skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hi everyone, just wanted to share a cool demo I hacked yesterday. If you want to know how it works, make sure to read the README.md. Let me know if you have any questions!
You are missing a third option: AC became more necessary for normal life functioning
It sounds like you would like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNOBOL.

Though if you had to do enough work with text, my bet is that you'd eventually figure out why regexes won. They are simple, straightforward, and just enough to tackle the occasional matching problem on your way to doing something else.
PCRE has the DEFINE keyword. Here's an example:
https://regex101.com/library/gJ7pU0

(not to be confused with named capture groups)
This is the wrong way to look at getting traction on HN. The more you do it, the more likely you are to fail, with the modal case being that none of your posts get any attention at all. I can't tell you how many people we see who think that a clever title and posting at the right time and attracting upvotes in a tricky way will get their content noticed. It pains me to see people spending their energy on something that we know from experience won't work.

What matters is whether an article is interesting. That's what you should spend your effort on. An interesting article doesn't mean you'll get noticed, but an uninteresting article means you won't. Articles that try to make a system out of how they succeeded on HN always miss this point. In reality, what happened is that they hit on something that the community found interesting. (In this case, it was how Nike sold its first shoes.) Then they try to generalize based on the mechanical tricks they used. But those are not what made the article interesting.

What makes this difficult is that it's hard to produce interesting articles repeatedly when your motivation isn't curiosity but marketing your business. With most content marketing articles, you can feel what the author was solving for: "What's a thing that HN would find interesting that we can use to market our startup?" You can even imagine the brainstorming session that led to that topic getting selected. There's a limit to how interesting such content can ever get—if it's not something even the author is intrinsically interested in, why would it excite readers?
Perhaps – but I'm pretty sure there's some that don't even receive emails either. It's as if someone was just creating a "standing army" of accounts in preparation to unleash something. Spooky :)
Afro Nation's exclusive content and distribution deal
> universally

That word doesn't mean what you think it means.

If it did, censorship wouldn't be relevant. The content you don't like isn't a naturally or accidentally occurring substance. Someone wanted it to exist.
There's this notion of 'bad money chases out the good'; stems from the time when coinage was made from expensive rare metals. Because weighing your currency is annoying, the state decrees that any stamped coin is to be treated as if it is worth precisely what it says its worth, even if it is a little light.

In such scenarios, everyone saves up their fat coins and spends their most shaved off misshapen light coins. Eventually ALL the money in circulation is the 'bad' money.

The same seems to happen with social networks: _IF_ you allow questionable stuff on your site, soon all the other users will go elsewhere, and your social network eventually caters ONLY to the questionable stuff. The counterweight to that would be lots of users who put inherent value in the notion that the social network they are a part of 'does not believe in censorship', but I think we all know a vanishingly small amount of non-incel/dailystormer/etc users care enough about it to hang out on the incel/dailystormer/etc social network, where every stranger you meet, is likely tweaked in the head.

Give it some time and I bet soon the same thing again will happen to CDNs: If most CDNs band together to censorship such content, on one hand there'll always be a CDN that sees a mission (and perhaps, a business case) in being anti-censorship. But, soon, the ONLY thing that CDN will be hosting is questionable content. And at that point, I bet plenty of sites, filters, firewalls, internet providers, etc, will just blanket-ban the entire CDN and be rid of it all.

And then sites like 8chan possibly truly cannot survive.

Or not. Maybe they'll find a way.

But if that happens, the 'council of CDNs' will have quite a bit of power to wield. So far the messaging coming from at least cloudflare is that they understand this and take this seriously (and so far do not appear to want to open the can of worms if they can avoid it), but it feels inevitable.
I think that the phenotype of biotech founders is changing and will continue to change. Some of the early stage biotech VCs who built their businesses around funding ex-Genentech execs are beginning to fund younger founders (although they are still open to replacing them with experienced execs post Series A).

More $10B+ biotech companies have been built by younger (under 40) CEOs than experienced CEOs. The dogmatic preference for experienced CEOs in biotech is a relatively recent phenomenon (last 15-20 years). It is a function of 1) all the next-gen tech of the genomic bubble of the late 1990s flaming out (gene, cell and antisense therapy v1, genomics v1) and 2) the success of the asset-centric build-to-buy model in biotech VC.

If your model is to fund assets carved out from big pharma, develop them to human POC, then flip them back to big pharma, it makes sense to hire ex big pharma managers to run the company. If your model is to build a large, lasting startup, historical data suggest you are better off with a younger, more technical founder. In a world where pharma is not doing as much startup M&A, where capital is readily available from Series B to public markets, and where you can get drugs approved relatively quickly, more startups have the option of becoming independent companies and not just trying to sell to pharma
We're constantly denying our responsibility to manage our emotions and giving it away to others, so that they can protect us from ever seeing anything that might upset us.

Some people seem to think that there are authorities we can trust to enforce the lines we draw in the sand on what is acceptable speech and what isn't.

There is no such authority. People abuse authority because they can and guess what. When you'll try to say "Hey, you can't do that!" they'll just ban you too.

It is hard and unpleasant and disturbing to deal with reality. It's still real though.
The point is slippery slopes don't stop after the fact.

The next time twitter blows up at Cloudflare [or insert tech company name] over a tragedy what's going to happen?

Does this apply to Islamic Extremism or some radical groups in Ukraine or some hypothetical Flemish separatist group who is openly violent and posts similar un-moderated content? Or is it only for some highly touchy US problems since they're a US company or the topic got the most noise on Twitter/news sites?
And yet, we let Islam continue to be preached in this nation. When will we recognize that extremist ideologies like these can not be allowed to fester? Freedom of speech needs its limits.
I'll bite; the cpu power needed to operate and render that hamburger menu is many times more than was used on the Apollo missions to the moon. :p

We've been going into space for 60 years, we've only gone to cyberspace for 30.
That's the sort of thing that starts to hit some really grey areas, and also starts to illuminate some of the differences in the justifications for banning CP. If you're against CP because it means the exploitation of children, animated images of children that do not exist should be fine - but if you're against it due to it being disgusting or normalizing the abuse of real children it's not. However, I believe that the Supreme Court has thus far held that drawings fall under the 1st Amendment, as (IMO) they most certainly should.
> White nationalists murdering 29 people in 24 hours demonstrates quite clearly that the government does not have a monopoly on force.

The Dayton shooter was a leftist, not a white nationalist.
I had the same in the black Forrest, at the top of hills it was OK but mostly it was indeed Edge. Here in Austria I have LTE everywhere.
TV too. Living in Japan I find Japanese TV overwhelmingly boring, lots of shows of minor celebrities reacting to things (uncomfortable situations, food, travel)....with almost the exact same expression, every time. That, or drama shows with terrible acting.

Then I come back to the States and I'm honestly shocked at how macabre American TV is in comparison. It's non-stop crime shows, murder investigations, action, and militarism, with a shootout key to the resolution of almost any episode.

Is it any surprise that Americans reach for their weapons to solve problems with increasing regularity? I blame American's Puritanical streak.....we can't have nice, pleasant things like topless women on TV like they do in Europe.
Css is hard, by proxy, ui is hard :)
No. It gave me like 17 attempts before it realized that I wasn't a bot.
Going Buildless
July confirmed as hottest month recorded
Counting Differential Equations, I've had 5 semesters of calculus. (Calc I,II,III,IV, Diff Equ.) Until reading your comment, item 7, I had never heard this simple explanation of the meaning of the Fundamental Theorem of calculus ("why areas are the reverse of derivatives"). I was taught the fundamental theorem algebraically, and how to apply it, but none of my professors or textbooks ever explained what it meant.
Ask HN: High PPI Monitor Recommendations?
I want a high DPI display (anything over 180PPI to use at 200% scaling), but few such monitors seem to exist in the PC world.

I'm looking for a 24" 4K display or a 27" 5K display. The only ones that I've found are highly problematic:

* The Dell 4K 24" P2415Q monitor, which I've returned two times because it suffers from very noticeable horizontal gray lines over the entire screen.

* The LG 24UD58-B 24" 4K monitor, which I returned because extremely bad backlit bleeding and randomly powering off.

There is an 23" 4k display by LG which looks perfect, except for the fact that it can only be used with a Thunderbolt/USB3 cable because it was designed for Macs.

I'm prepared to pay more; are there niche manufacturers that have high PPI displays designed for photo/video work? What is everyone using for desktop work here? Low PPI displays?
No. Must I be to show someone the community's proverbial door?

The point was downvotes. That's how the HN community shows someone the door. HN itself shows someone the door by banning them.
People are used to treating the Internet as the new public square. Obviously, there are many private entities that make up the Internet, but if want it to continue to serve as the public square (rather than a patchwork of corporate fiefdoms) then I think we have to accept the moral (and possibly legal) obligation of these private entities to maintain the Internet as a public square.
It's not like there are flag events a triggered user can reach for when nothing else satiates that urge to suppress
Haha. I had the exact same thought. Lots of images with blocks of white behind white text. And the font is horrible. I guess sacrifices have to be made somewhere when you’re changing the world.
>add the hundred senators to get the famous 535 electoral college votes

Add the District of Columbia's 3 electors to get the even more famous 538 votes.
I don't recall mentioning anything about lords and feudal duty
Amazon Is Coaching Cops on How to Obtain Surveillance Footage Without a Warrant
ISPs boost traffic caps to speed test sites so they are completely useless for any real assessment.
Show HN: The worst voicemail transcription ever
How did this make it to Production?

Outlook - Voice Mail Preview:

Hey dad this is Darcy with your software and we can I was just checking on you I'm looking into how things are going and also sort of a quick housekeeping question it looks like you might be a version or show behind on the fries manager in comparison to shut let me know if you need any information you know stop being shipment so I changed troll with me that.
I’d be game.
Censorship is censorship whether it's done by a national government or not. You are conflating the First Amendment with (anti) censorship.
Non-compete as a Service! Wait for the AWS product code name and API soon /s
For what it's worth, on O2 there are a ton of better deals than that. Just checked winsim.de for example, 3GB for 8€, 6GB for 13€ a month with no minimum runtime. If you're a power user, Freenet Funk offers unlimited data at 1€/day used (so around 30€/month tops). Don't get me wrong, the situation here is still embarrassing, I just wanted to provide some pointers.
Picking the FB50 smart lock
Deciding to commit mass murder rarely happens in a vacuum. It typically happens when you surround yourself all day by people who tell you that mass murder is a good idea. Radicalization is a social phenomenon.

I'm critical of censorship, but not because I think it's ineffective.
> I like learning Rust so far. The main thing I wonder is what kinds of projects are good to do while learning. I went from Node to Rails to Phoenix and normally I just rewrite web apps I've previously created in the language I'm learning. With Rust, it feels like I should build something different, something lower-level like a tool, an emulator or a 2D game.

If your experience is web apps, I would stick with that; Rust has a great web app story in the form of at least two mature frameworks.
So people who buy a Prius are never virtue signalling?
Reminder that closing 8chan won't stop mass shoting.
it just stops them from announcing it.
World's First 32-Inch 4K Touchscreen PC
An implicit acceptance and endorsement for the messages of hate and violence?

I personally doubt violent video games turn people into murderers; I suspect they do desensitize people to violence, and normalize violence. That's the problem with 8chan: violence, hated, bigotry, etc are normalized
As a pre finance guy, I feel like the funding landscape change has more to do with the massive liquidity post QE just sloshing around. I feel like a lot of the financial trends can all be traced back to this single factor. It's the reason why we've had such a massive bull run in stocks. Come next financial crises that could freeze up, but then rates are going to go back down to zero again and who knows what might happen. So Paul Graham could be right again.
> This includes being able to do evil.

This also includes booting someone off your platform.
I'm most familiar with /a/ and can tell you there's a broad distaste for /pol/ on /a/.
This literally makes no sense whatsoever.
Time Series Analysis and Its Applications: With R Examples [pdf]
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. Coaxing in detail throngs online to attack immigrants, in my non-legal non-expert opinion, seems to be more in the actionable case.
I wholeheartedly agree with the principle here, but not all stocks pay dividends, so it's not precisely fair to compare them to hens in that way.
The "fire in a crowded theater" metaphor is always mentioned in a discussion of free speech. It's like Godwin's Law. I'm tired of it.

You can say anything. But if the thing you say carries consequences beyond the utterance, the freedom of speech does not immunize that sayer from assuming responsibility for those consequences.

It's not about what happens afterward. It's about not removing someone's voice, for fear of what they might say with it.

8chan is not required to support freedom of speech; it's not the government. It is itself free to pick and choose who is allowed to use its platform. My opinion is that it should not engage in content-based censorship, because no one should. Once you start doing that, there's no ethically clear place where the line between acceptable and unacceptable should lie. If you can make a case for banning neo-Nazis and Boko Haram and Sinaloa Cartel and such, you can also make a case for banning people who put pineapple on pizza or ketchup on hot dogs, with the argument variables set to different values.

Information is not the dangerous thing, nor misinformation. When someone is recruited and turned into a soldier via online image boards, using the exact same psychology as state-based militaries around the world--dehumanizing the xeno, and propagandizing them as an existential threat to the in-group identity tribe--that isn't the fault of the medium. It is the responsibility of the recruiter, the propagandist.

The rightful answer to speech with undesired consequences is not censorship, but counter-propaganda, and to some extent psychological hardening of the whole populace, by encouraging skepticism, critical thought, and formation of individual identity and self-image over group identities.

The former is a more active measure that unfortunately requires a bloody-minded relentlessness combined with unending tolerance for nonsense. Imagine a Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham debate that lasts literally forever, and the toll that would surely take on Nye. Now sub in a pants-on-head flat-earther time-cube woo-woo troll for Ham. No one person could take it. And that's why when these fools show up, the thought-terminating cliches have to be countered with thought-provoking dissent. If you see bullshit, call bullshit.

And the latter is something that probably has to happen in young people, coming with a side effect of making them less governable, and harder to convince of anything. Resistance to radicalization over the Internet would directly translate to more difficult military recruiting, drops in the strength of religious affiliations, and harder political campaigns. Not exactly popular among those loving god and country.

It's probably easier to just censor the things the state doesn't want people to say, and just trust that they will stop with the threshold line in the correct place.
Affordable Surface Studio clone
What's the point of accusing me of lying? Either take my argument at face value or don't bother replying.
They did the same thing to collect walking data using the game Ingress, and Goog-411 to collect voice data.

Well specifically, Niantic, which was a google internal thing.
Please name your provider, location and url to your plan. I find your claim very hard to believe.
Shit humans have always existed. But claiming they support "terrorism" in the same sense that we think of organizational terrorism is ridiculous.

4chan and 8chan didn't create hyperirony (although they certainly cultivate massive gardens of it) or densensitization. Our media cycle has created it in tandem with a feedback loop that synergizes with the principle of "more people + same time amount = more hyperslices of emotion eliciting news that distort mental maps of larger-than-self situations"

You're safer at a wal-mart than prior 4chan and 8chan. But if you combine higher population density and information density, you'll get more raw events of violence even if the chance of experiencing violence has gone down.

Imo, there's a more insidious risk in allotting more powers of censorship to entities who are far less subject to reciprocal investigation. Think of 9/11. If we had done nothing, we would be safer and more prosperous today. We let the fleas provoke us into gouging untold amounts of flesh to stop itches.

Edit: A more simple way to phrase it is that hyperirony and the lack of "proper affect", which is really what people seem to be most horrified about, is a defense against the 24/7 atrocity exhibition which turns emotion into banality.
Doesn't really make sense when you consider some amazing stocks (ie: Berkshire Hathaway) that have never given a dividend.
I mean, this is a slippery slope. Before Cloudflare took down TDS without any court order, they could argue that they took nothing down. Now they've taken down a site that hosted hateful extremist content along with a lot of other, more acceptable things, and further takedowns will likely be easier still to justify. That's a textbook slippery slope!

But my argument here was that treating political views and religious views differently doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me, since the content of those views can be almost identical.
That is not protected speech. The 'attack' is the keyword. Therefore, supremacist groups typically say "<oarabbus_'s ethnicity> is destroying <oarabbus_'s country of residence>" which is legal. They're just connecting the dots the only way they know how.
I've experienced that in the past, without using tor, but using Firefox. I go to great lengths to block anything Google. Google Fonts, Google CDNs (and I now use Decentraleyes so CDNs are mostly not even reached). I have to explicitly unblock reCAPTCHA scripts for it to even work - or use a clean and disposable browser profile. I've occasionally seen the behavior on the video when I really need to access the page (though usually I just complain to the webmaster).

I once had to request a new password for my online bank account. I ended up asking the bank manager to reset my password, pretending that reCAPTCHA is preventing me from resetting the password myself. My bank is not paying me for solving captchas for Google's benefit (this is so screwed up…).

The biggest offender is CloudFlare for me.
Freedom of speech IS more important than few dead people. This entire country was founded on this particular issue. People went to war for it.

So there is no need to be glib here.
That's what the pregnant woman claims. The manager could have disliked her for other reasons or considered her unfit for leading people for other reasons.
Word of mouth, Job hunt every day for job B while I have job A.
true, though from a tax POV they are treated differently in many countries
Again, Free Speech is not a law, it's a principle. The question of whether or not this hypothetical law would be legal under the current version of the US constitution is irrelevant.

To repeat my previous point: assume the same law was passed in North Korea instead of the US. Would the law then be "not a violation of Free Speech" because North Korea has no legal protections for Free Speech?
That's a concern leveled elsewhere in this thread: that you go to 4chan to discuss music or retro video games, and are one click away from an absolute hive of poisonous extremists.
Personally, I believe the change is in what you can't see.

FBI counter-terrorism are not the people you want to get the attention of. And these guys just got the attention of federal law enforcement, counter-terrorism, intel and counter-intel in a single weekend.

I mean, you gotta be a special kind of stupid to mess up that badly.

If it makes you feel any better, yeah, I agree with you. These guys have no intention of making any new laws to come after these threats. My concern is more the fact that they probably have no intention of following any inconvenient laws in coming after those threats either.
I think theyre referring to how noncompetes can be enforced everywhere except California.
Hatred and murder has always existed! The idea that online discussion forums create or foment hatred is laughable. That hatred has always been out there. Now people just have a place to vent. The good part about it being out in the open is that we can actually see it and be aware of it.