They are definitely not tuning down support they still arm and finance Hezbollah and the Hotis, Israel retaliated to those who attacked it.
The new government in Syria is most definitely in direct dialog with Israel on a new security arrangement.
The government officials of Syria, in all public statements, express very directly they would like to engage in conversations with their Israeli neighbors, but cannot do so as long as Israel continues to attack their territory.
Every part of your comment contracts current data.
Damascus, Nov 12: In a significant revelation, Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa has confirmed that his government is currently engaged in direct negotiations with Israel, aiming to establish a long-term peace and security framework between the two nations.
Why no one is paying Israel to rebuild the villages and towns in the south and north? Surly half of what Qatar, SA and others are "paying" should go to Israel, it's only fair
The first prime minister of Israel was David Ben-Gurion.
Targeting the British during the Mandate was an act of anti-colonization, not unlike other factions that wanted independence from the British at that time, and the Irgun did warn the British before hand but they did not evacuate the hotel which was the central offices of the British Mandate and the Headquarters of the British Army
There is nothing to whitewash about wars and war crimes, they happen in every war, and are inexcusable in every war, no matter the side.
For every war crime from Jewish side you can always point to a similar one from Arab side, this finger pointing is not useful for anything but spurring more hate and igniting the conflict over and over.
I disagree completely. Its important to condemn terrorism and genocide on both sides. I have no tolerance for that. Its absurd to try to convince me to ignore this, or to try and excuse the IDF because the other side is bad too. Hamas is bad. Nazis are bad. The IDF is bad. The Israeli state is bad. Israeli society is rotten. These are all true and useful statements. I don't understand why you would spend your time on the internet trying to argue against this.
"Hannah Arendt and Albert Einstein, in a letter to The New York Times in 1948, compared Irgun and its successor Herut party to "Nazi and Fascist parties" and described it as a "terrorist, right wing, chauvinist organization" "
Moral stand? Spain is the last that can take the high ground after expelling Jews and Muslims, countless atrocities in Latin America and Africa.
They still occupy parts of Morocco and Catalonia.
Did they say they want to bar Iran, China, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and Qatar? No, you are either all in on the moral high ground or not at all.
This is not what the court said, the court ruled 2 to 1, that the food/calorie intake should be monitored, not that it is below what was defined.
It says nothing against the change of menu for the prisoners accused of terrorism after the Oct 7 nor that it's not ok for it to be different from the criminal prisoners menu.
Very little information about safety other than marketing speak "Utilizing the latest in advanced safety technology—sensors to predict and classify collisions before they happen, airbags, and structural technology—to make our vehicles safer for everyone on the road."
You think a crumple zone isn’t required by current FMVSS, which they are designing against? That is, in fact, what they referred to with “ structural technology”.
I'm pretty skeptical of the safety as well. It's also pretty hard to judge where there don't seem to be any actual photographs of the vehicle, only computer renderings.
I would love a small truck like this, but I would honestly buy an old Tacoma or Ranger before even considering buying this on spec.
*edit: digging around I did find some footage on YouTube with actual vehicles. I'm definitely skeptical on the safety now.
I don't agree that it's off topic, nor that HN would be better if we suppressed it and acted like this isn't happening. We're trying for a global optimum*, and the most important part of that is not to settle for local optima, such as not discussing difficult things.
I've posted about this quite a bit, since it inevitably comes up every time this topic appears on HN's front page. Here's another part of the current thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44403458.
If you're really intent on fostering higher quality, honest discussion maybe don't just make exceptions for the the post about Israeli mistakes which they actually investigate.
There are reasonable discussions to be had, but the submissions which might catalyze them are quickly flagged (as opposed to defended, like this one).
Funnily enough I just finished responding to someone who makes the opposite complaint about us: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44403907. Notice that word "always", which both of you use. Interesting, no?
People with strong passions on a topic always feel like the moderators are against them. (As you see, I'm not immune to "always" perceptions either!)
I wish we could do something about that—I don't enjoy having so many people, from all sides of every divisive topic, feeling like we're against them when we're not. However, after years of observing this and thinking about it, I came to the conclusion that it's inevitable. The cognitive bias underlying it is just ironclad. We all share this bias, which is why your complaint and the complaint of someone on the opposite side are basically the same.
It's true that HN has hosted several major threads about Israel/Gaza, but it's also true that many (perhaps a hundred times as many) submissions on the topic have ended up flagged and we haven't turned off the flags. I don't see an "always" in there.
As for Saturdays—that factor is so far from affecting how we moderate HN that I had to puzzle for a bit over what you might mean. Nor does this discussion strike me as one-sided. People wouldn't be disagreeing with each other if it were.
dang I cannot respect you enough. Thank you. I have strong feelings about Palestine and learned quite long ago how powerless my rhetoric is. Although I believe I see the truth, it's clear the world needs yet more time. The only thing that must be done now is to facilitate discourse and to leave the flow of information unimpeded. Time will humble us all.
I would be very surprised if the majority, or even a significant fraction, of those who are on the "Israel" side were observing Jews. Jews are probably a minority of Israel-supporting commenters, and observing Jews are, in my experience, a minority of these Jews.
That's a pretty serious accusation, and I don't think you can actually back that up with anything.
Online, pretty much any time Israel is discussed, the majority of commenters (or articles) are anti-Israel. Regardless of why you think that is, it's just a fact. You can't blame dang for that.
You don't decide what's on topic or the spirit of HN. If anyone does it's Deng, who you're arguing with. Sorry you feel the need to decide what adults can talk about.
I've very well aware who Dang is (clearly you don't, at least write his name correctly). You have a lot of venues to vent on reddit, facebook, twitter etc.
Clearly Dang is biased and therefore he bends the guidelines:
"Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic."
Maybe you should have a bit more intellectual humility. "Clearly Dang is biased" (emphasis mine)? You might be right, you might be wrong, but I for sure don't think you can be certain of dang's motive here, especially considering lots of people on the "other side" of this issue feel he's biased against them!
I believe the majority of stories are voted on, and flagged, by the community. If the community decides these are stories worth discussing, I think they fit within the guidelines of HN. Stories about the Russia/Ukraine war also appear. So do stories about US politics. In all of these threads some people complain that they're off-scope, but apparently enough of the community wants to talk about them that they sometimes get upvoted.
That's not clear at all. What is clear is an apparent impulse to shut down an unfavourable discussion and throw unproven accusations. There are lots of articles on non-tech posts on HN, you haven't shown he's unfair.
Is there any information about updates to existing rows?
The FAQ says "Similarly to other data lakehouse technologies, DuckLake does not support constraints, keys, or indexes."
However in Iceberg there are Copy-On-Write and Merge-On-Read strategies dealing with updates.
1) Hamas run health ministry numbers are not trustworthy
2) You do know that Hamas uses children soldiers right?
3) Not everyone in Gaza is Hamas true, but most of them (pre war) and most west bank Palestinians (currently) support them
4) If Egypt allowed non combatants to flee, they would be safe, however they closed the door or asked 1000s of dollars in bribes, but then they couldn't be used against Israel like the Arab nations always do.
reply