skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That is not what CDA 230 does. It even allows a website that mostly publishes its own content (like a paper) also publish user comments, without being held liable for them.

> This "publisher" v. "platform" concept is a totally artificial distinction that has no basis in the law. News publishers are also protected by Section 230 of the CDA. All CDA 230 does is protect a website from being held liable for user content or moderation choices. It does not cover content created by the company itself. In short, the distinction is not "platform" or "publisher" it's "content creator" or "content intermediary." Contrary to Coaston's claims, Section 230 equally protects the NY Times and the Washington Post if it chooses to host and/or moderate user comments. It does not protect content produced by those companies itself, but similarly, Section 230 does not protect content produced by Facebook itself.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190507/16484342160/one-t...

The section is actually quite clear if you take the time to read it:

"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—
(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected".

An interactive computer service means anything that smells like a website, and here it says they may block or filter anything at all they find objectionable. It's quite explicit. It does not restrict its protections to "platforms", but to any provider of internet services that host third-party content.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230
I couldn't stop thinking of the comedy potential of hypothetical conversation between a French person, who keeps saying "non" profusely, and a Japanese person who is appalled, and is trying their very hardest to not say "no".

> French ‘no’ is often an invitation to debate, engage and better understand one another,

To someone who can read and sometimes understand spoken French, that seemed like a good approximation. Also liked that part where they explain that "non" is just another way of saying "I don't know".

From the personal point of view, would say a French "non" is also easier to say, it just rolls off the tongue in a way and seems less abrupt and confrontational than a "no" in English, for example.
You are right in a certain aspect that 8chan is more compartmenalized than Reddit or Youtube, but there is still a world of difference in the discoverability of the various boards on 8chan versus the internet at large. A non-radicalized 8chan user can end up on /pol out of mere curiosity and be pulled in. No one visits the Daily Stormer without a predisposition to hate.
You're in favour of censorship. Moderation is keeping discussion civil and on-topic, which interestingly enough mostly happens by itself in 'absolute free speech' spaces.

What you support is the selective suppression of ideas that you don't like. Don't call it moderation. Call it by its name. Censorship.

Cloudflare isn't 'moderating' 8chan. It's deplatforming it and enacting censorship.
Sure...vouchers would be nice! What does the spreadsheet mode do?
I can already see those kids thank OP in the future for this. To instill creativity as something rewarded, in such a young age, might impact positively their creativity for the rest of their life.

If I can be a little more personal on the matter: I wish I was shown creativity this way.
This is a really cool invention, and I think it would be a lot of fun to use. But it's not the first personal flying device, and fuel considerations have been an obstacle to many of those.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_pack

"their uses are much more limited than their fictional counterparts because of the challenges of Earth's atmosphere, gravity, low energy density of available fuels, and the human body not being suited to fly, and they are principally used for stunts"

The "low energy density of available fuels" is a concern for this device too: note that the prototype required refueling in order to cross the English Channel. Having to carry your own fuel is a big limitation for flying machines.
It could also be akin to the guardian of a minor, whilst a minor may have a mind, they wouldn't necessarily be in charge of making decisions regarding legal recourse, or in some cases personal health. If we pursue this train of thought, there could be some expectations for the "legal guardians of rivers" to justify what course of action they should take on behalf of such a thing, in that they may be expected to ensure the health and longevity of the river, and hopefully improve the quality of life for all living things in and around rivers.
It looks like there’ve been about four mass shootings in China since 1990; a couple criminal (robbery-related), one terrorist, one random.

Of course, information out of China isn’t that reliable, you could argue. The EU as a whole is considerably bigger than the US, and every year or so there’s a mass shooting or other mass killing. And it’s huge news for a long time. The UK has about a fifth as many people as the US, and this century has had five mass killings (one of which involved guns). The US rate and attitude really is abnormal.

Edit: It’s also worth noting that the vast majority of European mass killing incidents are terroristic; the “someone just shoots a bunch of people for no particularly discernible reason” thing is really, really rare. The Texas shooting (terroristic) would be extremely shocking in any European country and would dominate the news for a long time. But the Ohio one (looks non-terroristic) would probably have an even bigger impact and would likely lead to tightening of gun laws etc (the Dunblane massacre lead to the banning of almost all handguns in the UK, for instance).
Mosquitoes are valuable pollinators, and the majority do not carry diseases. If you have a simple solution to a big problem, then most likely, you're going to have more problems.
> Then I went to where was free speech was absolute and saw what was discussed.

That suffers from a selection effect. Since not many sites prioritize free speech and only allow things within some narrower region of the overton window to be discussed it follows that the more extreme positions get pushed to sites that allow more.

If, hypothetically, every site were tolerant then you wouldn't have that association.

Also note that even 8chan is still moderated, each sub-board has its own rules and there also are global rules. What it really enables is a diversity of rules, set by each sub-community.
What people seem to want is for sub-communities not to be allowed to exist even though they're not illegal. And that seems pretty dangerous.
Um...no. Excess glucose kills you slowly with tissue damage and ketoacidosis. Too little glucose kills you quickly by starving your brain of something it needs. So glucose is very much the stuff we want to control. The mechanism for regulating glucose is insulin.
A good definition for good I've come across is:

"Anything which should be done, if done as it should, to the extent to which it should, in the place where it should, at the time when it should, and in view of the end for which it should, is called good."

Kind of explains why the distinction between good and bad remains a grey area for some.
That doesn’t change the fact that the CRA restricted freedom of association. Still, the better argument for legislating platform neutrality is that those platforms enjoy special legal status based on the notion that they can’t be held responsible for user-generated content. If you can spare resources to purge content that offends your political sensibilities, then you are making a choice not to remove content that is, e.g., defamatory, infringes on copyright, etc.
If 8chan is really committed to some kind of free speech absolutism, it makes me wonder why they removed the offending posts.
It's not really lone wolf terrorism; evidence suggests that most killers actually have a loose but persistent social network. Even though they may select the time, location, and specifics of their actions in private, they typically discuss the possibilities and general goals/tactics with others.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1057610X.2017.1...

Media coverage can make a difference but I think relatively few people just decide to do it based on news coverage. FBI data suggests a median planning time of 1-2 months and a median preparation time of a week.

https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/pre-attack-behaviors-of-...

There is a community that actively celebrates, studies, and iterates on mass shootings for a variety of ends from political to psychic reasons.
This is chilling, and let me tell you why...

CloudFlare cuts off 8chan... but "There are other DDOS protection services, so this doesn't mean 8chan is going offline for good".

Except CloudFlare just turned DDOS Infrastructure from Platform to Publisher. CloudFlare explicitly doesn't support 8chan. So other DDOS protection services who allow them are forced to say why they allow them, when their competitors don't. The CEOs of these companies not to be affiliated with 8chan, or to just not lose their professional networks are now in a position where remaining impartial is no longer viable.

DDOS protection is now something that is only provided to "allowed" speech, where it is "allowed" by Tech CEOs based out of Silicon Valley.

It used to be "site X doesn't have to host you, make your own", except given how easy DDOS attacks are to perform even if you can build your own version of "site X" hosting is now no longer possible.

This is the last phase of web centralization. If tech giants don't like your site, they won't host it, or even protect it. But because its a "bad" site, its ok.
The variant I hear/use here in west coast english goes something like "Oh yeah, no, for sure" for a positive/agreement.

edit: USA west coast English
The Y Combinator in Ruby
It is, closed loop system are about to be legal in New Zealand, and the pumps the govt supplies will support it.

It has just taken time.
The only value in superficial diversity (the sort of diversity most valued in the West today) is that of a signal: signifying that there isn't any discrimination going on.

Aside from this signaling value, superficial diversity has very little value.

Ironically, as superficial diversity has become an end in itself, we are now encouraged to reduce individuals to their superficial characteristics, this behavior being the very foundation of the bigotry we want to eliminate from society.

Brave people willing to stand up and call out the diversity mafia for what it is - a bunch of well meaning but naive advocates for what often amounts to disguised bigotry - is what we need now more than ever.
This is the typical handwaving from the right. None of these incidents are even remotely comparable to what has happened in the US over the last decade in totality. Andres Breivik swings these stats in a way that is useful for this agenda.
> I think this is because CPython makes something like 1000 malloc calls just to startup, so if those can be made ~instant you get a lot of benefit.

This suggests that Python's pool allocator is really bad at handling start up procedures, doesn't it?

It intentionally over allocates, but not by enough to handle the warm up procedure.
This is patently false...the driver meets all the regulation set by cities and states. They also pass background checks and have continuous 6-12 month reruns on all those checks.

You similarly have no idea if your taxi driver, bus driver, train operator is sober. Hell, most people recognize their friends or family are not sober and still knowingly get in the vehicle.
Ask HN: What are the fundamentals of data structures and algorithms?
> You asked how...if you mean what technology...secret recipe... :)

I'm pretty sure that's what he meant. Generally, the tech stack you're using is not that important to the protection of your product...

And it's hard to obfuscate the stack you're using anyway. From using the chrome extension [1] Wappalyzer we can tell, you're using:

- Azure cloud

- Stripe

- Google analytics

- JQuery

Which doesn't (and shouldn't) compromise your product/idea at all, so there's no harm in sharing your tech-stack (how you built it).

[1] https://www.wappalyzer.com/
I never heard of them before, so I checked Wikipedia and read this:

"The platform works by buyers undercutting each other in a fashion similar to the stock market, eventually causing limited items to lose all value. "

Can someone elucidate how this is like the stock market, because I don't get it.
Personally, I'm both shocked and disappointed over the support people in this thread are giving to Cloudflare over this. This is both ridiculous and unprofessional.
The framers of the constitutuon recognized that land has rights too and made sure that geography, not just population, was part of the democracy via institutions such as the electoral college. Very forward thinking
A hyperlink is all it takes to stumble into another site.
The word "corporation", even in the legal sense includes things like towns. In a slightly broader sense, it includes things like provinces and countries. So why could it not include something like the community of people who live by and or use water from the river?

Now I can see all sorts of detailed problems with this (for example people upstream might have opposite interests from downstream, so the collective is not a coherent person-like entity). But I don't see a fundamental difference between this kind of corporation and that of the existing kinds.
I'd take a step back here. With phrases like "garbage" and "(unearned) privilege", this has obviously pushed a more personal button than poor methodology.

I just know from the (admittedly) small sample I am familiar with, it lines up perfectly.

The middle-of-the-roaders all became attorneys, executives, top bureaucrats, etc--precisely as foretold. The outliers--the ones who could still clean everyone's clock while hung over and half asleep--all ended up in markedly less glamorous circumstances: secretaries, clerks, pot-head househusbands, librarians, gigolos, and the perpetually unemployed. I'm not sure I'd call it a tragedy though. They all seem happy enough where they are.

edit: I grew up pre-internet. Post-internet, this may be a moot crisis. With all of the opportunities it has to offer for independent study, perhaps those secretaries and clerks would have become scientists and mathematicians?
yeah, typically you would get error if you use variable length lookbehinds

a few do support it (for ex: Python's 3rd party regex module) and sometimes you could workaround with \K (similar to \zs in vim) [1]

And there are other frustrating differences between implementations, for example \g definition is very different between Ruby and Python, character set operations are not found everywhere, etc. Plus, BRE/ERE versions found in command line tools do not even support features like non-greedy and lookaround

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/11640447/variable-length...
Best part of the post :
"People wonder why the FTC always settles,” Hoofnagle added. “It’s actually the defendants that want to settle. The FTC investigates and invariably uncovers other wrongdoing and knowledge of the action by executives.”
Why is the point of a river longevity? Left to their own devices, rivers change course and dry up. The key characteristic of a river is a flow of water not longevity
yeah, it's extremely important to seem positive and friendly in every case. i definitely prefer the central european way of judging mainly on actions though
Are you going to cite anything about knife crime not being a problem in the UK?

How do you explain much lower homicide rates in different US states, many on par or better than "every other first wolrd country?

If you drill down deeper, by county level, or even more granular - the picture becomes much clearer still. You should research it, see what variables drive it, instead of arriving at conclusions without any data.

Why do such discrepancies exist, sometimes literally across the street?

The problem is much more complicated than "guns bad".
'Yeah nah' - has variations across the English speaking world: https://english.stackexchange.com/a/253960/15280
Im not suggesting that it will work (to pay per article as we’re describing). But the idea that you should get something for free because you don’t like it isn’t how most things work. Caveat emptor.

Conversely, people said it didn’t cost any practical amount of money to listen to music, yet Spotify thrives.
Diablo 1 running in the browser, thanks to WebAssembly
Exaggeration isn't helpful.
I agree that the racists on 8chan who are in favour of mass shootings are still racists on 8chan in favour of mass shootings. That needs to stop, and this alone doesn't achieve it. But society drawing boundaries about their behaviour is an obviously good step in my view. Companies can be part of that.

I don't get how it's desirable that this shouldn't be called out. Even if cloudflare is clearly looking at its bank balance when doing so.
What is there to say? It's kind of off-topic for Hacker News. If you want an article though, here you go: https://archive.is/NBgoi
If the money doesn't really matter all that much to you then I suppose some people wouldn't be willing to sacrifice their happiness once their basic needs and wants are met.
Intersectionalism Is Nonsense. But the Backlash Against It Is Real
That is very well put, far from the rabid madness that usually seems to be conjured up when gun control is discussed. I spent some time studying it to spot the weak point.

I guess it is the phrase "to disarm them", which is somewhat provocative, since no-one would seriously advocate taking away all guns. Even Japan, with just 5% of the gun violence of the US, allows some citizens to have some guns.

