These tools are allowing *adjacency* to become a powerful guiding indicator. You don't need to be a reverser, you can just understand how your software works and drive the robot to be a fallible hypothesis generator in regions where you can validate only some of the findings. I had been searching for a good benchmark that provided some empirical evidence of this sycophancy, but I hadn't found much. Measuring false positives when you ask the model to complete a detection related task may be a good way of doing that. This is detecting the pattern of an anomaly in language associated with malicious activity, which is not impressive for an LLM. I've been using Ghidra to reverse engineer Altium's file format (at least the Delphi parts) and it's insane how effective it is. Models are not quite good enough to write an entire parser from scratch but before LLMs I would have never even attempted the reverse engineering.I definitely would not depend on it for security audits but the latest models are more than good enough to reverse engineer file formats. I definitely would not depend on it for security audits but the latest models are more than good enough to reverse engineer file formats. They won't balk at some insanely boring task and that can give you a real speed up. The trick is if you fall into the trap of trying to get too much out of an LLM you end up pouring time into your LLM setup and not getting good results, I think that is the LLM productivity trap. Even low quality results are a good sniff test. Some of the time I just throw an LLM at a code review thing for a codebase I came across and let it work. I also love asking it to make me architecture diagrams. I like to think of it like a swiss army knife of agentic tools to deploy as you work through a problem. They won't balk at some insanely boring task and that can give you a real speed up. The trick is if you fall into the trap of trying to get too much out of an LLM you end up pouring time into your LLM setup and not getting good results, I think that is the LLM productivity trap. Even low quality results are a good sniff test. Some of the time I just throw an LLM at a code review thing for a codebase I came across and let it work. I also love asking it to make me architecture diagrams. Also, when you have scale problems, just throw an LLM at it. Even low quality results are a good sniff test. Some of the time I just throw an LLM at a code review thing for a codebase I came across and let it work. I also love asking it to make me architecture diagrams. Still, Ghidra's most painful limitation was extremely slow time with Go Lang. We had to exclude that example from the benchmark. So I don't have a clear idea of what the comparison would be but it worked pretty well for me! That said, it should be easier to use as a human to follow along with the agent and Claude Code seems to have an easier time with discovery rather than stuffing all the tool definitions into the context. Perhaps combining models together can lead to that kind of testing. Oh, wait, we have had that for a hundred years - somehow it's just entirely forgotten when generative models are involved. Perhaps it would make sense to provide LLMs with some strategy guides written in .md files. But when we're trying to share results, "a talented engineer sat with the thread and wrote tests/docs/harnesses to guide the model" is less impressive than "we asked it and it figured it out," even though the latter is how real work will happen.It creates this perverse scenario (which is no one's fault!) It creates this perverse scenario (which is no one's fault!) I wonder if a hybrid approach would work better: use AI to flag suspicious sections, then have a human reverser focus only on those. Kind of like how SAST tools work for source code - nobody expects them to catch everything, but they narrow down where to look. A bad actor already has most of the work done. The code is open-source; you can run it yourself using Harbor Framework:git clone git@github.com:QuesmaOrg/BinaryAudit.gitexport OPENROUTER_API_KEY=...harbor run --path tasks --task-name lighttpd-* --agent terminus-2 --model openrouter/anthropic/claude-opus-4.6 --model openrouter/google/gemini-3-pro-preview --model openrouter/openai/gpt-5.2 --n-attempts 3Please open PR if you find something interesting, though our domain experts spend fair amount of time looking at trajectories. Please open PR if you find something interesting, though our domain experts spend fair amount of time looking at trajectories. e.g. an intentional weakness in systemd + udev + binfmt magic when used together == authentication and mandatory access control bypass. Each weakness reviewed individually just looks like benign sub-optimal code. Is there code that does something completely different than its comments claim? Or put another way, each of these three through three hundred applications or services by themselves may be intended to perform x,y,z functions but when put together by happy coincidence they can perform these fifty-million other unintended functions including but not limited to bypassing authentication, bypassing mandatory access controls, avoiding logging and auditing, etc... oh and it can automate washing your dishes, too.

They were provoked by the U.S. president, who promised support to take on the institutions, but that support never materialized. In other words, nothing changes for the people demanding reform. The author is "an ancient and military historian who currently teaches as a Teaching Assistant Professor at North Carolina State University" [1].> Students were not merely arrested — they were gunned down en masse in the streets and even in hospitalsNon-violent doesn't mean peaceful.People died in our Civil Rights protests. Each of their leaders were gunned down, and the last won in an autocracy. We didn't provoke these protests, though we did give them false hope.> the U.S. secures resource access while leaving the existing system intact, and the student protesters are hunted downWhich opposition figure is being hunted down in Venezuela under Rodriguez? Each of their leaders were gunned down, and the last won in an autocracy. We didn't provoke these protests, though we did give them false hope.> the U.S. secures resource access while leaving the existing system intact, and the student protesters are hunted downWhich opposition figure is being hunted down in Venezuela under Rodriguez? Non-violent doesn't mean peaceful.People died in our Civil Rights protests. Each of their leaders were gunned down, and the last won in an autocracy. We didn't provoke these protests, though we did give them false hope.> the U.S. secures resource access while leaving the existing system intact, and the student protesters are hunted downWhich opposition figure is being hunted down in Venezuela under Rodriguez? Each of their leaders were gunned down, and the last won in an autocracy. We didn't provoke these protests, though we did give them false hope.> the U.S. secures resource access while leaving the existing system intact, and the student protesters are hunted downWhich opposition figure is being hunted down in Venezuela under Rodriguez? We didn't provoke these protests, though we did give them false hope.> the U.S. secures resource access while leaving the existing system intact, and the student protesters are hunted downWhich opposition figure is being hunted down in Venezuela under Rodriguez? Lots of Americans think the world revolves around us. We didn't provoke these protests, though we did give them false hope.> the U.S. secures resource access while leaving the existing system intact, and the student protesters are hunted downWhich opposition figure is being hunted down in Venezuela under Rodriguez? Which opposition figure is being hunted down in Venezuela under Rodriguez? But how does he explain the failure of peaceful revolutions in Belarus or China?My understanding of social dynamics is that being peaceful only works as long as it gains you more supporters than you lose by government action against the movement. Some governments give in but if not, at some point, the scale tips and violence or surrender are your only options.In Belarus, I knew they were fucked as soon as I heard that police support the protests by putting down their guns and joining the protesters.They gave up their ability to use violence and therefore became as irrelevant as the other protesters. Maybe his bunker would get overrun.Maybe someone close to him would try to get favor from the protesters and kill him.But all of those potential outcomes were closed off if people opposing him didn't have enough guns. My understanding of social dynamics is that being peaceful only works as long as it gains you more supporters than you lose by government action against the movement. Some governments give in but if not, at some point, the scale tips and violence or surrender are your only options.In Belarus, I knew they were fucked as soon as I heard that police support the protests by putting down their guns and joining the protesters.They gave up their ability to use violence and therefore became as irrelevant as the other protesters. Maybe his bunker would get overrun.Maybe someone close to him would try to get favor from the protesters and kill him.But all of those potential outcomes were closed off if people opposing him didn't have enough guns. Maybe his bunker would get overrun.Maybe someone close to him would try to get favor from the protesters and kill him.But all of those potential outcomes were closed off if people opposing him didn't have enough guns. Maybe his bunker would get overrun.Maybe someone close to him would try to get favor from the protesters and kill him.But all of those potential outcomes were closed off if people opposing him didn't have enough guns. Maybe the dictator would give up if he saw the situation spiraling out of control (and hopefully be executed as punishment anyway).Maybe the dictator would try to flee and get caught and executed ("gunned down"). Maybe his bunker would get overrun.Maybe someone close to him would try to get favor from the protesters and kill him.But all of those potential outcomes were closed off if people opposing him didn't have enough guns. Maybe his bunker would get overrun.Maybe someone close to him would try to get favor from the protesters and kill him.But all of those potential outcomes were closed off if people opposing him didn't have enough guns. Maybe someone close to him would try to get favor from the protesters and kill him.But all of those potential outcomes were closed off if people opposing him didn't have enough guns. But all of those potential outcomes were closed off if people opposing him didn't have enough guns. The article discusses "efforts, in a sense, directed against the state itself, both violent approaches (what we might call ‘terroristic insurgency') and non-violent approaches (protest)" (Id. ).> how does he explain the failure of peaceful revolutions in Belarus or China? "All that said, there are very obviously regimes in the world that have rendered themselves more-or-less immune to non-violent protest. This isn't really the place to talk about the broader concept of ‘coup proofing' and how authoritarian regimes secure internal security, repression and legitimacy in detail. But a certain kind of regime operates effectively as a society-within-a-society, with an armed subset of the population as insiders who receive benefits in status and wealth from the regime in return for their willingness to do violence to maintain it. Such regimes are generally all too willing to gun down thousands or tens of thousands of protestors to maintain power.The late Assad regime in Syria stands as a clear example of this, as evidently does the current regime in Iran. Such regimes are not immune to an ‘attack on will,' but they have substantially insulated themselves from it and resistance to these regimes, if it continues, often metastasizes into insurgency or protracted war (as with the above example of Syria) because the pressure has nowhere else to go" (Id. ).> how does he explain the failure of peaceful revolutions in Belarus or China? "All that said, there are very obviously regimes in the world that have rendered themselves more-or-less immune to non-violent protest. This isn't really the place to talk about the broader concept of ‘coup proofing' and how authoritarian regimes secure internal security, repression and legitimacy in detail. But a certain kind of regime operates effectively as a society-within-a-society, with an armed subset of the population as insiders who receive benefits in status and wealth from the regime in return for their willingness to do violence to maintain it. Such regimes are generally all too willing to gun down thousands or tens of thousands of protestors to maintain power.The late Assad regime in Syria stands as a clear example of this, as evidently does the current regime in Iran. Such regimes are not immune to an ‘attack on will,' but they have substantially insulated themselves from it and resistance to these regimes, if it continues, often metastasizes into insurgency or protracted war (as with the above example of Syria) because the pressure has nowhere else to go" (Id. ).> how does he explain the failure of peaceful revolutions in Belarus or China? "All that said, there are very obviously regimes in the world that have rendered themselves more-or-less immune to non-violent protest. This isn't really the place to talk about the broader concept of ‘coup proofing' and how authoritarian regimes secure internal security, repression and legitimacy in detail. But a certain kind of regime operates effectively as a society-within-a-society, with an armed subset of the population as insiders who receive benefits in status and wealth from the regime in return for their willingness to do violence to maintain it. Such regimes are generally all too willing to gun down thousands or tens of thousands of protestors to maintain power.The late Assad regime in Syria stands as a clear example of this, as evidently does the current regime in Iran. Such regimes are not immune to an ‘attack on will,' but they have substantially insulated themselves from it and resistance to these regimes, if it continues, often metastasizes into insurgency or protracted war (as with the above example of Syria) because the pressure has nowhere else to go" (Id. > how does he explain the failure of peaceful revolutions in Belarus or China? "All that said, there are very obviously regimes in the world that have rendered themselves more-or-less immune to non-violent protest. This isn't really the place to talk about the broader concept of ‘coup proofing' and how authoritarian regimes secure internal security, repression and legitimacy in detail. But a certain kind of regime operates effectively as a society-within-a-society, with an armed subset of the population as insiders who receive benefits in status and wealth from the regime in return for their willingness to do violence to maintain it. Such regimes are generally all too willing to gun down thousands or tens of thousands of protestors to maintain power.The late Assad regime in Syria stands as a clear example of this, as evidently does the current regime in Iran. Such regimes are not immune to an ‘attack on will,' but they have substantially insulated themselves from it and resistance to these regimes, if it continues, often metastasizes into insurgency or protracted war (as with the above example of Syria) because the pressure has nowhere else to go" (Id. "All that said, there are very obviously regimes in the world that have rendered themselves more-or-less immune to non-violent protest. This isn't really the place to talk about the broader concept of ‘coup proofing' and how authoritarian regimes secure internal security, repression and legitimacy in detail. But a certain kind of regime operates effectively as a society-within-a-society, with an armed subset of the population as insiders who receive benefits in status and wealth from the regime in return for their willingness to do violence to maintain it. Such regimes are generally all too willing to gun down thousands or tens of thousands of protestors to maintain power.The late Assad regime in Syria stands as a clear example of this, as evidently does the current regime in Iran. Such regimes are not immune to an ‘attack on will,' but they have substantially insulated themselves from it and resistance to these regimes, if it continues, often metastasizes into insurgency or protracted war (as with the above example of Syria) because the pressure has nowhere else to go" (Id. The late Assad regime in Syria stands as a clear example of this, as evidently does the current regime in Iran. Such regimes are not immune to an ‘attack on will,' but they have substantially insulated themselves from it and resistance to these regimes, if it continues, often metastasizes into insurgency or protracted war (as with the above example of Syria) because the pressure has nowhere else to go" (Id. The claim that kids put themselves in front of guns forty days ago and again today because of Trump's tweets is extraordinary.Two, if they did, it's because they're desperate. I can't imagine Iranians actually want the shah back. In that way, it's actually smart to wave his flag around if it means someone on the other side missteps. I can't imagine Iranians actually want the shah back. In that way, it's actually smart to wave his flag around if it means someone on the other side missteps. Not in the sense that it was viewed as a war by the protestors, but in the sense that the logistics, training, and operations of the Civil Rights movement were a well oiled machine that looked like a well organized, but nonviolent, army (including counterexamples where there was no organization).One of the most memorable details is how James Lawson trained in nonviolence under Ghandi and came over to train protestors in nonviolent tactics. They gathered in church basements to scream insults and spit on each other to prepare for the restaurant sitins and other ops. One of the most memorable details is how James Lawson trained in nonviolence under Ghandi and came over to train protestors in nonviolent tactics. They gathered in church basements to scream insults and spit on each other to prepare for the restaurant sitins and other ops. This was used for evil in the form of slavery. (2) Expansion of the interstate commerce clause to mean basically anything. A main argument for why this can't be reversed is that it would destroy the civil rights acts, which acts upon even intrastate business. Rather what should have happened is 15th amendment should have been written to apply to private entities as well, instead of blasting away the interstate commerce clause. (2) Expansion of the interstate commerce clause to mean basically anything. A main argument for why this can't be reversed is that it would destroy the civil rights acts, which acts upon even intrastate business. Rather what should have happened is 15th amendment should have been written to apply to private entities as well, instead of blasting away the interstate commerce clause. Many times here on HN I have debated people who were well versed on constitutional law, and when I mention rolling back the interstate commerce clause one of their main go to is that they're afraid I will destroyed the CRA and that's why they can't do it. And I know quite a few folks who believe in overturning Wickard.The CRA, as currently interpreted, is more than fine on equal-protection grounds. The CRA, as currently interpreted, is more than fine on equal-protection grounds. But we literally have the nationalist government's democratic, capitalist successor kicking in way above its weight class economically and technologically. It's fair to say that if the '89 protest hadn't been massacred, the 21st century would currently be undoubtedly China's to rule. (I'd also put even odds on Taiwan having peacefully reunified by now. But we literally have the nationalist government's democratic, capitalist successor kicking in way above its weight class economically and technologically. It's fair to say that if the '89 protest hadn't been massacred, the 21st century would currently be undoubtedly China's to rule. (I'd also put even odds on Taiwan having peacefully reunified by now. Armed Baloch and Kurdish groups have been boasting of firing on Iranian police. Hard to call them non-violent when they openly boast about armed attacks. “…it is important to note that while the overall framework of these two approaches is the same their tactics are totally different and indeed fundamentally incompatible in most cases. Someone doing violence in the context of a non-violent movement is actively harming their cause because they are reducing the clear contrast and uncomplicated message the movement is trying to send. Likewise, it is relatively easy to dismiss non-violent supporters of violent movements so long as their core movement remains violent, simply by pointing to the violence of the core movement. It is thus very important for individuals to understand what kind of movement they are in and not ‘cosplay' the other kind” (Id. They undermine each other.> Who knows where they are getting their weapons, with western countriesNobody has a monopoly on weapons supply to the Middle East. They undermine each other.> Who knows where they are getting their weapons, with western countriesNobody has a monopoly on weapons supply to the Middle East. > Who knows where they are getting their weapons, with western countriesNobody has a monopoly on weapons supply to the Middle East. Nobody has a monopoly on weapons supply to the Middle East. Kurds are people the West foments to armed rebellion, and then quashes, for decades, depending on western material needs at the minute. The Kurds were also supposed to have their own state at the end of World War 1, but western countries abandoned them and didn't force Turkey to honour its obligations, leaving Turkey free to genocide them just like it did the Armenians, Assyrians and Pontic Greeks. It's well past the stage where non violent protest or resistance stopped being a viable option.. The problem with your stance is that too many people want it both ways: They don't want the US to intervene, but then also want support in terms of money and special treatment for people emigrating from these countries (and blame the US for the deaths that occur for a terrible government). Because your moral principles seem to demand an invasion and subjugation of Israel. There is absolutely no requirement for consistency in geopolitics. Advocating for a position on e.g. Gaza or Iran isn't undermined because that person isn't expending equal efforts on injustice in another theatre. Africa is tricky due to historical reasons, though. Any western power that would intervene there without the explicit invitation of the local government would be accused of neo-colonialism etc. And all while making "death to america" part of their national slogan. At a certain point there ceases to be a middle path between violent resistance and complete surrender.> Protesters which foreign states (China or Russia)This type of relativism is dishonest. Of course US is speed running the path to authoritarianism but its not quite there. e.g. morally it would be perfectly acceptable to support weapons to protestors in Russia and not the other way around.The Iranian regime is objectively evil, period. > Protesters which foreign states (China or Russia)This type of relativism is dishonest. Of course US is speed running the path to authoritarianism but its not quite there. e.g. morally it would be perfectly acceptable to support weapons to protestors in Russia and not the other way around.The Iranian regime is objectively evil, period. Of course US is speed running the path to authoritarianism but its not quite there. e.g. morally it would be perfectly acceptable to support weapons to protestors in Russia and not the other way around.The Iranian regime is objectively evil, period. Measured, e.g. by the number of people it has killed (both directly, and indirectly by sanctions and support for brutal dictators - e.g. Pinochet, but also Saddam while he was waging war with Iran).Meddling in internal affairs of other countries has a terrible track record, the world would be so much better off without it.Armed resistance most often leads to a damn bloody affair in which everybody is worse off, unless the state is already so rotten that it has no will to fight for itself. Meddling in internal affairs of other countries has a terrible track record, the world would be so much better off without it.Armed resistance most often leads to a damn bloody affair in which everybody is worse off, unless the state is already so rotten that it has no will to fight for itself. Armed resistance most often leads to a damn bloody affair in which everybody is worse off, unless the state is already so rotten that it has no will to fight for itself. And the only test of sovereignty is against another sovereign. The world is littered with sovereigns meddling in each others' affairs and those who aren't sovereign.) The US is evil because of who it supports? Tell me about Iran.And at least the US didn't murder thousands of anti-government demonstrators so far this year.You're right in this: The US is not the shining example of goodness and purity that we wish it to be. But when you condemn the US compared to Iran, using those metrics, it looks suspiciously like motivated reasoning. And at least the US didn't murder thousands of anti-government demonstrators so far this year.You're right in this: The US is not the shining example of goodness and purity that we wish it to be. But when you condemn the US compared to Iran, using those metrics, it looks suspiciously like motivated reasoning. You're right in this: The US is not the shining example of goodness and purity that we wish it to be. But when you condemn the US compared to Iran, using those metrics, it looks suspiciously like motivated reasoning. What circumstances has Iran created that demand armed rebellion? This would seem to suggest that sinking an aircraft carrier and frigate or two would actually be justified according to your principles? Are your principals that a government should only focus on self preservation?What would be better for the people of Iran, sinking an American aircraft carrier or just disbanding their nuclear and long range ballistic missile programs? What would be better for the people of Iran, sinking an American aircraft carrier or just disbanding their nuclear and long range ballistic missile programs? Which were imposed for work on atomic bomb. These sanctions didn't come out of the blue. That naturally causes corruption to spread because you are involving outlaws in fundamental processes of your economy. It impoverishes the country and makes the populace more likely to accept when approached by foreign agents offering monetary rewards for help in bringing the government down.Obviously the commenter I responded to is not arguing in good faith so I don't expect anything but an NPC talking point response, so I wish to note that my answer is for a curious passerby. Obviously the commenter I responded to is not arguing in good faith so I don't expect anything but an NPC talking point response, so I wish to note that my answer is for a curious passerby. There is no reason whatsoever to enrich uranium beyond like 20% if its not for military purposes in such quantities.Saying that others are NPCs is interesting. Is the United States required to bake them a cake if it offends our religious principles? Jaish al-Adl would continue bombing Iranian police stations regardless of who's in power in Tehran as long as India maintains operational control of Chabahar Port, Chabahar-Zahedan Railway, and INSTC.Similarly, the BLA and BNA would continue bombing Pakistani police stations regardless of who's in power in Islamabad/Pindi as long as China maintains operational control of Gwadar Port, the Western Alignment expressway, and CPEC.Iran is de facto non-existent in much of Sistan-ve-Balochistan. Heck, Urdu/Hindi fluency remains the norm in much of Iranian Balochistan as a large portion of Iranian Baloch continue to have family ties across the border in Pakistan, work with their brethren in the Gulf as migrant workers, or travel to Karachi, Quetta, or India for medical, religious (most Iranian Baloch are Deobandi), and education services. Similarly, the BLA and BNA would continue bombing Pakistani police stations regardless of who's in power in Islamabad/Pindi as long as China maintains operational control of Gwadar Port, the Western Alignment expressway, and CPEC.Iran is de facto non-existent in much of Sistan-ve-Balochistan. Heck, Urdu/Hindi fluency remains the norm in much of Iranian Balochistan as a large portion of Iranian Baloch continue to have family ties across the border in Pakistan, work with their brethren in the Gulf as migrant workers, or travel to Karachi, Quetta, or India for medical, religious (most Iranian Baloch are Deobandi), and education services. Iran is de facto non-existent in much of Sistan-ve-Balochistan. Heck, Urdu/Hindi fluency remains the norm in much of Iranian Balochistan as a large portion of Iranian Baloch continue to have family ties across the border in Pakistan, work with their brethren in the Gulf as migrant workers, or travel to Karachi, Quetta, or India for medical, religious (most Iranian Baloch are Deobandi), and education services. Heck, one of our old neighbors growing up was a Iranian Baloch-Pakistani Baloch couple and according to them Baloch marriage across the border was extremely common. But anyhow, the entire thing has become a quagmire after CPEC was announced in 2015, because that forced India to confront the very real possibility of being enricled by China during a war.This is what lead to India's quiet and now overt diplomacy with the Taliban, continued investment in Iran despite the sanctions, and building Saudi and UAE cofinanced megaprojects on the Indo-Pak border in GJ and RJ as well as in JK. Like for example supporting Russia genocide in Ukraine? > Who knows where they are getting their weapons, with western countries also openly declaring their intent to destabilize Iran.When I fought in the YPG (Kurdish militia in Syria), almost all the weapons were Russian / USSR block type weapons, though the AK were stamped with the symbol of many soviet block countries. The Khomeini government is not going to just say "oh, you're right" and change. Sometimes - sadly - violence is the least worst answer. "All that said, there are very obviously regimes in the world that have rendered themselves more-or-less immune to non-violent protest. This isn't really the place to talk about the broader concept of ‘coup proofing' and how authoritarian regimes secure internal security, repression and legitimacy in detail. But a certain kind of regime operates effectively as a society-within-a-society, with an armed subset of the population as insiders who receive benefits in status and wealth from the regime in return for their willingness to do violence to maintain it. Such regimes are generally all too willing to gun down thousands or tens of thousands of protestors to maintain power.The late Assad regime in Syria stands as a clear example of this, as evidently does the current regime in Iran. Such regimes are not immune to an ‘attack on will,' but they have substantially insulated themselves from it and resistance to these regimes, if it continues, often metastasizes into insurgency or protracted war (as with the above example of Syria) because the pressure has nowhere else to go" (Id. The late Assad regime in Syria stands as a clear example of this, as evidently does the current regime in Iran. Such regimes are not immune to an ‘attack on will,' but they have substantially insulated themselves from it and resistance to these regimes, if it continues, often metastasizes into insurgency or protracted war (as with the above example of Syria) because the pressure has nowhere else to go" (Id. States are the most prolific users of violence (even more when you also count potential/threatened, not yet materialized). Anyone who wants to claim that violence is bad has to oppose the existence of states.Violence is risky, dangerous, unpredictable, costly, etc. But those are practical and legal, not moral, concerns.Violence is also necessary, as you say, against governments or other actors which cannot be deterred, stopped or punished using other means.Violence is also most effective when it's certain and overwhelming/indefensible. If we lived in a world where dictators and their flying monkeys get regularly shot or droned to death, we wouldn't have dictators. Not because they'd all end up dead but because nobody would dare try becoming or supporting one.This is why we have to publicly support _proportional_ punishment of dictators and their supporters, both now and after they've been removed from power. Good people have to use the same tools as bad ones (after all, they are just tools, not good or bad). But those are practical and legal, not moral, concerns.Violence is also necessary, as you say, against governments or other actors which cannot be deterred, stopped or punished using other means.Violence is also most effective when it's certain and overwhelming/indefensible. If we lived in a world where dictators and their flying monkeys get regularly shot or droned to death, we wouldn't have dictators. Not because they'd all end up dead but because nobody would dare try becoming or supporting one.This is why we have to publicly support _proportional_ punishment of dictators and their supporters, both now and after they've been removed from power. Good people have to use the same tools as bad ones (after all, they are just tools, not good or bad). Violence is also necessary, as you say, against governments or other actors which cannot be deterred, stopped or punished using other means.Violence is also most effective when it's certain and overwhelming/indefensible. If we lived in a world where dictators and their flying monkeys get regularly shot or droned to death, we wouldn't have dictators. Not because they'd all end up dead but because nobody would dare try becoming or supporting one.This is why we have to publicly support _proportional_ punishment of dictators and their supporters, both now and after they've been removed from power. Good people have to use the same tools as bad ones (after all, they are just tools, not good or bad). Violence is also most effective when it's certain and overwhelming/indefensible. If we lived in a world where dictators and their flying monkeys get regularly shot or droned to death, we wouldn't have dictators. Not because they'd all end up dead but because nobody would dare try becoming or supporting one.This is why we have to publicly support _proportional_ punishment of dictators and their supporters, both now and after they've been removed from power. Good people have to use the same tools as bad ones (after all, they are just tools, not good or bad). This is why we have to publicly support _proportional_ punishment of dictators and their supporters, both now and after they've been removed from power. Good people have to use the same tools as bad ones (after all, they are just tools, not good or bad). used by bad people.If it helps you reconcile my worldview, I absolutely oppose the existence of states. If it helps you reconcile my worldview, I absolutely oppose the existence of states. But the same state will attack you in turn if you abduct that person and hold them for 10 years in similar conditions to prison because _practically_, it weakens the state's monopoly on violence, even if _morally_ that action can be justified (i.e. because if a punishment is just there is no moral reason why it should matter who carries it out).> often ... usually (always? )I think the crux lies in how we quantify this. If you live in a western democracy, almost all of the violence you come into contact with or hear about is in fact used by bad individuals (thiefs, gang members, drunks, etc.) But even then you have the right (moral and usually legal) to defend yourself.If you live in other places, that violence might more often be used be institutions (such as states or religions) and might not be materialized (it is potential/threatened/implied). E.g. what happens to a muslim woman who refuses to cover her face - the violence usually never happens because she knows it would and therefore doesn't break the rule. It is still violence used to achieve a goal though and she has the same (moral but usually not legal) right to defend herself - even if any practical defense is beyond her ability to do so because the aggressors are too numerous and dispersed.I would argue that billions of people live in countries where violence is used against them every day because it is a threat which for example stops them from freely accessing information.In that regard you're right that it is usually used by bad people. The way I see it, violence being used by bad people is a stable equilibrium but it can be used by good people during a transition to a different stable state. It is usually not used by good people in a prolonged because materialized violence tends to reduce the number of people on both sides and cannot be sustained forever. )I think the crux lies in how we quantify this. If you live in a western democracy, almost all of the violence you come into contact with or hear about is in fact used by bad individuals (thiefs, gang members, drunks, etc.) But even then you have the right (moral and usually legal) to defend yourself.If you live in other places, that violence might more often be used be institutions (such as states or religions) and might not be materialized (it is potential/threatened/implied). E.g. what happens to a muslim woman who refuses to cover her face - the violence usually never happens because she knows it would and therefore doesn't break the rule. It is still violence used to achieve a goal though and she has the same (moral but usually not legal) right to defend herself - even if any practical defense is beyond her ability to do so because the aggressors are too numerous and dispersed.I would argue that billions of people live in countries where violence is used against them every day because it is a threat which for example stops them from freely accessing information.In that regard you're right that it is usually used by bad people. The way I see it, violence being used by bad people is a stable equilibrium but it can be used by good people during a transition to a different stable state. It is usually not used by good people in a prolonged because materialized violence tends to reduce the number of people on both sides and cannot be sustained forever. I think the crux lies in how we quantify this. If you live in a western democracy, almost all of the violence you come into contact with or hear about is in fact used by bad individuals (thiefs, gang members, drunks, etc.) But even then you have the right (moral and usually legal) to defend yourself.If you live in other places, that violence might more often be used be institutions (such as states or religions) and might not be materialized (it is potential/threatened/implied). E.g. what happens to a muslim woman who refuses to cover her face - the violence usually never happens because she knows it would and therefore doesn't break the rule. It is still violence used to achieve a goal though and she has the same (moral but usually not legal) right to defend herself - even if any practical defense is beyond her ability to do so because the aggressors are too numerous and dispersed.I would argue that billions of people live in countries where violence is used against them every day because it is a threat which for example stops them from freely accessing information.In that regard you're right that it is usually used by bad people. The way I see it, violence being used by bad people is a stable equilibrium but it can be used by good people during a transition to a different stable state. It is usually not used by good people in a prolonged because materialized violence tends to reduce the number of people on both sides and cannot be sustained forever. E.g. what happens to a muslim woman who refuses to cover her face - the violence usually never happens because she knows it would and therefore doesn't break the rule. It is still violence used to achieve a goal though and she has the same (moral but usually not legal) right to defend herself - even if any practical defense is beyond her ability to do so because the aggressors are too numerous and dispersed.I would argue that billions of people live in countries where violence is used against them every day because it is a threat which for example stops them from freely accessing information.In that regard you're right that it is usually used by bad people. The way I see it, violence being used by bad people is a stable equilibrium but it can be used by good people during a transition to a different stable state. It is usually not used by good people in a prolonged because materialized violence tends to reduce the number of people on both sides and cannot be sustained forever. I would argue that billions of people live in countries where violence is used against them every day because it is a threat which for example stops them from freely accessing information.In that regard you're right that it is usually used by bad people. The way I see it, violence being used by bad people is a stable equilibrium but it can be used by good people during a transition to a different stable state. It is usually not used by good people in a prolonged because materialized violence tends to reduce the number of people on both sides and cannot be sustained forever. The way I see it, violence being used by bad people is a stable equilibrium but it can be used by good people during a transition to a different stable state. It is usually not used by good people in a prolonged because materialized violence tends to reduce the number of people on both sides and cannot be sustained forever. I always find it useful to ask "why", whenever someone tells me their beliefs. (If it's possible at all because morality operates on reality while legality operated on provability - a subset of reality which can be proven to a neutral third party.) (If it's possible at all because morality operates on reality while legality operated on provability - a subset of reality which can be proven to a neutral third party.) For normal Iranian people who just want to leave their life?I hate my current government. Idk, when people put themselves in front of a gun I'm inclined to listen to what they're demanding, not folks in their armchairs a world away. Hitler was so bad that anybody is willing to publicly talk about killing him, there are movies glorifying it, people talk about going back in time and killing baby Hitler. He was so bad that the very strong taboo against killing does not work on him.So, when _exactly_ did it become OK to kill him? Think about it.What cumulative sum of his actions between 1889 and 1945 tipped the balance?Now, do those same rules apply to current dictators or people in the process of becoming dictators even if the taboo is still strong there? So, when _exactly_ did it become OK to kill him? Think about it.What cumulative sum of his actions between 1889 and 1945 tipped the balance?Now, do those same rules apply to current dictators or people in the process of becoming dictators even if the taboo is still strong there? What cumulative sum of his actions between 1889 and 1945 tipped the balance?Now, do those same rules apply to current dictators or people in the process of becoming dictators even if the taboo is still strong there? Now, do those same rules apply to current dictators or people in the process of becoming dictators even if the taboo is still strong there? It seems like a consequence is that publicity outside Iran is only going to be effective to the extent that it mobilizes people inside Iran? (With the possible exception of getting Trump's attention, but I don't think air strikes are going to do it? )And the government of Iran seems very willing to kill people.I don't see this ending well. (With the possible exception of getting Trump's attention, but I don't think air strikes are going to do it? )And the government of Iran seems very willing to kill people.I don't see this ending well. And the government of Iran seems very willing to kill people.I don't see this ending well. Or Tel Aviv, Rihyadh, New Delhi or any other one of the hosts of Iran's adversaries and enemies.> the government of Iran seems very willing to kill peopleI find it helpful to decompose states as monoliths in these cases. Besides attracting an intervention, the purpose of such a protest would also include motivating state elements to attempt a coup. > the government of Iran seems very willing to kill peopleI find it helpful to decompose states as monoliths in these cases. Besides attracting an intervention, the purpose of such a protest would also include motivating state elements to attempt a coup. I find it helpful to decompose states as monoliths in these cases. Besides attracting an intervention, the purpose of such a protest would also include motivating state elements to attempt a coup. TLV (already know) and Islamabad are lobbying the US in favor of striking the regime, as can be seen with the prominence Asim Munir, Muhammad Aamer, and Asim Malik in acting as a backchannel and unofficial advisers to the US on Iran under the Trump admin as well as Netanyahu's continued lobbying for a stronger response to Iran for decades. At the same time, both goverments have been supportive of America's non-proliferation work in Iran.My broad point is there are plenty of folks who may be open to covertly supporting the protesters beyond America blowing blowing god knows what up. My broad point is there are plenty of folks who may be open to covertly supporting the protesters beyond America blowing blowing god knows what up. Absolutely> My broad point is there are plenty of folks who may be open to covertly supporting the protesters beyond America blowing blowing god knows what up.Makes sense. And yes that's true!Also, despite all the bots on this page and any other Iran page on HN (pro-protest accounts in Iran please, please, please follow OpSec best practices and remove any personal references of yourself on HN), the reality is a large portion of Iranians do want the regime to end.They most likely do not want the Shah, but they are tired of the incumbent regime as well. And unlike during the Green Movement, Iran is much more isolated. > My broad point is there are plenty of folks who may be open to covertly supporting the protesters beyond America blowing blowing god knows what up.Makes sense. And yes that's true!Also, despite all the bots on this page and any other Iran page on HN (pro-protest accounts in Iran please, please, please follow OpSec best practices and remove any personal references of yourself on HN), the reality is a large portion of Iranians do want the regime to end.They most likely do not want the Shah, but they are tired of the incumbent regime as well. And unlike during the Green Movement, Iran is much more isolated. And yes that's true!Also, despite all the bots on this page and any other Iran page on HN (pro-protest accounts in Iran please, please, please follow OpSec best practices and remove any personal references of yourself on HN), the reality is a large portion of Iranians do want the regime to end.They most likely do not want the Shah, but they are tired of the incumbent regime as well. And unlike during the Green Movement, Iran is much more isolated. Also, despite all the bots on this page and any other Iran page on HN (pro-protest accounts in Iran please, please, please follow OpSec best practices and remove any personal references of yourself on HN), the reality is a large portion of Iranians do want the regime to end.They most likely do not want the Shah, but they are tired of the incumbent regime as well. And unlike during the Green Movement, Iran is much more isolated. And unlike during the Green Movement, Iran is much more isolated. Though what it could be exactly, that western intelligence wouldn't be willing to trumpet from the mountaintops, I could not say. Germany used to have great Middle Eastern intel, but they either lost it or got better about leaks. American HUMINT in the Middle East is notoriously awful, so I'd err on the side of us being as confused as everyone else. If it were that simple authoritarian regimes would be a thing of the past. That's why these movements barely make a dent even with covert outside support. Public support for the Iranian state has been around zero among the population for years now, the problem is that the Iranian government has probably 2-3 million of armed governmental agents (from police over regular military to IRGC/Basij) [1] and is just about as willing to compromise as the CCP was and is ever since Tiananmen.In fact, I would say what we've seen from Iran the last weeks (credible sources say around 35k deaths) is even more deaths than in the 1989 China protests which had a death toll of (worst case estimated) 10k.Against that level of fanatical, money- and religion-driven bloodlust, there is no chance of successful protests, not without serious external aid shifting the power balance. And in the case of Iran, that is the US and Israel wiping the mullahs out of this world, or causing them enough trouble so that the leadership accepts an offer to escape to Moscow alive.Let me be clear: I despise both Trump and Netanyahu. But this is, IMHO, the one and only chance these two men have to assist a just and rightful cause for once. In fact, I would say what we've seen from Iran the last weeks (credible sources say around 35k deaths) is even more deaths than in the 1989 China protests which had a death toll of (worst case estimated) 10k.Against that level of fanatical, money- and religion-driven bloodlust, there is no chance of successful protests, not without serious external aid shifting the power balance. And in the case of Iran, that is the US and Israel wiping the mullahs out of this world, or causing them enough trouble so that the leadership accepts an offer to escape to Moscow alive.Let me be clear: I despise both Trump and Netanyahu. But this is, IMHO, the one and only chance these two men have to assist a just and rightful cause for once. Against that level of fanatical, money- and religion-driven bloodlust, there is no chance of successful protests, not without serious external aid shifting the power balance. And in the case of Iran, that is the US and Israel wiping the mullahs out of this world, or causing them enough trouble so that the leadership accepts an offer to escape to Moscow alive.Let me be clear: I despise both Trump and Netanyahu. But this is, IMHO, the one and only chance these two men have to assist a just and rightful cause for once. Let me be clear: I despise both Trump and Netanyahu. But this is, IMHO, the one and only chance these two men have to assist a just and rightful cause for once. But I agree, maybe at least westerners could find the courage to simply just make the Epstein class at least pay all the costs, including compensatory damages for all the wars they constantly instigate, orchestrate, and perpetrate upon humanity because they profit from them instead of it costing them anything at all.America/the west should demand that all war must be led by the ruling class charging into battle, leading the troops into war and that all costs, including any associated money printing fraud and restitution to innocent people is paid by them through direct taxation on their income and their wealth.Since the wars they always instigate and orchestrate are so very important, they will surely have no problem paying for them instead of making everyone else pay while they profit and benefit.What we currently have is de facto aristocracy akin to the 19th century, where the aristocrats did exactly the same thing and they had weaseled themselves out of charging into the melee while sending millions to die. We need to fix all those perverse incentives so humanity can survive. America/the west should demand that all war must be led by the ruling class charging into battle, leading the troops into war and that all costs, including any associated money printing fraud and restitution to innocent people is paid by them through direct taxation on their income and their wealth.Since the wars they always instigate and orchestrate are so very important, they will surely have no problem paying for them instead of making everyone else pay while they profit and benefit.What we currently have is de facto aristocracy akin to the 19th century, where the aristocrats did exactly the same thing and they had weaseled themselves out of charging into the melee while sending millions to die. We need to fix all those perverse incentives so humanity can survive. Since the wars they always instigate and orchestrate are so very important, they will surely have no problem paying for them instead of making everyone else pay while they profit and benefit.What we currently have is de facto aristocracy akin to the 19th century, where the aristocrats did exactly the same thing and they had weaseled themselves out of charging into the melee while sending millions to die. We need to fix all those perverse incentives so humanity can survive. We need to fix all those perverse incentives so humanity can survive. Oof, this is a catastrophic screw-up and very offensive. I think you have some serious homework to do. and you will only be able to say "because the colonial puppet Shah regime used to have good relations with the country founded by terrorists (the Haganah, the Irgun (ETZEL), the Stern and the LEHI) we call Israel today, you know, the ones that supported Epstein that liked raping children like you, which has manipulated me into caring more about killing other people children because I cannot think for myself or realize what awful things they have me supporting!" May there not ever be someone as awful as me in the world that decides to bomb you or your children in the future for others who have manipulated them to be awful." May there not ever be someone as awful as me in the world that decides to bomb you or your children in the future for others who have manipulated them to be awful." Israeli social media is full of posts about how people hope to one day visit Tehran. No, not as an occupier, get over yourself.Your hate blinds you. I don't expect it to change anything, because the whole system is just a fake democratic ruse, a facade, but it will surely introduce even more volatility when the blue team starts also realizing that it's just lies and the agenda of the parasitic Epstein Class continues unabated regardless of "our democracy". Would organising an armed resistance be more effective? Non violence works only in democracies and other systems where the rulers care about what people think. How many guns can they get their hands on? I don't know the answer to that, but my expectation is, not many. I mean, with dictators, that's usually what it comes down to. But it often takes years or decades of unrest and repression before someone with enough guns decides they want to be on the right side of history.It's a fascinating if morbid process we go through every now and then... sort of, building consensus by sacrificing livelihoods and lives.Iran is one of the most oppressive regimes remaining on this planet, so I really hope this does it. The problem is that revolutionary governments are usually not dumb and do their best to make sure that another revolution can't overthrow them too easily - hardline loyalists with benefits in the military, etc. So this probably ends with a military intervention by other countries or some other sequence of events that will spell even more misery.The whole history of the Iranian revolution is pretty wacky. It's easy to take a knee-jerk position that "the West did it", and we definitely set some pieces in motion, but Iran wasn't really hurting prior to the revolution, which is why it caught everyone by surprise. The shah made a number of political missteps, there was some sentiment against the UK and the US, and people wanted change... but almost no one wanted a theocratic dictatorship instead. It's a fascinating if morbid process we go through every now and then... sort of, building consensus by sacrificing livelihoods and lives.Iran is one of the most oppressive regimes remaining on this planet, so I really hope this does it. The problem is that revolutionary governments are usually not dumb and do their best to make sure that another revolution can't overthrow them too easily - hardline loyalists with benefits in the military, etc. So this probably ends with a military intervention by other countries or some other sequence of events that will spell even more misery.The whole history of the Iranian revolution is pretty wacky. It's easy to take a knee-jerk position that "the West did it", and we definitely set some pieces in motion, but Iran wasn't really hurting prior to the revolution, which is why it caught everyone by surprise. The shah made a number of political missteps, there was some sentiment against the UK and the US, and people wanted change... but almost no one wanted a theocratic dictatorship instead. The problem is that revolutionary governments are usually not dumb and do their best to make sure that another revolution can't overthrow them too easily - hardline loyalists with benefits in the military, etc. So this probably ends with a military intervention by other countries or some other sequence of events that will spell even more misery.The whole history of the Iranian revolution is pretty wacky. It's easy to take a knee-jerk position that "the West did it", and we definitely set some pieces in motion, but Iran wasn't really hurting prior to the revolution, which is why it caught everyone by surprise. The shah made a number of political missteps, there was some sentiment against the UK and the US, and people wanted change... but almost no one wanted a theocratic dictatorship instead. It's easy to take a knee-jerk position that "the West did it", and we definitely set some pieces in motion, but Iran wasn't really hurting prior to the revolution, which is why it caught everyone by surprise. The shah made a number of political missteps, there was some sentiment against the UK and the US, and people wanted change... but almost no one wanted a theocratic dictatorship instead. This was promoted by Israel and the US itself. So even if we do not trust those other journalists, there is strong evidence that we are seeing propagandized news.We also know that Iran has been a target of Israel and the US since 2001. The political situation has become far less extreme over time. Their president is kept in power with eternal war. And they are actively depopulating the original population. Israel is openly manipulating politicians and creating fake news to start this war with Iran. We also know that Iran has been a target of Israel and the US since 2001. The political situation has become far less extreme over time. Their president is kept in power with eternal war. And they are actively depopulating the original population. Israel is openly manipulating politicians and creating fake news to start this war with Iran. Their president is kept in power with eternal war. And they are actively depopulating the original population. Israel is openly manipulating politicians and creating fake news to start this war with Iran. Now every protest chants “Javid Shah”, “death to Khamenei”, etc, which are political chants.> And they have an Apartheid system.The only apartheid system that allows the minority they discriminate against to achieve highest positions as judges, academics, celebrities, etc.> And they are actively depopulating the original population.This is not true. You can simply check how number of Arabs grew, and in many cases, outpaced in their growth the Jewish population. > And they have an Apartheid system.The only apartheid system that allows the minority they discriminate against to achieve highest positions as judges, academics, celebrities, etc.> And they are actively depopulating the original population.This is not true. You can simply check how number of Arabs grew, and in many cases, outpaced in their growth the Jewish population. You can simply check how number of Arabs grew, and in many cases, outpaced in their growth the Jewish population. > And they are actively depopulating the original population.This is not true. You can simply check how number of Arabs grew, and in many cases, outpaced in their growth the Jewish population. You can simply check how number of Arabs grew, and in many cases, outpaced in their growth the Jewish population. Have you seen a dead body in your life? It was like 5 battles of D-Day, but in a shorter amount of time.And you are conveniently forgetting the fact that most of the people came out when Reza Pahlavi requested a mass protest.And then you portray it as if the people had no agency in this, they didn't know that 1500 were killed in the 2019 protests. And you are conveniently forgetting the fact that most of the people came out when Reza Pahlavi requested a mass protest.And then you portray it as if the people had no agency in this, they didn't know that 1500 were killed in the 2019 protests. And then you portray it as if the people had no agency in this, they didn't know that 1500 were killed in the 2019 protests. Balance cannot be restored until a whimsy Show HN appears Monday afternoon followed by an LLM EDC by a high profile FOSS developer the following day and then rounded out by a “cozy web elegy” come Hump Day. Not that I'm a political activist, but I'm constantly disturbed that all my friends who posted non-stop about supporting Palestine have NEVER made one mention of supporting the Iranians protesting that regime.I get that they were in theory protesting the US support of Israel, and the Iran situation is different, but... it seems like western liberals refuse to speak up against any Islamic regime. I get that they were in theory protesting the US support of Israel, and the Iran situation is different, but... it seems like western liberals refuse to speak up against any Islamic regime. There are many extremely significant differences between the situations Iranians and Palestinians have been in. But Iranians and Palestinians have emphatically not been in even remotely comparable situations for the past half-century.Not claiming a bias is necessarily absent or present. Not claiming a bias is necessarily absent or present. What exactly do you want to happen here? In your view, am I taking the side of the Ayatollahs because bombing isn't enough and we should be nuking Tehran instead?It's telling that perceived tacit support of an Iranian regime — which America is more hostile to perhaps more than any other nation on the planet — is more disturbing to you than the deaths of 20k+ children in Gaza. It's telling that perceived tacit support of an Iranian regime — which America is more hostile to perhaps more than any other nation on the planet — is more disturbing to you than the deaths of 20k+ children in Gaza. It's not coincidence or luck that you're focused on Iran; people were sitting around planning an invasion of Iran and part of their planning was "How can we get the public to focus on Iran enough to give Congress cover to ignore another Executive war? They literally said that many of the protesters were Mossad agents. You might as well be saying "please kill them." It's as if Al Qaeda announced that they were materially supporting and completely infiltrating BLM protests, and when many BLM activists were arrested, they were carrying Al Qaeda satellite terminals and arms smuggled from Pakistan. (The Iranian middle class was even out, because they aren't traitors, they just don't want to live in a theocracy. The West helped Iraq use chemical weapons against Iran. We're thieves, and we're consciously moving to a economic strategy of piracy in order to take advantage of our navy. )5) The US moved as much navy to bear on Iran as it did when it invaded Iraq, and said that unless some magic words were said that nobody knows, it would invade.You might be comfortable being manipulated like this, but I am not. They literally said that many of the protesters were Mossad agents. You might as well be saying "please kill them." It's as if Al Qaeda announced that they were materially supporting and completely infiltrating BLM protests, and when many BLM activists were arrested, they were carrying Al Qaeda satellite terminals and arms smuggled from Pakistan. (The Iranian middle class was even out, because they aren't traitors, they just don't want to live in a theocracy. The West helped Iraq use chemical weapons against Iran. We're thieves, and we're consciously moving to a economic strategy of piracy in order to take advantage of our navy. )5) The US moved as much navy to bear on Iran as it did when it invaded Iraq, and said that unless some magic words were said that nobody knows, it would invade.You might be comfortable being manipulated like this, but I am not. 1) a currency crash was intentionally instigated in Iran by the West, which caused protests. They literally said that many of the protesters were Mossad agents. You might as well be saying "please kill them." It's as if Al Qaeda announced that they were materially supporting and completely infiltrating BLM protests, and when many BLM activists were arrested, they were carrying Al Qaeda satellite terminals and arms smuggled from Pakistan. (The Iranian middle class was even out, because they aren't traitors, they just don't want to live in a theocracy. The West helped Iraq use chemical weapons against Iran. We're thieves, and we're consciously moving to a economic strategy of piracy in order to take advantage of our navy. )5) The US moved as much navy to bear on Iran as it did when it invaded Iraq, and said that unless some magic words were said that nobody knows, it would invade.You might be comfortable being manipulated like this, but I am not. They literally said that many of the protesters were Mossad agents. You might as well be saying "please kill them." It's as if Al Qaeda announced that they were materially supporting and completely infiltrating BLM protests, and when many BLM activists were arrested, they were carrying Al Qaeda satellite terminals and arms smuggled from Pakistan. (The Iranian middle class was even out, because they aren't traitors, they just don't want to live in a theocracy. The West helped Iraq use chemical weapons against Iran. We're thieves, and we're consciously moving to a economic strategy of piracy in order to take advantage of our navy. )5) The US moved as much navy to bear on Iran as it did when it invaded Iraq, and said that unless some magic words were said that nobody knows, it would invade.You might be comfortable being manipulated like this, but I am not. They literally said that many of the protesters were Mossad agents. You might as well be saying "please kill them." It's as if Al Qaeda announced that they were materially supporting and completely infiltrating BLM protests, and when many BLM activists were arrested, they were carrying Al Qaeda satellite terminals and arms smuggled from Pakistan. (The Iranian middle class was even out, because they aren't traitors, they just don't want to live in a theocracy. The West helped Iraq use chemical weapons against Iran. We're thieves, and we're consciously moving to a economic strategy of piracy in order to take advantage of our navy. )5) The US moved as much navy to bear on Iran as it did when it invaded Iraq, and said that unless some magic words were said that nobody knows, it would invade.You might be comfortable being manipulated like this, but I am not. They literally said that many of the protesters were Mossad agents. You might as well be saying "please kill them." It's as if Al Qaeda announced that they were materially supporting and completely infiltrating BLM protests, and when many BLM activists were arrested, they were carrying Al Qaeda satellite terminals and arms smuggled from Pakistan. (The Iranian middle class was even out, because they aren't traitors, they just don't want to live in a theocracy. The West helped Iraq use chemical weapons against Iran. We're thieves, and we're consciously moving to a economic strategy of piracy in order to take advantage of our navy. )5) The US moved as much navy to bear on Iran as it did when it invaded Iraq, and said that unless some magic words were said that nobody knows, it would invade.You might be comfortable being manipulated like this, but I am not. (The Iranian middle class was even out, because they aren't traitors, they just don't want to live in a theocracy. The West helped Iraq use chemical weapons against Iran. We're thieves, and we're consciously moving to a economic strategy of piracy in order to take advantage of our navy. )5) The US moved as much navy to bear on Iran as it did when it invaded Iraq, and said that unless some magic words were said that nobody knows, it would invade.You might be comfortable being manipulated like this, but I am not. 5) The US moved as much navy to bear on Iran as it did when it invaded Iraq, and said that unless some magic words were said that nobody knows, it would invade.You might be comfortable being manipulated like this, but I am not. You might be comfortable being manipulated like this, but I am not. That crowd only seems to care if they can actively oppose Israel or the current administration. They don't consistently care about any particular type of human suffering. Just opposing Zionists, colonizers, capitalists, and whatever current keywords are activated. > I'm saying if you were a very vocal pro-Hamas activistPalestine ≠ HamasPro-Palestinian ≠ Pro-HamasIf you genuinely don't believe a significant number of people support the former but not the latter, I... don't even know what to tell you. It certainly says a lot that you can neither distinguish these two nor believe anyone else sees a distinction.> They don't consistently care about any particular type of human suffering. Just opposing ZionistsPeople are not numbers for your narrative.Whether on a population chart or on a death chart.Again: you're ignoring more than half a century of history and extremely relevant differences regarding how each got into their current situations, whom the involved parties were, what the current situations even are, and what their futures might look like... and more.Just because the number of deaths appears to have reached a similar order of magnitude that does not mean anyone who fails to display the same reaction to the situations the two groups of people have been in is a hypocrite. Palestine ≠ HamasPro-Palestinian ≠ Pro-HamasIf you genuinely don't believe a significant number of people support the former but not the latter, I... don't even know what to tell you. It certainly says a lot that you can neither distinguish these two nor believe anyone else sees a distinction.> They don't consistently care about any particular type of human suffering. Just opposing ZionistsPeople are not numbers for your narrative.Whether on a population chart or on a death chart.Again: you're ignoring more than half a century of history and extremely relevant differences regarding how each got into their current situations, whom the involved parties were, what the current situations even are, and what their futures might look like... and more.Just because the number of deaths appears to have reached a similar order of magnitude that does not mean anyone who fails to display the same reaction to the situations the two groups of people have been in is a hypocrite. Pro-Palestinian ≠ Pro-HamasIf you genuinely don't believe a significant number of people support the former but not the latter, I... don't even know what to tell you. It certainly says a lot that you can neither distinguish these two nor believe anyone else sees a distinction.> They don't consistently care about any particular type of human suffering. Just opposing ZionistsPeople are not numbers for your narrative.Whether on a population chart or on a death chart.Again: you're ignoring more than half a century of history and extremely relevant differences regarding how each got into their current situations, whom the involved parties were, what the current situations even are, and what their futures might look like... and more.Just because the number of deaths appears to have reached a similar order of magnitude that does not mean anyone who fails to display the same reaction to the situations the two groups of people have been in is a hypocrite. If you genuinely don't believe a significant number of people support the former but not the latter, I... don't even know what to tell you. It certainly says a lot that you can neither distinguish these two nor believe anyone else sees a distinction.> They don't consistently care about any particular type of human suffering. Just opposing ZionistsPeople are not numbers for your narrative.Whether on a population chart or on a death chart.Again: you're ignoring more than half a century of history and extremely relevant differences regarding how each got into their current situations, whom the involved parties were, what the current situations even are, and what their futures might look like... and more.Just because the number of deaths appears to have reached a similar order of magnitude that does not mean anyone who fails to display the same reaction to the situations the two groups of people have been in is a hypocrite. > They don't consistently care about any particular type of human suffering. Just opposing ZionistsPeople are not numbers for your narrative.Whether on a population chart or on a death chart.Again: you're ignoring more than half a century of history and extremely relevant differences regarding how each got into their current situations, whom the involved parties were, what the current situations even are, and what their futures might look like... and more.Just because the number of deaths appears to have reached a similar order of magnitude that does not mean anyone who fails to display the same reaction to the situations the two groups of people have been in is a hypocrite. People are not numbers for your narrative.Whether on a population chart or on a death chart.Again: you're ignoring more than half a century of history and extremely relevant differences regarding how each got into their current situations, whom the involved parties were, what the current situations even are, and what their futures might look like... and more.Just because the number of deaths appears to have reached a similar order of magnitude that does not mean anyone who fails to display the same reaction to the situations the two groups of people have been in is a hypocrite. Whether on a population chart or on a death chart.Again: you're ignoring more than half a century of history and extremely relevant differences regarding how each got into their current situations, whom the involved parties were, what the current situations even are, and what their futures might look like... and more.Just because the number of deaths appears to have reached a similar order of magnitude that does not mean anyone who fails to display the same reaction to the situations the two groups of people have been in is a hypocrite. Again: you're ignoring more than half a century of history and extremely relevant differences regarding how each got into their current situations, whom the involved parties were, what the current situations even are, and what their futures might look like... and more.Just because the number of deaths appears to have reached a similar order of magnitude that does not mean anyone who fails to display the same reaction to the situations the two groups of people have been in is a hypocrite. While I agree with you that Hamas and the Palestinians are not one thing, Hamas would not be able to operate the way it did (and still does to an extent), without broad support from the population. I never made the statements you're suggesting I did to begin with.> Hamas would not be able to operate the way it did (and still does to an extent), without broad support from the population.Leaving aside whatever "still broad, to an extent" means: I never claimed otherwise, regardless. Certainly they have their share of supporters.What I'm pointing out is that the parent's "friends who posted non-stop about supporting Palestine" are (probably? Heck, I imagine they're probably not local Palestinians or in the surveyed population here to begin with. > Hamas would not be able to operate the way it did (and still does to an extent), without broad support from the population.Leaving aside whatever "still broad, to an extent" means: I never claimed otherwise, regardless. Certainly they have their share of supporters.What I'm pointing out is that the parent's "friends who posted non-stop about supporting Palestine" are (probably? Heck, I imagine they're probably not local Palestinians or in the surveyed population here to begin with. Leaving aside whatever "still broad, to an extent" means: I never claimed otherwise, regardless. Certainly they have their share of supporters.What I'm pointing out is that the parent's "friends who posted non-stop about supporting Palestine" are (probably? Heck, I imagine they're probably not local Palestinians or in the surveyed population here to begin with. What I'm pointing out is that the parent's "friends who posted non-stop about supporting Palestine" are (probably? Heck, I imagine they're probably not local Palestinians or in the surveyed population here to begin with. > I agree with you that Hamas and the Palestinians are not one thingThat was literally my point. Polling Israeli or US citizens on the extremist groups they support would be similarly dishonest; organizations like ICE, Blackwater and Irgun cannot be fairly conflated with their respective populations regardless of how the majority feels. I don't know why you insist on acting like that's not happening. This seems to be another case where American pro-Palestinian activist culture may be getting confused with actual Palestinian culture. )Two, I'm going to be almost everyone in America wearing one doesn't know that. I can't even begin to imagine what fraction of #StopKony posters in the early 2010s could have placed Uganda on a map. Two, I'm going to be almost everyone in America wearing one doesn't know that. I can't even begin to imagine what fraction of #StopKony posters in the early 2010s could have placed Uganda on a map. And you said you are friends with such pro-Hamas, pro-genocidal people?> I know know why you insist on actingYou clearly neither know what I'm doing (certainly it's not acting), nor why, but feel free to believe as you wish.> like that's not happening.Nobody said that's that's not also happening. What I said is there are many, many pro-Palestinians who emphatically do not support Hamas, and you're lumping them together with people who support both (yes, they also exist).If anyone is insisting on anything, it's you insisting on not making the distinction between these positions or groups, for some reason. And apparently on keeping said pro-Hamas/pro-genocide people as your friends (?!) > Wearing the kaffiyeh is explicitly pro-Hamas and Genocidal towards Israel. And you said you are friends with such pro-Hamas, pro-genocidal people?> I know know why you insist on actingYou clearly neither know what I'm doing (certainly it's not acting), nor why, but feel free to believe as you wish.> like that's not happening.Nobody said that's that's not also happening. What I said is there are many, many pro-Palestinians who emphatically do not support Hamas, and you're lumping them together with people who support both (yes, they also exist).If anyone is insisting on anything, it's you insisting on not making the distinction between these positions or groups, for some reason. And apparently on keeping said pro-Hamas/pro-genocide people as your friends (?!) And you said you are friends with such pro-Hamas, pro-genocidal people?> I know know why you insist on actingYou clearly neither know what I'm doing (certainly it's not acting), nor why, but feel free to believe as you wish.> like that's not happening.Nobody said that's that's not also happening. What I said is there are many, many pro-Palestinians who emphatically do not support Hamas, and you're lumping them together with people who support both (yes, they also exist).If anyone is insisting on anything, it's you insisting on not making the distinction between these positions or groups, for some reason. And apparently on keeping said pro-Hamas/pro-genocide people as your friends (?!) > I know know why you insist on actingYou clearly neither know what I'm doing (certainly it's not acting), nor why, but feel free to believe as you wish.> like that's not happening.Nobody said that's that's not also happening. What I said is there are many, many pro-Palestinians who emphatically do not support Hamas, and you're lumping them together with people who support both (yes, they also exist).If anyone is insisting on anything, it's you insisting on not making the distinction between these positions or groups, for some reason. And apparently on keeping said pro-Hamas/pro-genocide people as your friends (?!) What I said is there are many, many pro-Palestinians who emphatically do not support Hamas, and you're lumping them together with people who support both (yes, they also exist).If anyone is insisting on anything, it's you insisting on not making the distinction between these positions or groups, for some reason. And apparently on keeping said pro-Hamas/pro-genocide people as your friends (?!) What I said is there are many, many pro-Palestinians who emphatically do not support Hamas, and you're lumping them together with people who support both (yes, they also exist).If anyone is insisting on anything, it's you insisting on not making the distinction between these positions or groups, for some reason. And apparently on keeping said pro-Hamas/pro-genocide people as your friends (?!) What I said is there are many, many pro-Palestinians who emphatically do not support Hamas, and you're lumping them together with people who support both (yes, they also exist).If anyone is insisting on anything, it's you insisting on not making the distinction between these positions or groups, for some reason. And apparently on keeping said pro-Hamas/pro-genocide people as your friends (?!) If anyone is insisting on anything, it's you insisting on not making the distinction between these positions or groups, for some reason. And apparently on keeping said pro-Hamas/pro-genocide people as your friends (?!) Can you think of any motivating reasons for the crowd to focus on Israel specifically? Last I checked, the American government isn't sending billions of dollars of weaponry and political cover to the Iranian government, so that is one massive reason why protesting Israel makes more sense.>have not made a peep about the thousands of Iranians recently murdered by their regimeI don't protest to signal my moral outrage, I do it to effect change in my elected leaders. >have not made a peep about the thousands of Iranians recently murdered by their regimeI don't protest to signal my moral outrage, I do it to effect change in my elected leaders. I don't protest to signal my moral outrage, I do it to effect change in my elected leaders. > I'm saying if you were a very vocal pro-Hamas...See how quickly things have turned from the first post manufactured to seem reasonable? No more "Curious" and "just asking questions".How many pro-Hamas friends can a person have?! See how quickly things have turned from the first post manufactured to seem reasonable? No more "Curious" and "just asking questions".How many pro-Hamas friends can a person have?! How many pro-Hamas friends can a person have?! I believe you are being taken for a ride friend. You just make these claims to avoid any accountability of your actions. PS Most of the videos that swayed you were AI generated. This is an absolutely insane and downright insulting claim to make about anyone. You really think if the US wasn't supporting Israel, no one would have cared about Gaza? Do you care about those people or not?Sorry, unless I'm missing something, what you said just sounds like a cop out. Sorry, unless I'm missing something, what you said just sounds like a cop out. "Pro hamas activist" has become the calling card of deeply committed western and israeli islamophobes.Much like their close cousins, the holocaust denying anti semite, they almost universally refuse to recognize the UN recognized genocide in gaza.>That crowd only seems to care if they can actively oppose Israel or the current administrationIm sure if the current administration backed a genocide in another country they would passionately oppose that too. Much like their close cousins, the holocaust denying anti semite, they almost universally refuse to recognize the UN recognized genocide in gaza.>That crowd only seems to care if they can actively oppose Israel or the current administrationIm sure if the current administration backed a genocide in another country they would passionately oppose that too. >That crowd only seems to care if they can actively oppose Israel or the current administrationIm sure if the current administration backed a genocide in another country they would passionately oppose that too. Im sure if the current administration backed a genocide in another country they would passionately oppose that too. Which are the actual groups calling for genocide? What Israel has been doing for decades at this point is completely unacceptable. Hamas is a bunch of terrorists, but in context they are the inevitable outcome of Israel's continuous mistreatment and ongoing antagonism against all of their neighbors stretching on for fifty years.You really have to wonder what the hell is wrong with the Israelis that they can't stop being aggressive towards literally everyone around them. You really have to wonder what the hell is wrong with the Israelis that they can't stop being aggressive towards literally everyone around them. You've let your true colors show through...People were angry at the world allowing a genocide to occur and at their own countries actively supporting that genocide.It was also a genocide going on for several years allowing momentum to build and anger to grow. The most recent Iranian uprising lasted a few weeks.I would be more upset that Trump told the poor Iranians to protest and that he would support them if violence was used against them - and he let them die by the thousand. He told them "help is on the way". People were angry at the world allowing a genocide to occur and at their own countries actively supporting that genocide.It was also a genocide going on for several years allowing momentum to build and anger to grow. The most recent Iranian uprising lasted a few weeks.I would be more upset that Trump told the poor Iranians to protest and that he would support them if violence was used against them - and he let them die by the thousand. He told them "help is on the way". The most recent Iranian uprising lasted a few weeks.I would be more upset that Trump told the poor Iranians to protest and that he would support them if violence was used against them - and he let them die by the thousand. He told them "help is on the way". I would be more upset that Trump told the poor Iranians to protest and that he would support them if violence was used against them - and he let them die by the thousand. He told them "help is on the way". https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=20T6XrrLdiA&pp=ygUYbG9zIGFuZ2V...Edit: Also, the Left seems to more often pick sides when its one ethnic group oppressing another, as identity politics is prominent in their messaging Edit: Also, the Left seems to more often pick sides when its one ethnic group oppressing another, as identity politics is prominent in their messaging Of course then the right would be protesting foreign interventions. If Biden repeatedly shot boats that he alleged carried drugs without evidence and then shot survivors again for good measure until he eventually went and captured Venezuela's de facto head of state, people would support him a lot more? I, and many I know, would love to see the Iranian regime fall, just not via US regime change which tends to make things worse. I think it's just an instinct to oppose anything the current administration supports. But it consistently aligns them with some of the most suppressive regimes.Venezuelans are glad Maduro is gone. Any external meddling would have probably made it much bloodier.You can be assured most Iranians do NOT want US to intervene. How many Americans want China/Russia to intervene to 'help' you get rid of Trump?Get off your high horse and use a bit of empathy and common sense. You can be assured most Iranians do NOT want US to intervene. How many Americans want China/Russia to intervene to 'help' you get rid of Trump?Get off your high horse and use a bit of empathy and common sense. Also you seem to not grasp that the current regime are viewed as invaders forcing Islamic rule which I'm pretty sure is very very different from the scenarios your mentioning. And it's not like I'm making it up, i happen to have many Iranians in my family, and many of them living in Iran still and i can assure you that the vast majority in the big cities want the US to kill off the regime. I'm sure there's some kind of rural population that loves sharia like the us has maga, but i don't think they are the majority any more. Empathy means that you understand that what YOU consider terrorism might mean 'supporting self-determination of oppressed and occupied people' by somebody else. Is it so difficult to understand that ordinary Iranians do not see their government as international supporters of terrorism?I was 19 in 1989. While I do not claim to understand geopolitical realities in their entirety, I was old enough to distinctly remember how surprising the fall of communism felt. Despite almost all people I knew being (low-level, passive) anti-communists, nobody saw it really coming until the last few months. While I do not claim to understand geopolitical realities in their entirety, I was old enough to distinctly remember how surprising the fall of communism felt. Despite almost all people I knew being (low-level, passive) anti-communists, nobody saw it really coming until the last few months. Not saying that what's happening with ICE is okay. But it's a very sheltered view to think that is at all equivalent to what happens in those countries if you actively protest against the govt. For Iranians, USA is strong foreign country that is hostile to them.For Americans, Russia/China are (relatively) strong foreign countries that (they think) are hostile to them.As Americans would NOT like if Russia/China was influencing their internal matters (Russia gate ? ), so would Iranians NOT like if USA was deciding who is going to govern over them.First, they are a proud nation with long history. Second, they have a very good reason (many historical precedents) to believe USA will not act in the interests of Iranian people, but in their own (and Israel's) interests. For Americans, Russia/China are (relatively) strong foreign countries that (they think) are hostile to them.As Americans would NOT like if Russia/China was influencing their internal matters (Russia gate ? ), so would Iranians NOT like if USA was deciding who is going to govern over them.First, they are a proud nation with long history. Second, they have a very good reason (many historical precedents) to believe USA will not act in the interests of Iranian people, but in their own (and Israel's) interests. As Americans would NOT like if Russia/China was influencing their internal matters (Russia gate ? ), so would Iranians NOT like if USA was deciding who is going to govern over them.First, they are a proud nation with long history. Second, they have a very good reason (many historical precedents) to believe USA will not act in the interests of Iranian people, but in their own (and Israel's) interests. First, they are a proud nation with long history. Second, they have a very good reason (many historical precedents) to believe USA will not act in the interests of Iranian people, but in their own (and Israel's) interests. People that ask "where are all the students on campus that were protesting Gaza" do so because taking action on injustice, in a way that demands accountability from their leaders, is an uncomfortable idea. For them, the purpose of taking action is largely to signal moral outrage, and making an aggrieved post on social media is the beginning and end of praxis on an issue. And if that is your mindset, why wouldn't you make an equal amount of posts about Iran as you would for Gaza? Since they are both Things That Are Morally Bad.What they don't understand is that for people that e.g. protest in person, protesting isn't a quaint, feckless action merely meant to signal one's care about an issue to the right people. Rather, it is an action with a goal to effect specific change of behavior on a particular issue from a specific group of people (usually leaders in power that are beholden to the protesters). If you are American and protesting US military support for Israel based on the conflict in Gaza, there are practical, material, direct cause-and-effect reasons to make that argument towards your elected representatives; the same is simply not true for the Iran situation (which the majority of the US government is already aligned with bombing yet again).It's just such a strange point of view to interpret lack of action on a particular issue as tacit support. What they don't understand is that for people that e.g. protest in person, protesting isn't a quaint, feckless action merely meant to signal one's care about an issue to the right people. Rather, it is an action with a goal to effect specific change of behavior on a particular issue from a specific group of people (usually leaders in power that are beholden to the protesters). If you are American and protesting US military support for Israel based on the conflict in Gaza, there are practical, material, direct cause-and-effect reasons to make that argument towards your elected representatives; the same is simply not true for the Iran situation (which the majority of the US government is already aligned with bombing yet again).It's just such a strange point of view to interpret lack of action on a particular issue as tacit support. It's just such a strange point of view to interpret lack of action on a particular issue as tacit support. A coup is... not even remotely the same thing. How many coups do you know of that helped the local population? Then you will say things like: but it was 80 years ago! You're right that those examples and some others are good ones. I just also don't think the US invading is a solution that would bring long term peace and prosperity. I just also don't think the US invading is a solution that would bring long term peace and prosperity. Is it just your general assumption "Westerners weak, must fold, third-worlders stronk, they endure"?Under what conditions would you say that sanctions are OK? Under what conditions would you say that sanctions are OK? At that time, there were two strong anti-shah factions in Iran. What was left was religious fundamentalist opposition that it couldn't touch, and that the Shah himself partially relied on to stay in power. The US saw another Iran coming and quickly stepped in to destroy the popular will and install another dictator that they could control. What the USA did is the same thing it does in all of the Islamic dictatorships that it props up - it used its intelligence and its cash to help its dictator exterminate all of his secular opposition. What was left was religious fundamentalist opposition that it couldn't touch, and that the Shah himself partially relied on to stay in power. The US saw another Iran coming and quickly stepped in to destroy the popular will and install another dictator that they could control. Same thing that happened in Egypt after decades of helping Mubarak kill members of the secular opposition and destroy their organizations. The US saw another Iran coming and quickly stepped in to destroy the popular will and install another dictator that they could control. What happened is that Khomeini consolidated power after the revolution and eliminated these people. Turns out, however, that he really enjoys money. And that the US has a lot of it. HN'ers hopefully arent stupid to fall for obvious propaganda? You starve and disenfranchise the average person to make regime change by internal bad-actors more successful.Therefore many citizens protest against their conditions, not against their government. The misconstruing of this reality is intentional and an essential part of war mongering.We understand this and we are smarter than the BBC thinks we are. The misconstruing of this reality is intentional and an essential part of war mongering.We understand this and we are smarter than the BBC thinks we are. Probably the only successful use of sanctions was South Africa. They didn't, for instance, mess up the building of water infrastructure which is causing the taps to run dry in their capitol. But since that has nothing to do with sanctions, you didn't hear about it because it doesn't fit a specific political narrative.Also, apparently everyone in the world has the right to trade with the west, even if they are doing everything in their power to destroy the west.PS Iran funds the Russian war in Ukraine. PS Iran funds the Russian war in Ukraine. When will American students stage a large scale anti-government protest against the regime? Iran regime already does that, they gunned-down thousands just last month, including 100's of public hangings. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6S1AFh88PEI didn't even know about that, just that it was a beautiful place and looked it up one day to fantasize about a potential future vacation, and saw that news.So Iran may have nukes and is beating up its own people.. Maybe Trump's planning to make it a trilogy I didn't even know about that, just that it was a beautiful place and looked it up one day to fantasize about a potential future vacation, and saw that news.So Iran may have nukes and is beating up its own people.. Maybe Trump's planning to make it a trilogy So Iran may have nukes and is beating up its own people.. Maybe Trump's planning to make it a trilogy Or is it something else going on there?When China knocks at the door of New Caledonia - https://www.aspi.org.au/report/when-china-knocks-door-new-ca... When China knocks at the door of New Caledonia - https://www.aspi.org.au/report/when-china-knocks-door-new-ca... > Every single westerner pays more for things because of the instability Iran funds.This is simply a lie. Every single Westerner pays vastly more for things because they spend trillions propping up illegitimate middle eastern dictators in order to keep their natural resources cheap and accessible for sleazy western middlemen to mark up. Every single Westerner pays vastly more for things because they spend trillions propping up illegitimate middle eastern dictators in order to keep their natural resources cheap and accessible for sleazy western middlemen to mark up. Funny how they all have spoken out against the genocide in Gaza. You know when Iraq was preparing weapons of mass destruction. When Libya needed to be bombed for the good of its people so that Islamist warmongers could destroy the country. It is the same old lies.Now they want to destroy Iran. You know when Iraq was preparing weapons of mass destruction. When Libya needed to be bombed for the good of its people so that Islamist warmongers could destroy the country. It is the same old lies.Now they want to destroy Iran. It is the same old lies.Now they want to destroy Iran. So it seems nobody is stopping them from leaving if they wanted to... Which is its own sort of gullibility, readily exploited by propagandists from the other side. The opinion of its 'allies' is regularly ignored in Washington... Nope, folks, people really do not like being oppressed or lied to, and will on occasion let you know that in dramatic fashion. This is false, and even the moderators admit ithttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46396613 > Despite how dark and sinister you've made everything sound, you've mostly just rephrased what I wrote, with a lot of pejoratives. In that sense, you're right—there isn't much disagreement here. You just think we're wrong and bad to run HN the way we do, and that's fine.There's nothing wrong with someone not liking how HN is run. It's just weird to complain about it, on HN no less, when there so many other sites already run by people who share your politics, sites where you would feel welcome and you wouldn't have to invent scary stories about the ulterior motives of moderators.HN's attempt to focus makes it special, unique and valuable. Turning it into a general political free for fall like every other site would destroy that. There's nothing wrong with someone not liking how HN is run. It's just weird to complain about it, on HN no less, when there so many other sites already run by people who share your politics, sites where you would feel welcome and you wouldn't have to invent scary stories about the ulterior motives of moderators.HN's attempt to focus makes it special, unique and valuable. Turning it into a general political free for fall like every other site would destroy that. HN's attempt to focus makes it special, unique and valuable. Turning it into a general political free for fall like every other site would destroy that. 95% of the moderation at HN is just the accumulated actions of your fellow readers who upvote, downvote, flag and vouch for stories and comments.

When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox. The connector is permanently bolted on so it doesn't move even a bit. As the picture above shows, Dell uses genuine Amphenol metal fittings to make sure the 12V-2x6 connector is completely fixed in place, unable to accidentally come loose. The cable actually plugging into this female connector isn't even a native 16-pin one; rather, it's an adapter that terminates in 2x standard 8-pin PCIe plugs. Countless stories of meltdowns and even the GPU catching on fire are on record, and that's just the documented cases. It's clear that if even Dell has to make sure there's not an ounce of leeway in the 16-pin connection, it's perhaps too fragile or reactive or a connector to begin with. In a prebuilt that's otherwise completely shut off and has no see-through panels, this is even more of a fire hazard. It's a 1000W 80+ Platinum unit with standard connectors, so there's plenty of room for future upgrades. It's likely not a native ATX 3.0/3.1 power supply since it's lacking the 16-pin connectors, forcing Dell to bolt on that adapter. Speaking of which, the GPU is also a Dell-branded version of the RTX 5070 Ti, but its performance is not hindered by its OEM nature. The funny thing is that the 5070 Ti doesn't even have a large enough power appetite to really require that connector, but you can't really be too cautious. Hence, Dell has also set the GPU on a sag bracket to support its weight. The prebuilt is otherwise fitted with a Core Ultra 275K and 32 GB of DDR5-5600 RAM. Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds. Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox. Hassam Nasir is a die-hard hardware enthusiast with years of experience as a tech editor and writer, focusing on detailed CPU comparisons and general hardware news. When he's not working, you'll find him bending tubes for his ever-evolving custom water-loop gaming rig or benchmarking the latest CPUs and GPUs just for fun. Tom's Hardware is part of Future US Inc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. © Future US, Inc. Full 7th Floor, 130 West 42nd Street, New York,

‘Ask Intel' rolled out to handle warranty checks and troubleshooting as part of a broader support overhaul. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox. Now live on Intel's support site, the tool is designed to open cases, check warranty coverage, give troubleshooting guidance, and escalate issues to human agents when required. The launch of Ask Intel follows changes to the company's support model that include removing inbound public phone numbers for support in most countries and directing customers and partners to initiate cases online. Intel has also ended direct support interactions through certain social media platforms, consolidating engagement around web-based case systems and community channels. The support assistant — described by Intel VP Boji Tony as “one of the first of its kind in the semiconductor industry” on LinkedIn — is the first step in what Intel has described as a broader “digital-first experience” and is understood to be capable of guiding users through issue diagnoses, creating or updating service tickets, and providing status updates. It also notes that chat logs may be retained and processed by Intel and third-party service providers under its privacy policy — there is no opt-out for this. The assistant was built using Microsoft's Copilot Studio platform, a low-code tool designed for enterprises to create custom AI agents that connect to internal data sources and perform workflow actions. Speaking to CRN, an Intel spokesperson said that early partner response “has been positive,” and that early performance metrics show improvements in satisfaction and case resolution rates compared to prior quarters, though no specific figures were disclosed. The same spokesperson indicated that future updates will “deepen integration” with Intel.com and expand the assistant's ability to identify required driver updates and autonomously create warranty claims. By consolidating support intake through a centralized, AI-driven interface, Intel is reshaping how partners and customers interact with human agents, who now sit further downstream in the support process. Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox. Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds. Tom's Hardware is part of Future US Inc, an international media group and leading digital publisher.

