HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | choo-t's commentslogin

> By Hamas' own military figure pre-war and Israel's war assessments, up to half could be non-civilian.

No a single estimation are near your number : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_war#Civ...

Most are about 80 to 90% civilian killed.


You are quoting Wikipedia which quotes an article by the Guardian that the IDF had identified ~9000 Hamas/PIJ casualties by name. It is a logical fallacy to then assume the remainder are not part of Hamas/PIJ. Further, identifying adversary combatant deaths by name is an extraordinary high standard for warfare and is applied to no other conflict on earth.

Oh boy, more disinformation and "we do this better than any other military" bullshit.

First, the article cite multiple estimations by different source.

Second, there is no logical fallacy, you on the other hand are trying to frame that unidentified body (by Israel) could be majority of combatants, disregarding that nothing prove this and that lot of them are women and children.

Third, you are only quoting IDF number and no other third party, this only quoting the perpetrator to defend its body count


Food production was target, even in different part of Palestine (west bank).

Farmers were killed, even in different part of Palestine.

Killing farmers have nothing to do with the definition of genocide.


No link to a source ?

Anyway, IDF as ≈170k active duty personnel and 465k reservists[1]. Literally a different order of magnitude. Add to it the vast different of resources, access to an air force and nuclear weapons and it become even more clearer that there is no comparison possible.

(And comparing personnel count to the USA is laughable as it is vastly different military type. Both a fighter jet pilot and a foot soldier count as one personnel, but it's neither the same force projection nor the same investment of civilians working for the war machine).

1: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/graphics/2023/10/14/idf-explai...


> you have to look at how Oct 7 shaped Israeli society these last 3 years.

Counterpoint, a more passive turn of phrase is more fitting: How Israeli society was shaped around oct 7.

The event doesn't shape society by itself, political and media response/interest shape the society.


Most P2P video system make you seed only the video you started watching, thus making the point about transmitting csam moot.

If I search for The Best of Both Worlds but open the video to find it's csam and not st:tng then I've unwittingly started watching, and thus potentially seeding, the csam.

But even simple checks like the number of seeders on a torrent will defeat a vast majority of this problem. I would not expect a torrent with 1k seeders to be csam for e.g.

I understand the worry, and it is a difficult problem worth thought but the alarmist virtue signalling helps absolutely no one, victims included.


That might work for popular culture. It's probably a good strategy if you want to watch the latest superhero movie.

I listen to the Butthole Surfers and Amboog-a-Lard - I'm willing to bet a good portion of their material has less seeders than much illegal content do.


Are you not describing perfect as the enemy of good?

A product doesn't need to serve EVERY human on earths needs, just enough of them that it can become large enough that established legacy solutions need to adapt.

I get why you might think this wouldn't be a fit for YOU but rather than argue against it from a niche viewpoint instead maybe look at how if it did exist it could be good for many.


That's pretty unlikely. P2P can have moderation systems. Also that can be solved by only seeding videos you kept watching.

Is that actually done in practice?

There's no popular peer to peer video system in the first place so uh not yet?

Peertube has moderation.



They could have :

• etch the ram around on the board itself.

• provide a pre-RMA check so user can verify if their unit is genuine (serial number linked to ram amount)

• void warranty on resoldered board.


Wikipedia predates Youtube by five years.

Unpaid cooperation of human to generate knowledge or entertainment predates YouTube by tens of thousands years.


YouTube is part of Alphabet, one of the biggest corporations in the world. It can easily afford to pay people. It isn't co-operation, it's a corporation which takes the work of other people and makes lots of money off them, without paying them properly (or at all in many cases). Wikipedia's content is used by LLMs and other such outlets who also profit off unpaid labour.

It is a basic right of people to be able to afford to live. It's easy to work for free when you have family money but you cannot support yourself when you don't.


> I know a few. They're called "normal people who don't suffer from crippling tech libertarianism" and there's more of them than of you.

They voted for it or you assume they don't mind it existing?


They accept it as a tradeoff. They vote for things like "less crime" or "our children don't access things that are bad for them".

> For any parent with a child, it goes the other way, but with a slightly different mechanic. There is an effect on the adult, but it is so minor compared to the effect on children, that the proportionality causes you to dismiss the minor inconvenience it poses to adults, since you are focusing on the question of what happens to children.

Can you fathom that childhood is only tiny part of everyone life, and negative impacts on adults are, mathematically, bigger in anyone's life than same impact on children?

It get even tinier if you factor that the slice of life were someone is old enough to use Claude, willing to do so and minor at the same time is really small.

Even more if you try to articulate how Claude could be more harmful to an educated minor than any other activities.


> Can you fathom that childhood is only tiny part of everyone life...

The loudest parents absolutely cannot. I don't know if this is because of the sleep-deprivation-induced brain damage that caring for a tiny human for their first year or so gives you or what, but there are some very loud, very neurotic people out there who appear to have forgetten that humans live for sixty to a hundred years.

Childhood is a tiny slice of life and if these folks had the time and ability to sit down and think very clearly and carefully, they'd see that making it so much harder for parents, relatives, and authority figures to get away with child abuse -sexual or otherwise- does far more to keep minors safe than removing those minors' ability to talk to adult strangers.

Hell, being able to talk to adult strangers is one way minors can both realize that they're being abused and find a way to get out of that abusive situation. To borrow a dark meme, it's hard to know that Penis Inspection Time isn't a legitimate activity when you can't talk to anyone who knows better.


Counterargument, everyone lived a childhood, but not everyone lives adulthood, so childhood affects more people. Also related, childhood is foundational, what happens in childhood forms who you are as an adult, so issues in childhood affect you as an adult too.


There's a lot of myopic comments about children on HN, but this argument is so insane it's worth pointing out.

You're essentially arguing to poison a well instead of inconveniencing yourself. You have agency, you're allegedly intelligent. But it sounds like you're so dependent on Claude you can't even conceive of using an alternative.

There are NUMEROUS alternatives available. If you lack the agency to subvert the check or implement an alternative that's on you.

A minor that's educated enough to build their own is a different topic, but so many unmotivated or uniformed humans would quit if Claude simply didn't work. The barrier to entry is supposed to be the validation of comprehension.


> But it sounds like you're so dependent on Claude you can't even conceive of using an alternative.

I don't use Claude whatsoever.

> There are NUMEROUS alternatives available. If you lack the agency to subvert the check or implement an alternative that's on you.

I know there is, but I also know this trend of age verification bullshit is coming for everything, and that's a problem.


Ultimately it will be ID verification. How else are you going to check age?

Once everyone is used to handing over an ID to use AI, eventually it will be restricted to a small group. If you get on the naughty list you will be banned from ever doing knowledge work again.


Sure, but for all that short duration, childhood age is foundational and happens to effectively guide just about everything that follows;p


Of course, but it's also, with teenage years, the best years to learn tools.


Everything that happens in childhood affects everything after that, you know. Children aren't a separate class of people from adults. People are children, and then they are adults.


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

Search: