Can you elaborate on "basic competency issues", either in the case of Boudin's office and/or other high profile reformist prosecutors? Is that just a polite way of calling them dumb, à la what the kids are calling a 'skill issue' nowadays?

The main HIPAA claim seems to be that the victim didn’t provide (or consent to the publication of) that X-ray, and neither did their only family member known to possess it. I don’t know who released it, but if it was someone in the medical office, that is a genuine HIPAA violation.

How does it seem that Radley is talking past Gary?

All discussion of the 'Misrepresentations' article is responsive to Gary's mention of it in the original article. And at no point does Radley appear to endorse its contents.

> The Chesa Boudin DA "misrepresentations" document, linked towards the end of this story, is weak, bordering on Trumpian.

Are we reading the same document?

The first example is almost a perfect example of what's stated in TFA. Lim is incredibly aggressive in making her argument, and not an argument based on real evidence.

Scanning through the rest, it reads as much the same.

Direct gdrive link for those who don't want to go back and scroll through the article again: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VZKYxe0oGq7HeC5Kj2lxf-X55r4...

edit:

> At one point it accuses Lim of "violating HIPAA", which is not a thing† (HIPAA constrains covered entities, not reporters).

Ehhhhh. I diagree with that reading. There's a clarification bullet point two lines down from the headline bullet (page 3). Emphasis mine.

> This suggests Ms. Lim was received a patient’s privileged medical records from another unauthorized source in violation of HIPAA.

I read this as the unauthorized source is violating HIPAA. But I guess neither of us are lawyers. So...

I don't think having the money causes the problem, it's the journey to get to that point. People like MacKenzie Scott or lottery winners generally don't act like this. But aside from those rare instances, in order to make it to a billion dollars you need to consistently exploit people and absolutely refuse to use your power to help others in any significant way. You have to wake up every day with a hundred million dollars and think "the best thing I can do with this money is use it to make more money".

I would agree with you, I see people like Jeff Bezos who's unfathomably wealthy but also treats his workers so terribly that they have to pee in bottles and I wonder why? What compels someone to so obssesively seek wealth that they must treat people like that. I can only see it as some sort of mental illness. When someone compulsively hoards trinkets to the detriment of all around them, we call that a disease and I don't see why we should treat it differently when it's dollars they're collecting.

Perhaps it's more accurate to say that people are used to getting what they want. When they don't, it violates their hedonic adaptation and provokes a negative reaction.

Mixing wealth into this situation increases the blast radius and makes it more public.

You have it backwards. The person didn’t change, they were always like that, long before money. Our system selects for them and rewards them, and when they attain those rewards they use them to further express themselves as the person they always were.

It's the same problem that afflicts celebrities. Once you're to a certain level of prominence, there are many people who will gladly sniff your farts and tell you your ideas are great, thus you "lose touch" with reality on the ground. Then when someone comes along that doesn't care for your ideas or worldview it's easy to assume they're either engaging in bad faith or are somehow biased because it flies in the face of your day-to-day experience. I don't envy these folks, they're surrounded by liars and grifters.

> It’s sad to see how hatred toward progressives can distort people’s judgment.

The status quo is easy, change is hard, and anyone benefiting from the status quo will do whatever they have to in order to prevent change. Progressive by definition want change, progress. Change is scary. Humans are most easily motivated by fear.

This isn't great reporting. It's politics.

yes just ask claude to add quick-silence-dissension to your project

leave gstack alone!

And Paul G has defended him on X as a centrist. Weird blind spot.

The cult of Thiel - is he also the shitty vibe coder ?.

He's so far right that he endorsed Scott Weiner! That's pretty far, all right!

It's a requirement to reach the levels they have reached. Someone with empathy would get enough money to take care of their family (maybe even for multiple generations) and then be satisfied and focus on reducing the suffering of others instead of running up the score on net worth

That’s always true of almost any story. There are many signals that influence a story’s rank: votes, flags, vouches, age, site, software penalties, and moderator intervention (usually to override flags and automatic penalties).

In this case, there’s no way this story would be considered worthy of front page placement if it wasn’t about a YC exec. We’ve overridden usual moderation policies and signals to keep it on the front page, as per our longstanding policy.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

User flags can weigh stories down. If you'd prefer a different sort, try https://news.ycombinator.com/lists ("active" is popular, though not my taste really)

Then he shouldn’t be posting under his real name? Or specifically call that out.

When people tell you who they are, listen to