AWS (and many others) is also then war profiteering company with JWCC, C2E, WildandStormy, not to mention all the other defense contractors that rely on their computer power to design and operate mass surveillance and killing of people. Is your agenda selectively blind?
not OP but yes, i consider the tech sphere's dive into mass surveillance to be war profiteering and have eliminated or minimized several in my life including amazon and spotify.
for the same reason GP assumed war profiteering. Guy is maybe and probably, based on his talks, interested in his homeland's defense. Maybe he's in it for the tech. Every defense company is war profiteering and thus unethical, especially this one? That's not only uncalled for, but absolutely cancerous thought as exemplified by the thread and poison it spreads.
A friend of mine did posit the quandary that an "unpalatable" individual such as Luckey appears to be one of the few making consumer-friendly products: Removable, swappable battery packs, AA battery support, standard USB-C charging, easy interoperability, open sourced designs, exposed screws, teardown instructions, etc. Apparently ModRetro is even looking into making dumb TVs for gaming.
It's ironic, in another world HN commenters would be lauding Luckey and ModRetro for all these virtues.
Yeah I don't really like Luckey, or what I've heard from him anyways. But in the run up to launch the Chromatic, it became pretty clear that this guy, for whatever reason, is really passionate about gameboy. I have been less impressed with the other emulator/fpga machines. the chromatic is solid though.
Comparing a run-of-the-mill defense contractor to a serial rapist and murderer is certainly up there in the most unhinged justifications that I've seen on HN.
I don’t think the parent comment was trying to equate the two, but rather pushing the argument to its logical extreme to test show that the reasoning doesn’t hold consistently across cases. Whether they made a convincing argument is separate.
Taking it to a logical extreme is good practice for thinking from first principles, but always pair it up with going to the logical extreme in the other direction. That might look something like: "would you really eat at a restaurant owned by a habitual jaywalker?".
Run-of-the-mill. Ya know, a normal perpetuator of war profiteering. I mean he's your standard enabler of civilian bombing. Simply an average propagandist. Just a regular guy!
I suggest you look into the perception of self defense. Saving yourself and others via killing compared to killing to commit a crime are perceived very differently.
That’s not it. There are plenty of industrialists who have killed far more than any serial killer just for profit and they don’t get anything like the opprobrium given to serial killers.
> So you know, either go all in and live like you mean it or stop pointing fingers at only very select individuals.
Careful. You're one step away from playing out the "Yet you participate in society. Curious!" meme. Besides, many people who are not in the Anduril fan club already boycott Microsoft for their ethical transgressions.
You can't use that meme argument at the beginning and mention that it is perfectly possible to boycott the other company at the end. The whole point of the meme is that participating in society is unavoidable, right?
And I don't think you can use "one step away from" a meme arguments at all. Pattern matching to a cartoon is not a great tool for this in the first place, and once you've acknowledged that the pattern doesn't even match, what's the point?
> If we’re gonna go for a witch hunt then we better hack off Microsoft’s head as well, for instance, since even their Xbox controllers are used in military subs.
> It's ironic, in another world HN commenters would be lauding Luckey and ModRetro for all these virtues.
Lot's of HN (and "social" media) commenters in this world evidently are; nothing ironic about it.
It's just many people have a radically different set of ethics which, once they become principles, can't be easily, or at all, compromised on. And just to be fair, it's not just the what, but the how (which extends not just to Luckey & Friends, but to Anduril & Friends).
I am nuanced enough to appreciate that these qualities are present in the products being produced and still not buy from this producer because of their industry ties. Hopefully someone without such ridiculously unpalatable PR is able to copycat their design and sell a competitor - and hopefully the lead they've laid sets the standard for easily replaceable parts for the market (though, I'd mention that retro gaming hardware is intentionally made to be as modular as possible in most circumstances anyways).
> I am nuanced enough to appreciate that these qualities are present in the products being produced and still not buy from this producer because of their industry ties.
ModRetro produces one thing I do have an interest in. A partly aluminium-cast version of the, to me, most ergonomic gamepad made so far: the classic trimaran-style N64 controller. But that marriage ain't gonna happen. And that goes for every other (future) product of theirs as well.
Certainly one of the most devisive controller designs, but the lack of two thumbsticks is precisely what I like about it. The pad centers one thumbstick and the trigger on opposite sides of the "main hull", with the rest of the inputs divided along two (remappable) zones, i. e. the outriggers. I have never held a controller in my hand with better ergonomics and holding adaptability. Even the size is just right for my hands.
It's the only pad that ever made FPS games on a console a joy to play for me; put in two analog sticks and you fuck with that formula. Its only serious weaknesses are the cheap plastic, especially for the thumbstick, and the weight (too light). Make a full metal version out of it, with some thumbstick material mods known from the PvP fighting game community, and it's the best. Well, at least for me.
> Lot's of HN (and "social" media) commenters in this world evidently are; nothing ironic about it.
I suppose what I'm trying to say is that it's ironic that the one guy providing these consumer-friendly features is considered anathema by many of the people clamoring for those features. You, yourself even mention downthread that you'd otherwise be interested in the M64 Pro controller, but won't consider it.
I was just trying to make a genuine comment remarking on the dichotomy, but I guess people are more interested in making quippy one-liners.
> I suppose what I'm trying to say is that it's ironic that the one guy providing these consumer-friendly features is considered anathema by many of the people clamoring for those features.
Yeah, I got that. I just don't think the fact that a to me detestable individual can have, or work for, an outfit that produces (some) good, interesting, or even highly impactful merchandise is at all remarkable. History is littered with such people, especially in the tech sector (e. g. Ford, von Braun, etc.).
This propaganda against Palmer Luckey completely lacks any critical thinking. Then again, I guess all propaganda is targeted at people who aren't critical thinkers to start with, so that's why it ends up working.
I've seen this astroturfing and spreading of lies increase since he delivered weapons to Taiwan so they can defend themselves. Probably the CCP amping up their influence campaign against him.
I have mixed feelings about it. I don't agree with how my country often ends up using these technologies, but defense tech and weaponry still seems pretty necessary. The US is not the only one doing this. Should they wait for their adversaries to have the upper hand? I don't think it's such a bad thing, as long as they can put the right people in charge. That's a whole other problem.
Good Lord. You know that Anduril industries will keep making drones no matter how many discussions about retro gaming you ruin right?
This backlash can hurt modretro, it can affect the author of this game, but the impact on the defense industry is zero. And this thread, fuck, you'd think running JavaScript on an n64 would be the safest place to avoid yelling about US politics in 2026 but here we are. And there's nothing to be gained. A smart person doing cool work published a game through a fun and ethical company that is owned by a person that also owns a defense company, so let's all scream about murdering children. As if that protects anyone from anything.
He's not a war profiteer, he's a peace profiteer. His philosophy is peace through strength, not profit through death. He even strongly emphasizes saving lives through weapons with better precision, which has been the trajectory of US weapons design for many decades. Russia is over there killing everything in sight and leveling entire cities including thousands of schools.
Your claim is similar to saying nobody should own a gun, because it should be illegal to defend yourself or others. So everyone who owns any kind of weapon is evil and bad? Only bad people are allowed to own weapons and we should just roll over?
Nobody should defend Ukraine from Russia? Anduril has been helping Ukraine since very early on.
Starting a weapon company is different from owning a gun. You have control over that gun. Your weapons company, those weapons will be used to kill innocent people, there is no doubt. Weapons don't only get used for clean operations in war and there is almost always collateral damage.
It is a decision to start producing regardless of how well-intentioned it is. You will be profiting off of people being maimed and killed. Various people thought they solved war through new weapons only to create more effective killing machines. That's what WW1 was.
Palmer does not have to work on weapons nor justify making them. Building tech that will be used to murder people (and yes, it will happen) is a decision. Not funding his other hobby when he's getting money off US military contracts is hardly breaking his bank. He wants to build weapons? I don't want to buy his products. Easy.
Building more efficient weapons does not make us safer. Every dollar saved through "strength" and better weapons matters little to the parents who lost their kid when the most precise weapon in the world kills a bunch of schoolchildren like it did at the start of the Iran war. If you can't gaurantee your weapons won't get used for that, why would you build them? You cannot.
The problem is that China, Russia, Iran and so on have all been accelerating their weapons manufacturing. Go complain to them.
If nobody in the world was manufacturing any weapons and it was fully observable from space, nobody would have cause to manufacture these kinds of weapons. We do not live in that world.
At some point, any reasonable person should agree that if a country exists in an environment that contains many threats it might need to defend itself or others from, then it makes complete sense for it to develop weapons towards that aim. Countries are not people, people are people. So people make the weapons.
It just so happens that Palmer Luckey is a person. He can't sell weapons to any random person or country he wants, he can only sell them to the US or with permission of the US to a country that the US has a strategic interest in defending.
Precision weapons have helped reduce casualties. This is a fact. Please try to contradict this fact in the face of napalm bombing and nuclear bombs of yesteryears. Please try to tell me that precision weapons aren't better than just randomly aiming artillery at the sky and letting'er rip. Please do. I want to hear your well founded argument for this.
Hey, if your argument is that somebody has to build weapons, then that's your argument. I don't believe that's the situation and building weapons only encourages other countries to do the same. Notice virtually all of Russia's justifications are about US aggression, rightly or wrongly.
Is it more efficient than napalm? Great. It still will be used to kill people which I find to be gross, especially when innocents will die, too. If somebody has to build weapons and somebody has to fund said weapons maker, I'm glad it doesn't have to be me. Doesn't have to be Palmer either.
If killing people is gross (which I agree with), then we should kill the people that kill the people, right? Or should people that kill people run rampant, because nobody should ever kill them?
If they should be killed, then they should be killed with the minimum number of civilian casualties possible.
Countless millions of people died in World War 1 and World War 2. So many people died that we only have estimates, because there were too many to count individually.
If nobody pushed back against Japan, Germany, Russia, North Korea, China, Iraq, Iran and so on, the world would not be a better place. It would be a place where full on global war was legitimized as a viable global domination strategy. And global domination was in fact the goal back then. The problem is, we aren't sure that goal has ever gone away.
As a result, the entire world is a chess board with smaller countries being manipulated or compromised in various ways for some other grand strategy. For many years now we've accepted that there would largely be some sort of equilibrium or status quo. Except these smaller countries also have a mind of their own and their people universally reject being controlled and manipulated.
Russia with Ukraine. China with Taiwan. North Korea with South Korea. Venezuela with Guyana. Iran with Israel, Iraq, Yemen, etc. Now suddenly all of these countries are all the prowl almost simultaneously. If you only look at US action, look at the world we're reacting to. It's not as simple as some political propagandist hitjob soundbite on TV being the complete answer.
In a 2024 speech, Luckey said "Societies have always needed a warrior class that is enthused and excited about enacting violence on others in pursuit of good aims. You need people like me who are sick in that way and who don't lose any sleep making tools of violence in order to preserve freedom." ( https://techcrunch.com/2024/10/01/palmer-luckey-every-countr... ). He's said in a Bloomberg interview that "there are actually things I would like to build that the DoD would not use and would not deploy, that they do think are beyond the pale" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItLFpYha6Wc ), and he's said in an Axios interview that he would be willing to build nuclear weapons, as well as chemical weapons "in a specific vertical". He then elaborates by saying that it's a huge mistake that the US military isn't allowed to use tear gas in combat. ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZfW3YTJ5Eg ) I'm having trouble believing that someone like this is inherently peaceful and should be getting multi-billion dollar contracts to manufacture drones that autonomously kill people. Maybe it's better to buy a Nintendo game from someone who doesn't think that the US is being held back by war crime treaties.
I've already seen all those quotes and interviews. You're mischaracterizing them.
He's probably not wrong that you have to be a certain kind of person that can stomach the inherent violence involved, that doesn't mean you want to kill innocent civilians. Yet you do have to be the kind of person who understands that civilian casualties can happen. Life is not kind to the mind that is fragile to the realities of nature. That's accurate.
As for nuclear weapons, he explicitly said he thinks they have done a lot to stabilize the world, which does put some limiters on how extreme war can be, because there is an extra red line that actually matters.
When it comes to chemical weapons, he already stated that no he wouldn't create biological or chemical weapons, but he thinks that there should be a special exception for non-lethal means like tear gas and pepper spray. It's like, a woman can take pepper spray out of her purse and use it against a criminal, but the US military can't use pepper spray to suppress enemies without killing them? Killing people is a more viable option than suppressing them? I think that's the argument he's making.
We're talking about a company whose primary customer is the US military. Said military is currently involved in a pointless war of aggression. It has carried out unprovoked attacks on at least two other countries just this year alone. When was the last time the it was used in self defense?
"Peace through strength" is a fine motto, but you can't claim that motto and then turn around and base your business on selling to an entity that routinely starts non-defensive wars.
If you don't understand history or what's going on in the world, everything will seem pointless and you will fall easy prey to anyone telling you what you should believe.
You have so many tools at your disposal for learning, you really have no reason to just have no idea what is going on unless you just don't prioritize your time that way. In which case, it's ok to understand that you don't know, but why hold your opinion so strongly then?
Come out and say what you want to say. Don't give me this nonsense about how I have no idea what's going on and you won't even deign to explain where you disagree.
It is completely logically unsupportable that the war is pointless, so your claim is so flat and empty that there is no need to do anything other than point out that weakness in your claim.
Go do a couple searches real quick and see what some of the points of the war may be. Many of them will be incorrect or incomplete, but you will come back with at least some reasons that exist.
I was talking about the war with Iran. Is that what you're referring to here? Just making sure, because this is a pretty wild thing to say about that particular war.
Sure, I can do searches and find people giving various reasons for the war. What's your point? Am I not allowed to disagree with people? If I can do a couple searches real quick and find some people saying A, I'm not allowed to claim not-A?
I don't see how logic dictates that there's a point to this war. I understand that some people believe the war is being carried out to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon or whatever, but how does it "logically" follow that there is necessarily a point to it?
Ok, so that's one reason. It's not the only reason, because we don't commit so many assets for simply one reason. It usually requires many simultaneous overlapping reasons for us to do that. It is not a simple careless whimsical thing to send that much military to a place for no reason.
So let's start with the nuclear thing.
Russia is a bad actor. It treats its own people poorly, doesn't have a free press, doesn't allow free speech, it blocks a bunch of the internet so it's harder for people to find the truth. You get thrown in prison because they don't like you. Under the Soviet Union they killed millions of their own people in stupid famines from poor authoritarian decision making. They throw you at the meat grinder of the front lines of poor wars and destroy everything, because they do not value human life. They got nukes to make their bad behavior invulnerable. Ok, so fine, the world is a little worse off, but that's Russia.
Russia spread communism to Korea, since they have had a long-term strategic interest in Korea as a basing for attacking Japan in order to control more warm water ports. Japan and Russia have had conflict around this since the 1800s. It's not new. So Korean war. Now North Korea has nukes. They make their people suffer. The world is a little worse off, but that's North Korea.
Russia spread communism to China for many reasons too. China killed countless millions of people through poor authoritarian decision making too, through yet more famines. They kill any of their own people who don't agree. They took over Tibet by force. They execute more of their own people than the entire world executes, combined. They started building up the largest military mankind has ever seen and now they have nukes. Now that they feel invulnerable, they engage in the largest influence and interference campaign in world history, manipulating countries at scale and spreading extreme propaganda worldwide. It is all pervasive in social media comments, YouTube and elsewhere. I've seen this shift happen personally, slowly. It is not organic. So fine, the world is a little worse off. That's China.
Russia tried to spread communism to Iran and helped the Islamic radicals overthrow the government, thinking the communists could have some control afterwards or exist as an alternative party. Instead the Islamic revolutionaries kill thousands of communists to say, "no, go away." Now we have an Iran that is explicitly friendly with Russia, China, North Korea and Venezuela, learning from North Korea's nuclear program, sending its scientists there. It engages in Islamic revolution in a way similar to how the Soviet Union was trying to spread communism before World War 2, with armed activist militant communist groups. They infiltrated Yemen and that caused the war there. They infiltrated Gaza and Lebanon and Iraq. Afghanistan HATES Iran, because of their attempts to infiltrate it with their radicals. Iraq went to war with Iran, because Iran was engaging in revolution inside their country. Now Iran had built up a huge conventional military just like its friends Russia, China and North Korea, and aims to get a nuclear weapon to make their bad behavior invulnerable.
Iran can't be compared the same way as other countries that have nuclear programs, because most countries aren't Russia, China and North Korea which Iran is patterning itself after and buys military hardware from.
We're done with "so fine, the world is a little worse off". This is domino theory. This is salami tactics, slicing little bits of the world one at a time until the steamroll is so strong it has passed the tipping point and physics no longer offers a way for you to push back the tide.
That is only 1 reason for attacking Iran and it is highly abbreviated. There are dozens of other reasons for attacking Iran, defending Ukraine and deterring China from attacking Taiwan. Dozens of other reasons for capturing Maduro and trying to reform Cuba.
The US doesn't want to have to do any of this. We'd rather just be left alone and leave others alone, but that is not the world we live in. There are people that seek global domination and they are not the ones that want you to have freedom of speech or value your life.
I saw a video from the ModRetro YouTube channel a few days ago and thought it was AI because it only had 10,000 subscribers. They’ve been at it since March of 2024 and have less than 400,000 views spread across 54 videos. Strong attention economy recession indicator that even a memeified billionaire can’t get organic attention on a platform like that.
I mean, that's just defense companies in general now. Would you rather have your own soldiers dying in a war, rather than robots? Ukraine is using AI in their targeting, is that something you condemn?
This is no different from the invention of machine guns or artillery. Yes, it's sad that these things will be used in war to kill (more) people. But intentionally avoiding that technology means you're just handicapping your own military and sacrificing others' lives for your principles.
No one should be surprised that this comment doesn't go over well on HN. But the multiple people replying to you like "Oh? Cool I'm gonna buy more now that I know it signals that I love war" is really disgusting. And they're all identical, like you've activated something in their programming.
They're posting flamebait in an attempt to trigger HN's cool-down autokill and bury the root post. Usual red vs blue tribal conflict, influence campaign, or people reacting to something that makes them feel bad by pretending it doesn't exist, who knows.
I wish I could just leave earth until this whole "tech industry" thing blows over.
Yeah, I’m seeing this a lot too recently. I guess polarization comes for us all eventually. Nuance and cognitive dissonance are so painful for some they simply flatten their position to something that feels safely straightforward, even if ghoulish?
It common to reply to silly comments with more silliness. It's a obvious virtue signal, which rightfully draws ridicule. Some people use mocking as ridicule, and it says nothing about the person doing the mocking, since they're likely saying it as a joke.
It's not a good or acceptable thing for the level of discourse on this website to be a bunch of 8th-grade boys on Xbox Live. You can disagree with OP or be conservative or whatever, but saying you want to support a drone manufacturer for no self-interested reason but because you like drone warfare is not a proportionate response to someone saying something "silly".
but your position that people just making nuanced non-emotional purchase decisions is somehow flawed itself is the main point of contention, its similar to how vegetarians keep pushing their views and preferences as a yardstick to measure others who don't share the same values.
so the question here is why can you not tolerate people simply separating a product from the manufacturer of another niche that is completely legal and is demanded by sovereign nations?
This is the same concept as "separating art from the artist". i.e. can you appreciate the creation without associating it with the personal foibles of the creator?
If you went around scrutinizing the personal failings of every single creator and deciding not to support their art, you would cut yourself off from a huge chunk of human creation. Creators and builders are disproportionately imperfect people.
Harvey Weinstein, for example, is a serial abuser and genuinely evil person. He also was involved in an enormous number of Hollywood productions. Do you go out of your way to make sure to never watch or consume media associated with him? My guess is probably not. It's impractical and also I think the net benefit of this mindset, where we only allow people with certain moral characteristics to succeed, is a loss for society.
Xbox is literally imploding right now, they laid off half the company and significantly raised the console price. If sales were good they never would've had to do game pass.
Besides, it's a dumb argument to compare military purchasing non-weapons commodities like controllers or toilet paper to a literal weapons company. It is almost literally impossible to live anywhere in the world without using a platform hosted on AWS or Azure. It is very easy to not buy things from the drone and now retro-console king. They are entirely different asks.
but the comforts you enjoy directly came from those very items you listed as unethical.
you could live off the grid in the cabins without internet if you truly believed in being free from the grips of the military industrial complex and the petrodollar you deeply feel guilty about
anything less and you risk sounding like a hypocrite
Genuinely what am I supposed to do if you can't read? Participating in the global economy is not the same thing as enthusiastically giving money to a company that only makes weapons of war because you love war. If you try to not use AWS in a modernized economy like the US you will probably die on the street and still have unwittingly used AWS anyways.
After reading it I ordered an m64, I am tired of people trying to gatekeep people into boycotting or telling them what they should consume or not when it's pretty clear the author in question is largely trying to virtue signal as means to reach their target audience.
AWS (and many others) is also then war profiteering company with JWCC, C2E, WildandStormy, not to mention all the other defense contractors that rely on their computer power to design and operate mass surveillance and killing of people. Is your agenda selectively blind?
not OP but yes, i consider the tech sphere's dive into mass surveillance to be war profiteering and have eliminated or minimized several in my life including amazon and spotify.
Did AWS post this article?
Why are you presenting your unfounded assumption as a gotcha? Do you have any basis whatsoever to believe GP supports AWS?
for the same reason GP assumed war profiteering. Guy is maybe and probably, based on his talks, interested in his homeland's defense. Maybe he's in it for the tech. Every defense company is war profiteering and thus unethical, especially this one? That's not only uncalled for, but absolutely cancerous thought as exemplified by the thread and poison it spreads.
This is why I exited the tech industry.
They've all become war profiteers and fascist enablers.
The only way to live with my conscience was to choose not to be complicit.
Oh wow that’s cool, I had no idea Palmer Lucky owned this. He pumps out quality tech. Im gonna check it out.
A friend of mine did posit the quandary that an "unpalatable" individual such as Luckey appears to be one of the few making consumer-friendly products: Removable, swappable battery packs, AA battery support, standard USB-C charging, easy interoperability, open sourced designs, exposed screws, teardown instructions, etc. Apparently ModRetro is even looking into making dumb TVs for gaming.
It's ironic, in another world HN commenters would be lauding Luckey and ModRetro for all these virtues.
Yeah I don't really like Luckey, or what I've heard from him anyways. But in the run up to launch the Chromatic, it became pretty clear that this guy, for whatever reason, is really passionate about gameboy. I have been less impressed with the other emulator/fpga machines. the chromatic is solid though.
[flagged]
Comparing a run-of-the-mill defense contractor to a serial rapist and murderer is certainly up there in the most unhinged justifications that I've seen on HN.
I don’t think the parent comment was trying to equate the two, but rather pushing the argument to its logical extreme to test show that the reasoning doesn’t hold consistently across cases. Whether they made a convincing argument is separate.
I literally was trying to equate the two.
Taking it to a logical extreme is good practice for thinking from first principles, but always pair it up with going to the logical extreme in the other direction. That might look something like: "would you really eat at a restaurant owned by a habitual jaywalker?".
Except pushing it to the logical extreme is what makes it wrong.
Nevermind that he literally was equating the two and explicitly says so.
Wait, Ted Bundy was a defense contractor? I didn't know that.
He meant Anduril as the defense contractor.
Yeah, one of them kills school kids for money. The other does it for the love of the game.
Run-of-the-mill. Ya know, a normal perpetuator of war profiteering. I mean he's your standard enabler of civilian bombing. Simply an average propagandist. Just a regular guy!
I'm getting very tired of the redditification of HN. This place used to not be like this.
There is explicitly a rule against complaining about the redditification of HN.
It's funny how retail versus wholesale death is seen so differently.
Kill a few dozen people with your own hands and people are (rightfully) horrified.
Run a business that enables the killing of orders of magnitude more people, and you can be a respected pillar of society.
Killing instantly becomes respectable if it's done legally and for profit.
I suggest you look into the perception of self defense. Saving yourself and others via killing compared to killing to commit a crime are perceived very differently.
That’s not it. There are plenty of industrialists who have killed far more than any serial killer just for profit and they don’t get anything like the opprobrium given to serial killers.
Do not assume Hacker News is safe from foreign influence campaigns.
Sadly, this is just an average online take.
Are domestic influence campaigns fair game?
[dead]
[flagged]
[flagged]
> So you know, either go all in and live like you mean it or stop pointing fingers at only very select individuals.
Careful. You're one step away from playing out the "Yet you participate in society. Curious!" meme. Besides, many people who are not in the Anduril fan club already boycott Microsoft for their ethical transgressions.
You can't use that meme argument at the beginning and mention that it is perfectly possible to boycott the other company at the end. The whole point of the meme is that participating in society is unavoidable, right?
And I don't think you can use "one step away from" a meme arguments at all. Pattern matching to a cartoon is not a great tool for this in the first place, and once you've acknowledged that the pattern doesn't even match, what's the point?
> If we’re gonna go for a witch hunt then we better hack off Microsoft’s head as well, for instance, since even their Xbox controllers are used in military subs.
Sounds like a great idea! I'm all for it
exactly. who in their right mind would ever hate Microsoft?
Account created 2 minutes before this comment was made.
[flagged]
Countries have militaries.
As well as military industrial complexes!
> It's ironic, in another world HN commenters would be lauding Luckey and ModRetro for all these virtues.
Lot's of HN (and "social" media) commenters in this world evidently are; nothing ironic about it.
It's just many people have a radically different set of ethics which, once they become principles, can't be easily, or at all, compromised on. And just to be fair, it's not just the what, but the how (which extends not just to Luckey & Friends, but to Anduril & Friends).
I am nuanced enough to appreciate that these qualities are present in the products being produced and still not buy from this producer because of their industry ties. Hopefully someone without such ridiculously unpalatable PR is able to copycat their design and sell a competitor - and hopefully the lead they've laid sets the standard for easily replaceable parts for the market (though, I'd mention that retro gaming hardware is intentionally made to be as modular as possible in most circumstances anyways).
> I am nuanced enough to appreciate that these qualities are present in the products being produced and still not buy from this producer because of their industry ties.
ModRetro produces one thing I do have an interest in. A partly aluminium-cast version of the, to me, most ergonomic gamepad made so far: the classic trimaran-style N64 controller. But that marriage ain't gonna happen. And that goes for every other (future) product of theirs as well.
Controller was terrible, if only for lack of two thumb sticks. Going back to GoldenEye, my second favorite game of all time... It's miserable.
> [...] if only for lack of two thumb sticks.
Certainly one of the most devisive controller designs, but the lack of two thumbsticks is precisely what I like about it. The pad centers one thumbstick and the trigger on opposite sides of the "main hull", with the rest of the inputs divided along two (remappable) zones, i. e. the outriggers. I have never held a controller in my hand with better ergonomics and holding adaptability. Even the size is just right for my hands.
It's the only pad that ever made FPS games on a console a joy to play for me; put in two analog sticks and you fuck with that formula. Its only serious weaknesses are the cheap plastic, especially for the thumbstick, and the weight (too light). Make a full metal version out of it, with some thumbstick material mods known from the PvP fighting game community, and it's the best. Well, at least for me.
Thanks for virtue signaling. Unfortunately, you used internet today which also powers the very industry you are trying to boycott.
> Lot's of HN (and "social" media) commenters in this world evidently are; nothing ironic about it.
I suppose what I'm trying to say is that it's ironic that the one guy providing these consumer-friendly features is considered anathema by many of the people clamoring for those features. You, yourself even mention downthread that you'd otherwise be interested in the M64 Pro controller, but won't consider it.
I was just trying to make a genuine comment remarking on the dichotomy, but I guess people are more interested in making quippy one-liners.
> I suppose what I'm trying to say is that it's ironic that the one guy providing these consumer-friendly features is considered anathema by many of the people clamoring for those features.
Yeah, I got that. I just don't think the fact that a to me detestable individual can have, or work for, an outfit that produces (some) good, interesting, or even highly impactful merchandise is at all remarkable. History is littered with such people, especially in the tech sector (e. g. Ford, von Braun, etc.).
This propaganda against Palmer Luckey completely lacks any critical thinking. Then again, I guess all propaganda is targeted at people who aren't critical thinkers to start with, so that's why it ends up working.
I've seen this astroturfing and spreading of lies increase since he delivered weapons to Taiwan so they can defend themselves. Probably the CCP amping up their influence campaign against him.
Who else did he deliver weapons to?
[flagged]
I don't get it. Modretro is for retro gamers. What does that have to do with those things you listed ?
[dead]
[flagged]
Tech killing innocents? Citation needed.
I have mixed feelings about it. I don't agree with how my country often ends up using these technologies, but defense tech and weaponry still seems pretty necessary. The US is not the only one doing this. Should they wait for their adversaries to have the upper hand? I don't think it's such a bad thing, as long as they can put the right people in charge. That's a whole other problem.
Good Lord. You know that Anduril industries will keep making drones no matter how many discussions about retro gaming you ruin right?
This backlash can hurt modretro, it can affect the author of this game, but the impact on the defense industry is zero. And this thread, fuck, you'd think running JavaScript on an n64 would be the safest place to avoid yelling about US politics in 2026 but here we are. And there's nothing to be gained. A smart person doing cool work published a game through a fun and ethical company that is owned by a person that also owns a defense company, so let's all scream about murdering children. As if that protects anyone from anything.
Well, are those humans Iranian schoolchildren or Russian troops invading Ukraine? Hard to make a judgment without knowing.
Good to see Kotaku's admirable journalistic practice of posting a list of histrionic tweets is alive and well
He's not a war profiteer, he's a peace profiteer. His philosophy is peace through strength, not profit through death. He even strongly emphasizes saving lives through weapons with better precision, which has been the trajectory of US weapons design for many decades. Russia is over there killing everything in sight and leveling entire cities including thousands of schools.
Your claim is similar to saying nobody should own a gun, because it should be illegal to defend yourself or others. So everyone who owns any kind of weapon is evil and bad? Only bad people are allowed to own weapons and we should just roll over?
Nobody should defend Ukraine from Russia? Anduril has been helping Ukraine since very early on.
Let the guy have his little side modding hobby.
Starting a weapon company is different from owning a gun. You have control over that gun. Your weapons company, those weapons will be used to kill innocent people, there is no doubt. Weapons don't only get used for clean operations in war and there is almost always collateral damage.
It is a decision to start producing regardless of how well-intentioned it is. You will be profiting off of people being maimed and killed. Various people thought they solved war through new weapons only to create more effective killing machines. That's what WW1 was.
Palmer does not have to work on weapons nor justify making them. Building tech that will be used to murder people (and yes, it will happen) is a decision. Not funding his other hobby when he's getting money off US military contracts is hardly breaking his bank. He wants to build weapons? I don't want to buy his products. Easy.
Building more efficient weapons does not make us safer. Every dollar saved through "strength" and better weapons matters little to the parents who lost their kid when the most precise weapon in the world kills a bunch of schoolchildren like it did at the start of the Iran war. If you can't gaurantee your weapons won't get used for that, why would you build them? You cannot.
I thought Tony Stark already made this point.
The problem is that China, Russia, Iran and so on have all been accelerating their weapons manufacturing. Go complain to them.
If nobody in the world was manufacturing any weapons and it was fully observable from space, nobody would have cause to manufacture these kinds of weapons. We do not live in that world.
At some point, any reasonable person should agree that if a country exists in an environment that contains many threats it might need to defend itself or others from, then it makes complete sense for it to develop weapons towards that aim. Countries are not people, people are people. So people make the weapons.
It just so happens that Palmer Luckey is a person. He can't sell weapons to any random person or country he wants, he can only sell them to the US or with permission of the US to a country that the US has a strategic interest in defending.
Precision weapons have helped reduce casualties. This is a fact. Please try to contradict this fact in the face of napalm bombing and nuclear bombs of yesteryears. Please try to tell me that precision weapons aren't better than just randomly aiming artillery at the sky and letting'er rip. Please do. I want to hear your well founded argument for this.
Hey, if your argument is that somebody has to build weapons, then that's your argument. I don't believe that's the situation and building weapons only encourages other countries to do the same. Notice virtually all of Russia's justifications are about US aggression, rightly or wrongly.
Is it more efficient than napalm? Great. It still will be used to kill people which I find to be gross, especially when innocents will die, too. If somebody has to build weapons and somebody has to fund said weapons maker, I'm glad it doesn't have to be me. Doesn't have to be Palmer either.
If killing people is gross (which I agree with), then we should kill the people that kill the people, right? Or should people that kill people run rampant, because nobody should ever kill them?
If they should be killed, then they should be killed with the minimum number of civilian casualties possible.
Countless millions of people died in World War 1 and World War 2. So many people died that we only have estimates, because there were too many to count individually.
If nobody pushed back against Japan, Germany, Russia, North Korea, China, Iraq, Iran and so on, the world would not be a better place. It would be a place where full on global war was legitimized as a viable global domination strategy. And global domination was in fact the goal back then. The problem is, we aren't sure that goal has ever gone away.
As a result, the entire world is a chess board with smaller countries being manipulated or compromised in various ways for some other grand strategy. For many years now we've accepted that there would largely be some sort of equilibrium or status quo. Except these smaller countries also have a mind of their own and their people universally reject being controlled and manipulated.
Russia with Ukraine. China with Taiwan. North Korea with South Korea. Venezuela with Guyana. Iran with Israel, Iraq, Yemen, etc. Now suddenly all of these countries are all the prowl almost simultaneously. If you only look at US action, look at the world we're reacting to. It's not as simple as some political propagandist hitjob soundbite on TV being the complete answer.
In a 2024 speech, Luckey said "Societies have always needed a warrior class that is enthused and excited about enacting violence on others in pursuit of good aims. You need people like me who are sick in that way and who don't lose any sleep making tools of violence in order to preserve freedom." ( https://techcrunch.com/2024/10/01/palmer-luckey-every-countr... ). He's said in a Bloomberg interview that "there are actually things I would like to build that the DoD would not use and would not deploy, that they do think are beyond the pale" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItLFpYha6Wc ), and he's said in an Axios interview that he would be willing to build nuclear weapons, as well as chemical weapons "in a specific vertical". He then elaborates by saying that it's a huge mistake that the US military isn't allowed to use tear gas in combat. ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZfW3YTJ5Eg ) I'm having trouble believing that someone like this is inherently peaceful and should be getting multi-billion dollar contracts to manufacture drones that autonomously kill people. Maybe it's better to buy a Nintendo game from someone who doesn't think that the US is being held back by war crime treaties.
I've already seen all those quotes and interviews. You're mischaracterizing them.
He's probably not wrong that you have to be a certain kind of person that can stomach the inherent violence involved, that doesn't mean you want to kill innocent civilians. Yet you do have to be the kind of person who understands that civilian casualties can happen. Life is not kind to the mind that is fragile to the realities of nature. That's accurate.
As for nuclear weapons, he explicitly said he thinks they have done a lot to stabilize the world, which does put some limiters on how extreme war can be, because there is an extra red line that actually matters.
When it comes to chemical weapons, he already stated that no he wouldn't create biological or chemical weapons, but he thinks that there should be a special exception for non-lethal means like tear gas and pepper spray. It's like, a woman can take pepper spray out of her purse and use it against a criminal, but the US military can't use pepper spray to suppress enemies without killing them? Killing people is a more viable option than suppressing them? I think that's the argument he's making.
You should actually watch the stuff you link.
We're talking about a company whose primary customer is the US military. Said military is currently involved in a pointless war of aggression. It has carried out unprovoked attacks on at least two other countries just this year alone. When was the last time the it was used in self defense?
"Peace through strength" is a fine motto, but you can't claim that motto and then turn around and base your business on selling to an entity that routinely starts non-defensive wars.
If you don't understand history or what's going on in the world, everything will seem pointless and you will fall easy prey to anyone telling you what you should believe.
You have so many tools at your disposal for learning, you really have no reason to just have no idea what is going on unless you just don't prioritize your time that way. In which case, it's ok to understand that you don't know, but why hold your opinion so strongly then?
Come out and say what you want to say. Don't give me this nonsense about how I have no idea what's going on and you won't even deign to explain where you disagree.
It is completely logically unsupportable that the war is pointless, so your claim is so flat and empty that there is no need to do anything other than point out that weakness in your claim.
Go do a couple searches real quick and see what some of the points of the war may be. Many of them will be incorrect or incomplete, but you will come back with at least some reasons that exist.
I was talking about the war with Iran. Is that what you're referring to here? Just making sure, because this is a pretty wild thing to say about that particular war.
Sure, I can do searches and find people giving various reasons for the war. What's your point? Am I not allowed to disagree with people? If I can do a couple searches real quick and find some people saying A, I'm not allowed to claim not-A?
I don't see how logic dictates that there's a point to this war. I understand that some people believe the war is being carried out to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon or whatever, but how does it "logically" follow that there is necessarily a point to it?
Ok, so that's one reason. It's not the only reason, because we don't commit so many assets for simply one reason. It usually requires many simultaneous overlapping reasons for us to do that. It is not a simple careless whimsical thing to send that much military to a place for no reason.
So let's start with the nuclear thing.
Russia is a bad actor. It treats its own people poorly, doesn't have a free press, doesn't allow free speech, it blocks a bunch of the internet so it's harder for people to find the truth. You get thrown in prison because they don't like you. Under the Soviet Union they killed millions of their own people in stupid famines from poor authoritarian decision making. They throw you at the meat grinder of the front lines of poor wars and destroy everything, because they do not value human life. They got nukes to make their bad behavior invulnerable. Ok, so fine, the world is a little worse off, but that's Russia.
Russia spread communism to Korea, since they have had a long-term strategic interest in Korea as a basing for attacking Japan in order to control more warm water ports. Japan and Russia have had conflict around this since the 1800s. It's not new. So Korean war. Now North Korea has nukes. They make their people suffer. The world is a little worse off, but that's North Korea.
Russia spread communism to China for many reasons too. China killed countless millions of people through poor authoritarian decision making too, through yet more famines. They kill any of their own people who don't agree. They took over Tibet by force. They execute more of their own people than the entire world executes, combined. They started building up the largest military mankind has ever seen and now they have nukes. Now that they feel invulnerable, they engage in the largest influence and interference campaign in world history, manipulating countries at scale and spreading extreme propaganda worldwide. It is all pervasive in social media comments, YouTube and elsewhere. I've seen this shift happen personally, slowly. It is not organic. So fine, the world is a little worse off. That's China.
Russia tried to spread communism to Iran and helped the Islamic radicals overthrow the government, thinking the communists could have some control afterwards or exist as an alternative party. Instead the Islamic revolutionaries kill thousands of communists to say, "no, go away." Now we have an Iran that is explicitly friendly with Russia, China, North Korea and Venezuela, learning from North Korea's nuclear program, sending its scientists there. It engages in Islamic revolution in a way similar to how the Soviet Union was trying to spread communism before World War 2, with armed activist militant communist groups. They infiltrated Yemen and that caused the war there. They infiltrated Gaza and Lebanon and Iraq. Afghanistan HATES Iran, because of their attempts to infiltrate it with their radicals. Iraq went to war with Iran, because Iran was engaging in revolution inside their country. Now Iran had built up a huge conventional military just like its friends Russia, China and North Korea, and aims to get a nuclear weapon to make their bad behavior invulnerable.
Iran can't be compared the same way as other countries that have nuclear programs, because most countries aren't Russia, China and North Korea which Iran is patterning itself after and buys military hardware from.
We're done with "so fine, the world is a little worse off". This is domino theory. This is salami tactics, slicing little bits of the world one at a time until the steamroll is so strong it has passed the tipping point and physics no longer offers a way for you to push back the tide.
That is only 1 reason for attacking Iran and it is highly abbreviated. There are dozens of other reasons for attacking Iran, defending Ukraine and deterring China from attacking Taiwan. Dozens of other reasons for capturing Maduro and trying to reform Cuba.
The US doesn't want to have to do any of this. We'd rather just be left alone and leave others alone, but that is not the world we live in. There are people that seek global domination and they are not the ones that want you to have freedom of speech or value your life.
Do you see all weapons companies as bad?
Is SAAB bad making JAS Gripen being soon used against Russia?
I find your and similar views to be very childish. And somewhat suspicious.
Who would benefit from the west investing less in weapons systems? It boils down to what side you are on honestly.
I saw a video from the ModRetro YouTube channel a few days ago and thought it was AI because it only had 10,000 subscribers. They’ve been at it since March of 2024 and have less than 400,000 views spread across 54 videos. Strong attention economy recession indicator that even a memeified billionaire can’t get organic attention on a platform like that.
that's wild, it's not like the videos are hosted on an irrelevant platform like bluesky or something. Who knows
The article isn't "about" ModRetro, please engage with the actual material instead of off-topic political tirades.
> Modretro agreed to publish the game as a physical launch title for their M64 (a modern N64 clone), complete with cartridge, packaging and manual!
The article says the game is published by ModRetro.
And the contents of the article are almost entirely about the process of making an n64 game. This is HN not reddit.
[dead]
[flagged]
> which makes human-killing robots
I mean, that's just defense companies in general now. Would you rather have your own soldiers dying in a war, rather than robots? Ukraine is using AI in their targeting, is that something you condemn?
This is no different from the invention of machine guns or artillery. Yes, it's sad that these things will be used in war to kill (more) people. But intentionally avoiding that technology means you're just handicapping your own military and sacrificing others' lives for your principles.
Anduril is not "just" anything.
No one should be surprised that this comment doesn't go over well on HN. But the multiple people replying to you like "Oh? Cool I'm gonna buy more now that I know it signals that I love war" is really disgusting. And they're all identical, like you've activated something in their programming.
They're posting flamebait in an attempt to trigger HN's cool-down autokill and bury the root post. Usual red vs blue tribal conflict, influence campaign, or people reacting to something that makes them feel bad by pretending it doesn't exist, who knows. I wish I could just leave earth until this whole "tech industry" thing blows over.
I've never heard of cool-down autokill. Where is that mentioned?
Yeah, I’m seeing this a lot too recently. I guess polarization comes for us all eventually. Nuance and cognitive dissonance are so painful for some they simply flatten their position to something that feels safely straightforward, even if ghoulish?
Social media’s a helluva drug.
It common to reply to silly comments with more silliness. It's a obvious virtue signal, which rightfully draws ridicule. Some people use mocking as ridicule, and it says nothing about the person doing the mocking, since they're likely saying it as a joke.
It's not a good or acceptable thing for the level of discourse on this website to be a bunch of 8th-grade boys on Xbox Live. You can disagree with OP or be conservative or whatever, but saying you want to support a drone manufacturer for no self-interested reason but because you like drone warfare is not a proportionate response to someone saying something "silly".
but your position that people just making nuanced non-emotional purchase decisions is somehow flawed itself is the main point of contention, its similar to how vegetarians keep pushing their views and preferences as a yardstick to measure others who don't share the same values.
so the question here is why can you not tolerate people simply separating a product from the manufacturer of another niche that is completely legal and is demanded by sovereign nations?
[dead]
This is the same concept as "separating art from the artist". i.e. can you appreciate the creation without associating it with the personal foibles of the creator?
If you went around scrutinizing the personal failings of every single creator and deciding not to support their art, you would cut yourself off from a huge chunk of human creation. Creators and builders are disproportionately imperfect people.
Harvey Weinstein, for example, is a serial abuser and genuinely evil person. He also was involved in an enormous number of Hollywood productions. Do you go out of your way to make sure to never watch or consume media associated with him? My guess is probably not. It's impractical and also I think the net benefit of this mindset, where we only allow people with certain moral characteristics to succeed, is a loss for society.
I think one thing we can all agree on is that if you despite the artist, you shouldn't give him money.
Yes. It's not impractical, it's baseline human decency.
And ? Are you upset that Google/Microsoft/Oracle sells their tech to the military? Xbox controller is used on nuclear subs too.
also not a good look using kotaku as a source, were you aware of their poor journalistic standards?
I'd take a step back and assess whether the media you are consuming is dictating what to think and feel rather than from free will.
> And ? Are you upset that Google/Microsoft/Oracle sells their tech to the military?
Yes
> Xbox controller is used on nuclear subs too.
I have never played an Xbox, nor do I have any interest in doing so. There is nothing interesting about the Xbox.
You're saying things about yourself, not the Xbox or MS.
There is something interesting about the Xbox, as evidenced by its sales record.
Xbox is literally imploding right now, they laid off half the company and significantly raised the console price. If sales were good they never would've had to do game pass.
Besides, it's a dumb argument to compare military purchasing non-weapons commodities like controllers or toilet paper to a literal weapons company. It is almost literally impossible to live anywhere in the world without using a platform hosted on AWS or Azure. It is very easy to not buy things from the drone and now retro-console king. They are entirely different asks.
but the comforts you enjoy directly came from those very items you listed as unethical.
you could live off the grid in the cabins without internet if you truly believed in being free from the grips of the military industrial complex and the petrodollar you deeply feel guilty about
anything less and you risk sounding like a hypocrite
Genuinely what am I supposed to do if you can't read? Participating in the global economy is not the same thing as enthusiastically giving money to a company that only makes weapons of war because you love war. If you try to not use AWS in a modernized economy like the US you will probably die on the street and still have unwittingly used AWS anyways.
[dead]
Also worth reading "Do Not Buy The War Crime N64".
https://aftermath.site/war-crime-n64-palmer-luckey-m64-modre...
Thanks for the link, just bought one!
After reading it I ordered an m64, I am tired of people trying to gatekeep people into boycotting or telling them what they should consume or not when it's pretty clear the author in question is largely trying to virtue signal as means to reach their target audience.
Giving people context is gatekeeping now?
A clear hatchet job article written with more bias and vitriol in every sentence than your average HuffPost article is not "context" for anyone.
you just defined gatekeeping
[flagged]
where did I say you should buy the product? I have no stake, I simply bought it because the original article said we shouldn't buy it.
contrarian and virtue signaling are very different. i could totally care less if you choose not to buy it.
i respect diversity
[dead]
[dead]
[flagged]
[flagged]
I remain eternally grateful that HN's developers created an indicator that an account was created very recently.
For those not aware, look for the green name highlight.
[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]
Thanks for the heads up. I wouldn't have checked it out otherwise. Palmer Luckey has done some cool shit. And Anduril is super impressive.