skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-looks-to-contain-adver...

> “We do not make policy changes tied to revenue pressure,” Carolyn Everson, vice president of Global Business Group at Facebook, said in an email to advertisers last weekend that was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

And I’ve got a bridge to sell you.
Twist: "Someone" starts a new, right-wing social network that is endorsed by Trump, pumped by Fox News and secretly funded by Mark. The My Pillow Guy and all his friends take their ad dollars there where they are greeted by all the people who are currently crying that Facebook and Twitter are being "tyrannical" for censoring their racist posts.

6 Months from now after the election is done, Facebook quietly absorbs it and life goes on.
> If they knew he'd never release them, they'd have not bought it.

Im sorry but that is ridiculous. People in general dont evaluate that when reading or recommending a book. When only 1 book was written, people read it, loved it and recommended it. As it was: 1 sole book. Not due to a plan to have 6 more books afterwards.
Nope. This battle has been fought in newspapers and television, so I expect at some point that it will be settled by legislation or the FEC. If they block more of one party over the other, expect the lawsuits (frivolous or well thought) to start hitting. Trying to be the moderator to people who can change the rules of this game is not a good position.
At previous company we used for years Scrutinizer [1] and it helped us maintaining some huge PHP codebase.

It should be free for open source projects

[1] https://scrutinizer-ci.com/
> First, this analysis was done on Arch Linux, a source-based distribution. Since you know at compile time what your environment is, I would expect the benefits to be smaller. And of course, this means you're willing to do a lot of recompiles. I'd like to see analysis done on more traditional (& common) binary distros.

Arch Linux is not Gentoo. And AUR is only a secondary method of installing software. So I'm not sure what you mean.
They haven't published a new issue in 10 years, but if you haven't seen it before a trip through the archives of The Watley Review [1] might amuse you. It ran from 2003 through 2010 and some of the items are a bit dated, but many work just as well now as they did then.

[1] http://www.watleyreview.com/
Immunofluorescence
Facebook has better technology and policies in place to stop violence, human trafficking and hatful negative content.

The critics seem content with Twitter because it flags a RealDonaldTrump tweet from time to time. Perhaps Mark simply needs to do that to silence criticism of its platform?
Sure, but it isn't low rate enough to produce the level of gross artefacts needed to train the viewer to recognize faults in the images.

E.g. after looking at those jpeg images you're able to flip to much higher rate jpegs and notice blocking artefacts that a completely unprepared subject would fail to notice.

In my work on lossy codecs I found that having trained listeners was critical to detecting artifacts that would pass on quick inspection but would become annoying after prolonged exposure.

From a marketing fairness point since the only codec you evaluate 'below knee' is jpeg, it risks exaggerating the difference. It would be just about as accurate to say that jpeg can't achieve those low rates-- since no one will use jpeg at a point where its falling apart. This work is impressive enough that it doesn't need any (accidental) exaggeration.

I think it's best to either have all comparison points above the point where the codecs fall apart, or have a below-knee example for all so that it's clear how they fail and where they fail... rather than asking users to compare the gigantic difference between a failed and non-failing output.
The sources of that narrative are very prominent. Here's one.

https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2020/jun/05/architect-of-c...
No, because I got it and pointed out why it was misleading. Try reading my comment again and understanding it.
> They invest in things the society didn't even know it needed.

1. They invest in things that will out-perform other investment vehicles over the time frame that the LPs are interested in optimizing over. Generalizing beyond that seems like a fool's errand. VC is huge, incentives myriad, but, at base, return to investors is eventually a hard constraint on any private investment vehicle.

The article's main point seems to be "venture capitalists are capitalists and often retain/double as fantstic PR firms". Which, yeah. Good or bad, it's true.

2. "invest in things the society didn't even know it needed" is something that most anything high-yield claims to be doing in one way or another. Not all, but probably most. Not many other places to get high yields.

> but I think it's good that these businesses exist... Imagine a world where everyone was building things that everybody already knew they needed. It would be a dull world and very deterministic. Not a world I want to live in.

This "is VC good or not" argument seems a bit off-topic for the article.

It's possible that VC serves an important -- even critical -- purpose, and also that VC needs to be complemented by robust public sector investment because there are some things that just aren't going to have good returns over even long times frames (or ever) but which still benefit society. "Markets a great but not omniscient or perfect". Which, yeah.

Anyways, I think the article does more harm than good, because it sets up an us-vs-them. But, as the digital libraries -> google example illustrates, VC and public sector investment aren't mutually exclusive. They can support one another in a virtuous cycle: public sector investment in scientific progress -> VC-funded innovation -> tax dollars -> public sector investment in scientific progress -> ...
Historical Scientific Instruments
> So what happens when people disagree on a current and controversial topic like gender identity?

They are free to disagree. They can even couch that disagreement in terms of a group of people being a risk to the safety of others (which I personally believe is a dangerous thing to allow, but so it goes). The only change here is that they can no longer use Facebook's paid advertising channels to broadcast their point of view.
For me, there isn't a distinction between ads versus other content. "Free speech" refers to "freedom of speech" not free as in "not paid for".

> So you want people to be able to post ads that say that people of certain races are inferior? I don't understand.

I think you're considering a rather extreme example. To continue the Finland immigration example - would an ad for a politician who backs restrictive immigration to reduce crime now be disallowed?
Show HN: Harmony – A cross machine shell history sync tool
Sure? But most Tor users aren't trying to avoid their national secret police.
But "abolish the police" isn't jibberish, and is what some people actually, literally, mean. So how can I tell?
What‘s Coming in TypeScript 4?
We need a non-profit company (or something) that will purchase all location data from cellphone companies, all purchase histories from credit card companies, etc and post it online for everyone to see... maybe that would wake up some people.
> From my understanding "abolish the police" means to reorganize it and greatly reduced the funding.

No, it means abolish the police (the centralized, monolithic, paramilitary local law enforcement agencies.)

It also means to reorganize the law enforcement function within local government, and probably reduce the distribution of resources devoted to armed law enforcement. But just reorganize/reduce funding is the “defund” not “abolish” position, which are related but distinct viewpoints.
> Windows-specific drivers for stuff like embroidery machines, dongles etc. are a different story altogether.

For that we theoretically have ReactOS.
Slates Star Codex
I agree, this type of reasoning strikes me as bulling or shaming people into believing racism is systemic. The entire conversation about racism is becoming more and more about shaming or threatening people into line, not convincing them with truths. Even pointing this out may bring up accusations of racism. Moral shaming or threatening does get results so I can't argue with that, but I don't see it as sustainable.
Show HN: Is full stack type safety possible?
TL;DR: Physicist Angelo Bassi is trying to experimentally test the GRW collapse model [1], which is in fact experimentally testable. Personally, my money is firmly on the side of these experiments failing, but I would not bet my entire life savings on it. These experiments may well succeed, and if they do, that will be the biggest breakthrough in physics in 100 years. It's great that someone is actually testing this.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghirardi%E2%80%93Rimini%E2%80%...
> "Pardon sir, we are not programmed for this event! Please advise!"

do you have a blog somewhere, or more writing somewhere?
Thanks for the heads up! Quite plausible!

Braintree support seems to respond very slowly. I will write to them again about this and the pending subscriptions.

Update: Called the Braintree support just now and verified it is infact a fraud (credit card attack). Unfortunately, there were 8000+ transactions by the end of the day and 1000+ transactions went through. I have configured risk threshold to avoid this in future. Now, I will have to refund and cancel each of these subscriptions. Damn fraudsters!
Say we have program X with dependency Y. X+Y is either dynamic or static. X can either have responsive maintainers or unresponsive maintainers. Y can either change to fix a bug or change to add a bug. (With Heartbleed, I remember our server was fine because we were on some ancient version of OpenSSL.)
Here are the scenarios:

- dynamic responsive remove bug: Positive/neutral. Team X would have done it anyway.

- dynamic unresponsive remove bug: Positive.

- dynamic responsive add bug: Negative. Team X will see the bug but only be able to passively warn users not to use Y version whatever.

- dynamic unresponsive add bug: Negative. Users will be impacted and have to get Y to fix the error.

- static responsive remove bug: Positive/neutral: Team X will incorporate the change from Y, although possibly somewhat slower (but safer).

- static unresponsive remove bug: Negative. Users will have to fork X or goad them into incorportating the fix.

- static responsive add bug: Positive. Users will not get the bad version of Y.

- static unresponsive add bug: Positive. Users will not get the bad version of Y.

Overall, dynamic is positive 1, neutral 1, negative 2, and static is positive 2, neutral 1, negative 1. Unless you can rule out Y adding bugs, static makes more sense. Dynamic is best if "unresponsive remove bug" is likely, but if X is unresponsive, maybe you should just leave X anyway.
If you include the iMacs (e.g. the iMac Pro), I think there aren’t really all that many gaps in the product line, spec or price wise. It’s mostly that you can’t necessarily get the machine you want in the form factor you’d like.
> ghost kitchens can absolutely make money.

That is as assumption that has been made time and time again and it always failed. The most important part of a successful kitchen is a near zero dwell time. The smallest dwell time is achieved by having a kitchen be colocated with the customer.
>should not feel comfortable socially expressing that position anymore

What people feel safe in expressing, when "safe" means "safe from peers disagreeing with you," is a terrible reason to believe something. If I came back with a poll of my local area that said all of my peers thought racism wasn't systemic, would you council me to agree with them? That's an extremely dysfunctional way of thinking.
What if all the easy stuff has already been done and heavy lifting is necessary for the next wave of impactful startups? This funding model looks like it's going to continue fishing for guppies for the foreseeable future.
Angelo Bassi has a number of papers on arxiv.org:

https://www.google.com/search?q=angelo+bassi+site%3Aarxiv.or...

This one seems relevant to the topic of the NY Times article:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1310.8600
You wrote a lot but pointed out none of the flaws of this tech. What’s so alarming about drawing a conclusion that more police resources need to be allocated to a place that has a history of criminal activity?
The answer is pretty simple: "Capitalizm". It doesn't fix all the problems. It fixes them for creating profit, and not every serious problem promises profit when solved.
Quotes by Alexander Grothendieck
The only explanation offered in the article is that we have better technology for detecting these events now. It's irresponsible to link it to climate change, even though the link is superficially plausible.

> “Environmental extremes are living measurements of what nature is capable of, as well as scientific progress in being able to make such assessments”, he added.

> “It is likely that even greater extremes still exist, and that we will be able to observe them as lightning detection technology improves.”
I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you asking whether I build my kernel drivers as modules or built-in? Personally, I build my kernels without modules, but I've never heard of that technique being called "static-linking Linux".
>because software becomes a black box.

Is the brain of a detective not a black box?

>But here we are talking about people's lives, far stricter processes should be in place

Yes. And I want these stricter processes to protect me from software as well as from humans. Why discriminate between software and humans?
Now compare that to Linux where even the kernel can be updated without a reboot...

(Assuming you run a recent Ubuntu)
They invest in potential for awesome profits, period.

There are no awesome profits in unknowns, too much of a gamble and too much effort to get there; better to focus on the hype.

Take Bitcoin, no one would have invested in the idea before it was a fact. Once the hype started winding up, VCs were all over it.
Back in the 90s we'd statically link the most frequently executed programs on busy servers for a significant performance boost.

Dynamic linking is not a performance feature, it's a decoupling feature.
Again we are back to revisionism. The Authoritarian left likes nothing more than to doxx people, it happens every day on twitter and it is a critical part of Cancel Culture

That was not way she was rejected
How can you tell what’s an idiom, and what isn’t? Context clues. Do the same thing here.

Or, actually listen to people. Your call.
Tesla has millions of miles of experience with a level 2+ self driving system. Waymo has comparable experience with a level 4 system. Thus it makes no sense to claim that Tesla is closer to shipping a level 5 self-driving car than Google.
This is definitely a distinction which WHO should rely upon its Twitter followers to parse accurately. /s

Any mention of masks is conspicuously absent from their "what you should do to protect yourself" list. More than that, they stamped a giant "INCORRECT" over a social media image which, although it probably did get some details wrong, was much more on the right track than WHO with "Wear a mask everywhere!"
Play-by-mail games are a pivotal part of John Darnielle's novel WOLF in WHITE VAN. Some of these games sound like ones depicted in the book. Very interesting!
Hmm. You make it sound like very new idea and tool is worthy of equal and fair consideration. If a polician today said they introducing No Crime Left behind, where cops randomly select time and place to swarm, would a rational person even dream of debating its merits?
FT, June 2020: Instacart raises $225m from Yuri Milner’s DST Global and others: https://www.ft.com/content/da9dfac9-8186-41c4-8a1c-9052c8bef...
Didn’t a bunch of Facebook employees stage a walk out last month?

What are some examples of these companies acting incomplete unison at all times?
Buy Mobile Traffic
But this is not “pre crime”. Someone in those areas still has to break the law to be arrested. What you write has zero connection to reality.
Yes, 3d era GTAs all have physics tied to the frame rate. The default setting on PC is to lock the frame rate to 30 or 25 fps (depends on which game) and you get problems if you disable that. This video shows some examples: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0LwTzxhgyM
When the data is just as likely to be false as it is to be true then it’s worse than useless as a decision support mechanism.
> or insults a group because of race, nationality, ethnicity, religion or conviction, sexual orientation, disability, or a comparable basis

I disagree with that law being just. For instance, consider the Muhammad cartoons controversy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_carto...). But my main point was that the discussion of crime involving immigrants is a common topic in Finland, and that it is not a frivolous discussion to hold given the crime statistics. Disallowing discussions from individuals or advertisers or politicians on this topic would be an act of censorship and would be undesirable.
Cyprus have started using blockchain to battle Covid.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/cyprus-hospital-ready-to-stor...
> The lightning first hit nearby trees and was deflected into the open window of the truck. The strike knocked Sullivan unconscious and burned off his eyebrows and eyelashes, and set his hair on fire. The uncontrolled truck kept moving until it stopped near a cliff edge.

this is one lucky dude
In a containerized world, static linking will generally be faster, unless the OS does page de-duping for text/rodata. So doing the work to make static linking semantics not suck seems likely to be important.
I've never heard of Quarkus or used Micronaut. I did once survey available smaller/newer frameworks and considered Micronaut to be larger than my use cases.

Just reading the Quarkus docs now, I see they're using Hibernate. That was the one big problem I had working with Spring/Boot and I would personally avoid it although I don't have recommended replacement. My problem with JPA+Hibernate was that it was being clever (e.g. delaying operations, caching query templates) as well has creating different forms SQL vs JPQL with different limitations and gotchas.

You already like Micronaut and its docs. If not using Hibernate I'd say go for it. When I looked at it, it seemed like a more modern Spring.
> Their interview process sounds a bit like tech take home assignment

the worst are the Fermi Comedy questions;

How many mimes slip on bananas in Paris

If you fill the Empire State Building with helium how many people in New York will sound like dorks?

stuff like that, awful.
Where is the file that defines the host keyboard to emulated joystick mapping? Like where is # for colecovision?
Because they're still ducking a certain person's trick, like most of all mac users. I don't understand the truckholm syndrome problem some people have with abandoning mac altogether. It's a shit system. Fucking os 9 was better than the first osx. Arch Linux has been out fir fucking forever so we need tk question these asholes. I guess they're fucking bold and pederast lik e and syrian and wear blue jeans and shit. Steve Jobs looked like shit so imagine who buys Macs ""for the image."" Fucking more cellar like abd jewish than ''__'&&&&the rest of us'''' fucking jews
It's not like the second amendment stops anyone from trying and passing gross infringements.
The parent said violent content, not "content that hurts my feefees". Why shouldn't "angry cops" be allowed to express themselves? You don't need to follow them if you don't like what they have to say.
This article is 1 year old and a lot of highlighted content is 2 or 3 years old.

FB was investing heavily in increasing hate speech removal per zucks post. Do you have more up to date data that shows the opposite?
The sampling bias would have to be very large to throw off those numbers with 140+ African American participants.

Do you have a better poll that shows different numbers?
I wish that were true, but it isn't. In some places, facebook has a monopoly on all human communication. For instance, in my country, if you're not on whatsapp you're effectively unreachable.
I get a completely blank page.

I'm testing from two separate internet connections, with different ISPs, in the same region.

If there's a way to provide more info or some kind of error, let me know.
The rationale for having a monopoly on violence is not "let's make people do stuff" because that would be, y'know, slavery. It's the obvious fact that the only alternative to a stable monopoly on violence is an all-out war, so a monopoly is very much the lesser evil.

> When Warren proposed to create a wealth tax, implicit in that assertion is that the government would collect it from people by force if necessary.

Strictly speaking, as a government, you won't need to collect a wealth tax by force. The government's monopoly on violence is inevitably bundled with provision of some privately-valuable services, such as managing and enforcing property rights. People selfishly want their rights to be enforced in a fair and predictable way, so they will find it in their interest to pay up.
> better or cheaper than the many companies

why would existing companies be offering cheaper? The price will be set by the market, and any saving will be taken as profit, not passed on to the tenants.

The easiest way to insure against rent increase is buy a big chunk of local land. Actually offering it to your own startups just means they reduce overheads a little, provide an extra perk, and a small competitive advantage.
Yeah fair point, I see what you mean
I'll give a partial list and refer to the RCW since that's a state I'm familiar with. Again, the entire point is the driving code is long and complicated. There are many many reasons you can be stopped.

Explore the entire RCW yourself on driving rules here: https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61. I encourage you to read the entire section and ask yourself if you ever have a driving trip longer than 3 blocks where you don't violate one of these laws:

- Speeding (even 1 mph over the limit for only 1 second). 46.61.400 (2)

- Speeding (even if at/under the speed limit if the officer things the roadway is unsafe for that speed, subjective to the officer making the stop) 46.41.400 (1)

- Speeding (failure to slow down at an intersection, hill crest, bend in the road, or when pedestrians are nearby, subjective to the officer making the stop) 46.41.400 (3)

- Passing on the right (except in specific situations) 46.61.110 & 46.61.115

- Driving too slowly (driving too slowly such that you impair the normal and reasonable flow of traffic; note for extra fun that the normal flow of traffic is often above the speed limit and this particular law doesn't provide an exception for driving at the speed limit; subjective to the officer making the stop) 46.61.425

- Failure to signal (both turns and lane changes, even into your own driveway) 46.61.305 (1)

- Failure to properly signal (not signaling a full 100 feet of travel before turning or changing lanes) 46.61.305 (2)

- Illegal wide turn. 46.61.290

- Reckless driving (subjective to the officer making the stop) 46.61.500

- Failure to come to a complete halt at a stop sign. 46.61.190

- Failure to stop between 15-50 feet of the rail from a mandatory stop rail cross (note, the distance measured is from the nearest rail, not the stop sign) 46.61.345

- Expired tabs (even by a day). 46.16A.030

- Anything not street legal about your vehicle (headlight out, taillight out, cracked windshield, window tint).

> Cops don't follow a single individual around waiting for them to go 5 over the speed limit.

This is a preposterous statement and absolutely false. This happens all the time when an officer becomes suspicious of a vehicle. It's literally routine policing that you would learn at the academy if you took officer training.
That's not even remotely how it works. You can't legally do that.