Voluntarily choosing to not spend money in X related orgs ≠ using services that use X related orgs. As a consumer, our options to vote with our dollar is limited, but that doesn't make it pointless. Real life is not binary and the sentiment that one cannot criticize a system which they partake in is a thought terminating cliche. One only needs to ask "for who does this reflexive thought terminating cliche benefit the most" to find the lede.

Thanks for that but it's unrelated to what the OP said which was "I find it unconscionable to do business with someone who would do business with Elon.".

Having an X/Twitter account is doing business with Elon. You could say only paid X accounts qualify for this, but I would imagine most brands have paid accounts.

YCombinator has an X account. I suspect the OP is already asking for his Hacker News account to be deleted.

Why engage at all if you're going to engage like this?

Why post links to sites that harbor communist symbols? It is illegal in much of the Europe.

a platform wide ad hominem? where is your hacker curiosity?

I hate to tell you this, but by saying things like this, you are not much better than the authoritarians/totalitarians you seem to despise.

I do understand where the revulsion comes from, however. My own family, on my mother's side, during WW2, was reduced in size. Four out of every ten were liquidated by the occupying Nazis, and then two out of every ten (or one out of every three, if you adjust the denominator) were liquidated by the triumphant communists (to say nothing of battlefield deaths in-between, and the blanket dispossession that those left alive experienced).

That said, I do think that ideas and ideologies should be evaluated on their own merits, and should not be reactively shunned, because of an atrocity that happened generations ago. The reality, is that good ideas get hijacked and used by opportunists to benefit themselves at the expense of their neighbors. By being so vehemently against an _idea_, you create new opportunities for these kinds of pathological opportunists -- you create an entirely new category of scapegoats, whose pleas and screams and tears you can ignore, while they get dragged away, and separated from their homes and their families and their friends.

I'm not saying that you should cuddle up next to a communist, but I am saying that you should evaluate all people and communities in a nuanced and thoughtful way, befitting a member of _this_ community of absolute oddballs.

co-opted? The last paragraph of the article suggests this was quite literally the artist's goal:

> “One of the reasons Joe is so insistent that every single building is here is because he would never want someone to come and see it and not be able to find where they live and see their story,” Sherman tells Artnet.

Its not like they broke into his shop and shared his model with the world before he could, it is currently an exhibition at the Museum of the City of New York.

Nor is it nonsense to acknowledge how cool it is to recognize your own building or that he was able to accomplish the project without expensive materials. Spew is also quite the verb to use. What an all-around unpleasant comment.

> I'm not saying they did. I'm saying what they said was a load of rubbish.

I disagree. Employees often take some form of "ownership" over their buildings, especially in long term and public education facing facilities like museums. It isn't difficult to understand why they said "there is our museum". Human language connotes ideas as often as it does specifics, and there is nothing rubbish about that.

As others said: practice. Practice outside pixel art too. Pixel art can be compared to haikus: a set of restrictions which makes every artistic decision more influential than an oil painting on canvas or a 200 page novel. Learning on hard mode is not always the right path.

Really enjoyed the design/theme of this site!

Thank you very much for saying that, it's taken me many iterations to create something I generally assumed few others than me would ever enjoy haha.

MICE is the acronym for categorizing the common motivations for espionage:

M - Money/Greed

I - Ideology/Divided Loyalty

C - Coercion/Compromise

E - Ego

Sometimes, I think we look at people who are this wealthy and think they should be immune to these kinds of shenanigans, but I'd wager that the -ICE becomes even easier to exploit in people once they no longer need money, if they were already susceptible to it to begin with.

You have to be greed motivated to become wealthy at all. People don't get there by being satisfied with a few million, there's a selection effect.

I wonder which of these the intelligence services prefer. Every one of them has their own advantages and drawbacks in terms of predictability, reliability, long term stability and chances of double dipping/playing both sides.

Most of these assets are not super spies. They have access to one particular type of information and the adversary squeezes all they can until all the juice is gone. Sophisticated espionage and double agents only exist in le Carre novels now.

This is an unfair characterization and is against the HN guidelines. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I don't think voting with your wallet constitutes virtue signaling, especially at a time when end user boycotting is one of the universally known methods of protest.

I am a pragmatist so maybe I will never understand this line of thinking. But in my mind, there are no perfect options, including doing nothing.

By doing nothing, you are allowing a malicious actor to buy the domain. In fact I am sure they would love for everyone else to be paralyzed by purity tests for a $1 domain.

All things being equal, yeah don’t buy a .ru domain. But they are not equal.

Short form content is a medium that isn't going away. Short form content is not inherently harmful, although short form content replacing or displacing other important mediums arguably is. When I think about the issues stemming from short form content, I don't think about the inherent medium, I think about the providers and their capabilities to use the sum of all consumed content by a user in the name of a ulterior motive at scale. While I haven't investigated it too deeply, Loops seems to be an effort in patching that. Is your objection in the marketing language or in the inherent technology?

Short form user generated content being served in our faces in a constant and ever updating feed fucks up our brains. It does not matter if it's proprietary or FOSS or non profit.

>Is your objection in the marketing language or in the inherent technology?

I think saying it's like an open source slot machine is pretty much self-explanatory