skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The best explanation I heard for the appeal of fascism was from someone on the far-right – that fascism is basically an immune response of a nation.

When enough people are hurting from the status quo voting for "sensible" policies of soft reform isn't going to cut it. At some point you need to blow up the existing system so you clear out the rot.

This immune response might be costly to the nation in the near-term but the hope is when it's over it will have also have destroyed the infection.

When it's put in these terms I can begin to relate more with the appeal of Trump, and while I'm not personally convinced he is a fascist, I do get why people say that. I can be nervous and unhappy with the result, but also acknowledge that the US needs significant change and voting in Biden or Harris was never realistically going to bring that.

There's clearly something wrong with democratic party. They're no longer appealing to the working class they claim to speak for and instead their primary supports now seem to be suburban white-women and the college educated metropolitan class. Today they're also supported by the media establishment, war-mongers like Dick Cheney, most billionaires, Hollywood celebs and pop-stars. Given this it's really no surprised we smart well off people on HN don't like Trump and quite like the sensible status-quo Harris promised.

I hope this immune response doesn't kill the host and I hope something positive comes out of all of this. We should take comfort in the fact that the US is the most resilient democratic nation on Earth and Trump probably won't be alive in another decade. Those who worry about an actual fascist up rising probably need to relax a little. The great risk over the next few years is probably just geopolitical stupidity and we've seen plenty of that in the last 4 anyway.
you realize that Trump cut the CDC branch that worked in China (and other countries) to look for and contain novel diseases before they become pandemics right? if Trump hadn't been president, COVID probably would have been like Ebola or Sars1 where it kills a couple thousand people without becoming a pandemic
I've been wondering a while, is your username a reference to the comic "stone toss?"
Your judgment won’t endear Americans to vote for someone they believe is a worse candidate.

We saw firsthand what a Trump presidency was like. He wasn’t Hitler, despite what many in the political establishment would like you to believe. We saw firsthand what a Harris vice presidency was like, and for most Americans, it did not inspire confidence in a Harris presidency. More broadly, the Democratic Party has become weirdly fixated on policies that are more in tune with Reddit than with the average American, and that’s a losing strategy.
I think the current rumor is that only one of the chiplets will have the extra cache though, so you'll have 8 cores with the big cache and 8 cores with the normal cache.
You're misunderstanding my motivation.

I am a progressive. I'm obviously dissatisfied with the results of this election. But I'm even more dissatisfied with the reaction I'm seeing from the left. I cannot and won't respect the "vibes" of "we're all gonna die, there's roving gangs in F150s in the streets, I'm leaving for Canada, the country hates me". I won't respect that. It is not indicative of any reality outside today, or in the immediate future (and I live in an extremely right-leaning place).

The reality that I want the left to adopt is: Its not that bad. The world isn't going to end. Both Trump and Kamala received fewer votes this year than in 2020. Progressive policies are majority-popular in the United States. Kamala was just a (very) bad candidate. Don't let that energy you're feeling go to waste by planning your escape to Thailand or laying in bed all day wrapped up in a cocoon. Educate the people around you. Be out in your community. And prepare for an even more important election in 2028.
That's fair, they definitely waited too late. I guess I also wonder, what if they just left Biden as is. They believed he was going to win, heck he got 80M+ popular votes when he ran. Why risk swap him out. But then, I think, once they did swap him, she could have boosted her position by emphasizing how she will do things better. But perhaps she was also honest and didn't want to lie and she didn't really plan on changing anything.
It was a big story because (a) it was the first time it was attempted; and (b) there were concerns that older software would need manual intervention to update the key, thus there was a need to make it into a big story to ensure appropriate folks would update the trust anchor (this turned out to be a non-issue).
JD Vance is extremely likeable, and much less polarizing than Trump. The "weird" attack on him died the moment people heard him speak.
For one’s 24h capital gains to exceed the median American wage only requires a few million at play in almost any asset. That is a fifth of households [1] and I’d guess around double that fraction of likely voters. (If you’re in crypto, you could have done it with less than a million.) That will influence how folks think about Trump, at least in the short term.

[1] https://www.fool.com/retirement/2024/05/27/heres-how-many-mi...
Turned out not many people support open borders.
you could leave now...
> The "money supply" you are talking about was not the primary driver in the last few years and there was robust demand for the treasury issuance.

Unless I'm mistaken, I don't believe we can be sure of that. The economy is extremely complex, ferreting out the impact of any one intervention is nearly impossible.

On the surface it seems very unlikely to me that printing trillions in new money and giving it to banks, businesses, and directly to every citizen had no impact on prices. The supply of money increased dramatically and the cost of money (interest rates) was also extremely low.

Beyond my hunch though, I haven't found any data that has clearly isolated the inflation out of the equation to be able to show that the price increases weren't driven by the new money at all.
Probably in the end fundamentals beat candidate quality.

Rightly or wrongly, economic sentiment indicators are all in the dumpster and historically incumbent party loses in that scenario. We've had the best covid recovery, lowest inflation and lowest unemployment in the developed world but that doesn't matter to the average voter.

Biden probably would have done worse (look at approval rating & imagine another debate). Open primary might have helped, or not, total gamble. Probably less than 25% of this is attributable to Harris or her campaign.

If there was a dem mistake it was in picking her as VP in 2020 to lock up a demographic they already would win. From there it made her the presumed successor to an elderly president who was assumed to not really run for a second term.
Second time in the current millennium is probably the talking point you saw; Reagan was the the last Rep president to win two terms with a popular vote majority.
W is fairly recent in the official French alphabet and its officially called "double v".

In Belgium it can be pronounced or heard as "way" (wé) usually for
- BMW as "bay-hem-way" (bé-m-wé)
- www as "way-way-way" (wé-wé-wé)
- WC as "way-say" (wé-c) .
A beefier iteration is the Xbox PlayStation way. To many people what makes Nintendo special is that they often avoid that. Wii, Switch, snd DS being successful examples.

>Hopefully Nintendo learned its lessons from the Wii U.

That’s my concern, Nintendo doesn’t like incremental titles like “Switch 2”. They’d rather call it something weird like “Switch Me” which only confuses non informed customers.
I’m very liberal and very much opposed to authoritarianism. I don’t see the problem with forcing online content to be different than offline content. You gotta show ID or otherwise prove age to buy alcohol and pornography offline. Why not for online as well?
The biggest issue facing Canada is that all of the parties support rising house prices. There's no variety, even under a multi-party system
There was someone upthread that was talking about how unemployment is lowest ever while we have all these layoffs going on. It's kinda surreal.
As a foreigner it seems like the electoral college is obviously stupid. No matter who wins why. It is pure conservatism to keep it like doing something because the Bible says so. Given that it mostly helps one party it will never be changed but it cannot be argued from first principles in the 21st century.
Why do you say that? Without tariffs, the most efficient producer makes the good or service. With them, someone less efficient may make them.

Efficiency includes, but isn't only, waste and pollution.
The end of the war in Ukraine suddenly got much closer. I can't think of something more positive for me as an European.
Many, many ways:

1. Rhetoric of an "enemy within". Trump has already made it clear that he intends to use the US military to "clean out" our country.

2. Supreme consolidation of power. Trump plans to re-enact Schedule F. Tens of thousands of federal workers will be fired, and their replacements will be required to vocalize their devotion to Trump. The bureau meritocracy system, which has been in place since the 1800s, will be removed completely. In its place, a system of political loyalty.

3. Supreme avoidance of the law. Trump is completely immune to any criminal prosecution while president, and he has made it clear he plans to use this newfound power "very aggressively".

4. Desecration of education. Within the first 100 days, the department of education will be dissolved. States will pivot to ahistorical pro-conservative education, if they provide any public education at all.
The N64 was significantly limited by its form factor.

Many games were not ported to it because it used a cartridge that couldn't hold near the data of a CD ROM like its peers.

The controller was amazing though.
trump is running at least partially on a revenge-tour platform. his rhetoric is unlike anything else I've personally heard from another candidate on any side of the aisle.

I understand that we don't agree here and that we all view things that are said through a distorted lens... so you may feel that certain speech from one person isn't violent, but said by another person is.... and I clearly would flip that around.

Its a shame that things are the way they are, but hopefully we can all understand each other at some point and things are less polarized. Its pretty miserable to have calm and reasonable conversations about anything even broaching politics. Its just contributes to the echo chambers.
This is not very complex at all.

I linked an example below. Most CI/CD, like GitHub Actions[0], can easily be configured to trigger on changes for files in a specific path.

As a very basic starting point, you only need to set up simple rules to detect which monorepo roots changed.

[0] https://docs.github.com/en/actions/writing-workflows/workflo...
> If your testing is good enough, I don't see what the issue is?

Your testing isn't good enough. I don't know who you are, what you are working on, or how much testing you do, but I will state with confidence it isn't good enough.

It might be acceptable for your current needs, but you will have bugs that escape testing - often intentional as you can't stop forever to fix all known bugs. In turn that means if anything changes in your current needs you will run into issues.

> We release everything weekly, and some things much more frequently.

This is a negative to users. When you think you will release again next so who cares about bugs it means your users see more bugs. Sure it is nice that you don't have to break open years old code anymore, but if the new stuff doesn't have anything the user wants is this really a good thing?
I agree with you but you're missing the point.

As I said, women's reproductive issues ARE important to them. It does come up in discussions.

The point is that people often tend to be single-issue, or few-issues voters... and there are policy issues that are just way more important to them right this very second. Issues like the economy and the housing crises.

My wife and I were living on our own and starting a family when we were our daughters' age. Our daughters not only still live with us but they have abandoned any hopes of ever being able to own a home of their own.

Our oldest daughter, who will turn 25 soon, wanted nothing more in life than to have a family and she is seeing the time window for that slip by. She thought she'd be married with a home and kids by now. She found her partner, he lives with us now too. Why would the abortion message resonate with her when what's bothering her most is that she wants kids?

From what I've heard in the news, the women who were single-issue-voters on abortion tended to be older women who are concerned about the rights of their daughters and grand daughters.

But I do wonder how many young women are in similar situations to my oldest daughter. Women who are more concerned about whether or not they can have kids versus whether or not they could terminate an unwanted pregnancy. They might not be a huge voting block, I honestly don't know. But I can't imagine that the abortion message resonated with this demographic at all.
Obama wasn't a candidate since 2012 or president since 2016.
> put an uncharismatic non white woman as the candidate

As a "white" man (no more white than native Americans are "red", Chinese are "yellow", or Africans are "black"), I take offence at the suggestion that skin color or gender should be a defining characteristic to determine who should be the US president (or anyone else in power).

Charisma is a different story, but boy, if Trump is the benchmark for what counts as having charisma, we're in even bigger trouble than I thought.
Politicians are Jungian symbols, policies are facades
Humans Live and Die By Their Myths
Indeed, the attestation process, as described by the article, is more geared towards unauthorized exfiltration of information or injection of malicious code. However, "authorized" activities are fully supported where that means signed by Apple. So, ultimately, users need to trust that Apple is doing the right thing, just like any other company. And yes, it means they can be forced (by law) not to do the right thing.
Given the voting trends, many who initially fell for it eventually recovered over the next 8 years.
> A lot of men feel emasculated by the state and direction of our culture.

Can you elaborate on this, because it's a sentiment expressed a couple times in this thread, and I'm not sure I get it?
This is weirdly compelling. I have some retro info that I've wanted to put in a small website, this may be the thing that pushes it into the active list.

Thanks!
https://sdgs.un.org/partnerships/pacific-climate-change-and-...
> It does seem very likely that the Republican Party will govern the US for decades to come

Either you're a troll, governed by recency bias (i.e. today), or not very competent in US politics. If the Democrats could get their act together even just slightly, they should have won 2016 and this election as well. How? It's simple demographics:

More and more people move to cities -> cities are typically blue -> easy for dems to get elected.

There should be absolutely no reason democrats lose so often and yet due to their incompetent antics they lose far more than they should.
"Ignore the fact that everything costs more; you're just angry at the war but don't realize it" does not seem like a winning campaign slogan, but what do I know?
Trump was fairly inept in his first term, making lots of mistakes and pissing off his advisors and allies. He wasn't Hitler because he just wasn't very smart, which was a saving grace to all of us.

I've had a great 4 years, economically speaking, and I'm worried about the future a lot right now just in case Trump actually gets the competence to go along with his rhetoric. Hopefully he will be just as ineffectual as he was in his last term.
My partner's a welder. None of the comments here surprise me, sadly... you're right.
So, when the democrats finally said "hey, we were wrong, here's a boarder bill to limit entry into the US", and Trump said "don't fix the boarder",

Why did Trump then get votes?

Nobody is confused as to why people SAY they support Trump, people are confused that you can show someone who supports Trump objective evidence that he hurts them, works against his wishes, etc, and they will support him harder.

The "backfire effect" doesn't replicate, but boy IDK if we can call two elections anything more than an adequate sample size.

If Gender politics is such a nothing-burger that the president shouldn't care about it, why did they vote in the party who is enthusiastic about hetero-normativity? Why did so many republicans devote airtime and debate time to talking about the double digit number of trans people in sports?
Well, it worked for USB-C and GDPR (which spirit was implemented in other non-EU countries as well). Look up: “Brussels effect”.
Given the generally high regard that the US has for service people - military, police, emergency services etc - it always puzzled me that Trump was never held to account (in a political, rather than legal sense) for the harm caused.

Is there a reason why this has been glossed over? I thought that would surely be a red line for many of his supporters.
Russia has 30 percentage points more tertiary educated people than the US does. 60 versus 30. Huge, huge difference in education levels. Better PISA scores. Better in many OECD measures that relate to measurements of "ignorance." How would George Carlin rate Russia's politicians?
Thinking about recipe formats more than anyone should
Hillary Clinton won the primaries in 2008.
Exactly how many times can "nah you're not getting what he meant" be repeated? Is anything he says anything he means?
Trump already explained [0]:

> It’s true, because we have to get the vote out. Christians are not known as a big voting group, they don’t vote. And I’m explaining that to them. You never vote. This time, vote. I’ll straighten out the country, you won’t have to vote any more, I won’t need your vote any more, you can go back to not voting.

It was stupid phrasing and might have been a Freudian slip, but his explanation also makes sense. "The country is on the brink of {insert terrible fears here}, but we'll fix it up this term and you won't have to worry about it for a while." The man isn't known for his well-thought-out speeches, his entire schtick is speaking off the cuff, and most voters don't hold that against him.

[0] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/30/dona...
> He actively tried to subvert democracy and the public have rewarded him, why would he not?

That's the key observation.
> And towards a DEI set up where Kamala is hired because she ticks the colored and woman boxes rather than because of competence.

Biden said as much ~4 years ago and this election was probably doomed from that point on. I don't know how they are so tone-deaf.
That will never happen because there are too many other power-hungry people in the GOP who are not going to just let Trump sit in the White House indefinitely, if for no other reason.
Thanks for the illuminating context
I really believe that you are approaching this in good faith, so I will do the same. I don't have time to really dig into this deeply with you so these brief justifications of my stance will have to suffice. I don't understand some of your tangents, and you will have to forgive me for not addressing the reddit or sports stuff.

> Re: tech bro

The tech bro thing comes across most apparently in the pro-VC slant of this site (inextricable, I know). There is a high proportion of believers in a fantasy meritocracy where current wealth concentration is justifiable due to the sheer genius of "founders". This is very much a tech-bro way of thinking.

The way HN regularly reduces socio-political problems into a technological gap is another tech-bro "thing". When someone suggests that a country switch its currency to crypto to eliminate state corruption, or suggests that biometrics scanners be installed at ports of entry to eliminate slavery and humans rights abuses, that is a tech-bro opinion. It is different from a blue collar environment because the people on this website are extremely insulated from the social issues that come up on here. Nonetheless, they feel like they have an obvious solution to a version of the problem that they've concocted in their head based on a 2 second glance at a headline. It reminds me of this Adam Savage video that I think is great: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OP4CKn86qGY

> Re: obnoxiously male

This is exemplified by the high confidence and combativeness in this and other similar comment sections on HN, but let's just talk about this comment section.

Commenters here are confidently asserting that the author's lived experience is wrong because of a certain interpretation of the words that they typed in the article. When she says that someone made comments that made her feel othered, the reaction here is to disbelieve and downplay. That is very much a "obnoxiously male" way of approaching things. In more balanced spaces, the presumption would be that this blog post was made for a reason and that the person who made it is valid and rational by default. Nobody here has any additional information, and they are asserting that their interpretation of her words is correct even though they are heavily influenced by their own biases of gender, class, and otherwise.
There are hundreds of thousands of people alive in the US right now who were drafted to fight in Vietnam. The only war with conscripts that the US didn’t send people abroad for is the civil war in the US

We didn’t have any conscripts in Afghanistan because we don’t have any conscripts at the moment. I can say that there were a lot of people that were deployed in the Middle East when they didn’t want to be. Especially for second and third tours. I personally have a friend who was told he was going to be on a ship in the Navy who ended up in Iraq.
Consuming seawater is generally a bad idea, people died of thirst before drinking the material in which they swam for some time (if documentaries are correct, haven't faced this myself)
> It sounds like from your perspective, being better looking than their co-workers is a good thing. By and large, men are going to find women better looking than other men. That means the "better looking" comment is directly pointing out that the recipient of the comment is a woman.

It is hard to be funny without referring to anything about the current situation.
It is cheap only if you don't change CPU or GPU architectures. This is why the PS4 doesn't have PS3 compatibility.

When apple switched to ARM even with x64->ARMv8 translation layer (NOT emulating) it was still noticeably slow in a lot of software. Even though some x64 games worked on ARM macs they still lost A LOT of performance.

The backwards compatibility of the PS2 was due to the PS2 literally including an extra PS1 CPU (technically PS1-like CPU underclocked to match the original PS1 CPU when running PS1 games). On PS2 games this PS1 CPU handled only I/O so it wasn't completely wasted when running PS2 games.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_2_technical_specif...

The PS2 CPU is a MIPS III while the PS1 CPU is a MIPS I. I am not an expert but I think but I think MIPS III is only backwards compatible to MIPS II, not MIPS I
We do not, I wish I knew. We did post on Product Hunt https://www.producthunt.com/products/patterns-4#html-to-reac... about it as well as Twitter: https://x.com/Teddarific/status/1805268979508015589

I think it's possible it just went viral after an influencer covered it or something?
You could say the same about progressive taxes. Without them, the most efficient do the work. With them, less efficient people below taxable income threshold will do more work.
By waste I meant the consuming of goods and accompanying trash that comes with it.