skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
How & why is this happening?

I feel fairly confident that police don't usually attack media, but it seems clear that in the past few days there has been some kind of deliberate choice made to start doing so.

Are individual groups of police making the decision to attack media, or is it concerted? Are they just seeing it from other police and copying? I know some people will say it's because Trump has called media "fake news" and such, but is that really all it takes for police to start such gross behaviour? At the same time, I presume there hasn't been a direct order to start targeting media or it would have been leaked.
Agreed, but I think it’s perhaps just an unavoidable outcome of human nature. (Apologies for the pessimism.) It’s my view that humans are most moved by emotion, and the easiest way to produce emotion as a politician is to play up a charged partisan issue.

Would love to hear alternative takes or solutions if anyone has them.
> odds of contracting, 1 in 350

"Why are we even bothering to fight the stove fire? Only one in 50 of my appliances has burned!"
We can go back and forth with hypothetical situations all day long, but I think we all know there is a world of difference between a legitimate military operation and racist/xenophobic/hate speech.
You know what's hillaroius about all of this; the tweet was literally correct. Whether you interpretted as a threat or a warning or whatever, looters have been shot and killed by store owners protecting their shops.
There's fault on both sides without a doubt, but I think this flare-up is culmination of a systematic discrimination against a race and a long string of unaddressed and unpunished misconduct on behalf of certain policemen.

I really feel sorry for the people in uniform who are genuinely trying to make a difference, when the few bad apples make sure that nobody can have nice things.

Something had to give though. There are only so many blatant crimes that can be committed by police only to go unpunished before people say Enough!

Worst of all, we are not talking about crimes that can be repaid or repaired. Murder is the ultimate crime in some sense as (ignoring religion) it's irreversible and the loss the victim and their loved ones have suffered is the ultimate loss that we can never undo.

The callousness and carelessness with which these crimes were carried out and the complete lack of remorse or even acknowledgment from leading figures in police unions is basically just more fuel on the fire.

The countless acts of kindness and compassion of (I assume) the majority of officers is unfortunately drowned out by these bad examples.

Something has to change. The police force clearly does not have the ability or will to solve this problem on their own.
Police body cams have significant privacy challenges. There are no easy answers there.

Consolidation of power to the federal level is a very blunt tool. Our nation is not built on such centralization of power. In fact the foundation is the opposite.

Yes, deaths and injuries should be reviewed but this should happen at as local a level as possible.

There’s need for reform but more federal power is not the solution.
What about talking to the police to help them find the right suspect? This seems completely focused on how talking to the police can't help you.

(I'll admit I'm only 1/3 of the way through this video so far.)
Ugg... misspelled my email address: harris@hellolanding.com
Target (the stores) has been a really interesting force for encouraging board game designers to adapt their games to entry level. TtR: First Journey, Catan Junior, Evolution's base game rebranded and cleaned up to be an entry level game leaving Evolution: Climate the new "base game" for more experienced groups, Captain Sonar Junior. So far it seems that most designers that have accepted Target's challenge have built great adaptations that don't water down their main concepts too much and are great starting points to the deeper games.
This is the bare minimum.

This person worked for Facebook for just under a year taking its money while building and securing a platform/growth opportunity for white supremacy and other extremist views, and given what we know about Facebook compensation, likely did very well for that almost year.

This is a good first step, but I’m curious why Facebook’s defense/promotion of white supremacy, its support for Brett Kavanaugh, and the genocide in Myanmar, which this engineer mentioned in their resignation post, wasn’t worth quitting over two weeks ago.

Edit: referring to this tweet screenshotting the same engineer’s post about resignation.

https://twitter.com/kevinroose/status/1267864584867557376?s=...

Quoting the resigned: “Facebook, complicit in the propagation of weaponized hatred, is on the wrong side of history.”
$12B TSMC US Plant: What Problem Does It Solve?
This works for some drivers and not others! EDID overrides, for example, require the rigamarole I described. (The command you mentioned does need to be run regardless, or even drivers installed when rebooted into the special mode will actually stop working after the next reboot.)

If anyone understands more about the differences, I'd be very curious to learn more...
Absolutely not:

one is the question: if there exist a situation where the use of force is good, is teargas/cs gas a good way to apply that force instead of water cannons/ shields and sticks/etc?

This is the question I tried to ask before getting downvoted heavily.

The other question is if it is correct to use force.

(Or based on the amount of downvotes and weird answers I have got it seems more like some people think I support police brutality while other think I use the "think of the children"-argument.)
Using _just_ hand tracking seems like a bad way to interact with anything.

I have an Oculus Quest, and the hand tracking is like the Kinect all over again -- without having physical buttons every interaction is slower because the software waits for you to keep a particular gesture/pose long enough at a particular location to register as a "click".

