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

Yeah so far there's not enough nuance in the discussion.

I also like to separate between 1) solvable vs unsolvable problems: e.g. you cannot solve a deceased relative.

Also 2) first time vs multiple repeat problems

If find it very irritate someone is venting to me repeatedly about solvable problems.

But if it's a 1 time unsolvable problem, then it's important to be in listening mode.


You are missing the point, though. The complainer decides whether it's a solvable problem or not, not the listener. So "I'll listen if it's unsolvable (to me)" is a non-starter.

Well I decide if it’s annoying to me and I’m going to tolerate it or lend support.

> it is a disastrously poor use of resources

For it to be a poor use of resources, you have to have some goal you are optimizing against.

And I think you'll come to find that the assumed goal in your head is not one that's widely shared across what people in society actually want.

Okay, maybe the digital ad is a waste of resources. But is it any more of a waste than the gender reveal confetti that it was advertising? How about even the idea of a gender reveal party.

What about an enamel pokemon fridge magnet?

After a very low bar (for 2026), human essentials are taken care of and people mostly want luxury/leisure consumer goods for entertainment.


An interesting thing I learned from reading the article is that Spain is the 4th largest exporter of turbines behind only China, Germany, and Denmark.

Reading the other comments, it's really a shame we can't have a discussion about something happening in the world before it immediately becomes about the US, on topics that are barely relevant.


Spain is also big in the utility scale solar and storage industry with the Power Electronics company providing inverters or other components to many of the worlds largest plants.

CATL is building one of the largest battery manufacturing factories in Europe in Spain.

China battery maker CATL to train Spanish workers for battery plant - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46061492 - November 2025


I am interested. Tell me more. Any books / articles you'd recommend ? Given that Spain made such progress, there has to be atleast an FT article.

Search for Siemens Gamesa. Siemens fused their wind power branch with them a few years prior to the pandemic and finalized the full takeover in 2022.

Don Quixote.

> our government already doesn't like the government there.

Well yeah but we could drop even more bombs than we would have


You don’t see them as experiments because they succeeded and are now just seen as “normal”.

I’ve seen it personally in San Jose. Guy turned left but instead of continuing onto the crossing road, he turned onto the VTA rails in the middle of the road. Then proceeded to get stuck on the concrete partition once the intersection was over, and work crews had to come out to fix the mess.

Pretty sure this is a form of ad fraud and the people who paid for those ads would be really mad at you e.g. if it were a CPC campaign


You made the exact point of the parent comment.

Everyone remembers the bad ones only.

What about Germany and Japan after WWII? What about South Korea?


Germany was a split country for 50 years.

Korea is still a split country.

I guess I have to give you Japan, although now you could say "clearly the solution is nukes" if you're just going blindly on data.

Even if you think it's going to go well this time, you have to admit this sort of thing does not have a good track record.


Germany is still split in so many ways. Just look at any map of demographics, pension, income, anything "social/society scale", the borders are clearly there still, somehow.


Indeed, and not just on maps. If you drive through Germany on secondary roads the border is as visible as it ever was.


So you admit it didn’t go smoothly.


The intervention in those countries wasn't explicitly for oil. And do you wonder why do you have to go so far back?


> And do you wonder why do you have to go so far back?

I'm wondering why you don't think they count.


Newer information should cause you to update your Bayesian priors formed with older information.


Relevance is relative.

In the presence of more similar experiments, only with pure dogma or dishonesty that one can opt to infer the outcome based on far less similar and even less contemporaneous experiments.


So you think USA will go into Venezuela and do a complete takeover, rewrite it's constitution, and have troops there for 50 years to enforce the new order?


Because those things aren’t comparable to this.


The US did not care at all about Japan had all kinds of nazi clubs in the country.

It only gave a damn from Japan to retaliate against it... And let's not pretend it became all sunshine and rainbows for Japan post WW2. Internment camps. No standing military. Huge cultural disruption.

SK who remembers the war doesn't have the best opinion of the US either. They essentially pulled out and did a half assed job. Who's even to say that a communist Korea wouldn't have been the best long term plan? It might have destabilized faster than what we know today as North Korea.


I'm not the parent commenter, but here's one:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/09/americas/venezuela-election-r...

and you can google similar keywords from a variety of sources - many dispute the integrity of the 2024 elections


The running red lights thing is crazy. I think at it's height, I would maybe see 3 people do this in a single 20 minute drive.

And not like running a late yellow, but a full on my-light-is-green-and-there's-a-guy-in-front-of-me-sideways

It has dropped a bit now though.


I was tboned by someone that swore their light was green. I had a dedicated turn. Thank goodness for cameras.

The trend I’ve noticed this year is turning right from the middle lane cutting off people in the turn lane.


Are they cutting them off, though? If the street you're turning onto has two lanes, it shouldn't be a problem for two cars to turn at once. The car on the inside is required to turn into the nearest lane (according to any state law I know), so why can't the car on its left turn into its own lane?


> Are they cutting them off, though?

Its possible for multiple lanes to turn without anyone cutting anyone off, but its also possible for people to turn right from the middle lane of the source street into the rightmost lane of the target street, cutting off people in the rightmost lane of the source street attempting to turn, or to make a right turn from a middle lane that is not allowed to turn, cutting of a legal right-into-any-lane from the rightmost lane when it is the only turning lane, so if someone explicitly says that's what they see and there is no available counterevidence that they are misreporting their observation, questioning it accompanied by a description of how it is possible for people to turn from multiple lanes into distinct lanes in harmony without anyone being cutoff is not particularly useful.

> the car on the inside is required to turn into the nearest lane (according to any state law I know)

That's the base rule in most jurisdictions, but there are places where it doesn't apply. See, e.g., for California: https://law.justia.com/codes/california/code-veh/division-11...


"cutting of a legal right-into-any-lane from the rightmost lane"

"its also possible for people to turn right from the middle lane of the source street into the rightmost lane of the target"

So you've created hypothetical situations that are no more useful than mine. I specifically mentioned having to turn into the nearest lane. If that's not true somewhere, then neither would adjacent turners be allowed. I simply asked if they were really cutting the other people off.


You’re not allowed to double right turn unless it’s explicitly marked, at least in the US.


If the right lane goes straight, you can't turn right from any other lane.


Obviously. But the comment said TURN LANE.


Read it again. They didn't say the middle lane was a turn lane.


Nobody said he did. He said the RIGHT lane was a TURN LANE. Which means the lane to the left of it could count on the people TURNING, not going straight.

WTF, YOU made the comment: "If the right lane goes straight"

You might as well say, "if the people on the opposite side of the road cross the median..."


I read that as a sloppy way to say that the right lane allows turning, rather than requires turning.

Otherwise, it makes literally no sense, as you say.

Most people don't post utterly logically inconsistent ideas. Usually, they just screw up English and mean one thing when they say the other.


That would be the lane for turning, yes?


Yep. Which is why "If the right lane goes straight" doesn't make sense. We've already established that the right lane does NOT go straight, because it's a turn lane.


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

Search: