frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

Meta Announces New AI Glasses and Band

https://www.meta.com/ai-glasses/meta-ray-ban-display/
1•dream000•25s ago•0 comments

Meta Ray-Ban Display: A Breakthrough Category of AI Glasses

https://www.meta.com/blog/meta-ray-ban-display-ai-glasses-connect-2025/
1•bpierre•34s ago•0 comments

Show HN: Hacker News Analyzer – LLM summaries of the most active threads

https://hackernewsanalyzer.com/
1•sahn44•2m ago•0 comments

Everyone has a Chinese peptide dealer now

https://sfstandard.com/2025/09/14/everyone-has-chinese-peptide-dealer-now/
1•pogue•5m ago•1 comments

U.S. sees 5.7M more childless women than expected

https://www.psypost.org/u-s-sees-5-7-million-more-childless-women-than-expected-fueling-a-demogra...
3•geox•9m ago•3 comments

Waze for parking – don't pay the meter

https://parkremark.com/demo
1•benlimner•13m ago•1 comments

Show HN: Visual Prompts for Coding Agents

https://github.com/adiasg/prompt-canvas
1•adiasg•15m ago•0 comments

Most referrals never turn into meetings. Why does this happen?

2•kez_•15m ago•2 comments

Meta Ray-Ban Display: A Breakthrough Category of AI Glasses

https://www.meta.com/fr-fr/blog/meta-ray-ban-display-ai-glasses-connect-2025/
6•martpie•16m ago•3 comments

Meta Ray-Ban Display hands-on: the best I've ever tried

https://www.theverge.com/tech/779566/meta-ray-ban-display-hands-on-smart-glasses-price-battery-specs
6•coloneltcb•19m ago•0 comments

Why Bell Labs Worked (But the Likes of Google and Apple Don't)

https://manganiello.social/notice/AukwkbWFAQDB0uXM80
2•donjoe0•20m ago•0 comments

US Faces Global Free Speech Showdown with Brazil

https://www.newsweek.com/us-free-speech-showdown-brazil-2130732
4•smnthermes•23m ago•0 comments

Xkcd: Free Speech

https://xkcd.com/1357/
7•good8675309•26m ago•1 comments

Is It Time to Rethink Stream Processing?

https://www.epsio.io/blog/on-the-future-of-data-streaming
3•dkgs1998•26m ago•0 comments

Playstation 5 SSD Shrinkflation

https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/playstation/playstation-5-digital-edition-with-1tb-ssd-d...
2•zdw•27m ago•0 comments

Bitcoin Is Worse Is Better (2011)

https://gwern.net/bitcoin-is-worse-is-better
2•greyface-•27m ago•0 comments

FileFix: A New Attack Hides Malware in Plain Sight

https://securityonline.info/filefix-a-new-attack-hides-malware-in-plain-sight/
1•kPwn•29m ago•0 comments

Stepping Down as Libxml2 Maintainer

https://discourse.gnome.org/t/stepping-down-as-libxml2-maintainer/31398
1•zdw•29m ago•0 comments

Meta: Failed Live AI Demo

https://www.facebook.com/Meta/videos/meta-connect-keynote/1927325824791552/
6•arnab_optimatik•34m ago•3 comments

ABC pulls 'Jimmy Kimmel Live' off air 'indefinitely' over Charlie Kirk comments

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/17/charlie-kirk-jimmy-kimmel-abc-disney.html
46•donsupreme•36m ago•15 comments

Show HN: PageIndex MCP – Chat with Long PDFs on Claude or Cursor

https://pageindex.ai/mcp
1•mingtianzhang•37m ago•0 comments

Activity Type Effects Signal Quality in Electrocardiogram Devices

https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/25/16/5186
1•PaulHoule•38m ago•0 comments

What's the Deal with U.F.O.s?

