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

That's the issue with allowing people to bet on public events.

It's odd that we allow this to happen.


How did Starlink get so far ahead of everyone that everyone else is 20 years behind?

We like to hate Elon, but damn this is impressive.

Even China cannot catch up, and they can direct their resources and people to do anything.


I unfortunately don't want to work on an untyped codebase anymore.

It's been 20 years, and Ruby/Rails still can't get their typing working.


Because he made many more billions... Not sure why this is difficult to understand though. It's a simple subtraction.

Pound wise - penny foolish

Given that he has been running the company for many years and the valuation/profit/or whatever has gone up 100x times, I'd say the board is probably gonna be patient with the guy.

Imagine the guy made you $1.4 trillion dollars but lost $14 billions. Would you fire him?


I would.

After enough chances, yeah. Zuck probably has a few more big mistakes to go before the stock price is crushed and flat lines for awhile… in that environment a change of CEO would be needed.

So, no then.

But if he made X more mistakes, you would? Yeah sure bro.


I do blame cops and prosecutors.

But it's also your neighbors, friends, and co-workers who yell at cops and prosecutors to not arrest nor charge property crimes.


I'm gonna get downvoted for this.

But I'd like cameras in my neighborhood. Sure, there's a security risk but there's also a risk of not catching criminals due to lack of evidence. Tons of crimes aren't prosecuted due to the lack of evidence.

A security risk doesn't impact average people, and it can be handled more easily.


Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.[1]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html


One of the main arguments against flock is their abysmal security, lack of transparency, and flagrant dishonesty. If they solved these problems then we can have a discussion about the cameras themselves. I personally would have less of a problem with them if the footage was locked down, encrypted and could only be accessed with a subpoena, but law enforcement really want dragnet surveillance, so that's unlikely to occur.

I worked at Google before, so I trust Google more than these random organizations that claim they are better than Google at handling sensitive info.


Tell me how you can set up an Android device and install apps that require Google Play services (like all the most popular and important apps) and not have Google syphone all your contacts details. I mean everything: name, date of birth, addresses, emails, websites, relationships,etc.

Answer: you cannot.

Any time you log into a Google account just to use the Play Store, Android will instantly starts syncing all your contacts and you can't prevent that. You can't even toggle airplane mode as a network connection is required to login. And you cannot configure Android not to sync all contacts data with new Google accounts by default.

I bet Google has syphoned the details of every single person on Earth (without their consent) and I have to trust them not to use that?

F** em


That is all nice and well, but Google is primarily an advertisement business. A huge corporation that gained enormous power that operates only to satisfy its own self interest. So that gives us non-Googlers more to think about than just that consideration to take into account.


It is an entirely realistic scenario which afaik data backs up that most people don't change their default privacy related settings which Google profits from, but in case of actually setting their provided privacy settings ON, they do work.


What do you mean by "better [...] at handling sensitive info"? As in, they are more technically competent, or they will treat your data more ethically?

I don't think these projects claim they've got better infrastructure for handling private data, just that they won't sell it to advertisers. I trust Google are experts at handling my data, I just don't want them to.


On the other hand, I would trust a randomly chosen organization more than the world's largest adtech firm.


Better at siphoning out all the sensitive info, maybe.


To be fair, nobody likes Iran


Neither Israel.


Apparently many countries like Israel more than Iran.


Or rather the US likes Israel and most countries fear the US.


The comment is so out of touch. Even Chineses and Russians are disgusted by Iran's culture e.g. how they treat women and many others. Then, there's the saying "you know who Islam hates more than the jews and christians? other slightly different Islam groups."

And these countries are supposed to be Iran's closest allies due to having a common enemy.


Iran was/is Russian ally. Very prominent part of Russia is Chechnya. It is islamic and its leader is effectively Putins favorite pet. It is not as bad as Iran in treatment of women, but it is also not like Russia would care one bit about that.


Russians and Chineses and anyone really absolutely care about who they form alliances with.

Not sure where you get the idea that people don't care who they are friend with. They absolutely don't want to be friend whose culture is considered as disgusting.

They may form an alliance due to having a common enemy but in practice the alliance is just checking a box.


I'd bet on WW3 not happening in the next 20 years.

US's military power is too strong. Russia is in such a bad shape that it can't even win Ukraine. China never goes to any war; their equipments suck as we saw in the Venezuela occurrence.

Nobody is going to help Iran. China and Russia only see Iran as the enemy of my enemy. Other than that, Chineses and Russians are likely disgusted by Iran's culture e.g. how they treat women. It would be like wtf why are we helping people like this?

The world will continue being policed by US and Europe.


The US has shown very quickly that it is not a spent power. Compare what they have done recently in Venezuela and Iran to Russia's botching of taking Kiev and the mess ever since.

But to quote Fiona Hill in regards to China, Russia and iran.

--------------------

The Chinese have told the Europeans many times when they've been asked, 'Why are you continuing to support Russia? And why do you want Russia to win?' that, 'Well, if we wanted Russia to win, they would have won.'

Also, if they wanted Russia to lose, Russia would probably have lost.

China is, again, just gauging their support and playing all of this out, gaming it out, really, as to how it affects the United States one way or another.

The same is true of North Korea and Iran, she says: support for Russia has been built on antipathy towards the United States and their own beef with the United States.


> Well, if we wanted Russia to win, they would have won.

Good joke.


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

Search: