skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Do HIV drugs cause HIV?

How is immunodeficiency treatment at all related to deplatforming? Viruses aren't thinking human beings.

> Do civil rights movements cause racism?

The Civil Rights movement did not enagage in deplatforming. Many of them explicitly acknowledged that their opponents also deserve the ability to speak. It was often the civil Rights movement itself that was subject to deplatforming.

> Of course it's going to co-occur with the thing it's attempting to treat. This is evidence of nothing at all.

The rise of deplatforming preceded the rise of the Alt Right by about a year or two. They didn't always co-occur, one preceded the other. Their continued co-occurrence suggests that the implementation of deplatforming either 1. has no effect on that brand of extremist, or 2. maybe even causes it.

This is not consistent with treating a disease. Usually, a disease is present sometime before treatment is administered. Then as treatment is administered the symptoms are reduced, if the treatment is successful. This is not what we are witnessing with the relationship between deplatforming and the brand of right wing extremism we've been seeing lately.

> What you need to do, and what the studies I reference did do, is examine individual communities pre and post treatment.

Limiting measurement to individual communities is not a good way to measur it's overall effect. Again pointing out the fact that when a community deplatforms a certain view that view is no longer present is pointing out an obvious consequence. Of course the platform sees a reduction in the view that was deplatformed. That's basically just restating the definition of deplatforming: kicking a person or group off the platform.

If you want to measure the effect of deplatforming on society, then the analysis has to be society-wide. Otherwise one is effectively just building a bubble of the communities that do engage in deplatforming, and burying their head with respect to it's impact on the rest of society.
They already do that for black programs with cover stories and front organizations for spy agencies. So, there's certainly precedent.
Thru hikes sometimes it's peanut butter and Nutella
Because my phone number is not from where I actually live and most of these robocallers fake a number from your local exchange, seeing a number that looks like mine pop up basically tells me right away it’s a robocall since nobody calls me from that exchange. Whole thing is still incredibly annoying though and problem is getting worse.
Truck Owners Are Deliberately Blocking Tesla Supercharger Spots
Why don't they add a Garbage collector to new version on C/C++
I agree, I'm not sure the virtual kubelet concept is a great idea overall. It sounds good on the surface, but most of the time these kind of abstractions do more harm then good, as far as I'm concerned. But, I could be wrong. :)
Yes, that would be great. At the moment I can't do any iOS dev simply because I don't have, nor want to run, OS X.
> What’s gone from the internet, after all, isn’t “truth,” but trust: the sense that the people and things we encounter are what they represent themselves to be.

I wonder if attitudes towards trusting content on the internet are partially a generational thing. Frankly, the idea that "trust" ever really existed on the internet (post very early days, anyway) strikes me as slightly absurd. Having gotten online in the late 90s/early 2000s, my default position, augmented by countless stranger-danger-type warnings from parents and teachers and slightly tongue-in-cheek disclaimers on websites[1], was that everything was bullshit until proven otherwise. I don't want to sound too sanctimonious, but that sort of skeptical attitude is a good defense against being taken in.

In contrast, I've (totally anecdotally) seen older age cohorts and/or people who just ended up online later for whatever reasons develop much more relaxed, trusting attitudes towards internet content. The stereotypical boomer aunt for whom Facebook is the internet tends to be much less suspicious of content they see, as, after all, it's being posted by their real life friends! Why would one's real life friends go on the internet and tell lies? This is as good a place as any to plug my pet theory that real-name policies are actively harmful, as they incorrectly imply trust where none should exist. This dynamic, coupled with attitudes towards media outlets tuned by eras in which there were only a handful of (generally) credible outlets, seems to be a recipe for complete credulousness when transplanted into a low-trust medium like the internet.

So, rather than a redefining of the essential qualities of the internet, what seems to be in the offing is a general recalibration away from overly-trusting models of thought among segments of the population who never really developed the sort of awareness that I'd argue is necessary for not ending up as a total dupe.

Of course, the article's points on _why_ a lot of fake content exists totally stand - profit motive is a massive driver of that sort of behavior, and I genuinely hope that the ad model crumbles under the weight of its own depravity.

---

[1] "The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Sounds really strange coming from Americans. Maybe they all lived in some over-priced suburbs? Any major US city is definitely as grimy as Paris
All solo...truly amazing!
I have seen deadlocks and race conditions in non shared memory concurrent systems many times. They are no way exclusive of shared memory systems or even more common. They have nothing to do with shared memory and everything to do with message ordering.
This is in regards to the apps too (“iOS & Safari”). I mean, the native app shortcomings are the entire subject of this HN post. Where are you coming from?
Looking for someone to take over hackertoolbox.com which was inspired by the Tools of the trade post on HN.
I think they are quite different solutions, and each benefits from the other. Further, they also tend to run into the same concerns at the about the same time in their life time, eg. concerns around complexity.
Yeah.. I think I see what you say, I mean, the end user interface is the quite the same but this has big implications anyway for the systems design POV, so is not a small thing :)
I can't see how you can learn anything from it not in a reader view either. oh, and if you need any assistive technology (e.g. perhaps you're blind): tough luck!
Ill add that it can help to use languages that make expressing parallelism both easier and the default. Cray's Chapel is a good example with lots of versatility:

https://chapel-lang.org/
i am guessing that robocalls go after specific demographics. so people in more popular groups get more calls than others
I'd encourage you to read Bad Blood.

A lot of the regulations around laboratories exist because people have died or been injured as a result of lab screwups. Theranos hid entire labs from inspectors, let uncertified people run laboratories, and a lot more that wasn't fraud, but definitely violated regulatory requirements.
Hi! I am the founder of Zeda labs who did the website, branding, and illustrations on 16P.

All those illustrations were created by hand. Sketched and then made into vector in adobe illustrator. It was a style that we custom made for this client.

If you have any more questions about them let me know. :)
I agree here. But they just want to cover their asses I guess.
Bah... I had to check what it was called and it took me a few minutes.

Latest commit 19h ago https://github.com/darlinghq/darling
Yeah, too bad the theory requires a number of things to be true for data and models ... that are essentially never true. Once you think about

1) is the independance assumption really applicable here ?

2) does the underlying model satisfy the law of large numbers ? (NOT your model, the underlying model, ie. "reality")

3) am I really only interested in predictions within the data range ?

The answer for all these questions is almost universally "no", and the theory says that statistics is not guaranteed to work under those circumstances.

Correct statistical answers:

1) which average percentage of borrowers will default ? There is no answer to that question, because many non-random influences will make borrowers default in synchronized, and therefore very much non-independent ways (say, an economic crisis, an earthquake, an epidemic). Therefore you cannot correctly even calculate an average.

2) which average percentage of borrowers will default ? A model that describes whether an individual will default is going to be non-differentiable, and therefore certainly violate the law of large numbers (there will be sudden jumps in the default rate everywhere because of a million random reasons. An idiot tv anchor declares now the time to sell, and half the town finds out their loan is underwater, say). So underlying models involving humans essentially never satisfy the law of large numbers.

3) which average percentage of borrowers will default ? The number of factors changing that value do not match between the period your data is from (ie. the past) and the period you're predicting. Because there are so many real-world factors that affect your variable you can never avoid this situation. Therefore you cannot predict.

All of these issues allow one to construct realistic scenarios where even trivial statistics will fail spectacularly.
Powerful Photos of Life in the Old Glasgow Tenement Blocks – 1969-72
This is a misleading characterization of the situation. Being banned from an arbitrary website doesn't mean that nobody can hear you. Twitter is not the internet, you are free to post whatever content you want on a platform that is friendlier to the message or on your own personal platform. Nobody owes you a platform.
> I've seen that, but doesn't it take SMS/iMessages with it?

Indeed it does, which makes it a non-solution for me. I apparently have the same desire you do - an option for voice calls to go direct to voicemail unless they are in my favorites list, without having to use the more general Do Not Disturb mode.
In that example, is it not overwhelmingly likely (even 1.000 if they're doing their job) that both children will have some contact with child services, even if only one is placed?
You are omitting the requirement of common sense, or should I say discouraging it, and that is a dangerous path to go down. Almost all of the letters are strongly mnemonic. Someone who does not even think about what %y or %Y would be, after reading %G and thinking it correct, is going to have trouble with a lot of other things too.
No offense, but that's been the tune we've been constantly hearing for years now. Always the "next big thing" killing off C++ or Java or something with its superiority. And yet, somehow, when choosing a very efficient language that has 1st party support, we always end up with pretty much one widely supported answer: the horror that is C++.

Why do you think that Rust will be a different story this time?
This year I'm going to build a small CNC mill and learn to operate it correctly. That and dance cha to at least a competent social level.
caffeine is more likely the culprit
Ah yes, I did in fact mistake the function in question.

I wonder why they chose not to use out of range values for EOF there, given that `getchar` surely predates `read`?
By "ourselves" I mean the tech community as a whole, both engineers and entrepreneurs. The people who financed these problematic platforms bear a lot of the responsibility, of course. But I think we engineers must also accept some of the blame. Many of the best and brightest of my generation devoted their talents to building these things and without those efforts these platforms wouldn't exist.

You can always say that if you don't build it then someone else will but in my opinion that's a cop-out. You can't simultaneously claim that engineering talent is valuable and technology is powerful and that we have no responsibility for the things we build.
ECG right now
Hospital prices are about to go public in the U.S.
When I was getting robocalls a while back, I started saying "hi" and letting them talk, then I'd put the phone on mute and continue whatever I was doing. The calls stopped a few weeks after that. Usually this would take about 10 seconds of my time, and about 90 seconds of theirs, per call.

I'm pretty sure that over the long term, it costs me less time as it made the problem completely go away.

Things that I'd tried before that, that didn't work, include: immediately hanging up, politely and no-so-politely asking them not to call back.
I know more than one person who would take it very, very personally.
It’s interesting, and weird when you consider that the people who seem to be railing against this supposed censorship share significant overlap in the Venn diagram of people who complain about a growing sense of entitlement among others. Ironically at some point these same people decided that they deserve to be published wherever they want, and anything else is censorship. Presumably these are people who felt even harder done by when newspapers, magazines, and book publishers refused to give them full print runs too.

Honestly though, I have another theory. There is no sense of entitlement or hypocrisy, no confusion about what is or isn’t censorship. What we’re seeing is almost purely calculated, and just about trying to get a bigger audience. Twenty years ago if you wanted to publish your ideas about the queen of England being a lizard, you had to either self-publish, rant to a crowd, print fliers, or get lucky. Not that long ago blogs and forums were a huge improvement for those people, and it’s still very effective, but less effective than Facebook or Twitter or YouTube.

So do they really think that having the ability to self publish to the planet through blogs and modern self-publishing doesn’t count as speech? Or... do they just want more, and realize that position of “I want more” is less appealing than “I fight censorship!” It’s not that they don’t get it, it’s that it’s inconvenient to admit it?
>It's misleading to talk about sugar when the problem is obesity.

Really because plenty of skinny people have type 2 and plenty of obese people do not have type 2...but everyone who has type 2 has overconsumed sugar that is regulated in the blood by insulin and their bodies has stopped responding to insulin and most who have type 2 can reverse it by cutting out sugar consumption that requires insulin and making other lifestyle changes. No one is saying obesity isn’t linked to higher rates of type 2, but it’s not dispositive like type 2 and sugar consumption.
Being able to communicate with stakeholders, people in other departments if there are any, basically internal and external customers, and take that communication and convert it into meaningful and effective action.
Great advice! Do you know of any links/resources to help develop skills 2 and 3?
Perhaps it's time to rigorously research what we eat and why [pdf]
There is an app on the Apple App Store called Exchange Blocker, it automatically blocks all calls from your area code and first 3 digits. I use it, and it works great so far
The invention of the bow predates mans immigration from Africa so isolated tribates having access to it doesnt mean that they invented it independently. And fire is even older.
I have wondered at times if it would be possible to have a whole academic field of study in 'humor theory'. I personally termed it as the unexpected is part of what makes things funny.

A professor giving a lecture on medieval economics in a hall or an exotic dancer dancing at a bachelor party isn't funny. The exotic dancer giving a lecture on medieval economics at a bachelor party or the professor dancing at a lecture hall? Funny.
It’s an open question how the value of the infrastructure for doing this would be determined. Ideally the infrastructure would approach zero in cost and the value would be preserved for the participants in any transaction, not the rent-seeking hodlers.
How I Got Banned from Photographing the Band Arch Enemy
> Robocalls are one of those things that really upsets a small subset of people either because they are overly sensitive to robocalls or that they are a member of that unlucky subset that does receive a very high amount.

And you never get Robocalls?
Interviewing. I spent about 3-4 months this year working on my interviewing and competitive programming skills via LeetCode, reading The Algorithm Design Manual, and taking classes at Bradfield School of CS in San Francisco. I feel like it's made a world of difference. I know Hacker News tends to hate on programming interviews, but it really pays to be good at them (and trust me, it's a learnable skill). I do agree that the algorithms-and-whiteboard method can be highly problematic, but I've come to firmly believe that the time for criticism is when you're designing the interview for a candidate, not being interviewed.
So the garbage dump we call a USPS mailbox doesn't rise to the same level of concern for some reason still?
I feel pretty justified describing Facebook in its current form as toxic. It may be accidental to some degree but Facebook as it is exists today preys on people's weaknesses and insecurities, privileges fake and alarming content, encourages habituated, addictive usage, and undermines normal face-to-face human interaction.

I think it's possible to design social media platforms without those qualities so I feel it's fair to call Facebook, like junk food or cigarettes, toxic.
The problem with the Paradox of Tolerance is that while in theory it is quite correct and rather profound, in practice it's often an explanation trotted out by those in power to silence those they do not like.
So here are some facts:

Type II diabetes used to be rare. Obesity was not uncommon however the incidence was stable.

Now both have become prevalent in the last 50 years.

You know what I do when faced with a poorly understood system that used to behave before a bunch of changes were made but now does not?

I revert back all the suspicious changes.
YouTube faces backlash on Twitter over lifted, uncredited holiday video
Ten big science stories of 2018
The Slack versions are probably for the manager more than the individual engineers on the team. If you can't even give your manager a quick update on what you're working on, I think there's a problem. And there's no reason to hide that information from your teammates, so you might as well share it. Boom -- standup.
+1 to this. Reading The Bogelheads' Guide to Investing was a game-changer for me.
Why Medical Bills in the US Are So Expensive
A Parsing Trifecta (2009) [pdf]
Things Your Doing Subconsciously, That Make You Unhappy. How to Stop
It's pretty incredible that this is a bash script that outputs sixel graphics, and it in no way makes use of libsixel[0].

[0] https://github.com/saitoha/libsixel
Show HN: Blockchain secondary market fine art platform
"and the only promising path forward (at this time) is parallelism."

Don't forget the FPGA's, esp if bundled with CPU. They still partly work by parallelism but I think reconfigurable hardware deserves its own mention.
So "open" = "toxic"?

Or is it another aspect of Facebook and Bitcoin that you're criticizing? I fail to see another common characteristic.
Everything we knew about Fuchsia’s UI, Armadillo, is gone
Until there is a regulation requiring stir & shaken to be implemented, you won't be able to trust your caller ID. Most of the telecom industry is stuck on legacy tech stacks that they actively resist upgrading, thus why calls are slung bareback over the web with no encryption on the metadata or the audio stream for nearly all providers.
There has been a large increase in hate crimes in the United States in the last few years.

The issue of censorship is deeply nuanced (i.e. the paradox of tolerance).

On one hand, there is the problem of "what if the tables are flipped," and how different marginalized groups are treated.

Unfortunately, giving fringe viewpoints platforms and openly debating them actually encourages people to support those viewpoints despite any factual evidence against them. People with fringe viewpoints know this and will often, disingenuously, seek to publicize their views through open debate so they can convert other people into supporters.
It's an important distinction though. It's possible to consume sugary foods and not be obese. See twinkie diet.
Maybe it makes sense to read the success of Golang as a smart piece of social engineering. Start with a simple and accessible language and gradually ratchet up the complexity to deal with more real-world problems. You may eventually wind up with a worse language but at least you'll have users. Rust tried to solve a lot of hard problems out of the gate and that has slowed its growth IMO.

It's sort of another worse-is-better dichotomy.
Evolution of a Landing Page: Website Design for Early Startups
USPS gets paid to deliver spam... why would they want to stop it? actually, they even give cheaper rates to the spammers because they spam so much...
Nothing will "kill off" C++.

Nothing -- not even C++ -- "killed off" C.

But it's share of total usage can and will decrease. Java certainly took a massive chunk of the "programming market" that would have otherwise been C++. And then later JavaScript. Of course, software usage in general has been going up and up, so in absolute terms C++ has been increasing as well.
crossfit is like scientology of fitness
With Internet Banking, is easy to have a check sent to individual or organization one wants to support on an annual or semi annual basis, which has the same effect as $1-5/month.

Patreon is useful to discover new content. I imagine it is convenient for the "creator". But, not being on Patreon doesn't prevent a person from gathering support for their cause. It only prevents Patreon from advertising causes, which is Patreon's right.
C. I read K&R and did every exercise in it this year, and it really changed how I thought about programming, even in higher level languages. Specifically, I feel like it's made me a lot more considerate about algorithm design and detecting edge cases. More justification: https://blog.bradfieldcs.com/the-cost-of-forsaking-c-1139864...
This is in direct reference to the line:

> If you wanted a real audience, even in older times you would've needed a newspaper to print your thoughts, or a publisher to help with your books.

The point is that getting this "help" was much easier in the past. Even people who vehemently disagreed with you would share their platform.

Circling back to Patreon, today's norms are qualitatively different from when our rules of "private platforms" were developed. If a significant portion of publishing platforms retained open minds then it was OK to have others that chose not to. Regulation was not required.

Now that this norm of fairness has been lost if we want to retain open communication of ideas on the internet then we must bring back the notion of a common carrier. Referencing the fact that the rules are the same as the past ignores how the world has changed around us.
The USPS mailbox can be consumed asynchronously.

Isn’t it possible to opt out of a lot of bulk mail anyway? Bulk mail can never be as bad as online spam since it’s much more expensive to mail and easier to trace a sender.
Can you give examples of this in practice where those being "silenced" weren't expressing intolerant views?