skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> If social network is the new newspaper, everyone is free to create your own newspaper.

The main difference is that people buy a newspaper for the information it publishes while people join a social network because their friends are there. A social network starting to editorialize content is therefore a problem since there is really no alternative ways to keep in touch with friends as effectively, meaning these social networks gets to force their opinions on people.
It's the algorithmic bubbles. They amplify biases and stupidity of any given group of people, and make biases and stupidity seem like the "norm" within the bubble, so not only it is imperceptible, it's also socially damaging to speak up against it with those still in the bubble. So instead of tamping down stupidity by exposing you to negative feedback (usually stupidity of the opposite polarity), you're only getting in-group positive feedback, so the system becomes unstable (EE's here will understand what I'm talking about).

We have to deal with this somehow, because this is not going to end well.
Of course, there's no reason whatsoever to use a blockchain for this. The review website could simply offer dumps of their data signed with their private key.
Not sure who the IC is, but I thought we were talking about the New York Times.
When I read this piece, apart from the generally terrible writing, the poor spelling and grammar, I initially wondered if it was a spoof from GPT-3 or some other bot.

When I decided it wasn't, I checked the dateline, as it seemed likely to have been written a decade or so ago.
> Do I limit the number of users so that I never hit these metrics?

A darkly amusing solution to Eternal September.
Right. After certain revenue or certain viewership or commercialization you have new responsibilities.
I just prefer to live adapter-free when possible. But I guess I may have to accept that I will have to use on here.
>>" I don't believe I'm in a proper reality/timeline anymore."

Appropriate. Currently, freedom of speech is this climate technological sphere is freedom to amplify hate, lies, conspiracy and fear in seconds.

I don't have the answers, but you're not asking the right questions.

Time to have a word with your tech overlords, methinks.
7 Things Highly Productive People Don’t Do
> 4chan trolls were throwing spaghetti at the wall, seeing what would stick. Q-anon happened to stick, and off the rails it went.

It's just like how 100% of the memes are created on 4chan, the mechanism is the same, applicable from cat pictures to political propaganda. Since 2016 or so, there has been much talk about "weaponized memes" on 4chan that was mostly a meme by itself initally (I was a witness there in 2016), but based on the situation by now it's unfortunately surely a real thing, and even MIT Technology Review has an article [0]. It feels surreal. What an interesting time to be alive! A bunch of random grassroot web dwellers can create something out of nothing by natural selection and genetic exchanges, and by attracting conspiracy zealots in this process, it will eventually become big enough to make an impact on national politics.

20 years ago, it was a Sci-Fi plot. Although Usenet already foreshadowed many social aspects of online communities (I could find conspiracy materials even from the early ARPA archives), but nowhere influential.

One comment mentioned the changed perception of free speech before and after the 2010s, and this is an important contributing factor. Perhaps the society will learn to better adapt the new meme order in another decade.

[0] https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/10/24/132228/political...
> I don't want to be a pawn of the wealthy, or of governments, or powerful people in general.

Then don't. It's your choice to get all your news from facebook or twitter. You're here on HN, so I believe you already understand that the contents of facebook and twitter shouldn't determine the contents of your thoughts.
> I read section 230 and mentioned parts of it that I think are relevant to impartiality.

I don't think the part you highlighted is relevant to impartiality. It sets an aspirational goal of Section 230 and the safe harbor is the means to promote that goal. Without the safe harbor, providers would be forced to strictly police what users post. Smaller providers who aren't able to bear the burden of strict moderation would be forced to shut down entirely. This would have the consequence of reducing overall user access to information.

> I don't see how you maximize user control over the information they receive if information providers are going to be partial to one political party.

By using a different information provider.

> description of the internet as, among other things, "a forum for a true diversity of political discourse".

You said it yourself. The Internet is neutral, according to Section 230. Not individual information providers. If you don't like what one information provider does, go make your own. It's all based on free tools and open standards. No one's stopping you.

Believe me, no one of any political stripe should want to take away ability to moderate Internet forums. It will turn all forums, regardless of political, religious or other affiliation, into spam-filled, unusable messes. That also reduces "user control over the information they receive", since the garbage will drown out anything useful and platforms will have no power to remove it.
It’s amazing the timing of this coming out just before the election isn’t it. So so unlucky!
For those who watched the Plasma Lightsaber Build (Retractable Blade)[0] a few days ago.. here's the newly released test video

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24765267
I get the general idea, but I just don’t think it’s that simple.

“In that case, Apple's requirement of Telegram is in support of a repressive regime.”

It’s possible that this is at the request of the Belarusian government, but it’s also true that Apple does have its own terms against promoting violence.

Either way, it’s not obvious that preventing doxing supports the regime.

If individual policemen are targeted, it’s not a given that this increases support for the the pro-democracy movement.

I also believe that sometimes violence is necessary, but that doesn’t make it obvious that it’s the right thing in any particular case.

There’s no abuse of Apple’s market position as far as I can see.

Stores are generally restricted in what they can sell by the legal environment they operate in.

Now, I do entirely agree with you that we shouldn’t have to live in this world. I do want a platform where no entity can control what I can install.

I just don’t think that world has a lot to do with Apple.

Apple isn’t going to build it, no matter what we do, and Apple isn’t doing anything particularly different from any other corporation that sells any good.

If we want a freer platform we are going to need to build it.
C++ lambda. You can basically do this:

auto succ = [](int i) { return i + 1; };

To make variables in the surrounding scope visible (i.e., create a closure) you have to specify that they're available and how. Grabbing a reference to all variables in scope you could do:

int x = 0;
auto inc_x = [&] () { return x++; };

This makes x available via reference so it can be modified. If you just want the value:

int x = 0;
auto always_one = [=] () { return x + 1; };

And you can constrain which variables are visible within the lambda:

int x,y;
auto foo = [&x] (auto n) { x += n; };

The return type can be determined by the compiler, or they can be made explicit (I chose not to). The first examples all returned integers, the last one has void return type.
> it's not in the same sphere as the fear of the newly found fears of election interference that is driving people to become anti-free speech.

I grew up in a latin-american country, US interference in elections was a given, not a suspiction, a fact, million of dollars poured by the NED and the CIA, which proportionally meant a huge fraction of the electoral budget in the country and yet people still went to vote. Now I need to feel worried about the end of the civilization as we know it because the russians bought 500k or so of facebook ads and have bot farms? Go to reddit, specifically to r/politics and you will see there the blue wave doing the same, but there is not outcry. Hillary lost, because she was a lousy candidate and because of the EC system, luckily for Vladimir he also got what the wanted, but not because of the genius of his intelligence services.
Ask HN: Recommended monitor to reduce eye fatigue
I tried tweaking my monitor setup by reducing brightness, contrast, blue light (i.e. setting a warm color tone), but I still feel my eyes get tired from looking at the screen for long times.
(Note: I recently had an eye exam and everything was ok)

I was wondering if HN would have monitor suggestions to address this. I have seen some companies that claim that their monitors reduce eye strain, so also interested if people have had experience with that (e.g. https://www.viewsonic.com/library/tech/best-monitors-eye-strain/)
Not this easily
The fact that you're being downvoted shows how American HN is. You're plainly correct, and anyone who isn't indoctrinated in the Cult of Individualism knows it. The nations that have performed the best this year have been the more collectivist ones.
then don't use twitter and convince others you know to do the same
A platform does not mean there can be no moderation. Part of the platform can be offering moderation tools.

One could also draw a distinction between burying content vs. completely deleting it. A lot of HN moderation already works by just dropping the content from the frontpage or making comments invisible rather than outright deleting it. I presume the FCC would still consider this
I think we should have an National Science Foundation level federal institution for free software. Stallman advocated for this early on I think. The NSF funds fundamental research to the benefit of all (setting aside the issue of pay-walled journals...). Anyone can apply for a grant to fund research, and in fact this is how "soft money" researchers who are not tenure-track professors fund their salaries. Using the academic community as an anchor for a free software equivalent to the NSF would also solve the problem that academics have no incentive to develop or maintain software.
If Tesla made humans, that fact would be a problem for them.
Wouldn’t Congress have to make a law for judges to step in here, though? I’m not sure what you are suggesting, exactly.
As ever but chicken meet egg.
It’s not false though. Yes it’s censorship.
Everybody agrees he took on an important question, but his answer was not right. I spoke to a Greek classics scholar who said Jaynes's interpretations of the evolution of Greek emotion names was very far off the mark.

The most fundamental problem is that the dates don't line up. Causes and effects are separated by millennia.

It remains a mystery.

A bigger mystery is where the pre-dynastic Egyptians got hold of all those extremely precisely worked, very, very hard stone bowls and jugs. Some are of carborundum! All we know is that they were completely unable to make them themselves. We would be hard-pressed to make those today, using our most advanced fabrication tools.

Likewise the 50+-ton basalt boxes found empty underground at Saqqara, polished to a mirror sheen, optically flat, with interior faces exactly parallel.
On the contrary, the story of Russia contacts with the Trump campaign had excellent journalistic provenance - multiple sources from within intelligence agencies as well as a former MI6 agent willing to vouch for information he had collected.

The story received additional sources as it ran, and eventually grew into an investigation that yielded multiple criminal convictions.
Twitter and facebook have become an internet "public square", kept in monopolistic power by network effects and compulsion mechanisms stronger than casinos.

Insofar as they're monopolies, they should be managed by the people as if they were a public space.
Actually sounds exactly like a regular person would sound in this situation, being interviewed by national media about a story that could be pivotal to the election.
I don't think I agree that they are mischaracterizing how free speech understood, and I don't think that distinction you are drawing identifies a new idea incompatible with what they are saying. Free speech encompasses a lot of things depending on what you want to emphasize, including a notion in a healthy democracy the best ideas survive critical scrutiny.

As other have mentioned, I think however plausible that conception of speech was then, it's utterly ignorant of the problems we're facing today, where ideas spread for reasons that have nothing to do with merit. If anything, I would think you would want to agree with the person you are replying to that the spread of ideas is not due to good ones rising to the top in a marketplace that is selecting for quality.
Basically everyone advertises there. So boycotting their advertisers is like boycotting earning money because your disagree with the government and want to hurt their tax revenue.
I mean, it is aspirational and 10 years away. So they could be wrong and not hit the goal.

Beyond that, yes I buy iPhones anyways and so will trust Apple at their word until some new agency does a deep dive and provides the counterfactual data. Or if over 10 years, Apple erodes the trust they have built with me.
I guess I just don't see twitter as a monopoly. I lived a long time before they existed and I hope/suspect I will live a long time after they are a major player in the news cycle. (Lets just say I'm not long twitter.)

I think creating new platforms has actually gotten easier since twitter's inception. Back in the day it was almost magical to have a website that performed at scale. Now you just hand a credit card to your favored cloud provider.

In your metaphor I see the internet as the utility not the platform provider. If akamai or level 3 decide that they wouldn't carry your traffic, then you might have a case that you're being censored.

If Apple can keep Epic out of the app store then @Jack can ban whomever he damn well feels like.
aws's whole pitch has been cutting out server huggers & engineers, relying on aws. since day 1. often to wonderful effect. with far far better software programmability than our old crufty ways.

but lambda gets to the point where there is no local parity, where it's detached, is no longer an easier managed (remotely operated) parallel to what we know & do, but is a system entirely into itself, playing by different rules. one must trust the cloud-native experience it brings entirely, versus the historical past where the cloud offered native local parallels.
It seems like the real challenge would not be the translation of individual code snippets to a newer programming language, but more about adapting the code base to a different library eco-system. For example you would have to understand the exact behavior of the Cobol and Java standard libraries if you wanted to correctly translate code between the two languages.

You might also have implicit dependencies in the legacy code on the schema of some external database, all of which would need to be taken into account when migrating.

Also, tests might be missing, so how do you even know that your migration was successful?
Surely environmentalists would be glad that their car-owning colleagues are no longer driving to work?
If only every case of lying were so simple for the public to understand.

The NY Post story pushes the repeatedly-debunked claim that Biden pushed for the Ukraine prosecutor to be fired in order to protect his son. It has been fact-checked to death and found to be a lie. One side (the Trump campaign) continues to push this lie. The NY Post, owned by Trump henchman Rupert Murdoch, is pushing that lie in the article.

I don't see why Twitter and Facebook have to be neutral on their platforms when it comes to spreading lies in the run-up to a major election. The NY Post is a tabloid and this story has not been verified by any reputable news site. Banning this story is on par with banning a tabloid story that Biden is conspiring with Martians. It's a net good.
The converse is that given sufficiently accurate diagrams of data and networking formats is that you can generate the parsers thereof, as demonstrated by STEPS as a way to save lines of code: http://www.vpri.org/pdf/tr2012001_steps.pdf#page=2
A large portion of liberals convince themselves that woke capitalist censorship isn't really censorship and that it's fighting "the good fight" so long as it's hurting their enemies.

A large portion of conservatives convince themselves that the media has a left bias and therefore it's reasonable to ingest even trashier garbage uncritically. Very similar position - so long as their media is confirming their biases / hurting their enemies, they're cool with it, even if it's based on fiction.

We're in desperate need of a nationwide media criticism education and the free time for average people to actually engage in it. We should all be aware of various journalists, publications' biases, the think tanks they cite as "neutral" (often Koch-backed, e.g.), etc. The problem with garbage "news" in social media is that it convinces people of nonsense.

That's not really a problem of media outlets so much as a public that has no real response to it. Little familiarity with media criticism and no way to effectively push back outside of something like Twitter. Everyone tries to work within their extremely limited frameworks, many of which are systematically hampered by the forces that fund and profit from these camps.

The first steps to getting the boot off of our necks are (1) vastly improved public education with practical political courses that include media criticism, critically responding to statistical claims and graphs, and questionable forms of argument, and (2) a strong enough economic floor so that the average person can justify spending the time to actually pay attention to this stuff. If you're worried about your next paycheck and avoiding the stress of bills and incoming financial woes, you'd rather watch some TV than spend several hours learning about why Bari Weiss kind of sucks.
The wonderful thing about IoT is the criminal can be on the other side of the world with no chance of any justice coming to them.
Yep, it’s a small self hosted cluster on my own server hardware (VMs on Proxmox) I’m sure k8s would work, but k3s made it really easy for me to get going so now just has inertia.
join mastodon !!!
This seems much less about being casual or being a polymath and more about those who overestimate the value of their own input

I’m leaving this comment only because I most often do not overestimate the value of my input and therefor don’t leave comments, but this seems the perfect place to deviate
in cities where real estate is expensive and a premium, which pretty much is all metro cities in this world, this doesn't even tackle the real issue of the cost of paying for the space to store these cars. regardless of installing a solar panel strapped to a car lift, shopping centres, transit hubs, method of addressing the issue of parking space is by paying for space (also going up is't free or unrestricted in most jurisdictions).
I think the GP post was specifically saying that if you're a "platform" you cannot moderate content. You are required to distribute anything users write on your "platform" that is not illegal (in the US?).
(edit to answer the edit)

There's evidence in some Sanskrit texts that early Indian civilizations did, but they are probably contemporary to the Greeks.

But again, even superficial observations are sufficient. You don't really have to "trust" anybody or research anything. If anything, it's the belief in flat earth that requires extremely convoluted and unintuitive rationalizations.

Again, I understand this stuff is frustrating, because unwillingness to change one's mind in front of overwhelming contrary evidence is one of the worst possible behaviors.

They might believe the claim in the sense they'd pass a lie detector test, but I doubt it's because they find the argument genuinely convincing.

> early christians

This isn't true, either. Some early Christians might have stuck to a literal interpretation of the sacred texts, but the Church has strongly opposed that belief since the very beginning. I don't have any particular axe to grind, but this is really just a myth: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth
Trauma from Police Brutality
You may be interested in the no-communication theorem.
Correctness of a compiler for arithmetic expressions in Lean
To be fair, my home printer is a Canon MX860. I bought mine around 2009 or 2010 and it has wifi, an LCD (albeit not touchscreen) and the only time I've experienced a jam, I was trying to print on sketchy paper anyway.

The best part is, the ink tanks for it are dirt cheap. Like $20 for 4 complete sets of ink tanks on amazon.
That's also inaccurate. The purpose of a campaign is to ensure that more people vote for you than anyone else.

Convincing people you're the best person for the job is only one approach. Another approach is to convince people that don't like you to not vote, or to split their vote across multiple candidates.

If agree that the manipulation happens outside of the campaign. Once you've won, you can choose who gets to vote in the next election, whether they are allowed to vote at all, or if their vote counts in your next campaign vs somebody elses'

Eg. Gerrymandering, allowing/disallowing felons votes (and moving more people in/out of felon status), adding/removing rules on how voting is done etc
I agree with everything except for the fact you are treating gmail, YT and other google services users as "consumers"

remember if you do not pay for a service you are the product, and 90% of google services and algorithm's are deigned to control their product (aka the users)

This is the root of the problem; to google and their devs you the user are not a person, are not a human, you are just raw ore for them to mine, refine, pack and resell to their consumer the advertisers
There are then questions of monopolies and utilities.
Cloud providers won't allow you to host certain content and if you buy your own server your internet provided can and will restrict the kind of content you can host.

Also there are de-facto monopolies on communications and social networks.
The basic problem here is not a tech problem, it's a business problem.

Your data is siloed inside a cloud-only app because it means you'll keep paying for it. You can't export it or share it to other apps because that'd be competition for the service you're paying for. It's online-only because it makes the entire service useless once you stop paying.

There's technical solutions for this, and they'll get no traction whatsoever so long as it's more profitable to keep people locked into a cloud-based service.
Given the timeline, that he was lead investor, the name length, the experience of the VC, the current and past board members, it’s easy to figure out the missing name.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CircleUp Confirms the name which would also fit in the redacted parts of the email.
Commuting is destroying cities (we give up space for cars, noise pollution, pedestrian streets, etc.), people (how much time do you lose in commute?), and the world (pollution).

Cars were invented in an era where cities were not as dense, and where jobs were mostly done in person. With the advent of the internet and personal computers, this is changing, that you want it or not.
I wish the people downvoting you would say why. I think you make a good point and if there are good counter-arguments then I'd like to hear them.