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

why?

/me waves hands around wildly

This admin is constantly doing illegal things and when challenged in court has over a 70% loss rate.


Nothing to hide? Apparently you can be labeled a domestic terrorist for denouncing ICE. Who knows what the next president will escalate to terror. Maybe tofu will be too woke. Congrats on becoming the 1 more out of 100 caught, you domestic terrorist you.


You can reduce the transactions with payment providers. Instead of money exchanging from contributor to maintainer, have a token exchange. Contributors fund tokens with real money, and pull requests cost and refund tokens. Like an escrow account. But the money never goes to the target system. There are no perverse incentives to steal tokens. If you get a reputation of not refunding tokens (which have no value to a maintainer), then contributors will dry up.

"TrustTokens" or "EscrowTokens"


Probably just making it non refundable works almost as well (since time really is expended reading it), without the hassle of spinning up an intermediary layer blockchain.


"Data over dogma." Dr. Dan McClellen is an engaging source for historically accurate interpretations and understandings of the bible. I encourage others to check his content out.


source:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2026/jan/28/footag...

What I can tell is ICE starts to open a door, and a clerk immediately stops them and ICE shut the door a second later. The clerk opens the door to further tell them they are not allowed to enter. The ICE person states they will not try to enter and if the clerk touches them, they will yank the person out of the building. ICE then leaves.

I'm not ok with what ICE has been doing. But, it feels like a bit of a stretch to call this threatening staff, to me. Saying what will happen if the other party escalates feels like a different axis than threatening. Def taken as another data point in a sea of overreach however.


> The ICE person states they will not try to enter and if the clerk touches them, they will yank the person out of the building.

I'm not sure what the agent has to do to qualify as a threat to you, but at the very least this is thuggish behavior. The embassy is Ecuadorean sovereign territory where the staff have immunity from US laws, threatening to yank someone out of there is like extracting someone from Ecuador by force. It's highly offensive.

If you tried that at a US embassy you'd probably be shot, but it's generally impossible because they are all heavily secured and fortified.


I don't think that it's reasonable to see this behavior as anything but threatening given the location and the ample context provided by ICE's behavior up to this point.

> The ICE person states they will not try to enter and if the clerk touches them, they will yank the person out of the building.

Does that not amount to a threat?

It sounds as though most of these agents are poorly trained at best. https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/ice-unloads

> “The brand new agents are idiots,” an experienced ICE agent assigned to homeland security investigations told me.

> The new ICE officer continued: “I thought federal agents were supposed to be clean cut but some of them pass around a flask as we are watching a suspect,” observing as well that the new guys “have some weird tattoos.”


> Does that not amount to a threat?

"If you touch me, I'll break your jaw" has been ruled by courts to not be a threat.


If it were said by a masked agent who is part of a group of rampaging thugs murdering bystanders in the street, I would see it as a threat.


Firehawks spread fire to scare out game; that count?

https://wildlife.org/australian-firehawks-use-fire-to-catch-...


Did you drop a sarcasm tag? Anyone can make a fire on a plane as they allow lighters on a plane, and batteries, and any number of flammable objects. None of that is facing any scrutiny nor stopping crazy people from being crazy.


Ironically, both India and China forbid lighters on planes. Famously you see a collection of them around the bins just outside the airport as all the smokers leave them for others.


"Take a lighter, leave a lighter" - Guess you can just pick up one on your way back out when you return home!


Yes it's possible to make a fire on a plane, but it would be even easier to cause a big fire if there was zero monitoring of bags. As flawed as airport security is, it should generally catch things like somebody trying to get a carry-on bag full of gasoline or extremely large lithium-ion batteries on board.

I take security that catches 50 or even 20% of threats any day over 0 security.


I've heard that cell phones often catch fire on planes, and the crews know how to deal with that. I guess they have to because the odds of one going up are pretty good across so many flights.


It's easier to deal if it's in carry on bag. This is why batteries are forbidden in checked luggage. Once it all burns the airplane has got to land asap and it's an emergency.

My checked luggage did not pass xray multiple times because they detected powerbanks. I had to come back and take it out. However it also did pass xray a couple times with powerbanks so it's not a reliable system.


Alternatively, I checked 3-4 20k mAh powerbanks in my luggage on my flight to Utah and it never got flagged or detected.


like yes I pointed out it doesn't always work. sometimes I don't even know if anybody is watching the screen


Flammable liquid and all high temperature lighters are forbidden, as are Li-ion batteries over 100kWh.


You can buy up to 5L up to 70% alcohol after security, no? Sounds pretty flammable


Can get that up to 99% with the right salts and some vigorous shaking.


s/100kWh/100Wh/

But you can still have multiple batteries (I think up to 10 or so) as long as each individual one is less than 100Wh.


> Well at least be honest that these things are organized professionally and funded with tens of millions of dollars

source? best I see from the linked fox news article is less than $8M. Note, we have customers sending marketing email and sms spending more than this and they are not getting the same attention No Kings did.

> though Soros' foundations have awarded grants to Indivisible every year since the organization's conception in 2017. In total, the Open Society Foundations have awarded $7.61 million in grants to the group behind the "No Kings" protest [1]

1: this is the direct source that the abc article was referencing: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/soros-foundation-helping-fu...


It's an older code, but it checks out


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

Search: