cholantesh

Nah, just in the Epstein email drop begging to be included in a child trafficking ring.

That definition of 'human shield' is basically only used in this context by Israel and its advocates. If we adhere to it, the fact that Israel has military installations embedded in residential neighbourhoods ought to qualify, but it seemingly doesn't. And if one uses the most commonly accepted definition in IHL, Israel has a long history of participating in it. Is any of that fair?

>"Hamas-run Interior Ministry" is accurate. It's admitting the figures are basically enemy propaganda.

I guess we're in agreement that Reuters isn't engaging with the topic neutrally.

I take it that literally every NGO in this space and genocide scholars are all in on the lie?

>Independent 3rd parties were brought in to verify, though.

Reuters was given an IDF escort as they were walked through the tunnel system, during which a room with some servers was called a Hamas data centre, and they nodded along. That's not quite the same thing.

>Lots of the footage in the early days of the war that was claimed to be from Gaza was actually recycled from the Syrian civil war.

Lots of footage that Hamas or advocates for Palestine released or Twitter randos? Not all of those things are equivalent to Israel making a claim.

But not the video in the OP which demonstrates that the IDF were, in fact firing on aid workers and refugees as they had been accused of, and certainly not the hours of footage of the IDF brazenly taking human shields over the years while insisting they didn't, or the reports of the IDF arming settlers. Curious that you can't enumerate any of these, and you're happy to take at face value a claim the IDF makes but doesn't allow independent third parties to verify (a Hamas bunker w/ data center equipment directly underneath the UNRWA HQ in Gaza) while abjuring such behaviour.

A lot of that ambiguity would vanish if Israel did not have a habit of drastically overstating their case and quietly walking it back after they end up killing more journalists and toddlers than active combatants in hospital bombings. Also if reports didn't deliberately conflate 'armed man' with 'Hamas militant' and euphemize about the 'Hamas-run Interior Ministry' like that one does.

Yes, and that Elon Musk: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/30/elon-musk...

Why is this your primary concern?

Obama's been a private citizen for nearly a decade, so inserting him into the conversation suggests your rubric for integrity and critical thinking skills is in grave disrepair.

What are you trying to convey? That concentration camps are good, actually? Or that people only feel otherwise today because they're liberal hypocrites?

Reading the article? The only thing resembling an ideology in there is a vague libertarianism of the like a lot of founders express.

Estimates of birth that rely on the mid-2023 figure and deliberately ignore Israel's systematic dismantling of the health and food systems in Gaza and the drop in fertility levels.

>the casualty count that Hamas claims

The Gaza Health Ministry's count is widely regarded as an underestimate, but mostly by people who don't refer to it with a dogwhistling caveat.

This clarifies things, thank you. I've gotten the impression that Masad doesn't have a very coherent worldview so I doubt he has given this contradiction much thought.

>I was responding to the "why is this post flagged?", and you changed scope to "justify all moderator decisions across the platform".

The actual question in the top-level comment you replied to is "why is this post, and other posts that discuss potential malfeasance from X/Grok regularly flagged?" It is implicit from follow-ups that appealing to the guidelines does not wash except as a thought-terminating cliche. In that sense I guess you are right, the topic can derail intellectual curiosity.

> I was getting the sense from multiple replies to my comments that some people were assuming I (and the moderators) wanted to censor the underlying concern about Grok as if I was a part of the American culture/political war.

The current iteration of techno-optimism characteristic of a lot of this site's userbase may have originated in SV, but it isn't the exclusive province of Californians. That's most likely what is being referred to.

As it happens, genocide scholars disagree with you, and in any case, Gaza's population has not increased.

Whatever the guidelines state, those other topics are frequently discussed without much rancor which you refuse to confront. But anyway, all I was saying is that that specific line item is a non-sequitur.

>you assume I fall into some political bucket, when I almost certainly don't (I am not American and I don't follow American media). I don't use any social media other than HN and a couple private group chats.

This is pretty meaningless; one can share an ideology with an official they did not or even cannot vote for, and can do so even if they don't have Twitter.

I found the piece rambling and incoherent, but I don't really see how this follows. This is an individual Jordanian founder who made a political statement. That's not really the same thing as the deep integration between the Israeli state, Zionist organizations, and big tech.

More accurately, a Zionist descendant of Raphael Lemkin was working with Zionist organizations to abjure their characterization of the Gaza genocide as a genocide.

Still? Pretty sure it's widely acknowledged as one of his many fabrications.

Mozilla board: "best we can do is this handy stopwatch that no one asked for"

I don't see the issue; isn't a blog just a medium anyway, and media can host any kind of content, including essays, which anyone can write.

The CISO of a university is not an academic; neither is a writer at its student magazine.

Considering Gates was instrumental in bringing MS and OpenAI together, I think this is just greatmanning.

I don't think I've ever heard good voice acting in a JRPG, with the notable exception of Ys I & II for the TGCD, and that was released in 1989.

Hezbollah has not been known to behead and rape civilians and has in fact condemned the use of these tactics by Islamists. This conflation really draws into question the quality of your analysis.

I ought to have phrased it I guess as "I don't agree with the value proposition", mainly because of the downside you point out. This seems superior to Pulumi, though, in that the abstraction is (was) at least owned by Hashicorp so there was less likelihood of it falling out of date and giving you footguns.

>It's a war, you know.

It's an occupation that has been ongoing for almost 80 years, not a 'war' that began unprovoked, along with recorded history and the universe itself, on October 7th.

>Sometimes in perfectly legal and justified strikes, sometimes in attacks that contravene the laws of war.

More than half the time, these 'perfect justifications' don't hold water and in fact rest on the hope of total impunity from IHL.

>Hamas uses the civilians under their control as both a sword and a shield

Not according to any sane definition that is internationally agreed upon. Conversely, the IDF's use of human shields - as defined in IHL and in their own propaganda - is abundantly documented.

>Egypt simply refuses their obligation under IHL to allow refugees to flee, collateral damage is an unfortunate inevitability.

Rather odd that rendering Palestinians stateless is just a law of nature in your books, and that Israel's obligations as an occupying power and the agent that created a refugee crisis - ie, prosecuted a campaign of human cleansing - is not part of your calculus at all.

I too, wouldn't join the IDF.