skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> In your opinion, how are the two situations different (CloudFlare vs The Florist)?

I think there are at least two distinctions.

The first and most important distinction is that it's actually very feasible to write laws that protect LGBT people. You can't discriminate on that basis, and it's very clear what discriminating on that basis means (well actually all discrimination is thorny and hard to prove/disprove, but LGBT and race exhibit the same set of issues, and we seem to be in agreement that we should figure out how to make racial discrimination illegal.)

Conversely, political belief is an almost impossibly fuzzy line, since at the end of the day pretty much everything is political.

For example, I think we can all agree that I should be allowed to refuse to serve customers who are being completely unreasonable and hostile assholes to me. This happens every Friday night at bars across the country.

But what if those people are being assholes by coming into my Jewish-owned-and-operated pharmacy and loudly talking about exterminating the Jews while buying a bar of soap? Clearly they are being assholes, but they're being assholes by being political. So, can I discriminate and tell them to leave? And if not, is it the case that now any asshole can talk about raunchy sex is a family restaurant or be a complete dick to the bar keep as long as they find a way to weave politics into their speech?

(BTW, apparently the turning point in this case was Daily Stormer or whatever claiming that CloudFlare secretly supports them. So in my mind this was closer to kicking someone out of the bar for being an asshole to management, rather than political discrimination. "You can be a nazi in my bar, but if you go around telling people that just because I let you talk about killing jews in my bar I'm somehow in on the neo-nazi movement, then you need to never come back here.")

So, the first distinction is that protecting LGBT is about as difficult as protecting racial classes but protecting political speech seems pretty intractable, form a legal perspective, without turning public spaces into unusable cesspools.

The second distinction -- and I do think this is a distinction that a free and just society is capable of making -- is the obvious difference between being gay and being a Nazi. E.g., Germany doesn't tolerate public support of Nazis and it's a fairly free and open society -- in some ways more free than the USA, even with respect to certain forms of speech. So for me the jury is out on whether that's a good or a bad idea, but we should at least stop treating "silencing Nazis leads to a terrible unfree society" like an axiom, since there are clear and obvious empirical counter-examples. This assertion without qualification is just false, end of story.
Use a decorator to conditionally render React components
Seconded. I've been trying to find good write ups on production deployment best practices, especially people who have used it commercially for over a year.
I agree. I'm glad that's not challenged here.
First of all thank you for taking the time to write this long response.

Now let me try to correct some of the errors in how you arrived at your conclusion:

The first is that if you're an immigrant into a country you are roughly in the same position as a smoker who stops smoking. You, more than anybody else know the dangers of smoking first hand and so you will now fall through to an extremist anti-smoking position without realizing that the same people that allowed you to smoke before are part of the group of people who you are now arguing against.

Essentially you have leapfrogged the middle to end up on the other side.

Second, and point by point:

> I'm not a radical myself

You'd be surprised how many people would interpret your position as a pretty radical one. The one mistake I see over and over again in these discussions is that people have no idea in how extremist their positions really are because to them it is all reasonable.

> I am comfortable being a passive observer in a country going to the dogs.

It is going to the dogs, but this is in large part because of the group which you say you are a part of. There is a certain amount of hypocrisy in you moving from one country to another and then joining a group which fairly explicitly states that they are against people being able to do what you just did.

> Mistrusting everything mainstream media tells me

Why would you mistrust them and not mistrust the other sources that you have found?

> and trying to find alternative explanations for the same.

It appears to me that you are consciously selecting for sources that agree with your way of thinking and discarding those sources that disagree with your way of thinking.

> The rationalist bloggers (SSC, LW), Sam Harris, a bit of Moldbug

Those are considered 'fringe' (and worse) by a very large fraction of the population.

> conservative thinkers like Niall Ferguson, Douglas Murray, but mostly my own deductions from facts obtained from unbiased sources

Again, unbiased because they agree with you, not because they are actually unbiased.

> or if not available, reading from ALL the biased sources (instead of just one), and weighting their argument's merit.

That's a better method.

> You should try this.

What makes you think I don't? The fact that we disagree?

> Every time you read an opinion `X`, find someone intelligent who is (for some godforsaken reason) arguing for `not X`, and see who if his explanation makes more sense.

So, how is that working out for you so far :) ?

Note that - wittingly or not - you have aligned yourself with that element of your society that wants to destroy it an that given half a chance would deport you. That makes no sense to me.

> Most of the time the mainstream opinion would be right, but often it won't.

This we can agree on, but for different reasons.

Anyway, regardless of our different position on this subject once again my gratitude for taking the time for a reasoned and measured response.
I don't know what it was like before, but when I got my first MacBook Pro maybe 2 years ago, the default start page for Safari was blank.

Edit: Out of curiosity, I checked to see my defaults and the Homepage is still apple.com. However, the "opens with" settings are set to Favorites (top of the list, probably the default) which explains why it opens with a blank page. So the change was probably whenever they added the Favorites page feature; most likely to compete with Chrome/Firefox/Opera/etc.
> Hint: Neo Nazis wish to return to the good old days of 1939 or so where Jews and people of color are either dead, outcast, deported, enslaved or stuck in camps while white men rule the land as is their god given right.

Hint: In other words, neo-nazis have no shot right? So let the neo-nazis have their say.

People like you are so shortsighted that it is bizarre.

We have free speech so that neo-nazis CAN'T win. You start limiting free speech and that's why you have nazi germany.

As my jewish philosophy professor said, nazi germany happened because of censorship. That's why she adamantly supported neo-nazis, kkk, etc having marches and even giving speeches in colleges/forums/etc. And as she said, as long as the most offensive forms of speech are protected, then she knows everyone, including her free speech, is protected.

> The concerted effort to equate Neo Nazis to pornographers, atheists and lgbt people is rather worrying as well.

It's worrying if you don't understand what free speech is about.

The reason why I support free speech for neo-nazis isn't because I agree with them. It's because I don't agree with them.

It's not a matter of just censoring neo-nazis. It's a matter of setting precedence. Okay? If you say it's okay to censor one ideology or one form of speech, then you make a mockery of free speech and nobody has free speech.

If people who disagree with neo-nazis are in power and they censor neo-nazis, then how do we protect ourselves when people who hate porn or gays or atheists are in power? Hmmm? Have you thought about this or are you just going by "emotions"?

The reason why nazi germany happened is because germany had censorship laws. So when hitler won a small minority of votes and he took over the government, he could ban political parties and political speech. If germany had free speech and you couldn't silence the 80% of non-nazis voters, nazi germany could never have happened.

"Saying I support censorship because I find X offensive" is justification for saudis censoring atheists, chinese censoring pro-democracy groups and thais censoring anti-royalty speech.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15035308

Okay? So please take a course in philosophy and try to learn what is really at stake. Because if people like you were in charge in the 1950s, 1960s, etc, we never would have had lgbt movement or atheist movement or the civil rights movement. Because they all would have been censored because they were offensive.

Believe it or not, there was a time in america when lgbt, atheist and civil rights speech was deemed more offensive than nazi speech. Thank god people like you weren't in charge and thank god we had free speech rights so that lgbt, atheists and civil rights groups could speak and express their ideas.

And oddly enough, the pro-censorship people like you are more like nazis since the nazis loved censorship. If you truly are disgusted by nazis, then you should be disgusted by censorship.
Semi-automatic weapons, not automatic.

With respect, this is a crucial point if one desires to be taken seriously by gun owners when talking about guns, because confusing it reveals a lack of basic knowledge of the subject.
It's misleading to pretend that it's a substitute for full Visual Studio.
The Daily Stormer doesn't have access to printers? I'm unclear why they need Cloudflare to distribute their beliefs.
And you can defend a black girl who won't move to the back of the bus if you can resist the urge to claim blacks are people.

Fair trials without all that pesky social change! What could possibly go wrong?
Skilled bad actors use new pulse wave DDoS attacks to hit multiple targets
Do details no longer matter?

"A man was arrested for walking." and "A man was arrested for walking and aiming a rifle at a woman." are clearly different actions.

A lawyer went to prison, for illegal statements she made, in court, in defense of her client. These illegal statements that would be illegal even outside the context of being a federal court lawyer.

I can't understand this fetish of generalizing to the point of total vagueness. Case-by-case analysis is just as important now as ever.
No, the "radical leftist part" is that anyone who disagrees with what cloudflare has done is a "nazi sympathizer", I have Jewish parents, biracial, queer, and a communist. I'm about as a far from a "nazi sympathizer" as you can get.

Yet I still think that what cloudlfare has done is wrong because the same social norms that lead to such behavior, would have in the past lead to people stifling the communications of things I am very much for (civil rights, gay rights etc...)

Sure, Nazi's are obviously evil. But so what? In the past lots of things we think of today as "good" were in the past "obviously evil" and it took a great deal of hard work to turn those tides around.

There is a cost to letting people we hate have easy communications. But there is also a cost to making it hard for people we hate to share their ideas. The cost is that when we as a society hate wrongly, as we have done in the past with respect to people of various races, sexuality, and gender, if the people we hate have a difficult time communicating, we will not be able to progress as a society.

So yeah. I think the kind of thought that leads to what cloudflare has done, is dangerous because it makes it will make it difficult for society to have moral progress. And according to you that makes me a "nazi sympathizer".

So yeah. That is what people are condemning for, and rightly so. Not for being "against nazis", for saying that anyone who disagrees with what cloud flare has done is a nazi sympathyzer.
> I think what operating systems should do is to allow users set per app/website quotas and use sensible defaults.

I can't see how this would work. What would the sensible default be for a computer game? A text editor? An IDE? A video editor? This kind of thing is way over common users heads to set their own quotas as well. How would you avoid "This app wants to use more resources than the default. Allow?" popups with low defaults?
Software itself is the sacrifice of system optimization for human optimization. Give me unlimited human power and I'll give you purpose-designed chips for each individual use case with the program encoded in the wiring of the logic gates.
ScalaJS already is a real player, it just doesn't stack up to Typescript.

I'm not making this shit up out of thin air, look at usage numbers.

Purescript is not going anywhere, most likely ever.
I love the bot, but not, those matched are not played in regular basis, even a great part of the community is not happy with tournaments when they include those modes, the best example is the TI, the first version have a small tournament to see which was the best mid player, it was not very popular, and was removed.
Not really everyone.

In such a ventilation scheme during the works most personnel is near or in the immediate vicinity of the excavation front, they have "non-contaminated" "fresh air" at all times.

You get some "contaminated" air only during the time it takes from the tunnel entrance to the excavation front, and in some circumstances people making maintenance or other works far from the excavation front.

As said the quantity of fresh air fanned in is much more than what actually "needed", there are sensors for the contamination and all in all the air you breath in any modern tunnel during construction is much, much better than what anyone breaths everyday in a trafficked city.
I think we're all intolerant of hate. Some of us just think that due process should be applied even when the conclusion is obvious.
To give one example, Xilinx ISE is 18GB installed. Seemingly everything carries around its own copy of everything. The output of a basic fdupes -r on my /opt/Xilinx is 114976 lines.
What we need is a simple addition which allows whitelisting - if the contact isn't in your phonebook it's either blocked or you're prompted to accept.

Yes it would create an issue in the case of emergencies but that's what voicemail is for.
Or just don't visit the newsfeed ever.
> If we're going to talk about murders in a more general sense, you have to start looking at populations and then note that whites in the US are far, far more prevalent than Muslims.

But it's not murder in a general sense, it's murder by white supremacists.

> It is unfair if we're talking about terrorism, because prison murders are not terrorism.

Sure it is, if it's political, ie about white supremacy.

Terrorism:

> the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
If they did than then they are simulating latency, but I see nothing to suggest they did that.
... you say that like this wasn't literally a response to their present violence.
Relevant: https://xkcd.com/1357/
Speech on its own has no consequences. I'm on a phone so please do look up Brandenburg v. Ohio and the Brandenburg incitement test. Basically, the opinion of the courts since like 1969 has been that even "hateful" speech is protected because advocating some kind of lawlessness is not the same as actually encouraging or engaging in lawlessness.

Do also remember that for most of England and America's history, it wasn't "harmful" speech being punished, it was any speech that the ruling class deemed wrong. In America, this was overwhelmingly left-wig speech. Communists, anarchists, union activists, even pacifists were jailed under such laws as the Espionage Act of 1917. I'm not willing to put enough faith in the vagaries of public opinion to gamble free speech, and neither are American lawyers or historians. Furthermore, who would police such speech? Given how, for example, police in Charlottesville stood back and let the fascists and antifascists beat the stuffing out of each other, can you really imagine the State protecting speech such as "kill all landlords" and "fuck laws" and "smash capitalism" if it were suddenly legal to disallow certain types of political speech?
Right, but then you should store it "in a chip designed against physical attacks", as the person you replied to mentioned.
This didn't just happen by accident. It happened because the market demanded it. At a previous company I was at, we A/B tested this, and an image-heavy design did better on every relevant metric we could think of (and I assume many others have done the same).
The problem is who defines "dangerous speech"?

Dr. King himself was labeled as "the most dangerous Negro of the future in this Nation from the standpoint of communism, the Negro and national security"
My vertical axis washer uses probably as much as a horizontal one. The trick is in an improved impeller to properly agitate a full load in what's merely a puddle of water. Also the cycle starts with a pump spraying (recycled) water back into the basket so that all the clothes reach the same wetness therefore can have the same density and get impelled uniformly.
Whbat part of Islamists have waged terror that you did not understand. I am not advocating arresting Muslims for simply being Muslim, just as I am not advocating arresting neo nazis for being neo nazis. We don't want laws that are different for certain groups, or how rich someone is. That the law applies equally to everyone is something that is valuable to preserve. We don't want to go back to the old days where blacks were treated by the law as inferior. Suggesting you do this to any groups because you don't like them is a travesty of justice.
The syntax is bad (just like ruby), and there are some annoying limitations with macros, but the semantics are very good, and the ability to keep thousands (or hundreds of thousands, or even millions if you know what you're doing) of stateful connections to clients is very useful in practice.
Amazing Iphone8 was displayed in China
Only if you don't realize how psychology involves and implies biology.
For example, if you're a screenwriter in Hollywood who once said something nice about communism...oh, wait.
Data Platform also disagrees.

Which, by the way, we are hiring for a remote position: https://careers.mozilla.org/position/gh/734415
JFYI:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14904127
Same, but I figured it was doing something more like:

int speed = 0, retries = 0;
for (int time = 0; time < SPIN_LENGTH; time++) {
speed += speed < MAX_SPEED ? 1 : 0;
if (read_shake_sensor() > TOO_MUCH_SHAKING) {
time = speed = 0;
if (++retries > MAX_RETRIES)
break;
}
set_spin_speed(speed);
sleep(1);
}
> for illegal statements she made

Oh it was ILLEGAL. Why didn't you say so? That makes it totally palatable that a lawyer might be imprisoned for doing his job, and doesn't AT ALL impeach the entire concept of a "trial."

> would be illegal even outside the context of being a federal court lawyer.

You have it backwards, friend. The inside of a courtroom needs MORE protections for speech, not fewer, than the outside. Laws like libel simply don't apply there (disclaimer: in the US. Can't speak for how they do it in failed states like Germany), and for very good reason.
It happens in game development when you're targeting resource-constrained hardware consoles.

It can happen in web development as well if you're working on a disciplined backend team that cares about designing for request latency and concurrency.

But often scrappy startups don't have the time or money to care about those things. It's more about product fit and keeping customers happy to keep the money coming in.

I personally don't use that excuse and design everything I can with a budget in mind. It's a nice constraint to have an upper bound on response time. Forces you to pick your battles.
(1) With regards to the moral argument , I agree in the case that a tradition enjoys wide-spread use and is universally accepted by a given society as being morally right.

I now see that you in fact did not make the case that this tradition involving property damage is morally right (in the above sense). I must have read too much into your comment. Apologies.

(2) OK, then we are in agreement here. However, the only reason I brought up the arson in the first place was because the original parent specifically characterized the protests as "peaceful".
Excellent review! I haven't taken Ng's original ML course and noticed that you mentioned it would be a pre-requisite to taking any DL course (whether fast.ai or Ng's DL course). Care to elaborate why?
In the same way that some days I am happy and other days I'm sad, doesn't mean that my mood is choice.
I didn't read the book, but anything else than lying is intellectual cowardice (if you were brave enough to hide people).

It is like those people (I do not remember which religion it is) who will let their child die rather than have blood transfusion. No matter the philosophy, they do not love their children, maybe not even like them.

Same with priests who, for their own comfort, would not go to the police to tell about a pedophile who is about to go for a child, just because this was told under the secrecy of confession. Going to the police and therefore condamning oneself to hell would be the courageous thing to do, not to be "intelectually pure"
...but most people, whether using an installer or not, don't have multiple faucets that can dispense sand. Nearly everyone _does_ have access to water though.
> I didn't realize that HN was full of 16 year old communists.

Was the irony on purpose?
Do Americans really not believe in man-made Climate Change?
Hey all,

We're running a startup which focused on building a carbon footprint for any business (or potentially person/home) using their energy bills.

We've recently been advised to steer clear of the US market as there is too much uncertainty there around policy and supports?

What do those based in US think, or is there better markets to focus on?

Nb. Not a marketing plug but if you would like to try out our Beta tool just have a search for EnergyElephant (don't ignore the Elephant in the room ;0)
Stress isn't psychological? Think about what you are saying!
I get some tiles with the most popular websites. So actually the same as the new tab page in Firefox.
"... only available in particular countries which doesn't include your country, unfortunately..." was the message from HR.
Smart enough to land himself in prison .. is an oxymoron?
Absolutely.

How is this any different than germans throwing chinese tourists in jail for making nazi salutes? Or saudis throwing atheists in jail because they offended their faith. Or russians throwing lgbt people in jail for being "offensive". Or the chinese throwing pro-democracy groups in jail because they find them offensive. Or Larry Flint in jail for distributing offensive pornography.

Anything can be viewed as offensive by anyone. That's why we have free speech rights. To protect ourselves from the offended.

It's sad that the internet ( what I grew up believing was going to be the defender of free speech ) is slowly turning into a tool for censorship. And it's sad that the population of "netizens" who were extremely pro-free speech in the 90s and 00s are turning in favor of censorship as less educated people brainwashed by the pro-censorship media join the internet.
Ok, so US company re-discovered benefits of something that in Europe is mandated by law :) Once again we can see how US is a place to earn money and Europe is a place for work-life balance.
I believe I still have a copy of that issue. Does anyone remember "M-Lisp" at all?