skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Okay, best case scenario then if Ukraine falls.

Slovakia military: 25,000 people.

Polish military: 300,000 people.

Czechia military: 30,000 people.

German military: 183,000 people.

French military: 270,000 people.

Basically, don't piss off Poland, you'll need to defeat about 500,000 soldiers, though do you really need to march on to France if you win against Germany? Even if you did, that's about 1/3 the US military, and nowhere near as well armed, or well trained, or well psychologically prepared. If you're Russia, about 1 million soldiers should do the trick; and that's not hard when you don't have moral qualms and 21 million military age men to throw at the problem; and (edit) possibly an additional few million from North Korea for purchase.

As for nuclear weapons; Russia can probably bet that using a nuclear weapon from inside France, or inside the UK, as a first strike, would be too controversial to even do. The government would probably be sued by human rights lawyers from inside itself for even trying; convinced that it's better to take the loss while remaining on the moral high ground. What's even the point, when NATO predicts they have less than 5% of the defenses required for the inevitable retaliation? https://www.ft.com/content/5953405f-d91a-4598-8b6b-6345452ca...

> (edit to reply): Russia isn't winning against Ukraine.

Yet.
It's bad, but not as dire. Russian losses are very likely higher, but if I have to guess - multiples of 2 and above are just propaganda mixed with wishful thinking. They still didn't need to resort to further rounds of mobilization since 2022 or large scale usage of conscripts. And I don't understand what "North Korea" argument even is - Ukrainians would love to rely on someone else! But no one is willing to help in this department.
"Most countries definitely do not have nukes."

I did not claim that.

I claim it will be hard to limit the use of nuclear weapons.

Just like in the weapons itself, one ignition can trigger a chain reaction in the end forcing russia or US to take part in it as well. If all the people involved are level headed and able to think rational - it likely will prevented also in the future. But if the person in charge is already stressed (and old) and gets lots of pressure - this person, might then feel forced to press a button.
So I know this is not a popular opinion on this site but the only solution being offered by the other side seems to be the meat grinder approach. Basically continue letting both sides throw their men and (and also US taxpayer) money into the conflict until one side gives up or runs out of men.

I am fundamentally anti-war. We can and should compromise on this. There’s a reason the neocons are aligned with the left on it. The military industrial complex is profiting massively, big banks are securing massive land grants to help “rebuild”, and meanwhile both countries are depopulating themselves.

What happened to the left that used to be anti-war?
You're witnessing the collapse of American soft power, economic power, and our transition to an authoritarian isolationist state. Some of us accept it while others still have to grasp the situation.

The death of the post cold war neoliberal world order and the death of the American century. to be replaced by... ?
Whenever I read comments like this, I know that it is someone that has switched from another OS. macOS is neither Windows, KDE or Gnome. An awful lot of the functionality that you deem 'nonsense' comes from the days of classic Macintosh and even from NeXTSTEP.

In fact, nearly all the complaints I see in this and similar threads come down to people expecting macOS to behave like their previous OS did, and being surprised that it doesn't.
Another Ars [dupe] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43185909
> Say what you mean

You ought to take your own advice, buddy.
That is an entirely different claim than "trump folds" if anyone pushes back, which doesnt seem at all accurate to me. If anything, he digs in his heels.

The only things that seem to sway him is the sentiment of his voters and the economy.

Bully or not, I think the entire schoolyard theory that bullies fold when pushed back is bunk, cartoon logic. Did Russia give up and go home when Ukraine pushed back?
Excellent point, and I agree with you.

I’m curious if RAG can solve any of this problem?
Be concrete. Which countries and what effects? Berlin is less than 1,000 miles from Moscow. Why aren’t they spending 5% of GDP on defense if this is a real threat?
Everything he does is related to grift. A Ukraine-American minerals deal will probably have many layers of agencies and private contractors involved. All kinds of side dealings and under the table contracts will be exchanged where the Trump enterprise can skim off everything, like hedge fund fees.

