Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | nitwit005's commentslogin

It feels like there is more missing context than that:

> I just want S3. My needs are pretty basic. I don't need to scale out. I don't need replication. I just need something that can do S3 and is reliable and not slow.

What does reliable mean, without replication, and no mention of backups?


Successful mass murders with a knife are fairly rare. Killing people that way is physically difficult, and it's relatively easy to just tackle you.

Traditionally, arson was the means of mass killing, as it didn't have either problem. That's gotten much more difficult due to fire safety.


> Killing people that way is physically difficult, and it's relatively easy to just tackle you

I won't argue this as this sounds entirely hypothetical but let me ask you this: if you saw someone stabbing people, would you volunteer to tackle them or would you choose to delegate?

One, a knife never runs out of bullets and never needs to reload. Second, a knife doesn't make a sound. I'm unsure of what training you have but a knife is absolutely the tool of choice up close even if you had a gun on you. One can fatally stab dozens of people in a concert without even being noticed or detected.

I can't make those assertions about a gun.

The point is, a gun in the U.S. has been a weapon of choice but in other countries where a gun is very hard to get, stabbings are equally dangerous and widespread. I have been reading about fatal stabbings in the U.K for a decade now.

It's almost as if evil people will use whichever tool they have at their disposal to hurt people and we are just making it more difficult for good people to defend themselves against the evil.

> Successful mass murders with a knife are fairly rare

I mention 5 myself below but there are more. What I find surprising is how the term "mass murder" seems to be applied almost exclusively when a gun is used, but rarely a knife.

If you look for "mass murder due to stabbing", the media almost never frames it with that terminology, whereas they would immediately use it if a firearm was involved for the exact same number of victims.

When people hear "mass murder", they likely think of hundreds of people dying instantaneously to a volley of bullets, but that's a distortion of what "mass murder" actually looks like in the U.S:

By standard definitions, a mass killing involves 4 or more fatalities. While "mass murders" using a gun get wall-to-wall media coverage, mass murders with a knife rarely make it past local news. If you think these devastating knife attacks are just a myth, here are a few recent ones you can look up right now:

- February 24, 2026: A 32-year-old man fatally stabbed four people at a residence in the Purdy/Gig Harbor area. Responding deputies shot and killed the suspect at the scene.

- July 19, 2024: A grandmother, a mother, and two children (ages 4 and 5) were fatally stabbed in their Bensonhurst apartment. A 24-year-old family member was arrested.

- March 27, 2024: A 22-year-old man went on a "frenzied" spree, killing four people and injuring seven others. The attack involved a knife, an aluminum bat and a vehicle.

- March 10, 2024: In a domestic murder-suicide, a father fatally stabbed his wife and three children (ages 10, 12, and 17) before killing himself. It was the deadliest mass killing in Hawaii since 1999.

- December 3, 2023: A 38-year-old man used a kitchen knife to kill four relatives, two children and two adults, and injured three others (including two police officers) before being shot by police.


If you can only find 5 mass killings with knifes in 3 years, does that not proof his point? That it's rare.

Just like knife kills in the UK, which is less then knife kills in the US AFAIK.


One of the interviews I had straight out of university was a firm that asked if I was willing to lie about my work experience for Java consultancy work (Kuber Infotech).

They were designed with that in mind though. They were built to withstand an plane crash or attack.

You may have seen the famous test of ramming a F4 Phantom into a reinforced concrete walls without much effect: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4CX-9lkRMQ

It's certainly possible to blow them up, but they very unlikely to melt down like Chernobyl did anymore due to all the effort put into preventing that. Easier to just launch radioactive materials at your enemy if that's the result you want.


The containment building of new nuclear power plant has to withstand impact of large, commercial aircraft used for long distance flights, with aviation fuel loading typically used in such flights.

§ 50.150 Aircraft impact assessment.

https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part050/p...

Containment buildings for nuclear reactors are the strongest non-military buildings ever build. You need something much stronger than a small airplane, or simple drone, missile to breach it. Even a 155mm artillery granite or a anti-tank missile is not enough. You would probably need specialize bunker buster munition, or nuclear explosion.

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

The Russian army will not directly attack nuclear power plants in Ukraine. They could not gain much from release of radioactive material as the radioactive material would also migrate to Russia. The Russian army is attacking the infrastructure connecting power plants to the grid, to deny the electricity production. (And is attacking must power infrastructure in Ukraine).

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-hits-several-key...


Whoever designed that test forgot that kinetic energy is proportional to velocity squared.

A collision at 50 km/h is going to have roughly 1% the force of one at 500km/h.


Some people are just like that. They'll spend several times as much effort as just earning the money honestly would take. The thrill of petty crime I guess.

It’s probably more the challenge and the puzzle. I “played” PokémonGo until they shut down the apis. I had an absolute blast making a bot for that game, letting it run all night, making sure I wouldn’t get caught.

As soon as they shut the api down I uninstalled the app. The fun bit was the challenge.


That just sounds like endless corn fields, only solar panels.

I don't much like walking through corn fields either, it's heavy going, all that trampling. Farmers should just grow pretty flowers, small ones.

That is pretty much pasture land

Mentally ill people often have a justification for their actions which is vaguely rational, but you'll notice the vast majority of people aren't doing what they're doing.

These people just get attracted to political causes somehow. Even the woman's suffrage movement had some people setting buildings on fire.


I miss the days when people blamed all their woes on their parents circumcising them. Simpler times.

Are you implying that the suffragettes were mentally ill?

I think they're implying that the suffragettes who set buildings on fire were mentally ill.

Hmm, maybe. Even then, there are causes worth burning buildings over, I think, and the right to vote is probably one of them.

You might want to work on your reading comprehension.

This is just spreading rumors. You have to do better than "apparently".

Yep, and honestly it's going to come up with things other than lawsuits.

I've worked at a company that was asked as part of a merger to scan for code copied from open source. That ended up being a major issue for the merger. People had copied various C headers around in odd places, and indeed stolen an odd bit of telnet code. We had to go clean it up.


Headers are normally fine. GPL license recognises that you might need them to read binary files.

That you can't copyright the AI's output (in the US, at least), doesn't imply it doesn't contain copyrighted material. If you generate an image of a Disney character, Disney still owns the copyright to that character.

> That you can't copyright the AI's output (in the US, at least),

It's also not really clear if you can or cannot copyright AI output. The case that everyone cites didn't even reach the point where courts had to rule on that. The human in that case decided to file the copyright for an AI, and the courts ruled that according to the existing laws copyright must be filed by a person/human/whatever.

So we don't yet have caselaw where someone used AIgen and claimed the output as written by them.


You can copyright AI output assuming there is a "reasonable" degree of human involvement. https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/this-company...

Yes. And that’s why the rules say that the human submitting the code is responsible for preventing this case.

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

Search: