skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Methinks we as a society can arrive to similar types of rulings for intolerance.

Freedom of speech is too important to be of secondary value to something that can't even be defined clearly.
It makes me wonder if they have any projects planned that they can throw in if there are empty slots.
France has among the slowest Internet in the rich / highly developed countries group.

As recently as 2017 they ranked behind Russia in fixed avg mbps according to Akamai's report and were 5th slowest in Europe. They were #51 globally at that point and Germany was 50% faster and ranked #25 globally.

I'm sure it has improved some in the last two years, I doubt it has dramatically leaped forward.

They've also performed relatively poorly on mobile speeds (from early 2017):

"France got absolutely walloped by all its neighbours, and finished behind 21 other European countries"

https://www.thelocal.fr/20170224/we-all-knew-frances-mobile-...
I feel like there are a lot of "buts" like this to modern life. Whenever the topic of quality of life comes up, people are quick to cite modern medicine, the internet, smart phones, etc. as proof that we're doing better than ever. But so many people are seemingly relegated to this life of urban-wasteland scrounging, rather than the subsistence farming life that people of their station might have had before. I think in the past, it may have been a little easier to "have nothing". At least in the case that you cite, you'd have relatively fresh healthy food, easy access to nature, and gainful employment. Now you've got urban sprawl, food deserts, and no parking signs. It may be true that you're going to die earlier, but at least you could eek some happiness out of life just living in nature. Despite all of our technology, we're just animals.
Maybe there will be less monitoring. But with a lack of easily available places to congregate, the assholes will find it much more difficult to recruit, organize, and build their organization. This stagnates or reduces their membership numbers.

Also, it sends a great signal to anyone who might think of joining: that this ideology is so terrible that it's being chased off of the internet. That even the hands-off companies like Reddit and Cloudflare are rejecting it.

Sure, there will be a few who are attracted to it because it is so reviled, but many more will be repulsed. There's a reason why the hate groups did everything they could to be more appealing to the mainstream. Being forced back into the underground essentially means defeat.

As far as monitoring goes, I don't think it will make much of an impact. These are not difficult groups to infiltrate. Generally speaking, they're not the best and the brightest. Their opsec is poor. Activist groups have infiltrated many of them and have posted the discord transcripts. I'm sure the FBI, and other organizations, have gone even further than that.
My guess is - it was naturally suppressed in the past since there was only top down, centralized, slow and spotty in reaching audiences mass media and recently internet freed it. Everyone with a smartphone became its own little mass media, able to easily find like minded people, supercharge hateful propaganda through feedback loops. Who is spreading that propaganda and why is another question though. Anyone from politicians, foreign, local state actors to gun manufacturers.
I don't think the US is the country to compare against in this case.
based and redpilled.
Location: Ann Arbor, MI, USA

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: Kotlin, Android, Functional Programming, Java, SQLite

Résumé/CV: http://michaelpardo.com/resume

Email: michael@michaelpardo.com
It's between 500 (excl.) and 600 (incl.) as of last week. I saw the down arrows appear.
I've always been intrigued by this, do you think that platforms such as YouTube should be considered public infrastructure? And if so for what reasons?
Finally, this was predicted in the Idiocracy documentary. It seems the timeline is accelerating.

http://imoviequotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/202-Idioc...
I'm shocked by the comments of those here that don't see why something like this must exist and don't see that there is tremendous financial upside for whoever cracks this. Employee equity can generate unbelievable amounts of wealth as well as unbelievable tax consequences/missed opportunities. The deck is mostly stacked against employees, and you're on your own navigating treacherous waters with little information. A strong company in this space can protect employees and ultimately advocate for them and improve the landscape. Or it can augment the deck being stacked in favor of the investors etc. depending on how things shake out for the winners in this space.
That's not an equivalent third option unless you're in a position to afford it.
To me its more like closing the bar they hang out in, almost all of them will find other bars to go to instead almost immediately but it'll cause at least a temporary fracture and even when they all do find themselves back to the same place (asides from the ones who just got on with their lives), it'll take a while to build up the same kind of feedback loop.
Honestly, as a teen (over a decade ago now...), there were forums I was on that totally died due to a week or two of downtime, sometimes just breaking someone away from their familiar habits is enough to get them out of a bad routine.

The notion that we could reach them on 8chan is a bit idealistic, the only thing we're able to reach is the manifestos within seconds of the news breaking as far as I can see. If your goal is to _reach_ them, then do it in reality.
The post above was contrasting it against medium or higher risk investments, so in both cases your liquidity is compromised. Leaving it as cash (or near-cash) is even more conservative than paying off a mortgage.
You can say the same thing about video games. We had a moral panic over those, too.
I think no free speech right was trampled because it wasn't the government that acted, not because the reasons you stated. I mean, going by your logic, it's impossible to trample the free speech of someone unless you make it physically impossible for them to express anything ever again.
I'm sorry you didn't like that simplification. Anyway, it's better than "you have no money but you can make it appear from nowhere and lend it because you are a bank and have special powers".

The more details are given, the less interesting the special powers of commercial banks seem to be: not only is the amount of money that they can create limited to some multiple of the "real money" base, but they don't even lend that much out because it's not profitable.
I'm pretty sure those $225 Thompsons were fully automatic. You're not getting a full-auto AK for anywhere close to $500. Most full-auto weapons today are also in the $2000+ range.
I can't downvote you enough. This is horrible advice. People tend to view going to HR as "the nuclear option", but this is not the case. Most companies put their managers through training about how they put the company at immediate (potentially large) liability if you are aware of harassment, even a "gray area", and you don't report it.
Well now we're talking about what we should be talking about: social conditions. Why people angry enough to kill and end their own lives in America?

But social conditions in America and Europe are very different so it's not an apples-to-apples comparison if we keep talking about gun policy.
Yes, I stand to my word before, Cloudflare is 100% free to choose there own customer.

But if feel it's a bad move just to throw 8chan out because "it is rainy today".

My point was more, we start to privatize all services. From Internet to money to .. whatever. For me it's just wrong if the private companys start to act instead the justice. That's my real point. There is a justice system and they just should do the job.
Original Lisp vendors (Lucid, Symbolics, TI, LMI, Xerox, Franz, Harlequin, Goldhill, ...) and other companies selling CL (HP, DEC, IBM, Apple, SUN, Tektronix, ...) did market it, but that ended in the mid 90s with many of them exiting the business.
Perhaps they aren't and perhaps that's not relevant because they're not important enough.

Tends to happen in large organisations.
I made a Slack community just for feedback
>Why are there not FBI agents in /pol/ on 8chan actively chasing up leads on people who are threatening violence?

They might be, or they might not be. They tend to keep their mouths shut during active investigations, if people found out the FBI was actively subpoenaing the site they might be inclined to stop giving them more evidence. (That is, the FBI could have developed a public-private honeypot partnership for all we know.)

And many times people aren't espousing direct, actionable threats. Talking about "international bankers" and "globalists" is protected speech, saying they control the world is protected speech, and saying something needs to be done about this is also protected speech - as long as they don't get specific (i.e. "we should fight back, let's meet up at <place> on <date/time>"), they can't do much about it. So you have people constantly agreeing about how "Zionists" are a threat to "the west" and that "something" needs to happen, egging on each others hate with various hoaxes, reactionary takes and praising Hitler, and finally someone snaps. Despite these people clearly being partially responsible for encouraging one of their members to violence, none of them will get in trouble because they never gave direct threats or incitements.
Perhaps in Germany Google can charge for their services, but waive the fee if they solve captchas.
The tough ones are people who aren't clearly bad enough to just let go, but lack enough in the skill department that trust is lower than it could be and slows things down.
Never tested but I've heard from colleagues that noncompetes without payments at the base salary level are not considered "reasonable" and would be not be enforceable in New York state. Of course that's the whole schtick with hedge funds and the like, keep the base salary lower and pay bonuses.
Yep, it's almost as much've a shit-storm as Amazon's internal tools - which are rife with errors and pushed by Amazonians because "open source is shit" (verbatim from a lead engineer).
No, banning speech critical of the government and racial groups that reveive priviledged treatment from the government is the basis for every decision the media tells people to make.
One easy usage case - downloading steam games. Those things are now frequently >60gigs so speed can be the difference between try my new game tonight or only get a chance to play tomorrow after work.

Silly example I know but real.
Mass murder as a tool of genocide is a bit more than 'the moral outrage of the day'.
YC alumni usernames appear in orange to other YC alumni, but HN's ring detector prevents that from having much effect on the voting process.
> This is the story of a single manager within the company.

No, it's a story of at least two different managers, and an HR department that supported them.
If your friend falls down a gorge and is unresponsive it seems more than completely reasonable to phone for help.
Maybe they're planning to fill vacancies with their own payloads that are not time sensitive?
While true (and historically a place where people fled the mainland in general, AFAIK), it doesn't change the fact that allowing this settlement in the first place is indicative of a power imbalance at the time. For instance, if the Chinese wanted to set up a colony in the Channel Islands today (Jersey, Guernsey, Isle of Man, Isle of White), I'm pretty sure that wouldn't go over well. Nor would the UK attempting to set up shop today, say, in the South China Sea (in the Spratleys for instance). The balance of power has definitely tipped.
Text to Scene Generation
They remove it because people keep posting it. Just because its existence is transient, doesn't mean it isn't there
Agreed. Though, I would also argue that fighting the communication tools and to an extent the hateful speech is a bit fighting the symptom of a larger problem.

I think we're bogged down debating the specific problem of hate speech, without discussing why it exists. Mental health, education, and poverty have a material impact on crime; do they also have material impacts on racism? I'd wager yes, but I don't know.

Purely fighting 8chan might be akin to fighting one symptom of a larger disease. I fear we're ignoring the causes.
Just to add on my own experiences, Since starting to collect toys and also make my own, I've been entirely unable to find a better community for both of these than /toy/. Every other community is brimming with an endless barrage of superhero stuff and zero interest in niche/art toy lines. /pol/-esque posting is always mocked, reported, and subsequently purged by janitors there.
I've got another contender.

From my Grandpa, transcribed by Google Voice:

Hey,<redacted first name>, It's Pam on Pat be just driving up to the lake with his check in and see if you had a nice thanksgiving and enjoy the parade yesterday, and you were missed you had a nice thanksgiving with Kevin ward and it's only for a couple days just grandma died so talk to you later, okay. Alright

Relevant part: "it's only for a couple days just grandma died so talk to you later, okay."
I work for Google, can confirm many of the points you've made. While I haven't experienced any toxicity at Google, your analysis of the internal communication culture raises really good points.

On one side, the internal social justice campaigns are incredibly pervasive due to large usage of internal message boards. On the other side, Google is one of the few companies that allows this level of internal airing of dirty laundry. I've heard stories of similar incidences at Microsoft which were swiftly shut down.

The problem is that when you encourage internal dialogue and communication at a huge company like this, you'll never have people with different opinions pitching in. You'll mostly get people with the most 'acceptable' opinions, the others being silent as they value their jobs. It's a huge risk to be singled out as someone who thinks Damore was right or that Maven should've been continued. As a result, you'll get a constant stream of one-sided social justice campaigns which inevitably leak to the press.

Encouraging internal dialogue and communication but not understanding its limits at scale is one of the biggest mistakes Google has made. Google was built on principles of open company-wide communication and sharing of information, and while it clearly doesn't work as intended anymore, there's too much inertia to change the course.
A number towards which this comment does not help you to go, apparently.
I get too distracted wondering if these people are always like this or just in interviews.

The silver lining is that I don't get jobs where the interviewers make me uncomfortable, so I don't have to deal with them more than once.
> auto-currying is great but it wouldn't make sense in a multiple dispatch language since you have to evaluate every argument to dispatch (which makes n-arity functions necessarily first class, not a composition of 1-arity functions).

I have a question on this. I'll note up front that this is not an area of expertise for me.

It seems like knowledge of the types is/could be embedded in the process of currying. Multiple dispatch of a 2-ary function depends on the type of arg1 and arg2. If I call this with just the first arg, then the curried function "has knowledge" of the type of arg1. So now I have a 1-ary function that can do single dispatch on the type of its argument.

This seems possible to me to inductively extend to n-ary functions, since the process of consuming one argument by currying embeds knowledge of the type of that arg in the newly created function of n-1 arity.

Am I way off base here?
Tariffs do result in money to the government... from US importers. My mother, for example, sells products on Amazon that are manufactured for her in China. She must now pay tariffs to the government when she has more products made for her, and has had to stop selling several products as a result, since the tariffs made them unprofitable.
I'm wary of Amazon since they have a terrible reputation for tech work in addition to warehouse and delivery work. People who I've talked to who work there have not entirely refuted this for me.

Non-compete agreements are garbage and are unfortunately very common - I wouldn't be surprised to find them at Google, Apple, etc.. Employment contracts are usually "take it or leave it" in that regard, though personally I try to cross out everything I disagree with before signing one.

I'm surprised it's even legal to require employees to sign an agreement preventing them from quitting to work for a competitor. It seems like just the sort of violation of freedom to work, and a harmful restriction of the labor market, that should be illegal under labor law.

Like all employment agreements, it's also absurdly asymmetrical. Imagine this "if the company ends your employment for any reason, company agrees not to compete with you or your next employer in any way - including but not limited to products, services, and labor - for a period of 18 months subsequent to the end of your employment." No sane company would agree to this, since they would effectively have to shut down for 18 months (and lose 18 months of income.) But they are perfectly OK enforcing such an agreement on their employees.
There's a huge difference between washed-in-the-last-day-or-two genital odor and MONTHS of unwashed genitals!!
4 is a bad number because it sounds like “death.”

Tall buildings tend to omit floors 4, 14, etc., the way tall buildings in the US often omit floor 13. Amusingly, Chinese building often omit 13 as well. So you might be on floor 15 and only really be on floor 12 because 4, 13, and 14 are all left out.

Less dire numeric associations are 55 for crying (pronounced “wuwu”) and 88 for bye-bye (“baba”).
Walking in New York City: Greeley Square to Times Square via Broadway
You misunderstand even the principle or ethos of free speech, even by a radical GNU-style standard.

Take a step back, stop being so defensive, and realize you are wrong and you can actually learn something. You seem to care about this, so take it as an opportunity to actually learn what free speech is and what you can do to protect it.

Free speech is not some idea by which all companies much publish all content with an equal hand. That's an absurd standard. That's actually antithetical to free speech ideals, as it FORCES companies endorse speech that they, themselves, don't agree with.

> 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?

Of course it would. It would be in the US, and it would be in North Korea.

North Korea is a great example, and it's not hypothetical. But in North Korea it is illegal for anyone to be critical of the military—not just asking certain publishers to be more selective about what they publish.

But none of this has anything to do with Cloudflare. Cloudflare is just a business. It's a non-essential, privately owned company that has nothing to do with the government. If someone from 8chan goes into the local Starbucks and starts screaming about killing Hispanics, Starbucks can ask them to leave. That's not a free speech violation.

If this was something like ICANN seizing a domain or the FCC refusing to issue a radio license you could at least make the "slippery slope" case with some kind of loose validity. But we aren't even talking about that. No one has to support your speech. Dell doesn't have to sell you computers for your server farm and Cloudflare doesn't have to sell you CDN services. CNN doesn't have to give you airtime, and Amazon doesn't have to publish your book.

You can build a horrific media empire that endorses and promotes the most disgusting and hateful forms of speech imaginable, but NO ONE has to support you in doing that. And, in fact, no one SHOULD be forced to.

Just look at Alex Jones. No one has arrested him (minus an incident in New York with him literally screaming into someone's face with a megaphone, which was borderline assault) and no one should. But no one has to support him either.
The problem here is that you don't see the difference between the informal "should" from the first stance and the legal "should" from the third. You can't even say things like "the internet legally should X" because the internet is not a single entity that can be coerced to do X (yep, the legal talk all comes down to the issue of who should be coerced to do what).

Read Hayek BTW.
Amazon Is a Monopoly
Another project that could be used for inspiration here and worth checking is http://openrefine.org/
There's an interesting parallel here by Nassim Taleb, author of several books the most famous of which might be The Black Swan. In this article, a chapter from an in-progress book, he contends that the most intolerant faction will eventually come to dominate. In the article he's talking about extremist Muslims but it could just as easily be extremist Christians or extremist white nationalists.

https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dict...
Voice transcription is hard.

Think of how many accents there exist "in the wild". About the same as the number of people in the world.
Heliosync orbit suggests focus on visual Earth observation and surveillance type missions.
The "bad" boards frequently leak, and you do see highly political or racist posts from time-to-time on the regular boards. A sign that the community is functioning properly is regulars on /out/, /lit/, etc. calling out (read mocking) ethno-nationalist threads, or race-baiting for what they are.
Huh, really? that was surprising for me. I would put political views right next to someone's religional beliefs.
Except that - as we (hopefully) learned with the last recession - you're significantly more likely to be outside the "most people" category in this case, because layoffs tend to happen when companies have less money.
> they will sell large amounts of equities ... and they will buy large amounts of cryptocurrency

More likely they will buy new crypto focused companies (Coinbase IPO) or that existing firms will adopt crypto based business lines. The investment is firms innovating, rather than the value of the underlying instruments or technology they use.
> Otherwise there's no reason to oppose real images, since the harm is done before the image is ever seen.

We ban specifically real images for two general reasons - one is that allowing them encourages the production of more such images, necessitating additional abuse, and the second is that for the children involved, knowing that other people are looking at those images is a huge violation.

Neither of those applies for "artificial but real-looking" images.
I don't usually like to pull the deus ex machina card but.....

CloudFlare is going public next month. This seems like a clear-cut publicity stunt.
On the contrary. It is so important that it cannot be secondary to something that can be defined clearly. Hence my comment.

Edit for clarity: What you think is fine or not today may or may not be considered fine in the future. So there's an incentive to not set what is intolerance in stone on the basis that today's standards may not match those in the future.
If I were a US intelligence organization I would be incredibly happy that terror organizations were voluntarily letting a US company MITM all of their traffic...