Isn't the goal then demand destruction?

The net effect is demand destruction. The US shouldn't be exporting diesel when it lacks sufficient refining capacity to make up for all of the capacity destroyed or unavailable from the US war of choice with Iran. And as the price of US domestic diesel goes to $6+, oil demand is going down both because there's insufficient refining capacity and there's a general slow down in the economy from the added inflation baked-in by higher oil prices and higher diesel prices.

Vomit. We should ban 90% of ads. They are mostly net negative on society.

> The profitability of being able to serve a query wasn't really under question (nor is the margin expected to be anything less than 80%+) I think.

HN had long debates about whether AI inference could even be affordable from a compute perspective.

It wouldn't change a thing.

People have to live in their bodies. Do they care for them? No.

I don't understand what you mean. People still have to live in their bodies so it wouldn't change a thing? Can you elaborate how you came to this conclusion?

Do people generally take good care of their health? I do not think so. So if they will not care about even the present, why would making them return make them care about the future?

People aren't treating it as a thoughtful contribution. It is more of a flag, like "spam".

HN already has a feature for that. Just flag the article!

I appreciate when people write things like, "this is an advertisement for the author's product, X." Why stay silent? If the commenter's accusation smells fishy, I'll read the article myself. Otherwise, they helped me.

To me, it’s the equivalent of “HN is turning into Reddit” - it’s just a complaint without adding to the discussion.

> And if you do that, you’ll sometimes assign praise and blame to them, instead of hoarding it all to yourself.

I mean, if things are going well, the logical thing to do is to hoard it.

The problem with applying Hanlon's Razor here is that it presumes malice is rare. The current administration revels in malice. They very openly decide things based on malice.

Americans are such unserious people.

Yet they take themselves so seriously…

Nearly 70% of eligible Americans didn't think that Trump was a enough of a problem to vote against him in 2024.

This betrays a complete lack of civic seriousness, and a childlike belief of invulnerability to consequences.

Oh so Trump just came out of nowhere I guess

Of course not. But Trump has never been overwhelmingly popular, either. If Trump == Americans, that means more than half of US citizens aren't Americans.

That's a good point, but tech oligarch money is one of the most important ways Trump overcomes the fact he's not overwhelmingly popular. That's also one of the reasons why tech is no longer seen as optimistic and a force for progress.

Elon is setting aside a stash for the next election. Because money is speech, right?

But it is currently a strong mitigating factor. The law is full of oopsie defenses.