[mingus88]

This is so short sighted. We are so early into this AI revolution, and this administration is obviously in a tailspin, with the only folk left in charge being the least capable ones we have seen in a decade

Imagine what the conversation would be like if Mattis, a highly decorated and respected leader were still the SecDef. Instead we are seeing bully tactics from a failed cable news pundit who has neither earned nor deserved any respect from the military he represents.

We are two elections and a major health issue away from a complete change of course.

But short sightedness is the name of the quarterly reporting game, so who knows.

[travisgriggs]

> We are so early into this AI revolution…

I keep hoping it’s almost over.

Not trying to be the Luddite. Had multiple questions to AI tools yesterday, and let Claude/Zed do some boilerplate code/pattern rewriting.

I’ve worked in software for 35 years. I’ve seen many new “disruptive” movements come and go (open source, objects, functional, services, containers, aspects, blockchains, etc). I chose to participate in some and not in others. And whether I made the wrong choices or not, I always felt like I could get a clear enough picture of where the bandwagon was going that I could jump in, or hold back, or kind of. My choices weren’t always the same as others, so it’s not like it was obvious to everyone. But the signal felt more deterministic.

With LLM/agents, I find I feel the most unease and uncertainty with how much to lean in, and in what ways to lean in, than I ever have before. A sort of enthusiasm paralysis that is new.

Perhaps it’s just my age.

[radley]

Didn't we go through this same kind of uncertainty with PCs, the internet, and smartphones? It's early and we're all noodling around.

[HumblyTossed]

I'm seriously worried there won't be more elections. Not hyperbole at all.

[palmotea]

> I'm seriously worried there won't be more elections. Not hyperbole at all.

Why? That's a an unrealistic fear, driven by the insanely overwrought political rhetoric of 2026. Think about it: elections will be the absolute last thing to go.

If you want something to worry about, worry about this:

> And the stakes of politics are almost always incredibly high. I think they happen to be higher now. And I do think a lot of what is happening in terms of the structure of the system itself is dangerous. I think that the hour is late in many ways. My view is that a lot of people who embrace alarm don’t embrace what I think obviously follows from that alarm, which is the willingness to make strategic and political decisions you find personally discomfiting, even though they are obviously more likely to help you win.

> Taking political positions that’ll make it more likely to win Senate seats in Kansas and Ohio and Missouri. Trying to open your coalition to people you didn’t want it open to before. Running pro-life Democrats.

> And one of my biggest frustrations with many people whose politics I otherwise share is the unwillingness to match the seriousness of your politics to the seriousness of your alarm. I see a Democratic Party that often just wants to do nothing differently, even though it is failing — failing in the most obvious and consequential ways it can possibly fail. (https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/18/opinion/interesting-times...)

[filoeleven]

It's not an unrealistic fear. Trump has been making noises about "taking over elections." Abolishing elections wholesale is very unlikely, sure, but a sham election rigged by a corrupt government? That's standard fare for authoritarians. And there's evidence of voting anomalies in swing states in the 2024 election.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/27/trump-voting...

https://electiontruthalliance.org/

[abustamam]

Yeah, Russia still has "elections" for all the good that does them.

[HoratioHellpop]

Trump _says_ lots. Most of it doesn't come true.

[palmotea]

FYI, even though you have a new account, you were banned from your first comment and all your comments automatically show up as hidden-by-default to most users.

[bostik]

It's not who votes that counts, but who counts the votes.

(Attributed to Stalin, but likely comes from a despot earlier in the history.)

[panarky]

Authoritarian nations continue to have elections, turnout is near 100%, and Dear Leader wins with 90% of the vote.

[delecti]

I don't think it's crazy to worry that, but elections are run by the states, there are over 100,000 poling places nationally, and people are pissed. On Jan 3, the entire current House of Representatives terms end; Democratic governors will still hold elections, and if there haven't been elections in GOP-led states, they're out of representation. There are so many hurdles in the way of the fascists canceling or heavily interfering in elections, and they're all just so stupid.

[ckemere]

WaPo headline “Administration plans to declare emergency to federalize election rules.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/02/26/trump-ele...

[delecti]

Yeah, they can plan whatever they want. No such authority exists, and it must really be emphasized that they're all so stupid.

[abustamam]

Stupid and effective are not mutually exclusive.

I do agree with you that no such authority exists, but this administration seems to get away with a lot of things they have no authority to do.

[Loudergood]

If you think they're pissed now, just wait to see how they react to election interference.

I recently read up on how the House of Representatives renews itself and quite frankly it's one of the most beautiful processes I've seen, completely removing the influence of the prior congress.

[conception]

Putin crushes every election he has. Of course there would be more elections.

[re666]

Mattis- the same highly decorated and respected leader that was on the board of directors at Theranos... edit: added Mattis

[johnthescott]

a bit of casual research will show you hegseth is much more than just a fox pundit.