Another issue is with your stated statistic of death via mass shooting. This obviously ignores maimings and other non-deaths, and also deaths from guns in non-mass events, such as burglaries, accidents.

But most of all, it ignores the psychological impact from the threat of gun violence.

What happens to a young child's mind from having to participate in active shooter drills? From having adults explain to them that this is a real threat, and that they better be ready for it? No child should have to carry that burden.

And maybe that leads back to some agreement with your point. If the actual danger from guns is as low as you say, then why have these drills at all?
Too late to edit, but I'd forgotten paid-placement was a thing in search results before google. Can you believe it?

Of course, adwords has similarities (and copied from overture/goto), but don't masquerade as search results (though becoming less distinguishable over time...).
Shialator: A timer app for lazy people
You might want to put a disclaimer at the bottom of your post that you are working in the automated food space (http://infinite-food.com/).
Well, generically the topic is domestic terrorism.

I know that I'm verging on whataboutism. But there is the tendency to amplify outrage based on public sympathies.

I worry lots more about official government violence. Consider deaths of US troops in Iraq during the mid 00s. About 800-900 per year.[0] Or far worse, deaths of Iraqis, which exceeded 20K per year during that period.[1] The same issues that are driving mass shootings will likely result in another major war. That's the thing to worry about.

0) https://www.statista.com/statistics/263798/american-soldiers...

1) https://www.statista.com/statistics/269729/documented-civili...
This has nothing to do with the right to be heard. In this case, it'd be about requiring CloudFlare to _assist_ 8chan in _being_ heard. And there's no such right, or ruling.

8chan's hosting isn't even being yanked, only their access to an edge caching CDN. I'm really struggling to see a "free speech" issue here. What if Google Analytics decides not to offer 8chan analytics? Does that also interfere with the right to speech?
> we know now the Apple Card won’t play nice with a jailbroken iPhone

Smells like anti-trust violation.
I wonder if anyone ever measured failure rates for real world distributed systems outside of FANG vs simple non-distributed alternatives.
I do not support 8-chan, but by doing this and what they did with the daily stormer they are no longer a neutral platform. A neutral platform is like a utility, barring illegal activity, users have a right to use the service as long as they pay for it. Once it is curated, it is not. This is why efforts are afoot to have companies that do this to not get section 230 protections for content hosted on the platform.

The last thing I want is a large, un-elected, tech company moralizing about content hosted on it. Frankly, they are not good at it. If what 8-chan is doing is illegal this can be addressed through the legal system. Also, as needed, laws to address this can go through democratic processes that have checks and balances instead of this. Yes it may be slower, but due process is important.

At some point left un-checked they can and will target other content they disagree with, IE: labeling other fairly main stream right wing stuff as "hate speech". That is ultimately bad for everybody.
>So far he has been a "free speech absolutist" _aside_ _from_...

So not a "free speech absolutist"
Have we all just completely forgotten the years of fighting for net neutrality? The very same net neutrality where we all have been arguing that sometimes even private companies shouldn't be allowed to arbitrarily filter whatever they want?

If all of the major ISPs launch their own email competitor and then go on to block Google, would you be singing the same tune? "It's okay because AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and Charter are private institutions and are not obligated to do business with Google"? What if it turns out that the AT&T CEO is a Trump supporter, and he decides that anyone who has AT&T as an ISP will no longer be able to access any news site other than Fox News? "It's okay because AT&T is a private company and has no obligation to do business with the Washington Post"?

The entire argument for net neutrality is based on the premise that sometimes even private companies become so big that they become very similar to 'public utilities' and it is absolutely in the public interest to force those companies to not arbitrarily filter whatever they feel like.

You can argue that Cloudflare, or a bank, or whoever doesn't fit this definition, but you can't both be for something like net neutrality while simultaneously spouting this argument that "private companies can do whatever they want". We have literally centuries of laws that specifically say that no, companies cannot do whatever they want just because they are private.
Check the Disqus comments on the article. You will quickly realize the problem is way more than what it appears to be. Some of it is here as well...
The UK ‘knife crime’ thing is severely overhyped (in particular, most of the figures you’ll see include mere possession of a knife under certain circumstances). The UK’s intentional homicide rate is middling for Europe and about a fourth that of the US. Homicide rate has risen a little bit over the last few years.
Regarding NICS access, spot on. I believe it would be constitutional to hold private sellers responsible for a limited period (1-2years) for firearm crime by purchasers. Give a safe harbor for private sales which include a NICS check, but this would require opening NICS access in some way.
Why is your average citizen seemingly unconcerned about this? Is it a lack of reporting (awareness) or the misplaced belief amongst the masses that maybe one day they too could be the next Bobby Kotick?