←back to thread

We regret but have to temporary suspend the shipments to USA

(olimex.wordpress.com)
639 points CTOSian | 7 comments | 26 Aug 25 17:22 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
InitialLastName ◴[26 Aug 25 17:49 UTC] No.45029930[source]▶
This whole tariff circus boils down to regulatory capture by manufacturers at the 10+-figure market cap scale. Olimex (and other small and medium businesses) can't reasonably be expected to calculate the exact material composition of their products (much less their suppliers' products); the only people who can are on the scale of Apple, Microsoft, Samsung and Google whose volumes can amortize the cost of doing so on a per-product basis (and who have probably already done that analysis as part of their process control).
replies(5): >>45029951 #>>45030069 #>>45030327 #>>45030606 #>>45031917 #
softwaredoug ◴[26 Aug 25 17:52 UTC] No.45029951[source]▶
We’re living through a political revolution centralizing state and economic power. It’s almost like the pendulum swung away from the Soviet system and now we’re swinging back.
replies(4): >>45030136 #>>45030139 #>>45030198 #>>45030199 #
fooker ◴[26 Aug 25 18:12 UTC] No.45030198[source]▶
Yeah, seize the means of production, indeed.

Funny that this time this started from the right side of the political spectrum.

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

replies(5): >>45030220 #>>45030237 #>>45030265 #>>45030655 #>>45030788 #
ronsor ◴[26 Aug 25 18:17 UTC] No.45030265[source]▶
Horseshoe theory is real, but there's also the fact that politics has more than one axis.

Authoritarianism is the common denominator; only the details vary.

replies(4): >>45030313 #>>45030382 #>>45031858 #>>45036787 #
1. fooker ◴[26 Aug 25 18:21 UTC] No.45030313[source]▶
Makes sense.

If you think you have the best idea, the natural next move is to force everyone to follow that best idea, no room for disagreement or alternatives.

This pops up everywhere, everywhere ideology is involved in decisions.

replies(1): >>45030543 #
2. mrkstu ◴[26 Aug 25 18:41 UTC] No.45030543[source]▶
A recent guest (historian) made that point on the Triggernomitry podcast.

Stalin, Mao, Castro, Hitler- they were all 'idealists.'

They were in it to improve the human (or some subset thereof) condition. And they weren't going to let anyone get in their way of making things better!

replies(5): >>45031173 #>>45031184 #>>45031428 #>>45031897 #>>45036169 #
3. fooker ◴[26 Aug 25 19:32 UTC] No.45031173[source]▶
This is what's scary about Elon Musk talking about 'sustainable abundance'.
4. sherr ◴[26 Aug 25 19:33 UTC] No.45031184[source]▶
That guest is Dominic Sandbrook, one half of the excellent "Rest is History" podcast.

You can't make an omellete without breaking a few eggs, after all. That was Lenin, supposedly.

edit: spelling of "one"

5. sitkack ◴[26 Aug 25 19:48 UTC] No.45031428[source]▶
Idealists in the sense of a simplistic worldview.

It is worth a watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf-bSAnW_E0 but it itself is a somewhat simplistic take.

6. gtowey ◴[26 Aug 25 20:25 UTC] No.45031897[source]▶
It's probably more accurate to say they were reductionists -- it's easy to imagine an ideal system if you ignore the complexities of reality.

Which is why they all failed.

I bet it's related to the tendency for narcissism where you believe that you alone have all the right answers.

7. int_19h ◴[27 Aug 25 06:41 UTC] No.45036169[source]▶
On the contrary, Stalin was one of the most brutally pragmatic politicians of the 20th century.