skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Destroy them - all of them, by whatever means necessary. Get arrested, go to prison. Get threatened, beaten up, publicly shamed, financially ruined, digitally mauled. Become an online and offline pariah - whatever, it doesn't matter at this point what happens to your precious self. Destroy Amazon, Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. They will be the downfall of us all, if they haven't already succeeded in accomplishing this work already. Actively fight back against these new governments
Orion's parachute system [pdf]
Or you could argue that the current climate of world peace was brought on by multiple currents including:
1- An acceleration of technology development that changed the sharing of resources to go from zero sum to a positive sum situation.
2- That nuclear weapons and other WMD have created a MAD situation, guaranteeing only minor skirmishes by super powers.
3- A variety of other factors including the integration of global supply chains, women's voting rights, etc.

But please, don't let these factors get in the way of your narrative of American exceptionalism.
And thanks to the 13th amendment, once found guilty of a crime, are legal to be slaves. Again.
I agree about Afghanistan, but both wars? There was a ton of opposition to Iraq. Not enough, but a lot.
John Snow – Father of Epidemiology
It's a solved problem and not hard.

Most brick and mortar chains in the UK have a buying policy that requires you to prove your goods are fit for purpose before they'll put it on the shelves and risk hurting their brand. I imagine most of Europe operates similarly.

They will generally require suppliers to send examples of the range before being allowed in store, and they will test or examine a representative selection first. They'll probably do basic safety and legality tests too. As a new supplier you can expect your products to be subject to random checks over the coming months. After a period of good track record you will become a trusted supplier and subject to fewer, or perhaps no, checks.

Amazon should do the same. That they are big or that they are online is no excuse not to.
Switzerland: Welcome to the Drone Valley
See here:
http://www.counsyl.com/

But, about 30 genomic mutations are spontaneous every generation. I have one that causes brittle bone disease. So, just knowing the parents' genomic profile and screening out with IVF will not be sufficient.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3322360/
I have on the order of terabytes of digital photos from QuickTake through Nikon's various Ds to the Sony A9, with various pocketables and all the generations of iPhone along the way. I have a quarter million iCloud Photos images, 30K on Flickr, etc.

So this looks fantastic! Subscribed ... very willing to be a beta tester and provide detailed feedback.

However, the problem I'm finding is a small percentage of file corruption from all the storage upgrading and copying over the years, meaning no given file can be 100% trusted to be a valid original.

I haven't found any file or photo deduplication tools with the savvy to figure out which of two identically sized and timestamped files is the least corrupt image.

In many cases, a second generation is viewable while the original is present but unusable. This most often applies to very old Aperture libraries that got copied from NAS to NAS over the years, where a "master" may be corrupt but it still has a viewable generated high res cache as a JPEG.

Implication is the "structure" of the image files themselves has to be analyzed ... is this an uncorrupted viewable image?

Note that with JPEGs and various flavors of RAW, renderers will still happily open and display the file but what humans view can evidence bit rot. Conversely, some files are detected as corrupt by file examination, but can be viewed without problem.

To offer "principle of least loss" for mass merge of diverse collections, this would have to be figured out.
Isn’t this part of what put Krispy Kreme into bankruptcy?
I agree that we shouldn't claim votes were changed without evidence, but you are forgetting about the DNC hack and subsequent email leaks.
I assume by CA you mean SV. It's wildly inappropriate to generalize SV experiences to the US as a whole. It's about as applicable to the reality most people live in as Floridaman stories.
I cant find this interview anywhere. I only see the far left leaning media sites reporting on it. No evidence this statement was actually made by John Ehrlichman. Do you have any?
The first thing I would try in that situation is to input the first 16 characters of that randomly generated password.

I've stumbled upon login fields that just dismissed everything after the 16th character a few times.
Those on the Outer Banks among first to get orders to leave
> No idea what do to about the reviews,

They need to patrol the sources for fake reviews (facebook groups, etc) and perform sting operations to catch the sellers who solicit them. It shouldn't be too hard, a simple Facebook search finds hundreds of groups and thousands of solicitations. Once you identify a seller that does this, you ban them from Amazon, as well as everyone who's given their products a fake review (for the reviewers, it should probably be a three strikes thing before they're banned, since a lot of them seem to just like free stuff).

> but the first step to the counterfeit goods problem is simple: once you've received X complaints about a counterfeit product, stop selling the product.

> Continuing to sell a product for which there are numerous and credible indications that they are counterfeit is borderline fraud.

I'd say the second step is to roll back many of Amazon's practices that make counterfeiting harder to detect, for instance how they can commingle inventory between sellers (if those sellers weren't careful when they made their listing). That makes it impossible for the sellers to have meaningful reputation scores, since bad-actors can sell their counterfeits through honest-actor storefronts (and vice versa).

The third step is to implement better supply chain management and vetting of suppliers. Not everyone should be able to set up a marketplace store and sell any product. There needs to be effective vetting of sellers and it should be hard enough to setup a marketplace account they can't just create a new one when their last one is banned. There should also be especially stringent vetting around listings for frequently fake and counterfeit products, like SD cards.

The fourth step is to implement active counterfeit and fake product detection (through test purchases). If a particular item is too often fake or counterfeited, Amazon should ban it from the marketplace and only sell inventory directly sourced from the original manufacturer.

None of these things should be too hard for a company with Amazon's resources to effectively implement. The fact that it hasn't says that these problems aren't a priority for it.
Yes there is enough food in location A but we would have to transport that food to where it is needed. That costs money, there is spoilage etc. Who pays that cost? Obviously only the people with the money to pay it can pay it. So lets say we make people in the west pay (involuntarily) to ship excess food to other places. If you make it voluntary then nobody would pay it, since it is essentially voluntary now and nobody pays it.

All that would happen is those other places would become dependent on the free food we send them, and certain of their domestic industries would be destroyed as they couldn't compete with the cost of free food being dumped into their economy.

Also here domestically excess food would no longer be produced as if you don't produce any excess you don't have to pay the cost of shipping it, or doing anything with it. Everything would become "just in time" or made immediately 1 to 1 with a specific request. So the post scarcity impression we have now would go away pretty fast.

So I don't think we actually are post scarcity with regards to almost anything currently. Efficiency is very high I would say, so high, and we're so productive that we occasionally end up with wasted resources caused by poorly estimating demand.
It is very easy to get bad results in medical studies. Placebo effects are surprisingly powerful, and you need double-blinding to get rid of them. Beyond that, you have the typical slew of statistical fraud that can be committed: ignoring bad results (meaning that published results are more likely to be statistically flukes themselves), p-hacking, insufficient sample size, etc.

A proper drug approval trial process is one of the best ways to get statistically valid results. It is also horrifically expensive--you're looking at >$100 million for a phase III trial, whether or not you succeed (this is the main reason drugs are so expensive: you're paying for phase III failures). The studies you see are generally of much poorer quality, and most people who are interested in the subject tend to have a result they are aiming for, which increases the risks of statistical fraud greatly.
Counterfeit problem? Stop co-mingling inventory - then you can track what inventory went to which customer and easily peg down which sources are selling counterfeits by looking at the reviews.
I genuinely doubt we have the political will to do it. There are a large cohort of people who know they’ll be dead before these issues come to a head, and they have reverted to a “protect what’s mine” mode.
You see a similar thing with student loans. You can't make any reasonable system work when you set the requirements to be that everyone should be able to afford to go to college and free market lenders are the ones responsible for making that happen. I imagine that the first condition is one that most people agree one. So instead of making college cheaper for those people who can't afford it, we decided that we need to entice more lenders to make loans that are financially unsustainable. The end result is we need to guarantee the loans that private businesses give 18 year olds. You see it time and time again where there is a easier and more logical solution that the US refuses to implement because it is a little bit socialist. Instead we go with a more complicated and less practical solution that is more pro-business.
The other fun parallel with Rome is its expansionist nature - Rome was strongest as it grew and once it ran out of space to expand its basis for economic growth disappeared as well. Now that may be chicken and egg, but as long as Rome kept growing it was OK. I feel like that nicely reflects the stock market - the moment the economic expansion stops is the minute that things are going to get dicey.
Not sure why you're being downvoted as I think the empiric evidence supports the position that drug laws (and many others) are selectively enforced on the basis of socioeconomic status and race.

Cocaine is a schedule 3 stuff. Cannabis and crack cocaine are schedule 1.
Those who repackaged toxic assets while misrepresenting the contents and the risk.
For some reason I find it weird to think that it wouldn't take all that long to count to a million.
> Diet plays a huge role in mood.

I've seen many articles lately on the relationship between what's in our gut and our mental health. Their source escapes me at the moment, but here's a paper on the relationship between diet and mental health: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4167107/
The way forwards has to be a transition from an international order based on power to one based on justice and human rights. This used to be the plan - erode enemies of America by turning them into peaceful stable democracies. And it worked in Europe, Japan and South Korea.

However it got corrupted by America's preference for capitalist unfree societies over socialist or other democratic societies; everything from the bombing of Cambodia to the murder of Allende. It's also been undermined by a failure to recognise equal rights and freedoms for communities within America.

A good place to start would be to ratify the convention on Rights of the Child and re-join the International Criminal Court. The US is basically the single outlier on these and there's no good reason not to.
I remember reading easily a decade ago, when people were describing Amazon as a charity propped up by investors, that this was Amazon's long-term strategy--aggressively reinvest all profits, burn through cash making a loss in order to achieve monopoly or near-monopoly status, and then jack up prices once they'd captured the market. It looks more and more like they're following through.
Some people are suggesting stop paying for Prime and just use eBay. My biggest concern if I ditch Amazon is losing out on some of the cheap Chinese merchandise that I actually don't mind; flashlights is one example. It never occurred to me that eBay is probably selling the same junk though, so I think i'll start doing comparisons between Amazon and eBay.
Taking your estimated numbers it's interesting to add that cost to the price of fuel and see where it gets you. A gallon of gasoline on average produces about 20 pounds of C02, so 100 gallons gives a ton of CO2.

You can then calculate the cost of adding capture to gas prices.

* At $200 per ton gas prices increase $2 per gallon.

* At $100 the increase is $1 per gallon.

* At $40 the increase is $0.40.

* At $20 the increase is $0.20.

It looks as if we need to get numbers into the low tens of dollars for this to be feasible on a widespread basis.

The numbers are optimistic since they don't cover the CO2 from refining and transport. That seems to be around $2 but it's somewhat hard to get accurate values.
Postnord was created when the Danish postal service bought the Swedish one.

Unfortunately, the Danish postal service sucks and hence we now have crappy service.
I was referring to 'extreme' health care incidents. I don't consider it fraud if a person has their back against the wall fighting for their life, and on top of that is dealing with a system that prefers surgery to stem cell injections because of the extra operating room hours that it can bill. Just my personal interpretation.
... and the US national debt overtook it.
> It is about locking up poor people in order to keep them from voting.

Poor people already don't vote in high numbers.

> It is about filling our prisons with non-violent offenders so we can force them to work for slave wages, and line the owners of the prisons and the politicians they fund's pockets.

That's part of it, but private prisons hold a small minority of the prison population.

> It's about political suppression, not about some moralistic crusade to protect people from drugs.

It's about political suppression, but also about perceptions that "only bad people smoke" etc etc. Maybe the leaders are fully malevolent in their intentions, but they get their support from the populace who they misled about the drug problem in the first place.
but it doesn't really matter because we've become of culture of "good enough" that settles for sub-par achievements

Congratulations, that strikes me as one of the more elitist things I've read in a while. We are not a society of "good enough", we are a society that decided we don't need to go to the high priests in order to cut a demo. Because what you might call "quality" others might call "over-produced". Because some people would rather produce quality music instead of twiddle knobs. All kinds of reasons that GarageBand is adequate to replace a room full of equipment, if for no other reason other than every kid with an iPhone who wants to be a rock star can pretend to put an album together (which I'm sure will be of basement quality).

A culture raised on overcompressed and pitch fixed productions just won't care about dynamics and good mixing.

And how are they supposed to learn that for less than $200/hour? If only there were free software...

(And don't for a minute think I'm denigrating the importance of quality studio work. It's just not always necessary.)
And if you don't regulate them in the interests of the people at large, they will conspire to advance their own interests.

The free markets need regulation, or they stop being free.
Perpetual war against impoverished countries isn't bringing the US together--in truth it's one of the biggest issues currently tearing the US public apart.
I don't know how serverless platforms deal with it, but startup times could be "solved" by starting up the function and cloning it when it's ready to process requests, as Unix daemons have done for a long time.
If we're going to be capitalistic, apply Bagehot's dictum (from 1873) "in times of financial crisis central banks should lend freely to solvent depository institutions, yet only against sound collateral and at interest rates high enough to dissuade those borrowers that are not genuinely in need" [0]

I feel like, jail or no, the financial executives who got us into the mess - and who haven't really gotten us out yet - ought to be former financial executives that are working as, e.g., baristas.

Instead, a decision was made that the bloated mortgages that had been issued, would be turned from bad collateral into 'sound collateral', keeping asset prices high. It's like resolving Ford's problems with exploding gas tanks back in the 70's by arranging to buy all the bad cars.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Bagehot
It would only bankrupt America if Americans demanded social welfare at the same level as other 1st world nations. Instead of nurses we get soldiers, instead of housing for the poor we get army bases. If we demanded both, then maybe we'd go bankrupt.
Downvoting this because it's irrelevant to the topic at hand (Amazon is stuffing search results pages with ads).

It's your right to free-associate all amazon gripes onto this thread, but I'll just use the system to indicate that they are noise to me.
It was far worse with Obama, despite the wars going on.
I went on the other day to buy a specific brand of pants. I was in the app. I searched, clicked the first link, seemed like it was coming from a third party seller. Selected the size I wanted and ordered. It arrived and was a completely different brand. Went back and looked at the search and it was an ad. What I thought was a third party seller's store name was the brand name. From this experience I learned that I can't trust their search results. The mechanism for finding what I want will also now give me things I don't want.
If you are a US citizen, it's illegal to enter or leave the US with another country's passport anyway, even if you're a dual citizen.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1185
Generally speaking the "cause" of the pax Americana is safe (and mostly tax-free) international sea shipping. That's what made the huge difference.

Keep in mind that yes, that required shooting up a few countries.
Peak US consumerism. Can't wait 2-3 days for a product that would've taken a week not 10-15 years ago, or maybe you had to drive/walk to the store.

I cancelled because I started to realize Amazon is hardly ever the cheapest price anymore, and most other companies now offer 2-3 day shipping for free. I order direct and support the actual company making the product instead of giving money to a monopoly with terrible ethics.
Apple Watch getting ECG, says analyst Kuo; here’s why it matters
Just looking at my recent purchases:

Electronics - Newegg and Monoprice

Board & Table Top Games - Miniature Market

Pet Food - Chewy (owned by PetSmart now)

Clothing - Depends on your style, but I tend to stick to Eddie Bauer and Duluth Trading Company for good quality, affordable clothes

Comic trade paperbacks - InStockTrades

Books - Barnes & Noble (new) and eBay (used)

The big one I've still struggling to find a replacement for is shoes. Zappos seems to dominate that market and other online stores have been hit and miss. DSW has probably been the best, but I'd love to find something better.
The US "sphere of influence" goes far beyond its physical borders. The borders of this ""empire"" are places like the eastern border of Poland and the Korean DMZ, as well as a complex set of partial influences in the Middle East.
Designation Property and Assertion Predicate
At what point does this become semantics. Isn't a sponsored ad with strong context (including the context of the search) simply a paid search result? The issue is that there are competing masters, one that the ad wants to get served and two that the person wants to find the search results most relevant to their context, but amazon is attempting to provide a paid option that meets that context first, and if it meets that context slightly less and is paid, then thats a sacrifice they are willing to make.
"but don't believe anybody else gained from that: not us Americans as a whole"

Engineering Departments get large portions of their revenues through Defense programs.
MIT's Lincoln Laboratory made 27% of their revenue (roughly a billion dollars) in 2016. That's one research center.

Do you have an engineering degree? Were your facilities nice? Might want to follow the money with that.

http://web.mit.edu/facts/financial.html
To use your analogy, it's not clear to me that one can have the baby without it spoiling the bathwater.
I understand your argumentation and I'm happy you're convinced, and I'd like to be, too. However, I did some checks on the people signed here: https://emfscientist.org/index.php/emf-scientist-appeal and at least some seem very serious, knowledgeable and definitely not lunatics.
It was the first civilian block cypher.
Medicines shouldnt make people sicker – protecting people from poor-quality meds
> We don't have to "legislate" the morality but we do have a responsibility for doing _something_.

If the government, or specifically the justice system, is going to be involved in that "_something_" then we need laws that can be enforced by prosecutors and interpreted by judges. If you want that to include actions that is currently legal but which you find morally reprehensible (ex: the actions of these finance executives) then that needs to be codified in law before you can go after them. And that's literally legislating morality.

> "Rule of law" means nothing if one class of people has subverted the law, enforcement and governance to their benefit at the expense of everyone else.

They haven't subverted anything. They've taken advantage of a system that is available to them. Ditto for veterans who get subsidized school or home loans, Tesla drivers who get $7,500 in EV credits, small business owners who get SBA loans, or anyone else that takes a dime from the pool of money we call public spending. You could argue that anyone of those programs is to the benefit of only the receiver and the detriment of the rest of us[1].

And there's already a system in place to change it. Elect politicians that will make the changes you want and understand the positions of the ones that are currently in power.

With all the demonizing of wall street in regards to the 2008 crisis, most fail to go back to the true cause of the crisis, i.e. the repeal of the Glass-Stegall Act[2] via the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act[3] signed by President Clinton in 1999. It took almost a decade but the entire "too big to fail" concept grew from that repeal.

[1]: I generally don't like qualifying my statements but for clarity, I'm saying you could argue it. I'm not saying that I would necessarily argue against those (well except the EV one which is asinine...).

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_steagall

[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm%E2%80%93Leach%E2%80%93Bl...
This is f-cking gold man, I understand if you want to leave it all behind you, but there are millions of people suffering out there like you were. If you could write this up and monetize somehow, could be very lucrative and beneficial to a lot of people.