63 points fascinnn 2 hours ago 48 comments
ratherbefuddled 1 hour ago | parent
wwdx 1 hour ago | parent
bvcp 1 hour ago | parent
hollowonepl 1 hour ago | parent
m12k 1 hour ago | parent
draxen 58 minutes ago | parent
Violating the E (Environment) should lead to fines to make up for environmental clean up. If severe enough there should be prison time for the responsible higher ups.
Drop the S and G. There are existing laws to for most of these.
Governments can use weapons embargoes to stop their defense contractors from selling to specific countries.
toyg 57 minutes ago | parent
rob74 55 minutes ago | parent
einpoklum 1 hour ago | parent
War, invasions, occupations - it's a growth business apparently. The UK government approves.
notabotiswear 57 minutes ago | parent
anonymous_user9 1 hour ago | parent
Glad that's been settled!
ivell 1 hour ago | parent
anovikov 1 hour ago | parent
gambiting 57 minutes ago | parent
citrin_ru 48 minutes ago | parent
m000 1 hour ago | parent
Good for the British people then, and kudos to ESG. As if the UK doesn't have enough surveillance as it is.
KingMob 1 hour ago | parent
What's next, tobacco company bemoans anti-smoking ad restrictions?
weddpros 1 hour ago | parent
dcl 1 hour ago | parent
draxen 1 hour ago | parent
The SFDR and similar EU regulations were originally designed to tackle greenwashing, but has now made it almost impossible to raise money for nuclear, aerospace, and defense startups and ventures in the EU (and by network effects also in the UK).
Since 2025/2026 the EU has promised to find ways ease up these regulations because of the war in Ukraine.
ilikerashers 1 hour ago | parent
Something is really, really wrong in Europe. There will be books written about this in the future.
lawn 58 minutes ago | parent
Replace Europe with the US and the statement holds just as well. Or China or why not Russia.
We live in bad times.
toyg 46 minutes ago | parent
The reality is that, as long as we don't start firing nukes, we'll all be alright in the end.
lifestyleguru 34 minutes ago | parent
m000 56 minutes ago | parent
dcl 55 minutes ago | parent
MrBuddyCasino 37 minutes ago | parent
Otherwise I can recommend basically everything by Curtis Yarvin and Kevin Dolan (https://substack.com/@exitgroup, https://substack.com/@exitgroup).
There is a wide and rich ocean of deep thought and historical knowledge in that corner, for those curious and open-minded enough.
jmyeet 30 minutes ago | parent
For example, "if China were secretly conspiring to sabotage the US, they would goad the US into a war with Iran".
Anyway, as far as Europe's self-sabotage goes, I don't think China has much to do with it. The US however does. Trump browbeating NATO countries to spend 5% of GDP on defense is both a gift to US weapons manufacturers and a foil to dismantle the social welfare states in Europe. Because of different versions of austerity, those defense dollars come directly at the expensive of the social safety net and the tenets of European social democracy. I really don't think that's an accident either.
It's also true that Europe has been asleep at the wheel, perfectly happy to outsource their defense to the US. I am skeptical that the political will exists to replace foreign military hardware with homegrown industries but I believe that Europe needs to be responsible for its own security if it's to survive long term.
GDEpps 1 hour ago | parent
rwmj 1 hour ago | parent
toyg 55 minutes ago | parent
gambiting 45 minutes ago | parent
matt-p 1 hour ago | parent
edh649 1 hour ago | parent
m000 1 hour ago | parent
martimarkov 49 minutes ago | parent
AI misinformation and slop - should be moderated and not top of HN
martimarkov 42 minutes ago | parent
1:1 copy
rmccue 28 minutes ago | parent
zajio1am 30 minutes ago | parent
IshKebab 2 minutes ago | parent
What a weird response.
dismalpedigree 53 minutes ago | parent
Kim_Bruning 46 minutes ago | parent
toothrot 45 minutes ago | parent
asxndu 38 minutes ago | parent
surfingdino 38 minutes ago | parent
clarionbell 36 minutes ago | parent
helsinkiandrew 20 minutes ago | parent
A very young company with £700,000, a few employees and no trading history would get heavy "Know Your Customer" scrutiny at any bank whether or not it was defence or not. "Due to the nature of your business" could be due to that rather than it being a defence company.
They could well just have ticked to many boxes on Barclays "possibly suspect" checklist and got automatically denied by someone in compliance with hundreds of accounts to check a day.
Matt Levine/Bloomberg has talked about this a lot - where banks can turn the dial from giving everyone an account (and get sued and large fines - Barclays faced litigation due to Epstein), or reject more and get accused of not giving bank accounts to legitimate companies/people.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/newsletters/2026-10-14/ban...