Denmark summons top US diplomat over alleged Greenland influence operation

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0j9l08902eo

100•vinni2•2h ago

Comments

vincnetas•1h ago

HN readers from USA, what the hell is happening. How do we "get back to normal"?

JumpCrisscross•1h ago

> what the hell is happening. How do we "get back to normal"?

To a certain degree, that is what’s happening. Denmark should bolster its military presence on Greenland, potentially up to and including by putting it under a nuclear umbrella. (Ideally European. Pragmatically, homegrown.)

docdeek•1h ago

How would that work? The options for a European nuclear umbrella would be a choice between Russia (practically impossible), the UK (unlikely to be outside of US influence) or France (only EU nuclear power). A homegrown nuclear weapon would mean pulling out of the NPT and quite possibly giving a state like the US pretext to annex Greenland in the face of Denmark seeking nucear weapons.

aurareturn•1h ago

  nuclear umbrella would be a choice between Russia (practically impossible)

Would be one of the bigger plot twists in history. I wouldn't rule it out. I think it has a decent chance of happening. Maybe 10%?

Let's say the Russia/Ukraine war is over. Russia mends its ties with Europe and says it will be good from now on. The US is ready to annex Greenland. Denmark is powerless and will lose Greenland. Russia calls Denmark and says it can help. If you're Denmark, what would you do?

docdeek•1h ago

I think that the chance of an EU and NATO member aligning themselves with Russia would be a lot lower than a 1 in 10.

aurareturn•1h ago

What if a NATO member is suddenly hostile to you and Russia says it can help you? Russia probably does not want the US to have Greenland.

It would certainly trigger a collapse of NATO. But if the US is serious about taking Greenland, that automatically starts the collapse anyway, right?

Anyway, just all hypotheticals. Interesting to think about. I don't think chances are 0. History has shown us that countries make surprising decisions, including allying with historic enemies, when pushed against the wall.

polotics•53m ago

Well eventualy one would hope the Putin Mafia dies out and the Russian Diaspora manages to turn that country back to a happier place than its current child-abducting state. There are many good russians, there is an actual society under the madness, look: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_0E9IzXT34

egman_ekki•1h ago

You're giving a 10% chance to Denmark allying with Russia over a threat from US? Even right-wing parties in Dk aren't really pro-Russian, so I'd say the chance is closer to 0 than 10%.

vintermann•44m ago

According to lesser evil politics, if people actually believed in it, it wouldn't take that much to choose Putin over Trump. Putin getting better may not be so likely, but Trump has a lot of time to get worse.

But people don't actually believe in lesser evil politics, they believe in loyalty (to sides, not to principles). That goes for both politicians and people. Danish politicians will not switch geopolitical alliances, and they'd honestly be color-revolutioned out if they tried, without even the CIA having to lift a finger.

aurareturn•37m ago

I don't know much about the Danes. But if in the next 2 years, anti-Trump/American propaganda fills the media, the US is very serious about taking Greenland, wouldn't they be more open to support their politicians for signing some agreement with Russia to guarantee Greenland's position?

jacquesm•29m ago

Danes aren't stupid. They know that guarantees from Russia are not worth the paper they are printed on. Besides that they are in the EU, part of Scandinavia and whatever is left of NATO without the USA. Between all of these there are parts of a solution to be found that include neither the USA or Russia, which would be far better for Europe in the long term. Ukraine is a test case about whether or not the remainder of the free world can be salamied or not, that's the Russian side of it (and who knows, maybe the Baltics or more likely Moldavia would be next) and Greenland or Canada are the same thing from the United States' side.

tomp•39m ago

I mean, this is literally the story of Ukraine in 2014. Putin gave them a better deal than the West. The US organized protests and toppled the government.

Why wouldn't the US do the same in Denmark or any other Western country?

jacquesm•28m ago

> I mean, this is literally the story of Ukraine in 2014. Putin gave them a better deal than the West.

What a load of tripe.

JumpCrisscross•46m ago

> homegrown nuclear weapon would mean pulling out of the NPT

Build then pull. Or don’t. It’s a treaty from a falling world order.

> quite possibly giving a state like the US pretext to annex Greenland

If you believe America would wait for pretext, you don’t need the umbrella.

jacquesm•1h ago

Seeing the USA as a potential enemy in a shooting war is not 'normal'. It may be what it comes down to but as descendant of people who would not have been alive if not for the liberation of Western Europe and who was steeped in WWII lore this is not normal by any stretch of the imagination.

bryanrasmussen•1h ago

in a view of world history it is totally normal that benevolent countries turn antagonistic over several generations, although very seldom such an abrupt turn where allies are concerned as this one has been.

Mad rulers are also quite normal for much of human history, the theory was that Democracy would relieve us of that particular problem.

jacquesm•1h ago

> the theory was that Democracy would relieve us of that particular problem

I don't think that was the theory. I think the theory was something in the middle of the wisdom of the crowds and the fact that non-violent hand overs of power are less bad than violent ones.

The main flaw is that democracy can be undone by democracy whereas autocracy in principle can be made to last forever. Of course autocrats eventually kill the host organism so there too there is a built in fuse but it can take a long time (centuries?) to burn.

JumpCrisscross•52m ago

> don't think that was the theory

I think Athenian democracy was explicitly built by Solon to relieve gridlock among entrenched, corrupted families.

jacquesm•36m ago

We've moved on from that particular form of democracy (which many wouldn't even recognize as democracy other than in name). <Insert 'true Scotsman' fallacy reference here.>

aurareturn•1h ago

  Mad rulers are also quite normal for much of human history, the theory was that Democracy would relieve us of that particular problem.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqsBx58GxYY

This is one of the most insightful videos I've ever seen on society and governments. It describes Anacyclosis, where political systems evolve in a recurring sequence driven by corruption and decay.

Democracy will eventually decay. It's not permanent. You can see it now live where democracies elect more and more radical leaders.

stahorn•1h ago

I also think about this. With the amount of history I've read, I'm not surprised that suddenly there's autocrats that take power. I just wonder, is there some good example from history of what did turn the tide towards democrazy, liberalism, and humanism?

I think a lot of it has to do with inertia; people have made such a great job in the past in the wester world, with infrastructure, education, law, medicine, and so on, that even when real proper idiots take power, most things just continue being good enough. It takes a lot of time for idiots and autocrats to make their impact, which when (hopefully) voters will switch and get good people back in power.

joegibbs•15m ago

Has there really ever been such a thing as a benevolent country? I think it only exists in subjective histories depending on who wins.

For instance the Romans are thought of as a great, cultured civilisation because their histories won out, but the Gauls and Carthaginians would’ve disagreed.

Like Lord Palmerston said, countries don’t have friends v or enemies, only interests. Russia and China get along well now, definitely didn’t 50 and 150 years ago, but did in intervening periods. Yet they would both consider themselves as in the right regardless.

RobotToaster•1h ago

> as descendant of people who would not have been alive if not for the liberation of Western Europe and who was steeped in WWII lore this is not normal by any stretch of the imagination.

The liberation of Europe owes more to the Soviet Union than the USA, perhaps the current situation there foretells where we are heading with the USA?

philwelch•1h ago

The Soviets never liberated anyone. Go ask the people of Hungary in 1956 or Czechoslovakia in 1968 how liberated they felt. Or you could ask all the people murdered by border guards at the Berlin Wall.

TheAlchemist•56m ago

You are both kind of right.

The Soviets helped in a major way to defeat the Germans - on par with the US.

But it's also true that they did not liberate anyone in Europe, just replaced the German occupation.

saubeidl•54m ago

Factually not true. The Soviets liberated Austria.

flohofwoe•44m ago

Austria could have ended up divided by the Iron Curtain like East- and West-Germany, I wonder if you would view the Soviets the same way today if that had happened and your ancestors were on the wrong side of the wall.

FirmwareBurner•54m ago

The Soviet "liberation" story you hear only from western Europeans who never had to live under the soviets so in their history books they're the good guys for defeating Germany.

saubeidl•53m ago

As a Central European, the Soviets liberated my ancestors.

FirmwareBurner•50m ago

Did they also live under Soviet rule after?

saubeidl•49m ago

They did for a decade - after that they were given their freedom. Isn't that what liberation means?

flohofwoe•55m ago

Europe would owe much more to the Soviet Union if the countries that were liberated by the Red Army wouldn't have remained occupied by the Soviet Union, and the Soviet Union made it very clear multiple times (1953 in East Germany, 1956 in Hungary, 1968 in Czechoslovakia) that they are not going to leave without bloodshed.

saubeidl•54m ago

They left Austria without bloodshed.

FirmwareBurner•46m ago

They're still running it today but remotely from Russia. Putin was attending politicians' wedding there who then took jobs for Russian companies [1] and meeting chancellors for skiing, plus laundering their money through private banks and real estate purchases.

That's why they left, Austria agreed to became their trojan horse and lobbying arm in Europe, constantly torpedoing nuclear energy projects[2] and Schengen membership expansions.

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56280898

[2] https://www.euractiv.com/section/eet/news/austria-gears-up-t...

JumpCrisscross•51m ago

> liberation of Europe owes more to the Soviet Union than the USA

It really doesn’t. If America abandoned Britain the Nazis would have had a one-front war.

Swenrekcah•49m ago

Two things need to be mentioned in this context.

The Soviet Union got their equipment and supplies mostly for free from the US.

All nations the Soviet Union “liberated” were not so sad when it finally fell and they were actually liberated.

westpfelia•1h ago

legally Denmark can't have its own nukes. They can only borrow in a sense, nukes as a member of NATO. The US who is a main contributor towards that.

I agree something needs to be done but as it stands its not a easy solution. And I would assume if Denmark through nato put nukes on Greenland the US (and I would assume Canada) would treat it as some level of Cuban Missle Crisis.

Swenrekcah•1h ago

This is rationalising of insane and dangerous behaviour.

Who is it that Denmark should consider their enemy in this situation? Is it normal in your mind that the US should be considered the enemy?

aurareturn•1h ago

Maybe Trump found Hitler's fascism playbook. Part of it is to acquire new territory to stay popular. I'm guessing the US will make at least one serious attempt at annexing new land before Trump's term is over. Panama, Canada, or Greenland maybe?

Edit: Getting downvoted now. No clue why. It's not me who is making these suggestions. This administration has literally said these things themselves. If you downvote me, at least have the balls to explain why.

bertili•1h ago

This has the be the answer. If the approval rating tanks, you gotta disrupt.

But I'm trying to understand this... any American here who can elaborate how he would feel "great again" and re-vote for GOP if the US flag was planted in the center of Nuuk?

westpfelia•1h ago

Same reason any leader throughout time has planted flags.

lycopodiopsida•1h ago

We cut all ties with USA and consider them what they de facto are - a rogue state, resembling putinist russia more and more.

I've never seen a country disasembling itself with such speed. It took Putin 20 years to get the country and society to where it is now, I am not sure USA will be in a better state after 4 years full with nepotism, oligarchy, anti-scientific freaks in administration, corruption and ignoring laws on a daily basis.

casenmgreen•1h ago

I've read it took Putin something like four years.

He came into power 1st Jan 2000, and by 2004 people were no longer speaking openly, from fear.

lycopodiopsida•1h ago

We can say there were autocratic tendencies from the beginning, as well as "tightening the screws", but he went full batshit insane only somewhere after the Maidan revolution.

0dayz•1h ago

No it started on the day of a particular nato meeting (Munich) where putin gave a bizarre speech.

Which 1 year after he invaded Georgia.

Swenrekcah•1h ago

That is what the despots want. The way for democracy to survive is by keeping in contact and business with the regular population where possible, but with enough independent strength to not have to bow to the despotic governments.

pjmlp•1h ago

Even though I tend to criticise the state of Linux on the desktop, because I care to be able to buy a 100% fully functionable GNU/Linux laptop at the local shopping mall and not some strange shop online, if we want to cut ties, we also must do the same with all technology "Made in US", and to an extreme also includes FOSS contributions.

jimkleiber•1h ago

I wonder what percentage of this can be attributed to "covid killed a lot of Americans (and emotionally destroyed more), covid was brought to the US by foreigners, we can no longer trust foreigners."

I think processing our feelings around covid could help a lot.

krapp•1h ago

I think very little. Americans have been deeply prejudiced against foreigners ever since the founding of the country, every wave of immigration since the first has been met with hostility and violence. Trump was initially elected on a wave of xenophobic fear and hatred of South American immigrants. No, not just illegal immigrants either - that's a smokescreen.

I do think you're right that the effects of covid will have long lasting cultural and political consequences, but the zeitgeist behind the backlash was already well established, and one must remember intentionally orchestrated to benefit certain political interests.

Yeul•1h ago

I think that's kinda unfair. There are civilized states like New York and California.

Unfortunately the US has a strange system in which the most populous and economically vital parts of the country have the least influence in Washington...

krapp•1h ago

>Unfortunately the US has a strange system in which the most populous and economically vital parts of the country have the least influence in Washington...

We had to keep the slaveowning states happy or else they might secede - wait...

It keeps populist demagogues from taking over - wait...

I got nothing.

FirmwareBurner•52m ago

>There are civilized states like New York and California

What makes them more civilized than the other states? I think this elitist atitudine is exactly what got Trump supported from the other states.

At least in my life I've never met anyone who would like me if I declared myself more civilized than them and they wouldn't spite me back for it.

There's probably a good reason South Park crators depicted Californians as smelling their own farts in that episode.

sneak•1h ago

We wait. Trump is not in great health and he’s quite old, and constitutional term limits will have him out in a few years.

In case he tries another coup, one thing you could do is organize and obtain arms (and train with them) and have you and your group, as well as any other groups you can muster, near DC around late January 2029. The rule of law cannot be taken for granted.

There is only one language that tyrants speak.

fifticon•1h ago

There is a problem with this. Trump is just a wrecking ball. The problem is not the ball, the problem is the holes it leaves behind. Whoever replaces Trump, will arrive in the driver's seat of a vehicle which has had plenty of its safety rails removed or disabled. The problem is what happens, when a more capable, less octagenarian replacement arrives.

aurareturn•56m ago

  In case he tries another coup, one thing you could do is organize and obtain arms (and train with them) and have you and your group, as well as any other groups you can muster, near DC around late January 2029. The rule of law cannot be taken for granted.

That's the risk of civil war many have feared. There will be armed groups ready to defend the constitution and then there will be opposition groups ready to defend Trump.

subscribed•51m ago

If Trump expires, Vance will take the helm. He's propped by the well known military contractor.

Behind his back, the same ghoul (Miller) will still be holding the reins.

Trump was a catalyst for Project 2025, he's no longer instrumental im afraid.

aurareturn•48m ago

  If Trump expires, Vance will take the helm.

I don't ever see a world where Vance is president and Trump is still here. I think Vance will try to resign as president (suppose Vance wins election) and then give it back to Trump. That's actually one of the ideas people have debated on how Trump can stay on for a 3rd term. Still technically illegal but who knows?

jacquesm•25m ago

And Thiel. At least Musk is mostly neutralized (for now).

jacquesm•26m ago

He does not have to try another coup, he already succeeded.

krapp•20m ago

He didn't even need to try the first one. The moment the Democrats put Joe Biden up instead of someone the left actually cared about it was a fait accompli that Trump would win a second term.

0x_rs•1h ago

You don't "get back to normal". 77 million people voted for this, and 90 million more did not care enough to stop it. This is the "normal" now, what they voted for, and you don't just forget about it.

pandemic_region•42m ago

I doubt they voted for _this_. They voted for a vague promise of a better life through some cool sounding measures, at the time. Now that people are starting to realize the demon they have given full power to, I doubt he would win another (unrigged) election.

jacquesm•27m ago

That's the problem with ratchets. They click and then there is no going back. I always thought that votes should come with an elastic band.

Hikikomori•1h ago

Military coup and throwing the fascists in jail. There's no going back or adjusting course otherwise, people like this will only keep going unless punished. Yet we keep going with appeasement.

MomsAVoxell•1h ago

You start demanding the prosecution of your own war criminals.

It is the war crimes which are driving the USA into this totalitarian-authoritarian dystopia.

The idea of American Supremacy rendering the nation impervious to justice emboldens the agents of empire.

saubeidl•57m ago

Does Denmark have any war criminals?

tokai•38m ago

Anders Fogh Rasmussen

elktown•53m ago

You'd be surprised how many people here will just continue to downplay any kind of anti-democratic creep all the way to its abolishment. And Trump is even a vulgar example rather than a smooth one.

Privileged people have a bad habit of assuming they'll be outside of any significantly adverse effects - or may even think "Well, this kinda sucks, but maybe this is actually pretty good for my wallet (read: social-economical status)".

mna_•45m ago

Americans have been doing things like this for a while. It's just that they're doing it to their "allies" now.

VWWHFSfQ•38m ago

It's all so ironic considering Denmark took control of Greenland purely by conquest/claim and many Greenlanders view it historically as colonial/imperial.

But now Denmark is apparently upset that an even bigger, greedier bully is trying to take it from them?

I don't care about it one way or the other. I imagine an agreement will be made where USA gets something like 80% of the resource rights in exchange for Denmark getting to keep the title and then we'll all forget about this.

aurareturn•33m ago

  It's all so ironic considering Denmark took control of Greenland purely by conquest/claim and many Greenlanders view it historically as colonial/imperial.

Isn't that what the US is doing based on this article? Create a bit of story around the people of Greenland wanting to free themselves from Denmark (even if just minority of Greenland believes so) and then come in as the hero?

VWWHFSfQ•28m ago

Yes and it's unfortunate that Greenlanders don't get a say in who their conqueror is.

But Denmark isn't the one that should be complaining about their ill-gotten loot being taken from them.

AndyMcConachie•34m ago

There is no going back to "normal". The American Empire is failing, the imperial boomerang is in full effect, and it will continue to destroy American democracy from within.

Revolution is required.

mcosta•12m ago

Who is going to fight the revolution?

FirmwareBurner•1h ago

>"alleged Greenland influence operation"

Emphasis on the word 'alleged' which is doing a lot of heavy lifting in the article that is otherwise void of any details. What proof did he show that the US is doing what he's alleging?

Is it one of those cases where leaders try to move the attention of he population from some grave local issue by pointing at foreign boogiemen attacking them? "Hey voters, don't look at our corruption scandal, look at how allegedly the US wants to invade you"

>Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned the US that "you cannot annex another country".

Except you definitely CAN annex a foreign country. How does he think the US got Texas, Hawaii, California, Nevada, Utah, and overseas territories like Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands and American Samoa?

How did the Kingdom of Denmark get Greenland if not through annexation? Maybe they need a prime minister who paid attention at history in school.

Edit: love the angry downvotes form people who know I'm right but can't bare to admit it so they can only use the downvotes as suppression tool as they have no counter arguments for a debate

kasperni•1h ago

Incidentally, the Danish state is also the majority shareholder of Ørsted, whose wind farm off Rhode Island was halted the other day [1].

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/aug/25/rsted-sh...

pandemic_region•50m ago

I had a debate with my teenage daughters yesterday whether Trump was evil (all agreed), nice (all disagreed), stupid (they agreed, I did not). I explained that he's a fool wielding a very powerful tool. And we all suffer his greed. But in the end of the day, he's still a fool easily swayed by throwing a couple of dollars his way.

jacquesm•39m ago

At some level the difference between malice and incompetence disappears and you should assume malice.

Hilift•41m ago

The US administration hates offshore wind farms more than DEI. I don't believe this was a shock as stated in the article.

The US is actually in a weird place where it has more oil (and natural gas) than any other country by far, but has competition everywhere when selling it and now refining capacity will soon drop to the point where the US will need to import millions of gallons of refined petroleum products per day, probably from Mexico and Asia, with tariffs.

curt15•1h ago

> The earlier May report in the Wall Street Journal also referred to learning more about Greenland's independence movement, as well as attitudes to American mineral extraction.

> At the time, US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard did not deny the report but accused the Journal of "breaking the law and undermining our nation's security and democracy".

lolwut

lkramer•1h ago

The national broadcaster goes into a bit more details: https://www-dr-dk.translate.goog/nyheder/indland/moerklagt/c...

It seems pretty convincing. Greenland is such a small population it's hard to hide something like this.

LatteLazy•1h ago

The US has spent decades preventing and delaying the EU becoming a defacto state with a single army and significant foreign policy.

Now trump is driving its creation in a single term.

consp•39m ago

Same story as Putin trying to weaken NATO. The two might have given the nudge towards a EU army or at least a more tightly integrated defence force. Spending will be through the roof for at least the coming two decades.

AndyMcConachie•29m ago

Russia weaken NATO? Wut?

Denmark is in NATO. What does NATO even mean if the leader of NATO (USA) is attempting to take territory from another NATO country?

The point of NATO is to keep Europe tied to and subservient to the USA (ie. Atlanticism). Or at least that used to be the point of NATO. I have no idea what the point of it is now.

tomp•31m ago

Do you have any source for that?

From my perspective, as an European, there's plenty of forces / population within the EU that doesn't want federalization.

Even myself, I'm generally pro-federalization (necessary to solve some structural problems, border, army, money), I definitely don't want to give even more power to Germany (biggest and most powerful EU country), so the only way forward would be for Germany to massively diminish their power... but then they probably wouldn't want that.

LatteLazy•1m ago

I think we’re at risk of confusing 2 issues here

1. Has the pressure for more intervention and an EU armed forces gone up?

2. What will that look like, who will pay for it, who will control it, will Germany dominate it etc

I am just saying trump is driving point (1). How or whether (2) is solved is another matter and a more complex thing.

I personally think as need goes up, ways are found. So far people have been unwilling because the points above (2) outweigh the need (1). If trump invaded Greenland then I imagine people would be much more willing to engage even if it meant paying, accepting German leadership (or Germany accepting less oversight despite paying?) etc.

We have already seen France unilaterally extend its nuclear umbrella.

That is what happened with finances: Germany wouldn’t accept EU wide debt, and many countries wouldn’t accept German style fiscal constraints. Then the euro crisis forced both sides to compromise and here we are with both.

I hope it doesn’t take an actual military crisis to force the matter here. But one (two actually, trump on one side, Russia on the other) is looking available…

aurareturn•44m ago

If the US shows more signs or actually takes Greenland, it will trigger many countries around the world to do the same. China will certainly say it now has the right to take Taiwan because if the US can annex a territory, why not us?

Could lead to a very tumultuous decade.

Partisan Gerrymandering After Rucho

QEMU 10.1.0

No time to spend with your kids because you're busy coding?

Pig Lung Transplanted into a Human in Major Scientific First: ScienceAlert

Fixing an old .NET Core native library loading issue on Alpine

Show HN: Autofill forms with mock data for testing

John Roberts and the death of rule of law in America

Wolves Reject £55M Newcastle Bid for Strand Larsen

More than 100 companies are chasing an AI chip gold rush. Few will surive

Popular nx packages compromised on NPM

Monodraw

India's Russian Oil Gains Wiped Out by U.S. Tariffs

Framework Laptop 16 Gets a Nvidia RTX 5070 GPU Upgrade

Canaries in the Coal Mine? Recent Employment Effects of Artificial Intelligence [pdf]

MIT's 95% AI failure rate is wrong

Show HN: Get Web Vitals metrics straight on the SERP

Harald Jäger

Job Churn

Show HN: To To-Do – Collaborative Task Lists with AI and Dexie.js

Colorazen – My first $50 MRR project (adult coloring pages, now with AI)

Parents of teenager who died sue OpenAI

Hands Deep – A Journey into the Demoscene

AWS services scale to new heights for Prime Day 2025: key metrics and milestones

Let's Stop Nudification Apps Together

Ask HN: Stuck in maintenance work at FAANG, worried about stagnation – advice?

SSL is DEAD

Breaking the Creepy AI in Police Cameras [video]

Building Agents for Small Language Models: A Deep Dive into Lightweight AI

C++ or Rust: Differences Explained

Show HN: Safari extension for blocking YouTube AI translations

Partisan Gerrymandering After Rucho

QEMU 10.1.0

No time to spend with your kids because you're busy coding?

Pig Lung Transplanted into a Human in Major Scientific First: ScienceAlert

Fixing an old .NET Core native library loading issue on Alpine

Show HN: Autofill forms with mock data for testing

John Roberts and the death of rule of law in America

Wolves Reject £55M Newcastle Bid for Strand Larsen

More than 100 companies are chasing an AI chip gold rush. Few will surive

Popular nx packages compromised on NPM

Monodraw

India's Russian Oil Gains Wiped Out by U.S. Tariffs

Framework Laptop 16 Gets a Nvidia RTX 5070 GPU Upgrade

Canaries in the Coal Mine? Recent Employment Effects of Artificial Intelligence [pdf]

MIT's 95% AI failure rate is wrong

Show HN: Get Web Vitals metrics straight on the SERP

Harald Jäger

Job Churn

Show HN: To To-Do – Collaborative Task Lists with AI and Dexie.js

Colorazen – My first $50 MRR project (adult coloring pages, now with AI)

Parents of teenager who died sue OpenAI

Hands Deep – A Journey into the Demoscene

AWS services scale to new heights for Prime Day 2025: key metrics and milestones

Let's Stop Nudification Apps Together

Ask HN: Stuck in maintenance work at FAANG, worried about stagnation – advice?

SSL is DEAD

Breaking the Creepy AI in Police Cameras [video]

Building Agents for Small Language Models: A Deep Dive into Lightweight AI

C++ or Rust: Differences Explained

Show HN: Safari extension for blocking YouTube AI translations

Denmark summons top US diplomat over alleged Greenland influence operation

Comments