I enjoyed playing a game of Chess on the 'MissPiggy' PDP-11/70 running UNIX v7. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox. There's a plethora of old but gold - some legendary - systems available, so your visit should be like entering a living museum of computing. Please be aware that choosing an option will drop you to a command prompt on the system in question. No big deal if you have experience with that particular system and are scratching a nostalgia itch. Others may find that a bit of research is required to do anything productive or fun from the blinking prompt. You have GUEST access to 28 vintage systems in the browser at https://t.co/rAFRGXH0NvExperience vintage operating systems, architectures, programming languages and GAMES.https://t.co/ihON7y2jBE#retrocomputing #vintagecomputing #retrogaming #gaming pic.twitter.com/k7XpBC4JaZFebruary 14, 2026 We've put hardware in quotations as SDF explains,” these systems are a mix of emulation, hybrid, and vintage hardware running historical operating systems.” Which systems are real, hybrid, or emulated isn't immediately clear. Here it is available at your fingertips on a 'Honeywell 6180.' Another system with spectacular lineage is the DCD 6500 (option m, page 1) NOS 1.3. Designed for scientific computing by Seymour Cray, before Cray Research was founded, the CDC 6500 was architecturally split with a single main CPU and 10 Peripheral Processors (PPs). Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox. This system is considered by some to be the Rosetta Stone of UNIX, overflowing with the DNA of this remarkable OS. I managed to play Chess on the UNIX v7 ‘MissPiggy' PDP-11/70 system. It wasn't the most fun I have had today, though. The SDF says that funding to run the museum and projects like this comes from BOOTSTRAP membership, sponsorship, and donations. So, if you enjoy this kind of project and want to encourage more, consider signing up for that. Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds. Mark Tyson is a news editor at Tom's Hardware. He enjoys covering the full breadth of PC tech; from business and semiconductor design to products approaching the edge of reason. Tom's Hardware is part of Future US Inc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. © Future US, Inc. Full 7th Floor, 130 West 42nd Street, New York,

When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox. We also analyzed the pricing of several DDR5 kits from prominent suppliers in Germany, and we can certainly say that these kits cost less than they used to cost just weeks ago. Prices hovered around €95 (minimum, green) – €100 (average, blue) through early autumn, then began climbing sharply in October, accelerating through November and peaking in early February at roughly €430 – €470 on average, with minimum prices slightly lower. ), so we decided to do our own price trend checks of five popular 32 GB DDR5-6000/6400 dual-channel kits* from renowned brands like Crucial, Corsair, G.Skill, Kingston, and Patriot in Amazon Germany using the CamelCamelCamel service. Among the 32 GB DDR5-6000/6400 kits that we checked, only two models — from Corsair and Kingston — demonstrated steep declines: from around €480 in early February to around €425 now for Corsair and from around €550 in early January to €463 at press time for Kingston. Nonetheless, all memory kits that we checked are now priced below their peaks several weeks ago. We also checked price trends for the same 32 GB DDR5 kits in the U.S., and while the prices are far from where they were in September, some of them (G.Skill, Patriot) are also showing a modest correction, though we certainly cannot say that they are heading downwards. While $400 is certainly way too high for a 32 GB DDR5-6000 memory kit in 2026, we are not going to see prices decline to normal levels due to shortages of memory chips, which is going to happen either when excessive demand for all kinds of memory drops, when new DRAM production capacities come online in late 2026 – 2027, or when DRAM makers transit to more efficient process technologies. Yet, the signs of correction clearly show that the retail DDR5 kits' prices are way too high, which affects demand significantly enough for retailers to slash their price tags. *We used the following kits for our checks, as memory prices currently depend on supply, we did not specify based on whether the kits feature AMD Expo or Intel XMP profiles: Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox. Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds. Anton Shilov is a contributing writer at Tom's Hardware. Tom's Hardware is part of Future US Inc, an international media group and leading digital publisher.

When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox. We've been waiting on Nvidia's long-rumored N1X Arm chips for a while at this point. Through several leaks and official teases, the company's ARM-based consumer SoC has excited many as it's poised to open the gates of high-end Arm performance on Windows machines. Moore Threads, the region's local darling, has just launched the "MTT AI Book" — a new thin-and-light laptop powered by an in-house "MT1000" CPU. What's special about this chip is that it's Arm-based and features 12 CPU cores clocked at 2.65 GHz (base), along with an unknown GPU that's based on its MUSA microarchitecture. That's what makes this exciting, because now we're in N1 territory. The Green Team's offering is supposed to open up AI and gaming in a whole new way for Windows-on-Arm. Meanwhile, Qualcomm is already trying with its own X series of SoCs. lineups are both technically in the spot that N1X might gun for: a powerful, portable machine with strong battery life. Moore Thread's Yangtze doesn't seem to be there yet, and that's proven by its Geekbench listing: it scores 1,127 points in the single-core test and 7,420 points in multi-core. The most modern CPU we could find around these results was the Ryzen 3 7320U at 1,112 single-threaded points; even a recent Core i3/Core Ultra 3 SKU scores more than that. Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox. Apart from its intriguing silicon, the MTT AI Book features a 2.8K 14-inch OLED display running at 120 Hz. The laptop weighs 1.5 kg despite being CNC-milled out of a "6-series" aluminum alloy. It also looks very similar to a MacBook Air and is priced at 9,999 CNY on JD.com, or about $1,447 USD. We hope to see more mainstream media coverage of this device with independent reviews that test the Arm-based SoC's capability. This was just one Geekbench listing, so there's still a chance that with the right drivers and firmware tuning, the MTT AI Book can deliver better performance. It's aimed at AI applications, though, so we may not be that impressed by its graphical prowess when it surfaces. Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds. Hassam Nasir is a die-hard hardware enthusiast with years of experience as a tech editor and writer, focusing on detailed CPU comparisons and general hardware news. When he's not working, you'll find him bending tubes for his ever-evolving custom water-loop gaming rig or benchmarking the latest CPUs and GPUs just for fun. Tom's Hardware is part of Future US Inc, an international media group and leading digital publisher.

Save up to $680 on your pass with Super Early Bird rates. Like Apple's App Store, alternative app marketplaces on allow for easy access to a wider world of apps on Apple devices, but instead of the apps going through Apple's App Review process, the apps on these third-party marketplaces have to go through a notarization process to ensure they meet some “baseline platform integrity standards,” Apple says — like being malware-free. However, each store can review and approve apps according to its own policies. The stores are also responsible for any matters relating to support and refunds, not Apple. This includes paying a new Core Technology Fee of €0.50 for each first annual install of their marketplace app, even before the threshold of 1 million installs is met, which is the bar for other EU apps distributed under Apple's DMA business terms. Beyond the EU, other markets are experimenting with alternative app stores, as well, like Japan. In December 2025, Apple announced its compliance with the Mobile Software Competition Act (MSCA), which gives developers new options to distribute apps and process payments outside of Apple's App Store. Below is a list of the alternative app stores iPhone users in these markets can try today. The open source app store will allow independent developers to distribute their apps alongside the apps from AltStore's makers, Delta, and a clipboard manager, called Clip. Unlike Apple's App Store, AltStore apps are self-hosted by the developer. Some popular apps that users are adding include the virtual machine app UTM, which lets you run Windows and other software on iOS or iPad; OldOS, a re-creation of iOS 4 that's built in SwiftUI; Kotoba, the iOS dictionary available as a stand-alone app; torrenting app iTorrent; qBittorrent remote client for iOS devices called qBitControl; and social discovery platform PeopleDrop. Similar to its other subscription offerings, the now-shuttered app store had included dozens of apps under a single recurring subscription price, and the number of apps grew over time. The apps were free from in-app purchases or ads and are generally considered high quality. However, it didn't include big-name apps like Facebook, Uber, Netflix, and others. Fortnite maker Epic Games launched its alternative iOS app store in the EU in August 2024, allowing users to download games, including its own Fortnite and others like Rocket League Sideswipe and Fall Guys, with more to come. The company said it's also bringing its games to other alternative app stores, including AltStore PAL, which it's now supporting via a grant, as well as Aptoide's iOS store in the EU and ONE Store on Android. The move to launch Fortnite in alternative iOS marketplaces comes more than four years after Apple removed the game from its App Store over policy violations, ahead of Epic's legal challenge to the alleged App Store monopoly. While U.S. courts decided that Apple was not engaged in antitrust behavior, the lawsuit did pave the way for developers to link to their own websites for a reduced commission. The company, already known for its Google Play alternative, says it scans the apps to ensure they are safe to download and install. As a free-to-use store, Aptoide doesn't charge its users to cover its Core Technology Fee paid to Apple, but takes a 10% to 20% commission on in-app purchases on iOS, depending on whether they were generated by the marketplace or not. A B2B-focused app store, the Mobivention marketplace allows EU companies to distribute their internal apps that are used by employees, but can't — or shouldn't — be published in Apple's App Store. The company also offers the development of a customized app marketplace for companies that want to offer employees their own app store just for their corporate apps. Last March, Skich announced the launch of an alternative app store for EU users, which differentiates itself by offering a Tinder-like interface for app discovery. That is, users swipe right to “match” with apps they might enjoy. They can also create playlists and see what apps their friends are playing. Onside is an alternative iOS app store available in both the EU and, now, Japan, as of February 17, 2026, thanks to the new regulations. The company promises it will charge developers lower rates while still offering security, including keeping payment information private. For consumers, Onside touts a range of top apps and exclusives that can't be found on other marketplaces within a familiar interface that includes traditional app store features, like editorial collections, ratings and reviews, and automatic updates. Hear from 250+ tech leaders, dive into 200+ sessions, and explore 300+ startups building what's next. Sam Altman would like to remind you that humans use a lot of energy, too Great news for xAI: Grok is now pretty good at answering questions about Baldur's Gate FBI says ATM ‘jackpotting' attacks are on the rise, and netting hackers millions in stolen cash A startup called Germ becomes the first private messenger that launches directly from Bluesky's app Meta's own research found parental supervision doesn't really help curb teens' compulsive social media use

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman says the giant rocket set to send four astronauts around the moon for the history-making Artemis 2 mission must be rolled back from its launch pad to troubleshoot a technical problem. “I understand people are disappointed by this development,” Isaacman said in a posting to X. “That disappointment is felt most by the team at NASA, who have been working tirelessly to prepare for this great endeavor.” The technical issue cropped up just days after a successful launch-pad rehearsal at NASA's Kennedy Space Center. “This occurred during a routine operation to repressurize the system.” Isaacman said the helium pressurization system worked correctly during this week's wet dress rehearsal. For what it's worth, a problem with a helium valve cropped up during preparations for the uncrewed Artemis 1 round-the-moon mission in 2022, leading NASA managers to take corrective actions. Several companies with a presence in the Seattle area are banking on Artemis' success. For example, a facility in Redmond operated by L3Harris (previously known as Aerojet Rocketdyne) builds thrusters for the Orion spacecraft and is already working ahead on the Artemis 8 mission. And Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin space venture, based in Kent, is developing a Blue Moon lander that's meant to put Artemis crews on the lunar surface starting in 2030. Blue Origin's New Glenn rocket is expected to send an uncrewed cargo version of its lander to the moon sometime in the next few months. Click for more about underwritten and sponsored content on GeekWire. Have a scoop that you'd like GeekWire to cover? NASA completes a smooth rehearsal for historic Artemis 2 moon launch