skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have to disagree though: all drivers are bad. Most think of themselves as good drivers who only make a rare mistake - but all those rare mistakes across the thousands of drivers you encounter every day means it is rare that you don't see someone do something wrong regularly.

There are a few really bad drivers who shouldn't have a license. However that isn't most of the cases of bad driving you see in a day.
You’re mischaracterizing how free speech was viewed in the recent past. “Free speech” (as a cultural value, I’m not talking about the first amendment) was about the marketplace of ideas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketplace_of_ideas. It meant a free market in ideas, where the dominant ideas arise from competition. What you call “amplification” is just something that makes the marketplace more efficient—it allows ideas to disseminate faster so people can decide which are the good ones and the bad ones. The curation you mention is the antithesis of a free market of ideas.
I wasn't convinced they had gained any traction, regardless of all the noise, until I saw them holding a "Save Our Children" protest at a local (rural southern Missouri) courthouse. Yikes.
I agree. I like it because it is mostly words, like lua, rather than symbols.
And yet, PINs are still not required.
> 12-15% per year

That seems unreasonably optimistic.
I think this is just an extension of the Eternal September. The population of the Internet is wildly different from those that you're thinking of: not only is a majority of the world now online, a vanishing minority of the countries many of us are primarily exposed to are not.

There are plenty of reasons that this new population may establish different norms than the old one: Some say it's because they're privileged, and don't understand the harm that Enlightenment liberalism does to the marginalized. Some say it's because they were free-thinkers and iconoclasts, and indeed, you'd expect any heavily-selected subpopulation to be less conformist than "all people". Others have claimed it's simply intelligence: back when the Internet was all educated nerds, support for free speech was higher because of the well-known correlation between intelligence and free speech absolutism[1].

In addition to the Eternal September effect, I think the broader retrenchment of liberalism we see across the world is very relevant. The cause/effect relationship between the Internet and this cultural retrenchment is unclear but IMO, almost certainly bidirectional. My model of liberalism has always been that its support in large populations is a fragile state, and that it's only supported by the masses when they've cargo-culted it from their civic religion. The minute this effect fades, most people don't have the moral reasoning ability to actually hold a principle, and can't be convinced that protection of an enemy under a principle is a protection of that principle, not of the enemy. They also don't appear to have the capacity to understand that the world turns, and the person on top is guaranteed to be someone they dislike, at one point or another. The only skew that rolling back Enlightenment protections is likely to have over time is against the _marginalized_.

[1] Note that this isn't a stand-in for "free speech is good", since the proponents of the privilege argument would claim that measures of intelligence are themselves just measuring privilege.
Does that have the 3D visualizations shown in Christopher's 2013-2014 talks? Both the github readme and the associated blogpost from July make it look like it only includes 2D visualizations. There are fewer "view" buttons on the right toolbar than the demo had. I should answer my own question by simply trying it out, but I'm not quite sure when I'll have a moment to get around to it.

[0]: https://inside.battelle.org/blog-details/battelle-publishes-...
I've always liked Don DeLillo. I especially liked this quote from the article, "Whatever technology is capable of doing becomes what it must do." I feel like that is a great summation of the world in tech today.
nod I'll go out on a limb and say "I think you may be somewhat in a minority in 2020" as many in my travels have moved over to an image based deployment methodology - it's not absolute and of course I've not been in every company, just the landscape in general. I wasn't aware Canonical had an "online PXE" flavour that you linked, TIL.

I say all this above, but I'm sure there are still shops out there burning ISOs to CDs (maybe USB now!) and hand installing everything - if I've learned anything, it's that nobody seems to agree on how to do stuff the same way. :) Each company is it's own beautiful unique snowflake full of their own design and deployment patterns.
> no social network in the 2000s and before

This isn't really true though. Social networks have existed since the earliest days of humanity:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_network
If you copy the FaceTime app and save it with a different name ("FaceTime copy") you can run that and it will let you pick any webcam, even virtual ones.

If you do this you need to remake the copy whenever the OS update or else Spotlight will crash whenever your phone rings. (took me awhile to figure that one out)

I don't know whether or not this will get the Sony driver working. Obviously it would be better if it just worked like any other USB webcam.
Comedy? In MY serious thread? Not on my watch.
Conspiracy became illegal in the 80s? Threatening people? That seems recent
Societal attitudes towards free speech have changed a lot in recent times. I believe this is related to technological advancement and the rise of social media. The advent of social media has made it too easy to spread dangerous levels of hate and false information online. Malicious individuals and groups now have the power to reach hundreds of millions instantly, at no cost to themselves. It started off innocently enough, with cat videos uploaded to YouTube, but soon extremists were taking advantage of social media for radicalization purposes, adversarial nations were spreading fake news to influence who gets elected, and others were even live-streaming mass murders. This has caused an upheaval in attitudes towards free speech. Enough is enough! There needs to be limits. Communities started imposing limits to free speech. Society — as opposed to governments — have decided that some censorship is in order. This is a natural evolution of societal norms. This particular evolution was a reaction to the excesses and abuses seen in social media. Some censorship, by private parties such as Twitter, as opposed to absolute free speech, will be the new normal. We live in a new world; the old norms no longer apply.
Stupid question: how does that work for the company?
> Politics and consumer capitalism are motivated to identify and target stupid people...

My bet is on a variation of this. To some extent, we all target people to advance our goals, be it to get them hooked on our product, to get people to rally behind an idea or a policy we want, or perhaps to get ourselves elected to a public office.

Entities with more resources naturally invest more in this and have more advanced tools to get people do what they want. Most likely emotions work much better when targeting large groups of people than smartness and objective truth, so that's what we get.

I think it's nothing new, but the recent research advances and the ease of reaching out to people personally these day made it so that using people to accomplish your goals become probably the most powerful tool on the planet. Why build weapons or wage wars if you could just make people do what you want on their own will and also sing you praises along the way?
I have a similar vein of thought;

Any sufficiently advanced technology (knowledge) is indistinguishable from magic -- Arthur C. Clarke

So people just see competing ideas as a choice between two forms of magic. Add in identity politics and hey presto, changing their mind means denying themselves (a rather difficult thing for most to do). Add in Dunning-Kruger, through no fault of their own, and then people think there is a rational reason for denying objective evidence. My evidence is better because your evidence is just your opinion.
But I’m not sure it passes its own rules for advice worth listening to, which does create a bit of a paradox
> How can one believe any discourse on the internet when the other person on the other end could easily be an unsupervised 9-year-old.

I think you'd be able to spot a 9-year-old attempting to engage in "discourse on the internet."

However, I think it's common to engage with people who are in their late teens to early 20s, who are at the point in their lives where their intellectual self-confidence has increased far beyond where their actual understanding is, but they've yet to realize that. They're fluent enough with adult language that they're hard to spot, but they've basically only absorbed one or two big ideas which they mistake for the gospel truth of everything.
"There was no more clear a demonstration of AI’s capability than when IBM had its Watson supercomputer defeat all the human champions in the game show Jeopardy."

The only thing that event proved was that a computer can press a button faster than a human can. The system was getting a digital signal when the signaling devices were unlocked, so unless Watson was unsure of the correct response, it could _always_ beat the humans to the punch. It also had the advantage of parsing the text version of the answers, rather than the audio of Alex speaking in real time, meaning it had a head start to begin with. Unlike the similar Chess and Go challenges, the Jeopardy event was incredibly unfair to the humans involved.
People are becoming less thoughtful. With the advent of social media, almost anything one might think about has an appropriate right think construct and the incentives for conformity are more powerful.

Humanities have been devalued and coopted by advocacy and the university has made its mission to please the customer, which is an increasingly emotional fragile late teenager who has been taught to demand a safe space.

I could go on, we all could go on, and it’s not funny at all.
it is generally agreed that the modern environment can cause people to have depressive symptoms, and that in most cases these will never progress to full clinical depression.

seems at least worth considering that the same is possible with psychotic symptoms.

i think some conspiracy theorists might just have a kind of low grade mania or psychosis. not enough to stop them from functioning, but enough to make them see patterns that aren't there and have a hard time thinking logically about certain topics.

this would also explain why many conspiracy theories nowadays no longer even pretend to be rational. With JFK or the moon landing, they would at least try to present evidence and make arguments, however distorted.

But if you talk to a QAnon believer or many flat earth people, their arguments do not even have internal coherence -- it's just free association.

All this being said, I think there should be a strong norm against trying to diagnose specific individuals with mental illness over the internet. But it's hard for me not to contemplate this as a possible explanation.
Building a Pannable, Zoomable Canvas in React
Did I say that I agreed? I'm just pointing out that they tried to move away from the "unverified information" argument because it was opening a huge can of dragons.
It isn't really fair to throw Tesla, Uber, and Cruise/GM in the same bucket in terms of liability. Tesla is level 2 automation, Uber is level 3, and Cruise is at least level 4. They all will have different capabilities and different expectations for any potential human driver so the breakdown of liability between the human and the car should vary.

https://www.nhtsa.gov/technology-innovation/automated-vehicl...
> Illegal immigrants who are willing to do your job for less will not affect your wages.

You might think that's untrue, and you're probably right, but all the experts believe that it will improve quality of life overall. Notice how no one claimed(in the last 20 years) that it won't effect wages, just that it'll improve your life by making goods cheaper and more accessible. They might be wrong, but I don't think that means they shouldn't be reported on.
Ah, fair point. So it's JPEGs and fallbacks all the way until Big Sur...
He's left valuable stuff before. He left his wallet and a crack pipe in a rental car that he returned. Some people are just forgetful.

Aside from the leak, it's also not the loss that it would be for most of us. He's rich. He had some sort of iCloud backup thing (sorry not a Mac user) to restore all the data, so he wasn't missing anything. Picking up an old laptop wouldn't be worthwhile if a replacement arrived before the old one was repaired.
Here's the actual creator's YT page and full doc. That link is to some other person's page, who doesn't appear involved in the production.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk11vI-7czE
> I am the one getting stupider, or was stupid all along, and so I don’t have the cognitive strength to accurately judge the stupidity level around me, and just happen to be thinking it is getting worse because I don’t know any better. (Dunning-Kruger effect)

The Dunning-Kruger meme needs to go away. The popular understanding of it demonstrated here is wrong. Contrary to popular opinion, Dunning-Kruger did not demonstrate that some people are too stupid to judge their own abilities, nor that confidence is inversely correlated with ability. In fact the data in the experiment show the opposite: the main figure in the paper shows a positive correlation between confidence and ability, and the whole thing is just speculating about why the correlation is less than 1.

https://www.talyarkoni.org/blog/2010/07/07/what-the-dunning-...

I do not believe stupidity is increasing, and there are measurable social indicators that back this up, such as rate of education, re-normalizing of standardized tests, global use of technology, etc. The post I just linked to has a plausible explanation: regression to the mean. More samples as you grow means your samples are getting more average over time.
I really think social media companies are deliberately promoting stupid and blatantly wrong beliefs. It's good for engagement.

If you've ever watched someone be completely wrong about something you know a lot about, you know how strong the urge to correct them is.

On social media, promoting clearly wrong beliefs and ideas (Flat Earth, for instance) is good for business because people will similarly jump in to correct the wrong belief. And if you tie that belief to a political ideology, the believers will defend their ideology, further increasing engagement.
Stop using markets (or "prices") for allocation.

Instead track resource/labor contents of products directly and "price" resources according to their pollution/known externalities.

One of the biggest problems we have is that markets can price labor costs effectively, but are terrible at pricing resource/raw material costs. Supply and demand has nothing to do with ecology and known externalities of resources. We should be able to set the costs of fossil fuels directly democratically (and same with rare earth minerals) either on a per-resource basis (if the use of the resource has known costs) or a per-process basis (if the process of extracting the resource has known costs), and have those costs trickle through the economy via companies that are effectively acting in a distributed productive relationship (like a market) but without using prices for allocation. Instead use orders directly, and then have consumers cover the costs of products on purchase, at which point the money they earned from their (negotiated) wages would be destroyed and not circulate the productive economy.

Markets can only effectively price resources in a democratic setting. This is impossible in a globalized capitalist system.
I think a lot of glassdoors data is really old. Just looking at some of my submissions, my 5-10 year old contributions are still showing up and seem to have a pretty large impact on titles where there's only a handful of contributions.
As far as entropy goes, if we actually have a "supreme leader" then it would actually drastically lower entropy. It would be a shitty society to live in unless we are talking about a benevolent AI or something, but entropy would indeed be low.

Btw my original comment wasn't about the danger of free speech, it's about the danger of absolutely unchecked free speech from all aspects of society.
Awesome, congrats on the progress Quang!
> I tried to go look this up but App Store Connect is down at the moment

This information is not relevant in this context. Please remove it.
I think the 10 items at the end were supposed to be where they cut the sizes down, but it doesn't sound like huge numbers. Unless they are saying that by cutting 40kb out of what is sent across results in 50TB or bandwidth savings over a period of time. Would they have anywhere near that amount of traffic?
I would guess that it is more like parents tell the kids to buckle up, but they will leave the driveway and get to the end of the street before they check that the kids bucked up.
Microk8s uses dqlite as a distributed database, which uses RAFT for consensus. They have their own implementation called C-raft. So if their implementation is decent it should be fairly comparable to etcd’s raft implementation.
Is it just censorship resistance that makes sense to put on a blockchain database? I know blockchains also have a trustless property to them. Maybe exchanging information among people who do not trust each other also has value here?
Find the cost of adding a NPM package to your bundle
I've engaged a few flat earthers...

Let me rephrase that for you: "I've been trolled by a few of the world's most obvious trolls..."

Really, man. The internet has been around. We've been around the internet. There's this kind of stupidity that's almost...meta stupidity, you know? Like, do you really not realize the flat earthers are putting one on? Maybe you're putting one on right now...because, how can you seriously be that naive?
Fun list. I've a third category: All of the above to varying degrees.

When observing one surface of multiple vastly complex interacting systems (e.g society), I often have to remind myself that the causal relationships and measurements are uncommonly as singular as they are in a computer program behavior or [insert artificial technical field of choice] that I'm used to reasoning within.
(dev behind sculptgl, but I didn't make the HN story)

Nice project!

sculptgl is based on polygons (tris/quads only, and using webgl for rendering).

As for the other project it was just as a quick and dirty experiments :).
https://stephaneginier.com/archive/editSDF/
https://www.shadertoy.com/view/WtjXDW
On Unity there is Clayxel and more recently Mudbun, both based on implicit surfaces.

And obviously, the Dreams presentation which is an inspirational must see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9KNtnCZDMI
If you run a service like Twitter or Facebook, you just can't win.

Your systems are being gamed by huge nation states with almost unlimited budgets. Your services are being used to spread disinformation and propaganda under "free speech". People also assume that, not only do they have a right to read this disinformation, but also a right for it to be broadcasted and amplified.

If you block these sources, people hate you.
If you allow them to exist, people hate you and you might destabilize elections and democracies.

What a terrible position to be in.
Fair. Is this qualitatively or just quantitatively different from discovery in previous generations; flicking through the channels you see Fox when you normally choose MSNBC. Or flicking through the newspapers on the rack you see USA Today on your way to picking up NYTimes.

I think part of it at least is that you simply get recommended way more things now than then; the shocking recommendations are the only ones we remember.

I do also agree that there is some sort of feedback loop going on here that wasn’t happening as strongly before, and I have a vague hunch that bots / astroturfers may be amplifying these feedback loops in ways that didn’t apply to previous generations.
>Meanwhile our sitting president insults, lies, spreads disinformation and incitement to violence and we made him president.

Yeah, but I heard Hillary injects the blood of unbaptized white babies into her eyeballs.

That's crazy. Isn't that crazy?!

Right into her eyeballs.
Meh... working from home for 3 days a weak is great... all the time, really sucks (for me atleast).

Yu miss all the fun with coworkers, all the fun side projects, productive or not...

..on the other hand, working from home, especially when they promote "whenever you feel like it", means you're "on call" all the time. Having "core hours" (eg 10-15h, weekdays) and having everybody available then (for calls, meetings, skypes,...) is ok, but I imagine this will mean ealy morning and late night calls and tasks, and workers will never be able to fully separate work and free time.
I thought it was a common term, but maybe it's just some reddit slang: I use it to mean one community “attacking” or “boosting“ a submission on a forum based on the community values, and not the worth of the said submission. In can have different levels of synchronizations:

- no synchronization at all: conservatives (especially American ones) flagging socialist-sounding posts (often upvoted by Europeans when Americans are asleep), Gophers & C++ guys flagging Rust posts, etc.

- loosely synchronized: some content is getting popular on /r/rust, or /r/python, some people there will connect to HN to upvote it here.

- strongly synchronized: some influential Twitter handle posts a message about how “some shit went to the front page”, zealot followers come and flag the submission. Also works with specific subreddits (/r/programmingcirclejerk for instance, even though it's more aimed at comment posts than submission).

It happens a lot, often enough to be noticeable. Sometimes it sort of regulates itself (like in the left-right battle between Europe & US, or between the Rust Evangelist Strike Force & Rust haters), but not always.
I wrote a step-by-step implementation of the majority of Crank.js’s component model. I was sort of sad to see what’s happened to Hacktoberfest so I wanted to do this writeup to encourage contributions. Took me an extra week or two to finish though.

It might take an hour-ish to read, but there’s some good descriptions of advanced techniques for working with JS iterators and promises, and thought maybe the Hacker News audience would appreciate that. Let me know what you think or if you have any questions.
I think you missed that it's third parties offering to perform these services. They target Yelp because it's one of the more prominent review sites, but I've gotten calls from people claiming to be able to manipulate Google reviews as well.
Agreed, it isn't for most people. I have a mail server running on my main hosting server that I have complete control over, with certificates and so forth to make it trustworthy. Then I have an in-home mail server that acts as a proxy, which pulls in all the email from the main server, so that when I type in mail.justinlloyd.domain I end up on a page that looks very much like Google's gmail. And of course, multiple backups of the servers in multiple locations. But this isn't for everyone.
Inconsistencies in Biden laptop repair analysed
I doubt this considerably. Aside from the fact that it is almost assuredly a combination of multiple of the hypotheses, from my in-person experience (i.e. not on the internet), age does not directly correspond to intelligence (specifically referring to the term as I believe the author would define it). When considering the entire population (i.e. not just the highly educated and the intellectually interested), I'd argue they are essentially entirely unrelated (though I know some would probably argue they are actually inversely related).