skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Clearly it is - I don't know why you would think I implied otherwise. My point is that maybe you have a hunch they are trafficked, but it is a logical leap to simply state it as a fact that they are trafficked.
In regards with marijuana, more and more people disagree that it should be illegal therefore its harder and harder for law enforcement to prevent it.

With child trafficking, very rarely people want it to be legal.

>Hanging out with child trafficker, and accepting money from them and inviting them to your private events is normalization

Yes, it is normalization. The normalization of hanging out with child trafficker and accepting money from them.

Note that is different than the normalization of child trafficking itself.

There are could be many reason one want to associate with child trafficker that has nothing to do with child trafficking itself, likewise with taking money.
I tend to agree. Better precision is nice, but the linked piece states explicitly that they don't expect extinction, but a decrease in viable population from 8+ billion to near 1 billion.

I haven't heard numbers that precise before. It's unclear what society looks like with that level of food insecurity. From what I've read, much smaller reductions in food security are correlated with large political upheaval throughout history.
Thank you for the informative response.
I think quantum mechanics is well-understood, the mathematics behind it provide us with excellent predictions.

I think because at its core it is a probabilistic (or perhaps there are many worlds, but the implications are identical) theory--there is some inherent uncertainty in the predictions. This uncertainty builds up over time if left unmeasured, due to the chaotic nature of the system. We won't be able to result this uncertainty until we have more precise and accurate measurement devices.

I was thinking, the only real way for us to progress was to get the results out of CERN we were expecting--either smaller particles or some detection method which allows us to peer even deeper into the atom.

I think certain physicists are tired of the search for a unifying theory since it probably won't help us make better predictions. We need to get out there and get new empircal data.
Is there any proof to your claim?
They were anonymous because the recipients hid the fact of their origin. There are receipts of their conversations about this.
Of course if they had an 'active' indicator, them failing could have been the impetus for him knowing he had a window of opportunity. Rather than 'pure coincidence'.
> Then use android.

This. It should be so simple, use the platform that best caters to your requirements. Instead, people are happier to bitch and moan about the tactics of a company we've been able to understand for the past 12 years rather than just use and evangelise the platform that best suits their needs.
How about:

3. Normalization of people who commit transgressive acts.

Once again, for the nosebleed seats: this whole argument is about how the Media Lab's taking Epstein's money, and welcoming him on the premises, conveys the message, "Well, he can't be that bad."

Remember how we follow the behavior of people more than their words, in determining what is and isn't acceptable? When people tell us one thing, and behave differently, we pretty reliably follow one of those over the other.

So it does not matter how many times anyone says Epstein was a shitty guy who behaved shittily. Every single word is utterly undermined by the press release photo of him and Joichi-san smiling and shaking hands, or whatever.

EDIT: So, while normalizing the person isn't directly normalizing the behavior, it's also kinda a distinction without a difference. A person who wants to behave like Epstein has been shown that he's still able to be socially accepted, even at the very highest levels of society, even if he does the thing that brazenly.

How, exactly, is that not normalizing the behavior? In what possible way is that not all kinds of "Eh, whatever..." over something so egregious?
In general, old rich men have no special powers over young women. It seems conceivable that usually, they choose to be around him of their own free will.

Otherwise, please explain what special powers old rich men would have over young women.
> Why was he running around free then?

Because Bush-appointed US Attorney Alex Acosta (until recently Trump’s Secretary of Labor) made an illegal plea agreement to let Epstein off the hook and cover up the details of his criminality. https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article226577...

Some extremely rich and powerful men were among Epstein’s child-rapist co-conspirators, so there are strong pressures on law enforcement officials to sweep the whole thing under the rug.
Man, these job interviews get tougher every year! No, I create my JPEGs with C-x M-c M-butterfly: https://xkcd.com/378/
What? How does that prove my point wrong? If anything, it amplifies my point.
Because of corruption. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jul/12/alex-acosta-...
Silicon Valley’s final frontier for mobile payments
Jail for what? Accepting donations from a pedo is not a crime.
You can begin to talk about rehabilitating abhorrent people only after they've demonstrated some contrition for their actions and growth towards being better. By all accounts, Epstein showed none of that.
How do you think he got away with what he did for so long? People would hear 'that Epstein fellow is said to be pedophile' and think 'Jeffrey Epstein, respectable philanthropist? Surely not.'

Why are you caping so hard for this guy?
No, the critical thinking mentioned, is:

1) If a powerful man who has been accused of sex trafficking

2) shows up with two girls less than half his age,

3) who are from eastern europe (while he is an American, not exactly where he'd get girlfriends or assistants),

4) he passes them of like his "assistants",

5) while they look like models,

6) and they make everybody uncomfortable to the point of telling them to signal whether they're there against their will

then critical thinking says he's more probably than not indeed sex trafficking, and there's something really shady in his relationship with the two girls...

