skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Is the person behind the potential recliner realistically able to say "no," or is that too impolite?
App developer here. It is impossible to build an app for the original iPad. Apple tools will not allow you to compile backwards compatibility to iOS 6 (or is it 5?).
Even 'racist' music can be tricky business. There are lot's of Swedish and Polish metal bands that would call themselves 'nationalist' but have a great 'nazi' following for example.

I enjoy some of these bands and would not want them censored. Just as I would not want Shakespeare plays to be censored either.

Keep downloading your music and your movies. You will never be able to trust your streaming services.
Been saying this for years. Gaming has some egregious examples like Diablo 3 where the single player mode turned into "multiplayer server with nobody else in it" and if your internet connection goes down or battle.net has problems you can't play the game at all.

Blizzard has a good track record of supporting old games, and as a studio I think they'll be around for a long time, but they won't be forever.

I recently read that Shadow of War is similarly always-online single player. And I have much less faith in Warner Brothers Games to keep that running than I do in Blizzard.
Do you calculate life lost as well? I'm being serious. There is a MASSIVE difference between a five minute commute, and an hour commute when you add it up over a lifetime. That's a stupid amount of your life wasted doing nothing.
> or even launch your own competing business.

That's what Gab did when they were banned from Twitter. Now an alliance of tech companies are banning it en masse, even though they are far more benign than some of the other apps on the Apple store and Google Play store (4chan, for example).

This isn't about freedom of expression. This is a coordinated attack against an emerging alternative tech industry.
The Primal Human Needs – A New Framework for Happiness
What does it say about our system that we have relatively more corporate overlords than government overlords?
We use MDM (Air-Watch) and it's still a problem. If the employee uses their personal iCloud account you cannot remove it. You can unlock the device remotely via MDM but you have to have their password for their iCloud account to remove the iCloud account.

You have to contact Apple and provide proof of purchase for the device to have them remove the iCloud account.
If we have learned literally nothing else over the past 20 years it is that incoming shame bounces off like 99.95% of these people
I was pretty embarrassed by it all to be honest. Nothing makes me cringe more than everyone responding ultra PC. It is bad enough with the commoners, but it is a disgrace when companies get involved with PC statements for no other real reason than to favor the brand.

I may be the same as you only I was a 90s rap kid, the entire directory of music I have collected since the 00s could be considered violent and hateful.
I don't understand how Godwin's rule is useful. Its only effect on arguments is that on top of the inevitable "Hitler" comment you now also get an inevitable "Godwin" follow-up, usually delivered with the air of having somehow won the argument. It's beyond redundant IMO.
They have a torrent download link, so if you want to help just start seeding.
Yes, these are hard-wired logic and just a handful of bytes for two to four registers (at least input and accumulator registers, everything in BCD). Only more advanced calculators use floating point.
Yes, it's a team of engineers. But interestingly, Google started with a mono-repo. All through their explosive growth they maintained (mostly, except Android and Chromium) their vision of mono-repo. It clearly shows that their vision of mono-repo works both for small companies, as well as large ones.

A build-script without dependency resolution clearly does not scale. It was the reason to design and implement Make, CMake, Maven, SBT and many others.
Invacare take powerchairs to a new level with LiNX technology
Hi everyone! I'm the original founder of geek canteen! I'm happy to answer any questions you might have or discuss feedback. This was posted by my husband who encouraged me to act on this idea in order to make healthy food more approachable to busy developers like himself.
> The Java group is also working on being native, so we will likely see Java native when it gets there.

I haven't heard about this. Can you give a reference please?
Increase your web development skill-set: 150 animated tips on Chrome DevTools
> Why are big companies banning this? Surely Google, GoDaddy and Cloudflare, even Spotify aren't going to be hurt by any public backlash

Because they are owned and run by humans with moral values, not financial return maximizing automatons?
yes but, you cannot access any of it.

the downside to them being down is that there's no more proof they were more than just white trolls.
I think there are still quite a few business professionals who miss their Blackberrys. But I agree, still a very small market. Personally I'd love to have a physical keyboard. Phones are big enough know that we could have a full size keyboard and still have more display than we had on an iPhone 4.
There are a few hundred neo-nazis in the US. There are 50,000 in Austria and they have seats on the European Parliament from Austria, Greece, and Germany, despite the much harsher rules there.
Vulscan – Vulnerability Scanning with Nmap – Hack4Net
The far-right is trying to be "counterculture", in an effort to make hate speech "cool". The people lobbying for the removal of the hate speech and its enablers are far more mainstream than "extreme left". People who are victims of hate speech don't have to be extreme anything to prefer that sites choose not to enable harassment.

I'm not even sure who counts as "extreme left" any more, there are very few people trying to do revolutionary communism or actual Maoism in the West.
If music streaming services should not be free to police their content, what about text hosting services (i.e. forums)? What about record labels, should they be forced to sign acts they find offensive (protected classes aside)?

Not arguing one way or the other but "music streaming services" is not too different from many other services which people expect to police content.

Perhaps considering whether the company holds a monopoly or near-monopoly on that media gateway is relevant.
This is how extremism spreads:

1. A Reasonable Position is expressed, in this case - 'Nazi's are very bad'. The Reasonable Position often involves an Enemy that must be stopped. Most reasonable people will agree with the Reasonable Position.

2. The Reasonable Position becomes the overriding factor in any situation that involves it. All other factors and considerations are dwarfed by it and forgotten.

3. Because the Reasonable Position comes to dominate the thinking of the Extremist - who often means well - they come to believe one can only ever be for or against the Reasonable Position. There is no room for moderate positions that try to balance the Reasonable Position with other important considerations and values - in this case, freedom of speech.

4. In order to show support for the Reasonable Position, third parties are forced to action in accordance with the world view of the Extremist. If they try to balance other considerations against the Reasonable Position, they are seen by the Extremist as sympathizing with the Enemy.

5. The fervor of extremism charges through society, trampling on other values and considerations.
"We guarantee software updates for 2 years"

Damn you Android guys have it bad. Apple pushes the software updates down your throats years after purchase.
>Racism? Ok nobody's really going to bat an eye at that disappearing. Violence and hatred though?

You've got this all backwards. We should be most concerned about censorship of political beliefs, however wrongheaded they are.
The Three Pillars of Healthy Open Source Communities
if you want to give a better world a chance you have to give a worse world a chance.
This is the challenge. It's easy to argue speech you don't like is "encouraging violence" and should be censored.

However, you create a path for the next person to use the same argument to censor other speech. Maybe they'll be riots over the next war involving the US and it'll be for "the good of society, to prevent violence" and it'll get censored as well.
There is a big difference between the government and a private organization. The government can throw you in prison and strip you of your constitutional rights. Private organizations cannot (unless hired by the government, which is should not be happening)
Yes, like all those conservatives fighting for Hobby Lobby to not provide contraception support for it's employees because "first amendment" and all those mom and pop shops that don't want to serve gay people in the South because of first amendment rights.

Seriously, conservatives in America want to have their cake and eat it too. "We meant freedom for corporations-as-people but only when it helps us".
Reddit decided that pro-health subreddits that spoke out against obesity were "hate speech". It quickly goes too far. And yes, these are private companies, but many are doing this out of fear of government prosecution.
It's the 1970's all over again...

https://www.aclu.org/other/aclu-history-taking-stand-free-sp...

We seem to keep forgetting what "Freedom of Speech" means.

[Update: Added Chomsky quote]

"If we don't believe in free expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."
- Noam Chomsky
For many Americans(including me) there is only one ISP to "choose".
Surely you can be free to say whatever you want but a business doesn't have to do business with you. For example I could wear a Nazi T-Shirt with "Hang all Niggers" emblazoned in it, and a shop could quite rightly refuse to admit me to their store or refuse to serve me if I did go into their store. So why is it different for Google or Facebook to say "we don't want you as a customer"?
The problem is the government is supposed to keep the private sector in check for such things.

But since we've basically given up on stopping monopolies and mega-mergers the companies and now so big and control so many things they have power without competition to keep it in check.
If you don't care about incremental builds and want just a full rebuild, I would write a shell script instead of a Makefile.

That said, I think incremental builds are important for most use cases.
This attitude is naïve to the extreme... You're surely aware that prolonged suppression of certain ideas can and often does decrease the prevalence of such ideas in the population? And that such suppression might even make certain people change their minds?

I'm not arguing that this is the right strategy, only that it is often extremely effective.
Imagine if Xerox Parc happened in the early 90s and we ended up with a Smalltalk web browser environment.
Which "freedom of speech" does? European Freedom of speech has quite a few caveats too.

There were cases where people lost their jobs for their extracurricular legal activities that were hate speech according to someone. Like in US, private companies seem to give in much quicker than government that tries to follow the law to the letter.
I think that lower error rate is the key. I've been using an iPhone since 2010 and I still can't type on it. The amount of time I spend pressing, holding, dragging the cursor back to make a correction, or backspacing, to fix errors more than offsets any difference in typing speed because of the pressure required on a physical keyboard.

Just speaking for myself, obviously, I'm sure other people may have different experiences.
I'm not bothered about my phone standing out. The 6 and later models are actually big enough for me to hold properly and read text on, without holding them up to my face. I first bought an iPhone when the 6(s) came out.
I agree, we should do this with Muslims too, right? Since they also kill people.
>on the flip side it's nice to know the government is set up in such a way that it isn't by default the most powerful entity in every imaginable way. The people themselves, private companies, etc have a chance to be more powerful than the government in a variety of ways.

That's been the case before, it's not a great thing. In the late 18th and early 19th century, a few magnates were arguably more powerful than the US government. They certainly ran the US government. A lot of the protections we have today are a response to that time period
What if their beliefs are ruining other people's lives? Where do you draw the line?
The many years that passed between the two.
If their hateful conduct and ideas are hidden from you, how will you know to fight back?

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

We should not be afraid that our ideas will lose if all sides are heard. We must win this war of ideas, there is no other way. But we cannot win unless we can point to what is wrong with their ideas. For us to achieve that, they must not be hidden.

It seems that history did not end. Every generation has to win their incarnation of this war, again and again, unfortunately. The beginning of our struggle is drawing nearer and nearer.
It may be that they are worried about getting punished by advertisers in the future. Youtube took a hit when news stories started claiming that extremists were making money off videos on the site.
I'm not sure this kind of policy even has whatever the intended effect is, seems how it appears to be a reaction to Charlottesville events.

Take "music that incites racism" (what do you put into Pandora to get that genre?) for example. If you have users listening to it (because before Charlottesville you thought it was okay!) and you remove it telling them their music is basically banned aren't those users just going to listen to it someplace else and feel more empowered by its message?

The more persecuted these groups feel online, the more justified they will feel in their real-world actions.
Would enforcing freedom of speech on companies that people communicate over mean any kind of moderation would be in violation of that?
The extreme right is mostly underground, and stay on these platforms a long, long time quietly. Only when they start getting loud and provocative do they get a response. They stay and thrive on these platforms until then.
http://sharps.org/wp-content/uploads/BECKER-CHES.pdf is probably the state of the art here. It's basically undetectable.

"Instead of adding additional cir-
cuitry to the target design, we insert our hardware Trojans by changing
the dopant polarity of existing transistors. Since the modified circuit ap-
pears legitimate on all wiring layers (including all metal and polysilicon),
our family of Trojans is resistant to most detection techniques, includ-
ing fine-grain optical inspection and checking against “golden chips”.
We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach by inserting Trojans
into two designs — a digital post-processing derived from Intel’s cryp-
tographically secure RNG design used in the Ivy Bridge processors and
a side-channel resistant SBox implementation — and by exploring their
detectability and their effects on security"
Facilitating the organisation of neo nazis is likewise dangerous, to the point that people die regularly. That is the other, just as real danger, that you are trading the dangers of censoring eminem with.

There is also the fact that all these companies already have arbitrary censorship in place, so this isn't an argument about the principles: that one is long lost. This is an argument about the existing excemption racism has.
Responsibilities of various pieces of the federal government are usually well-delineated but without clean taxonomic hierarchy. The hierarchy only gets cleaned up years or decades after things get spun up and it takes a massive reorganization effort. Single entities with two (or more) responsibilities often aren't worth the effort needed to split up, and thus never fall anywhere cleanly. Even to this day the department that investigates counterfeit currency is also responsible for bodyguarding the president.
They absolutely should be free to police their content. They should be free to police the content, not external pressure.

Bear too in mind they are removing content. Before this blew up in the media, did they have a problem hosting the stuff they're now removing?
That's what I'm saying. If it was truly freedom of speech, a shop couldn't refuse to serve you either.
Have you considered the Blackberry KeyOne?
Usually because that's the only place it's really codified into law or any other legitimate document in the US. The Supreme Court has limited the scope of the first amendment, but that's all just implicitly codified via past decisions and opinions - a less discoverable format I've yet to find.
How can you say it's "compressed" over "compiled" when you are actually parsing it into an AST and then (iiuc) converting that to binary? That's exactly what compilers do. You are in fact going to a new source format (whatever syntax/semantics your binary AST is encoded with) so you really are compiling.

To be fair, these two concepts are similar and I may be totally misunderstanding what this project is about. In the spirit of fairness, let me test my understanding. You are saying wasm bytecode is one step too early and a true "machine code" format would be better able to improve performance (especially startup time). I'm not following wasm development, but from comments here I am gathering that wasm is too level and you want something that works on V8. Is that what this project is about?

On a side note, it's truly a testament to human nature that the minute we get close to standardizing on something (wasm), someone's gotta step up with another approach.
> While I definitely don't support the people they're booting off...

A bit off topic but how many bytes are spent on prefaces like this on responses to this topic?

I assume that the vast majority of people on the planet don't support Nazis or anything related. I find it interesting that any discussion of them has to include that line lest the speaker/writer be labeled as one (which happens quite a bit anyway but that's a different topic).
Why do you think that's why you're being buried?
How many ISPs can you choose from where you live ?
They have an effective monopoly or duopoly in many regions in the US.

in addition to that, "but what about google" is no defence for what last mile ISPs are doing. If google ever becomes too ubiquitous as a gatekeeper (it's already at that point according to the EU antitrust commission) they'll also need to be regulated.
I think the attention is good. Normal people think of Nazis as 1930s/40s Germans. Now many of them know that it also includes modern Americans.
The Stormfront is a well known FBI honey pot. Why would people with "moral values" try to interfere with the FBI trying to infiltrate and arrest nazis?
ISPs are natural monopolies [1]. In the US we're seeing increasing market share concentration by some pretty big juggernauts in the space (Comcast, Verizon). So what you're seeing is a lack of ISP choices for consumers and in many instances only 1 choice and that in my opinion is far more problematic than what Google and FB are doing. I'm not defending censorship by any party here really, but I definitely think censorship at the ISP level is a much bigger problem.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_monopoly
If they just want "fast Ruby", then they should move to Crystal instead. Elixir as a language is a lot different than Ruby, in addition to the platform it runs on.
But that was the state stopping Nazis from marching, this is a private company refusing to do business with someone. Free speech is a right guaranteed by the state, so you won't go to prison for stating your beliefs. But no one should be obliged to help you air those beliefs against their will.
Pretty much anything of value in the Elixir ecosystem is "just" genservers. OTP remains the star of the show.
There is nothing inherently bigoted about Islam or Muslims. Neo-Nazism however...
Slippery slope fallacy applies here I feel.
I agree but only in part. The real problem isn't that Google is able to shutdown a site as a registrar it's the fact DNS as designed needs a hierarchy to make it scale. This is the real problem with DNS and trying to shame Google to not cover its bottom line on such matters isn't going to work when you have a government that may decide they're too big for their britches and decides to go after them.

Instead, I wish EFF and other organizations would fund the development of a replacement for DNS rather than trying to legislate its use. Computers aren't like other kinds of technology where the implementation has to follow the physical structure, especially when considering the idea of domain names which are human readable to bind to IP addresses (which aren't human readable enough). That way, you get around corporate and government interventions entirely.
RIP Tyler the Creator :(
I think an important aspect that is often missed here is how conservative most tech companies are when it comes to legal boundaries.

I would posit that each of these companies is arguing internally (at least in part) in favor of removing neo-Nazi and other violence inducing content from their services to distance themselves from fault when that content results in legal harm.
> If you can't access your website on ISP choose another ISP.

There are thousands upon thousands of webpage hosts on the internet.

In many areas of the US, however, you may have only one option for ISP. You either take it, or you go without internet.
While I don't agree with your first statement, I do agree with your second.
If a company controls so much of the internet that they are able to silence an entire group of people, that's probably not a good thing. Where they draw the line today may be different from where they draw the line in a decade. Once the line is drawn what does that mean for other content that Google doesn't agree with?
Companies like Google and Facebook control access to so much content that, with the tweak of an algorithm, they could make it appear that there is no one else in the world that shares a controversial viewpoint that you might have.
That being said, Google is a private company and should be free to block whatever they want. If enough people don't agree with them, over the course of time, other competitors will rise.
The masseuse who pulled my arm out
This 17-Year-Old Engineer Solved One of the Biggest Problems with Air Travel
If OS vendors could get over their "not invented here" syndrome with respect to default file systems we might see something a little bit more sane than FAT as the one interchangeable format. This is necessary but not sufficient to make decent file systems widely available. Then we can start hoping for such trivial features to become available.
Why don't people get upset like this when companies refuse to carry pornography? That's been really common for a long time, even if not universal, and I don't recall ever hearing a peep about it from the likes of the EFF. Maybe I missed it?
Not only that, but the companies you have listed are all to eager to get in bed with the Chinese government and then for efficiency reasons, they start moving everything to that least common denominator of free expression. We definitely have a problem here. I'm thoroughly disgusted with tech companies right now--these are not the brave risk-takers that made me so hopeful for the 21st century.
Too late, they already been for at least 2 years
Wow, I almost missed that part of the article. There's so much music that could fall under that rule...

Music is up to interpretation. One of my favorite songs is Sublime's April 29th, 1992. You could easily say it incites violence, glorifies looting and rioting, and should be removed. But my interpretation of the song makes me think it's more about understanding the mindset of the people who were looting and rioting, and not condoning the violence.

How could anyone impartially decide what should and shouldn't be published?