Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | andyjohnson0's commentslogin

Report Card:

USA, #1 world power, nukes etc, failed to win. Iranian regime wasn't destroyed, and the HE uranium is still there. Two carrier battle groups weren't enough to re-open the straits. Burned $45bn and achieved nothing much.

Iran, fourth-rate regional power, failed to lose. Regime still in power, and still has its HE uranium. Oil infrastructure intact. Military knocked-about a bit, but still capable of controlling the straits and bringing in the $$$. They get to keep brutalising their frightened population.

Israel, premium regional power, suddenly all on its own running a hot, two-front war with no easy exit because Trump cut and ran. Netanyahu is probably toast in the upcoming elections, which means hes going to jail for all the corruption stuff.

China, mega military power, picked the right side and comes out of it clean. Looks like a model, dependable global citizen. Access to the oil without paying the $2m/boat straits fee. Didn't blow $45bn on nothing.

Russia, third-rate power on the way down, made some roubles on the oil price thing, but still has all the same problems as before. Meatgrinder war. Economic and demographic collapse still imminent. Global pariah, except for Orban and Erdoğan and the Belarus guy. Putin's getting pretty old.

EU+UK basically sat it out. Sensible. Much economic damage though.

Thousands of dead/wounded/traumatised adults and children -- a running sore that shames us all. And deep, deep anger for multiple generations. Plus all the victims of the Gaza and Lebanon wars. Revenge, etc.

----

Officially its a ceasefire, but everyone knows the US won't restart after this. Its six months to the mid-terms, and the genius orange guy in Washington has other things on his mind. And Epstein is still hanging around like a bad smell. What to try next?


He had the same dead look as he does today.

“He wouldn’t lie to me.” - American President

I kind of agree that its not eithet/or, but:

> and another group who earns less, works hard, but does something they find very meaningful and important to their ethics

It is very rare, in my experience, to find this in tech careers. I don't know why - perhaps its something structural about the uses to which technology is put, and the disconnect with personal values and/or work ethic.


1. In tech, large companies tend to pay much better, which means that people flock there. In a large company you have little control over your work and you simply have to do what your boss tells you to do whether you agree with it or not. This quickly demotivates anyone who has any creativity.

2. Tech work is very lonely while requiring communication skills. You sit there all day long staring at the screen, once in a while replying to official-sounding Slack messages from people you wouldn't recognize in real life. In contrast, there are jobs where you're in a small group, and while your hands are busy, there are endless opportunities for conversation.

3. Your effort has zero correlation with reward - the effects of your work are often extremely abstract, especially if you're doing background work that doesn't pump out features, and managers rarely reward effort with salary bumps.


Sure, screen time. But I am also deeply tired of just keeping things charged. Some of my stuff insists on special usb cables - because those cables contain chips that mediate between the <thing> and its charger. Its exhausting.

Yeah, it's something I think about a lot.

I have a smartwatch, I like it just fine, but I kind of think that smartwatches are actually pretty bad at being a watch. I had a Casio G-Shock for about a decade that I wore nearly every day [1], and I never had to change the battery. My Garmin Instinct Crossover, which is considered to have very good battery life, has to be charged every two weeks, which despite that seeming like a long time, I manage to forget about it every time until the battery is dead.

[1] I have a few fancy wind-up watches I wear to formal occasions.


I’m not willing to settle for less than the Pebble Time Steel’s week that it holds a charge for nowadays. I think that is about fine for me.

Yeah, I mean, the Instinct Crossover has been my favorite smartwatch that I've used, and two weeks is a decent lifespan for these things, but I do kind of miss never having to worry about charging it.

Does your physical environment change that much that it requires cognitive load for you to decide on what cables to use? For myself, I bought two wireless charge "base" stations that handle my spouse's and my phone/watch/airpods. That's it. One place, bedside, where I need to put things.

Sure, for new equipment or in a pinch (that becomes cumbersome) but even traveling, you know what equipment you have, charge rate and things needing to get charged from what connector type. So you purchase the variants that you need.


They didn't repatriate the gold in the sense of physically moving it from the US to France. Instead, they sold the gold that was held in the US and used the money raised to buy gold from other sources, which is held in France.

Different gold, and two financial transactions, accounts for the financial gain.


Yes but the article implies that they somehow made 15B in profit by selling the gold in US and buying an equivalent amount which can’t be the case.

What happened was that

a) they bought the gold long time ago for basically nothing and had it on their books valued at basically nothing

b) they sold it now (in the US) for around $15b and thus for accounting purposes realised a $15b gain

c) they bought it back (in France) for around $15b and will have it on the book now valued at $15b.

The fact that the gold price rose over the course of b) selling and c) buying doesn't matter (despite what the article implies). That the gold price rose between a) the original purchase and now b)c), that's what resulted in the profit.


> Just looks like the Moon.

It is the moon.

> Also didn't realize we could capture an image like this in what I assumed was total darkness.

The "Dark Side of the Moon" is a misnomer. It gets as much light as the side we can see.


It works if you invert it too:

"For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law.”

- Óscar Benavides


Reading the "endgame" section, and I feel that some serious thought ahould be given to what the replicator colony will do after it has finished dismantling Mercury.

This reads like it was written by the Cleverest Person in the Room. I have to use Azure Devops at work, and some of the critique of Azure rings true for me, but the author-centric presentation was quite off-putting.

Sorry you felt like that.

> Fernandez, who more than two decades ago published a four-CD audio compendium of hundreds of recordings from around the world called the Conet Project. It's considered the Bible for numbers-station enthusiasts.

The Conet Project is an interesting listen -- very analogue, Cold War-ish, and a bit sinister. Seems to be available on the Internet Archive at https://archive.org/details/The-Conet-Project


Fans of the band Wilco will recognize one of the Conet Project's recordings as the source of the woman repeating "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot" in the song "Poor Places" from the eponymous album. Wilco failed to license the sample and the resulting lawsuit gave the Conet Project a portion of Wilco's royalties on that track.

Why would they need to license the sample? You don't own the copyright for something just because you recorded it off the radio, that's silly. I looked it up and the station in question was operated by the Israeli government, so presumably they would be due the royalties. https://priyom.org/number-stations/english/e10

This reminds me of Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel, which established that copying someone's photograph of a public domain painting is not a copyright violation, as the photograph is not copyrightable under US law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel....


The recording of a public performance can be copyrighted.

Sure, but there's an element of creativity there (what parts to focus on, how much you zoom in, how closely you follow the motion) vs. simply turning a radio on and pressing record, with the intention of producing a 1:1 recording of what's being broadcast. All the creative parts of the Conet Project recording (the message to broadcast, the way it's formatted, the voice samples used, etc) were done by the Israeli government, not the Conet Project.

TLDR: you're basically applying the US standard to something that has been released worldwide, and US intellectual property law is known to be one of the most lax when dealing on derivatives (Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co.). Without saying that the original broadcaster/s do not held any copyright (because, of course, there is a reasonable claim for their copyright), there are two good candidates for the Conet Project's case, both hinging on European IP laws.

The first one is the "sweat of the brow" concept, where effort (not originality, or at least not significant originality) is the determiner. Because this was released in 2001, most European jurisdictions (like Britain's "skill and labour" and Germany's Leistungsschutzrecht) still had this concept. Because the collaborators of the Conet Project did exert significant effort here (they didn't just tune, but significantly denoised and made it reasonably intelligible), it could be argued that they held a new copyright on these works. New laws now significantly tilt towards the creativity/originality concept, but this is usually not a retroactive claim.

The second claim (and the reason that I said IP laws, not specifically copyright laws) is that Europe (incl. UK and Russia) has database rights which does not exist under US law (again, Feist v. RTS). Even if the Conet Project release is ineligible for copyright in most European jurisdictions (and I doubt it due to the non-retroactivity of these laws), they can still point out that the curation of the work provided for enforcement of database rights.

There is actually a third claim (although weak), based on the first publication of a recording of a performance (phonogram rights). This also exists under US laws, although I will be sure that the first "publication" is the broadcast, especially if it was also aimed in the US. (This is the reason why "sampling" some music is considered an IP infringement.)

P.S. If you think that US IP laws are bonkers, try to navigate European IP laws (it's not even harmonized inside EU). There's even a "Copyright in Typographical Arrangement" (UK) where even assuming that the text itself is not copyright, scanning the page might put you into a lawsuit (https://cdn.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/copyright-typo...)


Thanks for that, I love this album and never knew that info

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

Search: