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

On a less medieval and more ancient basis, from the original 白馬非馬 ("A white horse is not a horse.") we can derive the following suitably high-gravitas philosophical truth-revelatory statements:

競態非態 ("A race race condition is not a condition.")

釋後非釋 ("Use-after-free is not free.")

隱後非隱 ("Things hidden are not.")

單向交接非交接 ("A one-way handoff is not a handoff.")


Inter-national wars are fought with technology, so this makes sense. However, I believe from an optimist perspective that ideas of global citizenship and environmental awareness / macro humanism are already in the post-formative, snowballing stages of disrupting nationalism, and without an anachronistic national affinity amongst the citizenry, countries are objectively becoming obsolete.

Wireless broadcast media, PSTN, air travel, international post, international financial networks, global supply chains, the internet have all contributed to this, but AI will drive it home: AI governance in particular. Once one nation adopts it, the benefits will be obvious and expand rapidly. Few yet realize how transformative the changes will be.


Sorry wouldn't fit ;)

The government of Tasmania is still allowing logging of the forests which is utterly insane. See for example this current court case: https://mailchi.mp/wilderness/swift-parrot-court-case

Logging of the forest that the Tasmanian government planted, to log. Fear not, a Tasmanian tiger never saw the forest they are logging.

Environmentalists trip over themselves on what “old growth” means.

It is a renewable resource, and Tasmanian forestry is one of the most advanced and sustainable industries in the world.


That leaves a few questions though (which I'm not implying that I know the answers to):

Did this planted forest (used for logging) replace another forest that was used as a habitat for animals? Is it counted as an equivalent to non-logging forests to justify the destruction of non-logging forests?

Can this sustainable industry sustain suitable living conditions for animals in the forest? Or can the industry only sustain itself and its own interests in future resource extraction?


but you didn't even seen that article, it's about logging causing yet another species to go extinct, planted or not

you can always plant more forests but you cannot resurrect what went extinct, extinction is forever, new forest is 20 years


Very importantly, the biodiversity of mature old growth forest is exceptionally distinct to a bunch of 20 year old (often single or few species) trees. Take parrots for example. Many rely on old trees with openings or hollows for nesting. Without sufficiently old trees, they literally can't live there. The growth of such critical habitat often takes 100+ years, whereas fungi, reptiles, orchids, insects, and bryophytes may never recover from clear-felling.

If you're not someone's flamebait LLM bot: citation please. I find it very hard to believe that an endangered species chooses to live solely in recently planted forest, particularly with focused legal defense from such an esteemed and long-running NGO as the Wilderness Society. I find it far more likely you are incorrect, and frankly spouting nonsense.

There is nothing 'advanced' and 'sustainable' about clear felling old growth forests supporting endangered species, if you are lucky enough to have them as Australia is (they are vanishing globally at an insane rate). It is about as nuanced as shooting your children in the head.


If forestry planted it... is it "old growth" ?

And yes, animals could go live in it, even if it was planted.

What's your alternative? boycott wood? Let the trees fall and rerelease their carbon as they rot?


Me too, M4 and keen to run Linux, partly because every damn system update bloats the system by 20GB but no memorably useful novel feature actually emerges and partly because it's long term stable. That said, at this stage in my career I appreciate a working system that doesn't require umpteen kernel recompiles!

For further inspiration, check out Wings of Fury, an old DOS game. https://www.myabandonware.com/game/wings-of-fury-ta

Apparently a newer 'inspired by' successor is https://store.steampowered.com/app/1371710/Rogue_Aces_Deluxe...


Musk was raised affluent in apartheid-era South Africa, his father had some connection to Zambian emerald trading/mining, and Musk's companies have benefited enormously from public contracts and policy. He's not stupid.

Musk has benefited enormously from public contracts and policy, but all the questionable ones are in Tesla (and especially originally solarcity, but that got folded into Tesla).

The government contracts that made SpaceX were all open bid, where SpaceX bid an better solution than anything that any of the established companies did, at literally half the price. Falcon 9 was a massive gift to the US government, in that it drove the entire industry to halve the prices they extracted from the government. Dragon was just as good.

That they also built a profitable launch company out of it just highlights how much of an outlier SpaceX is. They sold the US government a dollar for fifty cents, made a profit doing it, and ended up driving half the rockets already flying out of the business.


all the questionable ones are in Tesla

Let's not also forget that NASDAQ changed the rules right before listing SpaceX... resulting in forced index fund procurement of sinking equity. Not sure how 'public policy' that is (arguably separate), but in reality global prime market listing rules are pretty high-significance effectively Federal or even international monetary policy. Well done Elon! Can't fault you for execution!


Yeah, this was pretty scum from my understanding. I think there are many things to criticize Elon about:

- Lack of free speech on X when it was a core part of messaging.

- DOGE / Data theft / corruption

- Election meddling

- narcissism

Just to name a few. I think telling the truth is important, which is why I have really been disappointed in Elon. It just irks me when we acknowledge a jr engineer is in "tech" and an "engineer". But we rewrite history to say Elon is a "non-technical business guy". People should admit it was an amazing immigrant story. A nerdy kid who was bullied all the time in apartheid south africa fled domestic abuse to Canada, eventually landing in the US with a scholarship to UPENN. He started 2 software companies that were amazingly successful and then went to give back via a passion for space, green energy and sustainable transportation. Then, because of various external and internal factors, he gradually became a serious villain hated by millions who embraced him. We don't have to invent some weird backstory that some relatively small stake in his estranged and abusive father had in a mine is the cornerstone of his success. If only I too was born in apartheid south africa to a wealthy but extremely fucked up family, I would be the richest person in America.

I guess it makes me mad because people don't value real success and overvalue fake success. We should want smart people to build companies and be successful. It is harder than it was in the past, but we can acknowledge that the American dream can still be possible, and should be celebrated. It doesn't matter that Taylor Swift's family were relatively well off. Sidenote: he was a wealth management advisor but people don't know what that is so they think he was Jamie Dimon. She still has an amazing story and we can acknowledge that. Yes, there was some privilege and luck, but she is extraordinary.

Tl;dr I guess I just wish we could be more honest and less likely to follow bullshit narratives. People are complex, you can acknowledge skill, hard work and the truth which will ultimately make valid criticisms go further because having a good honest reputation and dealing in good faith are important


Yes. Obviously, I wasn't implying he never benefitted from the government. It is just a wild retelling that he started a rocket company, solar company and car company to make huge amounts of money. Also, he was largely estranged from his abusive father since he emigrated to Canada at 17. I am sure he received help and money from his mother at points, but this idea he is some trust fund kid like Donald Trump. People really believe they would be as successful as him if they grew up being abused in an upper class family in apartheid South Africa. It doesn't make him a good person, and there is so much to criticism about him, that I think it actually detracts from legitimate criticism.

He benefits enormously from the government but then acts like he doesn’t.

[flagged]


It's not good to take info as a personal attack.[0]

The most subsidized companies in human history by how long they've been around. it's worse than the actual military industrial complex (though both his major companies are heavily tied to the MIC as well)

https://subsidytracker.goodjobsfirst.org/parent/tesla-inc

https://subsidytracker.goodjobsfirst.org/parent/space-explor...

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_cognition


[flagged]


I didn't flag your original comment. You're clearly very deep into identity-protective cognition and unable to discuss logically. You are taking criticism of a company very personally and getting emotional about it.

[flagged]


I looked through the link again and couldn't find a single one that is a contract and not a subsidy. Most of them look like this:

> Nevada has offered Tesla, an electric car producer, a subsidy package worth estimated $1.3 billion over several years. The package includes 100 percent abatements of sales taxes ($725 million saving over 20 years), real and personal property taxes ($332 million over 10 years), and modified business taxes ($27 million over 10 years). In addition, the subsidy package includes transferable tax credits: a tax credit of $12,500 per job for up to 6,000 jobs ($75 million saving for the company); a tax credit of 5 percent of the first $1 billion investment ($50 million); and a tax credit of 2.8 percent of the next $2.5 billion investment ($70 million). In addition, Tesla will receive cheaper electricity rates for eight years, which will save the company an estimated $8 million. Nevada will spend $43 million to buy the right of way for USA Parkway for the Tahoe Reno Industrial Center, where the Tesla facility will be located (the amount is not included in the total). The state will also change its laws to allow Tesla to sell its cars directly to consumers, rather than through car dealers. Jobs are projected full-time permanent jobs at the facility. Investment is total projected investment (the company has committed to invest $5 billion within first 3 to 5 years and another $5 billion during the following 10 years). However, to receive the subsidies, Tesla must invest $3.5 billion.


Ironic to be acting like this and telling others to go back to bluesky. Please go for a walk.

[flagged]


Some value coherent educated responses to emotional name calling. Being proud of devolving into that is something I don't share.

One thing that surprised me as a parent is that watching kids grow up provides significant introspective reflection which is nourishing in a different kind of way.

Seems as good a reason as any to nationalize it, have the shareholders forfeit their chips at a steep loss, and ensure its remnant facilities only produce socially positive, safe products.

Corporate death penalty. I'm on board with that.

Also, we are in the middle of insect biodiversity freefall. Summary: A global meta-analysis covering 166 surveys at 1,676 sites between 1925 and 2018 estimated terrestrial insect abundance fell about 0.9% per year on average—roughly 9% per decade, 24–25% over 30 years, or about 50% over 75 years https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aax9931

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

Search: