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

This is also mentioned in the article that you linked:

> In April 2016, during UN-brokered peace talks in Kuwait, Houthi representatives gave the United States a "sincere apology" for the "Death to America" slogan, claiming that the slogan was used for "domestic consumption as a means to attract support in the streets and create a common cause between their supporters to keep them united."

> During the Red Sea crisis, Houthi supporters waved the flag of Palestine every Friday during anti-Gaza genocide and anti-western attacks on Yemen demonstrations, alongside the slogan and flag of Yemen. A new Houthi slogan appeared after the group's re-designation as a terrorist organisation: "America is the mother of terrorism" set on a red background.


> A new Houthi slogan appeared after the group's re-designation as a terrorist organisation: "America is the mother of terrorism" set on a red background.

Well, they're not wrong.


They are wrong. Muhammad's terror campaigns predate the US by more than a thousand years.


"is the mother", not "was the mother"

If you take this all the way back to ancient history, nobody will be happy with the examples we drum up.


I agree with you, but that also means that no one can claim to be a parent of terrorism. It is just one long series of bastards from the eve of civilization up.


Calling Muhammad a terrorist is really a special amount of Islamophobia.


Freedom of religion is also freedom from religion and a right to be disgusted by particular religious figures. No one owes even an ounce of respect to any bearded prophet out there, this is literally the essence of a liberal society: the very absence of blasphemy (that you recast as "Islamophobia", same thing under a different name, only sounds more modern) as a concept.

Muhammad had between 400 and 900 POWs of the Banu Quraish tribe beheaded. Not calling this terrorism means twisting the very meaning of terrorism into pretzels.


Executing captured combatants was not atypical for the time period.

I doubt you'll find many historians calling the Massacre at Verden terrorism, for instance, despite executing 4500 prisoners.


The fact that it used to be somewhat more typical (though not everyday occurrence) does not make it less of terrorism. That definition does not depend on frequency of an event. It depends on the use of terror to achieve political means, and a mass beheading definitely tells the vanquished people that from now they'd rather obey their new overlords.

It is a matter of linguistic taste if we use such word in medieval context, but the principle is the same as in modern terrorism, and jihadists of the 21st century explicitly say that they are motivated and inspired by Muhammad's acts like this one.


They did that just as they began the starvation siege of Taiz.


It would be interesting to compare the costs of a top of the line machine every decade or so. Costs were steadily decreasing until recently.


John Dvorak said many, many decades ago (80s/90s) that the computer you want will always cost $3000. That statement has been more/less true for some time periods than others, but with some wiggle room I’ve found it to be accurate enough.

Care to guess the approximate price of the MBP I bought earlier this year?


My heavily-upgraded M1 Max came in slightly over that when I got it five years ago. (Still going very, very strong.)

This new Studio? Can't find a config under $5k I'd bother with. But for the MBPs that number still mostly tracks for the average Pro user. (I buy large and run it into the ground so long I mistake the ground for the computer's remains.)


I got a 64GB M1 Max four years ago or so, used. Felt like a ridiculous overspend at the time, but I'm sure smug about it now.


I buy large and run it into the ground so long I mistake the ground for the computer's remains.

My still-being-used 2012 MBP (which cost me about $3K) says, “hi”.

And, as you point out, the new computers I want blow Dvorak’s hypothesis out of the water. Never would I have guessed 30 years ago that Dvorak would be wrong the other direction on price.


I bought my refurbished M3 Max MBP with 64 GB for $3k a couple of years ago. Before Ethan I never spent more than $2k for a computer.


The “spend” and “want” number might differ, depending on one’s financial state. I know I’ve purchased plenty for less than $3K. But the one I wanted…


I'm old and established (after spending most of my life not), but ya, I get what you are saying. It was a huge leap for me to spend $3k on a laptop.

Before local LLMs became a thing, I had completely lost interest in buying anything but the cheapest laptop. It felt like "personal computing" was a solved problem. But...it actually isn't, and this is exciting.


They still are, if what you want is roughly the same as the prior generations capability with some uplift (making then number up, but say 20% faster or more ram or whatever).

What is changing is that there genuine demand for more capabilities disproportionate to the cost decrease curve. Fab demand and supply constraints have slowed or even reversed some cost decreases - but that is still getting absorbed by the overall systems costs when you are looking at things like laptops. If you all you want is the last decades demand to browse the web and use office - things are cheaper than ever.


Interestingly, from the article you linked:

> The quote "For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law." (Spanish: Para mis amigos, todo; para mis enemigos, la ley) is often attributed to Benavides, although other sources also attribute it to other Latin American heads of state, such as Benito Juárez, Juan Perón, Getulio Vargas, or Juscelino Kubitschek.


* https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/12172510-for-my-friends-eve...

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

At least it's not Abraham Lincoln or Albert Einstein. semi-/s For contentions ones I do a search, especially https://quoteinvestigator.com


> Is all of this arbitrary?

You’re describing language.


> It was also perplexing when Iran was shooting missiles at their allies, until you realize they aren't rational humans.

Ah yes, the classic “my enemies are ontologically evil” gambit.


What is your definition of speech? It seems like you are defining it literally.


> NemoClaw is expected to be officially unveiled at NVIDIA's annual developer conference, GTC 2026, scheduled for mid-March 2026. NVIDIA has been actively presenting the platform to enterprise software companies ahead of the public announcement.

Guess we will find out.


> But this rant's "solution", which seems to be "let's empower the police state to do more excesses" - yeah, no.

What led you to believe this is the solution presented in the article? Much less try to pass those statements off as quoting or paraphrasing.

> Maybe let's just ensure that everyone gets the same due process?

That is the actual solution presented in the last two sections of the article.


Have a link to your blog?



It sounds objective to claim a reasonable person would not kill a person because they felt scared. Based on the video footage[0], a reasonable person would be able to tell that woman presented no threat. Even if you argue shooting her in the leg because he was scared, it is nearly impossible to claim he was still scared and he has stalked her around her car and then shot her five more times. That is objectively, an unreasonable response to being scared when it’s apparent the woman was not endangering his life.

[0]: https://youtu.be/RSlOY39ynaY


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

Search: