Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | type0's comments login

this is where we desperately needs Johnny Mnemonic

> There have been many such endosymbiotic events in the history of life - there are subfields of evolutionary biology that study these processes.

Exactly, if mitochondria is alive then so is chloroplasts and who knows what else. The line needs to be drawn somewhere, also life and death isn't as clear-cut as many used to believe


they should autopaste "talk dirty to me" prompt for everyone redirected from it

It's sad but it might eventually. I would imagine to the end of Trump cadence we'll be paying with x-coin in supermarkets, both he and Elon will be making tons of money. Trumps and Elons x-coin will have tariffs built in to it and you won't be paying taxes if you use it /s

FB rebranded to Meta and obfuscated that they are behind those apps, it worked, most users still have no idea that Meta is FB

Mozilla management had friends that needed the money so they created those jobs, in my mind they should have donated it to EFF instead.

Gremlins exist, in real life they are called weasels:

https://www.iamexpat.ch/expat-info/swiss-expat-news/furry-me...


the feature to see as many Ukrainians dead as possible?


Why do you think NATO actually cares about Ukrainians dying? People are dying everywhere on the planet from war, famine, disease etc on a daily basis. Look at Gaza. What makes the Ukraine situation different or special loosing sleep over in NATO?

If people in your country would be dying do you think other people in countries on the other side of the planet are gonna care enough to do anything radical about it?

Of course not, they're gonna send some symbolic aid along with thoughts and prayers and that's it, you're still on your own to solve your problem.

Nobody's gonna risk they're lives and livelihoods entering a conflict they have no skin in the game in unless there's something in it for them.

If you were to give NATO member citizens a vote today whether they'd rather have cheap food, cheap energy and a pre-2022 economy, at the expense of Ukraine falling, a lot of people would gladly make that trade.

People without luxury beliefs don't care about other people on the other side of the world if it means their own livelihoods have to suffer as a consequence, otherwise they wouldn't be buying 4$ shirts made by slaves in Bangladesh, or cheap coffee and bananas picked by slaves in LatAM, or electronics with cobalt mined by slaves in Africa.

It might not be a popular fact to say or hear, but it's still a fact nonetheless, and pretending otherwise would be just virtue signaling.


And dead Russians. The longer the war goes, the better for the US and NATO. That's the whole reason it exists in the first place.


Pretty sure the war exists because Russia decided it wanted more land and resources.

If you want to argue otherwise, I would need you to explain how Russia has no agency and is instead a weak puppet for everyone else.

You cant have it both ways where Russia is a country that makes it own decisions, but also everything happening as a result of its actions, isn't their fault


there are numerous reasons and everyone has choices. I'm saying that the choices the US made were a major part of bringing about the war. It is 100% upside and the US would do it again.

I think keeping NATO out of Ukraine would have been sufficient to avoid the whole conflict. That is without getting into more exotic options.


> And dead Russians. The longer the war goes, the better for the US and NATO. That's the whole reason it exists in the first place.

>> there are numerous reasons and everyone has choices

>>> I'm saying that the choices the US made were a major part of bringing about the war.

Would you like to either not lie outright, or(if I am being charitable) explain yourself fully in the first place? The comment I responded to from you, was saying that the whole reason the war in Ukraine existed was because it was better for NATO and the US.

Walk that argument back, explain how you weren't nuanced enough in your original statement in the first place, or admit you're just pro Russia. I'll allow for another option I didn't enumerate, but you'll need to provide evidence for it


The war is great for the USA in almost every possible way. New NATO members, Better military positions, Sanctions on Russia and weakened economy, Europe is finally spending money on military, the list goes on.

If the war goes on for another 10 years, it would be a blessing.

Which part is confusing you? Anyone who is Pro-USA and anti-Russia should be for it, and for dragging it out as long as possible.

Thus, it is not surprising that the US took the actions within its control to bring it about, and then trickle funds Ukraine to draw it out as long as possible.

It is the military deal of the Century. We spent 2.5 Trillion dollars on Iraq(in 2014 prices) and look what we got. Ukraine has only cost ~175 billion, and most of that money is spent to buy US weapons.


I'm not really interested in dealing with you moving the goal posts back and forth, so if you would like to continue this discussion I am going to ask you to pick your strongest argument on this topic.

If you do not want to pick a single argument to defend, then ok


I haven't moved any goal posts. I stand by them.

Im saying this war is happening because the US wanted it. It wants it because it is great for the US. It could have been trivially avoided if the US wanted.

Again, what part of this is contradictory or confusing to you?


>there are numerous reasons and everyone has choices.

That part where you declare there are numerous reasons, and not just that its in the US's interest


It takes more than one country to go to war. Each has choices, like cars driving at each other. Each has the power to swerve, make concessions, or go to war, or surrender, ect. Each option may have pros and cons and costs.

The US could have stepped on the breaks at any moment with no cost by not expanded NATO. However, war is a win for the reasons stated, and Russia backing down and letting it happen was also a win. it was masterful strategy to put Russia in a lose lose choice. Sure, it has agency to pick, but it had no option to continue the status quo. Every party has full control to stop things at any moment. It is just a matter of what they stand to gain or lose.


>It takes more than one country to go to war.

So you agree that Russia could stop the war at any time, and didn't need to start it in the first place?


Any primary party could stop it at any time. Russia can stop it tomorrow. Ukraine can stop it tomorrow. Nobody involved "needed" to start it. I do think that Russia saw itself facing an existential threat.


That would be an interesting and defendable argument. It’s not the argument you made though.

You started off by pinning the blame on the US alone


> The comment I responded to from you, was saying that the whole reason the war in Ukraine existed was because it was better for NATO and the US.

False. Reread the comment.


Russia isn't a founding member because they're not the same as Soviet Union. Ukraine on the other hand is one of the founding members.

Just by allowing Russia to keep the permanent seat of USSR legitimizes their revanchist goals to regain the territories they controlled during the cold war

The best move UN could do is to kick Russia out of permanent seat as it was done with Republic of China, US has the mechanisms to do it but sadly they never will


and Norse mythology has 9 world dimensions, so maybe it worked for them


Consider applying for YC's W25 batch! Applications are open till Nov 12.

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

Search: