skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The last time I used Pillow to create GIFs [1], I also noticed that the files aren't exactly small. But instead of using a different library, I simply optimized the generated GIFs using gifsicle [2].

[1] https://github.com/Yorwba/kanjivg-gif

[2] https://www.lcdf.org/gifsicle/
I think both your comments are legit. The US, like many countries, is very paradoxal in its decisions. I hope that one day such negative acts will be negligible compared to the positive ones.
Thanks, I heard about this gun case & forgot. So this points out that it's not only about new kinds business, but about a changing mood in general, even in old businesses.

By new kinds business I mean that lots of internet companies seem to be awkwardly half-way between neutral infrastructure (like Windows, and your water company) and being publications (which of course have an editorial line).
I felt like this article over-promised and under-delivered. There was a lot of ink spilled on the animal kingdom, and a weak/unconvincing analogy to human humor.
> Why are we giving companies and people the right to silence vast amounts of voices and opinions on random whims?

This is not a new situation. But all of a sudden it’s a problem because it’s conservative white guys instead of women, LGBTQ people and people of color?
That's crazy - I was working on a chapter of my book and used not only that very portrait but was making much the same point - accountancy was a transformative control technology - but much less granular than software today.

I need to publish ... :-)
Could this be partially an issue of semantics?

- Why do we have subjective experience?

vs

- What causes us to have/creates subjective experience?

- For what reason/purpose do we have subjective experience?

- How is subjective experience implemented?

The last three seem to be reasonably well fleshed out in the literature. Do you interpret “why” to have an additional meaning?
"And while many internet creators argue that Silicon Valley is trying to censor free speech, what the companies are doing is legal, said Vera Eidelman, staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s speech, privacy and technology project. “The First Amendment right is on the side of the company,” she said."

I think that sums up the matter. If people want to raise funds from their supporters, they should disintermediate and just ask those supporters to send checks - just like it used to be done.
Ask HN: I'm building a PWA. What are my options for push notifications on iOS?
Personally, I don't like virtue signalling whether it is someone bragging about their recycling habits or how many times they go to Church. It's an obnoxious scramble in the monkey status hierarchy, and it generally makes me suspect the signaler of virtue is lacking in such in general.

Whether or not it is virtue signalling about a "sincerely held belief" is kind of irrelevant. Sincerity is also not, as they say, computeable.
You're reading way too hard into this.

It skyrocketed to ~$20K and then plummeted to here because, plainly, it was a vehicle to manipulate morons out of their money. That's worth at least some "cynicism and darkness", and should be prompting our community to contemplate how, going forward, we can avoid hurting the tech illiterate masses when our own irrational exuberance, in concert with the more classically opportunistic and morally deficient business types, leads to damaging outcomes.

This is in fact my gripe with the tech community more generally: we have demonstrated ourselves to be chronically incapable of tempering the innovative instinct with an even baseline understanding of the realities of human nature. And this is why we're becoming increasingly more responsible for breaking the world.
Lazy people make the best leaders
Can you explain why this is the case, especially when the value of BTC is declining? The capital costs (ASICs and the power hookups) are sunk costs, and if it stops being profitable to opwerate all the ASICs honestly, or even to operate any of them if you don't have the lowest cost per hash on the network, then it may be quite valuable to attack the network and barely valuable at all to continue mining normally.
A quote, from The Silences of Hammerstein:

“I divide my officers into four groups. There are clever, diligent, stupid, and lazy officers. Usually two characteristics are combined. Some are clever and diligent — their place is the General Staff. The next lot are stupid and lazy — they make up 90 percent of every army and are suited to routine duties. Anyone who is both clever and lazy is qualified for the highest leadership duties, because he possesses the intellectual clarity and the composure necessary for difficult decisions. One must beware of anyone who is stupid and diligent — he must not be entrusted with any responsibility because he will always cause only mischief.”
The 5 Most Innovative Augmented Reality Products of 2018
Not immune, but law enforcement generally has trust-by-default from the general population, whereas everyone they accuse has distrust-by-default.

I don’t know how to solve that. Not even in principle, as even a hypothetical future A.I. jury, judge, lawyer, and cop would have the “what does ‘good evidence’ mean?” problem in addition to the incentive alignment problem that already makes many of us question the justice of our laws.
It's an interesting problem. Speech has never truly been free, sometimes and in some places its been regulated by government, but in modern liberal democracies its been regulated by culture. Polite society regulates speech by rejecting people who engage in whatever that society views as harmful speech.

Social media platforms and the internet generally, substantially weaken the power of culture to regulate speech in the way that it used to. I don't know what we do about this. We don't want government regulating speech, and it doesn't seem like allowing social media platforms to regulate it arbitrarily is particularly good either. But the gates that culture and localism placed on speech in the past did, seemingly, serve some useful purpose.

Do we want to live in a world where speech is truly unregulated, even by shame or culture? Maybe. It's possible that the answer here is yes we do, that sunlight is always the best disinfectant, and that the truth always emerges victorious in the end. But it's also possible that those things aren't true. I don't have an answer, but I don't think one way or the other is the obviously correct path forward either.
If you have freedom of commerce, but no individual freedoms outside of that, like freedom of speech, then you basically have China. So it's a very reasonable trade off to make: give up a little freedom of commerce to ensure more basic personal freedoms.

The recipe for boiling the frog in introducing totalitarianism is the same: First you go after the least popular people and get tacit approval. Then you extend that to someone else, then someone else. Eventually, you get to a point where everyone is at least a little leery of speaking up. Then you turn it up just a little more. Rinse and repeat.

This is where we are now. We are in the middle of the process above. It doesn't matter how idealistic the people who are implementing it. Control thought and speech, and you lock in absolute power, and absolute power corrupts. All of the worst totalitarian regimes throughout history had idealistic, flowery sounding language to justify their actions. All of them.
Tall tales of outrageous jury awards (2012)
yup: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK223808/
I think you're debating the merit of the "virtue" part - whether it's sincerely held or not - while to me the main idea is the "signal" part.

You see this debate regarding the value of, say, a Harvard education: is it the knowledge gained, or the "signal" of having been accepted to it?

Similarly, when I hear accusations of "virtue signaling", I understand the person to mean that the action in question was used to signal something, not to inherently accomplish something.

As an example, consider beliefs about global warming. Whether or not you "sincerely" believe in global warming is immaterial to most accusations of virtue signaling. What you do about it is the question. The question to ask is, what did that action accomplish? So, posting a link to some article on facebook is likely to not really accomplish anything, and so the point of posting it was likely to signal. On the other hand, posting about how every year your family takes a trip to Europe, but you've realized that uses too much fuel, and instead your family is going to have a nearby "staycation" in the woods out back: that actually accomplished something, and I wouldn't expect to see that called "virtue signaling".
Agreed. I wish more political discourse followed this model. I too disagree with his stance on the military, but I applaud his decision to take an individual stand without hectoring, hyperbole or bad faith arguments. He states his position clearly for others to take or leave as they see fit.
No, your speech is still safe even if Comcast cuts off your service. The internet does not equal freedom of speech. Just because the barrier of entry to Twitter or Facebook is considerably easier than appearing on CNN they are companies that can have rules regarding who they allow on.

If people are being arrested for what they are saying then that's censorship and something to be worried about.
Many techniques to make binary analysis harder came from anonymous malware authors. In the early days, writing viruses was more of an educational game than infecting people to cause harm.
I'm thinking about poly- or metamorphic code that is able to change it's own representation without changing the actual logic.

Also many phrack articles are released under pseudonyms.
I don't think your reasoning here is sound. PoW is the elected federation of validators, it's just that they're elected in a very flexible way.
We live in a world where corporate entities have an extraordinary control over our lives, what opinions we see and hear, even if we actively seek out those opinions. At some point we need to stop thinking about free speech as simply a guarantee against government intrusion, but also a guarantee against our increasingly powerful corporate overlords.
I think that in very high-level terms, you're quite correct. You say, for example, 'it’s not clear to me that “decentralized technology” can prevent the very human process of holding others accountable' - I mean, yeah. That's a good starting point.

On the other hand, your comment betrays some of the underlying revelation here: indeed, the MPAA has gone after the centralized components of peer-to-peer file sharing, as you point out. Yet, the bit torrent protocol remains as strong as ever (which, to be fair, isn't terribly strong in the first place).

The internet has learnt and will continue to learn from this, and the next generation of censorship resistance will decentralize some of the points of failure you have listed (which we centralized in the bit torrent iteration).

As for your last point: regulators understanding how the tech works is not meaningful if regulators are no longer the ones making decisions about the world. That will be a wonderful shift if our goals include peace and justice, which governments have consistently and correctly seen as threats to their existence.

At the end of the day, my point is really this: even in the most wild-eyed crypto-anarchist fantasy, everything is fine. There's no need for the doom and gloom that we're routinely seeing on HN in threads like this.
The religiosity of this post is fitting.
Murder is unlawful, whether it's bad is... variable. From the perspective of then-applicable British law, the American Revolution was a massive seditious conspiracy involving tens of thousands of murders.

While that's a fairly extreme example, you see some of this playing out with more recent murders, like those in anti-abortion extremism, where there is a constituency that sees them.as justified whether or not legally murder.
For just once could we not downvote jokes here? The topic is humor. One HN thread of jokes won’t turn this place into reddit.
Traditionally, shipping was a high-risk, high-return business. If the ship came in, the owners made lots of money. If it didn't... The hero was the bold captain.

The Dutch figured out how to make low-margin businesses work at scale. They built big, slow, stable ships with large cargo capacity to ship routine cargo. They were derided as "herring-tamers", because pickled herring was a profitable business. These low-margin businesses required cost control, or the whole operation could deliver the goods and still lose money. Thus the importance of accounting.
Birds? Source?
The language of Brussels, translated
Doomba
If transaction fees go up too much this discourages the use of bitcoin as a currency....
Very true. I still believe this happened in Bitcoin in 2013... When Pieter Wuille and Luke DashJr decided to abandon the v0.8 fork and told the miners to hop on v0.7, they could have easily sold v0.8 coins...
If this kills dating apps. I think speed dating meetups will sky rocket.
> Likewise, Benjamin has been called right wing and an alt-right sympathizer by multiple news outlets. He rejects those characterizations, calling himself a “classical liberal.” However, a recent Southern Poverty Law Center report revealed he has been a stepping stone for some white supremacists on the path to radicalization. The Right Stuff, an unapologetically racist, antisemitic blog founded by white supremacist Mike Peinovich, hosted a poll asking users who their biggest influence was in coming to the alt-right. Multiple respondents named Sargon of Akkad. And for someone who says he’s not a part of the alt-right, he’s been spending a lot of time with them lately. He’s appeared in videos with alt-right figures like Millennial Woes and Richard Spencer, giving those men a platform to reach his nearly 800,000 subscribers in the process. - https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2018/04/25/milo-yiannopo...
What's stopping these people from creating a "MasterRacecard" and fulfilling their payment processing?
Yessssss... you star, thank you so much. Sending you lots of Xmas cheer!
I'm aware of what he said. He also said: ‘I was being anti-Nazi,’

I can't get into his brain and determine if he actually opposes genocide or secretly supports it, but from what I've seen thus far it seems he carelessly uses offensive racially charged language but takes exception with those who advocate for genocide.

Just so we're clear, I don't like this guy. I dislike a lot of people who fall well short of being nazis or otherwise advocating for genocide.
Most software is not one algorithm. Most software is a complex system which can be parallelized in a variety of ways, some of them embarrassingly trivial.
What puzzled me is how comes blockchain startups did not sell their crypto for fiat just after their ICOs.

I recommended this to several of my blockchain customers but none of them listened. I dont know if that was motivated by greed or something else.

According to Game theory there is no benefit in not selling the crypto for fiat: if you raise lets say 10million during an ico (typical amount raised 6m ago), there isnt much you can do with 20M (i.e you keep the crypto and it doubles) that you cant do with “just” 10M.

However, if the crypto crashes, and become 5M, you are going to have a hard time explaining to stake holders that 5M just disappeared...

At worst you keep 10pct in crypto if really you want to keep some upside to crypto but thats it
I’m comfortable with current protected classes not being expanded. I’m comfortable with non-protected classes being unsupported by services. I am comfortable with the line for people who are supported being drawn with these guys outside it.

These guys aren’t providing any value to society. Whether they make money or live on the dole is irrelevant to me.

The “no platform” argument has merit and I think it should occur by having ISPs be regulated as common carriers.
> import { test } from "https://unpkg.com/deno_testing@0.0.5/testing.ts";

This feels both very pragmatic and frightening at the same time.
Forgive me as I don't quite grok bitcoin.

Does the math to calculate a coin change based on... price?

For some reason I assumed the mathematical difficulty just naturally increased as part of what in my mind is "the mathematical problem" vs. number of coins.
And the earliest Christian art was almost entirely symbolic - fish, lambs, wheel cross, chi-rho, etc...

Even if elements of iconography are symbolic, they could have easily made Jesus look any way they want, yet the standard 'Byzantine' Jesus icon gives him dark features and slightly curled hair. Seems close enough, and none of the earliest art (either purely symbolic or very Roman - possibly to hide from persecution) seems any more accurate.
no, they should stop being assholes.
This is the result of privatized everything-it lacks the checks and balances that would be afforded by a democratic government. It is ironic people who are virulently anti-government complain because a private party has decided that they aren't going to act like a government.
There will always be people who say a breakthrough is just around the corner. How many years should the rest of us wait wait before we decide that blockchain tech was a dead end? It's already been around for a while and I can't think of any successful use cases outside of cryptocurrency.
Isn't that more about Fourier analysis than it is about the FFT, though?
not just that, my grandpa owned a grocery shopping bag/dolly with exactly the same 3 wheels idea, and it was like 30 years ago... they might have perfected an existing idea, but that idea is around for long time...
I built Quora for video and collaborative vine.  What do you think?
The "jokes" in this thread really underscore how painfully humourless tech people are
Or one could do the Chomsky thing and take military funding and use it for research that doesn't actually have clear military applications but looks like it might.
you can build a tolerance to caffeine, if ingested regularly. you would need to exceed your regular dosage to measure an effect.
"We are dedicated to revolutionizing mobility with innovative products that give people the freedom to do what they love by enhancing their mobility"

Who exactly gets convinced by such fluffy wording?
This quote was inside a list of negative experiences with WKWebView. It wasn’t intended to be positive.
The takeaway from that article I got was that companies are handing out credit to anybody who wants it- and some people take advantage of that when they want to go out with a bang.

Hellfire would rain down on any Network (Visa, MC, Amex, Discover) who thought about refusing to process firearm purchases. The NRA, any republican, and liberals like myself who support fundamental rights would be rightly pissed that a hard-to-avoid service such as the Visa network was making a decision on what I can or cannot do with my money. Because the minute you start making those decisions, it's a slippery sloap.

Their business prints them money, so why would they want to kick the hornets net? This is why I'm extremely weary of anyone who declares that Cash is Dead, or the future is Credit/Debit cards
Sounds like there is a hole in the market to cater to haters. Feel free to use my idea to become rich.
Disagree. Five seconds is in that category, one minute is in the “ha ha my cat fell off my bed isn’t that cute” category.
An interesting view point on this, if there was collusion between Patreon and Paypal over what subsequently happened to subscribe star, it could violate anti-trust law.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akJf2oz5JOM
> I've gained a new respect for Bitcoin from this incident.

This
Not really worrying. Just different individuals and organizations taking different positions on different subjects. Most importantly, all of it happening on private property.

I have an unpopular opinion. I believe people should be able to fly nazi and confederate flags on their private property. (Even if their private property overlooks yours.) I believe football players should be able to kneel during the national anthem.

And I believe private companies should be able to exercise their freedom of Association rights based on their beliefs or their bottom line.

All of these are just people having opinions. If you don't like their opinions, don't associate with them. That's the freedom that you have. I don't think any of this is a problem. Certainly none of it is censorship. The man flying a nazi or confederate flag in his yard alongside his JEB Stuart statue is not censoring MLK by refusing to put up an MLK statue as well.

The people who want an MLK statue should go put the MLK statue someplace else. The people tossed from Patreon should go raise money elsewhere. They're all perfectly free to do so.
Another way is to convert you email into a short URL with captcha protection while sharing it publicly.

i) http://scr.im/
ii) http://spamty.eu/
You can ask for childlike curiosity, or you can ask people to invest money.
It doesn't really push back though because it doesn't make sense. Phrases are powerful because they are compressed versions of larger truths. This new version doesn't work as a phrase like the one it is built from.
Are you insinuating that there have been no breakthroughs in the past 2 years? How do you respond to the ones I have listed in the comment to which you're replying?
A concert recording is a separate work. A music video is a separate work.

An online stream of an existing audio recording is not a separate work.
Interesting. Can ABCL be used for the same sorts of use cases as Clojure?
Usually with online video an HTTP request gets sent at different points to note how far they got in the video (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_Ad_Serving_Template). You normally see an exponential drop off, with many people watching only a few seconds. A lot of those minutes are likely people accidentally watching a few seconds of auto-playing video as they scroll through facebook.

I'd note that television viewing statistics are also likely inflated, at least for a normal person's definition of "watching TV". How often have you been in front of a TV in a bar or airport, but no one is actually watching?
I'd recommend starting with therapy and going from there if it's available to you. I've been going to cognitive behavioral therapy for years and feel like I've received a ton of value from it for a couple reasons.

1. the therapist is a trained professional that can help me unpack and normalize my experience.

2. the therapist can recommend strategies to try and potentially refer me to a psychiatrist if they think medication might be worth considering

3. having a regular cadence of structured communication with a professional gives me the time to reflect and think, when I'm depressed this feels almost impossible on my own

There are so many factors that go into depression and in my experience its very difficult to go about finding something that helps alleviate it alone. If you aren't able to go to therapy for any reason than I would definitely recommend trying out some of the strategies mentioned in this thread, but I'd also suggest trying to find a family member or friend that you trust to talk to about your experience as well. Depression is so isolating and it will likely feel difficult to get the strength and courage to talk about it, but it's been extremely helpful for me and I'd recommend it.
+1 I find myself regularly scrolling heavily until I find the “meat” of the article teasered in the title. I guess someone told them before “you need to tell a story” or they do it for SEO reasons.
I think this is a fine case to apply Hanlon's Razor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor

Conspiracy was unnecessary.
You go from “what caused it” to “must have been a load spike” in one paragraph.