skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is a good step

I've given input on political issues as well as gender issues under multiple identities and personas to gain consensus

Almost no progress on consensus regarding political issues but on some sex and gender issues the male persona was unqualified to "mansplain" or had to much privilege to contribute or complain, where the same information was agreed upon and deemed helpful coming from the non-male persona - assumed to be female

This is more about the decision path people make to discredit a someone. When confronted with information that deviates from your script, people typically look for faults in the messenger instead of the actual information. You look for words that a different party would use exclusively to pigeonhole the messenger as the other, you look for other biases.

I felt that even if an A.I. was created to try to aggregate perspectives and offer its observations, people would try to disagree with it based on who created it. A valid criticism, but what would be left with to offer potentially unifying perspectives.

I like this and I imagine how it can be trained to create a voice that you agree with, but that nobody else would hear.

..... based on your cookies.

Then everybody gets to hear a different voice and mostly the same information - perhaps slightly different words as to not undermine the illusion.
Hmm, I wonder if "genderless" will be more distracting than a clearly male or female voice. It seems unnatural.
I used to run a gaming server(s) for about four years, we peaked at about 3500 registered users, with 200 concurrent users.... We used Mumble in the community before I came along, we ran Mumble, after I came along, I took over the server and hosted it on a 1 core, 512mb memory linux server.... never went above 2% cpu and... I forget, probably 150MB memory usage with no restriction on quality (users can transmit CD quality audio)... this worked great, I set it up in about 10 minutes with little experience at the time, and the mumble server ran for years without issue until someone dictionary attacked the password.

Big advantages:

1. Free

2. Very low resource requrements, even for hundreds of users. Probably runs great on a google micro-f1 (Free forever) instance

3. Crystal clear audio

4. Lots of in-game plugins, such as positional audio in game (Battlefield: Bad Company 2, you could hear your teammates talking as they came up the stairs behind you, etc)

5. Cert based identity management. Used private key auth to verify you were you; no other user could sign in and impersonate you. Certified users had a big yellow C next to their name.

Probably the biggest thing for me, is that there was never, ever an audio glitch where the computer was not able to send/receive audio. We regularly run in to audio problems in Meet/Hangouts where audio does not work properly.

When I looked in to online gaming a couple of years ago I was stunned to see that everyone had moved to Discord, I didn't see the advantage of "upgrading" to something with a web client, but I suppose there's less friction to using a web client, even if mumble is a very easy install on Windows.
Better late than never.

A lot of commenters seem to be giving them negative credit for this outcome, and a number of people who claim to want racist content gone are also giving them negative or zero credit. As someone that wants racist content gone, this seems like a perverse state of affairs. No wonder they allowed it for so long given this.
Involuntary voting means that religious and other special interest groups cannot easily use their organizations to out-vote the more apathetic citizens. And therefore serious parties must target the center, or close to it, with policy.

I see this as an advantage of compulsory voting over other systems. Especially when voting is quick and painless, usually taking no more than 10 or 20 mins on a weekend every three years or so.
Probably shadowbanned, like you will not get you clearance/background check passed by untold reason.
It's technically a type of cheating, but it's used here to mean profoundly bad luck.

A cold deck is one that has been rigged to the advantage of one player, and then swapped in after the cut and shuffle (hence its "coldness"). Typically the deck would be stacked to give the victim a fantastically good hand, but the cheater one that's slightly better. The victim would bet a great deal thinking their hand was good only to lose at the end.

Players now use the term to describe the rare occasions when someone loses with a particularly strong hand in a fair game.
The EU is much more neo-liberal than the U.S., and as a Libertarian, I'll wait and see what I trust is a more "valid" ruling — the opinion of a U.S. federal judge. If he/she rules a monopoly, and their opinion stands, I'll come back and give you kudos — alas, I don't think it will happen.
It really very much has :)

On the other hand, I seem to remember that the security model was (somewhat) adapted to the threat at hand when it was designed (~25 years ago). I haven't kept tabs on it, so I don't know how well it has aged, but there's a chance it doesn't work anymore.
Now I'm curious about what non-censorship sites you are using? Because the only ones that I am aware of are full of terrible people. If you have one that isn't over-run by the bad guys, please share it because others here might want to use it too.
Should add (1992) to title.
It's quite dangerous to be allowed to be judge, jury and executioner.

FB has become too large and ubiquitous, they shouldn't be all of those.
I'm not sure Match Group (Tinder, OkCupid, PlentyOfFish, Match.com, Meetic) can become much more of a dating superpower. I suppose Grindr would nearly complete the monopoly. They're still missing Zoosk, eHarmony, Grindr, Bumble and a few other smaller players.

