Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | zoklet-enjoyer's commentslogin

I don't think most people have love for the Iranian government. We hate war and bullies


TIL Sam Altman is gay



Saw GPs comment while logged out and thought it must be pretty heinous, surprised to see he got downvoted into oblivion for something so benign.


You thought it was weird a comment randomly calling someone gay was downvoted?


I opened the article and it starts out saying it's a picture of his family. At first I thought the picture was Sam. Then I was like no, maybe it's his brother? And then I was like, that would be weird. So I googled "is Sam Altman gay?" And Google says, yes, he's openly gay and married. I had no idea. I thought it was interesting, because I've seen so many comments about Peter Thiel being gay, but never anything about Sam Altman.


Forgive me, I didn't know he was gay. There's so many troll comments in this thread, I thought you were just trying to use that word as an insult.


Haha, at least two people learned something new today.

His husband's an Aussie too!


We (United States) should have gone to war with Israel in 2006


The government of Israel can fight its own wars, it sure as hell doesn't need US help.


Then it should stop getting $3 billion/ year from the US. Maybe also give back the $14 billion gift from a couple of years ago.


When are you giving back the land to natives?


@esseph I meant US vs Israel, not USA/Israel vs anyone else


Why in 2006?


Israel bombed an apartment building in Beirut and killed a kid from a message board I posted on at the time. Haven't liked Israel since. I was young and didn't really have an opinion on Israel until then.


Killed isn't a strong enough word. I should have said, "2006 was when I learned that IDF indiscriminately murders humans who are just trying to live their lives, and many of those humans are children."


Consenting adults should be able to do whatever they'd like with each other and if they want to record it and share it, that's none of my business. How much mainstream entertainment is centered on murder? Is that ok?


I care more about how it's warming people up for more age verification and other censorship laws. I don't really care what happens to porn producers. Most of which are exploitative, abusive, and many times downright criminal. There is a non-moral argument to specifically target porn. Your libertarian argument falls flat on it's face when you start looking into who owns the majority of porn and what they've been known for. Extend this to OnlyFans, which simply turned pimps into shareholders. This is of course the fundamental problem with libertarians in general. They stand for absolutely nothing ("allow everything" is not a stance) which makes them simultaneously the worst ally to have and a formidable enemy to societal security.

The moral argument however is worth considering. Numerous well cited studies have discussed the deliterious effects of porn consumption. Porn (over)consumption directly correlates to loneliness, especially among males, for example. It also correlates to poorer relationship outcomes, increases in the rate of STDs, and other interpersonal issues. In general, porn is no different than any other drug with all the downsides associated.

We cannot say the same for "mainstream entertainment centered on murder". Murder in general has trended down year over year since the 60s. One would be able to make a stronger counter argument: the exposure to violent media has possibly made violence less appealing. You are bordering on using "violent video games create violent people" as proof we should not view porn differently. These are not the same argument as shown by a trivial search of elsevier.


Tl;dr

Nah, actually I did read it but I disagree. I don't want people imposing their morals on me. Adults are responsible for their actions


My username is a reference to the successor to totse. Totse was the first board I spent a lot of time on


Heh, I'm sure there are a few more wondering around here. Zoklet never clicked for me, but totse was my home for years.


And then what? Hover over me as I'm dying?


Yes. If you called from your cell phone while on foot or in your car, the drone can find your exact location and hover over you until help arrives, quicker than if EMS has to search you out themselves.


How so? I ask as a paramedic of 14 years, now retired.

If EMS has to "search you out" so does the drone.

At least in my County, we actually get very good triangulation info from 911. It was very rare that Dispatch told us they only had Level 2(IIRC) location info (which might be to several hundred feet).

FAR more common was people who actually told us the -wrong- location. Car accidents that were several miles up the road from their location. Saying Blah St SE when they meant Blah Rd NE, etc.

Drones don't solve for that problem. They're going to the wrong location, too.


> If EMS has to "search you out" so does the drone.

The point is that the drone is fast enough to arrive first, and do the searching so that you don't have to. It's just one of many possible scenarios.

I totally understand the argument that this might not be the most effective use of money, but I honestly don't understand the lack of appreciation for the number of places this could be used effectively.


Modern fire departments (including my own) are already using drones, and have found that the best use for them is not "how quickly can we find someone", but thermal imaging from above on structure fires.

> and do the searching so that you don't have to

The searching that we did just isn't really solved by drones (and I love them, some of my best photography is from a drone). It's things like "obscured house numbers on a street", "ambiguous address", not "person lost in a forest". Now if you want to talk about the use of drones for SAR? Absolutely. But for the vast majority of 911 "attempt to locate", getting there quickly is rarely the issue. We can get there quickly and still spend minutes figuring out that you're actually living on a flag property (where your home is behind another, but you share a driveway).


Yeah, I'm sure they wouldn't be helpful in every call. But the EMT user above talked about sometimes a caller giving the wrong location of a car accident. That's a clear case where a drone quickly on site could warn that crews need to be diverted elsewhere. But if it is just the occasional case where they'd be helpful, that makes them even less economically attractive.

As for fire services, in my city there is always a lead SUV vehicle (I think a captain or supervisor) who is a few blocks ahead of the actual heavy trucks. Presumably to get someone on site as quickly as possible; which made me believe that a drone could assist in that role. But I accept what you say, that there are too many limitations for it to help much, even if it can arrive quicker.


I want to see who is in a location. I get a plant to call 911, which triggers Flock drones in the general area and scans the faces of everyone it can find. I get that info from Flock.


There are always security concerns and exploits. Some crazy gamers call 911 swat attacks on people; that doesn't mean that the police shouldn't have guns, or that 911 should be turned off.

Yes, the drones should be secure. Yes there should be measures to make sure that they're not abused. But none of that takes away from anything i've said, which is ONLY to point out the situations where they could be useful. And people seem to be having a very negative visceral reaction to even considering the possibility.

Also, i'm not recommending or supporting Flock, just the concept of drone use in general.


Ok. I live in a small, flat city with few trees. So why did my police department buy these?


Obviously I don't know the specifics of your city, but in general there are a lot of scenarios where it's valuable to get to a scene very quickly (no traffic, etc.) and obtain reconnaissance. Especially violent scenes, or it could even be a drunk driver who is still on the move, or a stolen car where the perpetrators are likely to flee on foot if stopped.

I'm sure you can come up with a lot more ideas using your imagination.


Thanks for the explanation. I will ask my local city council to spend the money elsewhere.


Sounds like a scam


One of the best reasons is that a very large % of calls can be cleared without anyone actually going to the scene. Many cities using drones as first responders now report that they clear ~30% of calls with just a drone. This is great for small cities/towns that struggle to recruit officers and have had ballooning labor costs for police in order to get people to work there. Its also great philosophically if you want police to be involved less, because it dramatically lowers the amount of time they are going to scenes


Can they drive straight to you at 60mph without stopping?


Got it, a surveillance missile.


Common missiles go about 900 mph faster...


There's more than one definition of missile. Florida criminal code's just one place where a drone could be considered a "missile".

Florida criminal code:

  "790.19 Shooting into or throwing deadly missiles into dwellings, public or private buildings, occupied or not occupied; vessels, aircraft, buses, railroad cars, streetcars, or other vehicles.—Whoever, wantonly or maliciously, shoots at, within, or into, or throws any missile or hurls or projects a stone or other hard substance which would produce death or great bodily harm, at, within, or in any public or private building, occupied or unoccupied, or public or private bus or any train, locomotive, railway car, caboose, cable railway car, street railway car, monorail car, or vehicle of any kind which is being used or occupied by any person, or any boat, vessel, ship, or barge lying in or plying the waters of this state, or aircraft flying through the airspace of this state shall be guilty of a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084."


Oh wow, TIL. Thanks!


Israel and the US are both nuclear armed and are doing crazy shit.


I've been calling my reps and demanding they impeach Trump and Hegseth and get in contact with Doug Burgum and get going on the 25th amendment.


Kamala Harris would have started this exact same war. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48DxQTPOouU

Sometimes, it doesn't matter who you vote for.


would she though?

president after president has had the choice but haven't.

the best you get from that interview is that she was unwilling to say a yes or a no. probably a no, and she's not one to make decisions on a whim based on people stroking her ego


And she'd be in the wrong too. Our country is run by psychopaths.


There is exactly a 0% chance of the 25A happening. It will be a cold day in hell — these people worship Trump. They're not ousting him.

Impeachment would be more likely, but an impeachment conviction still seems utterly improbable. You'd need to flip a lot of seats in November, and this country is going to have forgotten all about this set of genocidal threats well before then. There's no way the current House/Senate GOP impeach, let alone convict.

> get in contact with Doug Burgum

I have absolutely no idea why you think Burgum would ever support a 25A invocation against Trump.


I'm from North Dakota. My reps know him. I know they're all cowards and cucked by Trump, but I'm going to keep calling them, demanding they do this, and reading insane Truth Social posts to them because I don't know what else I can do.

Burgum is a fucking disgrace to this state. I wish he'd grow some balls like the cowboy character he sometimes cosplays as and stand up to Trump. I wish my cucked reps would do the same.


I believe Annie Altman.


Not enough people know about her and her allegations towards him. It’s sad to see so much of the rich and powerful literally just can’t stop raping people. Epstein, Trump, Elon, scam Altman. How many more people have to be implicated?


Annie Altman is more credible than a serial scammer


Just a few hours ago while celebrating Easter, I had a discussion about oatmeal with my girlfriend's husband's dad about all the ways oatmeal can be enjoyed. My favorite way to make it is let the oatmeal sit overnight in vanilla soy milk, then mix in peanut butter, coffee, and cocoa powder or chocolate protein powder, and microwave. It's so good. I eat that at work maybe two or 3 times a week.


> with my girlfriend's husband's dad

With your what now?


My girlfriend is married but they been split up for like 10+ years, just never got divorced. We're all friends and it's all good.


I appreciate the world building in this oatmeal comment


that was an unexpected Occam!


I can’t figure out which is worse, a girlfriend’s husband’s dad, or a husband’s girlfriend’s dad.


I do roughly the same thing -Just oats with nuts and berries, no coffee or powder- but I haven't landed on what kind of oats to use yet for soaked oats. There are a ton of different kinds out there.


I usually just get the quick oats. I dunno the difference between em all. Texture doesn't really matter to me.

Sometimes I like to put a banana in there or some blueberries.


Quick oats are typically just rolled/cut to be smaller, so that they have a higher total surface area and so soak up liquid more easily. The downside is that this also makes them easier/faster to digest, so they have a higher glycaemic index (i.e. deliver a higher blood sugar spike) and give a shorter period of satiety.

Rolled oats are the uncut variety, which don't cook quickly for convenient porridge, but are great to soak as overnight oats. You can also get some which are basically in the middle - cut a bit so good for reasonably quick porridge (~5-7 minutes) but a bit more filling.


Oh, so I should switch since I'm usually soaking them overnight anyway.


"old fashioned" rolled oats are the standard afaict and I always cook them in 5 minutes


Interesting. Unless we have different standards for what constitutes a cooked oat, maybe we're talking about slightly different things? The full-size rolled oats (sometimes called 'robust') here in Germany are nowhere close to soft (and are still distinctly floating in the milk) after simmering for 20+ minutes. The alternative is also described as rolled oats (sometimes called 'tender') but are visually smaller; that's what cooks in 5-6 minutes.


This must be different, the "old fashioned rolled oats" sold in America would be more than done after 20 minutes of simmering.

Going by Bob's Red Mill, which is an excellent brand, we've got: * Old Fashioned rolled oats, 10 minutes: https://www.bobsredmill.com/product/regular-rolled-oats [the store brand I always see, on the other hand, is 5 minutes]

* Steel cut oats, 15-20 minutes (this is a lie, it takes longer than 20 minutes for them to get sufficiently soft in my experience, for any steel cut oat brand): https://www.bobsredmill.com/product/steel-cut-oats

* Quick cooking rolled oats, 3 minutes (in my experience this is consistent across all store brands, down to 2 minutes): https://www.bobsredmill.com/product/organic-quick-cooking-ro...

They also have a second species of oats that are significantly higher in protein, and they take 15+ minutes to cook in "rolled oat" form, which from personal experience is accurate: https://www.bobsredmill.com/product/protein-oats


Alton Brown did a great episode of good eats about oats. Basically, the faster they cook the fewer vitamins and minerals and good things there are in it for you


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

Search: