skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Do you have any data to move your statement from subjunctive into the realm of evidence based science?
It's not irrelevant. Why do you insist on looking at this is a vacuum? He's made hundreds of public statements about this. He already told us what he wants to do.

> Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on.

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-...

This is what he wants, this is what his supporters want. He's not doing a shitty job of communicating at all, he's being very clear and upfront.

As to your specific quotes, the vast majority of refugees from these countries are in the (Muslim) religious majority.
You know what is easy? Looking at the data now and coming to a conclusion that you believe to be sound. What is difficult is doing a little research to figure out how Chicago got the way it is. How gang culture took hold. How it was passed down from generation to generation. What policies were put into place that caused people to turn to illegal activities. Do a little research and try to get a full picture. Everyone agrees that crime, especially violent, should not be the norm in any place be it Chicago, Aleppo, or some random Brazilian city, but you need to understand how and why it got there before you give your final judgement.
Designing Euclid to Make Uber Engineering Marketing Savvy
Sadly I can't remember last time that was effective. I remember Occupy Wall Street from a few years back. So was so much excitement and energy there but what came of it? A bunch of arrests mostly.

There were some anti-Trump protests. Right after election remember people blocking hospital exits, and setting cars on fire. At the inauguration, downtown DC, a lot of protestors torched trash cans in the street and blocked people getting the main event. It was very visible, for sure, but did it have the desired effect? I don't talk to Trump supporters but wonder how many saw the burning trash cans or who failed to get to the Inauguration thought "yap, this has convinced me, I am switching sides and will vote against him next time..."?
> Ostracizing people who have links to the opposing side will positively hurt.

Yes. It will positively hurt them. Consider it a price signal, a message. This idea that we somehow have to be nice about this is wrong. This idea that I somehow have to do some soul searching is also wrong.
Sun Zsu: If you know the enemy need not fear the result of a hundred battles
HN's official position can be found in the HN Guidelines (see link at bottom of page):

"Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. ... If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic."
Yup. Already many such reported cases emerged. Many students & academics...
I like to see this opposing voice here. Discussion is good. Please though, don't use a throwaway: it makes me think you're a government person or bot.
> Emphasis mine. Why those 7 countries specifically though? Anything special about them?

I dunno. Is there?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/us/politics/refugee-musli...

"The visa-issuance process plays a crucial role in detecting individuals with terrorist ties and stopping them from entering the United States. Perhaps in no instance was that more apparent than the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001"

So the EO cites September 11 and other terrorist attacks. Yet most of the 9/11 attackers came from Saudi Arabia. Why is it not on this list?
Those machines generally had instructions on the attract screen and the ones that were too hard to figure out didn't get played. (Source: I was one of those kids too)
In that context the violence was targeted. The tea was owned by a company closely aligned with the state. So violence against a Trump property would make more sense then say just busting out a Starbucks window. This is even more true now that we know that Trump will keep his properties.
Would a laser cutter cause CO2 poisoning?
> to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.

Which religion is the majority in all of these countries?
Agreed. Trump clearly stated that he was going to institute a Muslim ban and didn't rule out a Muslim registry when asked by reporters, so this policy shouldn't be a surprise to those who voted for him.

Germans have accepted collective guilt for the Holocaust, and have come to terms with that, even though a minority first voted Hitler into power-and, as a consequence of this collective acknowledgement, popular support for Nazism has been purged from German culture.

In contrast, a large proportion of South African whites tend to equivocate when asked if Apartheid, which was voted for for generations of whites, before they voted it out, was bad (spoiler alert: it was evil, and I'm not going to relitigate why on HN again). The Truth and Reconcilliation Comission allowed for those who committed physical acts of violence to confess their crimes in return for forgiveness, but the broader plunder and evil of apartheid remains unacknowleged by much of white South Africa (and its diaspora), and it means that racism still permeates SA society.

Working class people are hurting all over the world. But the economic pain felt by Germans in Weimar Germany didn't excuse the Holocaust. They were voting for anti-Jewish violence, as much as they were voting for VW Beetles and autobahns. Similarly, the suffering of Boers at the hands of the British didn't excuse Apartheid.

I'm not equating the scale or scope of Trump's actions with the Holocaust or with Apartheid, but I do think that those who chose to vote for him did so with their eyes wide open, and knew what he stood for. Trying to forgive them, or excuse their actions before they acknowledge their own culpability is not healthy for anyone.
Tech companies must use their advertising networks to influence public opinion on these issues.

Instead of ads for products/services, they should allocate space for ethical and moral issues.

Staying 'politically' neutral is no longer an option when we're dealing with issues which affect a great part of Earth's population, like climate change, globalised economy, aggression and war and so on.

Tech companies must get political - in fact, they must reinvent politics like they reinvented so many other fields.

We have to do this now or these people will slowly shut everyone down, like they did in China, Russia, Turkey, etc..
None of this justifies discrimination against Muslims. I'm flagging this because this kind of incendiary racism has no place on HN.
But lebanon_tn, guns are scary and you're likely to get hurt if you have one in your house. It's much better to rely on the police to protect you. Why would you ever want to own a gun.
That's not necessarily the issue. There are places where people want to discuss politics, and places where those politics can be discussed constructively. A lot of HN members don't want HN to be a place where politics is a focus of a lot of discussion. It's also not necessarily a place where it can be discussed constructively. There are other places to be more actively political. HN doesn't need to be one of them.
I feel short of breath when I try this.
Not the point. OP (it could be a woman) said that it takes weeks to unbind when in fact the half life is 74 mins.
I mean.... Stay out of the political posts? The tech stuff seems unaffected by this.

One thing I love about this community is that, even on divisive political issues, I usually see excellent discussion and points, specifically by people who disagree with me.

I want HN debating politics* because of how HN debates.

* But yeah, as long as it stays to DEFINITELY political posts. Only politics I want in my tech is language wars :P
> Of course, one plausible explanation is that Democrats don't like Christians

That's a conspiracy theory with no evidence, not a plausible explanation. Refugees can't vote for a long time. There are too few to make any substantive electoral difference.
> City officials said ransomware left police cameras unable to record between Jan. 12 and Jan. 15. The cyberattack affected 123 of 187 network video recorders in a closed-circuit TV system for public spaces across the city, the officials said late Friday.

> Sercet Service spokesman Brian Ebert said the safety of the public or protectees was never jeopardized.

Which implies that we're perfectly safe without these systems.
That is very, very broad.
For many Americans Sam Altman and Madonna are unrelatable so the messaging falls on deaf ears (or is potentially even counter productive). Nobody believes Google or YC is hiring refugees, or that Sam Altman and others are sending their kids to public schools attended by refugees, or living in low to middle income neighborhoods housing refugees and having to manage the increased violence that ensues. All well and good to bang your hands on a table from the Ivory tower that is San Francisco when millions of people in middle America believe that you are not the one bearing the cost of this "open door" policy. To be effective, I think the message needs to come from people middle America can relate to not millionaire celebs and billionaire tech CEOs.
From another comment thread: "Refugees are referred to the US by the UNHCR.". You're also comparing the percentage to the total population of the country, rather than those who applied for asylum/refugee status. This is not a meaningful comparison. Finally, you provide no year-over-year data; it's possible that they fled first in previous years, or are residing in areas that are protected by pro-Assad forces.
Things companies in tech can do:

- Demand to see the detailed plan for TrumpCare. What's it going to cost us? What will it do to our employees? Where are the details? That's what lobbyists are paid to find out. Employers have a big stake in this.

- Demand to see the tariff plan. So far, it's all talk, but soon it will be legislation. This has huge impacts for many businesses. Business planning and investment will stall until the details are settled. Already, you don't want to build a factory in China or Mexico. On the other side, will there be efforts to make it easier to sell into China?

- About that infrastructure thing. What kinds of projects will be supported? Roads? Internet access? Pothole repair?

- How serious is the administration about not employing illegal aliens? Will employer sanctions be increased or more stringently enforced? Will employers be going to jail? On the other side, will the enforcement be effective enough to force growers to use robotic picking? Is it time to get behind ag startups like Abundant Robotics? Get into robotic floor cleaning for commercial buildings?

- Will there be tax incentives for investing in communities in rural America? If so, how much, and when will they become available?

- Will Glass-Stegall come back? That was a Trump campaign promise, and it's in the Republican platform.

Every one of those is a real business issue, and business needs to know what's going to happen.
It's a funny joke if you pick the right audience. The woman in this story wasn't the right audience, so he had the sense to contain himself. Doesn't seem that bad.
I'm sure there are but they are afraid to say so. On many ways Thiel has the biggest balls, he sounds weak, but sure does have guts. I applaud him for having courage. I'm sure many people here don't live in a liberal circlejerk either but are afraid to talk out because of the aggressive left.
> you have to take responsibility for your vote

You're not advocating "responsibility". You're saying Trump supporters are morally defective, and when they refuse that label, you say: "see! not only are you morally flawed, but you won't even admit it! proves my point!"

Is it hard to understand that Trump supporters vote for what they think is morally just and right, just like you, and not for evil, because they're evil?
In a proper EMV solution, hardware like this can not intercept the PIN code even if it can interpret any signal, as the unencrypted PIN is not sent anywhere beyond the keypad - even if you do MITM on the wires between the keypad and POS terminal, you would get only an encrypted version that then gets sent to the bank for online verification or to the chip for offline verification. You can get the PIN code by cameras or extra keypad on top of the real keypad, as sometimes is done for ATM skimming.

Furthermore, they can't get the card private keys in this manner, so they can't duplicate the card chip, only its magstripe; and they are definitely able to tell if a replica of your card is suddenly used in a magstripe-only mode. This means that it's a problem, as the parent post said, "only for countries like USA which have not completed the move from magnetic readers" because otherwise you can simply reject any transactions that might use a cloned magstripe.
Those people implementing these orders need to also take responsibility for their actions. The concentration camp guards take just as much responsibility as dictators.
I disagree that this will not be helpful. The old-guard of Democratic Party hails from these hyper liberal areas (Fienstein, Schumer, Pelosi), and based on what we have seen so far, they aren't even showing a slightest hint of resistance to Trump. See the senate democrat's response to Trump nominees for example. Put enough pressure on them, they will at least form a semblance of resistance which can inspire and have real effects.

For a practical example, if people of San Francisco jointly decide that they want Nancy Pelosi to do X, Y and Z (otherwise she will get primaried in 2018), she will have no option but to do that. This is exactly what the Tea Party did (with tremendous help from Koch brothers) in last eight years. They unseated the old leaders and took over the party.
Well, neither of these ideas make sense. He's just going through his list of priorities and trying to do what he promised to do. Maybe his tweets are a deliberate smokescreen, but his executive orders are not.
Vietnam, MLK, Womens voting rights, gay rights, workplace safety, end of apartheid etc.

Plenty of them all over the world. Occupy Wall Street lacked one thing: a clearly defined goal. You can protest social and economic inequality but that's not the same as saying we will continue to protest until we have 'X' where X is some very clear, concrete and achievable goal.
Python https://gist.github.com/bradmwalker/b300f36e9427f729b458
I pride myself as being one of the few teens who know how to use computer.
He's not really obsessed with those things, but it's an opportunity to run elements from the Russian propaganda playbook.

First, it establishes a norm with the press. This administration will lie to them, and blatantly. That way some of them will react more positively in the future when they're given anything resembling an answer of substance on some future issue. It's the PR equivalent of the "negging" pickup practice.

Second, it increases the separation between his core constituency and the rest of the country. He can't afford for any of his core constituency to abandon him, so he needs to ensure that they live in a different reality from the rest of the country and that no logic can cross that barrier. The more that the credibility of left-center-neutral news organizations is destroyed in the eyes of his Fox/Breitbart/alt-right constituents, the more legitimate news/logic can be dismissed by his supporters.

Third, it can help create a feeling in the minds of middle ground voters that the truth is unknowable if every fact is contested. At that point, it becomes a battle of personalities to determine who people believe. Donald Trump, if he's good at anything, it's sounding sure of himself.

These don't work if you only do it once or only do it on the important things. They work over time, based on opponent fatigue to combat every falsehood and our (humans) own natural-but-flawed ways that we determine trust. These techniques start off feeling absurd, especially to opponents, but have proven very effective to dictators around the world, including Russia.
Just to get us on track:

I agree that talk of Second Amendment remedies is incredibly inappropriate. Random internet comment suggests it, and it should be downvoted. Donald Trump suggests it, and he should be considered ineligible for election to dog catcher, let alone President. Agreed?
Nearly every vaguely political anything online is quickly overrun by trolls, astroturfers, bots, and spammers.

It'd be a challenge, but perhaps you can build one. Good luck!
Bullshit. The goal is claimed to be reduction of the risk of jihadists immigrating to the US to cause harm to Americans. You claim seems to be that by not including Saudi Arabia this will have no such effect. This claim is transparently false, unless you believe a) there is zero risk of jihadists at all in the first place, or b) that literally every jihadist who would have normally come from their country of origin will now instead fly to Saudi Arabia or another country on the non-suspended list to enter. Surely you can see how both of these is false.
> Trump is undeniably more corrupt,

Undeniably? Why do you say "undeniably". Almost half the country disagrees with that I think. Not saying he is not corrupt, but I wouldn't go with "undeniably" here.
At one of the red lights it comes to a complete stop then crawls forward. 0:49 Maybe because of the cars turning left. That stood out to me
> Fuck them

This is the same flavor of bigotry and ignorance that leads people to believe that all immigrants or black people are dangerous criminals. Not everyone who voted for Trump supports all of his positions. Hell, it wouldn't surprise me if a good chunk of his voters disagree with the majority of his positions, such is the nature of a two-party system.
Republicans were against Trump. He's a centric independent who run as republican.

