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

Sins of the father are not sins of the (grand)son.

Of course, but this lineage should indeed encourage some scrutiny.

Especially as multiple people in his family have had fascist sympathies.

Given his ancestry wearing a black shirt for a TV interview was pretty bad judgement.


If it quacks like a duck...?

To an extent, but with caution and charity. A lot of exceptionally good people have come from bad families - one of the Borgias was a saint, for example. A lot of exceptionally nasty people seem to have perfectly nice families.

Of course sometimes people who are, for example, brought up to be racist, are racist.


You'd be surprised how often the beliefs of the father/grandfather are those of the son/grandson, not to mention how often they feel the need to avenge for the perceived injustices or slights done to their parents

Given the history of his family, one would expect them to avoid risqué associations and activities. I think it deserves some scrutiny.

Of course not, the grandson is hard at work on his own sins.

My point exactly.

Elon Musk is far from the nicest person in the world and there are many fair reasons to dislike him but he wasn't in "the Epstein list" (whatever that is), he was pictured with a number of other tech CEOs at a dinner with Epstein, who was a wealthy financier.

I don't normally engage with comments like this as I assume there's no hope for someone who may be so willfully blind to the facts. My comment is more for those who might read what you wrote and accept it as truth.

I believe the previous commenter was referring to Musk's emails with Epstein, many of which were released by the DOJ Jan. 30th earlier this year. On Nov 25, 2012, Musk asked Epstein "What day/night will be the wildest party on your island?" Source: https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01977...

So I think it would be fair to say he had more involvement with Epstein than a dinner. Epstein was a convicted sex offender since 2008, so it's not like people around Epstein didn't know who they were dealing with.


Ignoring your incredibly obnoxious (and a smidge smug) "You're too far gone!" routine, I've read the E-Mails. Epstein and Co. didn't like him so much they awkwardly lied about winding the "operation" down when he asked about visiting once - I highly doubt they'd let him into "those" parts of the parties even if he begged on his knees.

Stop being a fanboy. He partied at the island AND LIED ABOUT IT.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/02/28/elon-mu...


> "ChatGPT says" is the enshittified LLM-era equivalent of LMGTFY [...] Recipients are left to figure out whether it's AI generated

How?


Your ellipsis leaves out the answer to your question. The paragraph is contrasting "ChatGPT says" which is annoying, but transparent (as LMGTFY), with "sloppypasta" which includes no such indicator.

Admittedly, the paragraph is somewhat confusingly written. Also probably written by an LLM.


> But Carmack isn't wired for empathy; he has never been.

What an utterly pretentious and rude thing to say.


I mean it's the truth. It wasn't necessary to base your argument on it in the context given but still disregarding it with a hand wave is strange. Everyone who worked with him knows people skills and altruism are really not his strongest character traits.

I don't see why this matters, there are accidental civilian casualties in every war. This was unintentional, unlike Iran killing 30,000 of their own citizens, which was entirely deliberate.

If you can find evidence the United States directly targeted a school with the intent of killing children and not just due to outdated intel (and somebody setting up a school in what was once part of an Iranian Revolutionary Guard naval base), maybe I'd change my mind.


30000 is nothing compared to the civilians the US has killed all over the world, all "accidentally" of course. Since 2023 Israel has killed 57000 civilians in Gaza. Shouldn't you be calling for an invasion of Israel on humanitarian grounds then?

> Your content, obscured.

Is that supposed to be a good thing?


For content you want public, no.

> There is a reason why Microsoft is now called Microslop.

Because young people repeat things they see on social media?


You mean Micro$lop or the classic M$?

Why am I entirely unsurprised that this anti-LLM hard fork is hosted on Codeberg? At this rate, how likely is it that Codeberg is just going to become a wasteland of abandoned ideological forks (with the exception of one or two major projects) by next year?

I'm not sure what the angle of where it's hosted is.. Are you suggesting the project would have more legitimacy if it was hosted on github ?

From what I've read of Codeberg it's user base is a tad tetchy and has a tendency to make mountains out of molehills. It was more of a comment on Codeberg than the project itself.

Codeberg has always been like this for what its worth. One of the most starred projects on Codeberg is a wayland terminal called foot (Which I used to/use btw, highly recommended terminal) :]

> It was more of a comment on Codeberg than the project itself.

This is more so an observation of Centralization. Let me explain.

Centralized platforms like Reddit/Twitter/Github usually exist. Fediverse solutions like Lemmy/Mastodon/Codeberg (Codeberg is adding fediverse support) to some degree exist to counter the centralization.

You use mastodon because you don't want twitter/reddit. You don't want twitter/reddit because you don't ideologically support it or the idea of proprietory commercial solutions in general.

The latter community of fediverse is also more likely to care about Privacy in the sense that they sacrificed some comfort to support open source project by actually using it.

And when you think about it, This all boils down to ideology. We want open standards of internet, not Centralized behemoths. This Ideology is similar to anti AI resistance and for good reason because guess what or who again are training AI models on the corpus of text available on centralized media.

If not for Ideological reasons, then you had no reason to use codeberg for a long time. Now you do, because Github has turned to shit. But the reason I had made an account on Codeberg some 2 year ago was because of my ideology of not wanting a Github account in general and support open standards in general until I caved in to Github someday to make some issues and star some projects.

I am thinking of going back to codeberg seeing the enshittenification of github... Codeberg winning is a net positive for society in general given its open source/non-profit nature.

Reminder to donate to Codeberg as it actually runs on donations :]


Codeberg has my favorite UI of the bunch as well. As a regular user rather than a programmer, I really appreciate how easy it is to find both Issues (I am a frequent bug reporter) and Releases near the top of the page. GitHub hides Releases on the side or bottom (mobile), and GitLab's UI is such a mess I don't even know where to start. I've often edited my URL to get to Issues or Releases on some git forges because it's easier than dealing with their UI.

Given githubs stance on AI "coding" it would be hypocritical to host the project on github.

So it's a fork based on principle ? I'm a slop hater as much as the next one but that really does seem petty.

Making a decision on principle is the opposite of petty, isn't it?

Yes, the location of the repo really doesn't mean much to me at all, complaining about it being hosted somewhere because of principle is certainly petty.

> At this rate, how likely is it that Codeberg is just going to become a wasteland of abandoned ideological forks (with the exception of one or two major projects) by next year?

I don’t know. What makes you curious about that?


> they feel safer this way,

What if somebody started a Whites-only gym because it made them feel safer?


Are there many assaults on uber passengers because they are white? Are there many assaults on uber passengers because they are women? There is your answer.

[flagged]


I understand socioeconomic factors so I just ignore racist talking points.

the fact that skin color can be a proxy for socioeconomic factors does not change the statistics. Do you investigate why a rapist has raped someone and then ignore it if the reason is socioeconomic factors?

If applying your logic on skin color leads to discrimination then maybe it's discrimination even when the discriminated party is males.


It doesn't but it contextualises them. An inability to recognise that is a signal.

Have you seen any correlation between socioeconomic factors and perpetrators of sexual assaults?

Recognising that one group commits the majority of certain crimes isn't the issue, as you said it's just stats. The issue is entirely in ignoring other factors.


[flagged]


The driving factors do exist though in the case of race which make filtering by it unacceptable. SA is common across race, socioeconomic status, etc. There are certainly some argument for some cultures encouraging beliefs that make it more common for them no argument here.

That said filtering out drivers of a certain race is unlikely to make any difference in your risk profile where women filtering out men is likely to make a huge difference in their risk profile.


Your average woman subjects themselves to a spectrum of sexual harassment ranging from cat calling to approaches - or even worse - by just leaving the house. Imagine them in gyms in workout clothing, or night club dresses in locked vehicles. If the solution is to limit what they wear, we're part of the problem

If Whites had, on average, 2.5 standard deviations lower upper-body strength than non-Whites, then maybe.

That's not why women ask for women-only gyms.

It's one of the relevant factors. It, and related facts, make it usually possible for a man to overpower a woman (and a predator self-selected for being somewhat above average in fighting ability might be confident of overpowering multiple women, or at least being able to get away in the worst case), which has implications for safety.

Women-only gyms are because women don't like being oogled whilst exercising.

Maybe some claim it's for safety but the fact they're often 24hr would decry that.


No one owes anyone moral consistency.

[dead]


Typically? I mean sure, those spaces exist, but the typical "leftist space" is usually still drenched in rape culture, maybe with some pretense of not being so (ending up as a bad experience for everyone except the self-important people running it).

A similar uncomfortable reality exists in rightoid spaces where theres hemming and hawwing at articles like this being blindly misandrist, despite the evidence and statistics on a societal level that men overwhelmingly commit more acts of sexual violence on strangers and deserve higher even segregation (its not even close to the same ballpark), but alas, they flee the consequences and promote a culture that critiques their legitimate and statistically backed reluctance to participate (like this thread). Despite the name, cherry picking isnt that fruitful of an activity.

You realize your argument works double well for black people right? This is the textbook misandry I was talking about. Bigotry based off statistics is what we call stereotyping. Also, sexual violence against strangers is nothing in comparison to violence perpetuated by people you know.

The Phinder Phallus if you will.

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

Search: