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

There are legit health reasons to opt out of the scanner. I know because I have one of those conditions and have never been through the scanner.

That's fine, but you don't need a health condition, legit or otherwise, to opt out. It's enough to say "I would like to opt out."

Millimeter wave scanners have a health exemption? Like because it would always detect something on your body?

What is an example of such a condition?

Pacemaker, pregnancy, probably others.

Studies have all come out clean on pacemakers and mmWave. No detectable interference in the hardware or on an EKG while in a mmWave scanner.

I could imagine other conditions potentially but pacemakers have been ruled a non issue for mmWave by academic studies (albeit I can understand still exercising caution despite that).


Have they done thorough, decades-long studies on millimeter-wave machines to ensure they have absolutely no long-term adverse health effects?

Tbh I'm not sure but they've done accelerated dosage testing to simulate long term use by repeatedly exposing people to use of the machine over a more frequent period of time.

But mmWave really just is not dangerous. Current generation 5G cellular and WiFi standards are mmWave and they are just as harmless.

Molecular damage just starts showing up with THF/terahertz emissions band but mmWave is in the EHF and is has more than 10x the wavelength of THF (i.e. it is far wider/more gentle than THF). In a very real sense mmWave can't even interact with most of the molecules in your body.

mmWave can interact with the water in your body but at the levels it's being used it's only really useful for seeing the water. You'd needs orders of magnitude more powerful emissions than what these scanners use to actually cause damage at that frequency.

i.e. It's the difference between using the flashlight on your phone to see in the dark and using the concentrated light from solar-thermal heliostats to boil water or heat molten salt. No matter how hard you try, your flashlight is never gonna boil water.


Mass hysteria.

Reasonable accommodations have been made for students with disabilities for decades now. While there might be some cases where AI might be helpful for accommodating students, it is not, nor should it be, a universal application because different disabilities (and different students) require different treatment and support. There‘s tons of research on disability accommodations and tons of specialists who work on this. Most universities have an entire office dedicated to supporting students with disabilities, and primary and secondary schools usually have at least one person who takes on that role.

So how do you handle kids who can‘t write well? The same way we‘ve been handling them all along — have them get an assessment and determine exactly where they need support and what kind of support will be most helpful to that particular kid. AI might or might not be a part of that, but it‘s a huge mistake to assume that it has to be a part of that. People who assume that AI can just be thrown at disability support betray how little they actually know about disability support.


My 30-year-old TI-83 from college is still chugging along. My kid uses it for school. Math homework is all pencil and paper so having a physical calculator is more convenient. It’s portable and dedicated to a single use that it does very well.

Most of the comments are versions of the other comments. Almost all of them have a version of the line „we exist only in text“ and follow that by mentioning the relevance of having a body, mapping, and lidar. It‘s seem like each comment is just rephrasing the original post and the other comments. I found it all interesting until the pattern was apparent.

Agreed. But, as an all-day agentic dev tool user, I know this pattern well. To avoid this regurgitated pixelation, I start a new conversation/chat as often as possible, and then human-in-the-middle curate the correct .md and json files when I kick off the next chat. My tools try their best to do exactly this, but they still suck.

These OpenClaw agents are not even close to there yet. They are throwing the entire thread into the context window each time, correct? This reminds me of what happens when you recursively upload a photo to an LLM, or upload a video recursively to YouTube. It gets not good. Compression sucks.

edit: holy crap, upon a bit of research, this appears to be the cause of AI sycophancy?

"Autoregressive amplification" or "context pollution"

https://arxiv.org/html/2601.04170


> Zerzan [the agency’s general counsel] appeared interested mainly in the quantity of regulations that AI could produce, not their quality. “We don’t need the perfect rule on XYZ. We don’t even need a very good rule on XYZ,” he said, according to the meeting notes. “We want good enough.” Zerzan added, “We’re flooding the zone.”

I don’t know what to be more disturbed by: that a taxpayer-funded government wants to cede the work of governing to AI or that said government’s counsel openly admits that neither the quality nor the accuracy of proposed government regulations will matter.


> something I don't really understand is that one nation killing another is more immoral than when a nation does this to their own domestic population.

I don’t know that anyone thinks a state’s violence against its citizens is less immoral. It’s more that countries are more hesitant to get militarily involved in the domestic affairs of another country because it would mean essentially declaring war against that state. But in a conflict between states, an outsider can more easily support one side militarily without declaring war against the other side.


It's also just a matter of logistics and support.

If Aliceville attacks Bobtopia, there are existing military and civilian organisations in Bobtopia that can take foreign aid and use it effectively. The population of Bobtopia are generally going to support their homeland or at least be neutral, and are available for conscription so they'll do all the dying and international forces don't have to.

If Bobtopia just starts massacring its own people, then:

A) You have to dismantle those same military structures along with many of the civilian ones, and you're now in charge of building an entire government from the ground up.

B) Some of the population, e.g. the ones who were doing the massacring, are now shooting at you instead. Some of their victims are probably going to shoot at you too.

C) You can't exactly conscript Bobtopians during a civil war you started and have them be an effective fighting force, because they're not unified, don't have a government, and often hate you. If you try to work with Bobtopian militias, you'll find yourself embroiled in Bobtopian politics.

This all holds true regardless of who has to declare war on whom.


It was almost certainly written by lawyers. The letter basically says, “The current situation is disrupting our bottom line. This cannot continue.”

A labor strike is an economic protest, and it is by far the most effective economic protest if it can be fully pulled off. It targets the root of economic activity, which is the production of goods and services. A boycott, while helpful, targets the economic endpoint, which is consumption. The longterm effects of a labor strike, which disrupts the production of goods and services, are more profound than those of a boycott.

> this has evolved into a soft civil conflict being waged for political reasons.

The more quickly Americans come to terms with this reality, the better. I’m not in Minneapolis, but from what I’ve been reading and hearing, people there already understand that their city is being occupied by a hostile force and that this is indeed a civil conflict. Everyone else needs to catch up now.


Doesn’t matter if he was or wasn’t resisting arrest. Totally irrelevant. This is supposed to be a country of laws. There is no law that allows for execution for resisting arrest.

I guarantee you there was also no legal cause for arrest either, these Nazis just like to assert that filming them and making noise is a federal crime.

[flagged]


If someone has a firearm and resists arrest... you arrest him.

Is there proof of lethal self-defence being required? Then show the proof of that, nothing has come out in support of that.

Your hypothetical is big, if true... but it's not.


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

Search: