skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well, they're calling it hate speech. He doesn't talk about any particular ethnic group (not even Jews, despite what his detractors might say).

He's against IIRC having trans children take puberty blockers, which might be an issue, but TBH an argument can be made for the well-being of the child.

No, I think this is an issue of twitter-mob pressure against Itunes after Spotify announced they would keep Infowars content. And there are, AFAIK very few people who care one way or the other. It's more a slim minority of people who hate Alex Jones' views and wish to have his content blocked much the same way trolls are trying to take out Rick and Morty.
> Nor is LGBT

SCOTUS has ruled discriminating against a gay man to be akin to discriminating against him for his sex. Sex is undoubtedly a protected class. The argument is, roughly, that the person would face no prejudice if they were a woman marrying a man. But because they are a man marrying one, the treatment changes. It’s a bit convoluted, but it makes sense.
So your theory is that most people want supposedly-benevolent fascism, rather than liberty and freedom?
I liked Jackie Luo's take at the time -- linked in the OP [0] -- which posits that there is not "a clear-cut, unambiguous victim and perpetrator in this narrative".

I didn't catch any of this controversy as it was apparently happening back in April. Reading this article and VICE's, and the scattered tweets at the time, I'm still a little confused about the timeline. But in any case, it seems like there are 2 discrete conflicts: VICE vs. Wu, and Wu vs. Jeong. And the former conflict seems to be what caused Wu material injury (such as the Patreon ban), whereas Jeong's part feels more tangential, e.g. the insult on top of injury.

That is not to say I think Wu is right or wrong to be angry at Jeong and angry at the NYT for hiring her. But some people tweeting on this seem to believe Jeong had a much more direct role in the troubles Wu had after the VICE story, other than being someone who -- as Wu sees it -- piled on Wu in a misguided defense of VICE.

[0] https://twitter.com/jackiehluo/status/982087205907607552
I Hire Software Developers. Your Resume Is the Reason for Not Getting Interviews
Because that's just an example. He has plenty of objectionable content.
This how I feel about Uber Eats drivers in my local McDonalds. There’s usually 6-8 at a time, so at busy times there are often not any tables spare.
I support the term "freedom of speech" as it refers to the Constitution being used correctly.
I agree with most of the comments here. Private entities such as Apple should be free to work with whomever they want on their platforms.

However, i feel if this was some left-leaning podcast, the same people supporting this removal would be outraged.
Apple's first ever dual-SIM iPhone may not launch in India
But that imprint would be static. It would be a nightmare to go from a static imprint to a time series of some kind. Even in the article, they were analysing video, whereby the diffs from one moment to the next could be captured. I bet that as the length of video decreases (become a static picture in the limit), so would the useful output from their algorithm.
Ohh well then basically you are saying no one should be allowed to make public statements that could cause a revolution. Why cant you feel your own stupidity!
> So you support the idea that Verizon and AT&T should be free to block whatever content they wish, correct?

Not necessarily. Apple is a non-monopoly making a judgement about their corner of a decentralised protocol. That’s quite different from an ISP, where many Americans have little or no choice. Particularly when said ISPs have often received lawful monopolies and government subsidies. Context matters. Finally, my ISP doesn’t have terms of use in respect of content; Apple does.
Yes, and everyone is free to criticize Apple for not supporting freedom of speech, even though if they are not obliged to do so.
Disagree. There may be a short term bump, but long term it would be damaging. Tech workers are value creators. Having a hub of talent like SV increases value and salaries for everyone here because it attracts companies here, increasing demand along with supply. If there’s no talent in SV, there’s also no companies here. They’ll just move overseas to where the talent lives.
Although I'm happy seeing this kind of content removed, I'm really afraid of a future where private corporations have such a definitive influence of free speech. They set their own rules, and it's dangerous.
Updated my comment. It's possible for it to hurt, but that's an unusual outcome. The marriage usually helps in Canada even when the spouse is less qualified, unlike Trump's proposal.

[Edited to remove inaccurate info about the 40 points]

You may also be interested in Quebec's system, which as of August 2 makes children purely positive to the skilled worker points system there, and never removes points for spouses.

(The marriage only mildly raises Quebec's approval threshold, usually outweighed by the spouse's qualifications even if far lesser than the principal applicant.)

Source for the Quebec comments: the specific way I immigrated to Canada was via Quebec. I have friends who want to immigrate on both sides of the provincial border, so I continue to pay close attention to both systems.
In my area, I have access to Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and many other smaller ISPs. Since there is no ISP monopoly in my area, should these ISPs be allowed to block content?
Probably be down-voted for this, but I find it funny, lots of people here support Apple. No matter how trash the podcast author was, I'd imagine there'd be an outrage if this were a move by Google.

I'm not a fan of either, but interesting to observe the polarized reactions depending on the corporate in question.
I found that link in this twitter thread: https://twitter.com/IrelandSkycam/status/1025765631013076992

Recent fires have made some of these signs visible again.
Sorry Alex Jones speaks out against parents giving puberty blockers to babies and this gets him removed from Apple.
Well you can't have it both ways now can you.

Verizon, AT&T et al according to the US Supreme Court have the right to freedom of speech just as much as you do. So yes they are free to block whatever content they want.

And you have the right to not support them, campaign against them or build your own ISP. But your right to freedom of speech shouldn't stop others right to their freedom of speech.
Apple is not a private entity, its publicly traded company that has a monopoly.
And won’t the proponents say this is a feature as it keeps them off other instances?
I am confused about something that seems very basic, and hoping somebody can help me out with this.

I have always supported left politics, and I think I understand the basics of supply-and-demand economics. If immigrants come to the US looking for work instead of bringing work, there should be a higher supply of labor, driving the low-end pay-rate down. Given that the low-end rate has gone down significantly throughout the 3 decades that I have been alive, how do we on the left reason that immigration is not a factor? Or is it?

Also related: I thought public resources and the labor market were the most central reasons for nations having immigration policies. Am I wrong about that?

My parents voted for Trump, (or we might say they voted against Clinton). They have since decided to support Bernie Sanders next time, but they point to immigration’s effect on the labor supply as the reason to keep the border closed.

I would like to think we can address this with far more dignified solutions than what is being popularly proposed, but first things first; what am I missing?
Your assertion that the problems of H1B visas outweigh the benefits is pure conjecture and, for the most part, not supported by facts.
> I disagree, classical philosophy is what sparked the enlightenment

The rediscovery of classical philosophy spurred the Renaissance, the Enlightenment was later and, though it built opon the Renaissance, not really directly stimulated by classical philosophy.
Shutting out skilled, educated immigrants doesn't magically make natives more skilled nor better educated.

Take a look at the UK and Brexit, they're having problems hiring enough health care professionals precisely because of their desired post-EU immigration policies. This before they even apply any new rules!
Sarah’s role was basically as a Canadian or Korean descent, providing advice to Vice that publishing rumours from 4chan and Reddit regarding a Chinese national’s sexual orientation, sex life, or relationship status would be harmless.

This, after Naomi had explicitly advised Vice that discussion of her sexuality and relationship status were absolutely out of bounds.

Vice does not comment on the sexuality or relationship status of male makers they interview.
In a lot of non-tech business, they would probably not award credit. Some would even sue you for even implying that their "perfect" brand could be vulnerable.
it is a side account of my main account.

commenting on climate change is risky.
Good for Apple. It's terrifying that we need to rely on corporations rather than our elected representatives to make the right choices, though.
The article is absolutely wrong. It states Canadian immigration scores you out of 67 points, that system has been phased out in 2017, before this article was written.

Also, Canada absolutely gives weightage to your spouse's age, English/French skills, education etc. up to 40 points.
Sorry, but was Sarah involved in the reporting or publishing of this article? She did not work for VICE at the time.
A poor kid in the US Midwest isn't being held back by a Chinese PhD candidate in the coastal city when the latter can help local companies grow and acquire capital thus facilitating the hiring of locals not just for the company but for the surrounding economy.

The argument is clearly stated in the article. And your assertion about opportunities does not really align with our understanding of immigration policies.
> not even Jews, despite what his detractors might say

He’s talked extensively about the Jewish mafia. He promoted violence against the made-up “Pizzagate” B.S. and only backed down because Texan libel law is particularly stern. I support Alex Jones’ right to speak, but I don’t think—particularly in the era of the Internet—Apple should support him.
Skeleton in cylinder
Fox News is problematic, may be even extreme (Sean Hannity et al) but I would not put them in the same league as InfoWars. At least not as long as Shepard Smith gets airtime there.

See also https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHjFS5f1IT0
Ignorant here. How do you take an already trained model and execute it elsewhere? Isn’t the training phase part of the whole (ongoing) simulation?
I think Naomi Wu is trying to protect herself from being attacked by conservative Chinese trolls on the internet who can draw the attention of Chinese companies who will censor her to appease the Chinese govt. which doesn't like scandalous content related to sexuality, etc to be broadcast on public media or likely the Chinese govt. will call for her content to be censored or shut down for sexual or illegal content (Remember technically using/blogging on Twitter and Youtube in China is a grey zone, as firstly its banned in China but you can do it quietly but if you get found out you're saying stuff the Chinese govt. doesn't like, you can be shut down. Its a grey zone because I think the rules depend on what you're saying and I think you are evaluated by individual groups of monitors or something because even Chinese state television has an official youtube channel they update).

Seen it happen before with a popular web series depicting gay love:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addicted_(web_series)

http://time.com/4236864/china-gay-drama-homosexuality/

that got two actors banned from appearing on screen.

Scandalous Chinese rappers have also been censored in media and caused a varying degree of hip hop culture to be banned on Chinese media (although still alive and well on the web):

https://www.scmp.com/culture/music/article/2142444/chinas-hi...

Basically if Naomi Wu is seen depicting values that the Chinese govt. doesn't like (like criminality, sexuality, traitorous behaviour, drugs, discrimination, democratic/human rights, etc.), they will censor her and tell the web to shut her down. And then companies won't work with her and every message she posted will be taken down in seconds and she will stay home all day scared and frustrated.
That's called a false equivalence. And this is not a "theory" its facts on the ground.

People have spoken with their actions. Facebook, Google, Youtube, Instagram, Apple etc etc continue to grow, prosper and not be subject to any major criticism whilst still happily removing content.
Not to mention that a significant portion of the Vice article was based on rumours and scuttlebutt from 4chan and Reddit.

The article was very clearly a hit piece intended to portray Naomi as a fraud because as far as Vice, Motherboard or Koebler are concerned pretty women can’t be makers.
Apple does not have a monopoly on podcast indexing and it won’t become true no matter how many times you repeat it.
woah... some partisan scientists with a statistical
model ran it a few times ??

thats how we got in this mess in the first place.

with a hot summer we are at least talking about something concrete and measurable
Exactly. If you really care about being competitive, invest in education and social services. Then the locals can compete effectively for high value jobs.
You might also enjoy:
- Baobabs.com aka Le Jardin Naturel
- RarePalmSeeds.com
- PalmTalk.org
- Palmpedia.net
Apple isn't a public utility. It does not maintain iTunes as a public service, nor does it have any sort of monopoly over podcast distribution. It would be very strange to regulate it as such. (To be clear, internet access is not regarded as a public utility in the US, although I think I lean heavily in that direction.)
I love much of the stuff Vice creates and Sarah Jeong is a important voice I follow. But it seems both could not see past the appearance of Naomi Wu, could not understand her circumstances and putting her at risk to make a minor point in a story.
Again, I have mentioned this in different threads. H1B isn't just for SV. There's way more companies in US like automotive industry that needs multidisciplinary engineers (mechanical, controls, signal processing, programming, active system knowledge). It's just impossible to find people. My team has about 3 empty vacancies with job postings everywhere, we just can't find people with skills (I am on H1B, there aren't enough people in many fields) stop applying H1B = cheap tech jobs logic.

Also, the Masters degree I pursued (in mechanical engineering - Dynamics/Vibrations/Acoustics) had barely a couple of American kids vs ~8 foreign kids.
If the entire value a tech worker creates is properly captured by their salary, sure.

But if that were the case then no one would bother with spending the insane amounts of money it costs to get qualified foreign labor.

Talent is global and the difference a skilled individual adds to a company has a multiplicative effect.
I'm not really certain how to respond to this viewpoint of yours.

You seem to be under the impression that such a safe space 1) can exist and 2) would be beneficial.

I'm going to simply point out that such a space cannot exist. People will think things, and those things will eventually leak out. There are very real evolutionary-biological reasons for all of those things and mans nature is not so easy to change.

As for whether such a space would be beneficial, I hold that it would not. It may be beneficial to have something akin to it as part of child rearing, gradually alleviated as the child gains maturity, but the dark nasty side of humanity cannot be eliminated. It can only be sublimated and disciplined. Thus, to eliminate speech simply because it offends your sensibilities is to ensure that you are blindsided as the nasty things metastasize into a cascade of pent-up Id.

And then where will you be? On your knees in front of the undealt with, undisciplined Id, simply because rather than have a dialogue with it, you chose to stuff it into a box.
It's all much ado about nothing anyways. 85,000 new H1 visas a year for a population of 330 million? Give me a break. Even if these all went to Wipro it wouldn't even be worth thinking twice about. And the refugee intake is only 49,000 a year. An absolute disgrace.
> Auto cars can also drive away from expensive parking when not in use.

Driving away is, of course, not standing still. That increases the cost, but, perhaps more importantly, increased latency (or, rather, jitter).

They need not be stored in the most expensive, densest areas, but, for those who want to get rid of car ownership, that non-zero cost (especially if borne by the public with free on-street parking) isn't likely one they're willing to ignore.

> about $0.50 per hour.

A car sitting idle for 9 hours per day and averages 30mph while driving adds 1 cent per mile. A car sitting idle for 18 hours adds 5 cents per mile.

The former may be almost nothing, but the latter isn't.

> Almost nothing compared to paying a driver.

I still disagree, but that's just semantics.
I'm not sure I really understood this - a mixture of skimming and the author implying things without stating then directly.

The author suggests that Vice misled her in early talks, gathered information about her that should've been off limits for the story but shared it anyway despite her pleas for them not to. My first read of this was that she's gay and was concerned how that would look to a Chinese audience and Vice exploited that for attention.

I skimmed the Vice article too - https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/3kjqdb/naomi-wu-s... and that didn't really seem to be it. I have to confess I couldn't understand what she objected to in the Vice article. However, as the author writes about the Vice editors, I'm not in any position to understand what is or isn't concerning to share for a Chinese woman with a large social media following living in China.

Without really understanding what the disagreement is I have to withhold my judgment. However, if I'm ever in a position where Vice would want to interview me I'd probably turn them down after reading this purely out of caution.

The complaint about Sarah Jeong seems a bit more clear - Jeong dismissed the author's concerns claiming to be able to evaluate them fairly because they were both Asian women. Jeong's perspective though is as an ethnic Korean who has lived in the US pretty much her entire life (moved to the US at age 3) which is clearly a very different perspective than the author who is a Chinese citizen.

Given what else we know about Jeong I don't think it's that surprising that she's insensitive about race.
You just made a claim too without any results let alone sources for those results.
The definition of "freedom of speech" is "the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint" (Oxford Dictionary). It does not say anything about the 1st Amendment.
> Since there is no ISP monopoly in my area, should these ISPs be allowed to block content?

You cherry-picked one point. Taken together, Apple’s lack of monopoly status, terms of use and lack of an explicit history of subsidies and markets exclusively granted by fiat make the First Amendment less applicable to it than e.g. Verizon.

In the cases where customers dinged ISPs for throttling, it came down to the ISPs having marketed “Internet access,” not some convoluted expansion of the First Amendment to private actors.

I believe in encouraging a public forum for the exchange of ideas. But I also believe in private citizens’—including corporations’—rights to decide with what they’re associated. In this particular case, we have someone who serially relays emotionally-charged and unambiguously-false information to his viewers. Not going to defend him unless a government tries to shut him down.
I don't think any of the 20 odd people I find interesting enough to follow belong to my instance. Nor was I aware of a 'local feed'. I see all instances that interact with mine, and their feeds.

It may be harder to find you on your own, unless you're reaching out to others... And frankly that just sounds like network effects.

People are more likely to 'discover' you if you interact with celebrities on other social sites.
> It doesn't seem to mesh all that well with the other narrative of Sarah as an anti-white racist...

People's motivations are rarely one-dimensional.

I don't know Sarah Jeong, but she could easily hate white people on one hand, and have that overridden by a feud with a non-white person.

I've read a few articles now, and I still have no idea what to think of this all.
Sounds about right. I've only met a handful of devs in crypto. They were all in college or recently graduated individuals. I don't know if they were getting paid in cash or tokens, but it was hinted at that they were being paid, at least in part, under the table.

Most of the crypto workers I've met in the last six months have been mostly freshly minted MBAs or marketing people with tons of money to burn.
I had a conversation about this with a colleague, he uses /source since he said long time ago some virus scanners would skip this directory by default, not sure how accurate that is now, I became curious after that conversation to find where other people would store theirs.
Kind of specific, but I find that in the React world, Enzyme is worse than useless for the same reasons as mentioned in this article. The tests you end up writing just verify your XML (which generally has little to no value). Even if there is some tricky logic which needs testing, you can pretty much always just refactor your code a little bit and just use standard unit tests.
Would you say the same thing about e-mail and SMTP?
High EC Coco Peat Blocks Supplier
One of the things I don't understand is why Wu agreed to participate in this story at all? Surely the extra exposure from an international feature article -- even as glowing as the VICE article turned out to be -- is going to draw scrutiny from Chinese authorities?
And won't detractors say that this is how the mainstream media got the 2016 US presidential election predictions so wrong? https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/10/what-...
Can you tell me more about it? I’m curious to as why McD let’s you sleep in the restaurant, here they would just kick you out.
I am actually quite happy with Sympy, it sometimes needs a helping hand but :
- it can solve the equations that I need solved
- it is open source and free
- it is a python library (I alreaddy know the syntax and it can be plugged in a python codebase)
- I can export the results in Latex, C++, Haskell, ... (nice bonus)
>Jewish Mafia

There's a Jewish Mafia?

>Pizzagate

He talked about it, sure, but if you can find me where he promotes violence against Alefantis then I'll eat my hat.
A different approach to decoding vibrations into speech, involving a laser microphone: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_microphone
Is this loss?
You seem to assume that foreign labour can only be used if imported to the US. That is not the case, consider remote talent.
Another, related, question: at https://github.com/amark/gun/blob/master/README.md we can read that:

"Distributed - GUN is peer-to-peer by design, meaning you have no centralized database server to maintain or that could crash. This lets you sleep through the night without worrying about database DevOps - we call it "NoDB". From there, you can build decentralized, federated, or centralized apps."

And then goes on to show how to boot an instance on heroku etc. But is a production setup documented anywhere? I'd assume one would want three server instances (to allow taking one down for upgrades) - to make sure clients can write data to a managed instance, in order to make sure data is backed up etc?

Apologies if I've overlooked an obvious documentation link.
Are average attention spans decreasing?