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/annals-of-inquiry/whats-the-deal-with-ufos
1•pseudolus•39m ago•2 comments

Three years of apathy, lassitude, and failure

https://samkriss.substack.com/p/three-years-of-apathy-lassitude-and
1•paulpauper•40m ago•0 comments

Reactions to If Anyone Builds It, Anyone Dies

https://thezvi.substack.com/p/reactions-to-if-anyone-builds-it
1•paulpauper•41m ago•0 comments

Ask HN: What Are You Reading?

1•ImPleadThe5th•41m ago•0 comments

Aiwaf: An AI-Powered Web Application Firewall for Django/Flask

1•aayushgauba•41m ago•0 comments

Django.tasks Exists

https://theorangeone.net/posts/django-dot-tasks-exists/
2•Bogdanp•41m ago•0 comments

Xmonad seeking help for Wayland port

https://xmonad.org/news/2023/10/06/wayland.html
1•clircle•42m ago•0 comments

Tariffs Kill the Starling Home Hub, Google Nest's Best Bridge to Apple Home

https://www.theverge.com/news/780013/starling-home-hub-discontinued-google-nest-apple-home-bridge
1•latexr•43m ago•1 comments
Open in hackernews

ABC Pulls Jimmy Kimmel Live from the Air 'Indefinitely'

https://www.vulture.com/article/abc-pulls-jimmy-kimmel-live-from-the-air-indefinitely.html
135•pulisse•1h ago

Comments

xenospn•1h ago
Hey look it’s cancel culture all over again
bediger4000•1h ago
I thought we had freedom of speech, and we're broadly against "cancel culture".
paxys•1h ago
It's only cancel culture when the left does it.

And this one is infinitely worse than a bunch of internet commenters disagreeing with his comments or private advertisers pulling out. Trump and the FCC directly threatened to pull ABC's license unless they regulated his speech, and ABC caved. The first amendment is dead and people are celebrating on the streets because their favorite political party was the one to kill it.

ranger_danger•1h ago
Sounds like it's time for Jimmy to retire... there's no point in fighting this anymore and I'm sure his family is ready for him to quit anyway.

We've sure come a long way from The Man Show.

fennec-posix•59m ago
god, that's a blast from the past...
armenarmen•1h ago
The right, has for the past decade or so taken a moral high ground with regards to cancelation. Seems that now they've adopted a "turnaround is fair play" mentality.
paxys•1h ago
The right is simply good at PR. People forget that they invented cancel culture. Dixie Chicks anyone?
armenarmen•1h ago
I had totally forgotten about that!
XorNot•1h ago
Video games all through the 90s as well.
xnx•1h ago
> The right is simply good at PR

One of the defining characteristics of the right is not placing any value on logical consistency. Being a hypocrite will not lose you any support with them.

user982•1h ago
Hypocrisy is a show of power.
pupppet•1h ago
They protect their own above all else. Is their own a POS? Oh well.
HK-NC•11m ago
Applies to left also.
VikingCoder•1h ago
Sorry, I thought you were going to end your line with "McCarthyism".
wrs•1h ago
Turns out they're not all that big on "free speech" in general! Who knew.
billy99k•9m ago
Spreading lies about a terrorist, which will result in more violence, needs to be censored.

On top of this, Leftists use the system of free speech to rot our system from the inside and then feign shock when there is finally push back.

I welcome more networks finally waking up.

epicureanideal•1h ago
Is there some way the two sides could reliably arrive at a truce on the issue of cancellation?
armenarmen•1h ago
Prisoners' dilemma at scale. I don't think a truce is doable unless reporting someone for having what you believe to be unsavory opinions becomes a major social faux pas
XorNot•1h ago
Who do you imagine represents the "sides" in negotiations? Do they have names and group bodies which they represent? Are they able to sign and enforce diplomatic agreements?
techpineapple•1h ago
I think the problem is it’s not the moderate 80% of each party that’s doing it, so all of the people who might be inclined to a truce are already at the table waiting.
xp84•1h ago
Couldn't agree more with this. The majority of Americans think that the "leftest and rightest" people they know are absolute wackos.
fullshark•1h ago
Not gonna happen until the left acknowledges its cultural dominance and how it's shaped public discourse the past 15 years via fear.
lawlessone•1h ago
Are things like racism and sexism being bad exclusive to the left?
UtopiaPunk•45m ago
Pronouns? Or do you mean something else?
kulahan•1h ago
I don’t think they need to. I think they just need to shake hands and say it’s okay to have a different opinion.

There have been a number of studies around the world, plus some real world examples (Utah gubernatorial 2020) where showing your opponents in a sympathetic light can make a big difference in reductions in political polarization.

It’s especially effective when signaled by the “elite”: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00323217241300...

Edit: I hear plenty of stories of people abandoning family members over a difference of political opinion. My MIL won’t talk to a niece of hers after the niece made the same decision. I won’t go so far as to say that’s never warranted, but it seems these days that it’s happening a lot more.

To me, this implies we’re losing acceptability of political “others”.

rat87•1h ago
What truce? Sometimes cancelation is good, sometimes it's not. It depends on the why. Also Republican principles these days are just to blindly follow whatever Trump wants including complaining about cancelation and renaming bases to confederate generals and blackmailing companies into firing people
binary132•3m ago
Someone was just murdered for his opinions so no, that doesn’t seem likely. I think that’s one cancelation too far, and I don’t think there’s going to be any meaningful coming back from it.
ceejayoz•1h ago
> The right, has for the past decade or so taken a moral high ground with regards to cancelation.

Have you been in a coma for that decade?

kulahan•1h ago
Man, can you at least elaborate? This kind of comment isn’t what I wanna see HN devolve into.

He’s definitely right with that sentence. Do you not think it’s generally true that the right has been on the defensive with regards to cancel culture, and thus is constantly preaching about how cancelling is wrong?

The few times they’ve gotten to go on the offensive, they play the same game, cancelling whoever it is they’re upset about. It’s horseshoe theory all over again.

ceejayoz•1h ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._national_anthem_kneeling_...
kulahan•1h ago
Never mind, please just read commenting rules moving forward.
ceejayoz•1h ago
“Do not cite the Deep Magic to me, Witch! I was there when it was written.“
PaulHoule•1h ago
I first saw a moral panic over ‘cancel culture’ circa 2013 from The Atlantic and the opinion page of the New York Times. (The first because it’s demo is the naive liberal and pearl clutching parents of college students and the second because folks like Brooks and Blow don’t want to be canceled themselves). It was until 2017 or so that conservatives noticed the phenomenon and started to talk about it in The National Review and such.

Ezra Klein, who I generally respect, said he got more crap over

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/11/opinion/charlie-kirk-assa...

than anything else he’s written but I think it was unfortunate that he chose the words because Kirk, among other things, promoted Trump’s lies about the 2000 election, bussed people to the Jan 6 riot, and had a hit list of professors he wanted to punish just like David Horowitz, dad of the Andressen-Horowitz Horowitz. That bit about “prove me wrong” was always disingenuous, it would fool the pearl clutching parents who read The Atlantic and the likes of Ezra Klein. Probably the most harmful thing about illiberal campus leftists is that they allowed illiberal rightists to appear to take the high ground.

tptacek•1h ago
This is one of those interminable sprawling message board arguments that has a really simple resolution nobody wants to accept, which is that commitment to free expression and "right/left" are mostly orthogonal, and both the right and the left weaponize commitment to free expression when it makes sense for them to.
GuinansEyebrows•1h ago
i get what you're saying but "the left" has basically zero political power in the united states. it never has. the closest we ever were was with FDR but i wouldn't consider a leader who operated concentration camps to be leftist by any stretch.

we have a right wing and then a righter wing. bernie sanders is an anomaly, elizabeth warren is just left of center, and i can't think of too many other current politicians at the national level who actually lean left. i guess nominally "the squad" but they mostly present fairly centrist platforms by worldwide standards. no current politicians at the national stage are talking about meaningful economic reform (as in, away from capitalism), police abolition, nationalized health care, or any other typical leftist ideas - not that i'm trying to argue any of these points in this thread - just providing examples of what i mean by "leftist".

whether or not "the left" weaponizes commitment to free expression, "the right" is the only side of that binary who has ever wielded serious political power, and they use it to extremely destructive ends at all times.

maybe someday if we ever have a political party that actually represents leftwing politics we can judge them as harshly. i'll wait.

CamperBob2•39m ago
...but i wouldn't consider a leader who operated concentration camps to be leftist by any stretch.

And that's my cue to take yet another hit to my HN karma by asking, incredulously, "WTF are they teaching kids in school these days?"

ceejayoz•37m ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_Japanese_America...

> During World War II, the United States forcibly relocated and incarcerated about 120,000 people of Japanese descent in ten concentration camps operated by the War Relocation Authority (WRA), mostly in the western interior of the country.

> During World War II, the camps were referred to both as relocation centers and concentration camps by government officials and in the press. Roosevelt himself referred to the camps as concentration camps on different occasions, including at a press conference held on October 20, 1942.

> In a 1961 interview, Harry S. Truman stated "They were concentration camps. They called it relocation but they put them in concentration camps, and I was against it. We were in a period of emergency, but it was still the wrong thing to do."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentration_camp

> Not to be confused with Extermination camp. A concentration camp is a prison or other facility used for the internment of political prisoners or politically targeted demographics, such as members of national or ethnic minority groups, on the grounds of national security, or for exploitation or punishment.

CamperBob2•31m ago
Very good, you've addressed half of the proposition. Now do the other half, specifically the part about how True Leftists don't do things like that.
ceejayoz•26m ago
I mean, they don’t. Just like True Conservatives don’t leverage the government to interfere like this.

People are more contradictory than pure theory. FDR was progressive in some aspects, regressive in others. A leftie, he wasn’t, and there’s more to politics than mere left/right, or we wouldn’t have trans Trump supporters.

CamperBob2•24m ago
How about Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot? Were they lefties?
ceejayoz•3m ago
Same shit as Trump - the self-proclaimed label and the actions are wildly disparate.

They - and Hitler - are notable for their totalitarianism. I bear no illusions that folks like Stalin wanted anything more than power.

somewholeother•54m ago
The horseshoe is a bit like a boomerang in that regard, both in form and function!
yongjik•1h ago
IMO, being able to cry louder for persecution complex does not equal a moral high ground.
throwawa14223•1h ago
I believe they changed when the government put pressure on social media during COVID. I think that caused a huge attitude shift among the right.
zzgo•1h ago
Bill Maher rather famously lost his job on ABC 20+ years ago related to his comments about the 9/11 hijackers. I don't think conservatives cancelling people in the media for speech they don't like is anything new within the last 5 years.
SketchySeaBeast•26m ago
Wasn't a lot of that pressure coming from a right wing government? COVID's initial year and a bit was under the first Trump admin.
rat87•1h ago
They have not in any sense taken any high ground

The right has consistently tried to cancel people, has tried to censor people, has complained/played the refs about moderation saying their rights to say racist stuff was being infringed even when it was a moderation decision by a private company not the government

And then under Trump it's only gotten worse/more divorced from any principles

bitlax•1h ago
Dumb. We were talking about singing along with a rap song or dressing like Michael Jackson in 1985, not malicious false accusations of murder or cheering someone's assassination.
ceejayoz•54m ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_body_count_conspiracy_... dates back at least to the mid 90s.
bitlax•47m ago
You're making my point.
GeekyBear•1h ago
> The right, has for the past decade or so taken a moral high ground with regards to cancelation.

If you are going to morally judge the actions behind cancellation attempts, "I don't find Dave Chappelle's jokes funny" is not morally equivalent to "I don't think people should celebrate the murder of those they disagree with."

maxerickson•57m ago
Jimmy Kimmel didn't celebrate a murder. He criticized the cynical exploitation of a murder.
tonfreed•43m ago
Why would we defend the rights of someone that refuses to defend ours?
JohnFen•20m ago
Because "their" rights and "our" rights (whoever "us" and "them" happen to be) are one and the same. You wouldn't be defending or attacking "their" rights, you'd be defending or attacking rights in general, and that includes yours.
dismalaf•1h ago
Believe it or not, alienating politics isn't great for business. Neither is peddling conspiracy theories.
ceejayoz•1h ago
It worked pretty well for the Murdochs.
Bud•1h ago
Neither of those things occurred, here. Kimmel's remarks were extraordinarily mild, and they also happen to be entirely true.
xp84•49m ago
Nobody has provided any evidence that I've seen that the murderer was motivated by a right-wing anything, and frankly as the least logical conclusion it needs sources. I read that the person who turned him in (or an acquaintance) said that he was the only leftist in a family of hard right people. [Apologies for the lack of source; I read it as news was breaking and don't have the link]

It's a nonsensical argument that the attack was random. It's farfetched that it was for some unrelated-to-politics reason given that these men as far as we know had no connection to each other, and it's nonsensical to believe that someone beloved by most people in the right wing would be targeted by a fellow right-winger.

If someone like AOC or Bernie Sanders was viciously attacked at an event, you can't tell me that you would accept an unsourced assertion that "it was actually a marxist that harmed them."

thatswrong0•30m ago
> it's nonsensical to believe that someone beloved by most people in the right wing would be targeted by a fellow right-winger

Look up groypers and Nick Fuentes - he's a right winger who was NOT a fan of Charlie Kirk and amassed a following about it. There is _some_ very mild evidence to believe that it's possible (I personally don't think that's the case FWIW)

defrost•1h ago
What I had believed, as an outsider to the US, was that US Federal politicians directly leveraging business decisions over a speech issue was explicitly unconstitutional.

What I've come to realise is that few are prepared to bell the cat and prosecute unconstitutional behaviour.

bix6•52m ago
We’re trying but the lower courts keep getting overruled by a corrupt Supreme Court.
defrost•34m ago
It's a tough one, even without the Supreme Court issues, Kimmel alone is circumstantial at best; sure, the current POTUS is on record saying that Kimmel would be next to get the chop, but that proves nothing- any actual action taken would, I assume, be just pressure with no paper trail - classic intimidation leverage made famous by Scorsese.
tenuousemphasis•1h ago
The FCC threatened to revoke ABC's broadcast license. That is government censorship, a direct attack on free speech.
dismalaf•1h ago
Kimmel was straight up spreading misinformation about the shooter.

Is US free speech absolute? In Canada and most of Europe, false speech especially when it can be interpreted as defamatory isn't protected...

SketchySeaBeast•1h ago
> Kimmel was straight up spreading misinformation about the shooter.

There's been an absolute ton of that going around. Who else has been pulled from the air?

What Kimmel said was

> “The MAGA Gang (is) desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” Kimmel said. “In between the finger-pointing, there was grieving.”[1]

If that's "misinformation", and I'd love to hear how any part of that beside being "one of them" could even be considered so; regardless, it's pretty mild compared to some of the crazy shit we've been hearing lately.

[1] https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/article/abc-yanks-jimmy-kimmels...

rat87•1h ago
It's fairly absolute. There are exceptions but they are usually narrower then most people think. Proving defamation especially against a public figure is difficult on purpose.

As for spreading misinformation if that was illegal the whole Trump administration and fox would be in deep trouble

_DeadFred_•48m ago
'FOX NEWS' told the court they were innocent because they don't report news, they give opinion, and opinion doesn't have to be true.
davesque•19m ago
Yes, I agree. So let it be business then instead of explicitly making it ideological?
dismalaf•7m ago
Firing someone for making a political statement is business. You never want to alienate half your consumer base.

COVID is still fresh enough that people should remember. If you were pro or anti anything 5 years ago it probably hurt you since sentiment swung both ways and both positions look silly in hindsight.

tptacek•1h ago
Keep in mind that Kimmel has been hinting about retiring for a couple years now, his contract was up in the air, the "late night television show" category is evaporating (if there's still even a Tonight Show in 10 years, it'll be purely for nostalgia), and this sends Kimmel out in a blaze of glory.

I think it's too easy to sort of anthropomorphize these kinds of conflicts --- Kimmel's show has a large staff, and he's responsible for their livelihoods --- but it wouldn't be totally out of the question that Kimmel steered right into this.

There's nothing new about this, though: ABC also took Bill Maher off the air, 20 years ago, almost identical circumstances. Maher wound up at HBO. Kimmel will wind up on a podcast, and, like Conan, probably gain in relevance.

Moments later

I think some people here might be too young to immediately get the Maher reference, but the point there was: he was forced off the air for political reasons as well.

throwawaylaptop•1h ago
I thought this was because he said the Charlie Kirk shooter was a Republic maga guy, when there was already more than enough info showing he wasn't and anyone in media would know that.
BolexNOLA•1h ago
the WSJ has faced no repercussions for all their initial reporting either. It’s ridiculous.
tptacek•1h ago
That's kind of what I mean by steering directly into this.
throwawaylaptop•1h ago
So he misinformed millions of people for the sole purpose of getting fired from his job instead of just resigning? Nice guy.
jimmydoe•1h ago
so far it seems the kid is friendly to trans, and loves guns, which fits neither lefty or maga labels. rushing to conclusion seems peak american idiocracy
ranger_danger•50m ago
> more than enough info

Source:

bigyabai•1h ago
Deeeeeeeefinitely not the political angle. Anything but, really.
ranger_danger•1h ago
I got downvoted for saying the same thing... go figure.
mooreds•1h ago
Here's a video of the Maher reference: https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/1c672...
magicalist•1h ago
> There's nothing new about this, though: ABC also took Bill Maher off the air, 20 years ago, almost identical circumstances

Leaving aside "similar things have happened before, therefore we shouldn't care about things" nihilist take, this doesn't even appear to be true.

I don't remember the firing that well, but looking it up now, ABC didn't renew his contract, which meant he was kept on the air for another 9 months after he made his comments just 6 days after 9/11. This was also several months after the Sinclair Broadcast Group stopped showing the show on their affiliates.

So not at all similar to the "snap to attention" apparently here.

tptacek•4m ago
Please don't put words I didn't say in between quotation marks as if I had said them.
moogly•10m ago
> There's nothing new about this, though

Threats from the head of the FCC bandied about on a far-right podcast? Hello?

vFunct•1h ago
What's the end game of these right-wing legacy media? The median age of TV viewers is like 65. How do they expect to maintain any viewership once all the elderly people die off? The only thing people watch anymore are live sports and local news, and even those are showing signs of declining.
techpineapple•1h ago
There was an article recently that basically said lots of moves on the right aren’t strategic they’re ideological. So yeah, I think the right really wants to control media, and isn’t worried about the inevitable backlash.

But I do keep thinking about the fact that the move to the right among young men, will probably pretty quickly reverse itself, if they keep going after media/video games/porn, etc.

Gigachad•39m ago
It’s not the company behind this. The federal government forced them to do this. All media is being taken over by the state.
wstrange•33m ago
Well, you have Larry Ellison and Elon doing their best to corner social media - so I think the right wing has it's bases covered.
potato3732842•7m ago
>What's the end game of these right-wing legacy media?

Probably to wring a few bucks out as they circle the drain in the same fashion as every other old formerly prestigious brand name.

breadwinner•1h ago
Are we officially Trumpistan yet? Consider this: Stephen Colbert was cancelled, many suspect, to please Trump. Now Jimmy Kimmel for saying that the murderer might be MAGA. Trump is suing New York Times for $15 Billion for "defamation". Universities, lawyers, media, all being silenced. The administration is violating the constitution continuously, including 1st amendment, emoluments clause, etc. Violating laws continuously, and suggesting a lot of Americans actually want a dictator. At what point do we say we are no longer a democracy, we are Trumpistan?
paxys•1h ago
The fact that comments on HN saying that the government shouldn't threaten to jail citizens for first amendement protected speech are getting downvoted and flagged should tell you that we are way beyond that point.
tptacek•1h ago
Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

tptacek•1h ago
Colbert was almost certainly on track to be cancelled anyways. The program was tremendously expensive and was losing boatloads of money. I don't know if Trump accelerated the cancellation or not, but the writing was on the wall.
xp84•58m ago
Indeed, it was just a smart move by Viacom/whatever to curry some favor with Trump by doing it now instead of waiting for another time, figuring that favor would be more valuable than the bad PR they earned. Probably a good bet since with the mergers (including the one they themselves were supposedly trying to push across the finish line) it's impractical to hold grudges for long. With only a few oligarchic firms in each industry you can't practically boycott more than maybe one at a time, and they all do shady stuff.
allturtles•51m ago
It's exactly the problem that currying favor with the President is a smart move for businesses.
potato3732842•9m ago
Turns out Ajit Pai was actually a visionary who saw the political writing on the wall. He attempted to dismantle the agency to a point where it couldn't do anything and by not being able to do anything it couldn't be used for evil and wasn't worth corrupting. It was a long con to get the FCC to survive the 2020s. If only we had listened to him. (This is satire)
collinfunk•13m ago
He also sued The Des Moines Register because they released a poll that he did not like [1]. It is sad that people defend this.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/17/us/politics/trump-sues-de...

alpha_squared•1h ago
I'm unsure where we as a society go from here. The left's cancel culture resulted in the firing of private citizens from their jobs, or at least some reprimand. The right's cancel culture is the full weight of the federal government brought down against opposition, in stark violation of the First Amendment; that is, until the Supreme Court can find some new carve-out for why this isn't protected speech.

Realistically, how could anyone be okay with the level of power this administration is wielding? I struggle to see a peaceful transfer of this specific set of powers. Unless the assumption is just that the left will always behave "more responsibly."

moogly•14m ago
> the assumption is just that the left will always behave "more responsibly."

Probably true, which means you're in for a full-blown dictatorship for, oh, 30 years or so before (perhaps) some violent revolution.

JohnFen•11m ago
We start by rejecting the cartoon labels of "left" and "right" as if all conservatives or all liberals believe the same things and think the same way. The left/right division is a longstanding technique intended to keep us divided.

The reality is that outside of the actual extremists, liberals and conservatives agree on 80% of everything. We can, and need to, start there. We are all Americans and have to realize that just because we may disagree about things (particularly a small percentage of things) doesn't have to mean we're enemies.

But, if history offers any lessons, then our path is likely set and we're going to have to push through some nightmarish times before we find a way to be better.

pppp•1h ago
Nexstar, who initially threaten to pull Kimmel's show from all (200) of its stations and started this ball rolling, owns ALL THREE OF OUR LOCAL network affiliate stations. All 3 in one market. Remember when this was illegal?
magicalist•58m ago
> Nexstar, who initially threaten to pull Kimmel's show from all (200) of its stations

They also have a $6.2 billion bid for even more local stations by acquiring Tegna, a deal which will have to be approved by the guy at the FCC who yesterday was telling local affiliates to threaten to pull Kimmel's show!

https://apnews.com/article/nexstar-tegna-newsnation-cw-trump...

pppp•21m ago
Sorry, after the Tegna deal they will own all three stations in my market. Essentially, the viewpoints we see will be determined by one man.
iamdelirium•1h ago
Sorry but the fact is a government agency (the FCC) pushed for this. This is a completely different thing than Disney deciding to do it on its own.

This is a 1st amendment issue.

honeycrispy•1h ago
Where did you learn this?
iamdelirium•59m ago
https://www.foxnews.com/media/fcc-chair-levels-threat-agains...
panarchy•3m ago
Which is completely different from when leftists go "we're 'cancelling' this through individual boycott" which a lot of people in this comment section seem to be missing or intentionally misrepresenting.
_wire_•1h ago
Republicans are continually outraged by cancel culture, and Republican hypocrisy is (without hyperbole) sociopathic.

News just today--

Republican DoJ censored longitudinal study previously published by DoJ which revealed that far and away the most U.S. political violence is perpetrated by... Republicans! Both internally and internationally.

Utah Republicans put a suicide watch on Kirk-shooting suspect because they want the pleasure of killing him themselves.

Noem is bragging that she shot the family hunting dog because he was "worthless"; all he would do is "massacre chickens" at her hunting lodge, and tried to bite her. She also put down a "disgusting, musky billy goat" that lived around her compound. She said wanted to come clean and show how she can "responsibility". She bragged that the story of shooting her dog got her the top slot at ICE.

Republicans:

- Bullying - Bigotry - Censorship - Election interference - Gerrymandering - Blackballing - Targeting for death - Persecuting - Trafficking - Inciting & agitating - Grifting

The beat goes on.

As W used to say "You're either with us..."

rolph•55m ago
"Noem is bragging that she shot the family hunting dog because he was "worthless"; all he would do is "massacre chickens" at her hunting lodge, and tried to bite her. She also put down a "disgusting, musky billy goat" that lived around her compound. She said wanted to come clean and show how she can "responsibility". She bragged that the story of shooting her dog got her the top slot at ICE."

this is so chillingly reminiscent of a serial killers autobiography.

bitlax•1h ago
This is not cancel culture. What Jimmy Kimmel did was always out of bounds.
lawlessone•59m ago
what did he do here?

rate limited when i replied to you so my response below:

>We had some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and with everything they can to score political points from it.”

Where is the lie?

seanmcdirmid•50m ago
Not sure what the original text was, but FoxNews keeps trying to play up a tenuous trans angle, which they keep back tracking on. It is weird, creepy, and I really should stop looking at the FoxNews homepage to figure out what the other side is thinking.
soupbowl•1m ago
The kid wasn't 'MAGA' though.
davesque•18m ago
What did he do? Quotations and direct sources please.
coldtea•38m ago
"Weren't we supposed to have freedom of speech now?"

If you cheered for cancelling when the other side was calling the shots, why expect to have it now?

"Because the other side said they'd re-install it"

Well, apparently they lied.

But it would be so convenient if they didn't go back on that promise, wouldn't it? Then you'd get freedom of speech when they call the shots, and cancelling when your team calls the shots, win-win!

good8675309•22m ago
Relevant: https://xkcd.com/1357/
DeRock•4m ago
Actually not relevant, the pulling came after threats from the FCC: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/fcc-jimmy-kimme...
Sparkle-san•4m ago
This effort is being lead by the FCC commissioner threatening to pull licenses so you just need the first panel.
jjfoooo4•9m ago
I expected Kimmel to have somehow criticized Kirk, a dubious enough reason to pull the show. But this isn’t even that. Comments quoted in stories assert that the shooter was MAGA - maybe that’s somewhat controversial, but it’s ludicrous to suggest it’s offensive. That paired with comments criticizing the Dear Leader were enough. This is a new low in corporate cowardice toward Trump bullying.

Terrible precedent aside, how could Disney think that capitulating here will result in anything other than more attempts to control their programming in the short term?

nipperkinfeet•57s ago
All these late-night shows are terrible anyways. Cancel all of them and make room for actual shows.