skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
And maybe, you know, oversight, accountability, and most importantly: informed consent, by actual local law-enforcement and communities because no one gets to set bombs and then just walk away, for the same reason land mines are a war crime.

If you can't even vaguely guarantee it won't kill people (e.g. on private land at least an accidental baseball-over-the-fence distance away from the perimeter) your approach is most definitely illegal and you should be held accountable, and your agency's dealings revised.
The Controversy of NASA’s EmDrive
There are good reasons to not be a hypocrite. This isn't one of them.

So, the theory here is that if we only purify ourselves enough, we'll finally get climate skeptics to listen? If we only take on all the systemic problems with personal sacrifices?

Like, don't show up to important policy meetings on principle because we'd have to fly there? It should be the other way around. Full-time climate activists should get to fly where-ever they want, whenever they want, and the rest of us should avoid flying.

I don't think the article's theory of change is how any other kind of policy change happens. The strength of belief demonstrated by a minority doesn't, by itself, convince anyone or move policymakers.

If you base your credibility on being a perfect example of how you want others to act, it's exactly what the climate skeptics want. You'll fail and they'll laugh at you. Because in this society we're all complicit until there are systemic solutions.

I think there's more evidence for a small minority moving public opinion and public policy when they act in a coordinated, continuous campaign. Self-perfection doesn't come into it. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/02/why-nonviolen...
Show HN: Debbit – Automate spending requirements for high-yield bank accounts
Extremely low interest rates have cut high-yield savings account interest rates from over 2% to ~1%. Most folks would be better off with a high-yield checking account, which pay between 3% and 5%. However, high-yield checking accounts typically come with a catch; you must make `n` debit card transactions per month. Depending on the bank, `n` can be between 10 and 60.

I created Debbit to automate meeting these spending requirements. Debbit will programmatically buy 50 cent Amazon gift cards and/or pay your cable bill in small increments throughout the month. It's built to be a set it and forget it solution. Run it once and it will execute in the background using headless Firefox month to month. Behind the scenes Debbit is a hand rolled scheduler + Selenium automation.
I like Krita. I use it regularly. But the anime splash is unprofessional. The big boss is NOT a tech. If I open it up to show him something, and the first thing he sees is Kiki, he's going to have opinions on the subject. Company of <100 people I don't need problems with the CEO who is already somewhat iffy on tech folks (even for a tech company).

If there was a flag in the settings to turn off the splash I'd be fine with it. As it is I just install GIMP and move on. I have limited time and patience for IT work (details about link/desktop files don't fly anyway since we're 100% Macs) and anything that expends my time or patience faster tends to get dumped.
Google Meet - the mute/hangup buttons are hidden in the bottom bar in a completely undiscoverable way

1) Why hide them? It is like hiding the steering wheel in the car and popping it out when you need it.

2) Why not make them discoverable?

3) Why can't we give a little bit of real-estate to the most important interaction - to unmute yourself before speaking - a permanent place in the UI by sacrificing sleekness a little bit?

This is not just aesthetics, far from it. There is so much horrible UI/UX/Service/Whatever-you-wanna-call-it in the world. It is filled with it.

I could write a 10 page article about Twitter's UI/UX. It is full of obvious improvements like this. It doesn't take an expert to notice these and they're not off for a debate - there is no subtlety or subjectiveness here.

People like yourself are rare and not that common. Most UI/UX folks are all about following design trends, aesthetic sensibilities and injecting personal taste into products as if it's some kind of a creative extravaganza.
Yeah, it seems like the HiFiC version has the same large-scale structure, but the details are sort of "regenerated": e.g. it's as if the image format says "there's some hair here", and the decoder just paints in hair.
I have come across several but used none (not really a Node developer so no reason to try any). Are they all just not up to snuff or something?
Considering cell phone companies in the US already have this data have this data and have been anonymizing it for covid-19 research, and considering public health officials are doing some degree of contact tracing, it's pretty strange how little information has been coming out about how and where most people have been getting it. Not just in the context of protests, even before that, it's been a huge hole in data released to the public.
Bandcamp is just fantastic in general, seconded.
Peer-Reviewed Scientific Journals Don't Do Their Job
How is this the news to come from a company with $1.5T mkt cap? How is Microsoft possibly valued so highly? They can't even ship a redesign on Windows.
This article doesn’t quite live up to its title - swerving at the end to say unless we change, instead of concluding we won’t change.

This article was pilloried at the time for its negativity, but I think Franzen’s article,
“What If We Stopped Pretending the Climate Apocalypse Can Be Stopped,” ultimately has it right.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newyorker.com/culture/cultu...
The MongooseIM process for collaboration when building a messaging app
The problem with measures like that is that they would still not be enough. With everything that hass been pledged so far in terms of policy, we are still well on our way to >= 3°C in warming, which would have catastrophic consequences. But even getting those concessions was extremely difficult, and there is still no guarantee everything will even be implemented as promised.

But the changes we actually need run much deeper, and they would directly impact our lifestyle, because our current one is not sustainable. The problem with that is that if governments were to attempt to implement those changes, they will be voted out. For instance, the French government tried to do a carbon tax, but was met with weeks of violent protests.

It's also a game theory issue for governments: putting a carbon tax on your country's production will make your economy less competitive compared to those that won't. You can mitigate the consequences for that by carbon taxing imports, but that will not help you with your exports.

The bottom line is that we need to do much more, but it's politically not feasible at this point. It will only be when people's lives are being much more severely impacted, but by that time, it will be too late to avoid a catastrophic outcome. IMO the only realistic hope we have is the development of active carbon capture technologies that can be deployed on a global scale. Whether that is feasible in time remains to be seen.
Imagine attending a left leaning protest, having your participation recorded (unknowingly) forever by your phone, and then having a right wing, authoritarian government come to power and use that forever information to round up yourself and your friends.

Or imagine a left wing authoritarian government targeting lockdown protestors.

We should all be concerned about wanton data collection.
Yep, I know a number of freelance writers who pay the bills with content marketing. It's a tried-and-true path.
We simply don't have any data of quality that could substantiate any claims on this subject. So all claims on it are unsubstantiated.

> it's completely compatible and most likely that the ratio is overwhelmingly good cops with a few abusers, and generally if/when present, concentrated in specific localities.

What is your reasoning? Not only is this an unsubstantiated claim, but it also comes with no logical reasoning describing how you reached this conclusion, unlike my original post.

> The generalization that cops are inherently predisposed to evil or something is bizarre, unhelpful and polarizing - not to mention inflammatory to all the cops that are in fact lawful and in many ways more honorable than most citizens in terms of sacrifice, risk, and social good.

You call this idea bizarre, inflammatory, and state that cops are in fact lawful and more honorable than most citizens. You haven't given any evidence to support this, nor have you explained any type of reasoning or logic for how you arrived at this conclusion.

I find this very ironic and hypocritical, as you directly accused me of making unsubstantiated claims; I at the very least provide logical reasoning, while you fail to provide anything other than vacuous conclusions.
>On paper its possible in theory during an era of low application numbers to become an officer in an obscure location with various waivers if you're lucky, but in practice the requirements to actually get hired as a P.O. are the same as military OCS.

Today, the published requirement to apply to the NYPD is 60 college credits (i.e. a two-year associate's degree). The LAPD only requires high-school graduation.

On the other hand, Army OCS requires a four-year bachelor's degree.
Sure, I wasn't trying to make any point about your comment. I just thought it was a really fascinating example of how language spreads and evolves,slowly at first then all at once. Please excuse the musing haha
That was a snarky dig at how Windows still has different styles and paradigms from different eras in different places. Menu bars, tool bars, control panels, and so on.
There's gotta be a level 3.5 here. Cars almost always don't require a driver and can safely stop and transfer to a driver when they do.
We're about to see a whole lot of software that "doesn't work" on Macs and especially software that "doesn't work well". Is the solution to ban the software? Should we impose a short time limit on improving software and ban the stragglers? These would be ridiculous things to do to software on ARM Macs.

There was one particular problem Jobs had with Flash that transcended the software's addressable issues and made it "impossible", which is why referring to it as platform abuse is apt:

> desire to avoid "a third party layer of software coming between the platform and the developer"

Shortly after that they banned Flash, Unity3d, and most other compatible dev technologies, eventually relenting due to outrage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_and_Adobe_Flash_controve...

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/technology/companies/13ap...
> It seems like the stores were a missed opportunity, but they always had the odds stacked against them.

Odds were against Microsoft stores being profitable because Microsoft is now an underdog in consumer tech. If you want hardware (possibly with the exception of xbox; I just do not know, never had one), Microsoft is rarely the name that jumps to mind. But this is exactly why Microsoft should keep them (using some profits from OS and software), even at a loss, to provide demos and let folks play with their toys. Not doing this means riding much more on inertia of existing corporate Windows 10 and Office installations. This is very profitable and still has a lot of inertia, but abandoning consumer tech is putting a $1.5 trillion dollar company into a more vulnerable long-term position.
It would help if 75% of the police force weren't there drawing a salary because they need to make money for the police force by harassing people for minor traffic violations.
For the first part, basically have to thrust up and left to keep the path going up the middle line.
By extension of the argument in 2, is not the punishment also unfair to the rich? Perhaps fines based on wealth not flat amounts or prison based on life expectancy would be "fairer".
Without widespread antibody testing, we'll never know.
The Nix package manager solves the 'single docker container to be my build environment' thing well. nix-shell is significantly nicer to use than docker.

How is it for the docker-compose 'I need x, y, z running' use case? It's not something I need that much, there are various shell.nix hacks I've seen to (e.g.) get Postgres running for Elixir development. They work, but it's not as rich an approach as the rest of Nix.
His rape analogy is terrible on many levels, but I’ll go with it for a second. It’s more like the electric company uses its proceeds to fund rape squads. He argues we shouldn’t take any anti-rape activists seriously unless they first disconnect their houses from the power grid.

Me reducing my personal carbon footprint is a drop in the bucket compared to cutting CPU time at work, and that’s a drop in the bucket compared to voting in a Green New Deal politician.

Reducing my personal carbon foot print is harder than reducing work’s carbon footprint. So, I’ll start there, and vote and donate to political campaigns accordingly (because that’s easier and has higher impact)

Ordering actions by cost benefit doesn’t make me a hypocrite, it makes me an effective pragmatist.
It's not that simple as "everything is optimized at CPU level," actually. Virtualization has very different performance impacts on different workloads.
This article gets the problem right, but misses some other reasons for making personal changes to combat climate change.

For one, the more people that buy products that are more environmentally-friendly, the more the market will shift towards offering environmentally-friendly options. If consumers were beating down car dealership doors to buy every EV they could, car manufacturers would shift heavily towards EVs. If everyone buying a house were looping in a solar panel installation into their loan, we'd probably see more competition and faster price drops in solar panels. The more people that buy meat alternatives, the more money gets invested in developing meat alternatives.

Secondly, each individual action has the potential to influence someone else. If you see your neighborhood switching to EV's, you may be more likely to buy one. Or if a friend had a great experience with reducing their energy costs by upgrading their windows, you might be more likely to get it done yourself.

Put the first two factors together, and then it is much, much easier to build political support for the legislation needed to enact big climate change initiatives. If more people take personal ownership of climate change, that helps those people drive political will towards addressing climate change. Politicians absolutely will respond to public pressure, but if the public is largely indifferent on the issue, it makes it less likely politicians will spend political capital on climate change initiatives.
Spotify needs to enable dislike on any song playing, not just in discovery playlists.
Individual choice has a very small role in climate change. The author has done nothing, zero, to contextualize the issue in numbers and data, which clearly demonstrate that individual choice is maybe 5-10% of what we need to decarbonize.

Foreign vacations (which aren't even occurring in 2020) are a pittance here...we're talking about billions of fossil-fuel powered engines, hundreds of millions of livestock, heating and cooling homes for upwards of 10 billion humans, the production of steel, fertilizer, plastics, concrete, electronics, mining operations, shipping, trucking...it's just so much more vast than the hypocrisy of rich leftist environmentalists going on vacations.
I am trying to read Axler's book and it is proving to be extremely boring to me (no offense to the author) but this post gave me an idea that I should probably explore a linear algebra library along with the book to make things interesting.
They didn’t mean that a certain class has to wear masks. Just reminds them of the bells.
A huge part of the problem is people like the author that demand _cuts_ in living standards. I enjoy my high standard of living and as someone with friends and family in less developed places, I understand very well they would really like the same high standard of living. Not only that, but I think they deserve that high standard of living.

The way to achieve that is by developing a set of substitutions, and having rich people migrate to these substitutions and having poor people work towards them. Many claim that this is impossible, but the fact is that we have barely even begun trying to do this.

For example, all ground transportation can be electrified - cars, trucks, semis, trains, etc. There is now a very clear path towards this that did not exist 10 years ago. All electricity generation can be decarbonized in tandem. Homes can be heated with carbon-free electric heat pumps by automating geothermal installations. Short-haul flights be be electrified within a few years. None of this is a missed opportunity, nothing is too late. We are just starting to realize this path and there is a lot of work to do.
Also the ubiquity of auto-uploaded videos and livestreaming. Only in the last few years has virtually all video recording become online first. Before all police had to do was take a person's phone away to hide their actions.
There's a real, specific concern here that doesn't apply to Google analytics on blogs. The concern is that if this data is available for purchase by a company consumers haven't heard of, it's available for purchase by police. Police could use location details to track, arrest, or harass people they don't like. And this has implications outside the U.S. as well.

But also I think you'll find that some of the same people in this thread also complain about Google analytics. My personal website, for example, does not use Google analytics.
I’m sure there used to be this idea that content should be, or at least solidly start, above the fold. In this case, I observe two whole screenfuls of meaninglessness before the content begins. And on a 1920×1080 display with typical OS/UA chrome, it’ll be about 2½ screenfuls. This is grossly excessive.
In your extreme case, it is PayPals duty to inform the authorities. And then to act upon the instructions recieved from that authority. But it is not PayPals duty to decide whether the customer is a criminal or not; that is what the courts or your local version thereof, is for.

It might be that in the US, this is different, but in the EU it is not. In fact, in the EU, payment providers are, in several cases, prohibited by law to shut down or inform customers. So if Paypal were to shut down the contract of such a customer, that would be thing that might bring PayPal employees to jail.

Now, that is obviously aside from any EULA or other agreements PayPal has with its customers: as a private entity, paypal is free to put arbitrary rules in that contract: dissalow stuff that is otherwise perfectly legal, for example. But that is very different from becoming a judge.
Edit: but my point was, that the moment PayPal becomes "critical infrastructure", such arbitrary rules are problematic because, if, say, a PayPal account is required to pay taxes or receive any form of wages, such arbitrary rules will exclude people who then might get into serious trouble.

Also, please keep the conversation civil. Calling me "very stupid" does not help to bring your otherwise valid and thoughtful concerns forward.
They are supposed to kill every criminal that tries to kill them.
>>> you: If I say no one floats across the spectrum like that...

>> me: What is your basis for saying this?

> you: I don’t need a basis other than feelings now.

Of course your feelings and experiences matter. However, if you want to (a) have a deeper conversation; (b) help others understand where you are coming from; or (c) possibly convince other people, I suggest you try to unpack your experience.

> However my feeling are invalid because they are not the currently beloved norms.

If I interpret this literally: This is not true. Of course your feelings are valid.

If I interpret it this as sarcasm: I encourage you to rephrase your point; sarcasm is not useful if you want to engage in discussion.

My tentative impression, so far:

1. You seem currently seem focused on a narrow mental framing of this issue. You seem to fixate on a particular part of the debate without much rigor or reflection.

2. I have not seen much of a willingness or skill to engage on a deeper level.

3. It appears to me that you are using HN to vent. Keep in mind that venting or mischaracterizing others does not suit the audience here.

I'm not asking you to change your experience, values, or goals. I'm asking you to put an effort to engage and listen. I'm also asking you to use your strong feelings about the issue to encourage a deeper investigation into the situation; the nuances. At the very least, you can improve on how you present your experience, arguments, philosophy, etc.
The same article bashing a wide range of crime statistics uses even shallower statistical misdirection to support its argument.
I'm only calling it "trickery" because DNS isn't supposed to work that way. The entire systems structure of authoritative resolvers to recursive resolvers to cachers depends on a record being the same regardless of external factors like location or source IP. Meanwhile, anycast was literally designed for this purpose. And it's been around since 1993.[1]

>explain how anycast works

Advertise your IP space in multiple locations. Traffic will come to the location closest[2] to it. There's nothing particularly complicated about it.

How the routing end of it works is up to the specific protocol you're using and whether this is external or internal... so it depends on BGP on the Internet (in the case we're talking about here), but you can also anycast on your internal network, and the routing will be handled by OSPF/IS-IS/whatever.

Further, effectively every large service online today uses anycast clusters. Do you think 8.8.8.8 goes to a single server? Cloudflare IPs? Google IPs? It's all anycast.

[1]https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1546

[2]"closest" is subjective, it's not necessarily the geographically closest, but the "best" path. This is decided by the specific protocol you're using, but generally you can assign costs/metrics to various routes to prioritize/deprioritize them. This is your netops team's problem, not yours, so for all intents and purposes you'll always get the "best" path.
I'd disagree with #1.

A large amount of discussion has been around "what is a COVID19 death?" If someone dies with COVID19 in their system, does that count as a COVID19 death?

There are the clear cut cases where someone dies on a ventilator while testing COVID19 positive. A straightforward COVID19 death.

But there are clear negative cases: Consider someone who has COVID19, but gets into a car crash and dies. This ideally wouldn't be a COVID19 death, because it was clear that the car crash killed the person.

But from here on out... cases get more complicated.

But what about someone who tested COVID19 positive, but dies of a heart attack? COVID19 clearly stresses the body, going on oxygen or other treatment, has been proven to cause long term chronic issues. But do we know for sure that the heart attack was causally related to the COVID19 virus?

There's also the case of long-term chronic issues. COVID19 causes kidney damage and lung damage. If (formerly COVID19 patients) people start dying of Kidney failure next year, it is probably COVID19 related, but with a year delay.

This muddles the death count, and ultimately it comes down to individual medical opinions of thousands of doctors. In the case of the heart attack, we classify it as a COVID19 death if it is the opinion of the doctor. I'm not sure if there's a better solution, but that's how the US works.