shifts from "the system produces unjust outcomes" to "violent personal retaliation is understandable or even laudable" There's something unsettling to me about how quickly Americans are to explain white collar wrongdoings by talking about "the system" but how slow they are to take that same attitude towards crim…

Once again: The reference to white collar crime is an extremely provocative assertion, because it smuggles in a tenuous allegation that Thompson committed white collar crime. More generally, I said there is a major difference between structural harm, white-collar crime, and deliberately killing someone. Your answer was to fixate only on general claims about inequality, underpolicing, social causes, etc, which insinua…

If your argument amount to saying that white collar crime isn't actually proven beyond a doubt for certain people who are the lead images for organizations that result in millions of people suffering, then you have lost the public's support even if you may win a debate.

The axioms for a majority of people right now are 1. Person X is doing bad things or leading an organization that does bad things 2. The government is refusing to address it and is actively abetting it 3. There is no way to stop this evil from occurring besides extrajudicial murder. The only thing you can suggest without breaking one of those axioms is that we must let evil happen because the alternative is worse, and frankly i'm not sure that argument is a good universal standard.

Re: Molotov cocktail is hurled at home of Sam Altman

#693

Post by JumpCrisscross »

MiguelX413 wrote: post #668
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why not? I don't wish violent ends on anyone. I'm not open to sacrificing that part of myself in a rich, historically-free society that retains peaceful means of power transfer.

Should we just let these terribly evil people who are responsible for thousands of deaths roam freely free of consequence then? It's not like they're breaking any laws in their evil acts, so we can't hope for our legal system to prosecute them, in fact we can count on it to protect them. Zuckerberg played a major role in the Rohingya genocide. Sam Altman disagrees with you about violence being bad, he just signed a d…

> Should we just let these terribly evil people who are responsible for thousands of deaths roam freely free of consequence then?

No.

> It's not like they're breaking any laws

Then it’s not categorically evil. If it is, change the laws. Anywhere.

> he just signed a deal with the same DoD that killed a bunch of innocent schoolgirls in Iran

Yup, not okay with the precedent that anyone affiliated with our military deserves summary execution. Because then someone will justify the same for anyone affiliated with Greenpeace or the Sierra Club or who shops at Target.

> That healthcare CEO would still be alive and completely consequence-free if Luigi hadn't killed him

Was a middle-managing CEO within a subsidiary. The actual billionaires are doing fitness—they don’t walk the streets of Manhattan. United has changed zero policies and thus zero patient lives have been changed. Well done. Glad Mr. McDonald’s got his ab pics out for his moment of celebrity.

Re: Molotov cocktail is hurled at home of Sam Altman

#694

Post by daveguy »

apothegm wrote: post #678
daveguy wrote: post #622

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You clearly haven't been paying attention.

Oh, no, I was agreeing with you. What you posited wrt elections is what I’ve been anticipating (with dread) for the past 18-ish months.

My bad, I thought you were referring to the implicit assumption about momentum. Not the explicit assuming that Trump doesn't put troops at the polls. He sure is trying his best to normalize troops in civilian settings.

Re: Molotov cocktail is hurled at home of Sam Altman

#695

Post by dan-robertson »

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #612
gattilorenz wrote: post #591

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I think the problem is that no-one is seeing justice being done. The Epstein survivors had their names released in the publication of the Epstein files whereas the perpetrators had their names redacted. Without any serious attempt at carrying out justice, I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that anyone associated with Epstein was part of the criminal conspiracy.

People are not seeing the prosecutions they were expecting. I think some of that is because the person who would be prosecuted is dead, part of that is because the justice system makes a successful prosecution difficult (eg some people may be likely to have been victims while also not being sufficiently credible witnesses to win at court), part of this is because prosecutions that are deemed unlikely to win are not pursued, but I also think part of this is that there is a belief within parts of the public that more people associated with Epstein ought to have been guilty of something (abuse related rather than misconduct in a public office) even if there is not actually any evidence of it other than that association. That isn’t to say that many of those people weren’t acting immorally but immoral isn’t the same as illegal.

Re: Molotov cocktail is hurled at home of Sam Altman

#696

Post by adastra22 »

bdangubic wrote: post #521
adastra22 wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately some people are.

this is true for just about everything, there is always some as outliers for whatever but isn’t true in general. there are people I believe are rotten to the core but would never wish any violence against them

A significant proportion of people are ok with violence as a means of solving problems. True pacifists such as yourself are relatively uncommon. And even if it was rare to be ok with violence (it's not), those few who behave that way force violence on the rest.

Re: Molotov cocktail is hurled at home of Sam Altman

#697

Post by MiguelX413 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #693
MiguelX413 wrote: post #668

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should we just let these terribly evil people who are responsible for thousands of deaths roam freely free of consequence then? It's not like they're breaking any laws in their evil acts, so we can't hope for our legal system to prosecute them, in fact we can count on it to protect them. Zuckerberg played a major role in the Rohingya genocide. Sam Altman disagrees with you about violence being bad, he just signed a d…

> Should we just let these terribly evil people who are responsible for thousands of deaths roam freely free of consequence then? No. > It's not like they're breaking any laws Then it’s not categorically evil. If it is, change the laws. Anywhere. > he just signed a deal with the same DoD that killed a bunch of innocent schoolgirls in Iran Yup, not okay with the precedent that anyone affiliated with our military deser…

> Then it’s not categorically evil.

I disagree.

> If it is, change the laws. Anywhere.

Tell me who I should vote for this next election cycle to do that.

> Yup, not okay with the precedent that anyone affiliated with our military deserves summary execution. Because then someone will justify the same for anyone affiliated with Greenpeace or the Sierra Club or who shops at Target.

I think it's a false equivalency to draw a line between an organization that kills children and an organization that campaigns for the protection of the environment.

> Was a middle-managing CEO within a subsidiary. The actual billionaires are doing fitness—they don’t walk the streets of Manhattan. United has changed zero policies and thus zero patient lives have been changed. Well done. Glad Mr. McDonald’s got his ab pics out for his moment of celebrity.

Sure.

Re: Molotov cocktail is hurled at home of Sam Altman

#698

Post by ETH_start »

metalcrow wrote: post #692
ETH_start wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once again: The reference to white collar crime is an extremely provocative assertion, because it smuggles in a tenuous allegation that Thompson committed white collar crime. More generally, I said there is a major difference between structural harm, white-collar crime, and deliberately killing someone. Your answer was to fixate only on general claims about inequality, underpolicing, social causes, etc, which insinua…

If your argument amount to saying that white collar crime isn't actually proven beyond a doubt for certain people who are the lead images for organizations that result in millions of people suffering, then you have lost the public's support even if you may win a debate. The axioms for a majority of people right now are 1. Person X is doing bad things or leading an organization that does bad things 2. The government i…

Which white collar crime did Brian Thompson commit?

As for letting bad things happen, every time the party we don't like wins the election, we let what we personally view as "bad things" happen instead of use violence to overturn the election. That's the whole point of democracy. We show some humility and respect the majority will. We respect the process.

Re: Molotov cocktail is hurled at home of Sam Altman

#699

Post by ETH_start »

cineticdaffodil wrote: post #676
ETH_start wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Claims of structural harm are far more speculative, and thus harder to establish, than direct violence like a stabbing or shooting. 2. The reference to white collar crime is an extremely provocative assertion, because it smuggles in a tenuous allegation that Thompson committed white collar crime. 3. Structural harm, where it exists, is most often done without intent. Intent is a key element in criminal culpability…

Democracy that produces outcomes advesarisl to the voters intentions, for example massmigration even though voters voted against that - has ceased to be a democracy. Making the government and its cronies as illegitimate as any bannana republic dictatorship.

People still get to vote and express their political views and have elections decided by majority will.

Re: Molotov cocktail is hurled at home of Sam Altman

#700

Post by metalcrow »

ETH_start wrote: post #698
metalcrow wrote: post #692

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your argument amount to saying that white collar crime isn't actually proven beyond a doubt for certain people who are the lead images for organizations that result in millions of people suffering, then you have lost the public's support even if you may win a debate. The axioms for a majority of people right now are 1. Person X is doing bad things or leading an organization that does bad things 2. The government i…

Which white collar crime did Brian Thompson commit? As for letting bad things happen, every time the party we don't like wins the election, we let what we personally view as "bad things" happen instead of use violence to overturn the election. That's the whole point of democracy. We show some humility and respect the majority will. We respect the process.

The crime of making people suffering from illnesses go through a hellish process to be able to get treatment for them, or worse outright denying their ability to get treatment. It's a crime the US encourages insurance do, but it's a crime against morals nevertheless.

As for letting bad things happen, there is something to do when your side loses the election: wait 4 years. It's a very easy action to take, you know for certain there will be a change or strong opportunity for it soon. That is not true in all situations.

Post reply on HN