Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | JCharante's comments login

> Sure, PG&E implodes but then who manages Diablo Canyon and who delivers electricity to the unprofitable rural areas?

Hopefully no one manages them and that forces residents to move out and stop being a drain on society.


I assume the same should apply to, say, USPS, and the residents of Alaska and Hawaii should stop being leeches who can get letters delivered to them below cost?

If you prioritize ideological consistency over pragmatics, sure. I don't; I just want a fair system for electrical services.

why not just say private location? My house is a private place, but it's not a secret.


Maybe because "private" in English can also mean non-publicly-owned, ie in private hands. This facility could easily be a publicly-owned and yet not open to the public. English is weird.


Then it's simply restricted.


How about "stinky", if the goal is to discourage corpse tourism while being technically accurate and honest.


Why is everyone arguing about the semantics here? Why don't we just start a zoom call with the author and complain together?


What’s your address?


I like it. “You ban ours and we’ll ban yours” type of approach


As a parent, this kind of behavior leads to escalation and is indicative of adolescents in grades K-6. Usually people grow out of it before they reach adulthood.

Our ability to suppress our desire for revenge is what makes society work.


Usually adults both work together and play by the same rules, no? Is China working together in cases outside of this?

In prisoners dilemma tit for tat is a winning strategy for a reason.


Tit for tat is not a winning strategy in the game theoretical iterated prisoner's dilemma. It is a winning strategy in a competition between strategies, but the incentives of these competitions do not align with the actual game.

In fact, the strategy by definition never leads to a win and is weakly dominated by just never cooperating.


No, we judge the rules based on merit. If the other person kicks you out, you don't usually follow suit blindly by applying their rules to them. That is following other people's rules rather than your own and lacks integrity.


I think the characterizion of this as tit for tat lacks nuance. If you look at China's actions over the last while, in the South China sea, in regards to Taiwan, banning western apps, "accidentally" damaging subsea cables, industrial espionage at huge scale, and probably a thousand other small and large things I don't know about: if we put this into human terms, it's like a child who is constantly testing you and pushing the boundaries to see what they can get away with.

The correct thing to do in this case, as an adult, is to have firm boundaries and push back strongly but fairly whenever they are crossed.

However, while it's an interesting thought experiment, anthropomorphasizing nation states in this way will only get you so far. China is not a child, nor is the USA, and they're not adults either. While it does sometimes seem apt, the concept of maturity, in human development terms, cannot be applied here.


The concept of maturity is for us. We have the freedom to choose what we believe about the actions of nations. Besides a nation cannot do anything without the actions of people.

We conveniently describe people's actions as being of a nation, but we should be careful in not taking this too literally. It's a convenient linguistic device that doesn't reflect the reality that underlying all national action is the action of people.


A better answer would have been to develop some kind of decentralized censorship-resistant worldwide network, but that wouldn't have served the "iNtErEsTs" of the people wanting to maintain power over civilians.


Do they ban our apps? How come all of Apple's and Microsoft's apps can work there?



Great for cgi and video games


Based on the title I thought this was about Glitch, the chat app that was semi-popular in OSS projects. Or maybe I’m misremembering the name


Gang and organized crime-related shootings are very bad to have, most developed countries don't have them either.



It's always weird to me when people want to exclude them from stats.


Because it paints the image that normal innocent people are getting shot up in schools and markets more often than they really are, primarily to push the narrative that guns need to be taken from people who have committed no crimes, to stop crime.

In reality, the majority of shootings are done by people who will find a way to kill someone, one way or the other. Whether it be with a legally-purchased gun, an illegally-purchased gun, a homemade gun, a knife, a homemade shank, a baseball bat, a vehicle.


>normal innocent people are getting shot up in schools and markets [often]

>the majority of shootings are done by people who will find a way to kill someone, one way or the other

Both of these things can be true. You can have a rampant gang violence problem, and also a rampant school shooting problem. The fact that the gang problem is worse doesn't make the school shooting problem okay, and to use this to argue against gun control is... odd.


The point is that gun control isn't solving anything but eliminating what many Americans perceive as a fundamental right, because bad people do bad things with neutral items. You can stab dozens of people mortally before you're put down. You can mow a crowd of people down with your vehicle. But I carry a gun every day out of the possibility that someone might do one of those things to me, or my loved ones.

Banning a right is the worst bandaid "fix" possible, on top of what is a much more fundamental problem that can't be solved by merely stopping one of its symptoms. Our people are sick in multiple ways. Let's fix that.


They're authoritarians, they don't want to take away guns from the government, only the citizens.


A bit late to the party, but yes. I'd rather live in safety than with civil liberties.


The majority of shootings are actually gun owners or their family members killing themselves. 60% or so.


Suicide makes up 55% of gun deaths, and the US is literally the only country in the world that counts these as gun violence. The remainder is primarily gang violence. Shooting of non-gang affiliated people is extremely rare, and noteworthy because of this rarity. Murder-suicides are also rare, about 1% of suicides.

Most discussion and statistics about gun violence intentionally obfuscates these facts. We could speculate about the motivations why, but it is largely irrelevant.


You seem to be hinting, by your choice of statistics, that gun violence in the USA is not the pressing social issue it is commonly made out to be. (We could speculate about the motivations why, but it is largely irrelevant.)

Since I disagree, I will offer my own statistic: the leading cause of death in the United States among children and adolescents is gunshot wound.


I would agree that gun violence is a serious issue. However, I think most people are misled/misinformed about nature of the problem, who is at risk, and their personal risk.

I think that the risk is highly concentrated on a subset of people, an individuals can take simple actions to remove themselves from that subset.