Not, "they're surely just his assistants, nothing to see here, why would anybody consider anything else going on without some written testimony, a full confession and perhaps lab evidence?"
This mission was actually multi-country... NASA provided a retro-reflector for the lander, and in exchange provided DSN coverage. Maybe your reaction was slightly knee-jerk?
> Following the protests, 54 percent of adults agreed that climate-change threatens our extinction as a species, a poll by Comres found, compared to just a quarter who disagreed.

Key phrase: Following the protests.

The follow up question I wish these surveys would ask is: Have you changed your behavior and/or habits in order to minimize your personal impact?

My point is, many people give the answer they believe they should give, but their actual action are disconnected from that answer. As they say: Actions speak louder than words.
The idea that someone with equal ability to do calculations with both could understand Newtonian mechanics better than they understand quantum mechanics belies an extremely naive view of how easy it is to perceive the true metaphysics of classical mechanics. In fact, the metaphysics of classical mechanics remains unsettled even today, the only reason it seems like there isn't a lot of philosophical debates left to have is that it has fallen out of fashion. A brief conversation with any philosopher will reveal that nobody "understands" the basic essence of being or whatever you want to call it. In fact, if "understand" means "have direct sensation of the true nature of reality," or even "have some grasp of the true metaphysics," then nobody understands anything.

To give a specific example, let's say you have a classical system with only three particles in the entire universe, and further let's say they are interacting via a conservative force. So, how many things are there in the universe? Is each particle communicating with the others to organize their movements? Then, there would be three things in the universe. Is there a potential field permeating all of space, into which the particles project their influence? That would be four things. Is there a "strand of force" connecting each particle to every other particle? Then, there would be six things.

The debates in the paragraph above were alive and well in Newton's time. However they were philosophical debates, not physical debates, because the three suggestions I proposed (along with the other possibilities I didn't mention) are all mathematically equivalent and would lead to the same motion.
That very negative event is less than the expected externalities of coal and in many types of gas exploration
No I mean you have to try to recognize the face. Otherwise you can not decide whether the face is from a person who wants to be identified or not.

I don't see how it could work any other way.
Remember the last time HK protesters were using mesh networking via an app in 2014? Something like FireChat or something

Anyway, funny how this is still novel news and there is no market leader in this space, because that was 5, almost 6 years ago.
The best is not to use and provoke violence at all.
A cabal of child traffickers/rapists operating in government doesn't need to a partisan issue.

Additionally, Trump and Epstein appear to have split up after Trump got the upper hand during a property sale.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/donald-trump-and-jef...
What's your point? Humankind can be doomed without the species going extinct because we are far more than just a few bodies walking around. Collapse of civilization is as bad as extinction from my point of view.
nobody can make nuclear plants cost efficiently anymore

You have to account for the externalities of the only cheaper thing out there (fossil fuels).

And then there's this

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-d...

Unless you're lucky to live next to hydro, or unless you do like China and steamroll over your citizens building massive hydro, there's nothing cheaper, overall, than nuclear.
I spent a few years as a member of a church that took the sabbath (Friday night to Saturday night) seriously. Having a day where you just. did. not. work (and didn't make other people work for you), was honestly pretty great. Great day to go to the beach, hang out, bbq, hike, etc.

I left the church but really miss that aspect of it.
It is pretty fascinating! I first learned about them by watching a local TV educational Japanese science program (early 2000s, but the videos were older, ~90s). They even mentioned about using them on car’s exteriors. If you had a car accident, you would just add hot water to fix it.
Some of the things you mention are different from the others (drugs, maybe lies). But overall, in my opinion you are taking away too much agency from the women. It is too easy to blame somebody's actions on "manipulation". That would be a wildcard to accuse anybody of anything you want.
What does this change? "Someone else would do it anyway" has never been a valid excuse for doing shitty things.
How many have to die before we’re doomed? Is being “doomed” reserved for human extinction, or is a few billion deaths enough? A few million? Look, the situation is bad. Really bad. This whole conversation is a distraction from the main point. We’re screwed/doomed/whatever you like, if we don’t act now.
Yep, that's the company. That's the specific site for the app: http://www.bfy.buzz/, which mostly seems to be intended to show that the tech they want to sell works.
You’re way off track if you think that human extinction is the measure of how concerned we should be.
There can be career FOMO too, spending 20 years developing .NET applications, many of which will now be defunct isn't as fancy sounding as someone who has worked at FAANG, invented GMail then done a startup and then moved on to quantum cryptography.

You know the little bios people do to boast they are a "TED Speaker, this that the other". I dream of making a blog that just says "Proudly lazy person, slightly above median IQ but works just for the money, enjoys lying on a towel in the sun on the patio. You won't catch me running through a marathon finish line".

That would be for satire of course, but there is a grain of truth to it, in that so many people online look like super achievers.
Reframed: No, MIT shouldn't knowingly give money to child traffickers and drug cartels.

I don't understood the argument for non-politician organizations returning donations from problematic people. By keeping the money, you're enriching your organization, at expense to the bad person. Win-win for society.

For politicians and political organizations, there is an implicit association with bribery, so in that case I can understand demands to refusing contributions from bad donors. (But even there, better to redirect it to a good charity than to return it to the "bad donor.")
I've no idea about nuffink, but

> We need to get out there and get new empircal data.

To do this it's necessary to formulate the right questions first, as gathered data (which are in effect, answers) provide no information alone.

Edit: "provide no information alone" is a bit too strong. What I'm trying to say is more precise questions tend to produce more precise answers in normal discourse, I'm generalising that.
In some cases not even badly maintained, the nitrogen buildup along with how that affects the life in a properly maintained reservoir have a large cumulative impact.
Letter Regarding Action on the Media Lab
Would higher precision of measurements help here?
"psychologically manipulate" - isn't that just a loaded way of saying "convince"? Did he actually do all those other things, beatings, threatening? Or is it such a stereotype that it is just assumed that it must have been this way?
Perhaps doing the assignment improves the student's understanding of the course material, which the professor thinks is a good thing, but it's possible to pass the course with only a mediocre understanding of the material?
Back in 2008, Epstein was convicted of a single prostitution charge [1]. The word "trafficking" doesn't even appear in that story. It makes it sound like Epstein had a weak moment frankly.

It was only after the Miami Herald story came out did we learn about the child trafficking that took place -- and then this year it became a huge national story.

[1]
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/01/business/01epstein.html
A policeman I know was telling me how a few times he had to get Narcan from the nearby junkies to save the person who was OD-ing.

I had forgotten to ask if there is any legality or cover-your-ass issues there, say if they infect the person or the Narcan ends up being something else that kills the person. I imagine they probably thought this person is going to die and decided to do it anyway.
Since having been suspended from Twitter, I wholeheartedly agree with this article. I’ve found that my quality of life has been so much better, and I’m actually finding ample time to work on and finish side projects.

Personally, I’ve found that the biggest factor to my stress is obligation, and not having enough time for everything. Social media, trying to get a handle of everything that’s happening, and reading every interesting link is a bloody big obligation.

IMHO, time spent on social media vs your quality of life are inversely proportional.
Unsubstantiated imperative sentences with no further context are not especially compelling arguments and do not meet the usual merit bar for comments on this site.
Do you mean to say that you think that the OpenSSL project feeling obliged to implement the heartbeat extension created by a standards body is significantly more to blame for causing Heartbleed than the (understandable) causes for the general quality of the OpenSSL project code base (like lack of funding, etc)?

EDIT: Clarification.
Is there a list of companies who make money on violence? I'd like to ban them on using my products. I could find only this https://wikileaks.org/hackingteam/emails/emailid/31778
“... the technology to make fossil-free steel is already currently operating with natural gas...”

Natural Gas IS a fossil fuel!
If they didn't know he was sketchy why did they go to such lengths to obscure the origin of his donations? If you are rich and you really want to make an anonymous donation (perhaps out of humility, perhaps to avoid solicitations from other worthy causes) you hire a lawyer and direct them to submit the funds on your behalf.
> nobody can make nuclear plants cost efficiently anymore.

That is simply factually untrue. You can get cost effective nuclear plants from China or South Korea right now.

The core problem with nuclear has always been that if every reactor is a bespoke thing, it will be expensive. Mass production helps with nuclear as with everything else, that has been true whenever we saw a large expansion of nuclear power.

Trying GenIV reactors on a 'small' scale is simply not possible.

> The big problem is that nuclear is essentially a big government project, and America is very bad at those.

Then go to South Korea and order 50 reactors, give them access to US labor and let them build it.
> I mean for sure you can "whine" at the US government for exporting such crowd-control equipment to the HK gov.But why shit explicitly on the company itself?

Because companies that do ethnically shitty things should be called out on it - just because it's legal, doesn't necessarily make it "right" by default.
Him donating to MIT doesn't change my mind about him. I'm not sure what your $100,000 point is about, he wasn't offering to pay everyone on earth to like him.
The only thing the working classes have to lose are their shackles.
I disagree that someone would see it as "only" $200 a month. That's a 20% pay increase for 30 hours a week - hardly onerous.

I mean, incentives 101 tell me lots of people would be happy to work 30 hours a week for extra cash.
I play this game as well but call it “daughter or prostitute.”

It’s pretty common to see old dudes with young women. I’ve rarely been able to actually find the answer.

The few times I’ve gone to fancy resorts or expensive areas, I’ve always seen couples like this. Only a few times did I see more than one woman.

I worked for a ceo once who always had a much younger (25 vs 65) assistant in the building.

I don’t think I would change my behavior if some rich guy had two models in tow for business meetings. I might assume they are prostitutes, but as long as they aren’t children I don’t know what action I would take.
Malthusian predictions have a long and storied history of reliably underestimating human adaptation to a staggering degree, even when coming from otherwise reputable sources, and I see the claims in the piece in much the same light.

That said, I agree with you that food insecurity and upheaval will become issues, big ones -- but only because they'll become big issues long before 7 billion people starve.
> a bare platform with basically no other facilities at all (e.g. you cant even change directions without going outside back up to the street and back down through the turnstile again ... I don't think there are even chairs?).

This simply isn't accurate.

You can change directions at most stations. Generally the only stations where you can't are local stops, with side platforms, and no lobbies... that configuration certainly exists but definitely isn't the majority.

Regarding chairs, off the top of my head I can't think of a single station that has no seating whatsoever. I mean there's probably a small handful like this, but it's definitely a tiny tiny minority.

> Some of the larger stations in NYC have a bit more in terms of infrastructure, but a lot of the time there is basically nothing down there (and they are dark and filthy)

What's the appeal of large stations? Big lobbies just add significant walking time to get to the platform. Also means more space for the transit authority to maintain, clean, and police.

As for cleanliness, personally I'd rather have a dirty 24/7 system than a clean part-time system.
>And after that the String Theory people were much better at aggressive self-promotion than any of the competing QG theories.

I'm not sure if that's a fair interpretation of history. At the time string theory still looked like the best option, and some say that even today it is the closest thing we have to a consistent theory.
The SMS verification in this app makes it insecure. The Chinese govt could easily see who has the app based on this. They can probably assume anyone who has the app installed is a protester
It is phrased as a request.
If your plan is "light pipes, but fall back to LEDs" that means you have to build two complete systems. You get double the installation costs, incur the combined complexity of both systems (plus overhead), and box yourself into the limitations of both systems.
Et tu, gojomo?
I agree, but WTF did they keep the name "BuzFeed", which has such a poor standing?
Somebody should tell these "farmers" about sweet potatoes!
Speed up the browser search with Jump Commands
I do not know about the U.S. government, but at M.I.T. he had been already been banned from charitable giving, so Joichi was having to lie about the source of the money.
Where can I cash in on this $100,000?
She’s getting money, he’s getting ... something. (sex? youthful energy? sight of beauty?) As long as it’s legal, it’s a fair exchange.

Or do you object to young women (and otherwise beautiful men and women) acting in movies and things like Victoria’s Secret shows as well (well, you could object on the “encouraging body image problems” angle but that’s orthogonal).
It's not clear at all. In fact it's not just not clear, it's not even remotely true.
Working on a new product and would love your input and ideas for commands. It's inspired by bunnylol, an internal tool at Facebook!
I can't edit the original comment, but to clarify: that passage is damning to Ito (and Cohen). The MIT staff were justified in considering the possibility that Epstein's assistants were trafficked, given his prior indictment and plea bargain admitting to procuring underage prostitutes. Ito and Cohen knew what they were doing was shady, as evidenced by their attempts to hide their dealings with Epstein from the university at large, which had placed him on a donation blacklist.
Not sure why you're being downvoted, you're completely correct. The only significant negative effect heroin use has on you besides addiction is constipation. For a heroin addict, the problem isn't the heroin, it's the absence of heroin.
I definitely get the appeal for some people (and if I was young and single it would probably appeal to me). I just get annoyed when I see people saying that we should all want to live in dense urban areas. Not saying that happened here, but I've seen it several times lately.
In China Amway (called Anli in China) and Mary Kay generates over 40% of its global revenue. It's memebers actively promote and use WeChat and their relationship with personal friend for sale.

All the live broadcaster use their friends network. Every conversation happening in WeChat or other messaging app is analyzed multiple times to figure out what could be sold to those people to generate profit.

It becomes tiring when you can only see in everything one do someone is trying to sale something, be it taking taxi, trying to talk with your friends, watching movie, even when people sleep companies try to analyze their sleep and process the information to find what can be sold to that person.