skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I've seen a broad mixture of those scenarios over time, people of various personality types doing it (myself included).

The one thing I'd say, is that it's critical to know whether you have a strong internal drive / self-motivation. If you don't, it can be a dangerous context to put yourself into (dangerous in the financial or time waste sense). If you don't have that internal always-on motivation, it's super important to have a firm plan and object/thing/business idea that you're going to be pursuing before you quit. Start at least drawing up some sort of minimum framework before you quit, laying out what you're going to do, how you'll spend your time, what type of lifestyle businesses you're interested in, plot everything out financially as much as possible and so on. Good advanced planning will save the day and help prevent catastrophy as the road gets challenging. It's a new type of 9 to 5 job, although it's more likely to be a 50-80 hour job getting started. Without financial pressures, you have to either naturally self-motivate strongly so you don't constantly veer off (get lazy, get distracted, get bored, and such), or follow a fairly strict plan that you've laid out for yourself ahead of time to keep yourself sane, productive and making progress.
Live Nodetube.js Instance (Nullvideo.com) Archiving Coronavirus Videos
Given historical experimentation by the military and intelligence agencies it seems pretty likely that this sort of research is happening.
It's worth mentioning that the article doesn't specify if that age group had a higher mortality % per infected, or just a higher mortality total. I'm assuming they meant the first, anyone know for sure?
You can get permanent residency in the US for a $1 million investment (or $500k investment in rural areas).
> Extremist bigots take it as read that people of the wrong ethnic/religious/political group are either not people or at best inferior people, and direct their efforts to promoting those views, planning how to eliminate those they dislike, and normalizing that behavior.

Uh, well, isn't that the same that some leftwing activist advocate for those they disagree with? Deplatforming, censorship, criminalisation?
Think about the rhetoric being used whenever someone refers to "boomers" today.

First, identify a sub-group. Begin referring to the group as "they", as
"other" than "us". Make sure they are not seen as heterogenous individuals -
"they" are a single, malevolent entity.

Next, ascribe to them great power, unearned, over "us".

Then, ascribe to them ill-gotten wealth, power, control. All nefarious and
self-aggrandizing.

Now describe them as "the problem", as "intractable", implying that something
must be done - about them - to them.

Begin to use the language of violence, attributing it to "them". A blockade
is an act of war, committed by an aggressor.

What do you think the outcome of this kind of rhetoric will be?
That would be a funny reason to switch to .io because people have been complaining about .io as well:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8587379
The data suggests that deplatforming works. Milo; Katie Hopkins; InfoWars et al have all lost their former agenda-setting influence following deplatforming. And studies have shown that banning hate sub-Reddits does _not_ cause that content to “pop up elsewhere”, it causes it to decline overall.

It’s important to remember too there are incentives for people to argue and behave otherwise: FB, Twitter, hate-speech mongers who want easy access to large audiences — All have commercial cause to act in favour of more and more extreme speech.

People like that benefit from more and more extreme speech. They permit or encourage it on their platforms. This in turn causes the white blood cell count of the body politic to spike as it tries to counteract the bile and hate. This angry counter-speech then gets presented as “polarisation”.

The solution to ignorance _can often be_ silencing the ignorant, yes, in order that the educators can be heard.

Would we still have an anti-vax problem if FB banned it across its properties? Really?

Banning disruptive speakers works. Every pub landlord knows it.
Not "minorities" in the sense of black people or trans people or whichever group, but meaning the narrow sliver of upper-middle-class urbanites in a highly visible cluster of academic and media institutions. "Blue checks" if you will.

Many of whom don't even overlap with the above minority groups, yet use them as tokens to push their moral system. They do this because that moral system is rigidly codified but arbitrarily extensible, so it has a built-in need for consultants and gatekeepers to tell the rest of us what the current standard is to be an empathetic decent person instead of a racist sexist xenophobe.

This might sound overly cynical or uncharitable but woke culture is dissonant with genuine human compassion. There's a big missing mood there and I think the difference can be attributed to career incentives for the people at the top of it. The rank and file mean well but they don't grow past the moral crusade attitude because their leaders actively disparage those who do, and most people learn by example. The religious right is the same, but they're not as relevant right now.
I disagree with what you're saying for a few reasons:

1. The claim that Assange is being tortured is being made by a single individual as their personal opinion, and
2. The claims of torture are from actions taken by the governments of the UK and Sweden

The actions of foreign countries have no bearing on if he would get a fair trial in the US; the two ideas are not correlated at all.
Ah, reminds me of using Slirp back on those dialup links to get a proper SLIP/PPP connection and TCP/IP over my regular shell account. Of course that hole to was closed eventually also. Though their first attempt at it was just blacklisting the executable by name which was quickly worked around but they wised up after that.
I made this point in a more lengthy fashion in a parallel comment [0], but it seems really odd to me you would ignore the circumstance that the lion's share of the work towards endangering those civilians was done by the US, by recruiting them to be collaborators in a hostile country. Why does the US government have more moral license to endanger Afghan civilians than Assange/Wikileaks?

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22205463
...or a well funded PR campaign to assign blame to somebody else.
It is an RNA virus. Please update title to stop spreading fake nucleic acid news.
Given Locusts have an exoskeleton, would some kinds of focused sound weapon have a viable use in bringing down such swarms?
I'm a big fan of the idea of abolishing states, having a US national government and then county/city level governments. The states were created when it was infeasible to manage large amounts of territory due to the difficulty of communicating across long distances. That's no longer the case. We could cede some state powers to local governments and some to the federal level.

The idea would get pushback from those in smaller states who enjoy a disproportionate voice in national politics, but I feel that those voices don't deserve to be amplified over anyone else's just because they have a bunch of empty land backing them.
You don't need anything but the cable that came with your phone.
Viruses which kill too quickly don't spread widely enough to kill a lot of people.

Good viruses kill after a few days of showing few (if any) symptoms so that they can maximise their spread.

This is the difference between epidemic and pandemic viral contagions.
The situation is far more bizarre than "use" or "not use." As I understand it, America uses something along the lines of "converted metric units" - i.e. the entire imperial system is defined according to metric/SI. Some subset of public records have been, supposedly, converted to metric. If you have a recent car, it should have km/h alongside mph (in a smaller font, or as a different digital readout). You'll find metric all over the place if you keep an eye out for it.
Imagine that Trump could be president for 20 years, instead of just 8. Or that George W Bush could. Or that Clinton could. No matter where you sit politically, at least one of those should give you pause.
It's odd that you seem to believe "Silicon Valley hall monitors and tattletales" somehow control and arbitrate the entirety of LGBT discourse, such that Contrapoints "tows their party line," even though she upsets the left and LGBT community all the time, and has nothing to do with Silicon Valley as far as I'm aware, but whatever.

However... since it seems I only need to find a single example of someone "even slightly to the right of center" who has "run afoul" of the left without being deplatformed... J.K. Rowling. Engaged in behavior many consider to be transphobic[0] and bigoted, yet not deplatformed.

Or James Damore? Hasn't been deplatformed. Jordan Peterson? Not deplatformed. Stefan Molyneaux? Not deplatformed. Brendan Eich? not deplatformed.

Searching Twitter under tags and terms like alt-right, right wing, far right, gender-critical, mra, etc., reveals a lot of open and unapologetic discussion of definitely not left and extreme left politics, which shouldn't be the case. All of that should be memory-holed by the SJWs scrubbing the platform of wrongthink, shouldn't it?

[0]https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/12/19/21029874/jk-rowlin...
Quaternions (a.k.a. rotors) are by far the easiest representation to interpolate and compose.

Matrices and Euler angles are both horrific to interpolate.
Nano Auth is a PHP library that allows you to create authentication
I really like your comment, I don't know what the end goal is? Does that mean we should never try to give our opinion?
Maybe I don't understand.. I think it would be a good thing if every individual with their beliefs is slowly normalizing others to their feelings and beliefs.
> entire world was relatively borderess prior to 20th century, and it was completely outside of humanly possible for the state anywhere to keep tap on every individual

You could also write that it was borderless because they couldn't track every individual.
Gimbal lock is a problem for euler angle representation of rotations, not rotation matrices themselves. You can fix it for euler angles the same way they used to for old mechanical gimbal gyroscopes. By having a fourth rotation of the frame that points the singularity out of the way. This is a typical solution in navigation for dealing with the poles of the earth (a wander angle frame).
The "toxic" people are trying to be honest about real issues

Sadly there are lots of reasonable-seeming right-leaning people whose discourse about 'real issues' sooner or later circles around to 'race realism' or 'the jewish question' or some other ideological Pandora's box. It's often later; a common rule of thumb among far-right extremists is that it takes at least 2 years to reliably indoctrinate a person online.

Here is an example of how these persuasion techniques are deployed, albeit a slightly offensive one. This particular example (spread across 3 pages) aims toward recruitment of people for the 'Qanon' conspiracy which is popular among some right-leaning people. While it's orthogonal to other far-right extremist movements, it is a useful example of a developing militant ideology.

https://centipedenation.com/library/red-pilling-a-general-gu...
What Got Done is basically Google's internal Snippets. I wish there was an on-prem setup to do that. The idea is basically every week you write, in free form text, what you've done, and possibly what you're planning to do, and your team mates get to view it, and subscribe to updates conveniently. If you're anything like me, you will find this valuable not only day to day, but also when the review time comes and you need to beat your chest a little. I tend to forget how much I've done.
One thing to consider- you approached everything with the assumption that businesses want a SaaS; the sheet metal post made it sound like you were surprised that the shops didn't want a SaaS. Software Developers like SaaS, because it makes more money and had recurring revenue. However, to a business owner that just sounds like another bill that they don't want. Owners at small to medium companies, in my experience, are very cost-conscious.

For example, I'm currently evaluating warehouse management systems. It appears that everyone in this space runs a SaaS; with ludicrous prices where they want to bill per shipper/ac count. We still plan on being in business in 3 years; and after 3 years we will have paid more than what it would cost to develop this system ourselves. If you are mostly focused on tech it's easy to think that everyone likes the idea of SaaS; but realistically the only people who get excited about that idea are the people cashing the checks every month. I have heard much lamentation and whining about having to 'subscribe' to software instead of just buying it.
Funny, I would have assumed the opposite. Nobody wins a war by releasing a doomsday virus that indiscriminately kills 5% of the world. But they can win battles by temporarily incapacitating an army, with no fear of loss of their own life if the winds blow in the opposite direction.
How would you know? You can't see any of the comments because the mods generally remove them all..

The reason why YC seems more left-leaning nowadays compared to a few years ago, is exactly what the grandparent of this thread suggested, anyone right-leaning (or libertarian) has been harassed off the site / strongly discouraged from sharing their perspectives.
How to engage your community to take action on the environment
Our Social Media Is Broken. Is Decentralization the Fix?
No, this is not wrong (but you're not wrong either).

When discussing the goals behind AGPL, it definitely shouldn't be described as Open Source license (although it technically is one), but a Free Software one, since the whole difference between those two terms (highlighting the political issue as opposed to technical one) is actually relevant to the intention behind the license.

The goal behind licenses written by FSF is to ensure that distributors of your code do not restrict freedoms of the users that the license guarantees them. If you think it's about "encouraging more usage of open source", you clearly miss the point of copyleft licenses.
https://media.giphy.com/media/lSmgsPG0mGfemqtCv3/giphy.gif
Thanks for writing this! It's spot on. I referenced it in a post upthread[1].

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22204995
(a) Bigotry is already normalized in the United States. The president is a bigot and almost half the country voted for him. This is another negative effect of deplatforming: if you live in a liberal city and only frequent Reddit/Facebook, you live in an echo chamber where you don't have any visibility into what's normal.

(b) The legitimacy of a platform is based on what is said there, not the other way around. You view Voat as less legitimate than Reddit because you disagree with what is said on Voat more than you disagree with what is said on Reddit. If someone said something bigoted on Reddit, would you view it as more legitimate? No? Then why do you think anyone else sees it that way?
Decoding the preferences of people from their behavior is just a first step, it's not the only rule, it's a rule that makes writing other rules safer than they would be otherwise.
Great read, thanks for writing this. One of the hardest parts of doing a bootstrapped startup is the peer pressure and the perceived opportunity cost. The numbers won't add up for a bootstrapped business for many years (I am talking upwards of 5 years even). The only thing that keeps you going is your ambition ('this is what i want to do', 'nothing else i would rather do').

The best way I have learnt to deal with this is to surround myself with people who think similar.
Generally, when an employer owns your "inventions", this only applies to "inventions" created while using the employer's resources. Most employement contracts will make it sound like they own every waking thought, but in most cases when this has been taken to court, the precedent has been set, that it really only applies to inventions or ideas that happen in relation to and using employer's resources.

So this means that an employer can argue they own software that you build:

- On a company-issued computer

- Using contacts you garnered through work

- On company time (this is complicated for salary employees, but definitely applies to time in the office, or standard business hours when you are expected to be working)

- Work collaborated on with other co-workers

Now I should clarify, I am not a lawyer. None of this is legal advice, yada yada...

But generally you can work on side projects and skirt around intellectual property clauses as long as you make sure to distinguish work time and work resources from your personal projects. The biggest thing is to avoid doing it while at work (or when expected to be actively working if you are remote), and avoid using a company computer or piggybacking off company resources (for example making a sub-account in your employer's CI/CD tool to run tests for your software).

So make sure you have seperate accounts for everything, avoid doing it on company time, and use a personal computer (not a work-issued computer) and you should be absolutely fine with working on a side project.
Sure, and we're discussing it via a consequence of such a case (arpanet). But because the military by default has zero accountability, any funds that go there should be strongly vetted.
> At this stage it is not actually important if anyone could be hurt or dies.

I thank god for the fact that retards like you will never run anything of importance in this world. Your statement is deplorable and reckless.
The kenyan government is unprepared to handle this incident despite earlier warnings, the local minister cited a lack of an effective chemical in the local market, adding that the fight against the insect has been slowed down by the long procurement and import bureaucracies.

https://kenyanlist.net/index.php?threads/munya-says-that-the...
It does seem like something escaped a lab or a human trial gone wrong.
Here's a better explanation: https://jameslyonsweiler.com/2020/01/30/on-the-origins-of-th...
Ah, I see. I thought it was a random musing. My apologies then.

That being said regardless of the efficiency of such a solution I suspect that the scale of the invasion would make it hard to make a difference lest you have an army of drones at your disposal. The area to cover is insanely large.
This did happen 10 years ago, and they did standardize on micro-USB [0]. Use of the standard was voluntary, though.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_external_power_supply
They're probably too smart to want to run...
We don't, and we shouldn't. This is natural human behavior.

> Before, around 2010-2012, people who disagreed would usually leave it at that and walk away respectfully

I can tell you've never played Call of Duty.
It's not even necessarily someone with HIV - HIV is just one virus that is especially well-studied. If horizontal gene transfer in viruses is more common than we expect it to be, this genetic material could've been picked up from just about anywhere and we wouldn't necessarily know about that source.
Show HN: A.I. Powered Gym
Indeed, the paper seems to suggest that the natural occurrence of this virus is the extraordinary claim.
Nobody is forced to write such software, either. Assigning responsibility for actions with clear boundaries does not “rationalize” anything.

It is important to remember that humans, regardless of their level of ignorance, are responsible for themselves and their own actions.

Encouraging people to make bad decisions isn’t the issue at all, even if the final result would not have happened without such encouragement.
Hi HN!

We’ve been working hard on this for the last year, and I’m super excited to share this with you guys.

We built an A.I. powered gym. At our gym, everyone works out in front of smart mirrors. The mirrors demo how to do each workout, counts your reps, gives you feedback on form, and adds gamification. We use computer vision to automatically track workouts. All the data is pulled to a smartphone app at the end.

Essentially we built a gym that gives everyone a personal trainer, for free.

Happy to answer any question! :)

Derek

Technology Note: Our tech stack includes ML models we’ve trained from scratch, including YOLO-based object detection models (for tracking dumbbells & barbells) and Hourglass-based pose estimation models. Happy to answer any questions about our tech.

Technical demo: https://youtu.be/4a_U00KZ7uo

Privacy Note: All our inference is processed offline, no data is sent to cloud providers like AWS. No personally identifiable visual exercise data is ever stored, on our servers or cloud servers.
In my college in Antarctica we were taught

x ^ y = y x^T - x y

exp(ε x ^ y) v ~ v + ε x ^ y * v
= ε y (x,v) - v + ε x (y,v)

because we use the left-hand rule down under.
And then something like Trump or Brexit happens, and the left had no idea it was coming because a lot of people's viewpoints were silenced / deplatformed....
I can't find a good definition from credible sources but WikiPedia and the cited references (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_justice_warrior) refer to it as a pejorative term for an individual who promotes socially progressive views, not

> someone who is oversensitive, unable to accept other people have different viewpoints, and retreats to their safe space whenever someone disagrees with their world view

But the article does mention:

> they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments

and

> unreasonable, sanctimonious, biased, and self-aggrandizing

which does seen to have plenty overlap with the general definition and notion of someone who would exhibit toxic behaviour.

Ironically, it seems to be a term (SJW as well as 'toxic') that was invented (SJW) or re-applied (toxic) just to have one group of people label another group of people. Which is double-ironic because neither the labeling nor the behaviour validates ones own point or invalidates the other's point, yet doesn't further any conversation or discussion. It's practically just inflammatory filler.

(by the way, no, it didn't sound mean and I do like to review the popular labels and circular discussions from time to time -- much healthier for me than to be in the middle of it all the time)
We should question the veracity of the information presented. The nature of this fluid topic is a good example. I read the first part, a few days ago, and most of the information presented tallied with what was presented elsewhere. However, since then Dr. Eric Ding's profile has risen in prominence and the Twitter feed is commingling speculation with credentials, so it is entirely justified to question the validity of your source.

It would seem that there were doubts around the content in the Wikipedia entry.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletio...

From 2K followers to 64K+ followers in less than 7 days!
https://socialblade.com/twitter/user/drericding
A conflict in pursuit of the demise/revisioning of atrophied systems?
Well that depends on if Elon is a believer in Time Cube Theory which says due to 4 corner Earth there are 4 simultaneous days each rotation.
And George Soros should not be in control of the world's liberals either. See, I too can play this game.

Edit: This, BTW, was downvoted and flagged within literally milliseconds after posting. So I guess they have shills here making sure wrongthink doesn't get through.
The Internet lets people say things you wouldn't say in real life because you can be anonymous.

I myself have some opinions that are controversial and not politically correct and for reference I'm a well-educated software engineer. There are people out there with far more extreme opinions than me, and the Internet gives them the opportunity to share them.

And the reward of angering and fighting with people who disagree, with no real consequences.