Examples would be if you steer clear of gangs, drugs, and abusive partners, your risk is drastically lower than the national average. The same is true for your kids, especially if you don't keep guns in your house.

Now, I still think it's a problem that other Americans are dying from gun violence, even if I don't think I am personally at much risk. I will admit that this does reduce the sense of urgency I feel, and I suspect that this is why the numbers are obfuscated.

The groups that want to reduce gun violence rightly understand that personal fear is a greater motivator then general concern for the well-being of others, so the narrative exaggerates the former and not the letter. This is why you get lone suicide grouped with home invasion for gun violence statistics. It is why you get 2 gang members shot in a drug deal gone bad classified with school massacres as mass shootings.


Do you have a source on gang violence?

Of the numbers I've seen, in total gun related dealths are evenly split between suicide and homicide.

Of the homicides, ~10-50% are gang related (depending on source) and ~50% are drug-related (including overlap with gang).

F.ex. intimate partner violence being another major homicide category.


Not off-hand. Last time I looked into it, tagging homicide associations was a pretty messy business. I think drug related gun homicides and gang homicides two side to the same coin.

I've seen numbers on the order of 10% for intimate gun partner homicide. The percent is much higher for women, but women are a minority of gun homicide victims overall.


I looked at a variety of sources for the above numbers, but it certainly didn't seem like gang- or drug-specific associations drove the majority of non-suicide gun deaths. A decent chunk, but there are other reasons.

One surprising / not surprising other fact: ~50-75% of gun deaths involve alcohol and ~25% meth.


Would be curious to see what you are looking at too. Many deaths have no attribution as well, which could well fall into drug or gang.


Parent specifically said “shooting deaths”, which technically includes guns shooting the person holding them in any country.

Gun suicide specifically affects white conservatives males and their kids more than any demographic. Either it’s access to guns, or conservatives are particularly more depressed (or maybe they lack access mental health services?). Having a friend die this way when I was in high school (and knowing no one who was shot and killed by someone else), it’s particularly real to me.


True, let me revise. The majority of "shootings" are suicides, which can be carried out in all manner of ways. The second largest contributors are gangs and organized crime. The smallest, by far, is what people actually picture in their mind when they hear "mass shooting".


Guns are an easy way to do it with a higher success rate. It is really hard to stab yourself to death even though it’s possible, for example. Who knows what would happen in Korea if guns were legal.


Because it's mostly business dispute resolution and it dominates the stats if you include it.

It's not like you can ask the courts to use state violence on the guy that shorted you come coke or to kick that other gang's dealer off your turf because he's already been warned once. Illegal industry has to DIY it.

To include it would be like compiling a list of extortion and including government fines and civil judgements. It dominates the stats so much that if you include it and evaluate it you're not actually looking at the thing you want to be looking at, you're measuring by proxy the size of something else. You'll wind up deriving conclusions like "most mass shooters are low level gang members" or "the threatening party in most extortion is the state" that is nominally true but also absurd doublespeak not actually congruent with the meaning of those words.


Why? I'm not in a gang or a mob, so i am safe from their silly little squabbles. I don't care how many gang members kill each other. I also don't care how many people die in DRC civil wars, because I am not in the DRC. I don't care about people dying on other planets and in different galaxies.


Ah yes, because no one innocent has ever died from gang on gang violence, and nobody has ever been wrongfully identified as a gang member and been killed.

I don't personally care about what's going on in the DRC either, but I do care about the entire city being safe as I don't want to die from accidentally taking a left turn.


> I don't personally care about what's going on in the DRC either, but I do care about the entire city being safe

The Democratic Republic of Congo is a country, not a city.


I'm not sure what you need to configure, but you can definitely get iPhone alerts to arrive before you feel the earthquake. Not sure why your iPhone didn't alert you while your android did as it should be from the same local data source.

I really wish we had something like NERV but for SF, NERV works so well whenever I'm in Japan. It will literally show you a countdown of exactly when you'll feel it and it's very accurate, and you can see a livemap of monitoring stations reporting it in real time as the wave makes its way towards you.


it's literally the cost of a cup per coffee per day


This argument only works in isolation, and only for a subset of people. “Cost of a cup of coffee per day” makes it sound horrifically overpriced to me, given how much more expensive a coffee shop is than brewing at home.


Or the price of replacing your espresso machine on a monthly basis.


When you put it this way, I think I need to finally buy that espresso machine.


In America. If you drink your coffee from coffee shops.


> it's literally the cost of a cup per coffee per day

So, AI market is capped by Starbucks revenue/valuation.


I don’t drink coffee. But even if I did, and I drank it everyday at a coffeehouse or restaurant in my country (which would be significantly higher quality than something like a Starbucks), it wouldn’t come close to that cost.


I pay $1.5 USD per day on my coffee. And I'm an extreme outlier. I buy speciality beans from mom and pop roasters.


Not if you make coffee at home.


Maybe in an expensive coffee shop in the USA.

In Italy, an espresso is ca. 1€.


Or an Avacado Toast.


Not to be glib, but where do you live such that a single cup of coffee runs you seven USD?

Just to put that into perspective.

I also really don't find comparisons like this to be that useful. Any subscription can be converted into an exchange rate of coffee, or meals. So what?


You're right - at my coffee shop a cup of coffee is nine


Yeah but the coffee makes you more productive


the first 10 grants = $2000/mo? Seems a bit, odd to even mention


Agreed, feels like virtue signaling.


I don’t trust ITV to get an accurate number. People tend to have a huge bias against MENA and the figures perpetuated by everybody for Qatar’s builds are extremely exaggerated.


Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: