skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Wow, this transformed into a weird microrant. I didn't mean to offend - apologies if I have. To be clear - imperial units are awful. Everyone knows this. Americans know it, Brits know it, and while we might occasionally defend this system tongue-in-cheek, we know it's objectively idiotic. We're the ones that have to live with this thing every day.

> b) industry (mainly heavy industrial/machining) pulled too many strings in Congress saying the conversion would cost too much

This is real the only reason. The U.S. is somewhat unique because it had already heavily industrialized prior to the international push toward metric, and had basically no rebuilding to do after the war. It's similar to the technical debt that affects most giant old companies, but on the nation-scale. An (arguably) poor early design choice in industry-building and nation-building.

In history, generally, the largest economic entity gets to use whatever units it wants, and force the rest of its trading partners to deal with it. The British Empire picked their units, which the USA inherited, and kept using due to inertia. If/when either the E.U. or China eclipse the USA's GDP, you can probably expect the USA to try again to shift to metric.

This is all unrelated to anything of course. I assume the writers of Quanta articles are scientifically literate, prefer Metric, but know where most of their readers are from, and have chosen to use their language. I have lived in both England and America, and to this day, I still don't know what room temperature is in Celcius. I really don't think this was written with misleading, malicious intent - it's just an article that wasn't written for you, but rather for (the tremendous amount of) people still living in a "time warp" like me.
There are no fake accounts. There are only accounts or not.

There are no sockpuppet bloggers; those are called bloggers.

If you go down the fake road, you have to realize real news by real reporters is often wrong. I’ve had someone in law enforcement tell me the news accidentally labeled them the victim on televised news and didn’t correct it.

Classbooks written for US public school students- I understand that some content in them has been incorrect and intentionally biased.

There is truth, but it’s an ideal.

I’m glad that this is calling out those that are manipulating people, but on the other hand- what is the goal?

Will
shaming bring fairness?

We could have communist dictatorial leaders enforcing their version of truth, if you’d rather have that sort of thing.

Our president should tell the truth, and it should be a scandal if not, to a point of course, because I’d bet most have lied at times.

But if it’s time to activate something like a libel superpower on the internet, how would that even work in a fair and practical way?

Freedom of speech cannot be freedom only to tell truth; truth can be aspired to, but not necessarily known by all, and what’s understood to be truth by some may change. So, really, what should be done?

Btw- I’ve done my best in past years to tell the truth as much as I can when I’m not kidding around, and it typically makes things difficult, but better. I’m not recommending anyone fake up things to boost rep. But, it’s happening, it’s not good, and I don’t see how AI or oversight or a control play would end well when it comes to enforcing truth. However, the notion of a “fake” account is what allows most of the users to post content on HN and Reddit more freely.
Somewhat feasible. You really need distributed fact checking to scale up especially since you don’t have source ips. If you can do that you might have something if you can keep participation up.
Thanks for pointing this out, I just setup the DO firewall on my account.
Unsure if this is part of the assertion or not, but some of these appear to be actual people with LinkedIn profiles and careers. It was unclear to me if they were spawning new identities to author the content.
Wells Fargo fires 100 employees for lying to access relief funds
there's the concept of "standard temperature and pressure" , "stp" , which iirc is 0 celcius at the same pressure as there is at sea level.

Room temperature means room temperature. Room temperature and 1 atmosphere of pressure means room temperature and 1 atmosphere of pressure.
It's ironic to be championing the virtues of free speech in reply to a completely innocuous post that was flagged to death.
I look up to literally zero of those languages.
Leave It to the CRTC and Copyright Board of Canada to Get Money from Web Giants
TBH that would be even more weird. Customers are kami-sama, never yourself.

I think we're reading a bit too much into this: he was riffing off the "GMO-ism is a religion" theme and went a bit far with the metaphor, but Jesus is meant here as a "leader of religion", not literally God because trinity and all that. (Japan not being a Christian nation, the average Japanese knows next to nothing about Christianity.)
The trick is that these sports then don't have as long of a life if the money isn't in it. Upper/middle class adults are less likely to want to spend money watching sports they never played in their youth. Maybe more so if they see the sport as barbaric.

Exceptions abound, of course.
I remember a big-tech publications (TechCrunch or VentureBeat) fired one author who was caught getting paid by startups. This was 3-5 years ago.
Conceptually, I think this makes sense. People already bend Python into horrendous DSL-esque abominations using the flexibility already afforded. Macros might allow for these contortions to be more principled and vettable.

OTOH, I am not keen on this opening the door to even more stuff newbies have to learn, especially in the ML domain, where you just know people will use macros to do all manner of "clever tricks".

This proposal also seems too limited to truly enable the kind of performance speedups numerical Pythonistas really want.

The ! notation feels icky and "un-python" to me. Maybe that's just (lack of) mere exposure effect.

What I want instead: improve/stabilize tools and CPython hooks for decompiling, code generation, AST manipulation, and the like. When I can go source -> AST -> source with confidence, maybe lets revisit macros.
I lived in SF for a year and hated it. I don’t belong there: it’s not for me.
That's interesting. It's around July 2006 that the posts started to change from being about Smalltalk to being about Lisp. Who knows if there's a thread that comments on the change.

I see the posts there are pretty interesting. This one led me to a bit of a rabbit hole:

https://www.usenetarchives.com/view.php?id=comp.lang.smallta...
Like getting angry at Walmart for not stocking your favorite tabloid.
Not being a mechanical engineer, I don't have an intutive feel for how the additive nature of the pressure develops as you describe. I would have thought that the outer layers would start to compress the inner layers, relaxing some of their stress. Is the a mech-e 101 type of link you could pass along to help get me up to speed? Or maybe you are saying that 3.6 GPa times the ratio of 100 mm to 1 mm gets us to the 360 GPa mark? So you don't need to have layers of Kevlar as your "anvil", you could use something else more rigid, and just wrap one layer of Kevlar around it and develop the needed pressure. Thanks.
Right now, almost nothing. I have in the past used it for:

Writing, was originally a weblog, then blog.

Testing of various services.

Email tricks of various kinds. Did a spam map at one point handing out email addresses containing company names.

They literally all sold out!
Kubernetes security 101 – lightboard video
> Three lives is pretty challenging on larger fields with lots of unavoidable guess by the way

Agreed. On boards like Flower where there's a long thin strip of tiles, it's very easy to get to a point where it's pretty much a 50/50 guess, no way to logic out of it.

I like the idea of the unique board shapes, but if there's no practical way to win because you just keep hitting wall after wall of 50/50, well, that kinda takes the fun out of it.

Maybe need to think beyond classic minesweeper mechanics for a way around this to keep it interesting?
> By the way, there are no fake accounts. There are only accounts or not.

Yes, until we see a great advancement in AI, actual meat based mammals are driving these accounts.

> There are no sockpuppet

Sometimes it seems like half of Twitter is fake accounts. You've never seen photos or videos of a Bangladeshi click farm? 50 people sitting in small cubicles running proxy-connected virtual machines on desktop PCs, posting stuff, upvoting things on reddit, etc?

I assure you that such things exist. Some of the places that used to do MMORPG gold mining to trade virtual currency for real money have shifted into the market, because it's much more lucrative.

You've never seen the pictures from China of 1 person sitting in front of a board with 40 budget android phones mounted on it, upvoting and reviewing apps?
This isn't a particularly great argument (and is scientifically dubious).

There are different strains of flus, colds, and recently, a few different strains of coronavirus.

You can't generally be reinfected by the same strain. What can happen is that new strains can infect you. There are tons of cold strains around, and the flu mutates quickly enough that each year we get a new one, so vaccines have to be redeveloped for each new round of mutations.

Coronavirus is the same way, except that as far as I know, it mutates much more slowly than cold and flu viruses, meaning that vaccines (and having gotten it once) will be equally and more effective than flu or cold vaccines.
Although with email, you have the spam filter. It's just that those emails are not being picked up by it.

Also, usually, you can unsubscribe to email lists/sender. While you can't do that for phone calls. You might block a specific number, but those robo-calls might use many different numbers
Democrats haven’t been raising 230 regulation though, that’s been republicans disgruntled that their ads had been fact-checked (by partisan conservatives, it turns out). The proposed regulations coming out of the house have been more about competition and anti-monopoly.

It’s hard to see this as anything more than an attempt to change their bet on a losing horse in this race, as the commenter you replied to pointed out.

And I’m not sure if we’re remembering the same 2016 election. We’re both talking about the same election, that resulted in the largest win for an American political party in history, right? 2016 was absolutely horrendous for conservatives and their saving grace was the senate cycle was particularly bad for democrats. If there’s a similar performance this election there’s a good chance that they take both branches.
neat! maybe instead of a 7min tutorial a 10 second demo would be nicer to have at the top
I'm pretty sure most are actual people (mostly engineers in developed countries), but I came to suspect that at least 2 are not. I don't know for sure either way.
They acquihired keybase a while ago: https://keybase.io/blog/keybase-joins-zoom
I've been writing about and pushing for a decentralized system that doesn't require centralized services or verified identities - because any centralized system will have biases and flaws, and having real identities tied to your online comments has can have serious real world consequence.

https://adecentralizedworld.com/2020/06/a-trust-and-moderati... - With this, a site or users of the site can choose many trusted moderators from the network and as the system grows it gets better over time.
Yeah, this has been going on for a long time. The methods evolve, but the bullshit stays the same [1]. Good rules of thumb:

1. If it praises a product, the article was paid for

2. If it has a link that looks even slightly out of place, that link was paid for

3. With few exceptions, most of the revenue for the publication comes from selling features and backlinks (much more than subscriptions and ads).

