skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My point is that there's clearly something missing if a 75-25 split is measured as 0 net wasted votes. That means that the efficiency gap treats 75-25 as the "perfect election", and is actually measuring how far any given district election is from that "ideal".

Even worse, that means that if we actually use the efficiency gap to measure gerrymandering, then there is a strong incentive for parties to draw district lines to be as close to 75-25 as possible!
... until you stop taking the drug.
> That was the end of AIM, I think. Aol and yahoo both use gmail internally so I suspect they’re going to shitcan their email services eventually, too.

Man, that would be an absolute disaster. I have so many contacts who I can only through Yahoo and AOL email addresses. I guess I should reach out to all of them before they are disappeared. ;- )
Expressive C++ challenge in D
Berkeley Students Protest Exam, Accuse Test-Takers of White Supremacy
Just to be sure I have understood correctly, this is to have your different projects synchronized all at once, right?
There are many. The Holocaust is definitely off-limits. That's just one example.
or truth
The topic was that apparently Google insisted on testing Ken Thompson if he knows C, because policy.

Which if true means a stubborn bureaucracy running uncontrolled there.

It's like hiring Andrew Tanenbaum and then insisting on him taking a test to check if he "knows" Linux.

My question was in sense, did anybody right the wrong, once even the media recognized the absurdity of that particular case.
L0 says nothing about revenue sharing or other financial arrangements of more than one player.

L0's CLI _does_ support "stacking" metadata about available private licenses. So if you start an L0-NC project, I fork it and add my own significant contributions, folks who download my fork can tell they need private terms from both of us, at the prices we set independently.

I suspect many small projects, which are effectively single-maintainer, many-contributor, will accept contributions BSD-2-Clause, or offer waivers (essentially freebie private licenses) for the project in return for contributions on BSD-2-Clause terms.

There's some exciting work being done by others on transparent, automated licensing and royalties. As an aside, I think that line of research is far more promising for the kind of "network team", "swarm of contractors" business aspiration than models tackling, say, equity stakes or 701 plans. But it's not directly in scope for L0.
Has anyone ever installed OpenBSD for Macbook White (MB 5,2)?

I'm interested to resurrect this laptop since Apple no longer support (newer OSX can't be installed) the hardware.

I would love to see OpenBSD + Openbox + Crunchbang theme/window-decorator.
Nissan GT-R vs. Audi RS7 vs. Mercedes E63 AMG
I'm building a product in kinda new market. I'll use something like this to keep up with other landing pages.
>But I couldn't see myself using it for a medium-sized project just because static typing is that valuable to me.

See my comment above, you can have static-typing in Lisp with no problem: Type declarations are part of the Common Lisp standard[1], and implementations like SBCL (one of the best Lisp implementations out there, and free) will do static type checking.

[1] type declarations:
http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/d_type.htm

"the" (type specifier for return values):
http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/s_the.htm#the

EDIT: a good example here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8598149
Site is down. Can somebody paste a cached copy?
Everything is on the website:

https://licensezero.com/licenses

Everything is also being revised. So much good feedback!
Show HN: SimpleBulb.com: Easily Find LED Light Bulbs
Another thread suggested I check out a long lived commune in the US, so I did. It turns out that it was indeed long lived, but the average member only stayed a year and a half before moving on.

The larger point is, in America, anyone can form a commune or choose to live in one. There's no law against it. What you don't get to do is force people to join and prevent them from leaving.

There seem to be orders of magnitude more people advocating communes than are willing to live in them.
It's also important to recognize that government is not society. Government to my mind is a mafia. A group of thugs that enforces its will and buys good will with a little charity while sucking the life out of the country (eg: massive inflation, taxation, regulation to favor their allied businesses, perpetrating drug wars and wars in other countries despite society opposing them, etc.)

If government represented society, we would not have a drug war, we would not be in so many wars, etc.
> Please be a proponent for veracity metrics on news stories and "viral articles" ... it's about time we as users get to see the measure of reliability and trustworthiness of search results.

Google does lots of things I like, but I see close to zero evidence that they have developed the competency to act as an arbiter on any of veracity, reliability, or trustworthiness of news articles (or even less-timely information on the web.)

Relevance and my likelihood to be interested, yes. But those other things...no.

And that's even aside from the question of whether Google using its dominant search position to inject editorial commentary on search results is a good thing or, in the long term, a bigger threat than the one it would be addressing.
> You misunderstand me. I thought it was clear that I was talking about ideas, not threats or inciting mobs.

And who decides what's an "idea" and what's "threats or inciting mobs"?

Would you be happy for the British government to say that of course the colonists have the right to free speech, but many of them are advocating threats and inciting mobs, which isn't allowed? Or for the king of Thailand to say the same thing about those who insult the king? Or for the Spanish government to say the same thing about Catalonian politicians? Or for Trump to say this about the women's march?

What is a threat or a mob? Is a group of Nazis in Nazi uniforms marching down the street saying Nazi things somehow not a threat or a mob? The ACLU believes they have a right to free speech!
That is somewhat shocking that yahoo uses gmail internally.

What happened to eating your own dogfood?
Yes that is correct
You can try it for yourself in the browser:
https://paste.fedoraproject.org/

If you accidentally fpasted something sensitive, you're given a deactivation link to remove it immediately.
Why are age, gender, and (particularly) ethnicity deemed relevant fields used for tagging the data (but not things like handedness or hand related metrics)?
I would love to use typed racket, but I cannot really use it in the environments I program for, which are largely commercial apps on Apple platforms and mobile. If I could, I would jump to it in a heartbeat.
I'm on Ubuntu on a Thinkpad that has the trackpad disabled. Plain Jane Microsoft wired USB mouse plugged in.

I use the right-click/context menu a fair amount. Since FF screenshots was added, it gets triggered frequently when I'm popping the right/click menu on a page -- without my making any click after the right-click to open the context menu. And with the trackpad disabled and using a mouse with a physical button and a rather distinct click, I can say this with considerable confidence.

So, then I have to to hit the escape key to kill the FF screenshot functionality. Which is becoming muscle memory, at this point.
Home router/firewall. Outer-most point in my network. Inside I have a turris and used to even have an Apple but the outer-most point has been an OpenBSD firewall since 4.x.

My first job in IT was such a prolific openbsd advocate that we were listed on their homepage as one of the companies that use openbsd.

My current opinion is that I would never put myself or anyone else through using OpenBSD. Linux can do anything it can and I've actually become an SElinux advocate in the last 2-3 years.

I do however trust it completely on my home firewall and it gives me some practice with BSD.
Kurt is also involved with Sight Machine:
http://sightmachine.com/company/#leadership
This comment deserves more upvotes, because even if you don't agree with it, it accurately distills the perspective of those who are aghast that liberals increasingly seem to be unable to tolerate the idea of a jewish dude who is married to a black dude being allowed to speak (and worse, calling him a Nazi. If a gay, "race traitor" jew is a Nazi then who isn't?)

I'm a liberal, who years ago really worked to champion free speech.

I think what's going on now is the rise of a puritan neo-liberalism.

PS- the post I'm replying to is comprised of concepts or statements that I've actually seen people express.
That's the weird thing about it, how quickly it can turn into a total overgrown jungle!

On google maps, from NW to SE the longest point between trails I can find is 1.3km, but if you have the bad luck to head off one of the southern trails and get lost heading northeast, you could go just over 2km without seeing a trail. I mean yea, low chance of dying, but high chance of extreme discomfort :P
And there is another line of thought.

Bacteria's pay dearly for each extra bit of DNA they carry, since the energy cost of DNA replication is linear with respect to the length.

Bacteria's with less DNA can replicate more quickly and thus outcompete other bacterias.

The fact that after so many generations they still carry that "junk" which they pay for suggests it really is useful in one way or another.
The biggest advantage I can see is that it would let people get out of such supply-constrained housing markets. If you're got a guaranteed $15-20k UBI, then why not bail on being in a super-expensive city? Go earn minimum wage as a lifty at a ski mountain out in Wyoming or Montana, where land is dirt cheap, or whatever else it is that would float your boat.

The downside in most of these areas now is that the employment market sucks. Consequently, you already tend to see a lot of people on fixed incomes, like retirees, living there.
The dude on the right looks like an older version of Doug Funny.
As with my comment about typed racket, I can't really use common lisp in my work, however clojure is very portable and I can use it (as clojurescript) as a first class language on iOS, and Mac, and the web.
An Edible Actuator for Ingestible Robots
I don't think price is about the task (cronjobs), it's about how you value the output.

If I'm using cronjobs for some trivial unimportant task (like checking for firmware updates), I am not willing to pay. If I'm using cronjobs for super important competitive analysis, sure I'd pay.
So can genes transfer between species via viruses? Is that why our features are similar to pigs?
>Relatedly, I have certainly had the experience of remembering something as being hilarious only now to be turned off by how clearly sexist it is

That's part of the humor.

Plus a lot of people conflate sexual with sexist -- thinking about sex and working towards humping is considered automatically sexist in protestant-derived cultures (who'd rather we were all asexual and only interested in sex and in the other sex under very specific situations -- marriage, back in the day, a relationship, today).
https://web.archive.org/web/20171006051839/https://embedi.co... (Looks a bit funky tho, text and images are there, so should be fine)
Ask HN: How do you decide between startup ideas?
There does need to be some sort of sane standard for determining whether something counts as a threat/incitement if they're not going to be permitted.

Say I'm very popular on twitter, and say I don't like somebody for whatever reason. If there's a reasonable expectation that this will result in them being mobbed by my less personable followers, does that count as incitement?

Or at what point does aggressive banter in good faith become an actual threat in [favorite multiplayer video game]?
Six installment was my favorite - everything was perfect form music to graphics (at that time) and there was amazing mood in the game I could play for hours trying to figure it all out by myself instead than from manual. I wish someone would write a contunuance of #6 with new missions in the same theme I would definitely pay monthly to get new mission but I'm sure there is simply not enough of us :(

This and Dune 2 were my favorite games of young days and most memorable moments with my family still all together.
Are you sure you are understanding the argument being made here?

I think the argument, which is fair, is that it is very weird that if I pay Spotify $10 a month and listen exclusively to a single artist, that artist may get a penny from me and Justin Bieber may get $3 from me, despite me never listening to a single track from him.

Nobody is arguing Spotify can take it's 20% or whatever, people are just arguing that the calculation Spotify uses to distribute the monthly royalties severely penalizes small artists. (because it looks in aggregate across all listeners instead of divvying per user)
I understood you, but I think that you conflated freedom of conscience with freedom of speech. Freedom of conscience seems pretty uncontroversial, and it's what Paine is talking about in the quote you gave (on my interpretation).

I think everybody agrees that freedom of conscience is both good and necessary in an open society. However, it's incorrect to think that absolute freedom of speech necessarily follows.

> You'll have a hard time finding any self-described free speech absolutist who thinks those should be permitted.

I've debated people who believe this. You and I don't have to agree with them, but they exist.
"You are operating/arguing from the neutral reality perspective-- that is to say, that "we as a society" exists as a concrete entity that can pass laws. But that's not the case. We are not the government, far from it. The government is a collection of people who have power over us."

That we, the people, choose (a least in non-dictatorship countries).

"While inciting a mob to violence can be considered immoral, it is the violence that is the crime... the action.... not the opinion."

Taken to extremes, that means that hiring a hit man, or ordering someone in your cult to kill someone isn't responsible. And yet, as a society, we've said otherwise.
Teleoperating robots with virtual reality
Quite frankly, seems like are chugging the kool-aid.

If the government is so trustworthy and so eager to please why do they need to take political prisoners at all?
It's usually pretty clear, and if it's not then it's best to err on the side of free speech. Declaring one's desire to overthrow western society is not a threat or an incitement to violence. Here's an example of what counts as free speech in the US: "If they ever make me carry a rifle the first man I want to get in my sights is L. B. J."[1] It has to be a true threat. Likewise, inciting a mob only applies to actual mobs on the verge of violence.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threatening_the_President_of_t...
Call me a millennial but this is an extremely odd view of the world to me.

Everyone is unique. Everyone has had a different set of experiences that brought them to where they are today.

Relationships are also unique in this way. They are a shared set of experiences you have had with another. Each set of shared experiences is unqiue.

In the case of the OP, only he and his current SO will have lived through making this decision with each other. The strength of their relationship going forward will be in part because of this shared experience.

Are you arguing that it is possible that the SO would be happier if they were making this decision with the other person? I'm sure that this could be theoretically true, but it seems somewhat irrelevant.
I think you'll find a lot of people who will disagree what constitutes "threats or inciting mobs".
This is an informative article let down by a deliberately misleading statement: 'As to the government’s definition of terrorism, it has lost all meaning: remember that a peaceful protests are formally classified as “Low-level terrorism” in government training material.'

The 'government' early in the sentence refers to the UK government (the subject of the article) but the training material was published by the _US_ government, so it's irrelevant here.

It _is_ worrying, though, to see content being banned, and putting the burden of proof ('reasonable excuse') on the viewer, rather than the prosecution.
We've banned this throwaway as well as the main account.
Robotic bugs train insects to be helpers
I've seen professional comedians joke about the holocaust, war, abortions, slavery, cancer, kids dying, pedofillia, incest, serial killers, 9/11, torture, religion, and lots of other things besides.

What's exactly off limits?
This reminds me of Google's public transport routing algorithm.

https://research.googleblog.com/2016/03/an-update-on-fast-tr...
There is a simple fix - become a distributor. I worked for local European distributors that moved less merchandise per year and had direct relationships with Samsung/Fujitsu/IBM/WD/Seagate (you can tell it was a long time ago :P).
It's fine for people to not want to read things online. What's not fine is giving them the power to prevent those things from being written.
That's a distinction without a difference.

I also suggest the Google query.
Oh...shit. That is both stupefying and petrifying. More and more I feel that there is a new class war coming; and it is not rich vs poor so much as it is governments vs civilians. Really wondering whether this will be shot down or if other governments will follow suit down this road as quickly as possible.

Instinct tells me the latter is more likely. I've not been on this Earth long, but where the fuck did all my freedoms go? It's like we're standing on a sandbar watching the tide erode our liberties from under our feet. And shit, it's the ocean. We can't do anything to save our little sandbar.
Should surely be .well-known/security.txt, or if not explain why not.

rfc5785 "Defining Well-Known Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs)"

[edit: I see the FAQ says that, while the linked Internet Draft says it goes at top-level like robots.txt]
The L0 public licenses come with grace periods, essentially free trials. Right now they're at 90 days, but will almost certainly shorten, perhaps to 30 days or less.

The utility of L0 is to make it possible to offer one set of public tools with, say, a noncommercial use limitation, but offer those who need to use commercially an easy way to buy the right to do that. "License Zero", as in near-zero friction.

Zero is impossible of course, because there will always be some friction in the additional step of getting a different license, versus not needing a separately license at all. But it's up to developers to decide what's best, in terms of optimizing leverage to command support, on the hand, and minimizing friction that puts a brake on adoption, on the other. Purely proprietary software with closed source is at one extreme. Hyper permissive licenses like 0BSD are on the other.
Maybe a resize widget on the current standard keypad would help for bigger screens, rather than having to work with a new layout.
It seems to be this preprint: https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.09724
In the past I had an account whose handle people would often assume was a woman. I liked to discuss politics and so I'd disagree with people, and I ended up disagreeing with people on the right and the left.

The only death and rape threats that account received were from the left.
I agree that price discrimination can be a useful thing, but question the idea that only very large or wealthy companies should pay anything at all. What if licenses are low friction and affordable?

If we had a nice repertoire of flexible licenses available to play with, developers could experiment and try all sorts of ideas, including what you describe.

Non-FOSS-licensed software isn't going to play the same role in the ecosystem as FOSS software, but it doesn't have to. Plenty of room for different kinds of people/companies/software to co-exist.
A Kindle should be fine, preferably without backlight however.
I think we're not even at that point, yet. On Twitter, there are lots of people who receive violent threats, and they're told by Twitter that those are not a violation of the ToS.
At an old company after being acquired we built a blind-hiring system. No resumes. The WallStreet Journal wrote about it, it was popular.

Many lovely candidates came to us because of the process. One of them laughed at resumes as being a form of ritualized lying.

Neat project, but I shrug my shoulders at 'the resume'.
> Any limitations, as we have seen, on human rights become the camel nose under the tent, and then you eventually end up with government violating the right wholesale. (eg: secret courts and secret rulings, National Security Letters an the like, illegal surveillance and wiretapping.)

Free speech in Canada does not allow for hate speech or inciting violence, and we're at least no worse than the USA for whatever violations of the right.
Nice and responsive now! Thanks again for the resource.
> While inciting a mob to violence can be considered immoral, it is the violence that is the crime... the action.... not the opinion.

Instead of a mob, what if I use speech to sic a dangerous dog on someone?

The incitement is no different – the dog isn't thinking rationally, nor is anyone in the mob ("mob mentality"). In both cases the inciter is directing the action.

Of course, you can't legally try a dog… but you can't practically try a mob.

Same with war crimes. Should generals not be held accountable for genocides under their orders, if they never personally murdered any civilians? After all, they were just saying words.
Both government and private parties can pose separate risks to free speech, but the value of freedom of speech in a society does not change based on where those risks are coming from.

The point your are making is against the strawman argument that the first amendment should prohibit private companies editorial decisions. I haven't seen anyone making that claim.

When the bill of rights was drafted, it was inconceivable that any company would have the level of control over speech that companies have today.
This article is pretty click-baity. It claims to be about reading banned literature in the title, then when you navigate to the site it immediately says the announcement/law is actually about watching videos promoting terrorism.

The main body of the article is pretty incoherent and rambling; it never really clearly states what the law is actually about.

If you actually go read the linked BBC article[0], you'll find that what's happening is somewhat less alarming than the article would lead you to believe. From what I gather, a politician is attempting to increase the maximum sentence of an existing law from 10 to 15 years, and to apply it to streaming content rather than just downloaded content.

There are definitely free speech implications and concerns here, but it's not nearly as dire as the article would imply.

[0] https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-41479620

*Also, the subtext of the BBC article
> People who repeatedly view terrorist content online will face up to 15 years in prison, the home secretary has told the Conservative Party conference.
The blog post above adds little to the bbc article that it links to.. in fact the bbc article is clearer about what has changed -- it's not a new law (Terrorism Act 2000), and the change is from 10 years to 15 years, and it now applies to streaming terrorist videos (instead of just downloaded videos).

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-41479620

This article is also good:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/03/amber-rudd-v...
Be scared! The "Last Invention" is upon us.