If I get shot and someone writes some libelous bullshit about how I worked with hygienic macro systems, someone kindly jump on that shit ASAP. Thanks in advance!
"Authorities have investigated whether his death could be connected to this weekend's Brown University shooting and, at this point, a senior law enforcement official briefed on both cases told ABC News there is nothing to suggest they’re connected."
https://abcnews.go.com/US/mit-professor-shot-killed-home-bos...
Also worth noting... at one point the arrested the wrong guy.
They have no clue. And become hostile when people try to come up with one. While scrubbing student profiles and simultaneously claiming they have no knowledge of doing so. The whole thing is a total clown show and nothing said by the authorities is to be believed without independent verification.
[] Brown University spokesperson Brian Clark
1. No one should be stupid enough to put their name and rep on the line, in a fluid situation, where there’s 0 idea who did the first anyways, for days now.
2. Dunno what you mean by academics, students and professors? Usually academics refers to professors / grad students / has a job at university related to teaching, but Brown victims weren’t professors. Hard to see how that indicates a connection.
3. It’s a real stretch to put Providence to Brookline at a 1 hour drive. In general, it’s two different worlds, so it’s strange to use it as a clear indicator they must be related.
4. If it’s obvious they’re connected, and making any claim of probability re: their connection should require putting your name and reputation on the line, what’s your name?
To be very clear here, the claim is that "there is nothing to suggest the two sets of predmeditated murders within a week within an hour are related". The fact that they're the same demographic, high profile, using the same weapon, close in proximity, and close in time are all concrete things that relate them. It is embarrassing to state otherwise, so the officer was not named. However the reporters are not immune to this, so they take the hit.
I am not stating the positive "they are related", I am refuting the negative "they are unrelated".
And as for my identity: I am not a reporter or public official. You don't need to and shouldn't use me as a source of truth. I am a member of the public applying logic to facts. I am closer to this event than you but I won't say more. As a member of HN who respects privacy I'm sure that should be enough for you.
If you’re close to the situation, and have a substantiated reason to believe the claim that there’s no current information suggesting they’re related is inaccurate, you should be able to back that up. Except we both know you can’t, because you’re attempting to refute something that wasn’t actually said.
The same weapon being.. a gun? Hardly a notable connection.
I hope you’re extremely close to one of these events and are extremely distraught, even though that’s tragic, because it would indicate you’re not just comfortable disassociated from reality.
Note the difference in your approach this morning versus now, to wit, you this morning: “ We have no info but he was the department head of the MIT PSFC. It's easy to imagine a deranged individual picking a high profile target by browsing MIT's website. Or it was a domestic dispute or road rage or any number of things that would drive someone to shoot someone in their home. We have no information and can only speculate.”
edit to add: (For those who weren't aware, the Brown University terrorist is still on the loose).
The other was a mass shooting style event that targetted an exam preperation review hall populated by econ students and led by a 21-year-old teaching assistant.
It's a stretch to connect an isolated murder of a field advancing physics researcher and a hall full of students just because all the victims are involved in book learning.
Possible connection, sure. At an improbable stretch.
ChatGPT can certainly knock up a Clancy like novel here, no doubt.
But I have no more information than anyone else does, I'm making a low-confidence educated guess, and at some point in the near future it's very likely that the professionals whose job it is to investigate serious crimes will have a better idea of what actually happened than anyone posting in this thread.
In a neighborhood with mixed SFHs and condos, it makes little sense to target a condo. Makes even less sense for someone to break in, but to shoot the victim outside, in the foyer.
It's a tough one to find a motive for...
And even more horrified about the thread on homepage about surveilance cameras. I knew that shoplifting and car theft is essentially decriminalized in US. And now I learn that home invasions are also.
I imagine most preteens in America have a better grasp of reality than the one you’re espousing here.
The us is only 5 times bigger
Pleasanton remained safe and bland despite allowing evil public transit.
BART service started in Pleasanton in 1997. In 1992 or 1993 I had a glass CRT TV stolen during a burglary at our house in exurban Connecticut. There's no reason to claim that TV theft is some myth. It was a crime that did in fact happen.
You mean murder?
Although yours is more neutral than "CEOs do nasty things that get people killed, and get away with it" which you often hear from the same populations that cheered the assassination of a CEO that did nasty things and most definitely did not get away with it.
It's definitely become more politically charged in the wake of the Luigi event, when framing CEOs as violent people implicitly authorizes "self-defense" cheered on by what is usually associated with left-wing leaning actors.
It's most likely a matter of happenstance. It happened to be the warmest time of the day (even though it was evening). Maybe the thinking was someone was home to help them find the valuables, maybe not.
> 8:30p seems like a dumb time for a home robbery.
The assertion that there is some optimization for some specific imagined motivation, is literal fantasy.
* Drug dealer
* Cheating on spouse and someone got jealous
* Suicide
https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/general/2487170/jewish-...
(You'll note that even Yeshiva World News isn't speculating about motives here.)
That is simply not true, every single news outlet without fail speculates, uncritically quotes a speculator, or leaves out warranted critical speculation at their own discretion. Pick a news site that you think doesn’t do this and I will happily find an example from their front page.
Being politically outspoken on an issue which is contentious in that area, and which has caused violence before seems like the most plausible explanation that I have heard so far.
People also get burgled and shot. Lovers take revenge. A grad student loses their mind.
It's entirely irresponsible to suggest that something is being hidden if there's zero evidence so far that someone's religion or political views are even remotely relevant.
People's religion and political views aren't generally considered relevant to a homicide unless there's an indication they had something to do with the motive, at which point they get reported. Otherwise, the media sticks to basic biographical details like occupation and family status.
Otherwise, the media gets accused of sensationalizing things, implying someone's religion is relevant to stir up controversy, etc.
If it turns out this was either a hate crime or a politically-motivated crime, do you really think the media will suppress that? Spoiler: they don't.
This is problematic because most of the sources saying he was Jewish and pro-Israel seem to be quoting each other. The Wikipedia reference was added yesterday and removed today because the linked sources didn’t say anything about his religion, and I haven’t seen any sources about pro-Israel stances which I’d think would be easier to find if he was outspoken enough to be targeted. It’s still quite possible that he was the unfortunate victim of a stalker-most of the professors I know have had to work with security to keep someone off campus because colleges attract a certain brand of mentally ill people–but it seems odd that these sources are so confident about this assertion without citing sources.
Based on e.g. https://news.mit.edu/2018/nuno-loureiro-faculty-physics-1016 it really seems like his passion was physics and I think we should commemorate someone who tried to improve humanity’s understanding of the universe. If new details emerge, I’m sure they’ll be posted here.
Magnetised plasma dynamics is the study of the state of matter in which the motion of charged particles is influenced by the presence of an external magnetic field, according to Nature.
Loureiro joined MIT's faculty in 2016 and was named director of MIT's Plasma Science and Fusion Center in 2024."
Although it may be a total red herring, it may be worth noting that there are (debatably pseudoscientific) theories -- primarily Plasma cosmology[1] and the Electric Universe theory[2] -- that are related to (and potentially in conflict with) this field of research.