[1] http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
I think the best option is to go to the same doctor for many years, and build a relationship of trust, and then ask them for their opinion.
Restricting discussion about religion could be a Title VII violation, and restricting discussion about politics could run afoul of voter suppression laws.
Troy citizens also believed that if something is called a horse and looks like a horse, then it's obviously a horse and can't be anything else, especially when it's given for free.
That's an angle I hadn't even considered, but I'm surprised Twitter didn't. SV social media companies, of all the organizations in the world, should understand the implications of a Streisanding.

If they had just left it alone, maybe attached the standard "this might be false" disclaimer, it would likely have passed as yet another partisan thing, but now they've gone and infused it with a bunch of power it didn't have prior.
Yup, and a lot of the Danger DNA found its way to Android as well. The Hiptop had a Java VM, app store, push(!) IMAP/POP3 email, media support and more.
> I would say that if he tested negative, he would be unable to transmit infection so that part would be true.

This has not, to my knowledge, happened yet.

> I don't believe any sensible person believes that they become immune to all strains after recovering from one, and I do not believe that Trump was saying this. Do you?

I certainly do believe that the message trump intends to convey is that he is immune to the coronavirus and can no longer be re-infected period.
Isn't this extremely common honestly? Isn't this so common it has names like "astroturfing" and "growth hacking"? This so not black hat that it's basically just regular ol' hat.

Yeah creating fake grass roots support isn't particularly new, and I would venture that it's been around as long as there's been marketing.
Nope, you see I’ve been on the black isn’t evil argument for a while because I own various black colored guns. It’s a pretty common argument to say the black guns are scary yet nobody can explain why. So again, why do you think black makes it scary or intimidating?

I have, in fact if you see my replies to others you’ll see me point out that very thing. But people are going around saying the goal of painting it black is to be intimidating. If that were true then why doesn’t the military use the same tactic when they do want to look intimidating? This would imply it’s used for camo, like you said.

It’s not a race thing, don’t take it there because I most definitely am not.
> I built this website because I was tired of quora asking me to sign up all the time

not to be condescending but isn't that the natural convergence point of all these apps assuming you're operating in a capitalist environment? so the way I see it, your app either will stay unpopular and without signups and aggressive user conversions, or it will get big, and become quora. die young or live long enough to be the villain as they say.
That would have been a specific machine built around the Z80. The Z80 CPU has a 16-bit address bus and can handle 64K of memory. It has an 8-bit I/O bus, but it was common for Z80-based machines to use memory-mapped I/O like the 6502.

Two very common machines from the era were the ZX spectrum and the TRS-80. But there were dozens - Kaypro, Osborne, MSX, the Nintendo Gameboy... the Z80 was used in lots of machines. Chips based on the Z80 are still used in embedded systems today.

I built a retro-computer this year using a Z180, which is a Z80 (minus undocumented behaviours) core with a handful of useful peripherals built in. They're still actively manufactured and sold.
Perhaps to remember that every average Joe is equipped with their own brain and ability to think for themselves.

The role of science is to study topics empirically. It is not to establish sacred truths that need to be protected from scrutiny.

A few years ago if you said the big tech firms were each working on establishing their own ministry of truth, most people would have told you to take your tinfoil hat off. But this is exactly what we are seeing now. Independent thought is not a problem that needs to be solved. The only reason we are in this situation to begin with is because these institutions have done so much to tarnish their own credibility, that they now think the best solution is to limit people’s ability to think for themselves. It’s horribly dystopic.
> Why should the political opinions of the employees be preferred over those of everyone else?

The people who are complicit to violence perpetrated by the company they work for are inherently making the same decision as those who are activists. Either way you end up with a programmerocracy, so why not try to reduce harm on others then? Maybe what you advocate for isn’t perfect, but if you can’t avoid politics in your workplace, why don’t you fight for what you believe in?

> Political changes aren't objectively "for the better". If that was true, they wouldn't be political decisions, but business decisions.

Very few things are objective. Some would argue that nothing is objective. This is not a reason not to act.

> we resort to distributed opinion instead

This is not true. I think it is safe to say that political decisions in our global society are overwhelming made by a very small group of highly elite individuals.
It's pretty standard when you want to force people to express an opinion. For example, I know a company where the interview ratings sheet does not have a "neutral" choice, you need to either support or oppose the hire and can then calibrate how strongly you feel either way.
He did have 12 disciples tho.
If this isn't black-hat, what is? Specifically, an author not disclosing an affiliation or payment, fake accounts promoting it, and fake accounts commenting on those promotions. In the continuum between white and black, what's left on the black side? :-)
far side.

It’s correct in the original title.
Long Pages
No, I'll reiterate my prior comment: Section 230 was written to fix that glitch. The law, as written, doesn't allow that to happen.

The cases you're citing predate the law, so they aren't precedent on how the law should be handled.

If you want actual precendent, here's some:

- https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230/cases/batzel-v-smith

- https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230/cases/universal-communicat...

- https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230/cases/perfect-10-inc-v-ccb...

- https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230/cases/parker-v-google-inc

- https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230/cases/ma-v-village-voice-m...

- https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230/cases/jurin-v-google-inc

That basically all says that the provider can't be held liable even if they moderate things, due to 230, the most recent in that list is from 2011, but there are more recent rulings that exist.

Here's matching precedent from 2018/19: https://www.lawfareblog.com/herrick-v-grindr-why-section-230...
I have scars from the battles that the author describes and I don't recognize the author as a fellow veteran.

The main problem is that "data scientists" don't follow procedures at all in their work. If they applied conventional software engineering so far as it applies they would do a lot better.(e.g. use version controls but don't check the database password in, think carefully what configuration goes with the hardware, the "model" in general, a particular instance of the "model", etc.)

ML projects get you in trouble in other areas.

For one thing, an ML project might involve a step that takes 24 hours or more to train a model. This means you have to schedule in terms of calendar time (e.g. can't start task A until task B is complete) as opposed to punch clock time, story points, or whatever passes for reality in your flavor of agile.

Related to that is automated testing. Normal software "works or doesn't work" but ML software is expected to get it wrong a certain fraction of the time so the question of "Is version x.y.z good to ship?" is fundamentally different in nature with ordinary software.

It irks me particularly that he ends his circle with "harvest insights" when any real game theorist knows it is about taking actions based on information -- e.g. why winners at gambling and trading use the Kelly Criterion.
How is that funny or surprising? Every source that mentions political leaning of news media says they're right wing.

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

https://www.allsides.com/news-source/new-york-post

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-post/
> What panel of certified physicians is YouTube using to identify what information is correct vs. incorrect?

According to the article youtube's policy team meets with the WHO weekly to discuss potentially problematic videos.
The power to imprison and seize property is the core free speech issue. If the government can't enforce the law by putting you in prison or seizing your property, the entire issue is moot.
would it be possible to filter the frames of the video such that only a certain app is shown? so if you're tabbing back and forth then the desired app is shown
Is this actually news to people? This has been happening for decades. The purpose is largely for SEO / sometimes for actual traffic.

Just go google "private blog networks" (pbn) or "link farm".
> It's just been forgotten because the iPhone overshadowed it.

Or maybe because it never successfully left US and reached the rest of the world.
> seriously? I think I first saw it in 1996. Sock puppets are nothing new or innovative as a general concept.

Sock puppets have existed for a long time, but turning it into a contract service for clients, selling it to well-known startups, and scaling it up this big is not something I've seen before.

(also, hi from NANOG and the SIX ages ago!)
You say that, but...what were you going to do with mobile internet in 2002, exactly?

The connected devices at the time were all still struggling with the early adopter chicken-and-egg issues of an emerging network of services. There weren't "apps" and web sites had not centralized themselves. And cost, speed and service coverage remained very limited. You couldn't justify a data plan just for Mapquest when you could print it out at home. Most kids, myself included, wouldn't be getting any phone for a few years yet. The mobile phone's purpose in the 2000's was served well with what was in feature phones: call, text, Snake, maybe email.

In contrast, the iPod, a rough contemporary with the Hiptop, addressed something more immediately compelling with a two-sided, integrated marketplace when paired with iTunes. There was a value proposition in that since not everyone was or wanted to be a savvy song pirate, and you could buy singles instead of albums. Internet speeds and access were ready for that use case.

Apple's success at the time, both with iPod and with iPhone, rested on timing and quality of integration, which returns again to that which the article alludes - we have a lot of early-adopter developer services, and some of these are in a position to be more like an iPod/iTunes. But I don't think the article goes deep enough in recognizing that even the iPhone was capitalizing on underlying infrastructure developments to channel them through a specific product and service mix.
"Opera, Brave, Vivaldi to ignore Chrome's anti-ad-blocker changes, despite shared codebase"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20137669