How much time Putin will need to break Minsk’s third ceasefire agreement?

I’d say money and security guarantees were never on the table.

My speculation is this - Trump in his head thought he could steam roll “peace in 24h” kind of thing with no pushback like he can do domestically.

He went (behind Ukraine’s back) to talk with ruzzians - they gave a hint that it’s either total Ukraine’s capitulation or they are not interested.

Trump then tried to extort Zelenski into signing capitulation wrapped into “minerals deal”.

I strongly believe Zelenski was hoping to find common ground in the white house, but trump did not give in and understandably, neither Zelenski wanted to stick to original plan as he said it multiple times in a week before.

Then Trump felt fire under his feet - mister “art if the deal” couldn’t strong arm Ukraine into capitulation. How he will look against MAGA? He needs to show he’s “the man”. Bully the man standing up to the modern Mordor, like a bunch of 13 year olds after school.

.. but “it’s great TV”.

EDIT: btw trump could’ve used same leverage against ruzzia. I’d argue ruzzia is not in better spot than Ukraine. Blockade ruzzian shadow fleets, set fire to their war chest, whatever. But trump instead chose to align himself with despotic dictators instead of alies. Trump is really scared of Putin (see Helsinki meeting of 2018), but has personal vendetta against Zelenski for not bending the knee for Biden investigation.

> I strongly believe Zelenski was hoping to find common ground in the white house, but trump did not give in and understandably, neither Zelenski wanted to stick to original plan as he said it multiple times in a week before.

This is simply not true. Zelensky and his cabinet rewrote the initial minerals deal (which was not favorable to them) and wanted it. Zelensky even wanted to come back to the White House to sign it.

> Perhaps surprisingly, the CEO of YC and Paul Graham have been publicly supportive of the DOGE team, despite all the racism and existential threat. I don't know if that's from fear, or greed, but there are strong arguments for both.

> …

> If discussing this openly and often this isn't possible due to very simple flag abuse, then what is this community actually even worth.

Just want to add to this topic that HN advertises YC AI Startup school: https://events.ycombinator.com/ai-sus - where Musk is listed as a first speaker.

Though it doesn’t surprise me - YC is in the same circle of radical technocrats (a16z, Altman, Musk, etc.) and hosted Balaji talking about dystopian plans about techno-authoritarian city states 10 or 15 years ago.

It would be fun if someone did the funni at him there

Paul graham has his head so far up his on ass it's unreal.

Listening to him talk about Elon taking over Twitter and that leading to more free speech was embarrassing. Like, actual adults believe this shit.

I just checked his blog. Latest post “The Origins of Wokeness”.

Protesting against police brutality of suffocating apprehended person is apparently “peak woke”.

Musk apparently “succeded in neutralizing” twitter - “without censoring either” (left or right). He argues in the notes that Musk prioritized paid users and paid users are more right wing and hence left wing users self censored themselves, but left “could tilt it back if they wanted to”.

EDIT: also again proving my original comment - PG is thanking Sam Altman for proof reading the post…

Christ they are truly dumb people who just got good with computers.

> … it seems extremely irresponsible to address the White House and the public to say …

It’s simple as:

1. They don’t care;

2. It fits their agenda;

Exactly. Statements like this have been used to approve new programs and legislation that in at least one case led to sweeping profiling and the incorrect retraction of government benefits, causing tens of thousands to end up in poverty and debt and the consequent issues of divorce, children removed from parents, even suicides: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_childcare_benefits_scand...

This all started when a group of Bulgarian migrants took advantage of a loophole, registering as residents for a small amount of time and defrauding the government for about €4 million. The price tag to set it right again was €7.4 billion as of last year: https://nos.nl/artikel/2503966-de-toeslagenaffaire-van-een-m...

What I'm trying to say is that right-wing / populist talking points can and will lead to sweeping reform with long term and far reaching consequences. For a few years we had an era of fact checking where these statements were immediately marked, but all the services have removed it again. I'm honestly surprised Twitter still has community notes.

And there's no punishment for being wrong. Even a newspaper has to publish official apologies, not that anyone bothers to read them. He could say the sky is red on that platform and there's nothing anyone could do to force him to change it or admit he's wrong.

Most likely related with this post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43002511

Correct, this is about Yao's conjecture and the implications for other hash implementations.

Reminds me of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr5sTGxMUdo

Some people won’t change their mind even with contradicting evidence is shoved in their face.

They’re just salivating for anyone to protest. Any protest will be a pretext to use violent power, start some marshal law and move ten steps closer of totalitarianism.

Needs a date in the title - this was posted a number of times here when it was published.

Similarly how it is surprising to see hundreds of too critical comments addressed at FOSS application with solo developer with 10+ years of excellent track record on another post in the same hacker news page: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42583082

Firstly, iterm2 is open source software (free as in beer and as in speech) and comes with no warranties.

Secondly, solo developer of iterm has excellent reputation from my point of view. History of his work on this project is something to strive for any developer and seems that always acts in (very) good faith while releasing software and replying to issues in threads.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42582206 - entitled for what features should exist or not in open source software. Also that feature was opt-in as far as I am aware. (EDIT: this user is also new and commented only on this post, with karma in the negative)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42581350 - entitled to how solo FOSS developer should act and write a critical update release response, with hints that said developer may not act in good faith.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42579595 - again entitled to what (or how many) features FOSS application should or shouldn’t have. Ironically also complains with entitled attitude that another FOSS software doesn’t have enough feature development.

There’s more, but obviously it’s subjective to reader’s interpretation. There were couple comments with attitude - that the developer shouldn’t be allowed to touch software ever again, but either I have missed them or they have deleted their comments.

> There were couple comments with attitude - that the developer shouldn’t be allowed to touch software ever again, but either I have missed them or they have deleted their comments.

It was too offensive and got flagged. Worse, the commenter doubled down instead of taking it back, I'm afraid.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42581359