skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> It's not actionable when it's a rando in an online multiplayer game upset at you. It's absolutely actionable when it's your jilted lover in your face, or even if they're texting you.

> The details make the case.

That's pretty much what I was saying, as well, I believe.

In and of itself, saying (even in person) "I'm going to kill you" is an idle threat that the police in my state will not do anything about in a vacuum.

However, saying such a thing while also being in a position to reasonably carry out such an action, the Police will step in on those threats.

In the situation you described, unfortunately, the first time they may just tell the couple to stay at different places that night to cool off. This assumes by the time they arrive there are no visible marks on the victim and no weapons out.

Now if they have to come out for several of these calls, it's no longer "in a vacuum", and they can probably detain the threatening person.

Your state or country's police force may operate under different rules and laws.
Can you ever really have a minimum guaranteed speed when often times the limiting factor is the remote's ability to upload?
If you support free speech so much then you should respect Cloudflare’s right to exercise their free speech right to decide what content they want to serve on their privately owned servers.

The idea that the government should force companies to host extremist content against their will is anti-free speech, not pro-free speech. It’s equivalent to forcing people to put up political yard signs on their lawn without their consent.
Nobody is talking about crminalizing speech. 8chan is a private website and 8chan service providers are private companies who do not wish to do businesses with 8chan because of the 8chan community's endorsement of domestic terrorism. Nobody should be forced to do businesses with 8chan and if nobody will and that means 8chan disappears from the internet, that is a decision society has made within their rights as free individuals.
to put another way, my freedom to swing my fist ends where your nose starts.
> Pretty much. It's a problem anyone doing privacy conscious software is going to run into, if it works it will be used by people generally agreed to be morally detestable (eg: child abusers or human traffickers).

Exactly what was happening to mastodon before they made a rule for all sane instances to not federate with neo nazi instances
Humility and self awareness is always inspiring. As well as starting to learn new concepts 20y in. Kudos!
What about Islamic intolerance?
> My opinion is that freedom of speech is a fine ideal to strive for, but it relies on having a stable society with some minimum level of education (moral and philosophical too, not just the technical kind).

It should be noted that the United States at the time of the drafting of the Constitution had way way lower rates of education than today. Even as recently as 1945, the median American only had a 10th grade education. No matter how you measure it, literacy, primary school completion, even intelligence tests, there's no question that the Americans today are significantly more educated than a hundred years ago let alone two hundred.

Yes, I know you explicitly said not to focus on "technical" education. But there's no reasonable definition of the term, whereby you can honestly make a case that the America of 1789 was somehow more educated than the the America of 2019.

All of which means that you have to bite a bullet. Either the Founding Fathers were wrong to enshrine such strong protections of free speech in our Constitution. OR admit that our citizenry more than meets the threshold you posit regarding minimum level of education.
> Moderate people are repulsed by such forums and the quantity of hate-speech they generate, which further compounds the negative feedback loop.

Lots of people are afraid of blood and spiders, but we still have doctors and exterminators.

Actually changing other people's opinions doesn't always look like having your friends Like your Facebook posts.
> If you have the means, though

I don't, at least not comfortably (I probably could swing buying a newer car, but it'd definitely be painful). There are millions of Americans out there for whom that's probably out of the question entirely. And then there's the people who can't afford streaming radio (and/or a device + data plan to actually stream it) or buying music outright, or otherwise don't want to pay for those things, and at the same time don't feel like sailing the high seas for it (if your sails catch my drift).
I recently read David Deutsch's book Beginning of Infinity, and it drastically increased my level of optimism. Summarizing it wouldn't do it justice, but I highly recommend reading it.
Google's greatest PR move was convincing people that they're not a soulless billion dollar corporation like those other soulless billion dollar corporations
If 8chan was recruiting people to join al queada in Syria, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. They're a terrorist recruitment site, full stop. Shut them down.
>>>gun rights/white supremacist media machine

Why do you link these two things, as if no minority is pro-gun rights and active in the media?

https://www.youtube.com/user/MrColionNoir
Coming from the same company that also listens to your conversations in your house via Alexa? Why do people still trust Amazon? Stop using Ring, and get another non-cloud device. Issue resolved.
I'd love to see a correlation graph showing the time this was posted to HN, and the server load on the Slack-emoji image-importing service. Pretty sure these are going to become hotkeys in a lot of workplaces.
“Let’s attack” is generally the indicator here, and where we draw the line both morally and functionally. For example - there’s been very few partisan attacks on democrats despite the absolutely virulent “they’re destroying the country” speech from every conservative news sphere (and vice versa). Pundits have learned to walk that line because that has been the line that actual violence starts. 8chan has no filter or moderation on that. We see the results.
But doesn’t that also raise Chinese import costs the same amount? Or is that where Chinese tariffs in the things they import come into play (like Canadian canola, etc)?

This feels like a sort of race to the bottom.
Always having an excuse for being happy to see people. "Why yes, that is an iPad in my pocket"
A couple of things:

1) The tariffs are not getting paid by China. That money is coming from American businesses that buy from China. The tariffs just force those companies to look for cheaper alternatives.

2) The devaluation now makes China that cheaper alternative again even with the tariffs because now the USD goes further.

End result now is it makes the tariffs more useless and China continues to disallow American imports.
https://wondermark.com/c1485/
Shooting people is obviously against freedom, should be illegal and is illegal.

You're insinuating that if freedom of speech laws in the US were less principled, those people wouldn't have died. But maybe if news outlets didn't report on mass shootings those people wouldn't have died too, should we prohibit news outlets from reporting these things?

It's not the fault of free speech that some mentally unstable person killed people, the same way it's not the fault of the journalists that report these tragedies.
After 9/11 and the Oklahoma City bombing, it became harder to get the materials for bombs. Bullets did not become harder to obtain in the same way. So the method of choice for causing mass panic moved to shooting.
Ah apologies, I only took a cursory look at his dispatching logic. It looks to me like it supports both modes, but you have to hand roll the dispatching logic if you want to use it at runtime (but he provides an example). If you _really_ need the runtime dispatch then yeah I'd agree FMV is probably cleaner.
Yeah, that's about 2-2.5x what it costs here; the 2k a month is what you pay on a loan of 500k for 30 years repayment.

I have absolutely 0 interest in moving, it's nice here: we have a proper Democracy (proportional representation), you can cycle everywhere and the culture is socially liberal* and understanding.

* The Netherlands is very socially liberal, but I live in the Bible Belt where a large proportion are socially conservative. However people learn to accept each other's differences and the PR ensures that certain groups don't get a disproportionate voice. I actually like living here: Bible Belt means community and a similar decency standard whilst live-and-let-live means that our LGBT friends can actually live their lives in the open.
What is winning the war mean in this case? Because the producers in the US, such as soy bean farmers, are not winning anything. Consumers and producers generally don't seem to win trade wars. Especially when tariffs come into play.
I guess atleast the speedtest numbers are high.
Maybe I heard wrong then, but I was told that links posted by YC members are colored differently visible only to other YC members. Perhaps that was just a conspiracy.
"Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient". Censorship can be conducted by a government, private institutions, and corporations."/wikipedia

It is censorship, even if it is private companies and nobody got arrested etc, censorship is surpressing undesired information
thanks: https://biostat.wisc.edu/~compoptics/Analysis%20of%20Feature...
I’ve spent my entire career at Fortune 250 companies. Never seen or heard of something like this personally. Neither has my wife who works in sales (high turnover) and is currently pregnant.
The criteria is pretty straightforward: you apply the "intolerance of intolerance" to the first intolerant action in the chain, i.e. the one that infringes unprompted on someone else.
[...]If you are a policeman, clearly you are going to opt for population A if you want to make a bust.[...]

Whether I have to make 1000 controls for a 39 percent chance to catch one dealer, or 1000 controls for a 95 percent chance to catch one dealer – both are incredibly ineffective. This is exactly the problem.

If I am only capable of random controls with low chances, I have to control very, very many people to make a hit (and each control of an innocent person is something, that should be avoided if possible, because it is a form of harassment). Now by going from one low probability to a somewhat less lower probability by ignoring the group of the lower probability and putting all the burden of unjustified control to the other group you create a huge sense of frustration, stress, injustice and anger. For good reason! You make a 60:40 relation to a 100:0 relation with this approach. The problem is not with the dealers, but with the false positives. 600 innocent people of group A have to be harassed for one true positive, but 0 innocent people of group B get harassed and 0 people of group B get busted, because they are not even controlled anymore (as hits are less likely). And now, by making hits only in group A, the ratio of convicted drug dealers gets pushed even more into the direction of group A, allegedly confirming the efficiency of racial profiling. It is utterly wrong. Morally and mathematically. It is a pseudologic abuse of science to discriminate a group of people. And the desire for discrimination arises from hate. That is, why racial profiling is forbidden in modern democracies and it is not a matter of free speech, in my eyes.

If you wish for a more efficient handling of your police with drug dealers, you really do not want them to perform random controls (whether racially biased or not)!
Yes, it is. The nuance he was intentionally illustrating is the basis of our entire law. The one key exception to freedom of speech is speech that will, with high certainty, provoke "imminent lawless action."

And this is something that is interpreted in the most literal and conservative fashion possible. In his former statement he has a specific target, time, and location. It is extremely likely that his behavior will result in imminent unlawful action. By contrast condemning a large group lacks any specificity and is, in and of itself, not likely to suddenly drive any specific unlawful action.
Pretty certain that wholesale theft was not part of the "voluntary deal". Can you point to exact language in agreements that granted them absolute rights to any IP?

However, the western executives that signed those deals, have long made their massive bonuses, it's all been paid out and some of those execs probably even retired. What do they care?

Such a great way to raid the company you manage at the expense of shareholders/employees.
Bullet proof armour, I think.
Death Valley is also in a valley surrounded by tall mountains loaded with cell tower equipment so the signal propagates pretty easily because there are minimal line-of-sight obstructions.
8chan took the shooter's manifesto down way faster than it took Facebook to take down the Christchurch shooter's streams. You're mistaken if you think that 8chan "relentlessly fails to comply with the rules", anyone paying attention knows that they're very responsive. This is nothing more than a witchhunt because people want the site to go away.
Kyle Bass would disagree.
> I continue to be surprised at the level to which people misunderstand this.

It isn't "misunderstanding" it is willfully ignoring to push a narrative. I sincerely doubt most of the people here calling this a violation of free speech are doing so in good faith.

It is a pretty basic set of logical steps to determine that a private business refusing to serve a customer is perfectly okay and should be encouraged. Arguing that a private business should be forced at gunpoint by government goons to do business with nazis or racist assholes doesn't make any sense at all.

All the attempts to derail into minutia like "cloudflare is a utility" is simply done to wear you out.
This expectation & comparison is part of why “Death Valley Germans” is such a meme.
Stock valuation is an up-to-the-second price for a highly liquid asset that is fungible to cash; a good comparison would be the exchange rate affecting the value of the "cash" in your checking account, which is not actual cash, but rather an IOU for cash. "Imagined money" is not a good way to describe stock valuation.
At a guess, you don't belong to, or have friends in, groups ISIS believes deserve to be put to death.
The USA has an extremely long time horizon. They endured the Qing dynasty, the PRC, the troubled times under Mao, and now bide their time patiently, waiting for a successor government more pliant to their needs.

I’m not fond of this whole “Eastern mysticism”/100-year-horizon crap; that sort of thinking is just soft-soled racism—along the same lines as the Noble Savage trope.
Brook's Law always reminds me of one of my favorite Dilbert cartoons:

https://dilbert.com/strip/1996-04-15
My new goto for animated buttsss.
Thank the Constitution that some of those "nice things" (freedom of speech, for example) are acknowledged as intrinsic rights and not granted to us by the government. So yes, we can have still them, because they cannot be taken away, only infringed upon, regardless of who is spoiling them.
As many a person who bought bitcoin at 20k will tell you...
Then again, last time I checked bitcoin was on the up trend again.
It's their right to associate or not associate through business with whoever they like as long as they are not breaking the law. Are they breaking the law? If not then it's now you suggesting imposing your viewpoint on them in a way that restricts their 1st amendment rights.
YouGov: Some ad blocker users still view 'acceptable' ads
The same thing happened to me. I was a manager at the company, and an employee came to me saying he had witnessed harassment against someone else on his team. As a manager, after I heard that news, I literally had no choice in the matter - the only course of action was to directly report to HR (The HR team specifically put all managers, at all levels, through training saying they must report any known or suspected cases of harassment or else they put the company at grave liability risk).

While I think it's unfortunate that this is usually a more successful route, I agree with you that it's no longer a "he said-she said" case (or, in the case of the article, a "she said-she said"), and since HR also has to deal with people who do (even if rarely) use the complaint process as a weapon, coming off as a "reluctant witness" seems to help. Again, want to emphasize that it's unfortunate that is the case, but I also think that's human nature.
Wouldn't that be more like public roads? You couldn't decide that Fords are not allowed on a road, just because of the brand, but Ford is perfectly within their rights to not sell a car to somebody, just as Cloudflare and Voxility have decided to sell their hosting services to 8chan.
They do have a long time horizon, and on that horizon is a point at which China no long substantially relies on exports to the U.S. and can reject U.S. demands without fear of significant disruption to its domestic economy. Indeed, everything China has been doing has been designed, in part, to hasten that day.

Total exports as a share of China's GDP have been dropping since the mid 2000s. They're now below 20%. Americans, and especially American pundits, however, seem to be living in the 1990s and early oughts, when exports peaked near 40% of GDP.

China still has huge poverty problems, but what's changed is that both China and the world have grown up and fully industrialized. The entire world is China's market now, not just the richest, Western nations. The world is a much bigger, wealthier place today than 20 years ago, and the trend will only continue.
That's a completely irrelevant comparison. People who die from alcohol-related deaths have a choice whether or not to consume alcohol. The 29 people who died this past weekend in El Paso and Dayton were not given a choice whether they wanted to get shot by terrorists.
Are you talking about refugees??
Before the devaluing the US consumer was paying the tariffs.

But they devalued to compensate for the tariffs.

In effect, the tax is now being covered by China’s central bank.
>however I believe there are some situations where such a choice is not so bad. If you're young, have no obligations, believe in what you do and will end up a lot better after the sprint

How will YOU end up better after the sprint if you're not working on your own product but on your company's? That will benefit your CEO and shareholders for sure but how does it benefit YOU exactly?

Keep in mind, you have one health in your life and when it's gone it's gone for good whereas there'll be plenty of world-changing unicorns where you can work yourself to exhaustion if that's what you wish. Nobody has ever regretted on their deathbed not having worked more for someone else.
I could see a case for it if you were finding line endings in bytes mode, and then casting a buffer to a UTF-8 string. Then you'd benefit from a reverse iterator, which UTF-8 supports just fine.

I imagine the main reason people would use indexing is to scan through strings in lockstep, e.g. to implement comparison, but iterators can cover that case as well, especially if you can copy them.
My main issue with this line of reasoning is that it feels largely emotion driven. Even if communities with zero moderation do offer more likely spaces for extremist thoughts to develop and become action, I can't claim I've seen a broad academic consensus that sacrificing current free speech rights would actually solve or otherwise impact the problem in a meaningful way.

I don't think communities that turn a blind eye to hatespeech are wholly innocent, especially in light of how many threads downright enourage people thinking of taking violent action, but if we take a step back this doesn't seem wholly different from blaming violent video games for glamorizing gun violence or blaming rap music for gang culture. There's a reason that most people, including racists/bigots/etc. don't go on shooting sprees or run people over with cars. Handwaving the problem as a free speech issue ignores the long spans of time we weren't seeing these trends in spite of having the same rights to speech we have now. I don't know what the right answer is, but censorship affects everybody so it seems like it should be the last solution considered imo.
Bill's address back then:

5161 NE 41st St
Seattle, Washington 98015

https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6579855,-122.2705519,3a,75y,...
We've seen small Raspi clusters (especially for web hosting) frequently on HN, always as proof of concept. But does it really stand out? What about performance/(dollar spent on hardware) or (dollar spent on electricity)? How does it compare with an Intel NUC or an Atom/ITX Board?
Next up... lets make some "liquid bread" (beer) like the Egyptians did!
Is it your understanding that 100% of the followers of Islam are intolerant? There has never been a single person who identifies as Islamic who has been tolerant?
Where's this nutty notion coming from that tariffs yield revenue to the government?
Gah! Updated, thanks.
It's cultural. There's a serious adherence to the phrase let the buyer beware, however it's almost impossible to solve locally because if you acknowledge a problem you're apparently responsible for fixing it or you can be disappeared if it makes the country look bad. China is a very unique country with interesting sets of values. The whole global recycling chain got upended because a movie in China showed how nasty and harmful the recycling process is for low end plastics and metals which embarrassed the country. I remember there was an official who got in trouble for smiling at an inappropriate time. Almost everything is about appearance, much like the US early in it's ascendancy. China will eventually change when it's in their best interest to protect other people, it's not as if the US doesn't do very similar things to some of it's allies. Just look at the chicken tax or Canadian business suits for example. It's just in our best interest to enforce IP law currently because we own some of the most valuable IP. We over protect a ton of it too. That's nothing compared to our blatantly excessive copyright laws. Simply put it massive rent seeking behavior on the part of the US. As far as devaluing their currency, it's one of the few cards they have to play but it will hurt them in the long run as it means their foreign investments will lose value unless it's in real estate.
Not a lawyer either, but it's formally called The Brandenburg Test:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

"The Court held that government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is 'directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.'"
Generally for IP violations, you get sued. Like Huawei has been sued a bunch.
I'm not sure I'm following--you're 57 and finding it harder to find a job?
On the other hand, the extremists are one click away from the people who will call them out on their bs. I'm not sure if that's worse or better than deplatforming them only to have they retreat to even more extremist echo-chambers.
For reference: http://www.otherhand.org/home-page/search-and-rescue/the-hun...

It's quite the read.

It's also recommended reading if you go to the US West and your expectations are mostly informed by tooling around the countryside of Western Europe (or the eastern US for that matter).
> I can easily see people disagreeing on what is and is not intolerant

Not in the subject at hand. I think pretty much everyone reasonable agrees that "kill the {jews,muslims,hispanics}" (once more, folks, this was the THIRD ethnic massacre advertised on 8chan!) is intolerant, no? Can't we start there?