skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> If the intent is to punish critics and suppress the speech of party opponents, then yes. Any authoritarian can justify their actions in abstract and general terms, but context matters.

This is literally what Twitter has been doing. Trump's order puts an end to it.

> We don't have to ignore it, but we also don't have to accept an autocrat's temper tantrum by fiat as an answer.

Exactly why Twitter needs to be stripped of their 230 protections.

> The purpose of the First Amendment is to prevent the government from infringing freedom of speech - the President is attempting to use government power to infringe freedom of speech, to do exactly what the First Amendment was created to prevent.

This is the government upholding free speech. Twitter's policies and their selective enforcement of such run directly contrary to the underlying tenets of free speech. This holds Twitter accountable for their "un-American" practices.

Although it may be hard to see through the vitriolic debates currently raging, this will be a net win for the internet. This will encourage decentralisation in so far as there is now a soft power cap on these big tech companies.
I’ve been over this before. Unless if you’re going to eliminate the ability for Twitter to moderate any protected speech, then this is an expansion of government power. This would give someone in the government the ability to determine what protected speech is immune from Twitter moderation, and what protected speech is not. This is a massive expansion of government power, and turns a two tier speech system (protected or not) into a three tier one.
Part of them did. Because tribalism. But i think you should differentiate between socialists and liberals, the "left" is broader than the "right" right now. I don't think any liberal wants to nationalize a company like twitter.

Some may want to break true monopolies maybe, but twitter?

Anyway i was convinced by a conservative that big media companies should be partially nationalized (for gov oversight), still i don't think twitter is a big enough natural monopoly to warrant that.
HN used to rewrite clickbait headlines...
Who is a politician and who isn’t?
In this particular case, Trump is right, and Twitter is using its fact-check with false information. Just scroll through the confirmed cases of voter fraud here, it's mostly mail-in and absentee: [PDF] https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/docs/p...
And of course its always worth mentioning the MONIAC..

(Monetary National Income Analogue Computer) also known as the Phillips Hydraulic Computer

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MONIAC

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rAZavOcEnLg
How that wouldn't be replicated in a matter of weeks? He can just start posting on donaltjtrump.ru and people will check it. They can throw together a notification app.
Zoom's Biggest Security Scandal Explained: A Tale of Heroes and Horcruxes
Exactly, progressives are ok with business right (which often translate to individual rights), just against businesses having all of the rights.
We are taking about reform not what the current state of the law is. Twitter has an outsized impact for the small number of people who make those decisions.
A couple of other reading:

* https://elemental.medium.com/why-is-the-internet-obsessed-wi...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/26/upshot/you-probably-dont-...
The same conservatives who insist that bakeries have the right to discriminate against gay couples turn around and freak out when they perceive tech companies to be discriminating against conservatives, and then they run crying to the nanny state to demand they be protected from the evil megacorporations.

They're only in favor of deregulation as long it doesn't personally affect them.
Yes, the media were and are in a similar position of power, and despite some bumps in the road they've turned out to be a very good thing.

I don't object to a good-faith defense of Twitter etc. as arbiters of truth, because it's entirely possible they'll do a good job and become a responsible authority. I do object to the idea that only the political right would have a problem with them, and that the only problem anyone could have is tyranny of the majority. I'm more worried about tyranny of Jack Dorsey than tyranny of the majority.
I think of my work outfit as more like a costume.
I don't know about computer security, but I've published peer reviewed research papers in other fields and a year and a half from data collection to publication doesn't seem unusual to me. If anything it's pretty fast.
My wife is the same. Perfect teeth. She often forgets to brush. Perfectly white and straight and zero cavities. Me? Brush twice a day. Floss every single day. Chew gum between meals. Still get cavities.

Interestingly my children have the exact same tooth brushing regime. My eldest has had zero problems whatsoever, yet my youngest has a bunch of problems. Same household, same tooth brushing, same diet. Our doctor said some people just have weaker teeth but I don't know anything about the science.
Ugh, I do like withoutprefix a lot better. That makes it obvious it returns something new and that there’s no reason to raise ever.
groff really isn't difficult to write. The main problem with it is that it is terrible to edit after you've been away from it for a while.

That said, a markdown front end is probably not a bad idea. It would address editability and approachability for people who get anxious around old formats.
Because your post fell below the bar for 'significant attention' as explained in the comments I linked to.
I worked from home for 10 years without asking for a thing. Last year, I asked for a $3,000 office chair. They asked for a few weeks to think about it. I still haven't received a thing.

I personally don't feel like I need my company to pay for tools to do my job, outside of software that's priced outside of what an individual could afford. I think of the mechanics and contractors in my family who have spent an order of magnitude more on their tools than I have, and earn a fraction of what I earn.

I only asked for the chair because it was really nice and would have helped my posture, and I can't justify dropping $3k on a chair.
Unsafe rust is safer than C for two reasons.

You can limit what comes in from safe rust.

Unsafe rust still has more compiler checks than C. Unsafe rust is not as permissive as C. Its rust still, with certain things permitted.

Its unsafe{} not nosafe{}
If Twitter wants to become a publisher they can edit or curate their content to their heart's content.

Web publishers do not need any special protection from well established jurisprudence governing other publishers. It made some sense in the early days when it was unclear how things would turn out, now those protections should be rolled backed or adjusted.
Twitter is private from the point of view that matters at hand; that is, the legal one. Whether or not you can see content without an account has no bearing on this as this is a matter of ownership and liability. Even if it did, you cannot participate in those discussions without an account.

Laws pertaining to free speech do not apply here, as has been established time and again, partly because, like I said, it is their free speech in the wider gamut to remove things they don't want. Twitter's right to free speech exists in the public space, but your right to speech extends as far as Twitter's terms of service.

This all seems mostly disingenuous anyway -- the bias is very exaggerated. The right is mostly backed by armies of bots (a violation) and generally people who flaunt the rules more (anecdotally). Just something else to be outraged at.
> Perhaps someone can find some evidence that allows for deductive reasoning on this subject.

Such evidence would be admissible in a court of law, and would probably lead to the breaking up of Google (and Alphabet, and various holdings) under antitrust. Yes, that'd be nice, but you're asking for a lot; even given the premise, it's unlikely to materialise until the statute of limitations has passed, if that.

> Otherwise, all we've got is competing lines of perfectly valid incompatible inductive reasoning.

Not quite. Because you can ignore the lines of the reasoning, take into account the evidence, and then come to a conclusion yourself. If you don't quite trust yourself to do it properly (and who would, honestly? the bias you've highlighted is enough on its own, and it's just one), there's mathematics to do so: Bayes' theorem. (Of course, you have to estimate the conditional probabilities properly, but I find it easier to notice when I'm leaning on the scales when there's a level of indirection like that.)

Most predictions are made with inductive reasoning. If your comment doesn't contain some flaw (even if not the one I pointed out), then it suggests that predictions should be much harder than they actually are. Super-predictors should do not much better than chance. And yet, we find that, in reality, even the little-trained masses do pretty well: https://predictionbook.com/predictions You can see confirmation bias in the graph there, but it's not as significant as my model of you expects.
It's a very good point. I live in central London and had a very short commute to my office and I enjoyed coming to office most of the time. Now during the lockdown I am stuck working from my small studio apartment which is just not suited as a working environment and it is starting to take its toll. Working basically next to my kitchen corner and bed is not ideal at all and I feel I would be more productive if I were allowed to work from office again.
> No, it isn't, any more than a store is a public space because it has windows the public can see into.

It is absolutely the case in the USA that private properties which are open to the public are regulated as "places of public accommodation" under, notably, the Civil Rights Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. That includes privately-owned hotels, schools, restaurants, retail, and more.

You're correct that this is directly analogous to a privately-owned website that is primarily geared toward accommodating the general public (like Twitter), but it makes the opposite point of what you intended.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_accommodations_in_the_U...
Generally I use a Makefile that looks like this

```

SRC :=$(wildcard .tex .bib)

Paper.pdf: $(SRC)

pdflatex Paper

bibtex Paper.aux

pdflatex Paper

pdflatex Paper

short: $(SRC)

pdflatex Paper

clean:

rm -f .glo .log .dvi .gls .toc .aux .ist .out .glg .pdf .bbl .blg .lof .brf *.sta

.PHONY: clean

```

I hate that you have to run things multiple times to get references right. Really it should just be `pdflatex Paper` and you should be done.

Every once in awhile I just get references that don't want to stick. Same with images. [ht!] and floatbarriers only go so far. As much as tikz is a pain (and beautiful), I'd definitely invest more time into making image placement and references easier for the average user.

EDIT: code has a lot of wildcards before every extension but I'm not sure how to escape those on HN
> I can't see how a Twitter/FB feed is substantively different from a curated "letters to the editor" section in a newspaper and I cannot for the life of me understand why it is treated different legally.

Both companies offer non-algorithmic feeds where users are 100% in control of what they see. Even with an algorithmic feed, users are still doing far more curation than any "curation" that an algorithm does, which is random at best in terms of intention by these companies at a political level.

I don't see how we interpret that as publishing any more than posts on a forum. The only "editorial" stances these companies take is to moderate content - not delete or edit, only flag and delete. This case is only really interesting because it's a new type of flagging that has not been broadly applied yet against a president.

I'm not sure how we got the question reversed - how in the world is Twitter/Facebook considered a publisher? They have millions and millions of users that write whatever they want without any editorial help, only moderation like that of most all internet forums.

This begs the question - what is "publishing" defined as, and what are the relevant features? I'm hard pressed to think of a useful definition of publishing that includes Twitter/Facebook.
There is already a ruling by the Supreme Court where social media sites are referred as the modern public square.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-1194_08l1.pdf
I work on the cheapest 14'' laptop I could find.

I bought it last year and thought I do not need a good computer, since I thought I would spend most on my time on the PC in the office anyways.
That is odd as it means there is no left and right debate. A society choose. Law is what the society agreed. And you said the us society you in, unlike Eu say, are right leaning.

Whilst it might be, but is the left in us is already right (like Obama use Romey Insuranve not single payer). Or are we in mix economy some are left some are right. Or left right actually many different things like large and small Gov,liberty, ownership, ...

Or is there something like open source which is beyond left and right but community, not gov vs market etc.
It's private in the sense that the servers are privately owned and therefore the owners should have the right to decide what goes on there.
Chardet, written by mozilla, already detect encoding if you need such thing.
"Speaking" doesn't imply "managing" in a negative sense. It's simply a medium to convey information. Is it micro managing to see a direct report in the hallway or at lunch and casually say "Hey, Alice was saying that we could really use a new X, what do you think about that?" That level of discussion would very rarely occur over Slack or during a scheduled 1:1.
You're right; they're bonds. compare https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/iXcD4yjnYag...
Шпак богач...
tl;dr ?

Seriously, is there some simple list that precisely indicates what does this EO mean? What does it mean for regular normal guys and gals (and genderfluid attack helicopterkins)? What does it mean for Twitter?
Why buy the cow when you can get the (goat) milk for free? Before Sun was up for sale, Google chose to base its not-Java™ implementation on Apache Harmony (incubated at IBM).

There was no way of knowing the farmer who'd buy the cow would claim goat milk infringes cow-milk protein IP (apologies for stretching the metaphor beyond breaking)
I have also found that many people have problems with async/written communication or even just paying attention to email or tasks. It is related to their general competence, communication skills and habits, and level of interest.

It is a big problem.

For me if they can't handle git comments or slack then they can usually manage to show up for a phone call. And in my projects that is generally not the best, but it is good enough to be able to keep projects moving forward.

If it was a programmer rather than manager or client who did not reply to chat/email or handle git properly, in my opinion there is no excuse and that is a fireable offense. I mean, it should be fireable for managers and clients too but sometimes keeping the gig seems worth it.
Subcaption package https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/LaTeX/Floats,_Figures_and_Capt...
That is a bit of a naive understanding of flash failure modes that is, unfortunately, incorrect. SSDs can lose data purely through read-only workloads. Flash suffers from read disturbances (just like the DRAM row hammer attack). Cells are not perfect, and electrical charge from adjacent rows/cells can leak. As a result, even idle data needs to be refreshed in SSDs. This is a case where there are major differences in the behaviour of NAND vs NOR flash, with NAND flash being more vulnerable.

There are also documented cases of Intel SSDs that should have gone read-only once reaching the end of their wear life failing outright due to firmware bugs. As is usually the case, software failures in corner cases abound.
My dream is that someone invents a fleet of nanobots that I can put in my mouth that will clean up all the plaque and repair any tooth and gum damage. Just pop them in at night, recall them all back in the morning.
> the President is attempting to use government power to infringe freedom of speech,

thats an interestating take, considering trump is trying to stop the selective editorialization of individuals covered by the first amendment.

are we really taking twitters side of this because we hate trump so much?
That still doesn't make it _the_ place for political discourse. Reddit gets quoted quite often. Tons of politicians do AMA on Reddit and Facebook. Just because Trump is on Twitter doesn't make it special.
The reality is that Tweets are broadcasted to billions of people.

No, they're not. You have to visit the Twitter website or otherwise pull the data from some source to get tweets.

it’s about ethics and morals and how we compose a society with mighty power imbalances, fortified by new tech.

It's technically trivial to create your own Twitter. There are indeed plenty of competitors to Twitter. Twitter has no moral or ethical obligation to carry lies. Indeed, the opposite is true: because of their market position, they should be ethically and morally obligated to prevent lies from being spread through their platform because they have the greatest reach.
Good list. You might also like this one focused on thinking about systems: https://unintendedconsequenc.es/
We've always had these "arbiters of truth", and I don't know of a good way around it. As long as someone's filtering what you see (be it journalists, or recommendation algorithms on social media platforms), they're influencing what gets presented to you and how - and if you don't do filtering, there's simply too much for you to get any useful information.
Is it not the case that the fact checking is not going to change any of Trump's followers?
If all the bullshit that he has been spewing over all these years has not deterred his followers, showing facts will not.
It is been clear that Trump's only agenda is to make people turn against each other and profit from it and he will keep using any chance he gets to do that.
I’ve been toying with Nim lately to wrap C++ ML libraries, which gives a nice Pythonic syntax but compiles to a binary wrapping the ML lib. Seems to work well for Torch. There's a nice wrapper library nimtorch for Nim [1]. It's a bit out of date bit would be easy to update, probably. Well easier than bundling pytorch on an embedded device. Even manually wrapping the needed C++ libraries isn't that hard in Nim, IMHO.

