skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Thanks for calling my way of living immoral and then not having the decency to answer my question to you about how do it in a way that would mean I could ensure I get paid for coding and not get stolen from.
Last I heard, protesting is enshrined in the first amendment of the Bill of Rights and you cannot use the crimes of other people to crack down on all protesters.
It's not censorship. Just de-platforming.
It's a troll account created 10 min ago, don't bother replying, just down vote and move on.
The German Corona Warning App in Open Source
3) Germany : https://github.com/corona-warn-app (no discussion to be found at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23376682)
I've seen more and more games do that, from XCOM and Space Alert, which mostly use it to provide randomness and a timer to Mansion of Madness, which is mostly facilitating exploration.

Those games work well, but for me, I wouldn't want to play a board game that leans on an app any more than Mansion of Madness; at that point it's a video game, and while I enjoy those, it's not why I play board games!
The French only did that in Algeria (like the UK did it to the Irish). We're mostly more civilised closer to home. I guess the othering of black Americans means most US cops don't really feel like they are firing on their 'own' people.
>He has 80m followers on twitter alone, that's ~20% of all twitter users,

Many of his followers are bots, and almost 75% haven't logged in more than 120 days. I'd be very surprised if more than 10% of his followers were real and active.

>I believe it's the next logical step.

If it was that easy he would've done it already if just for the ego boost. Twitter is getting him something that he doesn't think he can get on his own.

>his supporters will inevitably skip the reports and go directly to the source.

Again, my family is full of trump supporters and none of them read his tweets directly.
You are going to do what you are going to do, but you might try looking up The Shirky Principle first (organizations tend to keep alive the problem they are designed to combat).

Years ago, I used to say on some email list I was on that "fighting against the fighting is still fighting."

People don't really want to be protesting. What they want is justice and they don't know how to get it.

If you really want solutions, look for things that already exist that genuinely help promote justice and better treatment for disempowered peoples or build something which does so.

/2 cents
> White people in ths United States riot to get haircuts.

Loving the casual racism. Keep up the great work.
I think you just gave Scott Adams a full Dilbert episode on a silver platter! :)
Copyright is the way it is because of publishers of various media lobbying for stronger, longer protection. The politicians are the people they lobby.
The Gloomhaven spin-off Jaws of the Lion also has a much more explicit ramp-up, as well as being a simpler game in general.
The problem is Company A has deep pockets person B doesn’t. If the amount is too small to file DMCA it wont change a thing. If it’s too high person B won’t be able to fight or put money in escrow. Sounds great and all but I don’t see a working solution to what I stated above.
Everyone is promoting conspiracy theories about a pandemic. China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has claimed the virus was a was spread by members of the United States Army who visited Wuhan in October. Russia's Channel One has been saying the virus is US bioweapon. And everyone knows it's really caused by 5G and GMOs managed by Big Pharma and Bill Gates :-). So don't lay all this at the US's door.
Yes they are. Rioting is not protest. It is criminal activity. Your right to protest, assemble, and speak does not include setting buildings with children inside on fire, murdering pawn shop owners, killing federal officers.

I fully support everyone out there marching not committing crimes.
Trump can’t send National Guard, state governors deploy National Guard.
'Bitcoin is the product of hashpower. The industry wouldn’t exist without incentivizing miners to continuously invest in hardware and burning electricity to augment Bitcoin network’s settlement assurance'

I think this is a common misconception. People don't need to continually invest in mining hardware to keep it going. The entire Bitcoin network could technically be run off a single Rasberry Pi. The network hash rate is only so high because the ROI is there, but without it, people would still be mining.

Case in point, there are plenty of long forgotten altcoins out there that people are mining just for fun. At the end of the day your computer is no different from an expensive space heater. Might as well mine some crypto with it.
Yet no mention of Hong Kong or Libya.
Zoom Video Earnings Guidance Crushes Estimates, ZM Stock Rises
> I have found myself unconsciously raising my palms and placing them at a different angle. This may lead to RSI, which I have suffered from in the past.

Probably not.

This position eliminates wrist bending and yaw, which will help you avoid RSI.
{"private_sentiment":"/"What absolute twaddle. Who would want to communicate like this?/"","public_sentiment":"/"To each their own I guess./""}
I've never actually been in a corporate gig, only worked for small businesses, usually directly for the owner(s). But after running my own web dev company for awhile, I was recruited to work for a small finance company.

I enjoyed being on my own, and the pay was fine, but I really like this job. I have one boss to worry about (and he's awesome) instead of 5-10+ clients at any given time, my coworkers are nice and friendly (but not too much), and I'm getting paid really, really well.

This job is way better, but I think the biggest reason is because of the culture here, plus the pay.

- I don't typically work outside of 9 to 5
- I get paid every week no matter how much work I do (hello paid vacations, it's been awhile)
- My boss usually has an idea for a thing to do, and then I do it
- If I have an idea, boss will let me run with it unless there's a good reason not to
- There's very little back and forth with picky clients who don't know how to tell me what they're looking for
- I don't have to worry about finding revenue and keeping expenses in check

While I do sometimes think about work stuff all the time (how many times has the solution to a problem materialized when I'm in the shower after I've been thinking about it for 3 days?!), I don't feel guilty and I'll just send myself an email and tackle it on Monday.
Is Jekyll the only static site generator that works directly with Github pages?
I wonder what future prospective employers think about his tendencies to publicly call out the company he works for? If eventually he quits his next job, what are the odds for him to be writing an inflammatory blog post about the company?

It seems to me to not be a prudent strategy to bring politics into one's work (unless the job is political of course).

On the other hand, maybe he finds a politically minded employer that way - maybe a leftist NGO or think tank?

I frankly don't understand why such moves receive so much attention. People evaluate their employers or employment prospects all the time, and decide against jobs for a variety of reasons. What's the big deal?
Why? Misinformation on Facebook and Twitter are spread by bots AFAIK. How does being anonymous help decrease misinformation?
It's funny because nursing isn't much less dangerous than policing.
> Has he droned people like Clinton?

Yes - he dramatically increased the use of drones:

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/08/tr...

And he eliminated the restrictions designed to prevent civilian casualties:

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/05/22/obama-drones-trump-kill...

> Has violence against black people increased compared to the previous presidencies?

One of his first actions was to disband the Federal oversight of police departments set up explicitly to address this issue:

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/04/jeff-sessions-c...

His DOJ rescinded orders from the Obama era that prosecutors shouldn't charge low-level drug offenses that had mandatory minimums with the exact opposite tact:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/7/18073074/j...

He's famously said that protesters should be roughed up and he explicitly said that police should seek to hurt the people that they arrest:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/07/2...

His Attorney General said that he was okay with the KKK until he found out they smoked pot:

https://www.npr.org/sections/politicaljunkie/2009/05/specter...

If you don't think his actions directly lead to this, you're not paying attention.
Yes! I bet there are numerous ways this could be implemented to make things easier for developers and end users.

With the current setup GitHub has more control on the resulting bits than I do.

Also, current Microsoft signature rules that a hardware dongle is required to sign the bits (all non-hardware certificates will be deprecated in time).

So, I'm supposed to take the .EXE that GitHub produced on one of their VMs running actions then certify it's legit by signing it with my certificate.

But what am I actually certifying? Well, that to the best of my knowledge this EXE is the build output of this Git commit that triggered the action.
I don't think companies should all conform to one policy. But the issue here is that facebook had a policy, then refused to enforce it.[1]

[1] "If anyone, including a politician, is saying things that can cause, that is calling for violence or could risk imminent physical harm.... we will take that content down." https://twitter.com/donie/status/1266416129448255489
With respect, I think this is a harmful attitude to take. People end up writing huge masses of Puppet/Chef/Ansible, or resorting to heavyweight technologies like Docker, just to place some files on a server. This problem is solved quite well by dpkg since forever, and it's a disservice to the community that this fact is obscured by so much cruft that only distro maintainers really need to know.
The header quote is:

"The more transparent something was, the more mysterious it seemed. The universe itself was transparent; as long as you were sufficiently sharp-eyed, you could see as far as you liked. But the farther you looked, the more mysterious it became." ——Liu Cixin "Three Body Problem"
This a really interesting thought. I do wonder how much the quantity “big enough” would have to be in this case.

With respect to adding fact checking, I 100% agree with you, but I’m conflicted over whether or not censoring should be a thing, because I think that censoring people is generally wrong, but also feel that it’s important to discourage inciting violence.
Not at all, and that’s not how other people will see it. It all comes down to intention and objectivity.

Misinformation is the resultant product of people putting their personal opinions ahead of ethics and evidence regardless of what those opinions are.
Macey's whole article develops that idea a bit more (here: https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/1384/).

Ford's response to the Dodge Brothers was:

My ambition is to employ still more men, to spread the
benefits of this industrial system to the greatest possible
number, to help them build up their lives and their homes.

and Macey says this was precisely the right amount to torpedo his case. If he had said less ("we're expanding"), he would have been fine. Had he said more and provided even a shred of a business justification (goodwill, better work from talented workers, expanding the customer base), he would have been fine. As it was though, he put the court in a situation where they more or less had to find that he couldn't openly do as he pleases with other people's money.

Shlensky has a fairly similar fact pattern. The Cubs decision was supposedly driven by non-economic factors, namely beliefs about 'proper' baseball and possible effects on the neighborhood. However, they left open the door that these factors might themselves affect Cub's business prospects, a door that Ford slammed shut on himself. As a result, the Court found:

“Plaintiff in the instant case argues that the directors are
acting for reasons unrelated to the financial interest and
welfare of the Cubs. However, we are not satisfied that the
motives assigned to Philip K. Wrigley, and through him to the
other directors, are contrary to the best interests of the
corporation and the stockholders. For example, it appears to
us that the effect on the surrounding neighborhood might well
be considered by a director who was considering the patrons
who would or would not attend the games if the park were in a
poor neighborhood. Furthermore, the long run interest of the
corporation in its property value at Wrigley Field might
demand all efforts to keep the neighborhood from
deteriorating. By these thoughts we do not mean to say that
we have decided that the decision of the directors was a
correct one. That is beyond our jurisdiction and ability. We
are merely saying that the decision is one properly before
directors and the motives alleged in the amended complaint
showed no fraud, illegality or conflict of interest in their
making of that decision.”

(from https://casetext.com/case/shlensky-v-wrigley)
This is such utter fucking bullshit. You can watch hundreds of videos of peaceful protesters being attacked by police. They are not looting. What you are saying is an outright lie.

Conservatives are just practicing the same racist tribalism t hey always have. There is no structural logic to how they behave except "us vs them" and right now the police are hurting the right people. It is not and has never been about principles.
The Facebook TOC has rules against violence. Zuckerberg has previously said that inciting violence is where he would draw the line for a political figure. Trump's post incited violence -- if you don't believe me, look at the way police officers felt empowered to treat protesters and reporters over the weekend.

Now that Trump has crossed that line, Facebook has contorted it. In the process, Zuckerberg and Trump talked on the phone.

To those of us who oppose this, it's because the neutrality argument has gone out the window. Would anti-China protesters in HK be able to get away with breaking the TOS? Can they call Zuckerberg on the phone?
I mostly agree with this analysis. As far as the webcam goes: you can use your iphone (just select it as a video camera) and get a really good webcam image. It also eliminates the issue where the other person on the call appears to be looking down all the time -- they are always looking away from the camera anyway(unless you print something to hold your phone in place) so you don't think they're not paying attention.

It was a good insight that the Touch Bar is a feature designed for non-pro users!

There are a few things I disagree with but they are all in the matters of taste. I don't have any problems with the big touchpad, but that could be related to the fact that I don't care about the "wrist rests" -- if my hands were to contact the cover anyway I think they'd be misaligned and at risk of carpal tunnel syndrome (piano teachers and typing teachers -- back when they existed -- taught you to maintain a straight line from top of hand to top of forearm for this very reason.

I do have a problem with the common refrain of "this is not a pro machine". It's just a name for differentiating their product line. I'm a pro -- full-time software developer -- and the feature sets seem designed for me precisely (almost never plug anything into my machine for example). Other people are also pros but use their machines in different ways and probably considered my use case absurd. I have assumed Apple collected info on how people use their machines to figure out, for example, whether the SD slot was worth it (I talked about a card slot with Steve Jobs 20 years ago and he was very dismissive, on some grounds that were reasonable for the time).

I always enable telemetry on my Macs and on most apps, as I figure the developers might use the info to improve the product the way I use it (I'd like to know that info for my code!). I know a lot of people do not do so from privacy concerns. I wonder if my feeling that "this machine is right for me" is because those of us willing to enable telemetry are overweighted in Apple's beliefs of use patterns. I'm not aware that they survey users in the traditional way, though probably they do do that as well.
I think when you read headlines you can work out if it has positive energy or negative energy. It would be pretty sweet if you could filter content based on if it has something positive to say or something negative.
Is the military receiving its orders via Facebook now? That WOULD be newsworthy.
Police do use teargas and mace for no reason. There are dozens (hundreds?) of videos of exactly that from the last week, including an aerial shot of Seattle PD instigating with mace at point blank range on protesters who were behind a barricade.
Thoughts on Peer-to-Peer Matrix
GitHub Actions, Terraform Cloud, and strict RBAC for everyone on our team so they can't see/change these values on GitHub/Terraform/our cloud environments. This doesn't need to be hard.
*no publicly-accessible records
Looks nice! Why is "SAP" holding the copyright? In Italy, the government acquired the copyright of the app (it was donated by the company that won the tender to develop it).
Rather bizarrely there are street protests about George Floyd in Europe too.
I've been to quite a few (admittedly smaller) protests, where the ratio was 1:2. So yes, 0.6% sounds like a small number.
After Facebook staff walkout, Zuckerberg defends no action on Trump posts
Were protests much more deadly in the 1970's? I'm not actually sure they were. Do you have easy access to any data that supports that?
Contact tracing is exactly the kind of tool that would help track outbreaks from protests. Unfortunately in the US we have almost no contact tracing going on.

It is unclear how bad the spread from protests will be since protesters are outside and often wear masks, and the density of protesters can vary greatly. I haven't read of documented super spreader events that occurred exclusively outdoors, it would be great science to track the spread due to protests.
Facebook is not merely "not censoring" Trump's message, they are actively spreading it.

In a world with no social media, how do you spread your message? You can yell from the rooftops, pass out fliers, publish a book, go on TV, etc. In every case there's a human or organization involved helping spread your message. When that message is vile, the TV station or book publisher is rightly held accountable for helping to promote it.

Facebook gives people a platform to spread their messages. If those messages are vile, then Facebook is just as complicit as if it were a book publisher or person handing our fliers. The difference is that Facebook says "we operate at a scale which does not allow moderation", which is true, and it's the same reason that you can reach so many people so quickly with your messages.

Facebook is actively spreading hate by giving Trump a platform. They need to be accountable. Without Facebook, Twitter, etc, Trump would just be shouting hate to himself. With FB, trump shouts hate at everyone.
I don't get why you get downvoted.

It IS a private company. And for that reason I do not prefer products of XYZ company, because I believe they are assholes. On the other hand I prefer products of ZYX company because of whatever reasons.

It would be fascistic of my to oblige XYZ company owners to change their opinions, because "I" think so (and trust me I do dislike that scum Zuckerberg).

For that I have taken the decision to ignore/sinkhole everything-FB (as I have stated many times in this forum)(hosts, firewall rules, blockers, etc) and I consider FB to be one of Humanity's cancers. Top-down, bottom-up assholery (my opinion - just like Clint Eastwood)(I don't value mine over anyone else's).

FB is not doing something alien to them. They know that tensions increase "engagement" and "engagement" increases ad-revenue.

Remember how Cambridge Analytica was (essentially) used to focus on certain people, divide and conquer?

I am surprised that people are surprised.
I'm just giving legitimate examples of wasteful things that people spend money on, because the person I was responding to seemed to have trouble coming up with good ones.

Just like the examples you're giving me- 12 dirt bikes? That's obviously a ridiculous proposition. So is only 1 out of 99 using that money to buy drugs- a much larger percentage of our population than that partakes. Using stupid examples like that doesn't persuade anybody that Americans are mostly financially responsible.
Does anyone else feel like this motion to censor political figures on social media as a result of what they said seems to have suddenly become a big issue real quickly. Until last week President Trump would say whatever things he would say and the defense was basically as the President what he says should be a matter of national record and although it might <dumb,profound,ignorant,genius,etc> the idea was people should know what their President is saying.

Now suddenly twitter hides one tweet and Civil rights leaders are applying pressure to CEOs and employee's are staging "virtual walkouts"? (Personally I find a virtual walkout to be kind of ridiculous but whatever)

Ultimately my concern is that it seems that people keep wanting to expand the limits and boundaries on discussion and discourse, and not necessarily what someone says but rather their interpretation of what someone says. By that I mean, it doesn't matter what you say, what someone else thinks you said is what dictates whether it is okay to say it or not.

I mean does anyone else remember the whole cofeve fiasco where several news outlets spent day(s) focusing on what it could mean and how it was a secret racist dog whistle?

Don't get me wrong I don't like Trump I don't like how a lot of this situation is being handled, especially as it bodes for our rights as citizens, but it seems to me that rather than focusing on the problem many are instead trying to use this as a means to exert influence and control over what thoughts are acceptable to express and not.
No, of course it's logical for them to ditch GPL at the earliest convenience.

And it's still logical of me to criticise the idea on principle.
Amazing! Saves so much time not having to read a paper only to find there is really no code or very limited code to run. Not having delved too deep into this a suggestion would be to add the level of completeness of code to each paper. There are times a paper has great code included and 80% is there but is missing a crucial piece, sometimes the secret sauce, which would render it if not impossible to use. This is the case with a lot of OpenAI papers.
+1, the integration to supplant K8 secrets is very nice.
But rioting doesn’t work. The first comprehensive study of riots was just done at Princeton and riots are found to result in crackdowns, not reform. Occupy Wallstreet, Ferguson riots, 1968 riots, LA Riots, Camden riots, all had opposite the intended effect.

Democrats already had the African American vote and the cities. Rioting will swing the suburbs back to Republicans, completing the cycle again.
Leave Facebook
How to Deal with a Tech Lead Who Doesn't Give You Enough Feedback
Has anyone done an analysis of the various open source government contract tracing app? I’d love to read some tear down/code review articles on what each country has released.
Caveat Emptor
Seriously. It's really telling how a few people rioting = all protesters bad!

But you see cops being abusive and "It's just a few bad apples!"

Anything to quell the cognitive dissonance.
It has spread to at least Paris and Amsterdam. Including the looting.
Seconded, I tried to package up a publicly available header-only tar.gz into a debian package for our private repo and found it impossible to do. I gave up.
Great website but too bad it's owned by Facebook. Personally I don't feel comfortable that FB will own/manage/control a repo of mostly academic research papers.