skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The distinction is that neo-nazis chose to follow a hateful ideology

Did they?
My conjectured proposal is both symmetrical and consistent with equality: any citizen X is allowed to open restaurant/school which only caters to class Y, for all X and Y. It sure allows apartheid, but there are no perpetrators here. It's perfectly symmetrical.
((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((Neat)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Shit, it's not working...
Why are you screaming? Don't do that.
+1 to this

The primary use-case for headless-chrome is to support stuff like scraping/crawling JavaScript-dependent sites and services, and emulating user workflows to retrieve data or trigger side effects that couldn't otherwise be achieved with something more low-level (curl, manual HTTP requests w/ Node's HTTP/S API etc).

headless-chrome would be used for the functionality of a server-side microservice, rather than for automated testing of UI/UX, there are already more appropriate projects to achieve that.
Political affiliation is a protected class. I don't really know what the word "Nazi" means these days because people have used it to label everyone from far-right conservatives to Trump voters to people who self-identify as neo-Nazis. Unless a person registered with the NSDAP prior to 1945, technically they are not a Nazi.
Maybe but that makes sense when this "smart person" leaves then no-one knows how to keep their stuff going and the system is likely to crash and burn taking the manager with it. If you have a 4 person team you can handle people coming in and out over time, using best ideas from the team.
Craigslist has lots of fakes and scams
No, it isn't odd at all: societies are made up of people and people in large numbers do not always act in a way that protects those that are weaker or in smaller numbers so to avoid the tyranny of the majority protected classes exist in order to make sure that it is spelled out under what circumstances you can and can not discriminate against others.

So yes, everybody is afforded equal protection under the law and protected classes exist to ensure that the majority can not hide behind their majority in order to legalize discriminatory practices.

You are suggesting that being a member of a (protected) class now equates to having an advantage but this is not the case, it is to make sure that being a member of a certain class does not become a disadvantage.
seriously? If you want to use any of a companies services, you have to agree to like any and all of their future changes to said service, no matter how monopoly-like they are or how many privacy protections they hack around?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genderqueer

https://lgbtq.unc.edu/resources/exploring-identities

http://lgbt.wikia.com/wiki/Gender_identity
yeah, no. Because among those great freedoms is the freedom of contract. Just as you can, in the absence of an agreed-upon fixed term, cancel your subscription to "Armchair Paralegal Monthly" any day you want, CF is free to fire any of their customers.
It seems very unlikely that discriminating against red-haired people would survive a challenge since it is strongly correlated with specific races.

i.e. "we don't serve people with dark very curly hair", good luck with that one.
> That's a fallacy because "free speech" is not unlimited - every civilization recognizes its existence is the result of limiting specific freedoms in order to guarantee everyone other freedoms.

Speech can't limit anyone else's freedom however.

> Germany, among others, outlaw this kind of content

Leading to multiple wwii games having a different version for Germany and for the rest of the world due to the censorship that they apply.

> Perhaps the US should learn from them.

Why should it?
For what it's worth, yes, I would still argue that ISIS recruitment videos should be allowed on the internet. (But I could see my future self renouncing this as immature and un-nuanced.) Because in general, I am more afraid of overreaction to terrorism than terrorism itself.

That's true that there are alternatives to CF. As long as there is at least one anti-DDoS provider with an "everyone is welcome" attitude, I suppose CF can do whatever they want. So I'll concede that point.
Exactly! Extremely frustrating that the rest of the quote wasn't included.

"Having made that decision we now need to talk about why it is so dangerous. I’ll be posting something on our blog later today. Literally, I woke up in a bad mood and decided someone shouldn’t be allowed on the Internet. No one should have that power."

His Gizmodo quotes are somewhat revealing as well:

“We need to have a discussion around this, with clear rules and clear frameworks. My whims and those of Jeff [Bezos] and Larry [Page] and Satya [Nadella] and Mark [Zuckerberg], that shouldn’t be what determines what should be online,” he said. “I think the people who run The Daily Stormer are abhorrent. But again I don’t think my political decisions should determine who should and shouldn’t be on the internet.”
But the person claimed that all libraries would be uniform when he said his expectation was that it would happen to any library. Therefore, he was wrong. The person you were correcting was right and you provided additional useful context.
> It's an outrage that businesses that want to enjoy all the benefits of selling to the public can discriminate against members of that public for any spurious or bigoted reason they like.

> Don't wanna sell cakes to gay people or host pro-Nazi sites? Don't start a business serving the public then.

Work and business is an enormous part of human life: exempting businesses from Constitutional protections dramatically limit the scope of those protections. Should federal agents be able to raid a business without regard for the Fourth Amendment? Should Texas be able to take legal action against Amazon, Microsoft, etc. for speaking out against the anti-bathroom bill?

In America, you get to run a business with whatever political views you have, subject to very narrow restrictions of a handful of anti-discrimination statutes (which are, incidentally, all based on the much-maligned Commerce Clause).
I don't really think semantics of literally matter in this case. In Charlottesville people were attending a "Unite the Right" event with actual Nazis .... If you are uniting with Nazis you're becoming a Nazi.
I find it amusing that many of the same people who bemoan the loss of "net neutrality" are in this very thread applauding arbitrary censorship of content by a large company.
Sorry, "badge seekers" then if you must insist on precision for the same idea. It's all fake internet points.
Wow, great! This magazine is precisely as old as I am. I wasn't born with a lisp, just a fondness for it (and now I know why).
> "Focus on what it is that you really want to do."

The older I'm getting the more it seems like this is the true fountain of life. Something that will keep you going no matter what happens in your life and wake you up with bright eyes in the morning.
I'm still amused at how the west coast is starting to pay attention to "those guys in the rust belt". ;-) I'm reminded of when I interviewed at TI and they were just coming across some foreign concepts. Some people have a practice of refreshing peripheral registers (like port direction and such) on a regular basis. What happens if the bit flips, and now that button on your door doesn't work? But then for some reason you disconnect the battery and everything is fine? Why would the bit flip? Transients, latch-up? And you're going to be connected to a battery for 6-10 years right? This stuff has all been seen, and it's not always just a reboot to fix it.
> My conjectured proposal is both symmetrical and consistent with equality: any citizen X is allowed to open restaurant/school which only caters to class Y, for all X and Y. It sure allowed apartheid, but there are no perpetrators here. It's perfectly symmetrical.

No, it is not symmetrical because the number of members of the various classes and their power dynamics are not symmetrical. This obviously would benefit the majority ruling, or in the case of outright apartheid the ones in power or wealthy at the expense of those without power or wealth.

So no, it is not symmetrical, in fact it is the same dumb and fallacious kind of reasoning that whites under the apartheid regime used to justify their position.

The law does not allow whites to create schools where blacks are not welcome any more than it would allow a school created by blacks where whites aren't welcome. Ditto for restaurants and if you wish to create such a society you will likely find that your view is a minority view that will not make you any friends.
yeah, lisp is cool, but I'd need a computer to run it on... I'm seriously considering one of those 8070 Series I Business System..... it has dual floppies, 591K bytes of storage a 19" color display, a 60 cps impact matrix computer, and!! they say at twice the price it would be a bargin, so at $7000 it seems the way to go
Usain Bolt's average speed was about 23 miles per hour[0] when he set the world record (9.58 sec/100m). Nearly everyone can "run" 2.3 mph for a quarter-lap; that's not even a brisk walking pace.

The 10x programmer idea also applies to adults working as programmers. If you were to limit the runners to an analogous population (runners, I guess, or even healthy adults), I'd definitely take that bet.

[0] His peak speed was a bit faster (~27 mph), but the point stands...
> Free speech, freedom of conscience, and non-discrimination are moral principles that go beyond US federal statute.

What does this even mean? Free speech is severely limited to the point that I can be fined for singing most songs in a public place. What I can say to or about people is limited, and I can be charged with various crimes based on the content of that speech. What I say to a child can be interpreted as abuse just based on its explicitness. In many circumstances, I'm not allowed to tell anyone any significant news about what's going on within a company that I work for or have any connection to, for fear that they might profit.

"Free speech" is about the government restraining people from political speech, and even that's been heavily restricted at different times - currently speech can be interpreted as giving material support to terrorists, conceivably opening one up for indefinite detention. We've jailed people for treason for anti-war speech.

Free speech is not about anybody being forced to help you say whatever you want to say. You can't just literally translate the phrase, it's a shorthand. If you want to fight for businesses losing control of their platform in proportion to their size, I'd be glad to support you. Expropriate and renationalize, I say. If Cloudflare is a public utility, I'd demand that Nazis have the opportunity to use it as freely as everyone else.

As for the rest, 1) there's no indication that Cloudflare can prevent them from thinking what they would like, and 2) non-discrimination is not a moral principle; if we didn't discriminate, we wouldn't need more than one word, or to learn our left from our right. Our norms are against certain types of discrimination, not the basic idea of distinguishing between things. There are differences between Nazis and Jews, for example. If we couldn't see them, we wouldn't be able to understand why some people wanted to murder other people, or discriminate accordingly when deciding who we should do business with.
Direct quotes from a Charolettesville neo-nazi organizer:

--

“I’m here to spread ideas, talk,” Cantwell says, “in hopes that somebody more capable will come along and do that, somebody like Donald Trump who does not give his daughter to a Jew.”

“So, Donald Trump, but like, more racist?” VICE’s reporter questions. “A lot more racist than Donald Trump,” Cantwell responds. “I don’t think that you could feel about race the way I do and watch that Kushner bastard walk around with that beautiful girl, okay?”

Video from Saturday’s protests show Black Lives Matter and anti-facist protestors with backpacks and signs. The white supremacists facing off against them pack helmets, shields and blunt weapons. After authorities force the crowd to disperse by police and declare a state of emergency, Cantwell says, “We’re here obeying the law,” he continues, “and the criminals are over there getting their way.”

“So you’re the true nonviolent protestors?” the reporter asks.

“We’re not nonviolent, we’ll fuckin’ kill people if we have to.” Soon, Cantwell’s pledge becomes chilling and devastatingly prescient.
I think Cloudfare made the wrong decision here, but for me the reasons it's damaging to free speech are deeper than "is free speech at the level of government or private organizations?"

There's a couple of ways of looking at this. One is to say Cloudfare is a private company, they were free to make a decision, they exercised that right, and now white nationalists have the right to choose to go to a different provider. Others have the right to do business or withhold business from Cloudfare in response.

Another, though, is to say that Cloudfare is now in a unique position--by the CEO's own admission--and has power over another person's speech as a result. It would be akin to a husband controlling a wife's contacts with others. Sure, the wife could leave, but that's not really a good argument for the husband's behavior being ok; someone is, similarly in the hands of the company somewhat unfairly.

Yet another way to look at it is this: when Cloudfare decides it can and will make content-based decisions, have they now implicitly argued that when they don't remove content, they implicitly support that content, in that it's not aversive enough to remove? Where do you draw the line with that? And if a company nominally accepts that responsibility, does that mean we, in exchange, should allow them to regulate other traffic?

One argument for net neutrality is that while it binds a corporation's hands, it also frees them of responsibility for things they might otherwise be liable for. This was the bargain with phone companies, after all, with common carrier status. No one blames the phone company for supporting white supremacists because they carried their phone calls, but nor do they worry about the phone company dropping their calls because the phone company disagrees with their political position.

My impression is that the CEO of Cloudfare is freaking out at the moment because he realizes he has now made Cloudfare implicitly responsible for the content on its systems, and has opened up an argument against net neutrality. He's essentially saying to the government "please come up with rules that absolve us for responsibility in this situation."

If Cloudfare had simply said "we don't drop clients because of the nature of the content" they would have had a very strong position. Now they've opened a can of worms and have called into question their complicity in the content they carry.

They can't have it both ways: by saying that white supremacist groups are too aversive for them, they have now implicitly said that everything else is not too aversive. This is a very undesirable route to be going in in terms of freedom of speech.

For what it's worth, I also oppose network companies removing ISIS recruitment videos, all other things being equal. Now, if a court decided that the content poster/creator was in violation of some ethical and legal code to such an extent that their right to distribute content should be restricted, that's one thing, but that would require actual due process in a court of law.
I made one for Firefox on Android (should work on iOS too).

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/hide-mobile-f...
Naivety is thinking you can open the Pandora's box of government limiting speech based on what is popularly acceptable in an emotional moment, and not eventually having any speech against government or incumbent politicians or ideas eventually labeled in the future as hate speech and banned.

The reason you don't go down the path of Europe in this regard is because Europeans are already losing representation, and democracy fails when people aren't free to speak their minds and express their ideas, love it or hate it. That's how a truly free society actually works.
Time moves faster in a dream than it does in the real world.

Code running in a container runs slower than in the outside world ;-)
Are you not an employee of Blockstream? The company who's business model necessitates the Bitcoin not be able to scale on its own?

Rusty, you've been made. You are a 1 Meg forever shill and your propaganda would better be left to your CPO, Samson Mow.
Looks like one did, specifically they ruled that it was both a license and a contract, here's an article on it [0].

I think that just like the ToS example it shouldn't be counted as a contract, and I feel reasonably confident saying leggomylibro feels the same. This isn't a legal judgment on the current state of the law (which I'm not qualified to make), but a moral judgment that contracts shouldn't be able to be created like that.

https://perens.com/blog/2017/05/28/understanding-the-gpl-is-...
Diversity Crisis in AI
I used to think so too, then I had kids :)

One interesting approach is to use snooping tools but to then explicitly tell the kids and to discuss the results periodically. I.e., "my job as a parent is to help you figure out how to be a grown up. Part of that is managing money. I noticed you spent money on X and wanted to talk about it"

I think for the 'cellphone based GPS-tracking' there was also an explicit rule that the parents wouldn't get the kids in trouble for information gathered from the GPS tracking. They might talk to them about it afterwards, but they wanted the kids to be willing to not circumvent the device for safety purposes.

But yeah - it's weird how it both ughs me out and at the same time scratches a deep itch/fear that I'll still be able to keep my kids safe even as they age.
What about the case where Microsoft Frontpage's EULA forbid creation of websites that shed a negative light on Microsoft? Wasn't the verdict that such a clause is not enforceable?
though I might need to get one of those fake wood veneer quad capacity two sided recording north star mini drives with 360,000 bytes per diskette!! but it has 4 drives so you can accesses over 1.4 megabytes of information.......
If the requirement is written in to law then the US Constitution (or other such documents granting exclusive use to an idea) must be amended to void any patent which prevents competition to meet that requirement.

Volvo[1] is the a good steward in this regard, seat belt laws cover most people but the technology itself is free to implement by anyone. That's how it should be. If you can patent something that the government then mandates be included your patents must be invalidated (or you do what Volvo did voluntarily).

[1] http://jalopnik.com/volvo-gave-away-their-most-important-inv...
Excepting protected classes, which "neo-Nazi" is not.
Clojure, with heaps of Clojurescript to manage the Javascript ecosystem.

For over a decade I wrote mainly in C++ doing a lot of Windows programming, usually games or simulations. Mix in some VB and C# when I didn't want to battle the Win32 API. I was used to seeing codebases with 100k+ loc and hundreds of megabytes of code files. xkcd COMPILING is real!

While working at BitTorrent in 2013, a coworker back introduced me to his little server that distributes uTorrent executable to everybody. It was an implementation of this[1] paper for a general purpose rules-based engine with a snappy (Clojurescript?) front-end. The whole thing was ~5k loc, and ran on surprisingly small hardware compared to it's traffic.

From there I was hooked. My project sizes are radically smaller, it's LISP, and I can go wherever Java goes. I wrote about my experiences with AWS Lambdas last year [2], for example. The community itself is outstanding. They are some of the nicest people you will ever meet. Because the community focuses on small libraries that are composable, those libraries become remarkably stable. Several heavily used libraries haven't had commits in months or years.

[1]: http://moscova.inria.fr/~maranget/papers/ml05e-maranget.pdf

[2]: https://github.com/jamesleonis/serverless-in-clojure
But some countries also unified their currencies: USD replaced state currencies and EUR replaced most European currencies.
Actually, check what the former COO of Paypal said here about blockchains

https://cointelegraph.com/news/paypal-ex-coo-bitcoin-crypto-...
Create your own team dashboard with custom widgets
Sorry, I'm not sure which part of those sites supports your claim.

Identification and expression, in gender and sexuality, are not the same as choice.

A gay person living in an society oppressive to gay men would not choose to identify as gay and may express themselves as being straight, but that doesn't mean their orientation is heterosexual.

They may choose to repress their sexual orientation or gender expression for the sake of survival, or other reasons, but the innate feelings behind the expression are typically not choice. Do you think LBGTQ people in countries where expression is punishable are death are just casually opting to risk the lives of thmeselves and their family?

Not coincidentally, LBGTQ people were persecuted and exterminated by Nazis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_homosexuals_in_...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_against_LGBT_people
Bitcoin is arguably better as a store of value because its surface attack area is smaller.
Sorry, where in any of your examples are the people waving Nazi flags saying they're Nazis? I'm unclear on why you keep bringing up red herrings when the issue is actual Nazis marching together here, in America, right now. These are all slippery slope arguments that don't appear to have any aim other than justifying not confronting real Nazis.
What gets me is - I don't think Daily Stormer was even important, was it? I mean it's not like this is a giant propaganda machine with millions of visits a day run by Hitler. It seems to
me to be pretty much a pissant little blog.

To be completely honest - when I went to look at what the fuss was about a few days ago - I couldn't see any serious hate message because it read like hilariously sarcastic teenage angst and black humour (no pun intended).

There was a recent article where they were laughing about a woman who was run down by a car. I absolutely abhor that that woman was killed! It should probably attract a life or death sentence after the facts are reviewed in court.

But the CONTENT about it was so stupid it was funny like 4chan, reddit, or encyclopaedia dramatica. I laughed. I wasn't laughing at her. What happened was a tragic crime. But don't we often laugh at awful things to cope with them?

I'm not a bad person. I myself don't and don't want others to spread hate or racist messages let alone hurt people or encourage others to do it either.

But ummm when it comes to words I think you should be able to poke fun at what you want. And now it seems you can't and things have been going that way for a long time.

I get that it's distasteful but I also find a lot of other stuff distasteful. Shrug.

Now I get on an intellectual level they weren't shut down just for being distasteful and somewhere in there (I didn't read much so didn't find any) there is actually hate content and that's why they were shut down.

But IIRC encyclopaedia dramatica was just distasteful stuff making fun of many colours and cultures and was also shut down.

So it has a real chilling effect and that's not the internet I want. Want to know what world is scarier than one with nazi's on the internet? It's one where corporations and governments paid by corporations tell you what is and isn't allowed to be said.

(Disclaimer: I've got nothing to say myself except we should all live together and get along.)
Jeff Dean's lecture for AI
The Pirate Bay is fine. DDOS gangs however? I would argue that they are worse than people who express a fascist ideology online.
Yep, "solid state" components are not actually solid state!