Overall looking at Python deployment story after using Elixir for the past couple of years makes me cringe a bit. Rather I have no idea how to do it. Deterministic versions, lock files, and container/tarball (or binary) support seems a given in 2020.

1: https://medium.com/@giovanni_94706/introducing-nimtorch-b8b0...
Not in any way that matters, and certainly not in the legal sense. In a legal sense, Twitter is your neighbor's backyard, and your neighbor is telling you to stop lying about sleeping with his wife or get the fuck out of his yard.
Interesting. So, it seems to be beneficial to have children chew on hard things when small to develop a larger jaw so that their teeth don't crowd. I guess chewing on ice would be beneficial in this sense. As long as they're chewing on it with teeth that will fall out as to not worry about damaging them...

I wonder what the aesthetic differences would be though. In a western beauty sense, I can imagine having a larger jaw being somewhat preferential for men but for women - isn't it not? Would it be enough to notice?

Wish I had known this growing up. Ironically, I felt like I did eat some hard foods but I wonder how much you have to eat in order for it to have a real effect.
TL;DR: it was bundled with Windows 9
>I'm not saying don't audit. I'm pointing out your initial claim that this will find anything unusual.

By "unusual" I mean anything that has intended or unintended negative effects on society, such as what was seen with Cambridge Analytica, or FBs emotional manipulation studies.

>It can find common errors. It can find bad behavior inserted by unskilled people. But against groups that know about current work, you won't find anything

Yep, and without a 3rd party audit, we can't even begin to approximate the degree of hypothetical bad behavior that exists affecting billions of people due to regular developers doing what they're told by their product managers (or of their own volition), let alone a nation state APT.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23336255

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23334345
Social networks were not in the "how original" category in 2005. Facebook was started in 2004 and was still restricted to college students when Loopt launched. Loopt was quite different (mainly about location rather than friend graph.) It was an idea worth trying.
>they outsourced were their bottom tier workers, the unproductive people

I don't think that's correct. They outsourced lower-skill jobs that could be done remotely to regions with lower labor costs.
1. Nope, but the dev team is located on the other side of the country from the rest of the company (and I'm in between).

2. This company started as just a client and then they made me an offer that was too good to refuse.

>The reason why I ask is because Principal-esque positions often come with perks not available to prole Developers.

I definitely have a lot of perks. But I had even more freedom when I was a contractor, and I made plenty of money. If someone is a decent developer with good communication and business skills, a similar path is very achievable.

>Not to sound snide, but the practical difference is - you're not the CEO.

When I said practical I specifically meant other than the fact that he's the CEO. My point is that a well run company won't fall apart if the CEO is unavailable for a few hours per day, and a well run team won't fall apart b/c one developer (or their boss) is similarly unavailable.

>It would not surprise me that some of these habits, fe. mentoring devs, meeting with leadership, etc, are best cultivated in a physical space before being done online. That's just me though.

That's entirely possible. But my guess is that if there is an effect it's small compared to all the other variables.

>Nothing to do with shitty bosses, but not everyone is exactly born with the qualities to check up on people regularly, ready to go out of the gate. Especially in a professional environment.

I agree with you there, but I also think those people probably shouldn't be managers until they have developed those qualities, and I don't think this is a remote problem.

Years ago I didn't have those qualities. I was a retail supervisor and I used to sit in the front office and mostly ignore the cashiers until there was a problem despite the fact that I was only 20 feet away from them.

Remote work does require different skills, and managing a remote team probably takes more skill in general, but honestly I wouldn't want to work in house for a manager that didn't have those skills anyway.
Let me also chime in and say this would be awesome!
That sounds to me like the outcome of both options are:

1) Toxic, awful to use sites with no personalization (custom recommendations, curation, etc)

2) Sites get more careful (and expensive to operate) because they don't want to get sued.

I really doubt #1 is even a tenable business. Who uses a site like that? On the other hand I really like the idea of more careful social media sites.
> It sounds unworkable and over the top

It easy to make it workable, just claim that general-purpose platforms beyond a certain use size become public forums where freedom of speech must be protected.