Manuel_D

12 ms·

241.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
Or perhaps when Amazon facilities security encounters someone doing destructive or harmful things, then sharing that information with other companies in the city is a perfectly reasonable measure? This is functionally no different than shar
242.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
Er, no, that's exactly how it's supposed to work: people who make violent threats have those threats more thoroughly assessed.
243.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
Linehan was arrested for making this post: > If a trans-identified male is in a female-only space, he is committing a violent, abusive act. Make a scene, call the cops and if all else fails, punch him in the balls This seems like a strai
244.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
The UK has different speech laws than the United States. Presumably, the actions of the police making those arrests are within the scope of UK law. Even if 90% don't result in a conviction, the police may still be operating within the
245.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
No? DRM gets cracked and the pirate sites still have loads of the latest shows, games, etc.
246.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
> It's literally sweeping something under the carpet.. No, it's sweeping something under solid rock. > At some point in time there will be a quake strong enough to crack your bedrock or some other natural disaster strong eno
247.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
Nuclear waste is solved by burying it in bedrock in a location with no groundwater. The fact that Zaporizhia was on the front lines of one of the biggest armed conflicts in recent memory and saw no compromised reactors is testament to their
248.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
If true, this could be verified by keeping a set of phones on older software and comparing that control group against a set of phones that received the update. That said, I'm totally unconvinced by this video. There's zero details
249.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
As I've told others in this thread who purport to see no difference between an embargo and a blockade: if you really think there is no difference between a blockade and an embargo, then why not just correctly refer to this as an embarg
250.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
Google's AI summaries already do this. I occasionally click through to see the underlying source the AI summary leaned on to generate the response, but probably only ~20% of the time.
251.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
I think this illustrates the problem with OP's prompt. If the goal is specifically to implement a scrolling background, this should have been in the prompt.
252.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
The piece doesn't seem to refute the key claims made by The Economist , namely that Gen-Z has higher inflation-adjusted incomes than previous generations. It's biggest criticism seems to be: > The Economist piece and kindred a
253.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
This seems to be a problem limited to specific metros. On the whole, Gen Z is more likely than millennials to be a homeowner at their age. Millennials in turn were more likely than Gen-X to own a home when Boomers were at that age. The idea
254.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
If you're going to accuse someone of lying, it'd be good to actually lay out that what you believe is a lie.
255.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
No, that logic doesn't apply. The US will not sink ships that send oil to Cuba. Nor will they charge any fee to the country sending oil to Cuba. Unlike your examples, there is is no threat of violence at hand here. What is being threat
256.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
No what? The US's embargo and threats to tariff countries that don't match this embargo is blocking most but not all oil bound for Cuba. Russia, for example, continues to trade with Cuba because it's willing to tolerate inc
257.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
The fact that oil imports are being curtailed by an embargo rather than a blockade is not minor semantics. The former is when countries voluntarily cease to trade with someone. The latter is when a country deploys its military to seize
258.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
The ship would be allowed to dock regardless of what Trump decided. Just Because Trump gives permission doesn't mean Russia needs permission from the US. If the US boarded the Anatolky Kolodkin , that would be an act of war against
259.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
If you genuinely think the two terms are in distinguishable, the why the stubborn insistence on calling it a blockade? Just use the correct term and call it an embargo, and you could've avoided this exchange. If you really think they&#
260.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
Yes, a Russian flagged tanker can sail and land in Cuba. The Russian oil tanker Anatolky Kolodkin did, in fact, dock in Cuba and offload oil in March 2026.
261.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
The meaningful thing is to understand the difference between a blockade and an embargo. When people say that the US is blockading Cuba I'm not sure if they are genuinely misinformed and think that the US Navy and Coast Guard are physic
262.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
> Seizing ships isn’t a blockade. > Turning away ships isn’t a blockade. If the vessels were legally flagged, both of these are indeed actions of a blockade! You're just ignoring the fact that the ships the US seized were flying
263.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
Because of US economic pressure, yes. But that's not what a blockade is. A blockade is preventing trade through military force, physically seizing any ships that attempt to dock in the blockaded country. > If the police prevent al
264.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
"The US isn't going to sell oil to Cuba." "The US will be Cuba's exclusive supplier of oil." Are these not polar opposites?
265.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
> At least one tanker turned away in the face of the threat from the USCG. If you're talking about the Ocean Mariner, it was not threatened by the USCG. The ship was carrying Colombian oil, and if it docked in Cuba that would trigg
266.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
As I explained in my reply, that tanker was not forced away. It lied and said it was headed to the Dominican Republic, but tried to sail to Cuba - presumably to surreptitiously sell oil without triggering retaliatory tariffs. When it realiz
267.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
Ships carrying oil are free to dock in Cuba. But whatever country is selling that oil will be subject to tariffs in the US. You can call it a blockade a thousand times, that doesn't make it true.
268.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
In case you didn't notice, this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48138329 is a different user than the comment I first responded to.
269.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
A blockade is an act of war, carried out by military force. Saying the US is blockading Cuba is saying that the US and Cuba are at war. That alone is a pretty big reason to understand the difference between a blockade and an embargo. The ot
270.
by Manuel_D 5mo ago
Yes the embargo is real. The point is, what the above commenter wrote: > The US starves anyone it does not like from natural resources and subsequently makes them buy US natural resources. It has done this to the EU, now it is trying to

More ›