The fate of many nerdy interests: you want it to become popular and widespread. Then it does, and you realise you've lost control of it and it becomes commoditised. So went comic books, goes tech.
Damn, I remember playing games in 90s instead of watching TV like my classmates, and daydreaming one day I’d be able to talk about games instead of what was on the TV yesterday.
Now everyone plays, watches or at least knows games, but most games are lowest common denominator focus group tested commodity crap. Huge budgets and production value, almost zero innovation. Even indies are 80% slop to make a quick buck.
If you have a hobby no one cares about, hold it dear and close to your chest, and be happy that no one cares about it.
> It's pretty hard to describe Elon Musk's ventures in space exploration, robots and human-like AI as anything other than prototypical, "core" nerd culture.
To me (and I realise this might not be a broadly accepted definition) a nerd does things for the passion and without regard for the money. Woz was a nerd, Jobs was not.
Musk has always been about monetising these things. Not to discount that he's interested in them, but for me personally he's not a true nerd. He's a businessman with nerdy interests.
A nerd that perennially wrong about their passion pits (e.g. when self driving is coming, the viability of his tunnel projects) would be mortally embarrassed about being so publicly wrong. Musk doesn't care.
It's the money side that applies pressure there. It's great that you're able to make enough money but a lot of people who aspire to the quiet academic life are stuck in the lower tiers making a pittance.
This is because there are far more people wanting a quiet academic life than there are jobs providing a quiet academic life with a livable wage.
And this is likely to become even more out of balance as college enrollment declines and there are smaller and smaller cohorts of freshmen as fertility continues to decline.
There are pittances and then there are pittances. I make a bit more than a typical adjunct or whatever because I have very specialized skills, but its ok not to make a lot of money.
I mean this is a place where the founder just wrote a blog post about being a billionaire. I'll never be a billionaire, thats for sure.
But I genuinely believe that pursuing that goal is vanity, bad for people mentally and "spiritually" and bad for the world.
Maybe I’m alone in thinking this but I think the long term victor will be the one that works out pricing best.
Fable might well be a better model but it’s too expensive for everyday AI use. Definitely if we’re talking about the kind of stuff you’re going to want to do on your phone. Even for coding, I’m not going to reach for Fable (well, when I can…) for 95% of the work I do.
I don’t believe a mature AI industry is going to have a one size fits all, single winner.
Yes, and pricing is one of the features of a commodity, because users can jump back and forth between services, it becomes a pricing race to the bottom. Agree also that you don’t need the best model all the time. You could have the most powerful model draft the design, requirements, guidelines, policies or whatnot then get the lower tier models execute it. Then again you can have the most powerful model do the testing and review, and give back feedback, rinse and repeat. Just like in the real world you don’t need an entire staff of lead engineers.
I don't think so, there is no HTTP requests being done from JS as it's stripped away, and all the other resources are pulled down (and I'm assume their reference made relative), so really shouldn't be any issues because of CORS at all.
It’s an interesting era to be alive in, where the rich and powerful (Trump, Musk) just assert things evidence free and then a whole community rolls in to come up with a post-facto rationalisation.
Musk hasn’t thought about any of this. He just says stuff. He agreed with a statement that “space cooling is free”[1], as a sign of how deeply considered it all is.
This also seems more sensible than space, although I guess if you’re in international waters then no military will protect you and someone could eventually destroy it. Way more organizations have the ability to blow up a boat is compared to a space station.
The current US administration would have likely been in favor of it. Long term it’s a bad idea but it wouldn’t be the first time we saw groups like this only thinking about the short term.
As a New Yorker this doesn’t shock me too much. The level of “Mamdani is an anti-Semite” sentiment I saw online (Reddit particularly) felt truly hysterical. And wasn’t matched by any equivalent in the offline world.
Mamdani and AOC were appealing because they grew up in those communities and had a history of fighting for their communities. (AOC with her organizing efforts while she was a bartender and Mamdani as Assemblymember and him doing things like going on a hunger strike for the Taxi protests).
AOC took on a congress member that was placed into his seat, served 10 terms (and was known as the Dem party's money link to wall street) and didn't even live in the district.
Mamdani was a clean slate from the messes of the prior administrations.
Platner has many of these qualities and is also taking on candidates (both in his party and the opposition) that have repeatedly failed his community. An oyster farmer that grew up in his state, he talks a lot about his upbringing in the state. It seems like so many of his speeches incorporate how deeply ingrained he is within Maine. The community organizing that convinced him to run is probably a lot to do with his success. I remember when AOC was just starting. There were multiple community organizing groups that knew all the tricks of the Queens machine. They were able to help AOC avoid early traps laid by the establishment.
It's not like it's a swastika, it was a skull and crossbones that turns out to have been used by the SS (I think?). I had no idea that particular image was nazi-related and I don't think most other people would have either. As far as "mistakes made by marines on shore leave" go it's pretty mild. Honestly his more recent scandals are more concerning as far as character.
Platner's upside is being a senator that's not from the student senate -> Hill staffer -> party insider pipeline. We're all pretty much sick of that character, he sounds much more authentic by comparison.
It's an extremely well known nazi symbol. Probably second behind the swastika itself. There's even that famous "are we the baddies" meme, which uses that symbol as a central pillar of the gag.
I'm pretty online, I've seen that skit and I to this day don't really know what a totenkopf looks like. I'd never heard the word before this Platner business either. Surprising you're saying it's well-known. Am I in some kind of bubble?
Hmm I don't know. Other comments are suggesting that unless you're well studied in nazi symbolism you'd never know. I think I learnt about this in high school history class. I wonder if there's a European/American divide on this topic (I am European)
I think it is probably useful for people to familiarise themselves with Nazi symbolism though. You would be surprised how often you encounter people online using these obscure symbols, knowing most people won't recognise them.
Hard for me to judge your bubble-ness, as I'm in a different bubble of ....I dunno, a recovered former Wehraboo? Those people who "study WW2" mostly to edge themselves about how militarily successful the Nazis were. I include a large part of the US military officer corps in this category, where quoting dead German generals is normalized. I had a copy of "The Cruel Hunters"[1] before I left high school back in 2001, so of course I know what a totenkopf is, and it's shocking to me that most people don't.
EDIT: And if I had to pick a Nazi symbol I think most people don't recognize, I'd go with the Black Sun.[2]
Really I have show it to several people and asked them what it was. Not one identified it as a nazi tattoo. To make such a bold claim it’s extremely well known is an exaggeration at best. What matters most is do you believe he has a nazi ideology? If the answer is no then I think it’s just a stupid debate to begin with.
If the bones are a little longer, it's a Jolly Roger. If the teeth were longer, it would be a punisher skull. If it weren't turned at that particular angle it would just be a generic skull. If it were 2 angular lightning bolts, it would obviously be SS but a skull is really common in a lot of contexts.
If you happened to clock this particular skull shape as a symbol from an SS division, then congrats, but 95% of people just would not and that's why it didn't land as a scandal. Everyone said "Huh. I didn't know either." and then accepted "Marine gets dumb skull tattoo while drunk on shore leave" as a fairly normal thing to have happened.
If I had wheels I’d be a bicycle. I don’t see your point? It’s very obvious what it is and just because you can alter an icon to make it look like something else doesn’t change what it is.
Ignorance of something doesn’t change what it is. “Oops I accidentally had a Nazi for nearly 20 years and only had it covered up 9 months ago when it became a political liability” isn’t a good look to say the least.
My point is that it's not very obvious what it is unless you are super studied in Nazi symbology. I thought I was clear but there it is in case I wasn't.
If this were a swastika, the SS lightning bolts or even the Iron Cross, yeah, that looks pretty Nazi. Instead it's a skull and crossbones just like every other one used all over the place, including the very cool jolly roger, except this one happens to be Nazi. I didn't know, most people didn't know, he can credibly say he didn't know, and we all think the jolly roger's cool. Dog's not gonna hunt.
“My point is that it's not very obvious what it is unless you are super studied in Nazi symbology”
Or if you ever played a WWII themed video game (Wolfenstein, Call of Duty), or if you’ve ever watched a WWII show like Band of Brothers or watched a major WWII movie like Schindlers List or Saving Private Ryan. I could go on, it’s prominent in nearly any WWII media.