Such a deal has no place in a peace deal where thousands of people have died. Stop the war first.
Donald Trump - whose business "got all the funding we need out of Russia"[1] stood up in front of the press and requested the Russian government target his opponent's email... and the Russian government immediately did so.[2] There has been a great deal of circumstantial evidence since, with little to anything to rebut it. This may very well be a quid pro quo rather than naked pro-Russian partisanship, but the practical difference for the United States is negligible.

1. https://thehill.com/homenews/news/332270-eric-trump-in-2014-...
2.https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/russia-hacked-hillar...
The linked article doesnt mention the agreement changing. Did it? If it did I can understand him not signing it.

However there was reporting prior to his arrival that he didnt intend to sign it, and considered it something that lower level officials could do. This was after the impression was given that he was coming to the US to sign it, as you admitted was his intention.

> No one ever said they needed to. What gives you that impression

NATO membership for Ukraine is an attempt to call Russia's bluff that they wouldn't continue fighting, or escelate to nuclear weapons if Ukraine were admitted. That is a direct die roll on starting WW3 and Ukraine is not worth it.

> To be clear European NATO partners do expect the US to go unlimited debt or die on the battlefield to protect them. It's called NATO.

I think you understood that I meant for Ukraine. If not, well, it wasn't difficult to see that's what I meant.

Yes, the US should, and I and most Americans do support, upholding Article 5 obligations.

> As for Ukraine. Firstly the US has give much less than the EU.

I hope you're joking.

> The US owes no one anything, but is it too much to ask that Trump goes hard on the ones who started the war, Russia, who...

The west collectively went hard on Russia. We gave Ukraine more of a fighting chance than anyone could possibly hope for. But Russia is winning. We will not escalate to risking WW3. Ukrainians are amazingly tough people and what happened to them is a tragedy, but its in their best interest to stop fighting and dying.
During Cold War 1.0, a lot of analysts and operatives were 1st and 2nd gen immigrants from Eastern Europe, and had ties and culture experience to help inform policy against the Warsaw Pact.

After the 2000s, the US began increasingly limiting those with ethnic or potential familial ties from working beats related to those countries. A Chinese American wouldn't pass the security clearance muster for the China role, nor a Jewish American for an Israel role.

There were attempts to potentially remediate this during the Biden admin, but it fell to the wayside [0][1]

Some white dude who went to high school in White Plains and college at Tufts just isn't going to have the domain or cultural experience or knowledge needed to really understand China or Iran, and it legitimately has caused a lot of IR Policy to become divorced from reality.

[0] - https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/16/state-department-di...

[1] - https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/18/asian-americans-sta...
I guess he's saying that hn is "non tilted/neutral" toward any political stance, and as such pinning a comment to a Ukrainian donation gov website could be seen as "supporting" someone
It's not about Lebensraum in this case. It's restoring the glory of the USSR. And Putin has been clear on that.
Manpower was always going to be their hardest-to-overcome problem in a protracted war. The relative population sizes when the war started meant they needed an extremely positive kill/death ratio (if you will) just to stay at parity.
It's quite a bit more than that: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/about-us/article/2025/02/26/in-the...

Also, let's not fall in false equivalences here.
You think Russia is going to nuke America if Ukraine loses the war?
> Can anyone tell me what the alternative is that would result in less people dying? This needs to stop NOW.

There's a logical flaw in what you are saying. Forcing Ukraine to accept a truce right now, without any security guarantees will result in a LOT MORE deaths. Russia will re-arm, using their oil and gas money, and in a year finish the job. Right now, Ukraine can hang on, but if Russia gets its shit together during a truce it's game over.

What could happen is that they negotiates a truce with security guarantees from the US or at the very least a no-fly zone. But Trump doesn't want that, Trump doesn't want to do anything, he want mineral rights to offset the cost of the last president gave Ukraine (Not $350 bn, that number is lies, its ~$70bn), asking for $400bn rare earths and other metals. I can only assume he will only give new weapons under the same terms. A shameful shakedown. And even if Ukraine agrees to this, Trump has said he won't enforce a no-fly zone or give a security guarantee.

The best thing Trump and the US can do from now on is just to not get involved in teh war. I can see Trump supporting Putin out of spite.
Your statement doesn't make sense.

Most Americans do support Israel and are very opposed to Putin and Russia.

Check the polls.

Which is why it's suspicious that JD Vance and Trump seem so afraid to upset Putin.

The idea that Russsia could have compromising information on one or both of them is entirely plausible. It's a way politicians have been controlled for literally thousands of years. J. Edgar Hoover controlled every US president for fifty years with this one simple trick.
"This is gonna be great television I will say that." - Donald Trump's last words as the confrontation ended. Just insanity.
Their demographic collapse was happening anyway. This made it worse, but they may have already just been resigned to that. I think that's also what made them desperate.

The cost to Russia has been steep, but I think Russia is walking away from this feeling good. Russia's borders are vast and undefendable so they view it as existentially important to control their bordering states as buffers. When one of them flirts with joining NATO they view it with almost the seriousness with which the USA would view, I don't know, California flirting with becoming a part of China.
Russian losses are significantly higher, from what I hear in first hand reports are 3-4x at the very conservative end.

What you are posting is not factual.
Must we endlessly fund a war that is in stalemate and will continue to savagely end the lives of military and civilian alike? Otherwise, we are a bully? Is it in our interest to continue to run up debt, send overseas ammunition and hardware? To what end? And for how long? I remember wondering the same during Iraq and Afghanistan. Is this really America's permanent responsibility, for any country in the world?

It's quite remarkable the change in America over a couple decades. In the 90s, the left was solidly pro-free-speech and anti-war. Anti-war sometimes to a fault, even. Maybe aside from some censorship effort of rap and Mortal Kombat, you could count on the left to defend free speech at nearly any cost.

Now, it is the left that seems interested in doubling down on wars, without any plan for escape, and of "reigning in" speech deemed by some as harmful.

I'm not here to say correct or incorrect. Pick your own ice cream flavor. My point is that it's striking how much the parties have flipped 180 degrees (on some issues).
Yes, it's completely spineless.

For all the intelligence they seem to purport, being complicit in supporting the takedown of democracy and the once good name of the US... Catastrophe for business, the startup world, and innovation.

Don't s** where you sleep.

And all those crypto bros thinking this would be a good thing... They seemed to forget that blockchain participation is essentially a luxury item. A dead economy is awful for crypto.
Yes. But it's like any un-even fight.

Russia was supposed to win easily right away. There is a huge size difference.

But if the little guy, even thought has been on back foot since the beginning, has lasted 10 rounds, and still hitting back. They are on the back foot. But now it starts looking like a win could happen. The underdog wins the crowd right? Now looks like US is the bully.
More like musk fanboys that either are just straight up nazi bros or are too invested in tesla instinctively smash that flag button
Oh, you all mean when expose or whatever it's called shrinks the windows down and spreads them all out? Yeah, I've never found it a useful way to switch apps if I have more than a couple open. Visually searching for the window I want like that isn't fast for me, and if the windows get too small it's not helpful.
>The fact that Americans can't see through the Fox News propaganda to understand this is unbelievable, embarrassing, and will set them back on the world stage for a generation or more.

Just a friendly reminder to not paint "Americans" with a broad brush. We may not have got our way this past election, but there are plenty of us who see through the fucking bullshit.
Personally, I think of DNA as being like the Linux kernel codebase. There's a lot of raw "code" there — but not all of it ends up in every running kernel!

DNA methyl-groups, acetylated histones, etc — these are the config file generated by running `menuconfig`. They determine:

1. which components of the kernel the "compiler toolchain" (RNA polymerase) will actually "compile" (transcribe) into kernel-module objects (RNA sequences, proteins) — in turn determining which "features" (developmental or metabolic processes) each of the components (cell/tissue types) of the resulting system (organism) will have; and

2. which #IFDEFs (coding regions) within those modules will actually be macro-enabled (expressed) during compile-time (transcription) — in turn influencing / varying / tuning the strategies and logic (frequency of production / likelihood of expression, final shape / folding / binding affinities of proteins) used by any given component (cell/tissue type) to perform a given "feature" (developmental or metabolic process).

(And just a tweak to steer this intuition pump — your body doesn't have one kernel, compiled once at conception; rather, your body is more like a distributed system composed of machines running Gentoo — every cell has its own kernel, and each cell is "tweaking" and "recompiling" its kernel regularly. When cells undergo mitosis, both daughter cells inherit these tweaks — that's like setting up a new one of these machines by mirroring the hard drive from an existing machine, carrying over not just the kernel but also the at-snapshot version of the `menuconfig` configuration file.)
Europe is not allowed to have its own foreign policy, let alone "side with China." All of those US military bases are there for a reason.
A shooting match between AMD and Mozilla would be a good day to be a cobbler
Maybe, but Trump's base is actually tiny, only about 22% of the US voters. This will strongly alienate the other 78% of Americans, not to mention 100% of America's allies. And America's enemies now see how grossly inept he actually is at negotiation, revealing that only physical threats will register with him. NOT a good development for America.

An insanely counterproductive ploy, but typical of Trump's 'gangsterism rules' philosophy of leadership.
I'm concerned the US is turning from ally to enemy of the EU.
BTW, the title feels too loaded. The controversy this time is significant enough to be articulated in its own title instead of this level of generalization.

With ongoing layoffs from companies with increasing market cap and the AI hype (where impressive but still LLMs are being oversold as 'AI'), I'm increasingly concerned about the rise of worker exploitation. YC, like many major investors, is positioned to capitalize on this trend, so their attempt to invest in a piece of exploitation tool that enables business owners to yell at "factory worker #17" isn’t surprising.

What's reassuring, though, is that enough people pushed back, which forced YC to delete the post. My take away is that piece of hope over all the efficiency obsessed exploiter CEO and investor assholes.
> the LEGAL definition of “sale of data“ is extremely broad in some places

> We still put a lot of work into making sure that the data that we share with our partners

This. What they seem to be saying is that -- at best -- they're riding so close to the edge of selling data that strict legal interpretations of the term "sale" have become important to them. It sounds like they're doing some shenanigans like not providing access to raw data, but doing some of the processing advertisers would do and selling that data.
just wired some bucks for defence, thanks
I was being sarcastic. I’m sorry, I am trying not to be passive aggressive, exactly in that order.
> why does the US need any involvement?

You are asking the wrong question (or at least, a wrong question). It's not "why does the US need any involvement", it's "Why has the US insisted on involvement for so long?" (e.g. during the 1980s when widespread sentiment in Europe was for the US to close its military bases, the US insisted on remaining).

The UK does not rely 136k people to defend itself from military risk. It relies on its nuclear arsenal, which while not as large as those of the USA or Russia, it quite the deterrent all by itself.
How the mighty have fallen. The 20th century was the american century, the 21st doesn't look like it lately. This is an empire in decline.
There’s no question in my mind that this went exactly as planned.
> He did one mistake though

I don't think I'd consider that a mistake. Not that it matters to everyone but it's one more asshole thing to know Trump did, which was only publicized because Zelenskyy respectfully asked for his turn to speak. Other leaders are likely to have taken note of that: Trump isn't even pretending that you're equals.

To some common folk, it will make Zelenskyy look weak but also consider this exact thread in which people say his calm demeanor makes him look strong. I'd wager Zelenskyy is interested in impressing the latter folk and not interested in impressing the former.
Is this a competitor to Google's TimeFM? https://github.com/google-research/timesfm
Good! because people prefer Chrome. People have to go out of their way to install it and they do.

If Safari was better then Safari would stay #1 on iOS. They shouldn't be allowed force this any more than Microsoft was allowed to force IE.

If 3rd party browsers were allowed we'd have had WebGL2 on iOS 4 years earlier. WebGPU 2 years earlier. WebXR several years earlier (Apple is only adding it now and only for Vision Pro), and many other features.
> It takes a little more comprehension skills to understand words. I understand if you didn't get that comprehensive education.

Like the sibling comment says, this is an embarrassing way to cap out an otherwise reasonable comment.
Its only a catastrophe if they didn't get Ukraine. If they have compromised the sitting US president and get Ukraine they will write history books forever in Russia about how they defeated a super power, expanded the county, with a shit army and Internet trolls.
They're trying to avoid extensive drafts in their power-base cities for fear of unrest. Plus that's their reserve if they need to supply a second front for any reason.
> Next they’ll shake up the military.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-brown-joint-chiefs-of-staff...
Depends a lot on the project, I think, as the parent comment suggests.
> Now, what is he doing regarding Canada and Mexico? That I have 0 clue. And his current stance honestly seems stupid.

I'm sure if you keep fantasizing you'll be able to make up an excuse for that, too.
I'm not sure most Americans will fully appreciate the gravity of this. We don't trust you anymore. We don't trust American self-control. You are becoming an enemy.

It genuinely feels like I'm looking at the precursor to a Nazi party.
Nothing wrong with the actual link http://euclid.trentu.ca/math/sb/misc/mathsci.html
I think you mean by Israel.
Interesting take. I mostly disagree, but you do make a good point that Europe won't be willing to "shed blood" for Ukraine.
You mean like the International Brigades? They are defending their country from an aggressor - they're supposed to roll over?
You might want to do a bit of research there before commenting further.

France built an independent system, the UK did not.
Is this a serious question? From whose viewpoint are you asking?
>selling the old garbage

EU does the same.
Negotiated peace was what Russia and Ukraine had before, and Russia unilaterally broke it.

That is why the focus now is on security guarantees, which the U.S. is refusing so far. Without those, anything negotiated is a gift to Russia, specifically the gift of time to regroup and re-arm for another attack later on.

Lasting peace is not created by concessions, it is created when instigators believe they have more to lose than to gain from further violence.
I didn't know Vance was that low-class.

Has he always been like that or is it something repulsive he's picking up from Trump?

He needs serious exposure to mature, cultured, well-mannered gentlemen and to get some pointers from honest, respectable US presidents and vice-presidents like he's getting none of now. Or he'll never reagin his former integrity, if he actually had enough to make a difference, it makes me wonder.
I don't think so. We just saw a closed-door meeting take place publicly. That's all.
There's nothing else in that link beside the current situation with the AP. Don't just post links; use your words, and discuss in good faith.
Section 127 of the UK's Communications Act 2003 makes it illegal to send e.g. tweets that are "grossly offensive" or "indecent, obscene, or menacing".

The Malicious Communications Act 1988 makes it illegal to send offensive communications.

I could go on...
You can ask CharGPT what "interests" mean in this context, it can give you a comprehensive explanation connecting these interests to GDP and quality of life of US citizens in the long term. You no longer can play stupid.

FWIW US spent less than 100B in 3 years of war, it's nothing compared to war in Afghanistan and Iraq. And it serves an important function, "every cent counts!" makes no sense here as the goal is to prevent bigger confrontation in the future
We all thought the singularity was going to be exceeding human capacity for change.

It'd be funny if it's actually full-automated, closed-loop automation of capital allocation markets.

"Why are we doing this? How much money are we getting?" -> "I dunno. It's what the models said."
If you don't understand why stability in Europe matters to America, you might want to read about World War II.

It had a rather pronounced affect on America. Some other countries too, I think.
It is true because levelsio, eric smith, maker of interviewcoder, etc exist.
especially with pg trying to suck up to president musk
Seems like they were banking on the Ukrainian president bending the knee, and that didn't happen. The greatest damage done to the US by that meeting might be the public display of POTUS's histrionic decompensation, requiring the VP to jump to his defense. It's a bad look overall, regardless of the eventual outcome for Ukraine or the US.
Seriously. He parroted his boss to the best of his ability. I'm sure trump is perfectly pleased with his "performance".