skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A lot of comments make the argument that any extreme political correctness is exclusive to the bay area, not the US as a whole, or that Sam's experience is true in an "expat bubble" in China.

To which I submit as evidence "Art and China after 1989: Theater of the World", an art exhibition currently on display at the Guggenheim in New York City.

This retrospective of Chinese art had 3(!) works of art removed (ie, censored) from the exhibition because the content was perceived as morally reprehensible by some groups of new york animal rights activists.

Proof that at least along some avenues of discourse (what is allowed in art? when is animal suffering allowed? when is representation of a disturbing act that occurred in the past allowed?) the NYC progressive contingent is more conservative than the Chinese.

Note: This does not mean that China is a paradise of free speech. There are other avenues of discourse (ex political discourse) where this is not the case.

Note 2: They sell hot dogs outside the Guggenheim.

[0]: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2017/sep/26/guggenh...
Not actually Starbucks, but the provider. I'm guessing they're doing this all over the place with a bunch of coffee shops and hotels etc!
This is basically just entertainment (Fox News included) so they can do whatever they want. If this was healthcare, for example, it would require a bit more scrutiny IMO.
The most common question I get from someone who's used Google Analytics and wants to upgrade to more powerful tools is "Which ones should I try?"

I put this Product Hunt collection together to help new clickstream users get started with some of the most useful analytics services.

Full disclosure: I'm a dev on the Astronomer Clickstream platform [0] that routes events to various clickstream destinations. I spend a lot of time working with clickstream analytics services!

[0]: https://www.astronomer.io/clickstream/
The most powerful man on earth, Pope Paul V demanded Galileo silence his thoughts on heliocentrism. He was then submitted to the Roman Inquisition, found guilty, and imprisoned for the rest of his life. Somehow this is seen as comparable in Sam's mind to a reasonable debate about ethics (“If people live a lot longer it will be disastrous for the environment, so people working on this must be really unethical”).

Quite frankly, if you can't find the courage to have a reasonable debate about your ideas, you shouldn't be the one working on those ideas. If your ideas run contrary to public thoughts around ethics, perhaps you should move to a culture where your ethics more closely mirror theirs. Or more radically — listen to why people disagree!

This whole post comes off as someone who's realizing their ethics are mismatched with the culture they're living in, and instead of questioning themselves, demand that the rest of the culture shift to their views. In other words: let me be this asshole, because I deserve it!
My emoji turned out fine, but full access to keyboard data is a non-starter for me. Sorry.
Many of those big, rich companies (Google, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) are in favor of net neutrality.
I was tempted to not vote seeing as I live in Idaho, I don't even have anyone running for local/state seats I want to vote for (our state district had republicans running unopposed for house/senate) and though I hate the phrase my vote literally meant nothing in the federal elections last year.

I still did it, because I firmly believe it's my duty (and I personally would go so far as to say we should have Australia-style penalties for NOT voting) - though I did get to protest vote both Hillary and Trump since the latter was going to win my state anyway.
I agree, we're making the same general point -- it does seem crazy to ask someone to "ensure they hold no offensive opinions". So why, for example, should the opinions of the person who wants to speak their mind about the immorality of gay marriage get precedence over the opinions of the person who thinks they should be allowed to get married?
Unpopular opinion: Title II is not a great solution to Net Neutrality. The only thing I disklike is there isn't a better option already in place.

I would rather see the FTC address EULAs. If a company says, "we may from time-to-time limit your bandwidth" I think they should be on the hook to produce a report every month when and why they limited you. This is not much different than the report you get from your investments, or your cell phone carrier report when you place a call or send a text message.
Give yourself a candidate worth voting for.

Abstaining from voting is cowardly and non-committal. Your silent protest is worthless.
Please don't bring divisive politics into HN. Fwiw Ajit Pai was appointed to the FCC by Obama not Trump.
I'm in the opposite camp: I stopped using FB because all friends were posting pictures of their kids, family, trips, parties, whatever. I really don't understand how people can post such things to FB.

I don't care what their kids ate today or how they fell asleep. I don't care that they bought a new phone and now posting pictures of it. I think all that stuff is personal and shouldn't be exposed to the public.

But I wish I could open FB and read political and tech news (no fakes please).
Actually, the public has been convinced that regulation on ISPs is a good thing, and that repealing that regulation without replacing it with anything is a bad thing. And I think that's a pretty fair thing to think.
Interestingly, the 3rd party candidates last time around were absolutely worse than Trump and Clinton.
Sorry but the two are not correlated, as much as I'd like to agree.

Trump appointed Carr.
Obama appointed O'Rielly and Pai.

This one is on all of us. We let Congress become a swamp in the first place.
Care to explain why you think this is a good thing?
You're leaving out the part where A whips up a real mob and lynches somebody.

And what do you think has a stronger chilling effect: the possibility of being fired or the possibility of being murdered?
3 ways net neutrality repeal will change how you use the internet – VICE News
We live in an oligarchy, the will of the voters hasn't been relevant for a long time:

> Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746
Full text: Republican FCC member statements for repealing net neutrality
Republican legislators are pretty uniformly against net neutrality. The Republican public is not, with one recent poll showing 3 out of 4 Republicans familiar with the issue voicing opposition to the rollback of regulations. [1]

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/12/12...
We live in an electoral system. For almost all of the states of the U.S. it's actually factually correct that there's no difference for whom you vote in the Presidential elections. In many locations, it also doesn't matter who you vote for in Congressional ones thanks to gerrymandering drawing boundary lines around you before you even get to the polls.

We can discuss ideologically what the differences are between the parties, but as those of us in CA, NY, NJ, etc. well know - it's purely academic.

[edit:] Folks, it's a winner-take-all capital-E Electoral system in the vast majority of states, and in the vast majority of states, the demographic votes consistently in the same way. Thus very few states swing the entire Presidential election process, meaning that they matter. In California, for example, 3 million Democrats could have stayed in bed all day and not voted at all, and still it would have not touched the end result there.
Is this one of those things that is just never going to work? It seems like our system can't execute on things that are all-or-nothing. We shoot for the all, water it down with compromise, and then we're surprised when things fail.

This happens in many situations, such as public transit. Build half a subway line so that it goes to nowhere and it fails, thus getting ridiculed as a failure from the start. How are we supposed to accomplish anything big or complex in this system?
Why is Twitter the problem if a company fires an employee.

If I can just ignore Twitter (and I do) then Twitter mobs don't directly affect me. But if my management does things because of Twitter mobs (or anything else like that) we have a big problem.
Why did they solicit public feedback then? And why did they misrepresent public feedback and refuse to acknowledge that most people want net neutrality? Obviously they aren't beholden to what the public wants, but the latter is clearly scummy, is it not?
> "Infinite" exponential growth at the scale of the universe might be possible

Only if the speed of light turns out not to be the hard boundary that it appears to be as of now.

If humanity is bound by any maximum speed (e.g. c, the speed of light), the maximum accessible volume of space is a sphere with radius c * t, where t is the time spent exploring the universe. The volume of this sphere is O(t^3), which is very much not exponential.
I agree that a dependency on Facebook is a mixed benefit/deficit. There's a lot of infrastructure there that means you don't have to build it. The other side is that you don't control the next layer down from your app, if it changes, your app breaks and you are the one losing customers not Facebook. That's one of the big long term problems with a platform dependency, the customers are Facebook's customers not yours.
Because people voted for someone, doesn't mean they fully agree with the elected person's whole program. In an election you have only a few candidates for a large number of possible combinations of positions. If you mostly agree with republicans except on a few things, you're probably still going to vote republican.
The Rarity of Coconuts in Medieval England and Monty Python
"Hacking" involves subverting authentication systems, which is a type of fraud. When there is no authentication system there can be no "hacking", and the CFAA should not be applicable.

The data itself isn't LinkedIn's property (argued elsewhere), so they don't have control over it after it leaves their servers.

This is wandering... please decide whether you want to argue the article, the case, or hypothetical free coffee.
That's a tiny minority.

Lets face it: if you haven't made your profit in 5 years you never will and the loss will have been written of.
Federal Communications Commission repeals net neutrality rules
If we stage a nation-wide boycot of Amazon, Walmart.com, and a few other big retailers (and stop using Google, Bing et al) I can almost guarantee it that they will move mountains to bring back net neutrality. You have to get the big corporations a profit motive to get anything done in this country.
>Well the jail comparison is really far away.

People in the west, right now, are going to jail for expressing oppinions. Right now those oppinions are universally seen as bad (e.g. rascism) but does that justify going to jail?

>boycott one probably isn't so far but who cares? If people band together to boycott someone they view as unethical that doesn't seem wrong to me.

You don't find it bad that a bunch of people, based on their own non-objective oppinion get to ruin someones business and/or career? I feel like I'm talking to a Hitler youth right now. If the person is behaving objectively unethically, that's one thing but this is not at all settled.

>Or we're dangerous in large numbers huh?

Yes, when you become a voting block and start outlawing thought, as is already happening. It's distasteful thought at the moment, but this entire discussion shows that things that are potentially great can be targetted.

>Usually the idea that provokes this kind of response is an idea which involves hurting some one or some group.

Not in the case of life extention. The objections are based on people assuming the worst possible case there but the evidence I see suggests the opposite.

>The idea that I can work towards something which hurts a lot of people and not be criticized for it?

Which is not what we're talking about. Only in your own mind. But here is the issue again, as soon as you decide, on your own, that something is "harmful" for however you decide that, now you get to do whatever you want.