Honestly, I don’t know if people toting the line saying it’s “obscure” are intentionally lying because he aligns with their political agenda or are completely oblivious to any level of detail in any media.
Not sure what to tell you--I like many others here it seems (and probably elsewhere) hadn't even heard of a totenkopf before this issue was raised. It's a non-issue. Honestly I think it's a bit strange that you think it's so recognizable.
Bro, I am not lying, there are skulls and crossbones from so many sources. I saw all those movies, I knew some Nazi units used skulls just like units of many militaries, pirates, motorcycle gangs etc. It's a cross-cultural symbol for "we fuck shit up".
If you examined so much Nazi symbology that you would immediately flag this as a particularly Nazi skull based on the angle and bone length, you are the unusual one. It's cool to have interests but understand that the rest of us just see a skull and don't have nearly the response we would to a swastika.
You do realize there are many people, especially younger folk, who will never have played or seen the media listed? And if they did not even noticed the symbol?
I’m older and have and I didn’t even know there was a special Nazi skull symbol while I do know about many of their other symbols.
Because it demonstrates it’s not some obscure piece of history that only WWII buffs would know.
A major film with one of the most acclaimed directors of all time that won the highest award you can win as a movie had the icon featured prominently on the main villain’s uniform throughout the nearly 4 hour movie. Come on my guy.
Not an American here, but I too never knew the skull and bones symbol is somehow associated with the Nazis. So I would disagree that it is "extremely well known".
The ADL is not a trustworthy source about what is and isn't anti-Semitism. Maybe they do point out actual incidents of anti-Semitism and true anti-Semites (which still exist in large numbers.) but they're unflinching support for Israel (a leading world cause of anti-Semitism) calls all their messaging into question.
When they go the other way and say something is not a nazi salute, that is pretty trustworthy. Especially of someone who they are quite critical of for other reasons.
Much more trustworthy than some internet crackpot conspiracy theorist, or the "trust me bro" people and groups whose political alignments compel them to also claim that Corey Booker's "nazi salute" wasn't, or that this guy's nazi tattoo is not a big deal, wouldn't you think?
Whatever that performance was, it certainly was not a debunking. The guy made a Nazi salute at CPAC, I saw it, there wasn't any ambiguity or question of intent. To me and everyone I know it was an obvious overt Nazi salute made in a context where it was clear that's what he was doing, esp. to me and my Jewish family members. The fact that the ADL stooped to what they did doesn't change reality, it just shows what a bunch of ghouls the ADL have become. Other Jewish orgs have been clear that this was a Nazi salute.
I have not heard anybody who is assured that it was a nazi salute after "doing their own research on the internet" who did not already hate Musk and wish desperately for this to be a nazi salute. The evidence for this conclusion that I have seen boils down to "Musk is a nazi therefore this was a nazi salute", because somehow the exact same kind of actions can be deemed with certainty to not be nazi salutes when performed by figures these self-enlightened people like. So you will forgive me for not trusting frothing "internet researchers" at their word, over organizations like the ADL.
Well this has been a fascinating case study in how rapidly expert opinion is cast aside and to make way for conspiracy theories about the scheming Jews when it suits peoples biases, so let's just end the thread at that.
I just mentioned the ADL saying it wasn't. Are you asserting without evidence that they are "Musk stan" anti-semites, or are you pretending this is too complicated for you to follow?
I am asserting they are Zionist (not anti-Semitic) to the point of denying that Musk’s “heil hitler” salute isn’t that. BTW—Being Zionist and against hatred of Jews is not compatible.
Pretending the ADL is some neutral apolitical research body of experts on antisemitism is absolutely ridiculous in 2026. Come on. They aren't any more a useful source on this then saying "the Republican Party cleared it" or "the CPAC secretariat cleared it".
This is the same org that defined antisemitism as being equivalent to criticising the State of Israel. They have zero credibility on the subject.
Also, it wasn't "the ADLs research wing did a comprehensive study and concluded it was not a Nazi salute". It was a tweet made solely by the CEO of the ADL, who has himself been criticised for turning away from civil rights and antisemitism and focusing on Israeli interests.
I'm not pretending anything other than the ADL has a lot more authority than the incoherent rambling of partisans and conspiracy theorists who think they know it all. Clearly people who think Corey Booker's exact same actions, or this hateful weirdo's nazi tattoo are "no big deal" a just hilariously contradictory if they claim to be certain that Musk made a "nazi salute"! If nothing else we can agree on that and laugh at those hateful cretins.
> Also, it wasn't "the ADLs research wing did a comprehensive study and concluded it was not a Nazi salute". It was a tweet made solely by the CEO of the ADL, who has himself been criticised for turning away from civil rights and antisemitism and focusing on Israeli interests.
Disingenuous. That is the official stance of the ADL and the tweet was made on behalf of the organization.
The ADL is much more concerned with Israeli settlers than they are with American Jews at this point and they've proved it repeatedly.
They don't care at all when republicans are admiring hitler in their group chats because they're reliable votes for Israel. Meanwhile, liberals who believe firmly in equality are in the cross-hairs because that equality includes arabs as well as jews.
Also, serious question, you're going after Cory Booker as anti-Israel? My information had him as pretty tied up with AIPAC, can you elaborate?
I really don't give a rat's ass what your twisted hateful little denier mind does, except I suppose for morbid fascination to know what "world view" it is you believe that i am "pushing".
I'm sure he figured it out at some point and should have had it covered up sooner, but I doubt he knew what it was when he got it.
Honestly, I'd be more concerned with someone who knows too much Nazi minutiae rather than too little.
EDIT: reading the CNN story, I'm actually less convinced, this is all coming from a conservative activist ex-girlfriend. Its a really obscure symbol and then there's this quote:
"Platner argued that he had the tattoo for 17 years without anyone raising concerns about Nazi symbolism, noting that he received a State Department security clearance, reenlisted in the Army after being screened for gang and hate-related tattoos, and regularly appeared shirtless around family members, including Jewish relatives."
Sure, maybe. I'm doubtful. But that's irrelevant. He knew when he launched his campaign. He chose to keep it. Worse, there's a good chance his family and his staffers knew as well. This is Jill Biden covering up Joe Biden's dementia all over again, except this time for racism.
Platner is a rubbish candidate. But! There is a case to be made that he's better for America than Susan Collins.
Did you recognize that skull as a Nazi symbol without being told? Like, "Oh, that's the Totemkompf"?
Personally, like I said, I think the more recent sexting thing is way more damaging to his brand. "Got a dumb tattoo on shore leave and posted dumb reddit comments 10 years ago" are fine for an everyman candidate, recent infidelity is not.
Plenty of people recognize that as a nazi symbol. Its why he covers it up in photos but leaves other tats uncovered. We only found out because of a leaked video from a personal event and someone inside his life confirming.
> Did you recognize that skull as a Nazi symbol without being told?
Nope. But if you're sending your pics out, someone is going to come back to you with that feedback. In this case, we have someone who says they did that.
> the more recent sexting thing is way more damaging to his brand
Sure, why not. I don't think, at the end of the day, we have any evidence either is electorally relevant anymore.
For the record, and I hope this isn't too forward, I respect your honesty and understand it's gotta be tough being a liberal zionist with everything that's going on. I respect it so much more than just going full Stephen Miller which I've seen some friends do.
For the record, I rotate accounts every year or two and this account's age coincides with the age of the current Iran conflict so I probably have a disproportionate amount of comments on it.
JumpCrisscross, I wasn't trying to pigeonhole you but that was my impression based on your interaction with a number of threads over the years, my apologies if I mislabeled you, I meant it with respect.
lostlogin, thanks for the neutral reading, I appreciate you.
I think people are really past the point of caring. The limousine liberals of course make a fuss but sitting on the high horse has not really served democrats that well, just taking L after L. And the sitting president is Epstein-Mossad pedofile and huge number still stand behind him without any shame.
I would expect anybody who graduated with a 4 year degree in the US to be able to recognize a totenkopf. It's probably the third most well-known Nazi symbol, and is almost certainly present in any textbook or museum about WWII (besides being a symbol is fictional media about Nazi Germany).
However, I think this is beside the point. The more relevant questions are (1) whether Platner knew what it was, and (2) whether an informed voter should want someone who doesn't know the meaning of the things they get tattooed on their body. Authentic or not, (2) demonstrates a lack of good judgement to me.
