Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | csomar's commentslogin

Soon he'll have to join the productive workforce so that he can afford cartridges. We might also observe a new wave of crimes from squirrels so that they can afford this new vice.

Would he be able to afford rent though in this economy, his days of eating acorns on trees and moving from one tree to another without paying rent are gone :-)

Most likely the squirrel is gonna create a meme coin and pump and dump it and become a influencer.

(On a more serious note, I am not sure if some ACTUAL Human being might create a meme coin or something about this squirrel... so there is some irony to it)


Read on the martingale strategy. This is Donald Trump signature strategy. Basically, when something doesn't work, you double down; and it pays off. This strategy keeps working until it doesn't and completely bankrupt the player. Because the strategy has been always paying off for the them (djt & co), they thought they have some kind of a special skill/power that others don't; not realizing that they are just bad at math, geopolitics and strategy.

I think it's perfectly encapsulated by Hegseth's comment about not fighting "with stupid rules of engagement."

The implication is that, the US's military failures in the past have been caused by lefty bedwetters wringing their hands about casualties and restricting the military. More generally, caused by "woke" policies that are about political correctness instead of about military success.

I would bet at least $10 that the top people in the administration are baffled that they haven't won the war yet. They're saying, we did everything right. We got rid of the trans people in the military. We fired the worst women and black people in leadership roles. We put a real tough guy in charge of the military. We told our troops to stop worrying about rules of war and let them off their leash. So why is Iran still able to fight?

That's one of the problems with bigotry and toxic masculinity and that sort of thing. Not only does it lead you to harm people, but it also hurts your ability to actually get things done. Thinking that gay people are destroying society is bad if you're in a position to hurt gay people, but it's also bad if your job involves preventing the destruction of society, because it means that you're going to look at idiotic "solutions" to the problem. And because it's not coming from a place of rationality in the first place, you're not going to eventually say, wait a minute, this isn't working, maybe gay people aren't the problem. You're just going to keep pushing at it harder because you know it's right, and if it's not working then it's just because you haven't done it enough.


> They're saying, we did everything right. We got rid of the trans people in the military. We fired the worst women and black people in leadership roles. We put a real tough guy in charge of the military. We told our troops to stop worrying about rules of war and let them off their leash. So why is Iran still able to fight?

Who exactly is saying this? Your comment is worthless conjecture.


Well duh. That's why that paragraph starts with "I would bet...."

yes and some bets are smart and based on sound logic and evidence. Some are based on stuff pulled out of the better's ass. This is the latter.

Not sure why you keep feeling the need to reply to state the obvious.

Trump doesn't care about the results in Iran. He's getting richer through graft while making himself look big. He's pathetic and we're all paying the price in one way or another.

I suspect Trump may not care about money much, but at the end of the life he wants to be some historical figure. Similar motive was for Putin to invade Ukraine.

Except for the little detail that Ukraine doesn't have a history of launching rockets into allied nations, invading embassies and holding staff hostage, unprovoked attacks against allied interests and ships in international waters and massacring it's own people for the crime of speaking out agains their government.

> - Assume everything will be fine and America will remain a global economic superpower.

My guess is 2/3 of the country at lease believe in that.

> - Plan an exit to a more serious, stable country.

Only the Top 0.1% are eligible. Probably only half of them are prepared. The other half are blind.

> - Some option in the middle of the two to hedge your bets?

That's the same cohort of the half of 0.1%. These people are not betting against the US as much as they are hedging their bets. They'll remain in the US till it's clear that the downward spiral is inevitable.


I like your optimistic view. The reality is that AI concentrates power and when power concentrates, the rulers can dictate. Democracy is not just voting but also a productive populace that has a voice in the production process.

The people on the top are not going to share sh*t. That's just not how greed works.


I am working on merge conflicts tool[1], so this area is of interest to me. But I fail to see the points of the author. In the first example he gave, git will actually give you three blobs: our, their and ancestor. The ancestor should have the missing information from his example and using code diffs[2], you can see what happened at each blob. Essentially, his blob is a single view of the 3 blobs merged together. Could be useful on the terminal, but if you are using a visual tool, a 3-way diff is always better.

> merges never fail

I am not sure what never fail means here.

> Conflicts are informative, not blocking. The merge always produces a result.

What does this even mean? You merge first and review later? And then other contributor just build on top of your main branch as you decided you want to change your selection?

If you want a smarter merge conflict tool, the one I am enthusiastic about today is Mergiraf: https://codeberg.org/mergiraf/mergiraf

1: https://codeinput.com/products/merge-conflicts 2: https://codeinput.com/products/merge-conflicts/demo


> And I really have to ask why we think the browser is the place to run this.

This is a big barrier if you want cross-compatibility and making Linux usable for everyday people. My whole interface is a terminal and a browser. I could use/pay for something like this in the same way I use figma. I don't need an app and when I open my iPad I can access whatever I was working on.

The browser should have been the place to run all of this from the very start; but Apple/Google decided to create walled gardens for their systems.


If they could do it, they would. White collar workers don't have any special status that protects them from getting the same treatment the blue collar workforce got. That said, I think it'll play out differently this time.Offshoring blue collar jobs eventually hurt the capitalist class; they lost whole industries to China. Offshoring white collar jobs is a different kind of risk: you end up with IOUs to countries that might not stay favorably disposed toward you when the power dynamics shift.

> Offshoring white collar jobs is a different kind of risk

Isn't this risk also present with offshorting blue collar jobs? I agree that both are bad ideas, but the capitalist class didn't care before and isn't exactly well known for it's long-term thinking.


It's a different kind of risk as blue collar has already been exported. Especially if you have neither a strong military nor natural resources.

Many people have processes on these machines that would be too costly, disruptive and with questionable ROI to migrate. They'll stay there until it's no longer an option.

Windows is no longer on the dominant position it was 20 years ago when it had 90%+ marketshare: https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/desktop/worldwide...

It's not sitting at 60-65% and has been slowly bleeding for the last 20 years or so. In my opinion, anyone who have figured out how to move his processes, has left the building and never checked back.

Now Windows is being attacked aggressively from multiple fronts:

- macbook neo. Apple is projected to sell roughly 5million of these this year. This is a segment that couldn't previously move out of Windows because of cost not Office.

- improvement in Linux (Desktop/Gaming): This will eat another chunk for people whom Linux didn't function previously.

- HarmonyOS Next. This is underestimated by the rest of the Western world. I think by 5-10 years most of China would have moved to its own OS. Windows highest marketshare is in Asia.

The idea that Microsoft can exist on Azure/Office alone is not valid, in my opinion. Especially for Office, Windows is your portal to the rest of Microsoft stack. If you use HarmonyOS, you'll like use their own Office system. From there, they'll own the rest of the stack.

tl;dr: MSFT is screwed and they know it. They are also going to do nothing about it.


You didn't answer the parent question.

They don't owe anyone an answer.

But if they want to attract users, like they seem to do, then answering would go long way.

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

Search: