skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
And now in Spain.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23351708 (HN: Spain approves national minimum income scheme)
I believe that's the correct answer (since the boxes were checked when I first opened the page).

Yeah - very confusing though.
The Best of Sahil Lavingia
Big Ideas From His Last 3,000 Tweets
I'd recommend the book Regarding the Pain of Others by Susan Sontag, read it a while ago, but still relevant, perhaps even more now...
That's definitely a theme that Matt Levine touches on a lot, especially when he talks about the WeWork and Uber IPOs: basically in the private VC market, your investors either pass on the investment, or they invest. They cannot short.

So the investors participating in your market (not the ones who chose to sit on the sidelines) are already selected for being the people that are overly positive or at least believe in the vision. Even if they have suspicions, their incentive is to pump pump pump the valuation and the narrative so they can ultimately dump the company onto the public markets. This largely worked for Uber, but not for WeWork.

Once you're public, you're exposed to short sellers and 10000x the scrutiny.

To expand more, if you're in the private market and don't believe in X company, you could invest in a competitor Y instead of shorting company X, but only if you think the market opportunity is legit and company X is going about it wrong and that company Y is any good. Pretty narrow case.

Matt Levine has a half-funny half-serious suggestion for essentially shorting in the private VC markets if you think the whole market is crap: found a company and have VCs pay you a shit ton of money to run it, and take a golden parachute before the house cards falls.
The Tiny “Spite Triangle” That Marks a Century-Old Grudge Against New York City
No, amphetamine is significantly different from methamphetamine.
Apple has as many kernel exploits as any other, software is not perfect. macOS has a long history of many many security patches in point releases, sometimes the release notes run into the tens of pages.

The point of view you should take is that the company that doesn't issue security fixes (or issues very few comparatively) is the one you should be worried about: They are not better, they just don't fix anything and leave you vulnerable instead.
I don't see what assurances you have of this guarantee you give. As so far it seems like when funding is cut, faculty (teaching and research) and academic departments are cut and financial aid is reduced, rather than major cuts in administration. So it's worth discussing what administrative units are cuttable, or come to the realization there is no free cuts to make to administration without sacrifices to some existing principles.
> Life is slowly returning to normal, but it's still wacked out and stressful - just be nice.

I think that the most privileged (of whom I, and I expect many of us on here, am one) are experiencing less of the hardships associated to coronavirus than they did in the first flush of the reaction, and that, in the US at least, there is a rush to try to act as if things are returning to normal, but I don't think that there's much realistic sense in which things are actually returning to normal, slowly or otherwise.
> Seems like a reasonable question.

Just to be clear, I think it's a perfectly reasonable question. A rational question can still contain a potential flaw.

But I did misunderstand what they were asking.
> Edit: the law defines the boundaries of what is acceptable outrage and what isn't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_(Thoreau)

"[i]t is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right.... Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice."

ETA:

> Edit2: there is a world of difference between reasonable civil disobedience and firebombing your local Target.

What is "reasonable civil disobedience"? If that Target is only in the neighborhood because it's an experimental LP store put in an incredibly impoverished area so that they can develop better techniques for putting people of color in prison, is it suddenly reasonable? https://twitter.com/IanColdwater/status/1265867904844693505

Who are we to make that call, in either direction?
According to the book "The Mosquito: A Human History of Our Deadliest Predator" by Timothy C. Winegard, the mosquito has killed an estimated 52 billion people from a total of 108 billion people that have ever lived. (Not sure how those numbers were determined.)
Telegram non-E2E is more than just TLS, though.
I didn't say that recompiling template changes is bad - e.g, you can accomplish the same result with much faster turnaround time using Tera, and for most projects the speed is in no way a bottleneck.
NSA’s Social Network Mapping Is More Vast, Omnipresent and Horrifying
BTW for California state employees including the public universities, the information is public so you can actually look it up.

https://transparentcalifornia.com/agencies/salaries/#univers...
Good point, it is ambiguous. I changed it to "semitone."
Perhaps this is too political, but the only tool they actually needed was one they had the whole time. Charge the offices based upon the evidence and open a more detailed investigation. The military equipment was entirely unnecessary - but it's very availability makes opportunity for bad decisions.
He hadn't been an hour ago, when he wrote that comment.
I don't think https prevents ISPs from knowing what domains you try to resolve - that would be where a VPN would come into play surely?
> "They actually hired people to sit around watching the coffee get made, so they caught the fraud."

There's (was at least, not sure if it's still going) an undercover unit in HMRC (the UK IRS) who's job it was to go to pubs and make sure they aren't under reporting sales by counting how many pints they sold. Of course to blend in they had to spend the whole day on the piss.

A popular team.
Your reference conflates hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine to try to prove your point. Chloroquiine is a different drug with stronger side effects, which I explicitly mentioned.

How about finding information about hydroxychlorquine on its own? This is from the FDA itself:

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2007/00...

I suggest you actually try to do some deeper research besides just reading politicized versions of information. First and foremost, educate yourself on the differences between hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, they are two different chemicals. Just like how "dihydrogen monoxide" and "hydrogen sulfate" are two different chemicals, even though they have the word "hydrogen" in them.
Tailwind CSS?
If you want to reduce the number, consider donating money to the cost-effective Against Malaria Foundation

https://www.givewell.org/charities/amf - review by GiveWell, and independent charity evaluator

$2 donation results in 1 net that lasts 3-4 years protecting 1.8 people on average from malaria
$3
Sure and let's ignore the fact that if anyone stayed in those shops and tried to prevent protestors from "protesting", they'd just be peacefully left alone by those violent criminals because... Some random X-th amendment?

How about martial law, seeing as we're throwing around unrelated legal laws and concepts?

Either way, these ridiculous "protests" indicate a complete break down of society and the government should be sending in the military to arrest people.
While free-market pricing may create an incentive to hoard for resale, price ceilings also create an incentive to hoard for personal use. If I’m on the fence about whether I might need an N95 mask soon, and I learn they’re being sold at below-market prices due to ceilings, I’ll hoard because I’m worried they soon won’t be available at any price. I’m motivated to forecast the duration of the shortage and stockpile what I think I might need. If I overestimate, I don’t turn into a reseller, I just swallow the storage cost until I use them. When someone hoards for resale they can at least liquidate their oversupply to other customers, even if not at the price they hoped for.

Prices don’t just discriminate between rich and poor, they discriminate between desperate needs and casual wants. Everyone agrees it’s a good thing for the poor to have access to things they desperately need, but price controls also ensure that wealthy people can buy lots of the available supply on a whim. Someone with a mold remediation business might be willing to stockpile thousands of N95’s if available at pre-COVID prices — storage is cheap, and they’ll be used eventually. But if they’re being sold at a 5x the normal price, they’re motivated to stretch their current supply through re-use and buy only what they immediately need.

That’s why price controls and rationing should always happen at the same time, and the severity of price controls is constrained by the effectiveness of rationing. If you can easily defeat rationing (e.g. ordering from multiple online stores) it’s as though it doesn’t exist. In those cases, market prices make more sense for ensuring availability.
I think I don't follow, what's "the other way"?

I run a newsletter where both subscribe and unsubscribe do double-opt-in (i.e., both subscribing and unsubscribing send you an email with a confirmation URL with a token - each newsletter has an unsubscribe link but that link doesn't include the token). Maybe this is a mistake? Is the norm that anyone can unsubscribe anyone else from newsletters?
As someone who maintains mirrors of Apple's open source releases: eh. They had a week a couple months back where they deleted the download links for every old version of XNU; they've been OK for the last few weeks on opensource.apple.com itself but opensource.apple.com/tarballs has been slow to update for all projects (I even sent them an email about it!) And it's important to note that a lot of the actual security features that the system relies on (such as much of the sandboxing code) is not included in the open source release at all.
> how do those who will use the software have a voice in what gets developed

Should they? If they want some feature, they can ask nicely or make a PR. Are there other options?
What's vague about 'When the looting starts, the shooting starts'? It seems extremely specific to me.
No, but nor should they be allowed to get away with it. They should be stopped and charged with a crime. But in the process of being stopped and arrested, their chances of being shot are not negligible, especially if they resist.
My friend just checked and couldn't reproduce this. Either they've gotten some backlash or this was a mistake.
Yeah, hope this is clear that this is not happening everywhere. However, where it’s happening it should be exposed.
To some extent, they were burned/looted/otherwise harmed because they were there. But on the other hand, you have things like this experimental Target whose whole purpose in that (very impoverished) neighborhood was to develop new LP techniques, aimed at putting more people of color in prison: https://twitter.com/IanColdwater/status/1265867904844693505

Target is complicit in this systemic disease; I have zero sympathy for them.
DoubleGuns Akimbo: China’s Own Share of Malware Botnets
China has its fair share of malware attacks too even though we do not get to hear of it often. Recently, the DoubleGuns trojan grabbed the top spot in China’s list of botnets.
(This is not legal advice, but I do deal with software licenses professionally.)

> IANAL, but “GPLv2 or later” allows you (the recipient of the license) to choose either GPLv2 or GPLv3 (i.e. the one that’s more convenient to you) but does not allow you to prevent others (the recipients of your modified version) from having the same choice.
> This goes both ways, “GPLv2 or later” cannot be changed to either GPLv2 or GPLv3 only without permission from everybody that has ever contributed to the codebase.

This is not the case. A dual license allows you to redistribute under one or the other license, or both. "GPLv2 or later" must necessarily allow distributing under GPLv2 or GPLv3, because otherwise it wouldn't be compatible with GPLv2 or GPLv3. You're also free to combine it with GPLv2-only code (in which case you must distribute under GPLv2-only), or GPLv3-or-later code (in which case you must distribute under GPLv3-or-later).

> The FSF requires copyright attribution from cotributors, that’s why they were able to switch their projects to GPLv3-only.

The FSF requires copyright assignment, but that's not why; any project under GPLv2-or-later may be changed to GPLv3-or-later. And new code would then be contributed under GPLv3-or-later.

Also, the FSF doesn't like to use "GPLv3 only", for the same reason they don't like to use "GPLv2 only". FSF projects under GPLv2-or-later switched to GPLv3-or-later.
Here's the list for 10.15.4: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211100. This one does not seem unusually large.
The anger is justified. Protests are justified. Maybe even violent protests, if not justified, are understandable.

Looting and burning unrelated businesses have no justification whatsoever.
The President keeps surprising me. Like, I keep thinking I have an accurate mental model of him being generally hateful and clueless and instinctive, but then things like this happen and underscore to me that he is deeply knowledgeable and sophisticated with these kinds of historical cultural references. So, still hateful, but not a dummy. That phrase was not an accident.
Just more talking. The kind of bugs and their number are not that far off from windows or linux systems.
Those who want to learn more about the alumni complaints can go to this web site:

https://renewrensselaer.org/

It's really sad the plunder.
Same reason phone spammers robocall numbers to see who picks up... if you “engage” then you are a way more valuable target
They already don't allow commenting on most articles. Makes you wonder what they are afraid of...
Let's be absolutely honest. Who the President may be at any moment in time is totally irrelevant in US being (not becoming, it's already there) an authoritarian police state.
What's to say something strange doesn't happen with these "modified mosquitoes" and we somehow engineer a super mosquitos or kill off 4 other species accidentally.

I really want to believe that doing this would be something that humans should explore, but I think the chance of something going wrong is fairly high. Considering our rather terrible track record with stuff like this (weapons, pesticides, etc).

It often takes decades to truly see how it works, so while we may end the mosquitos problem we may make ourselves a worse one.
> Turns out... actually yeah.

That might be how you feel. For me, GDPR and the “Cookie Law” have been amazing, as they make it incredibly easy to detect which websites and businesses you should avoid.

I do however wish they’d be a lot more aggressive with the fines.
>it’s not reasonable to demand universities operate at a loss to provide the remote education at a rate less than it costs them to operate

I feel its not reasonable to ask students to pay more than fair market value for what they receive regardless of operational costs. They should refund up to what similar online schools charge today.

If it costs the auto dealer as much as a new BMW to deliver a used Toyota, that isn't my problem I'm only paying used Toyota pricing or I'm taking the matter to court.
The Posse Comitatus act only applies to the Army and Air Force. It's DoD policy to pretend that it also covers the Marines and other branches, but AFAIK not a legal requirement. Even then, the Insurrection Act gives the Feds power to use the military as law enforcement in case of severe civil unrest (like the LA riots)
I might be showing my age, but we used to number the lines manually, but then we would leave gaps in case we needed to add lines in between.
Hey David from the Magic team here. Magic is a Javascript SDK that lets you add passwordless authentication to your app with a few lines of code. I'm here to help answer any questions!
> For a "modify and/or redistribute" example, under this "GPLv2 or later" licensing you can modify the software and use it in a SaaS without having to distribute it (which the GPLv3 would force you to), because you can choose to follow the terms of the GPLv2.

GPLv3 says absolutely nothing about SaaS. You're thinking of the AGPLv3. The only thing GPLv3 does in that regard is declare itself compatible with the AGPLv3, so you can combine code under those licenses.
Looks about the same as usual.
If we can't trust these organizations to make the right (and obviously needed) cuts in order to still realize their value to society in the face of reduced funding, then they don't deserve to be the ones teaching our children in the first place.
> Who the President may be at any moment in time is totally irrelevant in US being

This is not the case and has never been the case. Presidents have different interpretations of executive powers. Trump clearly has an extremely authoritarian take on where the President sits in our government.

This is plainly obvious for everyone to see and a very non-controversial observation.
>they're rioting because they don't feel like they're being heard.

This is almost the exact same phrase that MLK used, and it makes complete sense. If we use violence (implicit or explicit) to exclude people from "polite" discourse, they will find other ways to communicate.
hn upvotes
>AI roughly means "things human brains can do that computers can't"

Ok, then nothing being done today (neural nets, gan, etc) on computers is AI. What a dumb definition.

>claiming something isn't AI because "pft that's such an easy, solved problem"

Nope. It's not AI because instructions were directly written by a programmer of how to path-find. There was no input training where the program learned how to pathfind. It just had one method from day 1 that hasn't deviated since.
It’s almost as if rage is an overpowering emotion that is unlikely to stay narrowly targeted.

Edit: this was unnecessarily flippant. Real lives are being horrifically affected and I truly feel for your community.
If it's legal to praise a company you own shares in, then it's legal to criticize a company you've sold short.
A person commented and asked me about suggestions, but deleted his comment before I could answer so here it is anyways:

Super quickly (I'm sure you have heard of, or can quickly use a search engine to find the commonly listed issues):

Damages: damages need to be scaled according to the company size, severity and amount. GDPR was created to punish Big Players, but the wording that would have fit them is equally (and should be, laws should be equal) applied to small companies resulting in an impedance mismatch. Frankly, the damages are too small for the Big Players, but insane to the small ones. GDPR also does not apply to the state, but holy shit it fucking should!

Enforcement: it needs to be equally enforced and you need to be able to sue by yourself over it instead of just limiting it to a state organisation.

Data: it should be data that is directly tied to you, ie leave the normal web logs etc out of it. PII is just a sham as it's defined today. A factor of usage also needs to play into it, ie normal web server ip logs that are separate and don't feed into a user specific connection into a database should not be a consideration.

Access: access _needs_ to be able to be done online if the data is collected or transferred online. Ie no this "you need to physically mail us a certified mail with your id" shit. GPDR is a fucking failure in this aspect. Also no required strong authentication: access should be just directly through your account you can access normally without strong authentication.

Usage: GDPR does not allow you to trade tracking for access (ie monetisation of content is almost impossible if you care about user privacy): this is insane. GDPR also supposedly does not allow for those complicated "accept all or modify your preferences" windows, but it should have no saying in that: if a site wants to make the experience painful, that's up to them. It is up to the user to select if they want to use that site or not.
That's an overstatement, which has been popularized by Democrats to distance themselves from their longstanding coalition with southern segregationists. The key Civil Rights Acts were passed from 1957 to 1968. The political alignments on various issues haven't changed much since FDR. Democrats were on the liberal alignment with respect to government regulation, business freedom, taxes, education, immigration, social welfare, religion, gun control, etc.

Contrary to your statement, the Civil Rights Acts were not a "precipitating event for politicians switching parties." That doesn't even make sense--why would politicians who were against civil rights join the party that much more strongly supported every Civil Rights Act from 1957 to 1968?

The realignment of southern democrats actually occurred much later. Nixon did not win a majority in any southern state--to the extent he won with a plurality, it was only because the Democratic vote was split between Humphrey and Wallace. In 1976, Carter won with the same east-coast south/north coalition that long voted Democrat; with Ford winning the west coast and mid-west. Reagan won almost every state, but his margins in New York were larger than his margins in Alabama or the Carolinas. Reagan did blow out Mondale in the south in 1984, but I'm not sure how much that tells us. Even by the time of Clinton, he won Louisiana, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Georgia, not to mention Arkansas.

I think the more accurate take is that the political realignment of the parties on "civil rights" issues happened more in the mid-late 1980s through 1990s. And it happened because the nature of the "civil rights" debate morphed over that time. The battle fronts during the 1980s and 1990s was not eliminating de jure and overt discrimination (the aim of the 1950s and 1960s legislation republicans supported), but measures like affirmative action, which sought to use the power of government to shape private conduct to eliminate existing inequities. That of course maps very cleanly onto longstanding republican versus democrat positions.

(I'll give another example of situations where political alignments change because the issue has changed rather than the "mix of platforms" of the parties. On the abortion front, for example, a significant amount of the debate has moved from talking about whether it should be legal at all, to talking about whether religious organizations should be required to provide healthcare coverage for them, whether the government should support them with public funding, etc. If you're a consistent libertarian, you might have found yourself more aligned with Democrats back in the early 1990s, but more aligned with Republicans today.)
There is no equivalence between property damage equivalent to killing, much as there is no equivalence between a random twitter user “calling for the guillotines” and the commander of the armed forces threatening to unleash a massacre. It is beyond bad faith to argue otherwise.
The national guard does not work like that. Also, no the military cannot just shoot people on the spot for being in the area of looting, it is not a "statement of fact." You just made this up and pulled it out of thin air so don't respond with "well prove it" or some other BS. Quit being a racist troll and reflect on your hateful little life.
Disagreement doesn't imply misunderstanding.
Public education and knowledgeable voter base in the same sentence, what a joke.
> Of course this is a n^2 sort.

Isn't it exponential? An n element sort calls two n-1 element sorts. Each of those calls two n-2 element sorts, and so on. So you get 2^n total calls, if I'm not mistaken. That is also why the page asks if you can beat it with a function of equal length but subexponential runtime.