(Separately, having been to that part of part of Slavic southern Europe, it is inconceivable that any tattoo parlor that would give you a totenkopf tattoo is not plastered in other Nazi and far-right iconography. You would need to actively look past all of the other Nazi stuff and assume that the skull is the one thing that doesn't have some additional meaning.)
Plathner is authentic and able to see and correct his mistakes (tattoo), two important properties that candidates from the una-party lack. He is certainly not perfect, but apparently better than the rest.
If the main objection against a blackwater mercenary that talks fondly of the time where he made a living by being a murderer, is was that has a Nazi tattoo, then yes, it's quite likely that America can't find anything better.
Not being MAGA. I have some respect for Susan Collins. But this nonsense where a tattoo and infidelity should be disqualifying on one side while the President, popularly elected this time, sleeps with porn stars and endorses anti-Semites and KKK adjacents, is unsustainable. If we need a dude with a Nazi tattoo to win Maine, I guess I prefer to be pissed off and winning.
Yes, but that should be baseline for the Democrat candidate? Are there really no better candidates in Maine? This sort of thing would be regarded as disqualifiing in the UK even for local councilors from the far right. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/may/27/calls-barns...
Manchin was against Build Back Better, expanding voting rights legislation and codifying abortion rights.
Yes, he was better than a Republican. But he was a big reason why Democrats are seen as the do-nothing party who never achieve things. Because he stood in the way of it.
Not to mention, Fetterman isn’t Manchin. Manchin at least voted to impeach Trump, Fetterman is skeptical of even doing that.
>"Democrats are seen as the do nothing party".
Quite a few people I know [eu based] used to consider themselves 'democrats' ie not republicans.
But, more and more are co.ing to the conclusion that the dems are pretty darn useless.
Doesn’t confirm Pam Bondi and Pete Hegseth. Doesn’t confirm a new numpty to SCOTUS. Doesn’t blow the budget on a fake deportation push and tax breaks for the rich.
I agree Democrats have no agenda. But Republicans don’t seem to either right now. They have talking points. But the policy passed bears no resemblance to those in the slightest.
As if that has ever overcome the American media and political classes' fixation with bipartisanship (which is how the American system inoculates itself against left-wing policy)
Fear not: “As you can all probably tell, I got a lot of criticisms about the way this government functions. But in order for us to make it functional, we’re gonna have to do stuff,” Platner said. “And you can’t just go down there and be John Fetterman and ... just sort of be an a*hole.”
That's unfortunate. Choosing a leader who lies constantly and boasts of enjoying killing people seems like an unnecessary mistake. He is attacked by people who have defended far worse and are quite cynical. That doesn't mean he should be defended. He should be attacked by a left comfortable enough in its future vision as to not compromise on basic principles.
The attacks against Mamdani were disingenuous. This suspicion has heightened when the other candidates being artificially propped up had such huge flaws. I hope we can learn to see when that dynamic pops up in other places.
I suspect that many people, like me, now hear "antisemitic" as "anti Israel" and assume it's a politically motivated slur without justification. This is not good. As racism and actual antisemitism continues to be very real, any conflating or exaggeration of a real problem diminishes people's willingness to address the real problems.
If you notice a police officer is only ever arresting people of a certain race, you can suspect he’s a racist - even if they actually did commit the crimes.
Having an obsession with Israel, focusing only on them for things done by other countries as well in the same situation, exaggerating what they are doing, and demonising them is antisemitic.
The Overton window has shifted so far that you don’t even realise how it would sound if you replaced “Israel” with other countries in your statement.
Imagine hearing someone say I’m just “anti-Ireland”. Or I have nothing against Ukrainians, I just think Ukraine shouldn’t exist.
If you have genuine criticisms to make about specific people in Israel or specific actions of the Israeli government, and you do so also about many other figures and events internationally, that’s fair. But taking a position of “anti-Israel” in general betrays a prejudice against the only Jewish country that has nothing to do with their actions.
> If you notice a police officer is only ever arresting people of a certain race, you can suspect he’s a racist - even if they actually did commit the crimes.
Ridiculous comparison. Police are obligated to act impartially, private individuals are not. Expecting regular people to give every political matter equal attention is absurd.
Sure, and if the issues you care more about are the ones where Jews are being accused of doing something wrong, I may suspect what specific bias you have.
This is what I'm talking about! The discussion is about Israel and you've shifted it to being about Jewish people so you can make baseless declarations of antisemitism.
People care about Israel because we're directly funding it. Our leaders could easily end that war overnight if they wanted. The same is not true about China's Uyghur genocide.
This is a huge amount of Whataboutism mixed with exactly the problem I mention, which is moving the definition of antisemitism and putting words in the mouth of the speaker to hit that definition.
To pass your test, which is common out there, whenever Israel is criticized we must also: prove that we care about EVERY cause in the world; acknowledge every other conflict in the world; compare against every aggressive country in the world; declare support for Israel's "right to exist" and "right to defend itself" (which are nothing by proxies for aggressive expansionism); declare our criticism is limited to certain actions; denounce every opponent of Israel to an excessive degree; and make caveats that we have Jewish friends.
This is nonsense and this is exactly the nonsense that Israeli propaganda encourages as it suppresses criticism of Israel.
Everyday people talk in generalizations about countries, people, companies, etc... in exactly the way you claim they don't. Israeli supporters especially do it all the time, especially when talking about Iran. The hypocritical double standard is incredibly obvious to anyone not blinkered by pro-Israeli and pro-Zionist propaganda or self interest.
To overlap the Israel & Jewish issues: on Israel and also antisemitism, the Overton window in the west (especially US, UK & Germany) is located well inside the pro-Israeli, pro-Jewish side of the spectrum, especially if you compare it to what you can get away with saying about Muslims, Muslim countries and people of colour. Just think about what would happen if somebody said that in order to stop Israel committing genocide they should be bombed back to the stone age. They'd not only be uproar but that person would be driven out of their job and never serve political office in the US. But that's exactly what the US president and head of the armed forces said. The uproar was very one sided.
There is a prejudice, but it's opposite to what you think it is.
You're kinda proving my point here. Criticizing Israel is criticism of a country, not a people. Racism or antisemitism is not a factor in criticism of Israel unless there is proof of that as motivation. Actual proof, not a bad faith assumption, which is what unfortunately actually happens. Many people purposely come up with reasons conflate the two to use bad faith judgements & declarations which can then be used to devalue legitimate criticism.
As a newyorker who was raised a modern orthdox jew, but left that world for the world arts, the last few years have been weird.
On the one hand, it's been the first time I've no longer been able to take for granted that everyone in a room agrees with my political views and doesn't pre-judge me based on my background. On the other hand, I've gone back home to the suburbs and heard some really ridiculous hyperbole about what it's like in NYC.
Then there's the fact that while I support Isreal, I don't support all its actions. Nor do a lot of people in the [Orthodox] Jewish community, but they are afraid to speakup too much.
Modern orthdoox jews are kind of like Mitt Romney is for Mormons. Observant of all the rules, but also raised with a full secular education, encouraged to go to college, and expected to participate in society rather than isolate in thier community.
I like and have come to, on certain policies and candidates, ally with Mamdani. But I’m struggling to find the relevance to New York City in this article beyond supposition. I went in ready to find a foreign attack on our homeland and come away grasping at straws.
French foreign services said they discovered this, but they haven't made all material they know public. They say the contacted the NY/US authorities with what they know.
I want more than this! There is a lot of room between lying and fucking up. And if you're going to present a half-baked case on first impression, it's going to be a lot harder to regain everyone's attention when you get your shit together.
Maybe I'm just annoyed with this issue. But I came into this thread looking for anything actionable. I'm not finding it. Just the same old nonsese being flung across the same aisle.
(The whole Wired for war series on RT is interesting - https://www.rt.com/trends/wired-for-war/ - as it also describes AI techs evolving role in politics and the military).
Always ask yourself why RT would post something, since they are pure Russian propaganda. In this case they're probably hoping to help fracture the West by amplifying its internal division about Israel.
On the flipside the level of deep love and praise for Bernie Sanders did not translate into an equivilent outcome in real life. (And I say that as a Bernie supporter).
Its a hard lesson to learn that there is so much astroturfing in both directions that you have to learn to ignore the noise.
The NY Times coverage of him is abhorrently biased. Every time I see an article about him, the headline, summary, and article itself feel like the editors were desperate to paint him in as negative a light as possible.
The man has almost overnight gotten the city to start doing things that benefit the general public, nto just the wealthy. Actions on bike lane projects that were stalled and actually taking action against slumlords.
All that barely gets a mention, but they seem obsessed with trying to find fault with everything he does.
During the NBA finals, he paid for his own ticket but they still took him to task for its expense ($1000) and the ticket coming from the "VIP ticket pool" like this was some abuse of his position or unethical of him.
Of course the mayor gets access to the VIP pool of tickets? And he didn't abuse the privilege to get tickets for anyone else - not staff, not family, not friends. Just him.
He's showing that government can be efficient. It can help people. People can actually like their local governments. And that is completely counter to the politics of these rags and their funders.
They want to talk about how government can't work, will always be inefficient, and how it must be cut.
The people who own these papers know that the obvious solution to a lot of societal problems is "tax the rich, build out social programs" and they desperately don't want that message to get out. It makes it a lot harder to setup gig and gambling economies.
They are racist, and unfortunately hard core israel supporter, which makes anybody that doesn't go with that agenda as a target.
The moment that Mandani said he will stay home and serve the people of NYC, what asked 'where are you going to make your first visit when elected' it made him a target. He showed he wasn't willing to bow down to a foreign power.
NYT still tries to put a veneer of modicum. NY Post is the one that is unbashingly always negative against Mamdani, full on attacks all the time.
I think people had enough of it, and saw through it and voted for him just in spite.
I know all the members of my soccer team voted for him. I had no clue who he was, but all the attacks backfired and made him even more famous.
Murdoch's News Corp, owner of the NY Post, has always hated political figures cut from the same "for the people" cloth as Mandani.
It's a pattern going back to humble origins in Australia, continued forward in the UK when they shredded Fleet Street norms, and exuberantly applied throughout their decades in the USofA.
Did they categorize anti-Israel and pro-Palestine protests as antisemitic hate crimes like the universities did when they reported similar numbers? Do you agree with that categorization?
Whilst that was certainly my gut reaction, looking at the report, they only count actual felonies where charges are laid. Protests and anti-Israel rather than antisemitic things do actually appear not to be conflated.
However... Between 2013 and 2016, when that rule came into play, reported hate crimes rose 18.9%.
This seems to be less a giant jump upwards, and more a slow and gradual increase. Concerning, but not the end of the world. Unsurprising in an environment where "hate the foreigner" is en vogue for the political elite.
I’m glad to see antisemitism doesn’t have the sting it used to have. It’s been a shield to hide behind while doing the most abhorrent things. The world is waking up.
In most western countries it is the only true suppression of free speech, as the state will mobilise it's full force against someone, no matter their position or spuriousness of the claims.
> you think it’s all elaborate fakes to trick you?
The fact content and provocativeness of the reporting has varied wildly from source to source, and in particular, between the British tabloid press, on one hand, and British institutional press (and international press), on the other hand.
Not really: some choose to show the behaviour and translate the Arabic, others don't because "Pro Palestinian" marches inevitably end up revealing many of their participants openly support Hamas.
I’m glad to see racism doesn’t have the sting it used to have. It’s been a shield to hide behind while doing the most abhorrent things. The world is waking up.
It’s hard to say. The Israeli government, and its agents abroad have been pushing a narrative that any criticism of the government or its policies is in fact antisemitism.
New account made just for this comment is always suspicious.
Look - the correct amount of hate crime is always 0 but using a percentage masks the amount of crime that comes from noise. Hate crime is not evenly distributed - no crime is - and a rise from 10 to 20 per month in a city of 8.5 million is not the cataclysm you're acting like it is.
Again: no hate crime is good and this increase is an unalloyed ill. It's something that deserves attention and NYPD resources, as well as public campaigns.
The last thing I want is anyone to be attacked for their religious beliefs.
But the fact that this talking point is heavily botted is indicative of broader initiatives to make sure it stays a talking point disproportionately to its impact.
Just see what reactions I'm getting for posting a NYPD stat and my other comments who are very benign (flagged, downvoted) - HN is not a welcoming place for an actual discussion on these topics.
reply