$15 billion market cap, $1.7b in sales, $477m in profit. Only 1,400 employees. Match, despite being public, is of course roughly 80% owned by InterActiveCorp (IAC).
You find it funny because you have a misunderstanding over what the constitution says. It doesn't say that the state has external threats and so needs a militia, which is what would be implied by your 'state defending itself' reading. It says a militia is necessary to secure a free State, and so we can't infringe the right to bear arms. That doesn't just mean external threats, and in fact is rooted in the idea that the people are the defense of their community and the holders of their government.

That means it's not about the State defending itself, it's about the people defending the free State. The Heller case simply extended the existing individual right to own guns in order to protect their free State to that of protecting your person and home.

SCOTUS didn't change the Constitution however they wanted. That's ridiculous. They applied existing law to a situation they were asked to judge.
This was right at end of of life for AT&T as an innovator, but I don't think people really appreciate just how much AT&T did for technology. Sure, they had a monopoly. Government backed, really. But you can trace just about every piece of modern tech back to Bell Labs or someone who worked there. The transistor itself, UNIX, the C programming language, the laser, CCDs, solar panels, and the list goes on. I don't think there's ever been a company before or since that has done so much.

I can't help but wonder what a modern day Bell Labs would be able to do.
I recall reading a story of flying an SR71 through the cloud from a Chinese nuclear test. We wanted to know if it was a fusion weapon or not.

The Chinese sent up a fighter after it, and, well, it wasn't fast enough. It also had too low of a ceiling.

Can't cite a source (I read about this, what, four decades ago?) so I can't prove it happened.
Over 12,000 farmer suicides per year, Centre tells Supreme Court of India
this is really cool. my personal reaction was to feel it was a little odd and off, but as I moved the Hz meter up and down it went from "oh a womans voice" to "oh a mans voice" pretty clearly. that is just plain interesting to know, I'd never seen how clearly quantifiable and single-axis that distinction can be. I bet if i spent a few weeks or so using a device in those Hz ranges i'd get used to it.
Would you mind elaborating?

What you described sounded interesting
Here are some relevant and IMO very interesting videos for your viewing pleasure:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reytu0y5efs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5nSKLyrM1s (long talk by SR-71 pilot Maury Rosenberg mentioned in the first video)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeBu6mRDaro (an even longer talk by another SR-71 pilot Richard Graham)
Differences of opinion in what/how to run code outside of whatever browser people decide the sandbox boundaries are.
The reason you find it hard to find experiences is that there aren't a lot of us who stick around.

Across most of China the dominant foreigner is the young visitor, maybe as a student, maybe teaching English. There are also some old English teaching hold-outs, married people running F&B businesses, and a few traders (the imported wine merchant is a classic). Other professionals are rare outside of major cities and industrial areas, save occasional NGO/intergovernmental projects, conferences and trade shows. Travelers are pretty rare. To over-generalize, the type of media these people leave online is usually somewhere between "OMG squat toilet!" and "found a McDonalds!", to "selfie at [landmark]" or "[me picking up locals]".

I've done my time: 18 years here, and only hospitalized for salmonella three times! About half-way through I went back to the west for 2 years, then came back to China. I've also taken an extra year out. The short answer is the situation has been changing frequently. It's a lot more expensive now (cost of living), visa rules have changed greatly, the government is getting more aggressive at taxing foreigners, there are still few decent jobs for foreigners (outside of multinationals who generally fill them via internal transfer from elsewhere), and the domestic economy is in slowdown. It's a great place for hardware businesses, mostly due to supply chain. The manufacturing isn't the cheapest anymore. Legals and government are a pain in the ass.

My advice? If you want the language, you have to stay, and if you're going to stay, make sure to study a few hundred characters, and study basic Chinese history. You'll get far more out of your stay with no additional overhead after covering those basics. If you want a job from someone else, go elsewhere unless you bring experience and are in to career track stuff like management consulting, marketing strategy or some other kind of middle management where international perspective can add some value. If you want to start something in hardware, it's better to do it off-books and base yourself somewhere cheap near the border, eg. border-hopping Hong Kong/Shenzhen, or nearby in Vietnam, Philippines, Thailand, etc.

Running a company here is a real grind. Everything is a hassle: government, banking, visas, lawyers, logistics, medical, education, internet, business culture/negotiations, etc. It's not cheap anymore either.

Personally I couldn't live in most of the country due to lack of nature, pollution, cold winters. I've lived in Shanghai, Qingdao, various parts of Yunnan, Shenzhen and Zhuhai. Don't get me wrong though, China is fascinating, represents and allows you to better understand a massive chunk of humanity, and has some of the best history, nature and food on the planet. Happy to answer any specific questions.
I get it, I’m cynical. But am I the only one that wonders how much of this is true, and how much “poetic license”?
Controversial opinion here, but I think nukes are going to be an evolutionary dead-end in the history of weaponry. Either they'll end up getting used, in which case "WW4 will be fought with sticks and stones", or more likely they won't end up getting used because everybody knows that's the outcome, and we'll have more conventional proxy wars where everyone just pretends nukes don't exist.

Other controversial opinion: I think that the assumption that the next major war will be between nation-states is a likely candidate for one that'll go out the window. In my view, the next major war will be like Syria but on a global scale, with many semi-organized subnational groups duking it out in exceptionally nasty urban & guerilla warfare.
It's not that complicated: one party is committed to fixing this problem and has influential leaders backing such an initiative. Another party isn't even seriously trying. One GOP senator is interested in solving this problem? Good for that guy, but shame on the other 52 GOP senators that aren't.

> And bills don't represent ideology anyway.

Yes they do, that's why we vote for one party or another. Think taxes are too high? Want to expand social programs? Legislation is how all of that is executed. Bills absolutely represent party ideology. Take the green new deal, for example. How was that bill not an example of party ideology?

> Politicians might be interested in fixing a "vulnerable system" while rejecting a particular bill for some other reason. For example: Voter ID.

Voter ID laws were designed explicitly to suppress minority votes and have been struck down time and again by the courts. They were not designed to solve a legitimate issue, because there is no evidence that rampant voter fraud exists in the US[0].

What does exist, however, are coordinated ballot-harvesting efforts designed to unduly influence the outcome of elections, as was witnessed in NC-9 in this past election. But again, the GOP doesn't seem to be very concerned about this specific issue.

[0]: https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/debunking-voter-fraud...
I mean that’s valid, but a gay hookup app is going to struggle with not retaining personal data - location, pictures, sexual preferences, messages, HIV status, links to other social profiles…
So your thesis is that Israel as a country is officially a white-nationalist state -- (perhaps the most successful one?) and that Facebook would need to prohibit all political material from Israel because it would be inherently white-nationalist?
For evidence, you'd probably produce screenshots of their profile and threaten to send them to people who know the blackmail victim. Now maybe having the Grindr logo on there is a bit scarier, but any other dating site with a profile listing "taboo" interests should work just as well.

Regarding your edit: I didn't mean that there was another Chinese company owning a dating site used by Westerners, but that it would explain what made Grindr special if there weren't another such company.
Let's make it easier and less messy. Supposed there's a policy that you know for certain would harm me and certain other people, but would not produce any other effects. Let's say there's a law that says I must pay a special tax that will be distributed among ice cream makers of the city. Ice cream is no Vietnam war, right? Nothing that awful. And if I don't like ice cream, such law is obviously not good for me. It's not entirely fictional examples - we have hundreds, if not thousands, redistributive laws on the books. They hurt some people, arguably help others. Some people claim these are positive-sum laws, some thing zero-sum or negative sum. But whatever it is, somebody is getting hurt - and not just by reading some unpleasant speech.

Should people be banned from advocating for or against such policies on Facebook? I mean, if one advocates for, it would hurt one set of people. If one advocated against, it would hurt another set of people. If you say we must raise taxes, you will be repugnant to Libertarians. If you say we must lower taxes, you will be repugnant to welfare state proponents. Should we just limit ourselves to posting cat pictures on Facebook? Nobody would disagree with cats, right? Right?
"The JVM and CLR seem like they're language platforms first and VMs second"

Ding ding ding ding ding.

There are lots of extant application VMs out there, but effectively all of them were implemented specifically to be able to run a specific language (Java → JVM, C# → CLR, Perl 6 → Parrot/NQP/whatever, Erlang → EVM/BEAM, etc.). Other languages have been implemented on top of those VMs, but they have to adopt the semantics of the actually-targeted language; you'd have a hard time taking a pure C codebase and compiling/running it on the JVM or CLR or BEAM.

WebAssembly is not that much different, technically; its actually-targeted languages are C, C++, and Rust, and you can reasonably think of it as a VM for those languages. However, it seems to be making an effort to not get caught up in the semantics of any specific language, much like how machine code tends to not really care about whether the instructions it's executing were compiled from C or Rust or Java or Ruby or COBOL or Brainfuck.
I guess I am remembering it wrong but I thought sticks and stones were dangerous but words could never hurt me. (Calls to action dont hurt me either, but I can see how one could categorize them as dangerousness due to the resultant action)
Is Software Eating the Useless Class? The Story of Marc Andreessen
Sure, but this has been known for years to everyone with even a tangential interest in smart contracts. It is in no way news.
There's some public documentation on the "one version" policy here: https://opensource.google.com/docs/thirdparty/oneversion/
Nice to see more userspace implementations of wireguard.

I've been testing out wireguard's linux kernel module, but experienced too much jitter due to wireguard not respecting isolcpus.

Probably possible to make the kernel module behave, but working with userspace is so much easier. Wireguard-go seems to behave (the drop in performance is not necessarily a showstopper), although the description says that it shouldn't be used on Linux :-)

Would be nice if a high performance rust implementation can become a real alternative. A userspace implementation shouldn't need to be much slower than a kernel module if network card with kernel bypass is available, if you really need that extra performance.
"Steam, the Windows Store, Play Store, App Store, etc...."

And there's also your answer. All those are fragmented, proprietary plattforms.

WASI is not.
This is the idea of cryptocurrency "brainwallets," and the result seems to be that people are really bad at picking high-entropy passphrases. One of the nice things about cryptocurrency from a cryptography point of view is that it provides a direct, real-world monetary benefit to attacks. So we don't have to wonder if people will pick good passphrases or they'll be brute-forced—the experiment happened, and it wasn't promising.

Using a passphrase alongside some online verification mechanism by a semi-trusted third party (e.g., your initial Signal app generates a secret, encrypts it to your passphrase, and stores it on Signal's servers who only return the encrypted secret to "your" new phone if it has your phone number too) might be enough.
Apple is still selling the iPhone SE, IMHO the best version of the iPhone they've ever produced (mostly because 4"): https://www.apple.com/shop/refurbished/clearance
That sounds like it avoids accidentally breaking email forwarding by intentionally breaking email forwarding.
You could be talking about my life. My family has the same characteristics, in my case both my parents and myself are clearly on the ASD spectrum.

I do think that there's a ton that can be done by support. I think it's especially interesting since, as my parents have aged, many of their supports have been removed or become irrelevant, as you say, making their neurological quirks more and more evident. I hope when we get older there will be a better support network in place for aging ASD folks.

In my case a big challenge for me has just been accepting that I do need a significant support structure, and not feeling like that makes me less of an independent adult.
I'm curious, which platforms ban Republicans?
Could you share which coworking spaces you've used?
This is the same reason that things like unikernels have been built for. They haven't taken off because of how difficult it is to rebuild your application to also contain it's kernel, but this kind of sandboxing with WASM and WASI doesn't require that and could likely make things a lot simpler to deal with.
Maybe you shouldn't. Maybe the people who do care about it can go about creating solutions to their real or perceived problem(s), and maybe the can be okay.

It seems possible, from my perspective, there is enough motivation to go around to work on multiple issues at once.

While climate change, over-fishing, land degradation, certainly could do with more attention, gender issues represent a fairly immediate threat for some people in some places at some times.
But people do literally post on Facebook that they're going to kill someone and then follow up and do it. Remember Brenton Harrison Tarrant?
These "extreme railfans" occasionally make the already atrocious Amtrak service unbearable for the rest of us. Case in point: we once tried to take the Coast Starlight from Oakland to Los Angeles. The train was delayed out of Oakland by more than 3 hours, and into LA by about 5 hours (the difference between a 7 PM arrival and a midnight arrival). The crew had to change in an unexpected location, and conductors left the train unstaffed toward the end of the route.

The train had had two extra private cars tucked on to the end of it in Portland. When we looked at this particular train's schedule, we found that it started to fall behind schedule when it stopped to hook up those private cars (conductors confirmed this to us). That schedule gap started at 2 hours and grew to 5.

I know I'll never ride that Amtrak route again, and this experience soured me on all of Amtrak in general (except maybe for the NW Corridor - I know it's run differently).

We took the trip before the March 2018 memo that the article quotes: "These operations caused significant operational distraction, failed to capture fully allocated profitable margins, and sometimes delayed our paying customers on our scheduled trains ... one-time trips and charters are immediately discontinued." To us, that's too little too late, Amtrak's brand is ruined.
> "audience would want to listen to me but unable to because I'd have to build a new Internet to do it".

We are talking about Facebook here, right? Do they have to power to remove your content from the Internet entirely?

> If it's because of other forms of prejudice not listed in the list, or because of their non-membership in the ruling party, that would be ok?

It depends! It is entirely legal to discriminate against someone because they're stupid or ugly. Is that okay? Obviously we have to rule on a case-by-case basis.

> We know for a fact that the slope is slippery. We witnessed the descent many times.

Facebook has banned content it doesn't like since the inception of the platform. You have no more of a right to post there than have your articles be published by a newspaper. They aren't a government and can't police your speech, but they can (and should) decide what they post.

> Very bad example.

Except it's still actually illegal? The rest of your argument simply doesn't apply, since Facebook is not the government.
"I'd love to chat, but I'm lost in a foreign country. Can you just Venmo me some money so I can get home and then we can talk about $shared_past_event later?"
Libraries are great for heads-down focused work, but I can't imagine doing sales calls at the library would be allowed.

My local library blocks vpn and ssh, actually, so that makes it even worse.
> When it comes to you, nothing is too good to be true. It’s too good to be true for someone else. But you always think, “Oh, I deserve this. This is evidence of how smart I was in making this decision.”

Powerful