If someone is going in to a situation where they know there are armed riot police, armed federal agents, armed and agitated protestors, and several people have already been unalived, I would call them nothing but "suicidal" to carry their own weapon into that situation. Suicidal. Even when concealed and unused. Suicidal.
Of course they would be suicidal to go into that situation unarmed, as well. But carrying a weapon would be double-plus-ungood and guaranteed to make them a target for unaliving, sticking out from amongst the crowd bearing rocks and sticks or even Molotov cocktails.
The man was a Veterans Administration ICU nurse who cared for sick veterans that was helping a woman that ICE pushed to the ground and then used chemical weapons on. There are quite a few doctors giving testimonials to this man's character at the VA.
The right will tell you that an awful/chaotic world is one where a male ICU nurses helps a woman pushed to the ground and sprayed in the face with less lethal weapons by government jackboots wearing masks.
The right will tell you that a sane/reasonable world is one where that man is extra-judicially murdered and the woman taken into government custody.
Alex Pretti was a good man, who cared about our nation's veterans, who was murdered for defending a woman while exercising his lawful rights as an American (the Second Amendment and First Amendment). I didn't want to leave your statement slandering the murdered man un-contested as to the situation.
Alex was doing what we are taught being an American means, and he was killed by masked government thugs because of it. And bootlickers now justify murdering people because they dared exercise their first and second amendment rights and challenged masked government agents. Bootlickers that want us to live in fear of our own government. We have the right to exercise our Constitutional rights free of risk from our own government's masked thugs.
There is video. There was no riot by any standard.
How do you know how he got there? How do you know he wasn't already there when ICE arrived? You are making assumptions in order to cast a non-evidence supported judgement.
I didn't realize the second amendment limited magazine amount.
Yes, a man tried to help up a woman who was pushed to the ground by ICE and stopped further (illegal) excessive assault/battery by ICE. That was the extent he 'imposed' himself.
The man videoed on his camera, first amendmendment protected activity that is not considered impeding ICE.
ICE are not in fact allowed to use lethal force against impediment.
His character matters when you try to paint a picture that is completely untrue and portray him as doing something he didn't and make him out to be some agitator like the government did the last person ICE murdered or the bombastic and unsupported emotionally charged language you choose to use. You calling out/policing language use while using the emotionally charged (and unsupported) language you do is classic internet cry-bully bullshit.
I understand your position is that people can hide at home from the government thugs wearing masks. I understand your position this man should die because he tried to help a woman up. I understand your position this man should die because he videoed government agents (or in your words impeded) wearing masks. I understand your position that law enforcement can murder people when they are impeded (even though legally they can't do that). I understand that you support an absolute garbage position that is based on and backed by nothing and is the opposite of American.
But he didn’t need to die. His was a needless death. He never needed to do any of that. He sacrificed his life needlessly. He could’ve stayed at home. Not “hiding” but just peacefully staying out of the fucking civil.unrest.
You somehow imply that this dude armed to the teeth, walking around with 2.extra.magazines concealed, was unaware of riots going on in the streets around him? It is to.laugh!
You fundamentally don't understand America or Americans. You fundamentally don't understand the Constitution or the rights we by nature have, and that it protects (not grants).
Continue to disparage a man murdered by our government. Continue to point out he was murdered for exercising his constitutional rights. Maybe at some point you will piece it together instead of saying it was justified because he dared exercise his rights. Probably not, you seem pretty set in your ways. But maybe, just maybe you will understand that no American is justified to be murdered by their government for exercising their constitutional rights. And that down the path you lay out lies only bondage and government oppression.
You keep trying to point to magazine capacities as if a Veterans Administration ICU nurse that cared for our veterans, whose malicious act sparking his death was helping a woman up, was somehow nafarrious/justified murdered because he was 'second amendmenting too hard'. Again goes back to why I highlighted who this man Alex was. You want to imply something but not outright say it. Like you want to hide at home instead of exercise scary constitutional rights.
> Or maybe I eat my words and this is more like the tariffs thing, where he barks and growls but in the end is a bully tactic to get others to do what he wants. Because that has in fact worked somewhat well.
What if Venezuela undoes that? What if countries decide they're going to squelch on their concessions to Trump as a result?
I don’t know. I see more comparisons with Libya or Syria or Central America in the 60s-70s-80s. Invasions and government toppling of non-central countries that draw a frown, but that nobody would actually jump in the fire to save.
Denmark? An EU, NATO country? Shit that would really be unprecedented.
Almost. I’m admittedly being pedantic, but here’s the nuance:
Greenland is not part of the EU. Their citizens are Danish citizens, and as such, they are EU citizens. Confused yet? Greenland is a member of NATO - which is actually much more problematic. If Trump invades Greenland, he’s delivered NATO’s head on a silver platter to Vladimir Putin. I’d call that aiding and abetting an enemy - an act of treason - but I’m old school.
Since this is HN, what’s the tech angle?
The EU will restrict or outright ban U.S. Big Tech. Big Tech stocks will tank, and we can expect hundreds of thousands of layoffs as a result. More concerning, EU consumers will boycott as many American products as they can - just as Canadians have done. That means a wave of U.S. business failures and even more job losses. It’s also a big win for China, who will happily fill the gap.
Oh, and all U.S. military personnel and their families? Deported immediately. My crystal ball isn’t telling me what happens to the materiel.
They just don't have any particular interest in helping out 99.997% of the population. If your net worth isn't at least $100 million, then this administration isn't working for you.
In fact, there are many indications that this figure is closer to 99.999%: unless your last name is Trump, this administration is not working in your best interests.
So...Trump's critics are right? These actions in Venezuela have little to nothing to do with Maduro's alleged crimes? Is it really just about Venezuela having the largest oil reserves in the world?
A glass of wine with dinner is unlikely to significantly disrupt your sleep - provided you finish at least four hours before bedtime. Treat alcohol like food: avoid both in the hours leading up to sleep for optimal rest. Likewise, one glass of dry wine (about 5 oz) is unlikely to increase inflammation and may even offer mild antioxidant benefits. The key is moderation - one glass, not two - and choosing drier wines to minimize added sugar.
The potential benefits of alcohol are hard to decipher because of the population data:
“A lot of people who don’t currently drink are people who used to drink heavily, or who have health problems that led them to quit...” said Keith Humphreys, PhD, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences and the Esther Ting Memorial Professor. “That skews the data, making moderate drinkers look healthier by comparison.”
I wouldn't drink alcohol for health benefits. I'm just saying a glass of wine per day with dinner won't have adverse health effects for most people. If you don't currently drink, then there's no reason to start. If you're having more than one drink per day, then you should cut back to just one. If you do drink, then do so several hours before bedtime because alcohol does affect quality of sleep.
>A glass of wine with dinner is unlikely to significantly disrupt your sleep
it will and it does. anybody who owns a smart watch with heart rate monitor can observe it. the proverbial glass is very visible as a spike of resting heart rate and especially horrible on HRV.
besides, there are "glasses" which can take full 750ml bottle. may be most people don't go such extreme but still very good to fool themselves about alcohol volume consumption
Given that Robotaxis are currently crashing at a much higher rate than human-driven vehicles, it seems risky to put a large majority of your company's future earnings and growth in that basket.
On the Optimus front, I spent years in manufacturing. This industry is conservative and deeply relationship driven. Plants prioritize uptime and proven reliability, and they're slow to adopt newcomers. ABB is the 800-pound gorilla here - just as they have been in the PLC space for decades. ABB's long-standing relationships and deep integration support make it incredibly hard for newcomers to gain traction. I should know - I worked for one of their competitors!
Bottom line: Tesla's strategy hinges on two moonshots in industries where incumbents are entrenched and adoption cycles are slow. If these bets don't pay off, Tesla needs a fallback - energy storage, grid solutions, or advanced EV platforms - before the narrative collapses. They'd be wise to leverage their EV business to launch these initiatives, but waning consumer confidence and declining sales make that increasingly difficult.
> Given that Robotaxis are currently crashing at a much higher rate than human-driven vehicles
Robotaxis/cybercabs or whatever are not currently self driving. They’re Level 3, given the requirement for human monitors. To my knowledge, they’re doing fine safetywise as Level 3 systems.
>If these bets don't pay off, Tesla needs a fallback
Good news! No matter what Tesla does, Musk's orbiters will tell you that Tesla isn't a <thing they currently do> company, it's actually a bet on <future, tangentially-related thing>.
Well it kind of is. Tesla are not coy about their plans of moving away from selling consumers personal vehicles. If you think cybercab can eat any significant percentage of Uber/Lyfts lunch there is value.
It takes a lot of hubris to throw away ostensibly worldwide EV dominance. And selling Americans on giving up car/independence culture when compared with Europe or Asia will be tough.
They will undoubtedly crush in the robot and energy space though.
>Last month, Tesla confirmed the fleet had traveled roughly 250,000 miles. With 7 reported crashes at the time, Tesla’s Robotaxi was crashing roughly once every 40,000 miles (extrapolating from the previously disclosed Robotaxi mileage).
>For comparison, the average human driver in the US crashes about once every 500,000 miles.
The capitalization the parent poster used on Robotaxi may have been intentional to assist with interpretation. While it can be a generic term, I believe only Tesla uses it as a brand name: https://www.tesla.com/robotaxi
Robotaxi: Tesla's autonomously driven ride hailing service. Currently using Model Y's or whatever, maybe using Cybercabs once those actually exist, maybe eventually also leveraging Tesla vehicles owned by others (lmao no one who has though that through for more than a minute or two actually wants to risk their vehicle like that)
Cybercab: A Tesla vehicle explicitly built for the Robotaxi service, containing no driver controls whatsoever because they're expected to operate without any (local) human oversight
This feels like it's rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. We know GR is incorrect - after all it predicts singularities. GR is also silent on how stress/energy/momentum causes curvature in space time. In that vein, GR seems more like a law of gravity rather than a theory of gravity.
I would suggest we work on an actual theory of gravity before we tackle black hole event horizons and their formation. Such a theory should provide a lot of insight into the formation (or not) of black holes.
Excuse me if I don't feel much like celebrating due to our enduring a coup d'état from the inside. I just hope some semblance of America remains intact after 2026 but I'm not holding my breath.
reply