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

If only there was another browser option that was the first word of this thread's title!

Well the guy running Brave must’ve had absolutely nothing to do with Brave’s Adblock engine going into Firefox, so I can see why you’re acting so smug. After all, why would the guy involved with Brave be involved with Brave’s thing going somewhere other than Brave? Maybe it’s just random evolution! Excellent point, friend. I can tell you thought it out.

I'd imagine that's the reason it's not enabled by default, they're not finished fully implementing it in Firefox yet.

Who is "we"? I find GNOME great.

On the other hand, I'm not a fan of people disparaging free open source software that they've never contributed anything to, either money or code.


There are other countries and coalitions in the world that aren't the United States. Humanity fought and ended wars for thousands of years before the United States ever existed.

Most of the countries and coalitions you're alluding to have no functional militaries or actual interest in doing something about the war. They do strongly condemn.

This is addressed on their site.

> We might modify your laptop to remove or power down the battery, wireless radios, etc. to ensure it can be used safely in the data center.


"Gemini sent Gavalas to a location near Miami International Airport where he was instructed to stage a mass casualty attack while armed with knives and tactical gear."


It's absolutely not worth noting that because it simply isn't true.

If anything, the MoH numbers are lower than the actual death toll. Even the IDF said internally the numbers were right and their own statistics state that 83% of casualties in Gaza have been civilians.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2025/aug/21...

https://www.vice.com/en/article/israeli-intelligence-health-...


The IDF has killed many tens of thousands more women and children than Hamas has, so who the bigger terrorists are is debatable.


This is a statement of fact but the context is missing quite a lot. The IDF is a uniformed military force and Hamas is an ununiformed organization intentionally hiding among soft targets. Hamas also has children among it's soldiers.

Hamas intentionally created the situation where the IDF will kill women and children to accomplish their objective.

The IDF incursion is also a response to an attack by Hamas that targeted non-combatantants for murder, rape and abduction.

I don't think any of that is a controversial but correct me if I'm wrong.


I always find it fascinating that pretty much every time pro-Israel posters like yourself bring up Sudan, they only use it as a cudgel to deflect from the IDF's actions in Gaza, not out of any legitimate or sincere concern for the people of Sudan.

> The October 7 massacre passed with barely any notice in much of the Western world.

Verifiably false.

> Yet the moment Israel responded to recover the hostages—if not earlier—there were already demonstrations everywhere against so-called Israeli “atrocities.”

Because we've seen time and time again the brutal methods the IDF uses to retaliate against the entire population of Gaza, employing collective punishment against innocents. And the protesters were sadly proven very right yet again.

> Even with regard to the war in Gaza, Hamas’ use of human shields[1] has resulted in significant civilian casualties [...] Instead, the criticism overwhelmingly targets Israel for civilian deaths caused by Hamas’ human-shield strategy.

Surely even you realize that bombing a building when you know there are human shields held within is a bad thing, right? If you know there are innocent people in the blast radius of your bomb and you still fire the bomb, you are the villain in this story. The IDF has killed more civilians than Hamas has and it's not even remotely close, a difference of tens of thousands at minimum.


What information do you have that they weren't contributing to the bottom line?


The CEO saying "the business isn't viable" says a lot.


That sounds a lot like the CEO is throwing 50% of the company under the bus for his own failures to you know, make the business viable.


And would it be better that the whole 100% go under the bus for his own failures?


Did I suggest that? I'm pointing out the blaring hypocrisy of a company sitting on $350M in cash that opted to double the size of their company without having a clear strategy to become profitable. Then after laying off half the company, the CEO publicly states it's because the laid off workers don't have the skills they need for "the new era". I would really like to see in these scenarios the CEO accept a tiny bit of responsibility for their failures to set strategy and over hire, instead of publicly shaming 70 people they chose to hire in the first place. That's a failure in leadership, not in employees.


>the CEO publicly states it's because the laid off workers don't have the skills they need for "the new era".

Where did he say this?


It’s better for startup investors if it goes big or fails sooner. That’s the entire purpose of investing 100’s of millions into these companies.

If the CEO has no idea how to do that they should shut down the company or stand aside and find a better CEO, not try and milk as much money from they can by keeping the company shambling along as long as possible.


If they thought they would make more money on net with the employees than without them, they wouldn't have laid them off?


130 employees making <$3m in revenue seven years in means you have to do something else. The information we all have now is that the bottom line is not very much so whatever they were contributing to the bottom line can't be that much.

You have to go find a different business when this happens.


$2.8m revenue with 130 employees is about $21,000 per employee.

The numbers here don't look good.


What information do you have that they were contributing to the bottom line?


The burden of proof lies with the person making the claim (even if implicitly), not with the person questioning the claim.


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

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

Search: