Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ceejayoz's commentslogin

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

> According to legend, one day while building magnetrons, Spencer was standing in front of an active radar set when he noticed the candy bar he had in his pocket melted. Spencer was not the first to notice this phenomenon, but he was the first to investigate it. He decided to experiment using food, including popcorn kernels, which became the world's first microwaved popcorn. In another experiment, an egg was placed in a tea kettle, and the magnetron was placed directly above it. The result was the egg exploding in the face of one of his co-workers, who was looking in the kettle to observe. Spencer then created the first true microwave oven by attaching a high-density electromagnetic field generator to an enclosed metal box. The magnetron emitted microwaves into the metal box blocking any escape and allowing for controlled and safe experimentation. He then placed various food items in the box, while observing the effects and monitoring temperatures. There are no credible primary sources that verify this story.


They had no reason to stop this until it became publicly embarrassing for them.

And you don’t think short term profit chasing has a death count?

> If there is no real penalty for being a career criminal, people will continue to be career criminals.

I know this is a wild idea, but what if they had better options than career criminal for a living?

Americans are so invested in the penalties they can’t imagine the incentives approach.


I asked for a realistic alternative solution and you offered none, just more criticisms for the status quo.

There are already incentives for honest work… a paycheck, benefits, etc. Not to mention being a net positive to society. There is also the option to start a business, which has unlimited upside.

Some people put a lot of effort into breaking the law and making life worse for other people. If that effort was directed in a positive direction, they could be successful, without being a criminal.

This also goes for the white collar criminals that get a pass while running large companies or governments. If those efforts were directed in a better direction, life would also get better for everyone.

I wish there was as much sympathy for the victims as the criminals.


> Americans are so invested in the penalties they can’t imagine the incentives approach.

It's not Americans generally speaking, it's a vocal minority of white supremacist fascists.


The average drug dealer makes less than minimum wage. People commit crimes because they enjoy doing it, not because they need to. We know this because we have survey data on convicted criminals.

> The average drug dealer makes less than minimum wage.

The average drug dealer struggles to keep a minimum wage job.

> We know this because we have survey data on convicted criminals.

We know otherwise because the US isn't the only country in the world, and places that focus on rehabilitation and job training have dramatically lower recidivism rates.


This may be hard to accept - but there are some people who can’t help themselves. They are career criminals and even when presented with honest work they still choose to commit crimes. There exist sociopaths who don’t feel empathy or remorse, and are driven by their own desires and needs regardless of the cost to other people and society. They cannot be rehabilitated. They need to be locked in a cage forever. Society has known about these people since civilization began

Yeah there are people who can't help themselves, but they are a fraction of a fraction of the population. When presented with an honest and decent alternative the vast majority will choose it.

https://x.com/arthurmacwaters/status/2015533344914878923?s=4...

Maybe we just incarcerate you permanently once you have 31 arrests


Maybe we shouldn’t incarcerate anyone who hasn’t been convicted.

It’s not hard to accept.

They’re just a lot rarer than you imagine.


Tell me more about the US government.


Granting the argument that these are bribes, I don't see how one (not several) justice taking bribes from not Trump means the Court is in Trump's pocket.

I think it's already clear (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47093049) that you struggle a bit with causality.

https://www.citizensforethics.org/news/analysis/harlan-crows...

> Harlan Crow is more than Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’s secret patron—he’s also deeply intertwined with the shadowy world of Republican dark money. In fact, Crow personally took part in the creation of the post-Citizens United dark money system and secretly helped bankroll some of the new groups.


I'm waiting for the link between _Trump_ and alleged bribes to Clarence Thomas.

Despite the "where there's smoke there's fire" idiom, smoke is not fire. You still have to find the fire if you see smoke before you call it fire.

By the analogy, your going linking smoke A to smoke B to smoke C and claiming Fire A caused Fire C. The same broken logic you used in the linked thread.

Proposing an explanation that fits the facts doesn't prove that explanation correct and, more importantly, it doesn't disprove any other explanation that also fits the facts.

Anyway, I stopped responding to the previous thread because your conspiratorial thinking is impervious to argument. If I had noticed it was you I was replying to, I wouldn't have replied.


> I'm waiting for the link between _Trump_ and alleged bribes to Clarence Thomas.

Republican activists bribe Thomas for decades. Republican president in office with… significant need for friendly SCOTUS decisions, and got to appoint several of them.

Connecting those dots seems... trivial?


They can. They won’t.

Sure it does. https://techcrunch.com/2024/05/14/on-elons-whim-x-now-treats...

> If you write the words “cis” or “cisgender” on X, you might be served this full-screen message: “This post contains language that may be considered a slur by X and could be used in a harmful manner in violation of our rules,” the warning says. You can continue to publish the post or delete it.


“There are two types of freedom: freedom to and freedom from.”

Margret Atwood, the Handmaids Tale.


Is a two year old article the only thing you have?

Nope!

Looooong list at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Twitter.

Like when they banned posting the word Substack or linking to websites in your profile under Musk for a while. And @elonjet is still banned, despite an explicit promise not to.


It's not strange; they can just afford to weed out the people who say "no" from their lives. Everyone around them is either in the same situation, or depends on them for their cushy livelihood.

Not having to hear "no" for decades breaks brains.


> why would you muck with one of the most complicated systems humans have ever created

That system explicitly encourages mucking with it. We have elections every 2/4/6 years. It has an amendment process. Parts of it, like judicial review and qualified immunity, were just plain invented.

Per Jefferson:

“On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation. They may manage it then, & what proceeds from it, as they please, during their usufruct. They are masters too of their own persons, & consequently may govern them as they please. But persons & property make the sum of the objects of government. The constitution and the laws of their predecessors extinguished then in their natural course, with those who gave them being. This could preserve that being till it ceased to be itself, & no longer. Every constitution then, & every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years.”


so youre appealing to Jefferson to support your argument that we shouldnt revere the founders?

All im doing is explaining why Americans in the current moment are conservative about the constitution. Why are you failing to acknowledge this? Im not making a value judgement im explaining why people think this way.


I'm noting that the Founders weren't deluded or egotistical enough to think themselves as perfect as American conservatives treat them today. We should not revere them, and I think they'd agree with that.

> what cant be argued is that the US is the most successful political body in world history and it is the old continuous Constitution in the world

That’s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_San_Marino.


sigh... ty for the irrelevant and useless pedantry. inescapable on this forum

It’s a factually incorrect claim.

The other bit, “the most successful political body in world history”, isn’t even a falsifiable claim; it’s pure opinion.

The Pope might disagree on it, for example.


i will note your continued pedantry and wish you a nice day

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: