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

I mean, I've never financed or platformed violent far-right politicians, nor caused thousands to die by callously "taking a chainsaw" to government institutions. But yeah, other than that, I guess we're pretty similar.

Oh yeah, I also don't run a breeding cult. Or beg notorious sex criminals to party on their private island.


This directly contradicts most religions, which the people with the biggest weapons somehow claim to follow.

I must be missing your point. You're talking about a thought / belief framework. I'm talking about how the world actually works. In any fight between theory and practice, practice always wins.

The world largely moves forward through cooperarion, then regularly regresses through violence.

I have no desire whatsoever to undermine and bludgeon my neighbors in order to come out on top. Anyone who feels this way should probably be institutionalized for the safety of society at large.


Nobody is talking about you bludgeoning your neighbor. The point here is that there's no reason to leave your doors unlocked if you have the option of locking them. There's no reason to be weaker than you have to be.

Our military is and should be strong. If a company is willing to help them be stronger, I don't know why we'd be against that.


I think a true Orthodox/Catholic political orientation would be socially very conservative (without being hateful) and fiscally very liberal (giving/sharing as much as possible). This sort of party doesn't really exist, but it's almost entirely antithetical to MAGA, which caters to the rich and focuses on power, vengeance, and grievance politics.

Look at the kind of obstructionist histrionics that repubs were doing during Obama and Biden and amplify 10x given the severity of the situation.

I tried to respond to your comment with some personal observations on racist currents in this community, but my comment immediately got flagged. So yeah! This site ain't what it used to be. Best for the good folks to seek community elsewhere, I reckon. I miss the old days as well, but I don't think they're coming back.

If this site ever was anti-racist, that must have been a long time ago. I threw away my old account many years ago only to come back with this one (because it's difficult to completely ignore HN if you work in tech) and the reason I threw that one away was in part the overwhelming reactionary bias in this community.

The "progressives" were at best silent "don't rock the boat" types more inclined to insist on civility than to challange reactionary sentiments while the reactionaries ranged from dog-whistling to outspoken, across the entire range of white supremacism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, antisemitism, zionism and so on. The only comments that would ever get flagged or downvoted were those that were explicit enough to be seen as "impolite" because they happened to spell out calls for genocide or violence rather than merely gesturing at it with the thinnest veneer of plausible deniability.


Well, I do remember it being more about the underdogs and a cheeky "fuck the system" attitude without much malice. Maybe I just wasn't tuned into this stuff back then. Now, though, both users and tech leaders can unironically parrot Stormfront rhetoric from 10 years ago (using vaguely cordial language) and no one even bats an eye. The kind of stuff that would have made you unemployable just a few years ago.

When I think of HN in the before times, I think of people like Aaron Swartz. Would he have enjoyed his technical discussions peppered with comments on how the West is being "invaded" and "outbred" by third-world hordes? Based on what I know about him -- and please correct me if I'm wrong -- I'm guessing he would have noped out of that kind of community in a flash. Yet nowadays I see this kind of talk here all the time, percolating all the way up to industry leaders like Musk and DHH.


Nuking won't accomplish anything anyway. There's no obvious target that would "defeat" Iran given the seemingly decentralized command structure, and using nuclear weapons anywhere near the Strait would render it unusable.


Given their glee at droning unarmed fishermen in the Caribbean, I would argue they are much farther along this axis than you realize.


I wonder if his clients are aware of his posting history.


By your own logic, it sounds like you should not be voting. Do you live by your own principles? Or did you decide that you're not actually "foreign-culture socialized," unlike those *other* first generation immigrants?


I’m definitely foreign socialized and shouldn’t be voting. But I also think upper middle class people should pay higher taxes but I don’t pay more than I owe.


I think we will collectively upvote and vouch all of your posts if you vow to never vote again. Federal, local, and Internet polls


For a lawyer, you sure play fast and loose with the word "factual."

Here's a fact: Democrats agreed to fund the TSA. Republicans were amenable. Trump said no.

“It would have worked ,” Mr. Kennedy said. “We could have had T.S.A. paid by the end of the week, but the president said ‘no deal.’”

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/23/us/politics/trump-shutdow...

There is no ambiguity here: Republicans are blocking TSA funding unless a bunch of unrelated stuff is also funded.


Trump doesn’t get a vote in the Senate. That’s his shtick. He’ll ask for something ridiculous because he thinks it’s gives him leverage. He can ask for wherever he wants but he’s not going to veto a bill that funds both ICE and TSA.

What I’m reading is that Senate Democrats have indicated they won’t vote yes in a bill if it finds ICE. https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5801109-fetterman-tsa-pa...

“Senate Democrats insisting on major reforms to the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement operations in exchange for ending the 40-day shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) are worried they may be undercut by centrists looking for a way to end the stalemate.”


How does that contradict in any way what I said? Democrats have offered to fund the TSA. Republicans have refused. Ergo, Republicans are blocking TSA funding in order to get what they want. There is no ambiguity here: Republicans could get the TSA funded today, but they view their pet projects as more important than having functional airports.

Why are you on this site if you're never willing to ever say "oh OK my bad"? I don't know what you posted about in the past to get to 125k points, but these days you mostly seem to use the site as a pseudo-intellectual soapbox for conservative politics and anti-immigration sentiment. Is this really healthy? You're accomplishing nothing except getting mass flagged and raising everyone's blood pressure (including, presumably, your own).


It's ok for him to argue for extremely racist and xenophobic policies because of where he graduated, his country of origin, and skin color. He's fine burning karma for it


I’m struggling to understand your thought process. Do you think that:

1) Mass immigration of say Bangladeshis won’t substantively change the communities where they move.

Or is it:

2) You agree that this change will happen, but you think we are morally obligated to accept those changes.

The “racism and xenophobia” angle is nonsensical. I’m a Bangladshi in good standing. I make my Anglo wife deal with all our burdensome social rules and norms. But that doesn’t mean I want more of America to reflect my culture! We sacrificed a lot to get away from a country that was governed by our culture. How can I possibly have a moral obligation to accept parts of America becoming culturally like the place we wanted to escape from?


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

Search: