skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> If Facebook/Google instituted a policy of denying ad payouts to fake news (assuming that could be reliably determined) then the problem would correct itself.

Only in some cases: consider how much money is spent on political advertising, and then all of the second-order work funding think-tanks, newspapers, magazines, TV networks, etc. to promote a particular viewpoint. I wouldn't classify Reason as a fake news source but they're an example of what that might look like. Here are their IRS filings from 2015 showing ~90% of their operating income coming from donations:

https://www.reason.org/files/2015-reason_990.pdf

What happens if one or two of their major donors decides this isn't the most effective way to support their viewpoint and they'd get more return at the polls by setting up a less ethical site?

How many Google Ads could you buy for $9M/year, and how quickly would that translate into organic page-rank? Now consider that Presidential campaign spending has been in the billion-plus range for awhile and ask how many activist donors would be totally comfortable dropping tens of millions for a couple of years to run a fake site if they thought it'd be more effective than a few more TV ads.
You could rewrite portions, fix portions, do extensions, and contribute back any of these to developer. These are quite advantageous esp if it's small enough for customers to understand. One of the first systems to send the source to customers and accept good contributions into next release was Burroughs B5000: a 1961 mainframe that cost more than a house.
I am sure this will be cheered at here, but this is a troubling trend.
my stackover question from August 2016 http://stackoverflow.com/questions/38728614/how-do-i-control... before i knew the term curses. Thank you photoionized, you changed my life.
A Primer on DarkNet Marketplaces
You're being sarcastic, but I'm not sure if people weren't better informed in times where just a few organizations were gatekeepers to information.

It's undemocratic, I know. They still did a better job. Now, people support parties as if they were sports teams. Politics has become mass entertainment and the relationship between quality and success is so low, I'm unsure if we wouldn't be better of selecting congress in a lottery.
Annotated version of an original Deus Ex design doc surfaces
Does Vox count as fake news? Their manipulative misuse of statistics is so bad it should qualify as fake.
Wonder what spawned this?
Separation Anxiety – About Taiwanese Waste Management
Loads instantly, + for Mac/iOS docs it is way more stable and usable than Xcode's docs browser.
> If your communication style inhibits your audience's understanding or even their willingness to listen, then you are simply a bad communicator.

It's certainly not that simple. This only makes sense if your goal is to communicate in a culturally-agnostic manner, which is not something you can reliably do. It's like flag burning: you can't really communicate the same point better in another way. It at least makes some sense to tromp on people's emotions in a context where you are trying to teach them that their emotions are an obstacle to success.

It is important for the teacher to understand the student, but it is arguably more important for the student to understand the teacher.
Then change the title?
Lazily or not, that would be a global design decision (use a lazy language or not)
> There is no way you can defend the journalist integrity of the 'breitbart' of the web.

So far, Breitbart is the only one US big news website which published information that a Guardian columnist called for the assassination of Trump.

https://archive.is/iJYaJ#78%

https://www.google.pl/search?q=Rajesh+guardian+assassinate+t...

You won't find that info in NYT, WaPo or CNN. You won't find there information about 'Rape Melania' being one of the most trending topics on Twitter in the US either.

https://twitter.com/BobbyDellBSC/status/797865706897313792/p...

So it can be said exactly the same about them what you said about Breitbart: There is no way you can defend the journalist integrity of the MSM.
> What I am trying to say is that once such mechanism is in place it can go on a slippery slope from there on. Next thing they will decide to filter fake news search results and that very minute they will be subpoenaed to hide something in the name of state security.

This thread makes me deeply nervous thinking about tech giants turning into the Ministry Of Truth.

EDIT: As tech professions, do we not appreciate the scale, reach, and leverage technology provides? If we do recognize that, we must realize that with great power comes great responsibility.
That's not bias, it's just over fitting the model
Some things aren't worth the electrons it takes to refute. As it is, even a downvote generates a request/response, and even that is a questionable use of such minimal resources.
This is an ad. You're selling here! That's not what this site is for!
> A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.

Sure, but making sure your defence of your argument doesn't contradict your argument can hardly be considered to be a foolish consistency.
>FCC's decision not to ban zero rating (or the practice of exempting some content from usage caps) when crafting net neutrality rules ... As a result, despite having net neutrality rules, we now have companies like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast all exempting their own streaming content from the caps ...

the network is equally neutral to all content, to some content it is just more neutral.
In a similar discussion, someone working for OpenSUSE pointed out that their business model is selling FOSS. They make about $20+ million a year. Red Hat even more despite the fact that CentOS is basically Red Hat for free. You have a potential advantage in the enterprise market where companies are hesitant to take free software since they want someone to be responsible for it. They'll pay you for GPL stuff if they can call you for improvements or fixes.
Even though I do believe that insane right wing propaganda going unchallenged is an actual problem, I agree with you that it's difficult not to view this with worried skepticism and the expectation of further backlash.

I tend to think there is no real solution to that sort of thing except being regularly exposed to opposing viewpoints. I definitely don't think a government or a private organization should take it upon themselves to decide what is crazy and what is okay.
Really unfortunate Apple got rid of such a useful app. Oh well it was saved by open source.
This is good but I think there's an elephant in the room Google isn't addressing...and I don't know why.

Content origin/ownership.

Say I devote three weeks to researching a topic and then publish a detailed article on my website. A website with more traffic can swipe the entire thing, word for word, even the images, post it on their site and generate traffic on stolen content.

Google desperately needs a way for content authors to be able to register their work and penalize content thieves. This is probably impossible to make work retroactively but that's not a problem.

When it comes to news websites, the same applies. Why do we have the same story from 1,000 different sites? Whoever originates the story should "own it" and get the search traffic. Other sites are just copying. So, if CNN and FOX are just regurgitating stories from Associated Press, why are they even relevant?

I think sensible content ownership controls could clean-up a bunch of the internet and direct traffic to deserving sites. There's almost no incentive to create original content unless you already have so much traffic that you are going to capitalize on it.

I have hundreds of original articles I would like to publish on our sites and don't because I know what will happen. So, we publish articles with much less depth, because it costs money to sit down and devote hours to writing a well-researched piece.
> silence ... right wing voices

If the only right-wing voices are lies, maybe they deserve to be silenced?

That's obviously not the case though. There are legitimate right-wing viewpoints, and more people should hear them, but let's not pretend outright lies deserve that same respect.

And as for dissenting voices, that's really not what this is about (at least in theory). I could buy the argument that it's a slippery slope, and that's absolutely something we need to be vigilant about, but Google has reason to value the continued legitimacy of their search results.

It's a complicated issue, but I shed no tears for suppressed lies.
I occasionally use it on my iPad as an extra screen. It's also useful while on a plane. The desktop version if coding, or iPad if I just want to browse docs to learn a new API or something.

But, to be honest, I rarely use the iOS version.
this is the thing about cyclists is they are scarier than they are dangerous.

in a collision between a cyclist and a pedestrian there is an almost equal potential for harm for both the cyclist and the pedestrian. the rates of rapid deceleration are just as forceful as the rate of acceleration.

the pedestrian could potentially be struck with a metal part of the bike. an almost equal potential exists for the cyclist to be injured by a metal part of the bicycle hitting the ground or a parked car before the cyclist does.

So while i'm sure that your close encounter with a scofflaw
cyclist was scary, it was just as dangerous for you as it was for them.
>repackage what actual news organizations publish with ideological slant.

Which is what The Economist does - it's been doing so since 1843. Current circulation is over one million, and it's widely respected, though not by all...
It's worth noting that the "respectable" news organizations that you listed repackage associated press or reuters stories.
There was a big ad campaign from the diamond cartel to make everyone believe that 3 months of (gross) salary was the standard amount to pay for an engagement ring. That means if you only make $36K/year, you still shell out $9K for a ring. I don't know how many bought into it, but it likely did raise the average amount paid by anchoring the price so high. "That's crazy! Maybe half that..."
Show HN: ReactCasts, a series of short videos explaining React's APIs and concepts
The algorithm to run an STV election is not that hard to implement. If the government is willing to release the ballot files, then there's no reason that you couldn't conduct your own count. But let's not pretend that we could do massive amounts of tallying without any kind of computer.
> I can not believe we allowed right wing propaganda sites to publish so much false information for so long.

Isn't it their right to publish whatever they want? I have certainly been led to believe that's their right. And I support it.

> I am at the point where I feel like technologists and journalists have to work together to establish some sort of browser based credentialing system that we give to content creators to signal that they are a legitimate news source.

We can get permission to write "the news". That'll work well.

How about we worry less about guaranteeing that the source has the right signal, and instead teach our friends and neighbors (IRL, mayhaps?) how to correctly tune in to the sophisticated, cosmopolitan collective consciousness by sifting through the bullshit. I'd imagine that'd be good for anybody participating in such a discussion.
New Lenox looks to add vaping to no-smoke law
I get a little uncomfortable that a private company with as much power as Google is in the position to try to determine what is a legitimate news source and what is a fake news site.

This issue goes well beyond left vs. right. Leftist fake news may not currently be as prevalent, but the number of anti-vaxxers and vehemently anti-science screeds against "chemicals" shows that there's more than enough fake news blame to go around.

You are right that it is rotting our democracy. Information has become disinformation. People are moving to a "gut" only method of deciding what information to believe.

I don't know if Google is the one to determine this by withdrawing funding from fake-news. I don't know if anyone trusts government enough anymore for them to take on the problem. How do you determine a legitimate journalist?
There's plenty of propaganda on both sides. Quite a bit more on the right wing side most likely because it was, until recently, coming from a losing position.

Parent shouldn't have been focusing on "right wing" but neither should you. It's an overarching problem.
They're not taking a stand on which news stories are true and which are false. They're targeting sites that exist only to spread false information and make no attempt to be truthful in any story. These aren't news sites that occasionally write sketchy stories. These sites generate exclusively fake "news" content and fraudulently try to pass it off as the real thing.

Maybe someday we'll reach the slippery slope, and it will be harder to tell the real news sites from the fake ones. But at the moment, there are certain sites around the net that are obvious frauds, and it is good that Google is taking steps to reduce their influence.
Strange to see how Google, a company that once refused to do business in China in order to not have to engage in censorship, now openly seeks to implement censorship in the West.

And a bunch of "liberals" on a hacker news who in all other cases would rail against censorship on the Internet happily supporting censorship on the Internet.

I'm astonished that someone like Sergey Brin would even allow this to happen, considering that his family immigrated from a country that censored information it did not like for the exact same reasons in order to impoverish and control its population.

This is it for me, I'm moving away from all Google services.
He said she was the head of state. I don't know how this disproves the point that the queen has no legislative or executive powers in the Canadian government
I wonder how it compares with Waifu2x
If you "really" dislike Google, then why are you using Chrome?
Findingho.me
Conservatives are entitled to their own opinions, just not their own facts.
Can't beat using Alfred to search Dash from anywhere
Physics? Can you go in to some detail as to what you mean by this? You can't see physics with your eyes.
Stanford's tuition increased by 44% over the past 9 years[0]. No irony here.

[0] https://www.cappex.com/colleges/Stanford-University/tuition-...
care to expound on that?
As other comments pointed out there seems to be an issue with max pressure it can produce. If it has to be run for hours on end it might actually be cheaper to get a local place to do it...(Not even considering the costs of maintenance and consumables, just power and initial price)

I've had parts made on a crappy waterjet once and we just tossed them all out due to extreme taper (Although the company was a massive piece of shit too, used the wrong material)
That's quite the environmental setup:

The fourth generation watt balance apparatus, abbreviated NIST-4, shown in Figs. 2 and 3, is located inside a radio-frequency shielded laboratory, 12 m underground. For later reference, observe that the balance is oriented along a diagonal with respect to the compass direction of North as shown in the figure, with the main pivot axis falling along a line oriented from the north-west to south-east corners of the room. The room itself is temperature stabilized using an air jacket between the inner and outer exterior walls. Inside the room, the apparatus sits on the center of a concrete block that is 4 m long and 4 m wide and has a total mass of 67 metric tons. This block is isolated from the building’s foundation and, for additional vibration isolation, can be floated off the ground using eight air springs. The apparatus is housed inside a 1.6 m diameter and 2 m tall stainless steel vacuum chamber which is pumped to a vacuum pressure on the order of 0.1 mPa. The watt balance apparatus is supported at three points in a pseudo-kinematic fashion on top of two stainless steel, sand-filled, parallel tubes that run from south-west to north-east through the chamber. The tubes are structurally decoupled from the vacuum chamber via four flexible bellows. This minimizes the transmission of chamber vibrations to the apparatus and maintains the apparatus alignments from air to vacuum. We have verified the alignment of the top of the magnet in four different configurations: (1) with the vacuum chamber top lid open, (2) closed, (3) during the evacuation of the chamber and (4) in vacuum using an autocollimator with the beam reflecting from a mirror on the tear drop plate. Between these four cases, the angle between the top of the magnet and a horizontal plane did not change by more 30 μrad.
> Tech giants turning into the Ministry Of Truth

That already happened. According to a 2014 survey [1], about 64% of American adults "use" facebook and about 30% of the American adult population get their news from Facebook. Think about that for a moment. Facebook really has an incredible reach.

[1] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/09/24/how-social-m...
Does this mean we can finally get a form of Zoom-and-enhance seen on CSI?
Tutorial – Write a Linux System Call
Right, I'd love something like that for Go.
Every validation you do on a mock is an assertion on outside behavior that is in no way coupled with your test. If that behavior changes, your test is now false. Not failing. False. That concerns me.
>primary purpose of the web property,"

Clickfarm like other 9 out of 10 news websites

Well, I wish Googlers luck. Clickfarmers, botters, and runners of industrialised clickbait networks will always be a step ahead of them.

Whitehat anti-botting people are a mirror image of people who develop and sell "anti-virus" software.

Not only they have a profit motive to do their shıtty job poorly, they are simply not in the same class intellectually
That's because it's a really critical media failure -- we're still grappling today with the consequences of invading Iraq.

A more recent media failure would be the Rolling Stone campus-rape article.

You're right – and it's a good point – that there are a lot of trash "news" sites being passed around on facebook that are obviously completely bogus, and no one ever bothers to debunk them.

But I don't see it as much more of threat to democracy than the sometimes-right, sometimes-pushing-an-agenda mainstream media we've had since forever.

When people rail against facebook (essentially a communication tool) "allowing" these fake news articles to proliferate, what they're essentially saying is people should only be allowed to share with their friends official "truth", as decided by some arbitrary third party.

That, to me, seems much scarier and like more of a threat to democracy.
It doesn't have Swift or Objective C unless I'm missing it
Everyone should be held to that, not just conservatives.
Sometimes the big news sites add much-needed context to an AP wire articles that reads like too much inside baseball.
Surely to vote based on that is to bet on other like-minded voters not doing the same, while tactical voting under FPTP/plurality voting involves betting that like-minded people will do the same.
This is going to bring the New York Times down.
At least with a front-door you know it's there, I guess!
Sorry, but I never got the news that it is now considered a good idea in our Western societies to censor information you do not like for political reasons.

I'm probably a racist homophobe bigot for writing these words and should be put in a correction camp, sorry.
I don't really have a problem with this sort of practice, and I think it is reflective of the model I feel most companies should use: keep the core-to-your-business software for your company proprietary and open-source all non-core-to-your-business software. It is the only model that will help keep open-source alive and well funded.

It is unreasonable and unrealistic to expect a company to open source everything it creates; there are legitimate competitive advantages to keeping that software to yourself. It is much easier to convince companies to share their non-core software, and companies will actually gain from doing this.
tbh, I don't think it's Breitbart/HuffPo's that this is trying to disassociate it from

It's the likes of sites so disreputable they have to pretend to be Breitbart, like the Breitbartt.co site which was one of the sources for Denzel Washington's huge, if true (not true) endorsement of Donald Trump that was among Facebook's top trending stories recently.

The cynic in me suspects this is at least as much about pointing an accusing finger at social media platforms for not getting their house in order as getting Adsense off sites which tend to opt for far more in-your-face and dubious ad networks anyway.
SEEKING WORK - Anaheim Hills, California - Remote

Location: Anaheim Hills, Anaheim, CA

Remote: Yes

Contact: scottmweaver / at / (Google mail)

CV/Resume: Available upon request

Full Stack Developer with expertise in Magento / WordPress back-end development and integration with front-ends in Backbone.js and ReactJS. I've worked with PHP for over 15 years. Most recently, I've worked with a team to successfully integrate ReactJS front-end with WordPress REST API. In the past, I've worked with multiple Fortune 500 companies (on development teams, both onshore and offshore) to improve load times and increase the bottom line.

Technology: PHP5 (expert), NodeJS, ReactJS, Backbone.js, Python, Ruby, JavaScript, CSS, HTML5, XML, JSON, BASH / BASH Scripting

- https://github.com/tdlm

- http://stackexchange.com/users/1098787/tdlm?tab=accounts

- https://www.linkedin.com/in/scottmw

- https://www.codewars.com/users/tdlm

- http://scottmw.com
Censorship is about silencing uncomfortable truths. This is about declining to fund uncomfortable falsehoods.
Your comment history is filled with nonsense such as "germany doesn't have free speech", "CO2 is not a real pollutant", "coal is safe", "climate science isn't real" and my favourite: There's a conspiracy on HN to downvote you specifically.

I'm not sure how qualified you are in journalistic integrity. You might well be the most qualified on this site to talk about fake news sites though.

Seriously.
> having verified switches can give you confidence from first principles that it it has no way of observing you

Right, but this is what I meant to ask: how does one verify a switch that has been manufactured by someone else? I suppose that an electrical engineer could check the schematics, but how do you verify that the actual hardware in your device matches the schematics?
You're likely being downvoted for crude misattribution and faux outrage.
That travel columnist - she writes mostly about train journeys - is a freelancer that is equally syndicated in the Daily Telegraph, which is Britain's most conservative broadsheet, as she is in the left-leaning Guardian.

It took me less than sixty seconds to establish this.

HN's reader population has a pretty good BS radar, and fake outrage based on manipulated facts ranks sky-high on that scale.
I don't know why implicit equality is relevant here. The idea is that you'd explicitly recognize that there are multiple forms of equality, and that the one you want depends almost entirely on the problem domain. So you shouldn't have any 'implicit' or 'preferred' equality. You'd always let the call site dictate which equality relation it needs.

You asked for a non-structural equality relation, and I gave you a whole class of them. There are many more. There isn't even one kind of 'structural equality': are two things equal if they have the same memory layout? The same AST representation? What if the layout depends on the allocator? What if they are identical but must be treated differently through aliases?
That's not really irony. Anyone can have inside connections.

I made the comment because last thread was derailed because of it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12940159