Obviously the tracking in Quest is more fine-grained than the Kinect was, so perhaps we'll see some interesting uses for the technology in the future. But right now I'm not sold on the tech.
We are in the middle of a national emergency and the IA made an aggressive an panicked move to try and improve people's lives at a time when frankly people really needed help.

I would like to live in a society where temporary actions made in the name of compassion during an emergency can be overlooked.

The IA probably overstepped, but given the circumstances I hope that any court decision amounts to little more than requiring the IA to roll back their unlimited policy. No damages awarded. We should encourage people to help each other in times of crisis, any judgement granting damages sets a very bitter tone for future crisis management.
FWIW, I've been spending more time outside during the pandemic. Sunlight and fresh air are are almost always good for you, and this pandemic seems to be no exception.

The authorities responding with lockdown or "shelter in place" are their one-size-fits-all plan to threats. They only have a few sets of procedures, none of them tailored to a droplet-borne respiratory pandemic.

Leading with similarities to bats is unnecessary, and probably undermines your claim. There's evidence that vitamin D deficiency has a big effect on severity, and staying inside reduces sunlight-generated vitamin D, so you don't need to invoke bats. Just take vitamin D supplements get get outside.
>there's no reason you'd ever want to revoke control of a domain

Careful with those words. Experience taught me that if there isn't a reason to ever want to do that, reality will eventually provide you with one.
The author appears to be defending virtue signalling because of its marketing effectiveness for organizations like charities which have no marketing budget.

The author writes "Which means a lot of what I do and think about is how to make a business more successful. Usually this means helping the company make more money."

If an anti-abortion ad campaign would help a multi-billion dollar company make money, then I don't see anything from the essay where the author would be against it. I checked the other essays and saw nothing which indicated left- or right-wing support.

But since the point of the essay was to argue that we should "stop shaming people for literally helping charities" ... what actually are you arguing against?

The examples were the ALS ice bucket challenge, wearing a pink ribbon for breast cancer awareness, Black Out Tuesday, and going silent for a day on social media.

How are any of those "wagging your finger and looking down on your peers"?

Is there any way to show support which people won't label virtue signalling? Wear a MAGA hat? That's virtue signalling. Wear a "Vote Biden" button? That's virtue signalling. Wear designer shoes? That's virtue signalling. Switch web frameworks to the new hotness? That's virtue signalling. To the point that the term seems meaningless.

Or, quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling#Criticism : "David Shariatmadari argues that the typicality of virtue signalling to show off one's own values makes it no different than the acts that it was supposed to abhor. That is, virtue signalling is designed to call out individuals on their lack of action, but the very act of doing so is an act of virtue signalling in itself."

Neither you nor I are doing anything effective about the topic, so our comments themselves are virtue signally, yes? As are any up- or down- votes?
Zuckerberg Defends Hands-Off Approach to Trump’s Posts
There is so much FUD, conspiracy, and disinformation surrounding the topic of the hazards of EM radiation to human tissue that it's hard to separate what's relevant from the hyperbolic. Is there a good primer on which frequencies are actually harmful to humans? I seem to remember from studying for my amateur radio license (back in 1990) that the potential harm to a human was based one height and the frequency in question, that the body would act like an antenna and resonate with certain frequencies but in the 5G and Terahertz discussions we're talking about something rather different.
You underestimate the risk. Targetting a laser into the cockpit has a non-negligible chance of dazzling/blinding the pilots, possibly with lethal outcome. The light beam will refract and scatter through the glass/transparent plastic.
I am pretty sure that's the _intended_ Facebook stance, and the disagreement comes over what's a "grey area" and what's clear cut -- which is what makes it a grey area to begin with.
I recently read that if you tend to think, "it's a shame that black people are being killed by cops like this, but the rioting and looting MUST stop," perhaps you should consider thinking more like, "it's a shame that there is rioting and looting, but black people being killed by cops like this MUST stop."
The argument that this book is making (albeit not intentionally) is that copyright gets more and more expensive over time. As copying becomes easier you need more and more intrusive regulations with increasingly draconian punishments to achieve the same effect.

This is not an argument in favor of stronger copyrights; it is an argument that copyright is the wrong approach. It doesn't scale. There was a time where it was irrelevant because copying was too difficult to permit mass distribution. Once copying started to become easier it "worked" for a while, because copying still required significant effort and specialized equipment. It pretty much stopped working altogether—i.e., even imperfect enforcement costs society far more than it gains by subsidizing the creation of new creative works—once the effort became trivial and the equipment ubiquitous. It's long past time to let it go.

> That approach is based on the idea that a free market is an optimal way to determine the allocation of resources and we should use it whenever we can.

While "applying the free market to creative works" is a common justification for copyright, in fact the opposite is true. Instead of allowing the free market to operate in the labor of creating new works and the distribution of new and existing works we artificially restrict distribution to subsidize labor. Both areas suffer from misallocation of resources as a result. We waste huge amounts of labor creating minor variations on existing themes and (inefficiently) distributing them when what we already had would have been perfectly adequate if only we were allowed to distribute it freely.
On TV, Cops Are Always the Main Characters
Agreed! I am also concerned about how politicians will use UBI as bartering chips and how they will use it to further their own monetary interests.
I didn't realize this was sarcasm until I read the replies. In fact I'm still having slight doubts.

Someone will probably comment soon to explain how your
proposition is not at all absurd. A theater will be mentioned.
The incident that has sparked the current stretch of American decline involved police using force other than firearms against an unarmed man. It's clear that sending police to respond with violence to an incidence of passing counterfeit currency was perhaps not the appropriate response. Violence in American society has various structural root causes. It's not as simple as saying there are a lot of guns. Inequality, lack of opportunity, poor education, bleak built environment, and of course racism and the echoes of slavery are all aspects of the problem. Police violence can't solve any of them.
For HPC it is a huge handicap, though. Intel's 10nm process offers about 10 to 12 times higher transistor density than their 32nm process, for example. So, if you want to be fair, you should take this into account when comparing chips.
> "Sure, seeing large marches are great at grabbing attention, but seeing actual video evidence of police brutality is _much_ more persuasive."

again, for you. the people marching didn't need to see the video to be angry and mobilize for change. they were already angry, a long-simmering anger of an even longer and more widely tolerated injustice and oppression. when people protest, we should listen to them, believe them, because protesting is not without its risks and costs. that the video matters so much to you relative to the protesters is exactly the criticsm of perspective leveled here.
Oh no, what a tragedy. Perhaps [1] will be less willing to use violence if they know that they may be hurt as well.
The problem with this is that it undermines the end-game goal of UBI: efficient welfare powered by market forces. Any service-oriented approach would be different, and likely subject to the corrosive forces like corruption, cronyism, pork etc if deployed as national policy.
By the way, for anyone interested in the "real" keyboards – welcome to the r/MechanicalKeyboards and QMK firmware, you will not want to buy Cooler Master after getting familiar with these resources.
#ComputeEnvy
Justin Amash might be someone to look for.
To play devil’s advocate, one could use propaganda by only telling truths. This is done by selective truth telling. Can’t twitter’s selective truth telling be considered propaganda, even if the facts it present are not strictly incorrect?

For example if Twitter decided to annotate people’s tweets about coronavirus with a “fact” about it originating from China, it wouldn’t be untrue, but it would appear such notices would serve some public opinion shifting effects no? How they select what facts and what tweets to even annotate could be used to pushed an agenda through careful selective information control.
> Before the assassination of King ignited days of civil unrest, signals intelligence used computers to help in the government effort to defame King and undermine his cause. Large organizations have always invested in machines like Stretch because information is often the most effective weapon in a conflict.

This is a reminder for me to be mindful of how my beliefs and behaviors as an engineer are inextricably connected to questions of justice, civil rights, and human dignity.

i am grateful that this article has been written and shared here, so that i might be illumined.
> but I think anything the President posts on social media should be kept in place.

When you said the president, did you mean _the_ president?

I'm sure you know facebook is active in other countries. So when you say they should make an exception for the president, I think you actually meant _your_ president. I'm hammering on this distinction you've made because you could've as easily made the case that anyone could post what he does.

You didn't.

You made an exception for president X of whatever nation and that's fine. It's also fine that you mention the _national_ importance.

The problem is that you probably won't apply that rule equally when you consider that facebook operates in several countries. Some with presidents, some without. Some with a working democracy and a rule of law, and some not.

If you think he gets a free pass because he's _your_ president, that's fine. But don't expect people in other countries to follow your reasoning because we didn't elect him, we don't even want him and he's not special to us to deserve a free pass.
Registering offshore company with a fake passport will take whole $300 out of malware distributor pocket. Or might be $500 if they need random homeless guy to pass interview for them.
There isn't nearly enough wealth to make that work. I've already run the numbers on this. Even if you taxed every last billionaire in the US and stole their entire net worth and divied up all their wealth among every US citizen, it would still only be 300$ a year per person over 30 years. It doesn't work.

The problem with the world isn't distribution of wealth. The problem is NOT enough wealth in the first place. We need to concentrate on addressing that problem.

Also, gov is already such an enormous burden on people in the US. Right now almost 40% of US GDP is gov spending. that means the average person is loosing 4 out of every 10$ their earning. And, that's just the average. I'm sure in coastal areas the burden is much much higher.
Would be nice to test something opensource alongside. Like https://github.com/alphacep/vosk-api which runs on Android and iPhone offline.
It was about $10-$20/year although.
While a great idea in theory, said companies are adept at moving money around to avoid paying taxes. Is it unthinkable that a company would move its HQ down to some island nation to avoid several billion in taxes? I don't think so. And there will be endless arguments about how foreign companies that don't pay into that system are going to be more competitive.

One could maybe avoid the problem a bit by implementing a tariff on every import that calculates the man-hours put into a product and adds a fee based on how much UBI that would be if it were made by Americans, but that's hideously complex and still wouldn't help companies that want to export their products worldwide. Ultimately markets don't care about the general welfare of the people and are frequently at odds with schemes like this. Unfortunately we don't really have a better solution. Command economies don't work at scale.
If you've noticed such a pattern and dislike it, you could have restructured your argument to avoid it. I toss or substantially rewrite more comments than I eventually post.
Still pisses me off endlessly though, I'm only scanning a couple items that are going right in to my backpack. Takes 3x the time because of those stupid scales.
> Nope. They may have standing, but they're responsible for their own actions.

Actually, they kind of are forced into action here. Even if they were okay with the IA doing this (which I'm sure they're not) they still have to defend their copyrights, otherwise they could be declared abandoned and the works would then be in the public domain and could not be defended when someone they don't want to use their works then uses them
The reason is more practical. The only effective use of tear gas is against peaceful untrained civilians. It doesn't work against looters and vandals because they are highly mobile and aren't going to stick around long enough for tear gas to be effective. Provocateurs and ex-military are trained against the mind game that tear gas is. I know this because I've stood in a tent filled with tear gas reciting the UCMJ while my unmasked sergeant looked on, himself seemingly unaffected by the gas. Tear gas does not affect an individual trained in it. The only people you're instilling fear into is untrained moms and dads and children who are peacefully exercising their 1A right to stand there and breathe it in.

The use of tear gas is unconscionable mainly because it's a waste of taxpayer dollars. Its only purpose is to make its user feel strong laying waste to crowds of unruly women and children and stop them screaming at you.
This is cool! I’d love an immutable/functional version of this (I believe it can be about as simple).

Also, could work better on mobile...
The FBI's predecessor was formed specifically because of fraud involving local goverments in the Oregon Land Fraud Scandal. But even before that the justice department oversaw investigating federal crimes so this was never fully delegated to the states.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_land_fraud_scandal
Mobile computers on our hands!? they will never take off (at least in our lifetimes):

1. battery issues. 2. weight issues. 3. quality issues. 4. mobile computing is a niche market.
I believe this varies a little state-to-state and even in those (which I think is most?) where it's true they can usually still legally detain you if the have reason to believe you're trying to shoplift, though refusal to show a receipt on its own is, obviously, not enough to pass that test. Also workers are unevenly educated on the topic so may try to get in your way or otherwise escalate things if you do this, so take care and stay cool.
It’s the same here in Seattle as it was while I was in Berkeley during Ferguson.

People protest peacefully, and police shoot tear gas into the crowd and attack whomever they can get their hands on.

I’ll admit, the outright brutality I saw in-person in Oakland was worse than what I’ve seen here in the recent days.

In Oakland, the police would purposely corral protestors into groups and literally beat the shit out of them. I saw this in-person multiple times. In Seattle, I haven’t seen that sort of corral behavior. However, police do shoot tear gas completely unprovoked and fire rubber bullets and mace without concern.

In both places, no looting was occurring at the main scene of the protests. In both cases, numerous videos show police breaking windows themselves.

In any case, it’s all the same: in a country that parades its freedom, people of color can’t protest without the president calling for them to be roughed up, and without the police willingly complying.
Cops, like many other corps wearing uniforms and carrying guns are very often -not always but very often- aligned with the right. I've direct experiences having worked with them, also have a close relative who taught at the police school confirming it. Not in the US, but I would be extremely surprised if it didn't work the same over there. The mindset is what matters.

So it's not that a cop embraces right wing ideals but rather the other way around: it's a job looked for by many people who feel the need to wear an uniform and carry a gun (exercise power, dominate others, there are lots of psychological implications). I'd say that also the cops who expressed respect for George Floyd might be Trump Supporters, although they don't agree with their colleagues violent methods.
Is this because of police changing their tactics or is it because of journalists changing their tactics?

I don't know the answer, but with the internet and analytics, we've seen media become more sensationalistic to get those clicks and views. So this is a possibility that should be considered.
Did you reply to the wrong thing? The parent's video is performed by Akademie für Alte Musik Berlin, a German orchestra in Berlin.

Voices of Music is also great, though!