>Maybe the someone else is convinced, maybe not, that's called a conversation.

When is shut down when you start off by claiming anyone who believes what you saying is unethical. Do people not understand how to think anymore?
People in the south don't think about San Francisco at all. Only the Fox News anchors based in New York but charged with representing the politics of the south care about San Francisco.
Exactly why I moved to NYC after 10 years in the Mission.

It’s an elegant way to avoid dominant cliques, tribalism, etc. of which I already had my fill. No one can truly own or define the Culture or the Right Way to live in New York, it’s simply too big and too diverse for that.
Isn't it because this is required by the Administrative Procedures Act?
the problem is politicians (mostly local) who sell municipal monopolies in exchange for donations at a time when other parts of the world allow multiple companies to build/lease the dumb pipes to great success (like South Korea). its pure corruption. thats why places like florida (the sunshine state) don't use solar. Government backed monopolies.

we should be investigating these corrupt arrangements (given that the existence of obviously better options suggests fraud and abuse) and forcing the government to undo its shitty decisions. (buy back/sell if necessary) the opposite would be to submit the internet to regulatory capture under NN and the FCC (which effectively killed TV and radio - forcing private cable and streaming content creators to give us the few uncensored options we DO have)
A new Operating System
doppler labs tried to do that and they 've shut down (https://hereplus.me/)
Definitely, some ideas should fall out of the Overton window, and I'm glad that they do, even if there should be any truth to them (e.g., re: possible genetic inferiority/superiority of some groups -- whether true or not, it falls outside the window today, and that's a very very good thing).

I disagree as to inequality. You just can't get equality; get over it. But life extension can still be problematic. E.g., life extension w/o extension of working years is a tremendous burden on everyone else, especially if such life extension is/becomes low-cost, and the only way out is to automate more and more so that we might provide for enormous elderly populations. On the other hand, we'll end up automating as much as possible, so it may be that this is a non-issue. Life extension w/ extension of working years would certainly be better. Another issue is whether we can correspondingly extend fertility years, otherwise we might risk negative population growth (which might or might not be a good thing anyways).
I agree. This is the internet, after all. The first question is: Is this worth my time and attention?
A lot of questionable stuff happened before 2015 and net neutrality was put in place to prevent more of that in the future. Thinking that it will be eternally 2015 is optimistic.
> This situation has a lot of parallels for me to the situation they faced with IBM and the G5.

That's a great observation, and having witnessed the PowerPC -> Intel migration I'm disappointed I didn't make it myself. Both Motorola and IBM, who were supplying Power CPUs to Apple, sold off their microprocessor divisions after a litany of manufacturing difficulties. IIRC, that was what drove Apple to abandon PowerPC in the first place. It would be ironic if Intel, having benefitted so greatly from the manufacturing shortfalls of past competitors, would find itself in a similar situation.
Due to the way contemporary news media works, I think that Democrats (for the time being) have rapidly depreciating political capital after any election. Last time they regulated health care, despite knowing it would cost them many seats in the coming election. To say that 'they had a chance' I think ignores a few important facts about the contemporary US electorate.
However you feel about the system, it's the system that exists. Refusing to make a choice in the system also has consequences, whether you like or want them. This action by the FCC is one of them.
The fun part is when this goes to court and the veil of secrecy is lifted.
Read the Democratic FCC members’ statements against repealing net neutrality
Solid post and long due.

However, judging from a recent Y Combinator post (https://blog.ycombinator.com/13-startup-ideas/) on 13 startup ideas from YC alumni and staff for startup ideas that they wish would exist, Sam should start right in front of his own door regarding "working on less ideas for the 1%".
The fear of Non-Net-Neutrality goes far beyond the usual "there's only two ISPs where I life and they both offer the same deals".

It's something in completely its own category of nefariousness because they could be as anticompetitive as they want, and the market could not solve it.

That's because the injured party isn't their customers, who could take their business elsewhere, or at least loudly complain on the internet (if they have any).

It's someone not part to the ISP<->customer contract, namely that unknown video startup in Nantucket, or the e2e-encrpyted messenger app your friend Lauren is working on. They're going to be forced into paying ISPs if they ever want to reach the ISPs' customers. And there's no risk to the ISP, because nobody is going to change ISPs for some startup they've never heard about.

The result could be ISPs capturing almost every cent of value created by new startups. We will also have a fractured internet, because small companies will have to negotiate contracts with every single ISP. Also want to reach those 500,000 people in eastern Montana? That'll cost you $2,000 per week.

Anyone not living on the US coasts, and people in other countries, will constantly run into "HTTP Error 469: go suck a bag of.."
I imagine the iMac Pro will be a great machine for a lot of video/animation professionals, and at least some developers, even though I'm not sure I'd call this a "love letter" to them. It's a very powerful machine with an amazing display that takes up very little space.

And, yeah, I do think Apple has in recent years been seriously underestimating the value of internal expandability, but I also think critics may overestimate that value to some degree. A lot of people really do buy whole new computers every four to six years; I'm not convinced "but this one is a really expensive computer!" is a definitive rebuttal in the iMac Pro's case. It seems like it'd be pretty easy to put together an iMac Pro that's going to last you past that six-year limit--and, let's face it, if you're in the market for a computer that could easily top $7K in a midrange configuration, you're probably at an income level where doing that again in six or seven years isn't going to kill you.

And, of course: we have yet to see what the 2018 Mac Pro is going to be like; the signs are that it's going to be closer to what people who don't like the closed box of the iMac would want.

(My biggest kvetch about the iMac Pro is that it seems kind of petty not to have user upgradeable RAM. Maybe there's a design reason for that, but it just feels like awfully low-hanging fruit, given that the "non-pro" 27" iMacs allow this.)
I think the reinvigorating the opposition thing already happened when Obama was elected. That is how we got the Tea Party and how we got Trump. The Democratic party that Clinton ran under wasn't that different than the party of her husband. The Republican Party of Trump is drastically different than the party of GW Bush.
> but I don't regret moving to London. Not one bit.

The UK, along with all other commonwealth countries, has no equivalent rules to repeal or support.
I believe this is the Stratechery article Pai quoted and used for justification of the rollback.

https://stratechery.com/2017/pro-neutrality-anti-title-ii/
There's StackOverflow for code that doesn't work. The idea is that looking at code that doesn't work is essentially programming not reviewing.
Will the "new walled internet" have a better user interface than America Online?
Thanks for the nice compliment!
>Now that NN has unfortunately been repealed, we can cue in Congress to act.

lol
Ask HN: How do you know if you are productive or busy?
Do you have a way of distinguishing between busy work and productive work? Which are you doing?

This is more complicated than it first seems: Sometimes what you are doing can be useful, but it is best done by someone else.
Really funny when people in a democracy believe in majority rule.
Oh man, this analogy could be carried much further.
I agree with that. "Don't go around pissing off co-workers" is a sensible rule. But it's also our responsibility to not look for reasons to be offended. If you ask me about something I'm not going to lie. But I'm not going to shove it in your face either, if I think it might offend.
Don't give up. Our democracy isn't working properly. Too many are complacent.
But ... why? You can read political and tech news anywhere why read it on Facebook? The only thing I want to see on Facebook are the things I can't see elsewhere which are: personal updates and local events.
"at its worst" (and yes, it is government at its worst in the lack of competition protection)
Ush: A convenient Python library for invoking external commands
Sorry about that. Upon re-reading I see that you did specify developers. I will add that most of the developers I work with don't like to mess around with their work computer much... I'm sure at home they like to customize and do their own thing but I doubt that's a specific market Apple is trying to cater directly to.
>if you don't agree with me you're an obvious troll
> our democracy isn't working properly

Democracy doesn't work through public declarations, it works through elections. One year ago, the states chose Donald Trump as president, knowing they he would end Net Neutrality [1]. If a population wants to send a different message, they must do it in the next election [2].

[1] https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/53260835850816716...
[2] https://swingleft.org/
It's not that the state of the internet pre-2015 was a disaster but, prior to the 2015 reclassification, we were already starting to see abuses of net neutrality. When ISP's and telecoms started to block VoIP traffic because it cut into their phone services, it was unprecedented because no one had really prioritized data based on the content up until that point. Once that started happening and more companies caught on to it, it became a point of contention. While the 2015 reclassification wasn't a perfect solution, it did encapsulate the gist of the argument by saying that, like phone calls, we can't prioritize data based on content.
Didn't they take one of their standard, woefully underpowered 14" business class laptops, change almost nothing aside from the keyboard, and then call it a special edition?
There is nearly a decade of precedent for complaint-free use of the amzn.com domain here on HN[0].

The amzn.com link I provided is as much an Amazon link as your expanded version (both domains are owned by Amazon[1]).

I choose not to use the official, shortest a.co option (growing in popularity here[2][3]) because it obscures a tiny bit more context (the Amazon Standard Identification Number is usually recognizable as such).

[0] https://hn.algolia.com/?query=amzn.com&type=comment&sort=byD...

[1] http://blog.go2.me/2009/04/amazon-has-integrated-url-shorten...

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14162832

[3] https://hn.algolia.com/?query=:%2F%2Fa.co%2F&type=comment&so...
It is often required to solicit feedback before a rule change. Those in charge of the rule change are not generally required to follow the feedback.

The direct feedback mechanism is voting for those who determine the composition of the rule-making bodies.