By all means liberals keep doubling down on identity politics. The anti-fascist are the new fascist. Democrats were against Lincoln as well. Trump will be championed as modern day hero who was opposed by the most hateful people.
It's this kind of language that hardens people's positions, myself included. I fully support his policies despite your family being affected, gotta break eggs to make an omelet.

The campaign was about targeting and isolating the harmful effects of globalization as well as terrorism. The message of his campaign is loud and clear -- America is for Americans. No more siphoning off of resources and no more half-measures.
Renewable energy in the United States accounted for 13.44 percent of the domestically produced electricity in 2015, and 11.1 percent of total energy generation.

First sentence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_the_United...
Because the EO specifically cites 9/11 and terrorist attacks as justification for this ban.
> terrified of fictional terrorists

Fictional? Really? Look at what's happening in various parts of Europe.
That's different from being exiled from civil society.
Glad to!

1. Here are some examples of people calling for ethnic cleansing/genocide or similarly oppressive policies. If you're basically liberal then these articles will be pretty offensive:

http://www.amerika.org/politics/the-peat-party/
http://www.amerika.org/politics/why-we-need-three-castes/
http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/07/sexual-liberation-and-racial-suicide/

I don't want to get sidetracked into quantitative analysis, but if you really want I can direct you to material compiled by a former US intelligence officer that is documented with hundreds if not thousands of citations. The animus you'll find in the links above directed at people of other races, 'cultural Marxists' and so on may be novel to you, but I've been observing this particular social group on the net for nearly 15 years now.

2. I'm OK with physical violence against people who are actively promoting violence like this, yes. People can have differing opinions about all sorts of subjects and I'm fine with that. I am even wiling to defend the concept of free speech for people like neo-nazis and the kkk - but only up to the point where they endorse violence against others as opposed to merely asserting their own superiority.
And if they did, they'd probably lean Democrat, like Hispanics for example.
Or maybe the areas where most Christians live were less affected by the war?
I can tell you're upset, Vince, so I'll be the one to end this discussion.
This is a good anecdotal piece. Here's a structured study of what computer skills people actually have:

https://www.nngroup.com/articles/computer-skill-levels/

HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13111768
Or maybe treat the disease? No?

If history has taught us anything, it is that the we survive. Wars, disease, plague has not killed us off. We will survive this as well. The question is at what cost. I am not ready to give up my humanity. That is the only thing separating me from a monkey.

And US is not the only country affected by Islamic terrorism. A visa ban is hardly the magic panacea for terrorism.
Yeah, in my lab we prohibited cutting anything with chlorine, including PVC and polycarbonate.

The results are really bad anyways, it melts and burns. I'm curious though, can you get good cutting of polycarbonate using an inert gas shield? That would be interesting.
Looks like a good machine.

Really makes you wonder why Apple seems to be neglecting the Mac Mini, or the Mac line in general.
I am a life time Democrat, but every time I hear someone bring up the poor taste pussy grabbing comments, I have to ask: do you give Bill Clinton a pass on what happened with Paula Jones? Listening to old interviews as a very young woman, Paula Jones paints an awful image of what Clinton did. There is plenty to criticize Trump for, but nasty comments are not as bad as nasty deeds.
The problem is that, in practice, "rational political discussion" tends to turn out to really mean "political opinions I agree with." Which means you end up just building yet another echo chamber.
Smells bad to me. It could also be that Dropbox always kept the files and there's questionable government policies for doing so, and also that the bug isn't "ancient", just a normal bug from some weeks ago that brought back some files.
> this disgusting, offensive action

Why is this a "disgusting, offensive action," but droning and killing of Muslim people by Obama/Secretary of State Clinton/others not? Shouldn't actual, tragic loss of life evoke a bigger outrage than revising our border policy?
Yes, but it's a starting point we shouldn't loose sight of.
What I found to be working quite well for me, and not just with politics, is studying both sides of an argument and making a conclusion for myself.

When it comes to politics, /r/politics was a good place until it was overrun by the Correct The Record folks. It's been one sided ever since.
> "Once you start" implies drawing a line that any kind of regulation is infantilizing them.

I never said infantilizing was a bad thing. Most people aren't really able to make the optimum decision in their lives about most areas.

For instance, some of the most proficient programmers I know who make otherwise good decisions neglect their diet and exercise.

Should we enforce mandatory vegetable and exercise regimens for them? On a more prosaic level, should we limit the size and shape of knives that private citizens should be allowed to own because of violence concerns?

Realizing that there is nothing qualitatively different about these measures from the measures being described is a first step on evaluating all measures of this sort.