skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Every Facebook employee should receive blowback for continuing to work there. They make the choice each day to create more value than they cost to support this platform - they implicitly support its reprehensible ideas.

You work there, you own this. It is who you are.
Remember when "I disagree with what you say, but will defend your right to say it" was a thing? I certainly do. How far we've fallen as a culture since then.
There's a matter of politeness/good practice that goes beyond license terms. And in some contexts (e.g. academia) there's absolutely an expectation that you cite others' work whether or not you're legally required to do so.

That said, I basically agree with you. If you have specific expectations of whoever uses your code, you should absolutely pick a license that requires the behaviors you want. (With the understanding that fewer people may use your code as a result.)
There's a difference between ethical and legal. You can do a lot of things that don't break any law but make you a terrible human being.

Of course you can copy someone's design and not acknowledge it unless it's patented. You're going to be a dick then, not a criminal.
Passing judgment on thousands of employees like this is really no better either, you are just imposing your own morals on them.
Worth mentioning that Bret Devereaux, author of the piece (and blog) under discussion here, has some salt in other articles for the Total War series' effect on his students' perception of how ancient and medieval battles worked. Fun if you're into that sort of thing, but not to be taken overly seriously, is the impression I've gathered.
> Consider getting more friends in the US if you want a realistic view of the country.

I certainly lost contact with some people who started getting increasingly angry at everyone and everything. Lashing out on others like the world is out to get them. I'm sure if I kept in touch they'd give me their ever-so-rosy point of view on how well America is doing right now but it doesn't take a genius to figure out their point of view is an illusion they barely believe themselves.

I'm going to stop arguing now because you're starting to say things that are blatantly wrong and it feels like you're baiting me into a bigger argument than this is worth.

I'm just offering you a perspective from another corner of the globe, that isn't biased by your media you so proudly declare is supposed to be divisive. You're free to ignore it. You're free to think you're better-informed by consuming twice as much clickbaity media rather than half as much neutral media.

I don't gain anything by correcting you, after all.
We really need to make a list of all the people who are bastards, just to keep it straight.

So far we have all Cops, Facebook employees, Google employees (or is it just some).

Would be a handy reference.
Voluntarily working for Facebook and being judged for is not the same as being black.
Freedom 2 and 3 are limitations of your right of resale applied to software. Actual applications differ by jurisdiction, of course, but my point is that, by limiting a consumer right, they become a consumer-rights issue by definition.
You choose no acknowledgement licenses when your goal is to quietly make the world better. Thus what Microsoft did was a feature not a bug.

Of course if your goals are different it is the wrong license, but that isn't the fault of the license or Microsoft from using it as intended.

Note, I have not read the apache license in a while. I might not have the exact details of what it encourages wrong. The point should stand anyway.
I’m not paying for news because I want to see the current model of news die out.

It’s opinionated, biased, and heavily edited. When the news gets back to factual unbiased reporting I’ll consider spending money.
Displaying sheet music while I play the piano. And before that, nothing. I only have an iPad because I needed it to demo the app I was working on at the time.
It's not more diverse on unmoderated platform it's the opposite. Unmoderated platform (like chans) mostly attract those who despise any censorship, that's far from everybody.
Zuck has consistently backed right-wing politicians ever since he's had the chance. He had his Girl Friday solicit an antisemitic report on George Soros from a right-wing propaganda group -- that's something so stupid that everybody involved should have been fired right away and sent to Siberia. See

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIqESwzCGg4

Although Zuck won't do anything about Trump posts that encourage violence, his company certainly will "fact check" ads that oppose Trump, even when those ads come from fellow Republicans.
One of the things from the list that could be improved is this:

> Algorithmic optimizations have a greater impact than micro optimizations

This is kind of tautological, as micro optimizations can be an important part of algo optimization. We don't execute algorithms on formal automata, but on real machines with real architectures, limitations and opportunities.

> * “Real efficiency gains come from changing the order of complexity of the algorithm, such as changing from O(N^2) to O(N*logN) complexity”

Only if the constant factor that multiplies the lower-complexity expression is small enough and N is large enough.
I believe that is allowed in some US states, because political affiliation is not a federally protected employment class, and some, but not all, states prohibit it.
I'm only going off what you said:

> I don't take sides

Not taking sides is de facto siding with the more powerful side in a situation for practical/effect purposes, this is pretty well established across many disciplines. I 100% am not saying you are ideologically siding with them, only that it is the effect of your lack of siding at all.
Zuck get's it. Start censoring, editorializing etc. and section 230 protections will be gutted. On top of that anti-trust investigations intensify, rightfully, because you have not concentrated too much power into an un-regulated, un-elected platform vs the elected government which is against the interest of the country as a whole. For all of the engineers complaining about this, there are plenty of other ones who would be happy to take the place of the high paid engineers who have an issue with this and ask a lot less questions or who may even support what Zuck is doing.
> designed for this very purpose

... by the US Navy.

https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-the-TOR-browser-was-ac...
correction: a cost-effective snapdragon 865 sbc.
The negativity in this comments section is astounding.

Personally, I was originally introduced to it by someone in the Mithril.js gitter chat, and think it's a great project. I wish the Solid team the best and look forward to trying out Solid in my next toy project. The performance benchmarks and relatively clean API are truly impressive.
Bingo. This exemplifies why the current situation, however you feel about it, is untennable from both sides of the issue.
Arduino seem to have won the hobbyist IoT
It's around about that amount of time - living on-campus or at home if you're relatively close by. You get paid a wage of $33k USD from the day you start. With it increasing as you get experience. If you quit, it's like any other job.

Another slight difference is we generally only have 1 police force per state. You can transfer between different stations/areas - but they are all under control of a single state body. If you stuff up badly enough to get fired from one - you can't transfer. You could theoretically go to a different state - but you'd need to declare any past history and if it's bad you won't get a job there either.

In total we have less than about 30 law enforcement agencies nation-wide - including state police, military, fisheries, federal police, prisons and border control.

It's my understanding in the US there are many many police agencies - per county as well as schools, banks, etc. Which adds up to around 18,000 over 50 states.

For our schools or shops we have security guards which have different training and far less powers than police. They basically have the similar powers to a normal citizen. They are used more as a deterrent rather than anything functional.
Using Vim-Fireplace to Interact with a ClojureScript REPL
I usually compare them to pubs/night clubs:

They're places where people hang out and socialize or network.

Some have really strict bouncers whereas others will let just about anyone in as long as they're spending money and not shitting the place up too badly.

There are some that are so big and so popular that it almost doesn't matter if you prefer hanging out in another less popular one because no matter how you try, you'll never convince most of your friends to hang out at your favorite dive since everyone is at the big place.

...etc
Mobx is a great example. It works well for small projects, but as they grow, you get bugs. One thing winds up depending on another that depends on yet another and before you know it, you've got all sorts of unexpected updates happening. These bugs often require digging into and though the mobx implementation details as you try to step your way to the problem.

You can greatly reduce this issue, but you do so by refusing to use most of the 2-way binding features. At that point, you're going to basically be doing one-way data flow anyway and might as well go all-in with a library tailored to do that.
> Big interrupt handlers require more system-wide knowledge to verify

I think the point I'm trying to make is that sometimes following the rule of "make your ISR small" actually makes this worse because your bigger high priority task can be interrupted or you turn interrupts off or mask interrupts and you end up with even more complexity.
"AppGet uses YAML files instead of scripts; we call them manifests. Using data over scripts just seemed like a much better choice."

So it's an opinion, one that the WinGet team decided to go with as well. Okay... not sure that's massively compelling just because the author says so but I'm willing to be convinced. I guess I need to go back and dig deeper on this scripting being referenced in Chocolatey: isn't it just powershell scripting?
How this is not Zuckerberg being unable to control his revolutionary employees eager to implement political opposition censorship because they can?
Lol at Fbook's "attacks on democracy". You're the one that needs to prove your insane conspiracy theories bud. All Zuck said is that he doesn't think they should be the arbiter of truth, which is SMART, because otherwise they have to start censoring content for hundreds of millions of people, which they are bound to get wrong.

Watch some of Alex Stamos talks if you think this such an easy problem to solve.

Remind me again how Fbook takes away my right to vote?

Lotta people downvoting me because of the notion that "Facebook is bad" but won't explain why.
The thing the censorship fans can't seem to understand is the power they are granting.

Today the power is for their progressive friends, tomorrow it could be for regressive tyrants. Likely those are the very same people.

Just look to history. How many leftist uprising have worked out well?
So if I don't have any accounts in sociopathological networks, will the morons deny my visa? What a br.., I mean, a cowardly new world!
>It's been 4 years and it's still being developed? Apparently android v1/v2 was released about 1 year later after the first iPhone.

I'd say they learned a lot from Android, the use cases and problems arising from supporting such a giant project on so many different devices (and non cooperating vendors). So it's not a surprise they're taking their time. I imagine there must have been a long and in-depth analysis at Google of Android and other operating systems before Fuchsia came to be, considering the money they're going to spending on it.

AFAIK Android was a quick hack and the ecosystem, if you know anything about it, you know it's a mess.
> That would be like arguing that Six Flags over Georgia can't remove you from their park because you started protesting in it

But in the context of this post, you (and the Facebook employees) are actually arguing exactly the same thing: that Six Flags should be required to ban people who, for example, wear Republican candidate T-shirts to the park.
I had this debate with other mods on r/cscareerquestions a few years back. My preference was for SomethingAwful-style modding transparency, where your bad post (usually) stays up with a note that says "USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST", and in fact there's a global listing of all the recent bans, including the user and posts in question.

The other mods largely preferred invisible modding, that "stays out of the way", that doesn't draw attention away from productive discussion.

I'm not sure either is obviously a better methodology, honestly.
I think, the "3rd Age of JS" [1] of frontend libraries are running directly in the browser without a build step. Like in the beginning. ES modules in the browser paves the way.

Svelte and Solid are actually the pinnacle of the "2nd age of JS".

[1] https://www.swyx.io/writing/js-third-age/
Care telling me where you make hiring decisions so I can avoid it like the self righteous plague it must be?
The problem I see is that "violent" speech is a subjective perception. I could claim that your post was "violent", and that I was harmed by it.

Sticks and stones.
That sounded like an openion not a claim.
Well maybe we should compare apples to apples. With React you go down a rabbithole of workarounds around their initial concepts (like hooks) until you wonder why you chose it in the first place.
There message sounds like a clear apology, unless the poster is hoping to hear the actual words "I'm sorry". They screw uped and came clean, even though like in most cases takes trending on Hacker News to get that resolution.
In the US it seems it is slightly more complicated https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/can-employers-discri...
That's one of the key reasons I never apply to companies like Facebook and Google. I'm sure there's a lot of greatness to be had at those companies, but having already experienced working at a left-wing media company, I imagine the fear of being made a pariah by coworkers could only be greater at Facebook.
I had named an example, the one which just happened. Reading that question sandwiched between my last sentence and your next one I was legitimately unsure what you were asking. Therefore I made it clear which question I erred on the side of you asking, and proceeded to answer. Please consider considering your own lack of clarity in communication before insulting others in the future.

You want another example of riots leading to change? The Civil Rights Act of 1968 was signed into law during a storm of riots that had broken out following the assassination of MLK.
Nobody deleted Trump's posts. Twitter a) attached a "this may be misleading" link to one of them with the link leading to more reputable information on the subject, and b) hid the inflammatory one behind a warning about inciting violence, with a clear and present "View" button available. To my mind this is exactly the right approach: the original content remains fully available for those who would cry censorship, yet its destructive impact is hopefully dampened.
> People really want Zuckerberg to decide whether posts of the president should be deleted or not?

I think you have it backwards. He has explicitly decided to not delete a post, rather than leaving this decision to a more majoritarian and just mechanism.

"Facebook employees critical of CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s decision not to remove an inflammatory comment from U.S. President Donald Trump took their dissent public over the weekend on Twitter,"

see? he decided. That should not be his job.
What I liked about Hertz was being able to choose a particular from a collection of models in the chosen size category, which allowed me to get the combination of CarPlay and rear camera that I liked.

As for the article blaming their fleet for sticking with sedans for too long, to me as a European traveler, this is a feature. One time, I rented from a different company, which "generously" stuck me with some monster SUV, and I mostly hated the experience.
It would depend on what you would define as a diverse opinion, problem is who should define that and whether they took their own biases into account.
Really hope this is sarcasm.
In general I used a custom word vector model with a fixed dimension of n=100. As you should now, this feature transformer only maps word to vectors, but I have a more complex structure than just words to work on. The model works sentence wise and preparsing of text is made, let's say I have the following sentence:

"Hire Bill Gates as Front-End Developer at 05/05/2020"

Suppose the NER extracts the following entities from it:

- Bill Gates (PERSON)

- Front-End Developer (JOB)

- 05/05/2020 (DATE)

In my domain problem, I need the relation PERSON-JOB-DATE, which can be decomposed in two binary relations: PERSON-JOB and JOB-DATE. Each binary relation it's a model by itself with the following class outcomes: invalid, hiring, firing. If two binary relations has the same job and outcome classes, I build the triple PERSON-JOB-DATE.

At feature engineering level, which is you asked for, I build a tuple of local attention from entities perspective based on slices of the text: (entity1, entity2, before, between, after). Each part it's transformed into a vector by using average word vector and finally each part it's concatenated in a final vector that will be used by SVM. Since word vector dimension I choose in my experiments was n=100, my model will have n=500 features.

An example about the slices for PERSON-JOB it will be:

("Bill Gates", "Front-End Developer", "Hire", "as", "at 05/05/2020")

1. Each element of the tuple is tokenized

2. With tokens available, use word vector model to transform each one.

3. For each element of the tuple take the average of the vectors.

4. Concatenate each averaged vector into a final vector.

Using that structure the model is biased strongly by how the sentence is written with the words around of the entities. For my domain where the sentences are very regular it worked well. I am not sure if will work in more general domain, like social media.

I hope this clarify your question in some level.
Luckily for us, they're already keeping those lists.
If you’re “compiling all possible changes” that’s a diff, right? If there’s no VD, what’s being diffed?
I designed and built a burning man shade structure for out camp with one of Christo's Running Fence panels that we found in an old barn in Northern California. I was so glad about how many of my 'neighbors' knew about Christo. I got a little street cred from that :)
It might not be instantly fixed, but everyone would know where things belonged.
> has a lot of ammunition to fire at them if they decide to play politics.

In a very literal sense. https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-minneapolis-police-protest...
'He went for an interview at Microsoft's Redmond headquarters in December, which apparently "went well", but Andrew didn't inform him he would not get the job at Microsoft until six months later – on the day before the WinGet preview would be unveiled at Build 2020. '

This is bullshit. Keep him quiet with the hope of a job (embrace) until they release their version (extend, extinguish). Changing CEOs doesn't change everyone who works there.
Actual link to the statement: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/winget-install-le...
> Hiring based on political beliefs, or in this case, presumed political beliefs, sounds like a dangerous road to go down.

You don’t think this is happening already? I’m not sure what companies you’ve looked at but most big tech firms have left wing political cultures on an official level, with “culture“ departments and events promoting and sharing various culturally left-wing talking points everyone is supposed to be on board with. Try saying “I actually don’t think america is a deeply racist country in 2020, there’s a huge amount of opportunity here which is evidenced by the number of people (ostensible victims of racism from India, mexico, etc) who line up to come here. Oh and by the way I think natal women are entitled to privacy from men in their bathrooms (like 95% of Americans believe)” during a lunch interview and see how fast you get the “thanks for your time we’ll be in touch.” Or just say “I voted for the current president” if you prefer something shorter.

Alternately, talk about supporting BLM, BDS, and how terrible America is as a country—no one will bat an eye.

For the record I hold views from both of the above “columns” but I know which ones I’m allowed to share at work (the left leaning “progressive” ones) and which ones I need to keep to myself, namely, everything else.

EDIT: downvoters: please set me straight here and let me know what part of my comment is inaccurate or untrue.
WinGet is written in c++ and a
AppGet is written in c# so the code isn't copied.

I think his complaint is they copied the functional interface.
> Young, STEM-educated people skew left.

That's a surprising conclusion... I always thought they skewed libertarian.
Do you actually believe a company such as Google would constrain themselves with GPL (which is pretty much _socialism_) on a product that will possibly bring hundreds of billions in revenue?
How to Become a Hacker (ESR)
I think it's something about the earnestness of your website. The welcome message is friendly and it sets the tone. It didn't even occur to me to write something nasty, and this was before I even checked what others had written.
230 covers a lot of situations. For example, it has been cited by a judge who ruled in favor a library, which was the defendant[0]. This protected the library's choice to let patrons use the internet on library computers. It's summarized in the Wikipedia article you shared.

If 230 disappears, I don't see how any websites would allow user comments. I really don't see how we'd have any websites where user content is the service's value (Pinterest, recipe sharing sites, LinkedIn, Reddit).

[0] http://www.techlawjournal.com/courts/kathleenr/20010306op.as...

Edited: removed repeated sentence
The truth is that they do censor content so words have no meaning.
Except that the "glorification of violence" depends on the interpretation. It can also be a warning that people will start to defend themselves with violence or that the military will intervene. If that's the case those warning are here to AVOID violence by discouraging people to engage in looting...

Facebook shouldn't make such decision based on the interpretation of some emotionally biased employees.
Exoframe is a self-hosted tool that allows simple one-command deployments
Maybe there ought to be a Wikipedia page listing the "graft level" of a country (in nominal and PPP amounts, of course).

In more corrupt countries, a large fraction of the population gets to use petty graft. In less corrupt countries, a small fraction of the population gets to use grand graft.
Everyone observing the topic knew this 2 years ago, but that's first time someone important said it out loud.
Huh. It looks like you are right. The narrow inside don't actually impede the view of the defender that much. But keeping the narrow part on the outside does provide some extra defense.
An automated water storage and decontamination system for Moon and Mars habitats
ZeroGravitas – A lexicon of science fiction words
The point of social networks then is the same as it is now, to host content that does not break the terms of service of the site. Anything further than that is extra. Just leave it as things were and people are fine.

We've been saying that what's on the internet is not bond since before the inception of Facebook and Twitter, so there's no reason to try and change it now. When did people forget that there was no use in doing this?
Why not? The president intends to address to the people he serves and facebook, among others, is an effective means of doing so.
Ah the "I was just doing my job" defense.