skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
US sent Ukraine 31 Abrams tanks so far. This is for the largest land war in Europe since WW2. Now, can we compare this to the amount of military assistance by the US to USSR during WW2? The US could have helped Ukraine win the war, but chose not to.
I type `bcdedit /set "{bootmgr}" path \EFI\refind\refind_x64.efi` so many times a year that it's probably getting close to time to buy a macro keyboard so I can set it up on a macro.
I'm with you. And we seem to be in the minority here. Setting Ukraine aside for the moment, what have the many US military conflicts—they were not "wars" because the last one Congress declared was during WW2—since WW2 achieved?

Excluding proxy wars for simplicity's sake and only counting those where we had boots on the ground, from our engagements in Korea to Afghanistan, how has the world become a better place?

Besides (arguably) Korea, it seems our blood and treasure could've been better spent.
Ukraine offered an alternative approach. They are willing to compromise on territory - i.e. stop fighting over it, not give up the claim to it. What they want, and they've said it again and again, is a security guarantee for the future to prevent Russia invading again. Either membership of NATO or a specific treaty. This is their one goal beyond coming under the control of Russia during this specific war, not having to worry about being invaded again. If they don't get it then they're likely to start developing a nuclear deterrent (they've already indicated this and they probably have the capability).
I'm going to be honest, given your attitude to this as seen in this thread, even if you don't consider yourself full-stack right now, it looks like it's only a matter of time.

You've got the important skill, asking questions and being willing to try, learn and get your hands a little bit dirty =)...
About your analogy to China and Mexico... There are already 6 NATO countries bordering Russia. It's really just about Putin being unhappy that they can't attack and annex where they please.
Nice whataboutism. Europe (especially the UK) has less freedoms than the USA. That's a fact.
Having stockpiles of obsolete weapons to give away is a byproduct of having funded our military for decades. If other NATO countries were doing likewise they, too, would have stockpiles of obsolete weapons to give away.

The fact that it's just the US doing this is indicative of the overall military posture of the EU. It's reasonable to question whether they are prepared to do their part to defend themselves should Russia penetrate further west.
I'd be shocked if it was over 30%

Wow! You think pretty highly of us!
No, I meant de facto official. Putin is de facto a emperor, just not de jure. (but not need to further do pedantic semantics ..)
oh so wonderous times ahead
may they converge towards peace and prosperity for the whole galaxy
So why did Trump invite a so-called dictator to the Oval Office? You are going to have a very long 4 years of Trump if you choose to remain willfully ignorant about what his administration is about or if you place more importance on his negotiation tactics over the results.
You're right, he won 49.7% of the popular vote compared to Kamala Harris' 48.4%. Many states like Arizona and California took weeks to finish counting and I had not checked the final numbers.

If you're curious how most Americans feel now, you can read about Trump's approval ratings here; currently his poll results are net-favorable:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/approval/donald-t...
https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/all-medications-are-insigni...
What i do not get is the lack of understanding that contractsecurity goes with the western world order too. Investments worldwide are as safe as a owing a mc donalds in russia, in a multipolar autorian world. How a whole world is willing to risk their retirement funds and pensions like this, for peanuts..
It also , at least for people in some circles, doesn’t have the negative connotations that Teams does.

I’m more apt to agree to a Skype type setting than someone saying let’s setup a teams meet or I’ll message you on teams.

I am aware a Skype meeting and a teams meeting is essentially the same thing now, it’s just a bias in my mind.
Doesn't his quote hold true? The reason the US is involved everywhere is because it supports our business interests.

The thing about the founders is that there are so many with such varied views that you can usually find a quote in support of anything you want.
US policy is now one of forcing the world into a zero sum game and it is a shame because the world isn't zero sum. This means the world will loose the gains from friendship and cooperation that increase the overall outcome for everyone. It is like living in a city where crime is expected so everyone puts up iron bars on their windows and the parks are all locked-down nightmares. When there is trust and cooperation you can have nice things like open parks and friendly establishments but when trust and cooperation go away you get bars on windows. This is a shame. I am ashamed of the US. I am ashamed that we are so shortsighted and scared that we have to play the bully and force a minmax solution when things could be so much better for everyone.
I agree the first gulf war is a better comparison. In our household we thought Bush was wrong about that too, and I recall my dad being quite happy he lost reelection over it. I’d argue it set us up to get roped in for Round 2.
> Why otherwise they would go out of the way to make idiots of themselves in public in front of the whole world?

Because they are pure evil people, just like putin, and nobody is stopping them. It's that simple.
Trump and Musk are lying about that grant.

Show me proof of their claims that entire $29 million grant went to to that agency was spent on work in Bangledashi elections as Musk/DOGE claimed, despite no federal contract indicating that.

Show me the proof that DOGE "saved" that money after the contract was almost done and money was almost entirely granted.

Show me the proof that it went to an agency of two people as Trump claimed.

You can't show me proof of any of those things because they are lying.

You either ignorantly or willfully continue to repeat that lie, likely for partisan reasons.
This is insane. Just finding a single character must be a real challenge.

What is the character ordering on these cylinders? I counted about 40 characters per row, and I’m guessing about 40 rows around the cylinder (1/4 of a cylinder is around 10 rows). So that’s about 1,600 characters.

How does this typewriter score for usability? In Kanji, ~1000 characters mean basic literacy, and 2000-2500 characters is “newspaper level” literacy.

I still cannot wrap my mind around mastering the written form of this language.
The reason the US is the global hegemon of the western world was because they won the cold war against USSR. Being the leading member of NATO largely contributed to that, and ensured US dominance in geopolitics and trade.

With Trump now in office, the US seems to be willingly breaking, or at the very least withdrawing from, the NATO alliance. With that they give up their position as hegemon, and sacrifice their influence on Europe.

To me, it seems like Russia is now winning the cold war, 35 years after it "ended".
Where in OH?
As a non-famous infosec person I am completely freaked out.
Zelensky wouldn't have acted like that if he wasn't in the oval and on national TV. It was a performance in really bad taste, climbing to the moral high ground, and that rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. Zelensky even pissed off Lindsay Graham, huge urkaine supporter in the senate, who looks like he's done with him now.
The problem with Mearsheimer is that he completely ignores the people of Ukraine.

His analysis makes sense if you think people only live in the US and in Russia, and that Ukraine were an object.

But when you realize that Ukrainians are people, and they are choosing democracy and integration with the West -- it's not something the US is instigating -- Mearsheimer's analysis falls apart.

Because ultimately, Mearsheimer doesn't believe Ukrainians should have any choice over their own country. That only Great Powers like Russia and the US get to make choices.
I read this study earlier in the week. It doesn’t have a larger sample size, but the way they identified the genes could present problems. They did a whole genome search and found 21 genes with the associated change, across 131 participants. It’s hard to know if f they’ve correctly isolated that the cause is the conflict exposure. There could be a lot of other things going on here. The first group where the grandmothers were exposed all moved to Jordan in 1980, and the other group on 2011. There could be something about moving to and living in Jordan that caused the methylation.

Here’s the link to the study https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-89818-z
There is currently an air raid siren in Kyiv. Because of US Kyiv has better air defense, so in case of rocket strike some would be intercepted. There are benefits to US aid.
The Russian people are victimized by the kleptocratic petro-regime in charge, and the American people will be victimized the same.

It's best not to see these as the actions of governments acting in national interests, but as a section of an trans-national class acting in their own interest. With borders and statecraft being some of the pieces on the board they play with.

Lines between countries are for schmoes like you and I. Trump owns capital and etc assets around the whole world, just like Putin.
Better than Russia salami-slicing its way into Europe.

Ukranians are dying. We're donating cash and materiel. We're getting the better end of the deal there, and then some.
I think you're missing the point of what was meant by "prepare for revolution", and confusing the folks who are vocal with their political views and those who aren't.
The problem I have (besides the fact that its guidances are often quite different from contemporary norms) is that it doesn’t capture the complexity of what I would consider to be interesting ethical questions.

For example, is it ethical to create a company which automates the job of a large class of workers? Is it ethical to use such a product? I don’t even think the Golden Rule can account for it, frankly, because the “others” in “do unto others” can be multiple parties, some of whom are helped and some who are harmed.
What a great observation, maybe he can convince someone in Government to do something about it.
woah, the cat chases your taps on mobile!
It's stuff that would actually cost to trash, the us is at least a generation ahead of that equipment.
Did you check for changes in its Article of Board or Incorporation?

Stealth BoD(s)?
I've seen speculation that rare earth mining is environmentally destructive enough that it faces massive (expensive) regulatory hurdles in the US. Much easier to pay politicians in less developed countries to do it there.

https://e360.yale.edu/features/china-wrestles-with-the-toxic...
I've been pretty happy with 1Blocker across all my Apple devices, but I will probably give this one a try.
In past agreements like the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, Western powers and Russia pledged security guarantees not to use force against Ukraine. Security guarantees in this context would mean the US pledging to use force against Russia on Ukraine's behalf, doesn't it? That's a much riskier proposition. That could potentially start WW3.
I think you need better wording for Option 1: Support Ukraine sufficiently so it can make its own decision if they want to continue fighting.

For Option 2 I actually don't see a lot of downsides except dead European soldiers replacing dead Ukrainian soldiers. Russia would absolutely stop if being stopped in their tracks more ferociously. In fact, Russia is already fighting this war all out. If they could they would do more (or at least I can't phantom why they would not).
This this makes Europe less free than the USA. Again, nothing wrong with that. Just leaves a sour taste in my mouth to try to twist facts.
I think you might be underestimating the scope of work that happens on chromium a tad, from Github's "pulse" feature:

"Excluding merges, 684 authors have pushed 3,139 commits to main and 3,866 commits to all branches. On main, 14,924 files have changed and there have been 740,516 additions and 172,682 deletions."

That's stats from last week. Last year Google apparently was responsible for about 95% of contributions. Other than Microsoft (which has the same bad incentives as Google) none of the alt-chromium browser companies has like, 5% of the engineers to maintain a real alternative
The demand is met by Ukraine not being in NATO. You can see the list of NATO members here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO

If Ukraine joined NATO - that would be disregarding Russian demands.

Russia just didn't want Ukraine to join because they wanted to annex the eastern part of it. Having it in NATO would mean that they couldn't do that.

Of course they're opposed to Ukraine joining even after that annexation - they'll take more land if they can get it. They don't care about human lives, will regroup, recover, and attack again.
> Why are none of you confronting him when he claims insane shit like "Ukraine started the war"?

Unfortunately, many of them have eaten enough propaganda that they agree. I have an uncle who genuinely believes that, even if he can't fully explain how it could make sense.
Young people often feel powerless today indeed, not only in the US but in most parts of the West.

One of the reason is that they never had to go through really tough times - as a country. We're living in times of prosperity and stability pretty much all of our lives. And we take it for granted. It's not !

But the thing is, that people do have power. Start calling your representatives, take it to the streets. All of you. If the 50% of voters that voted for Harris show up on the streets protesting, things will change. Take real action.
Your intentions are good, but you're just stating the same thing as what you quoted with more steps.

Use this (faulty) explanation to make a statement about the impact of violence -> direct resources to one demographic or another based on that (faulty) explanation of why it's important.

Your fourth point is entirely valid, if we were performing these measurements & experiments at a large enough scale to have a valid baseline in the first place (which GP was arguing is not the case).
Same argument that people said that russia would steam roll over Ukraine because they have more people and equipment
> cannot happen again.

Hubris. Does not inspire confidence.

> We resolved the vulnerability within 26 hours of its initial report, and additional security audits were completed by February 2025.

After reading the vulnerability report, I am impressed at how quickly you guys jumped on the fix, so kudos. Did the security audit lead to any significant remediation work? If you weren't following PoLP, I wonder what else may have been overlooked?
What is nonsense is the suggestion that there is a "reasonable" argument that they had access to the data (which we now know), and an "ambitious" argument that they used the data. But nobody said that they know for certain that the data was used, this is a strawman argument. We are talking that now there is a non-zero probability that it was. This is obviously what we have been discussing since the beginning, else we would not care whether they had access or not and it would not have been mentioned. There is a simple, single argument made here in this thread.

And FFS I assume the dispute is about the P given by people, not about if people are allowed to have a P.
No, they didn't. They had an industry before there were EU-wide limits. The stuff about nitrogen emissions ignores the fact that no other country outside the EU has done what they did.

This cultish "EU is the world" mentality is tiresome.
You shouldn't let someone bait you into tangent town like rayiner just did. He was posed a sharp question ("Will Putin stop at Donbas?") and he ducked it for a reason.
Are you referring to ATACMS, Hi-Mars, M777's and M1 Abrams, the backbone of the US military and many of its allies? The materiel currently used all over the world? That 'obsolete' heavy weaponry?[0]

Or is it the thousands of Javelins that annihilated the Russian tank columns so that the Russians are currently mounting assaults in Chinese golf carts?[1]

[0] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62002218

[1] https://www.kyivpost.com/post/43685
Stockpiles of obsolete weapons are exactly the military aid other countries have been giving to Ukraine. You may want to check your sources.
For reference the underlying study is called “ Epigenetic signatures of intergenerational exposure to violence in three generations of Syrian refugees”

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-89818-z
Your move, blockchain.
They’re surprised because they don’t understand the history of tech and fascism. IBM was responsible for ensuring the Holocaust went off efficiently as hell. Now Elon Musk has access to American’s most closely held data, I wonder how that’s going to go. At this point, I’m just waiting for them to round folks up, and preparing.
I'm reminded of the Gervais Principle. Doing the work is not the way to "win," but not winning might be the better lifestyle. Depends on your motivations, aspirations, and ethics. It's easy to chase the total compensation number, because it's just _there_ and like what are we doing anyway? But then what are you doing, anyway?
Why do you assume everyone in the company (including folks working on infra) are authors on the paper? That’s possible, of course, but isn’t it unlikely?
I'm not an expert. But they probably would not be able to buy 81t of bitcoin.

Maybe 1m? Depending on who they were and what bank they use
> The U.S. is strong because of our own power, but also because of our many many friends with a shared worldview

You’re starting off on the wrong foot. That’s just Reagan-Bush universalism and everyone who bought into that stupid ideology has been wrong about everything my entire lifetime.

The way you say it, the Iraq War was simply poor execution of a basically sound ideology. To the contrary, the Iraq War was a predictable outcome of the notion that democracy promotion is in America’s material interest, or that it’s worth our while to police borders around the world. That’s a bad idea, rooted in a Christian/post-Christian version of the Ummah and the Iraq War should have discredited that ideology. If you continue to buy into those mistaken premises, a repeat of Iraq/Vietnam/Korea is inevitable.
U.S. Faces Record Agricultural Imports, Worst Trade Deficit in History
Here's seven minutes of head cam footage of a Russian and Ukrainian soldier fighting to the death with knives, for those who are more upset about Trump than the war itself:

https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1hrs6oz/clos...
This is very interesting, thanks for posting. It starts out very positively anyway.
> Writing reveals what you don’t know, what you can’t see when an idea is only held in your head. Biases, blind spots, and assumptions you can’t grasp internally.

I completely agree with this. Often, I think I understand something, but when I try to explain it to others, I quickly realize where my understanding is shaky. The gaps become even more apparent when I attempt to write it down because I have to structure my thoughts logically and precisely. Writing goes a step beyond speaking because it forces me to re-read and refine my ideas, whereas spoken words often disappear without deeper reflection. Oh, even this comment that I'm writing now was edited a couple of times before submitting it. The second half of the comment was added after re-reading the first half.
Source for $40000?
Presumably one of the issues being discussed here, such as mitigating the effects of Russia's wildly successful manipulation campaigns that have resulted in both US policy and cultural shifts in favor of Russian interests. To skip some steps in this comment chain, and at risk of being presumptuous, pick an option from this technically-exhaustive list:

Do you believe that:

1. Russia has not engaged in misinformation-based influence campaigns targeting US citizens

2. Russia has engaged in such campaigns but to no tangible effect, and they therefore require no response

3. Russia's influence campaigns saw success, but not to the detriment of the US, and they therefore require no response

4. Russia's success harms US interests, but it would be hypocritical to actively respond given the US' past actions

5. Russia's success is tethered to cultural shifts, which are impermanent and therefore don't necessitate an active response

6. Russia's success can only be effectively countered by the gov't, so civilian attempts at helping are futile

7. None of the items above relate to the topic of discussion in this thread, i.e. this comment effectively strawman-ing

8. The above points are non-exhaustive

I'm quite sure an intelligent person with an open mind can be convinced that each of the above points is false, save the last one.
its cool. not everything has to be typed in a "normal" way.
Iraq is not the correct analogy. Iraq put us a bit over our skis attempting to enforce our desired norms while entertaining some acquisitive impulses against an inferior opponent with ultimately limited aims. i.e. Saddam wasn’t interested in taking over the world.

The conclusion to draw from that is not that all conflict and cruelty outside the New World is irrelevant to Americans and their interests. You’re a bit older than me, but neither of us have experienced a world with a truly aggressive near-peer power. We’ve lived our entire lives on the laurels of our grandfathers’ victories in Europe and Asia. The resulting international system organized around fixed borders, the rule of law, and low barriers has allowed to flourish the multitude of mutually beneficial trade relationships that support literally the entirety of the only way of life either of has ever known.

It’s an unstable equilibrium. To not defend order against might risks knocking the whole thing down - and then who knows? Maybe we carry on with China and the rest of APAC while Russia dominates Europe? Maybe we live a decade or a generation of poorer, meaner, more isolated lives confined to the New World? Maybe the expansionary impulse brings them, eventually, to our shores?
I'd rather have an open platform with free choice (including the side effect of Chrome taking even more market share) instead of Apple forcing users to use their browser. I definitely dislike Chrome and you may unfortunately be right with your projection, but forcing people to use a different browser does not help the greater cause IMO.
Your comment deflects to reasons for the war. It does not address the core argument that it really wasn't a peace deal and that Russia commonly violates ceasefires. What good is a ceasefire when you know that Russia will violate it?

Doesn't sound like a deal (good or bad) at all. It's a paper prop for Trump to wave around and exchange for a gold star from Putin.
I would rather have fibre built out as a utility. People can always opt for starlink or whatever wireless they want on their own dime, but I think tax dollars should pay for infrastructure to be built in the places we live.
I read 2/3 of his book when it came out and nothing pissed me off more than realizing exactly what you just said. His GRANDMOTHER was Appalachian. Not him. He's a fucking carpetbagger
If you follow the conversation, the beef started after President Zelensky asked the same question he has been asking since the beginning of this circus: What are the guarantees for Ukraine? Ukraine tried diplomacy in 2015 and 2019; the results are well known. Why fall for the third time for the same putin's trap?

Instead of directly responding to direct questions, Vice President Vance starts shaming and bullying President Zelensky. This means the US has no answer and doesn't want to admit it. This is why Ukraine should walk away from the deal that gives them nothing.