It doesn’t seem like making money Is the object.

They all offer some "memory" cross chat now and they're all more annoying than helpful. Not really compelling. You can pretty easily export your chat if you want.

However sloppily expressed I think the intent is clear: he is saying “I don’t think it’s important that they comply with laws concerning their conduct, but they’re drumming up business for me, so I don’t mind.”

> he is saying “I don’t think it’s important that they comply with laws

I cannot see where Karp says that. Do you have the quote?

> “Part of the reason why I like this questioning is the more constitutional you want to make it, the more precise you want to make it, the more you’re going to need my product,” Karp said. His reasoning is that if it’s constitutional, you would have to make 100% sure of the exact conditions it’s happening in, and in order to do that, the military would have to use Palantir’s technology, for which it pays roughly $10 billion under its current contract.

Make your own judgment but I thought that it was a reasonable inference if his answer is about how he’s got dollar signs in his eyes that he doesn’t see a moral imperative here.

I'd say that many of the people upset now didn't like that either but it at least had the pretense of bothering with a declaration of war.

The US has not had a congressional declaration of war since WWII.

OK, AUMF. Sorry for the imprecision.

It was War on Terror, no? As a direct response to murder of thousands of citizens… (not condoning it though, America loves to murder people though I’ve heard a lot in October during election campaign that this time will be different…)

If you use War on Terror as justification, then why not use War on Drugs? How many citizens have died due to illegal drugs? How many lives have been ruined?

I would say it is pretty hard to take that seriously as a justification when they’re also letting Juan Orlando Hernandez go.

except there is no war on drugs - quite the contrary - https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/12/02/trum...

and if you were serious about war on drugs you’d start in America, not Venezuela

How many historical examples of civilians being misidentified as combatants does it take before we question whether these strikes have all been drug boats?

When he says "push to make it constitutional" what he means is push to make them comply with complex rules.

I feel like the headline kind of misleads since what he actually says is, essentially, "yeah, go nuts trying to limit it, then they need to buy from me." Which is still crass but not what the headline suggests.

Well I mean, they didn't "just give homeless people money" or just give them homes or any of those things though. I think the issue might be the method and not the very concept of devoting resources to the problem.

If for no other reason than they're actively attacking renewable capacity even amid surging demand

I like when they tell you they’ve personally confirmed a fact in a conversation or something.

PowerShell is completely suitable. People are just used to bash and don’t feel the incentive to switch, especially with Windows becoming less relevant outside of desktop development.

Powershell feels like it's not built to be used in a practical way, unlike Unix tools that have been built and used by and for developers, which then feels nice because they are actually used a lot, and feel good to use.

Like, to set an env variable permanently, you either have to go through 5 GUI interfaces, or use this PS command:

[Environment]::SetEnvironmentVariable ("INCLUDE", $env:INCLUDE, [System.EnvironmentVariableTarget]::User)

Which is honeslty horrendous. Why the brackets ? Why the double columns ? Why the uppercases everywhere ? I get that it's trying to look more "OOP-ish" and look like C#, but nobody wants to work with that kind of shell script tbh. It's just one example, but all the powershell commands look like this, unless they have been aliased to trick you to think windows go more unixish

First, that expression is overly complicated, shorten to:

    [Environment]::SetEnvironmentVariable($name, $value, "User")

You have un-necessarily used a full constant to falsely present it more complex. Please also note that you have COMPLETION. You are not forced to type that out. Second, you can use an alternative

    Set-Item HKCU:\Environment\MY_VAR "some value"

Third, if you still find it too long, wrap it in a function:

    function setenv($name, $value) {
       [Environment]::SetEnvironmentVariable($name, $value, "User")
    }

    setenv MY_VAR "some value"

Also, can you please tell the incantation for setting an env variable permanently in bash ? You cannot since it doesn't exist.

Powershell's model is far superior to Bash. It is not even a contest.

No, they don't all look like that, the brackets are an indication you're reaching into .NET and calling .NET stuff instead of "native" PowerShell commands which take the form Verb-Noun. Which can be a legitimate thing to do, but isn't the first choice and seems like an example deliberately chosen to make PS look more awkward than it is. I question whether, for this particular example, `echo 'export MY_VAR="my_value"\n' >> ~/.bashrc && source ~/.bashrc` is really all that intuitive either (and hopefully you didn't accidentally write `>` instead of `>>` and nuke the rest of the file).

What feels good to use is very, very dependent on personal preference. I think Powershell is much more pleasant to use than bash. You obviously disagree, but bear in mind that not everyone shares your preferences.

It took a long time for Powershell to write files with the same encoding it reads them by default. Very confusing until then.