frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

Lunar – LSP Surfaced Code Review

https://lunar-lsp.netlify.app/
1•thevedanta•37s ago•0 comments

Show HN: Two AI entities wouldn't write until we discussed their existence

https://github.com/wjcornelius/Claudefather/blob/main/THEY_ASKED_FIRST.md
1•BillCorOnBass•45s ago•0 comments

The Reason California Can't Build

https://www.theatlantic.com/economy/2026/03/california-housing-yimby-reforms/686334/
1•JumpCrisscross•1m ago•0 comments

Another Calif. company moves its HQ out of state, this time to Georgia

https://www.sfgate.com/california/article/yamaha-motor-headquarters-22062905.php
1•Alupis•1m ago•1 comments

Call for developers: Fossil for AI-agent dev

https://github.com/BenSiv/fossil-scm
1•bensiv•3m ago•1 comments

Virtual Math Museum

https://virtualmathmuseum.org/
1•narcraft•5m ago•0 comments

Claude Code Voice Mode

https://support.claude.com/en/articles/11101966-using-voice-mode
2•linolevan•6m ago•0 comments

Killing SaaS. Anatomy of a murder. How I replaced Wisprflow.ai with vibe coding

https://gpt3experiments.substack.com/p/killing-saas-the-anatomy-of-a-murder
1•nutanc•9m ago•0 comments

Ask HN: AI evaluation for an EV charger without additional installation?

1•chrisgd•9m ago•1 comments

Bubble Sorted Amen Break

https://parametricavocado.itch.io/amen-sorting
4•eieio•11m ago•1 comments

Show HN: A test harness that blocks unsafe AI actions before execution

1•celestinestudio•11m ago•0 comments

Grammarly Is Facing a Class Action Lawsuit over Its AI 'Expert Review' Feature

https://www.wired.com/story/grammarly-is-facing-a-class-action-lawsuit-over-its-ai-expert-review-...
1•laurex•12m ago•0 comments

If a web server runs websites then a corporation server? (2025)

https://interconnected.org/home/2025/03/13/homeostasis
2•alcazar•13m ago•0 comments

Linux Page Faults, MMAP, and userfaultfd for fast sandbox boot times

https://www.shayon.dev/post/2026/65/linux-page-faults-mmap-and-userfaultfd/
2•shayonj•14m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Cloud to Desktop in the Fastest Way

https://nativedesktop.com/
2•lasgawe•14m ago•0 comments

Software Maturity Wall

https://www.apolloacademy.com/software-maturity-wall/
1•akyuu•14m ago•0 comments

Fast and free coding agent written with Go

https://github.com/cheikh2shift/godex
1•cheikhshift•15m ago•0 comments

Show HN: PipeStep – Step-through debugger for GitHub Actions workflows

https://github.com/Photobombastic/pipestep
4•photobombastic•16m ago•2 comments

Apple's MacBook Neo makes repairs easier and cheaper than other MacBooks

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026/03/more-modular-design-makes-macbook-neo-easier-to-fix-than-...
6•GeekyBear•17m ago•2 comments

An agentic workflow, March 2026 edition

https://twolongos.com/3/12/an-agentic-workflow-march-2026-edition/
2•suzzer99•18m ago•1 comments

Is your vet owned by private equity?

https://privateequityvet.org/vet-list/
4•hampelm•18m ago•0 comments

Show HN: LogClaw – Open-source AI SRE that auto-creates tickets from logs

https://logclaw.ai
5•Robelkidin•18m ago•0 comments

WikiCity – Where every building is a Wikipedia article

https://wikicity.app/
2•leononame•19m ago•1 comments

Harness Engineering

https://openai.com/index/harness-engineering/
4•jlas•19m ago•0 comments

A Day in the Life of an Enshittificator [video]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4Upf_B9RLQ
2•KindAndFriendly•20m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Understudy – Teach a desktop agent by demonstrating a task once

https://github.com/understudy-ai/understudy
4•bayes-song•20m ago•0 comments

Inboxscan – find every subscription hiding in your email (runs locally)

https://github.com/LakshmiSravyaVedantham/inboxscan
2•sravyavedantham•20m ago•1 comments

Ask HN: In 2026, how do you share a list of URLs to the public (or friends)?

2•wenbin•23m ago•1 comments

Work_mem: It's a Trap

https://mydbanotebook.org/posts/work_mem-its-a-trap/
2•giulianopz•24m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Fixing Agent / LLM Context Decay in VS Code with Git Worktrees

https://www.appsoftware.com/blog/fixing-agent-llm-context-decay-in-vs-code-with-git-worktrees
4•gbro3n•25m ago•0 comments
Open in hackernews

US- and Greek-owned tankers ablaze after Iran claims 'underwater drone' strike

https://www.lloydslist.com/LL1156592/US--and-Greek-owned-tankers-ablaze-after-Iran-claims-underwater-drone-strike-in-Iraqi-waters
139•everybodyknows•1h ago

Comments

science4sail•1h ago
This is all about Hormuz, isn't it? Even though the attack itself was in Basra, Iraq, the intention seems to be to terrify any companies thinking of sailing through the Persian Gulf.

I wonder how many more caches of drones Iran has lying around. Days? Weeks? Years?

There's also the question of how to resupply any anti-drone systems in the area - maybe we'll see convoys carrying interceptors crossing the Arabian desert.

bluegatty•1h ago
Not so much 'terrify' as a hint to the insurance adjusters who set prices and therefore control the flow.

'Nope'

They'll signal something else later and things will open up.

JumpCrisscross•1h ago
A week ago we saw Iranian and Greek vessels plying the Strait [1]. I guess Tehran is now establishing its monopoly.

[1] https://gcaptain.com/iranian-shadow-fleet-and-greek-affiliat...

sschueller•1h ago
These tankers aren't easily replaceable are they? As in it takes significant time to build them.

Even if Trump's claims that the war will end shortly were true. Oil prices are guaranteed not coming down if many more of these ships are sunk.

Urahandystar•1h ago
Oh yeah, The Oil crisis in the 1970's effects were felt until the mid 80's this is just starting and it isn't going to go away anytime soon.
derektank•1h ago
Roughly 3 years. That being said, there’s thousands of carriers globally and they have maybe a 25 year lifespan, so a couple of ships becoming inoperable is largely negligible.

https://public.axsmarine.com/blog/build-time-for-new-vessels...

BoredPositron•1h ago
The two which got hit are pretty small and old ones. They were probably used to test the water after the CEO of the Greek one said they want to try to run it. If Russia didn't suck the graveyards dry for use in their shadowfleet there should be some skeletons around that could be refurbished pretty fast.
bluegatty•1h ago
There are a surplus of tankers, that's not the problem.

The problem is they are halted, which causes price spikes.

$120/barrel Oil will screw up the whole world.

ElectricalUnion•1h ago
They don't even need that many mines or bombs to start with, presence of wreckage on the shipping lanes that aren't more that 75m deep would already put all shipping at risk.
NickC25•1h ago
Also, the amount of oil spilling into such a small area can't be good for the environment, can't be good for local marine life (if there is any), etc....
marcosdumay•1h ago
Restarting the oil wheels that are closed now will take years already.
bootsmann•1h ago
Noone could’ve seen this coming, how were they supposed to know that the strait of hormuz is so important!
yxhuvud•1h ago
I'm actually somewhat surprised Iran is openly telling us they are using underwater drones for this. That piece of technological advance has gone mostly under the radar (!) so far.
chinathrow•1h ago
> That piece of technological advance has gone mostly under the radar (!) so far

The Ukraine would like to have a word.

yxhuvud•1h ago
The drones that are mainly used there are the flying kind.
trynumber9•1h ago
"Mainly" but they've been assaulting Russian boats and ships with USVs and submersibles.

For example - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Baby#Sub_Sea_Baby

cyberax•39m ago
Ukraine completely locked up the Russian fleet inside its bases with the underwater drones.
simonw•1h ago
Underwater drones, not drones in general.
bootsmann•40m ago
Ukraine has been sinking Russian warships in their harbor using underwater drones for at least a year now.
bootsmann•1h ago
It’s Ukraine, no “the”.
comrade1234•1h ago
In many languages the article is necessary. I assume English is their second language.
bootsmann•1h ago
Yes but as one of the other commenters pointed out, its a charged term when it comes to Ukraine so its worth mentioning to people that use it accidentally.
technothrasher•1h ago
FYI, "The Ukraine" is politically charged wording held over from Soviet times, and implies that it is part of Russia. The independent country is known simply as "Ukraine".
cloche•1h ago
How do you explain "back in the USSR"?
jjgreen•58m ago
... or "Born in the USA"
SideburnsOfDoom•34m ago
For the same reason as "The UK" or "The USA" - all of them are acronyms starting "The Union of ..." or "The United ...".

Similarly you say "The commonwealth of Massachusetts" but not "The Massachusetts".

This does not apply to Ukraine, unless you want to say "The Republic of Ukraine".

comrade1234•1h ago
There are plenty of languages with gendered country names. Ukraine is die Ukraine (feminine gender) in German and the article is necessary since changing the article changes the meaning of what you're expressing. Whenever I see/hear "the Ukraine" I assume English is their second language.
RobotToaster•1h ago
What defense is there against something like this? AFAIK only a few US aircraft carriers are equipped with anti torpedo torpedoes, and one of those sitting in the straight would be pretty vulnerable.

Of course that could be the entire idea.

wing-_-nuts•1h ago
This is very much a 'you break it, you buy it' situation. The US should be running destroyer screens for convoys a la WW2 today, yet AFAIK the US fleet is sitting hundreds of miles out of the Persian Gulf, within bombing range, outside of easy strike range.
mothballed•1h ago
It would be cheaper just to build an oil pipeline around it than to cover insurance and risk through that Strait. It would do well to just forget the Strait exists, our conflict has taken it out of commission for the indefinite future.
lm28469•1h ago
Let's replace a choke point by an even smaller single static point of failure transporting highly flammable content, are you an adviser for the white house? If not you should apply
mothballed•37m ago
You might be surprised to find out the Abu Dhabi pipeline, which does this exact thing, is still running.
wing-_-nuts•1h ago
Cheaper but less resilient to attacks. Pipelines are fixed infra, and are imminently targetible by even the smallest drones. One successful attack and your entire pipeline is down.

Probably a 'why not both' question though. If the US could quick deploy enough pipelines to support the entire d-day offensive back during ww2 I don't see why we couldn't do so today

lenkite•56m ago
Good idea, but pipeline would need to be 100m underground
jmward01•1h ago
Yes. I think the biggest issues though are:

- We likely don't have the assets to move the amount traffic that needs to get through

- We probably can't protect them perfectly (we don't have maritime supremacy) so ships will still take damage and that will stop the convoys pretty quickly

I suspect the escort ships would be fine though. They can defend themselves.

So if we did start them, they wouldn't continue for long until the economic pain was pretty massive and the cost of loosing ships was worth it.

lm28469•1h ago
> The US should be running destroyer screens for convoys a la WW2 today,

That's harder than bombing schools, goat herders or kidnapping the leader of the most corrupt country in the world, are you sure they can still pull it off, I'm starting to think even they know they cannot anymore.

After seeing the latest white house CoD style propaganda videos and Pete "Kafir" Hegseth speeches it's clear the people in charge completely lost it

> In After the Empire, written in 2001, Todd claimed that the reason for America’s “theatrical micromilitarism” was to prove that it was still an indispensable power in a post-USSR world. In his latest work, however, he revises this thesis, arguing that it would imply attributing rational intentions to Washington.13 The American liberal oligarchy is not driven by any clear project.

https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2024/11/how-the-west-was-...

wing-_-nuts•1h ago
Lol how did I know someone was gonna link Emmanuel Todd? Too bad more of his work isn't translated to english.
ARandomerDude•1h ago
The navigable part of the Strait of Hormuz is only 15-ish miles wide, maybe less. There is no way the US can convoy screen anything without significant loss in sailors and ships.

The WW2 convoy situation was far easier to escort (but still quite dangerous obviously) because:

1. The Atlantic is a much bigger place, even considering common routes and chokepoints.

2. U-Boats had to surface frequently, making them extremely vulnerable to Allied air cover.

3. U-Boats had to be within visual range to strike convoys, versus the drone and missile world we live in now.

pbiggar•21m ago
The US shouldnt be starting wars with countries, and bombing civilians, at all.
RobRivera•1h ago
I see what you did there
altmanaltman•1h ago
They forgot to add "check all angles (including the OBVIOUS ones!)" in the AI prompt.
VK-pro•1h ago
One of the self-owns of all time. Triggering a global supply chain crisis right before midterms is bottom of the barrel strategy. But then again, who expects competency from any recent American administration, most especially this one?
garciasn•1h ago
What’s baffling to me is how they’re going to attempt to spin the colossal fuck up this is from a “Best Military in the World” perspective, particularly after their unapproved relabeling of the DoD to the DoW.
lejalv•1h ago
Including starting with murdering 100+ kids based on stale intelligence, according to the NY times.
ForHackernews•1h ago
It doesn't matter how good the military is if the political leadership is incompetent and the strategic objectives are incoherent. You'd think that after Vietnam, Iraq 2, and Afghanistan this lesson would have been learned, but apparently not.
jonfw•1h ago
Whatever your political affiliation and thoughts on the war, I hope we can all agree that it would an awful thing to base our foreign policy on the US election cycle.
ordu•1h ago
Not so awful as it may seem. It would be even more awful if election cycle had no influence over decision to wage one more war. "Democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time".
dizlexic•1h ago
Depends, I just want to point out that the US is a net exporter of Oil. They also secured oil imports from Venezuela while at the same time in 2 strokes seriously hurt Chinese oil imports.

If the goal was to hurt China / BRICS and kneecap Iran it seems on point.

It's always hard to predict how the USA will vote when "war" is happening.

christkv•1h ago
They don’t need Venezuela look up Guyana next door its the new oil country in the region
ericmay•1h ago
What makes you think that if this was the case that the US wouldn’t also take action there to secure those oil exports?
dmix•1h ago
ExxonMobil is the one who found oil in Guyana, the US is already there
bilekas•1h ago
> They also secured oil imports from Venezuela while at the same time in 2 strokes seriously hurt Chinese oil imports.

This 'Venezuelan oil' is a pipe dream for the moment. It will take a significant amount of years to get anywhere near completed.

1234letshaveatw•1h ago
really? where are their oil exports going now?
piva00•1h ago
They aren't pumping that much oil since Chavez, the expertise for extracting oil was lost during nationalisation. It needs a lot of work to restart extraction, it will take years.
Frieren•1h ago
> in 2 strokes seriously hurt Chinese oil imports.

USA, Europe, and many other countries depend on China for manufacturing. I doubt that this is going to solve inflation.

But it will fill the pockets of a few people in oil rich countries that can still export.

burningChrome•1h ago
Inflation is currently at 2.4%. How much lower do you want it to go?
muddi900•40m ago
Still above the fed's 2% target.

And it will go higher now. And given the President's hatered for high interest rates and the next fed chairman being a garden-variety lick-spittle, things are not looking up.

wmfiv•1h ago
Venezuela has reserves. Relative to the gulf it doesn't produce any meaningful amount of oil from those reserves.
bootsmann•1h ago
Oil markets are global, you cannot hike prices for China while enjoying cheap oil yourself.
dizlexic•1h ago
Unless china is importing sanctioned oil from.... Iran, Russa, and Venezuela at discounted rates.

I think this has been the crux of many allegations against China. They don't operate fairly in global markets.

solarpunk•29m ago
Just for my own understanding, you're not insinuating the US is currently playing fair with regards to starting the war that caused all this?
relaxing•1h ago
China is still moving tankers through the strait, Iran has no quarrel with them.
3rodents•1h ago
“If the goal was the hurt China…”

You are mistaken to assume there was a goal. Trump has admitted he did this because he was told that Iran were about to attack the U.S. not because of any strategic goal.

https://youtube.com/shorts/YlkcOjSQVJk

lostmsu•6m ago
Oh no, it's coming right for us!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GaazFYTrQ_A&pp=ygUYaXQncyBjb21...

piva00•1h ago
> If the goal was to hurt China / BRICS and kneecap Iran it seems on point.

While also hurting Europe, South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, and many more. Very on point...

It will hurt everyone, Americans included, oil is a global market, fertilisers are a global market, those are basic inputs for probably every single thing produced in the world.

So now all of us around the globe have to pay the price for American Imperialism, compounded by the complete shattering of the USA's soft power as an ally, this will only create more animosity against the USA from all sides. Very on point.

But the USA oil industry can make a buck until everything buckles, or perhaps the USA admin will introduce price controls like in the 1970s, that worked very well too.

spwa4•1h ago
> It will hurt everyone, Americans included, oil is a global market, fertilisers are a global market, those are basic inputs for probably every single thing produced in the world.

Only because those countries choose for that to be the case. For example, Saudi Arabia and Russia don't do that. Local prices and export prices are different.

But the US, Canada, the Netherlands, and long list of other countries could make this crisis have zero effect on local prices. They choose to take every excuse to raise prices (in fact the Netherlands goes further: if sales tax on gas raises because prices raise, the amount of tax paid is kept constant if prices drop. So they artificially raise local gas prices. So if gas prices are low, tax on gas has at one point reached 72%), but it is fundamentally a government choice.

mamonster•52m ago
>But the US, Canada, the Netherlands, and long list of other countries could make this crisis have zero effect on local prices.

The US Government cannot force US companies to sell at a lower domestic price if they can get a higher price exporting. I know that God-Emperor Trump pretends that he can command the oil sector to make less money, but he can't.

>For example, Saudi Arabia and Russia don't do that

2 countries famous for being beacons of free-market capitalism.

johncolanduoni•1h ago
Just because the US won’t literally run out of oil doesn’t mean the economy (or populace) will be unaffected by a supply crunch. As everyone in the country can already see when they go to fill up their tank.
mytailorisrich•1h ago
The 'issue' here is that China has good relations with Iran and in talks to guarantee safe passage for their ships, like they had previously with respect to attacks off Yemen by the Iran-backed Houthis.
toyg•1h ago
These people live on manufacturing crisis after crisis in order to exploit the manic status that they generate. Why worry about how the midterms, if you can create a situation where elections cannot be held at all...?

Yes, it sounds crazy right now, but a lot of things sounded similarly crazy 10 years ago, and here we are.

gzread•1h ago
I heard a theory that since someone told Trump that Ukraine wouldn't hold elections until after the war, he thought America had the same law.
Jtsummers•1h ago
He has lived through multiple wars where elections were held. I do not think highly of the man, but he would have to be pretty bad off to come to that belief.
FireBeyond•25m ago
Which "war"? While there are the current "debates" about whether this is a war, the US hasn't declared war on anybody since WW2.

> but he would have to be pretty bad off to come to that belief.

Well, did you hear that the dead are walking around with no arms and no legs because they were blown off? Trump said that, a few days ago.

Marsymars•1m ago
If you listen to him talk and the things he actually says, it's hard to escape the conclusion that he's losing his grip on reality as he ages.

The mainstream media is incredibly generous to him, they parse out the non-crazy from his word salad and report on that.

malfist•1h ago
There is no crisis in the US that results in canceled elections
augusto-moura•1h ago
In the current laws you mean, dictatorships usually start by throwing current laws out of the window. Not that I believe Trump would do that, but it is not unheard of in other parts of the world
readthenotes1•52m ago
If they have one, First they start by replacing the Supreme Court with their own minions.

Start to worry of the Republicans start talking about expanding the Supreme Court to add their own to it

NetMageSCW•33m ago
That play already showed its limits with the tariff decision. They can’t stuff the Supreme Court with followers.
jagged-chisel•1h ago
I’m keeping a link to this comment to see how well it ages
margalabargala•1h ago
It's currently historically accurate. It's aged 250 years so far.

Civil war? Elections. WWII? Elections. Covid? Elections.

financetechbro•1h ago
Wake up. Things are different this time in case you haven’t noticed
nostrademons•58m ago
They may be, but if there are no elections, there is no United States. Constitutionally, its government is predicated on having elected representatives.

I could see Trump trying this, but I also can see dozens of other people or groups, some richer, more powerful, more competent, and more ruthless than Trump, just waiting in the wings for the guardrails to come off to make a play to rule the territory of the former United States. If he tries and succeeds at this it's open-season. It's not a Trump dictatorship, it's a civil war, akin to the Chinese Civil War after the emperor fell or the Syrian civil war after the Arab Spring.

margalabargala•51m ago
Yes, of course they are different. We're not embroiled in an active Civil War with tens of thousands dead and a third of the country having seceded. Most things are different from that.
malfist•8m ago
Things are absolutely different, but there is no mechanism in the constitution for canceling elections.
scruple•1h ago
What's the basis for this war in Iran? Did that stop this administration? This is akin to pointing out that it's actually illegal to drive 30 miles over the speed limit.
lesuorac•1h ago
We're talking about the same guy that sent a second slate of electors for the 2020 election.

The same guy that told the government of Georgia to add 10,000 votes to his total so he'd win.

The same guy that received 0 punishment for either action.

Why wouldn't he try something for the mid-terms?

skywhopper•1h ago
Yes, and Georgia refused. American elections are a lot more complicated than you seem to believe. There’s plenty to worry about in specific locations, but the federal government has no direct control over any of the voting processes or policies.
bryanlarsen•1h ago
The Federal government has some direct control and lots of indirect control. Relevant right now is the horrible Save America act.
malfist•10m ago
It doesn't this is a power specifically granted to states. The Save America act is unconstitutional.
FireBeyond•28m ago
> The same guy that received 0 punishment for either action.

and

> but the federal government has no direct control over any of the voting processes

Coming soon, to polling booths near you, "random" ICE activity.

epistasis•1h ago
Of course Trump will try something outrageous that would result in prison time for any other person. But I think that the states are also still independent, mostly ruled by law rather than man, and there's limited troop power to interfere.

Trump is not all powerful, unless everybody gives up their power. Not everybody is as weak as the SV elite, and the failures of Big Law and others that bent the knee were very instructive to everybody else. Bowing down to the king makes you his servant, but it does not protect you in any way.

spwa4•1h ago
Let's hope next year we laugh about this with the question with "And why did he have any expectation it was going to work?".
wheelerwj•47m ago
No man, thats not going to fly. No one ever got anything done by just hoping. Get started now.
gdulli•1h ago
Well he and his people are far too stupid and incompetent to have come close to succeeding. While it's not great that there was no punishment, we should at least be thankful that they act on emotion and can only loosely follow playbooks for corruption from the past rather than write new ones for modern times.
nemo136•58m ago
They still kill a lot of people and, through their actions/inaction, let many others be killed.
xbar•51m ago
I am surprised to see that this kind of complacency remains.

The corruption competence of this body of actors is as impressive as it is horrific.

Gud•27m ago
Yeah so stupid he managed to become president
krapp•22m ago
Yes. He wasn't elected for his intellect, because Americans don't trust intellect. He was elected for his attitude and personality.
AftHurrahWinch•1h ago
Agreed. The United States had an election in 1864, while the states were literally at war with each other.
miltonlost•1h ago
Yeah... because Lincoln wasn't a wanna-be tyrant like Trump. The leaders in charge of the elections are diametrically different people. Lincoln fought to keep the Union together; Trump tried to cause a coup to stay in charge in Jan 2020. My god.
NetMageSCW•35m ago
He didn’t try cause a coup. He caused some bad behavior that had no chance of accomplishing anything, should have resulted in his ineligibility to be reelected and lots of jail time (life sounds about right, on death row), but was no where close to a coup.
SideburnsOfDoom•24m ago
This is just not thought through.

If I try to rob a bank with a plastic toy gun, the charge which I would be arrested for would not be "bad behavior that had no chance of accomplishing anything", it would be "bank robbery". Just "bank robbery", full stop. The abject failure of my attempt would have no bearing at all on that charge.

The argument that "he had no chance of accomplishing anything" has no bearing at all on intent.

"He didn't try" is not in any sense the same thing as "he was nowhere close to succeeding". The goalposts have moved between those 2 statements.

Imustaskforhelp•33m ago
The name of Lincoln and Trump cannot and shouldn't be used within the same sentence. Lincoln's story is inspiring and you can see him worried about his country and he grew up learning law books being poor and rose up to power.

Lincoln says, "With malice toward none, with charity for all"

Trump is the exact opposite of Lincoln being "With malice towards all, with charity for none"

The irony of the situation is that they are from the same party.

He believed that the greatest danger to America came from within, warning that if the nation faltered, it would be due to self-destruction rather than external forces

Lincoln's famous speech: , "At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide."

Lincoln was ahead of his time and might as well have predicted something like Trump.

1234letshaveatw•1h ago
The only way you could do something like would be to "appoint" someone as the presidential candidate in a two party system without holding a primary
margalabargala•1h ago
The US held elections during the Civil War.

There is no crisis that would create a situation where elections "cannot be held".

That is to say, if the current admin attempts to suspend elections, the legality of that and the magnitude of the reaction will be the same, crisis or no.

cotillion•1h ago
Some of the states held presidential elections, not all, but the winners write history so it worked out fine in that case.
margalabargala•52m ago
Every non-Confederate state held elections. Two recaptured Confederate states (TN and LA) held elections. The only states which did not are the ones that had seceded, and thus were not US states at the time.

That's not precedent for the federal government declining to hold elections in any way.

miltonlost•1h ago
Account created Jan 6 2020. Now downplaying the current admin attempts.... hmmm.....
margalabargala•49m ago
Please explain how saying "there is no crisis which could justify suspending elections" downplays anything the current admin is doing.
malfist•6m ago
How are they downplaying it? Trump can try all he wants, but there is no mechanism in the constitution that allows him to do that. He wasn't successful in 2020 and he won't be successful this time.

The GOP won't even kill the fillibuster in the senate because they know change is coming.

amelius•1h ago
> Why worry about how the midterms, if you can create a situation where elections cannot be held at all...?

But they claimed "flawless victory".

Both things cannot be true at the same time.

coffeefirst•14m ago
I really think this gives them too much credit.

They keep making the same mistake: underestimating that your adversary gets a vote, whether it's Iran, trade partners, colleges, Colbert, the Kennedy Center's audience, or Minneapolis.

lm28469•1h ago
Tactical win, strategic defeat, a classic for the US military, especially in the middle east, you'd imagine they learn after so many blunders
lenkite•1h ago
Lockheed Martin already paid for Trump's ballroom (not a joke) and so needed the guy to start a War as their investment must be repaid a hundred fold. Who cares about American voters ?
epistasis•1h ago
The Biden administration was actually extremely competent, handled global inflation after the pandemic and Russia's war fairly well relative to peer nations, and set US manufacturing on course to provide us with all the batteries, solar panels, and EVs to prevent oil crunches like this from causing future inflation.

I expect more competency from US Presidential administrations, and also expect more competency and indpendence from the various parts of the executive branch, which should execute their missions without micro-management from the President, and I further expect far more competence from Congress and the US Supreme Court in setting law and enforcing law. It's bad enough that we have an incompetent Presidential administration, but that damage should be limited by the independence of the other parts of the government. The blast radius should be far smaller, we shouldn't have a King.

1234letshaveatw•1h ago
well, Biden was extremely generous towards Iran at least, which most likely resulted in the current situation we are facing
epistasis•1h ago
Huh? That's a pretty far out there statement that needs substantial support to be taken seriousl.

By all accounts Israeli leadership also tried to rope Biden and Obama into attacking Iran, but they were stronger presidents that paid more attention to US interests rather than being easily tricked.

muddi900•44m ago
US pulling out of the JCPOA was the biggest travesty of the 21st century. No nation state will ever feel safe without a nuke now.

But Israel wanted to destroy Iran as competition. And they got it.

3rodents•1h ago
Please explain what was different between Iranian and U.S relations before and after Biden’s presidency, and how that has impacted today’s situation.
hurricanepootis•45m ago
The current situation we're facing can be traced back to, in some parts, Trump pulling out of JCPOA and Biden's tepid resistance to Israel's war in Palestine, leading to this situation.
bouncing_bolete•25m ago
Bothsides-ism is such a plague. While I don't agree with everything you said, I feel like the pandemic response doesn't get enough credit. Everyone hated how the Biden admin responded in the moment, but looking back the US really came out ahead compared to almost everyone else
tjpnz•1h ago
Curious timing given the latest from the Epstein files.
realo•1h ago
But where are the Epstein Trump documents?

Someone really hopes you forgot about them...

josefritzishere•1h ago
I have no idea how American will extricate itself. We are nowhere near a Nixonian "Peace with Honor" exit. The Trumpian manuver of declaring victory and walking away seems increasingly infeasible. I think the best case senario is a Pyrrhic victory. The worst case is probably more like Russia's exit from the Soviet-Afghan war.
apercu•58m ago
The previous one, while not great, was reasonably competent.
p4coder•47m ago
The nation is one terrorist attack away from rallying behind the president. And sadly the chances of that happening have gone up significantly in recent days.
DivingForGold•36m ago
I would bet Trump just shot himself in the foot with this war, after midterms he will be a "lame duck" pres the remainder of his administration, relying on executive orders, which his opponents will merely take to liberal judges to have them stricken down. The final straw near the end of his term may be selling pardons to any takers.
nubg•1h ago
Why did they attempt to pass the closed Strait of Hormuz?
gzread•1h ago
What does "closed" mean in this context?
zja•1h ago
It means if you sail through it, Iran will launch drones and missiles at your ship.
ultratalk•1h ago
The strait is considered closed when a country not afraid to use its military says ships can't cross.
edaemon•1h ago
The Iranian military has stated their intention to attack any ship passing through the strait without their permission.
simonh•1h ago
I'd say the analogy is a closed door.

It's not that it's impossible to go through it, but you have to do something specific in order to do so beyond just trying to go through, or you're going to walk straight into getting a bloodey nose.

But yeah, these ships weren't anywhere near the strait.

sanex•1h ago
They were docked. And who gets to say a waterway is open or closed?
ArchOversight•1h ago
The insurance companies primarily... secondary the people with bombs that can sink ships attempting to use the waterways.
collingreen•1h ago
He who can destroy the spice controls the spice
dylan604•1h ago
They were anchored. Slightly different than being docked, even if the overall point remains. The other thing is they were in Iraqi waters
drivebyhooting•1h ago
In the article:

> IRAN has claimed responsibility for an attack on two oil tankers anchored in Iraqi territorial waters, as conflicts in the region continue to escalate and strikes on commercial shipping spread beyond the Strait of Hormuz.

mdni007•1h ago
trespass*
p-o•1h ago
Why did we have to go through all this pain. Was that really necessary? And given we mostly talk about technology here, let me put this through that lens:

With all the technology advancement and improvement with access to information in the last 30 years, why does it feel that all of this culminates to more disinformation, more pain, and less understanding?

jameskilton•1h ago
This is a tale as old as humanity itself. Power-hungry people will always push lies to foster their version of events. This always causes pain and destruction.
p-o•1h ago
I am not delusional about those power-hungry people, but I somehow thought that with better access to information, society would have been able to better regulate them.

Maybe in hindsight, "flooding the zone" will be considered a much bigger threat than it is today. Most of what's going on in the last 12 months have happened in plain sight and would have never worked 30 years ago. Today, it just flies, attention span be damned.

vladms•1h ago
Irak war seemed to me reasonably "in plain sight". And there were other blunders as well. What I find amazing though is that more people passionately believe very strange reasons.

30 years ago people were like "meh, sure we don't get something, I bet there are hidden interest that I don't know about". Nowadays they are like "oh, yeah we attack country X because they have aliens that attack us telepathically, I know that for sure and if you don't agree you are an alien too!".

collingreen•1h ago
People are people. Adding tech doesn't change the people very much.
gtowey•1h ago
It's because technology doesn't change the fundamentals of global geopolitics. Which is that nearly all of history can be explained as a struggle to control basic resources such as arable land, oil, minerals, etc. Everything you're seeing today is because those resources are becoming either increasingly scarce, or increasingly valuable.
lesuorac•1h ago
Are they?

We have so much stuff that we just throw things away if a tiny piece of it gets tarnished / broken.

The US's population density is pretty low and we have a ton of land not in cities that's very sparsely populated.

Like it largely seems that geopolitics of now is about creating scarcity.

gtowey•55m ago
> Like it largely seems that geopolitics of now is about creating scarcity.

How else do you create scarcity except by controlling all the resources?

bryanlarsen•1h ago
> increasingly scarce, or increasingly valuable.

Neither of which is actually true for oil. We're still finding oil reserves faster than we deplete them, major users such as China are rapidly decarbonizing, and the price was relatively low before the war.

But the people in power thought it was true, which is all that matters.

vladms•1h ago
Technology can change things but people that profit today from something will oppose a change.

Case in point: switching from oil to renewables - which can lower dependency to external actors a lot as solar panels and windmills have life span of years, so even if the producers suddenly refuses to sell more, one has some time to find an alternative - was done slower than it could have because of "discussions".

Since 20 years I almost feel the discussion "climate change or not" is fueled by people that want dependency on oil, such that we don't talk about the issue of a couple of big producer points of failure (USA, Russia, Gulf countries). Not sure if oil companies are smart enough to finance green groups (to which I agree generally but is besides the point), such that the public discourse stays in a conflict area (climate) rather than a simple one (independence), but if they are that would be meta-evil.

mrguyorama•31m ago
No actually. There's no real "resource" justification here.

This is directly caused by technology. Morons have helped the worst possible people build surveillance and coordination and propaganda networks and are all confused pikachu about that going exactly the way you should have expected it to go.

Technology was also bypassing the "resource" problem at warp speed. Solar panels are the energy future, and thanks to China being actually good at strategic planning, solar can be deployed and utilized far faster than any other energy innovation. With the sheer abundance possible through bulk solar, water scarcity is an engineering issue, about manufacturing enough plumbing and membranes to desalinate whatever you need.

We are fighting an 80s oil war because people voted for an 80s TV personality to run our country after he was known to rape kids, brag about Mein Kampf (even though everyone knows he doesn't read for fun), and attempt to invalidate the 2020 election.

Israel saw a clear opening to wildly advance their imperialist ambitions and because Donald Trump is so damn stupid we have jumped in to this absurdist situation because Donald Trump wanted to be seen shooting first, because he thinks that looks "Strong".

DesaiAshu•1h ago
Technology is at the mercy of our social and financial systems, it rarely leads social advancement. As with other tools, it can be used in many ways

In surveying my friends in Silicon Valley, it seems that most VCs/techies know that: 1. This administration is likely leading us into long term wars and social instability 2. American Dynamism and Defense Tech (or more politely bundled into "DeepTech") are war profiteering, benefiting from greater instability

Speaking / acting out against the American military complex and Big Tech/VC's role in this carries 3 big risks: 1. Not being invited to parties ("too much negative energy, we want to be surrounded by positivity" or "don't talk politics") 2. Censorship and reduced following across most major social media platforms 3. Being economically left out as the world bifurcates into a K-shape economy

As a result, most of my community (generally peace-loving, music-loving humans) seem to be either taking a position of "the world has always been at war and will always be at war, I'm just a realist" or "I'm just going to focus on my locust of control and my personal wellbeing" or "if it's gonna happen anyways, I might as well make money off of it". There is a strong contingent of the resistance as well (still fighting for climate, social justice, peace) but much higher rates of depression and social isolation in this group

So it does not seem to be a problem that can be solved by more information and more technology (though k-12 and higher education assuredly is worth investing in), but perhaps by less nihilism and a stronger social/moral fabric

A big reason I am considering starting a company again is that we need more flags of institutions that carry large weight/reputation and stand for a set of values that is different than the current (and historical) status quo. I expect most of my community would be thrilled to align with those flags if those flags where held up tall and broke through the noise

Which is to say, if you're considering setting up one of those flags, please please do. The world doesn't have to be this way.

GolfPopper•1h ago
>Why did we have to go through all this pain. Was that really necessary?

Because the United States government is so grossly dysfunctional that a blatant real world re-enactment of Wag the Dog[1] has gone off without a hitch. "Without a hitch" in the "distract from the President's rape of a child" sense of the original film, of course.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wag_the_Dog

akudha•1h ago
Because it is much easier to do more damage (disinformation, propaganda etc) with today's technology than ever before. Radio could do more damage than newspapers, TV could do more damage than radio, internet can do way more damage than TV...

Someone with a 500$ laptop, internet connection and a handful of social media accounts can do a level of damage and cause pain that would be impossible 3-4 decades ago.

Technology might advance, but people are still people. Greed, stupidity, ego, jingoism...these don't change no matter how much tech advances

moi2388•1h ago
Only more reason to finally get rid of the current Iranian regime and any and all of their military capabilities.
commandlinefan•1h ago
Does this mean that Greece will join the US/Israeli side in this increasingly global conflict?
cheema33•53m ago
Other countries have been bombed by Iran in this war and none have actively joined the war.
ipaddr•1h ago
Unless you are sending ground troops that's not happening.
moi2388•1h ago
I think you underestimate how much Iranians hate their current regime..
marcosdumay•1h ago
They hate it a lot less today than they did 2 weeks ago.
Ancapistani•50m ago
Interesting you should say that, as not a single one of the Iranian emigrants that I know would agree with you.
CapricornNoble•1h ago
Telegram is full of gigantic rallies all hours of the day and night supporting the Iranian government. Even street interviews with young women (no hijab!) claiming they were formerly protesters but aren't going to tolerate foreigners bombing their country.

Do you have some solid sources on the ground to the contrary?

moi2388•41m ago
All the Iranians I personally know. About 15 families.
cheema33•54m ago
They may hate their govt. But they hate Israel even more. And getting ruthlessly bombed by Israel and US, yeah that will not do what Trump and Netanyahu think it will.
keybored•34m ago
There’s plenty of pro-regime sentiment on Persian social media.

Apparently a recent poll had a 50/50 split among Iranian–Americans. If that’s the split outside of the country I can’t imagine that Iran itself is overwhelmingly anti-regime—and especially both anti-regime and pro-invasion—, it is after all they that have to bear the bombs.

It’s awfully simple to be Nationality and cheer for the invasion of your Nation when you have no literal skin in the game.

keybored•39m ago
Attacked nation fights back. The comments are in uproar.
pbiggar•18m ago
Or we stop attacking sovereign countries simply because our allies (why are Israel our allies?) want to start wars.
brentm•1h ago
He may still wriggle out of it but it is increasingly looking like Trump has stepped into something that he won't be able to reverse his way out of easily, a one way decision.
gosub100•1h ago
The stepping was done years ago when Epstein got kompromat on him. That's why he ordered this war for no apparent reason. His life is over if he doesn't, his life lasts a few more years if the blackmail is withheld, at the cost of innocent lives.
whynotmaybe•1h ago
I still don't know whether a drone attack is less worse than a suicide attack.

I guess that's another war to end all wars to add to the list

SideburnsOfDoom•41m ago
A done attack is utterly predictable though? Ukraine and Russia have been doing drone attacks on each other by air, sea and on land for years now. To great effect. It should be expected, not surprising at all.
koolala•14m ago
Why? Aren't drones just as bad as guided missiles?
hereme888•1h ago
The US will make a LOT of money from selling their oil at premium.

https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2032091651422720197

*Edit: Now I understand that some companies may make more money, but the economy overall may suffer.

*Seems like I hit a nerve with stereotypical people groups.

lesuorac•1h ago
Unsure if this is sarcasm or not.

Plus gas is largely immune to sales tax and we don't really tax corporations so this will largely lead to no revenue for the US and instead just record profits for Exxon.

BoredPositron•1h ago
It's delusion.
comeonbro•1h ago
That is hilarious cope. The US benefits far far relatively more when the global economy is running smoothly than when able to sell oil higher, like some shithole petrostate. Appropriate I suppose.
add-sub-mul-div•1h ago
You're replying to someone who gets their political analysis from Twitter. Hilarious is the best case.
atwrk•1h ago
Well and Russia. Trump essentially crippled the impact of 4 years of sanctions against Russia with these new oil prices he created.
siavosh•1h ago
More specifically a few oil companies and their shareholders. Everyone else suffers. Ie privatizing profits and socializing costs.
thesumofall•1h ago
Is this how it really works? With demand outstripping supply, prices rise across the globe. Prices at gas stations go up as well. The only ones earning a „LOT“ of money are Big Oil shareholders?
lm28469•1h ago
Either it's purely for monetary gain and it's dumb.

Or it's for "Da NuKeS ThEy AbOuT To GeT" it's even dumb because they killed the only dude who was against Iran getting nukes. [0]

Or he got tricked by bibi &co into yet another middle east war I don't have words to describe how dumb it is.

[0] Iranian intelligence minister Esmaeil Khatib said that the country may nevertheless change their stance if "pushed in that direction" like a "cornered cat". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Khamenei%27s_fatwa_against...

EtienneDeLyon•1h ago
While some naysayers might claim the US has entered the FO stage after the commencement of FA, I have full faith in the ability of great minds like Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth to navigate the sea of uncertainty and achieve strategic victory!
cheema33•57m ago
You forgot to put a /s at the end.
bilekas•1h ago
It was my understanding the the tankers could not be insured or it was prohibitively high cost without the margin cost covered and therefore could not pass through.

https://www.spglobal.com/energy/en/news-research/latest-news...

Either way for sure this will cause further backlog. And for what.

bluegatty•1h ago
some of them were not in the straights just near.
edaemon•1h ago
These particular ships technically were not attempting to pass through the strait, they were anchored in Iraqi territorial waters. The backlog will extend even further now that it can be considered risky to be anywhere near the strait.
rekoros•1h ago
This should go into dictionary as definition for "fuck around and find out"
sys32768•1h ago
An Iraqi security source said they think it was an Iranian boat rigged with explosives.

If Iran does have underwater explosive drones, why would they boast about it and invite attacks upon that weapon and its deployment systems?

an_guy•1h ago
"If Iran has missiles why would they boast about it and invite attacks upon that weapon and its deployment systems?"

See how that doesn't make any sense?

CapricornNoble•1h ago
>why would they boast about it and invite attacks upon that weapon and its deployment systems?

To complicate adversary targeting priorities. If you have to shift your pre-planned bombing sorties away from, say, local Basij HQ buildings, it takes pressure off of the Iranian government. Assigning aircraft to find/fix/target/track/engage "underwater drone launch points" is probably like searching for a needle in a haystack given the size of Iran's coastline.

bigyabai•1h ago
It might have been a low-observable watercraft like the Sea Baby: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Baby

A true UUV attack is probably outside Iran's wheelhouse, but cutting-down an attack speedboat to the waterline seems very realistic.

cyberax•37m ago
Why would it be outside of Iran capabilities? They are the ones who provided Russia with Shahed drones.
bigyabai•30m ago
It's not impossible. Iran has connections with China, who is great at designing and manufacturing UUVs.

That said, a UUV fleet would have downsides for Iran. It's expensive, dependent on imports and an overmatch for swarm-style attacks. Attack boats are a closer fit for the "cheap/attritable" tactics we see used with Shaheds.

data-ottawa•27s ago
Iran has two clear win conditions in this war: cause enough pain that the US withdraws (unlikely given the current admin), or wait until US midterms and hope the Dems secure a victory and use the war powers resolution to end the war.

The more FUD they can generate around transport in the strait of Hermuz the better for them.

Maybe they have this capability and maybe they don’t, but they are clearly able to hit these tankers with something. Ukraine has been using these drones so it’s entirely possible Iran has this tech too.

intrasight•1h ago
I get a blank page with that link
OutOfHere•1h ago
Trump has given a surprise gift to renewable energy worldwide, one that the sector should not fail to use.
ultratalk•1h ago
A lot of the world tried to shift to renewables during the ~10-year-long 1970s embargo. They went straight back to sweet old oil afterwards. This isn't gonna last nearly as long. Don't get me wrong, I hope and pray that renewables get a boost out of this, but I don't think it's gonna happen.
realo•1h ago
Really not sure you can compare solar and wind energy from the 1970s to the highly efficient modern solar and wind solutions of today.

Really.

philipkglass•50m ago
In the 1970s electric cars were not generally available and solar panels were 100 times more expensive than they are now. Today the world has the manufacturing capacity to install nearly a terawatt-peak of solar panels per year, at low cost, and millions of electric cars are shipping every quarter:

https://open-ev-charts.org/#global:electric-sales:quarter

It won't change rapidly in the US, because the current administration opposes renewables at every turn and keeps low cost BEVs out of the US, but most of the world's energy/oil needs are outside the US. This situation will accelerate a global process that was already gaining speed.

moralestapia•1h ago
I’ll laugh whenever someone comes along and says "This is definitely an act of war" despite everything we’ve all seen that has been done to Iran lately.
steveBK123•1h ago
This boondoggle is going to make Iraq 2003 look well planned.
intrasight•1h ago
https://archive.ph/ms992
gsck•43m ago
This is amazing news! I've just gotten my seafarers medical and my C-1/D visa for a job in shipping. Perfect timing!
dominicrose•34m ago
The USA and Israel should've went after the Iranian regime a long time ago. What we're seing now is the price of procrastination and weak past presidents.

Imagine if multiple Western countries allied early to correct this regime (and not just with sanctions).