skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Apathy is a symptom of lack of immediate value. Torrents and p2p went mainstream when dinosaur content distributors failed to provide service that people wanted. That turned into streaming services which made bank because they addressed the need for on demand entertainment. Centralized media publishers like Facebook and Twitter are now the dinosaurs. Create a news service that fulfills the need for unfiltered on demand reporting and you can be it. Look at the streamers that are beginning to do this. Give them a platform that can’t be censored and allows people to subscribe and donate to them. Figure out the video storage and delivery problem. The world needs you.
> Last time I've been asked to join a facebook group, I've said I didn't have an account and everyone switched to a mailing list administered via google in no time.

That's amazing. I've seen similar things the other way around. Someone didn't use Facebook. People didn't switch; they got left out and forgotten.

Another one was Google Groups (a type of mailing list). Someone didn't want to use a Google account. They couldn't figure out how to subscribe. Was the group willing to switch to another provider? No of course not. In the end an admin manually subscribed the person with their non-Google address, but if that hadn't been possible, the group would have let them go rather than switch service.

I think it depends on how much the group wants to accommodate everyone who wants to be in it, and what the mix of people is. Also whether it depends on additional tools such as Facebook Events.

If it's a fun social group that you're interested in joining, where the people don't particularly care who is in it, they're probably not going to change what they do. That's fairly obvious when the group aren't your friends (yet). Less obviously, I've seen it happens among friends too, where someone not on Facebook gradually gets left out and forgotten from things like party invitations.

> Over the last half-year of online academic events, I've seen at least half a dozen different online services used (Zoom, Zulip, Gather.town, google hangouts, Cisco Webex and probably a bunch I don't remember). Most of us users don't particularly like to, but can (without serious tears) learn a new tool when it comes up and turns out to be more suited.

I've seen the same thing this summer. (Some of those tools have awful data protection issues and permissions to do things they shouldn't on your computer, yet I've installed and used them anyway. When it's a job interview you don't really have a choice.)

The above list shows us Facebook doesn't have a monopoly. But I don't count them as great examples of freely leaving behind walled gardens either. It's more like, there are more walled gardens. You don't get a choice which tool to use. You must use whatever tool the group has chosen before you join it, and they are very unlikely to change tool for a new joiner.

> As it comes to reach, don't forget that email has probably the greatest reach of any service around.

Yes and no. Everyone uses email, but many only use it inside Gmail, which is a bit of a mess if you're subscribed to a bunch of mailing lists, and trying to keep track of events you've been invited to.
Thank you so much! We're just getting started and there is so much more to come!
FWIW shellcheck can help flag cases where you used a bashism in a file with the #!/bin/sh shebang.
Google discontinues its Google Nest Secure alarm system
Hah, came here to make this comment!
Nothing personal. There’s a ton of different possible ways to approach the problem. If you can’t construct reasonable approaches with amnesiac setups, you can still combine it with FDE for data storage. A lot easier to swallow a microSD card than a hard drive. Tails supports this mode of operation built-in. A persistent OS that is not amnesiac will leave a lot more metadata.

But you can totally set up a “download encrypted blob from external data storage” script if you want. You can do a whole lot depending on what resources you have available.
I'd guess any site that uses a captcha. I've recently struggled with the same as OP. Captchas have become increasingly harder to solve, even when you solve it correctly, it still fails. I've noticed an uptick in "failed" captchas after switching to Firefox exclusively.
I find stories about cancel culture both interesting and vexing.

I disagree with so many of the premises behind such alleged behavior that I want to write off the entire topic and its participants.

And I'm vexed and dismayed by the issue because, by it's very nature, I hold no hope of resolving it by polite but critical discussion.

But there's a small part of me that suspects its a low-probability risk I need to be aware of.

I find it eerily reminiscent of trying to live near someone with poorly managed mental illness.
Signal is moving to allow users registering without a phone number. The infamous PIN was a necessary step to achieve that and other features, such as proper group management, which has just been released.
It’s interesting watching the messy complexity resolve into patterns and order as you zoom out.

It’s reminiscent of what it feels like to dig deeply into a metabolic or reproductive process in a cell and be overcome with the sheer complexity of it, then look at the back of your hand and realize it’s all happening right there, now.

Basically it feels a bit like life.
If the bug was instead reported to Electron and given a CVE, Discord could have still implemented the fix. Either a workaround in their app or an upstream patch.
You aren't really addressing what I am getting at. There's too much happening for the simple editorial decisions that go into choosing what to talk about for an hour to not end up looking like bias.
> The final model took a few days to generate at the cost of just over £300.
"easily"
I've had the same problem since I was a teenager! I'm great at all other types of maths, pick everything up really quickly.

I've always thought it's because much of it is counter-intuitive, and so it doesn't work with my brain doing it's normal 'jump 3 steps ahead, yeah, yeah, I get it, get on with it' thing.
Exactly. It's kind of well-known at this point that negative net dollar churn is what people should aim for.

The minutiae of risk modelling for something as inherently volatile seem beside the point. Maybe if you're a stock analyst?
> and in doing so to an unnecessarily rote extent (I suspect because it's the easiest way to try to get it done)

That's likely part of it. I see another reason: I believe schools' incentives make them risk-averse. I think they have a stronger incentive to make one failing student do passably well than to make ten students go from doing well to doing very well.

I agree with everything else you said. I also found academic contests to be a good motivator to teach me to check my work.
Urbit is interesting, but this troubles me:

> there are only 2^32 (~4B) Urbit IDs, so they cost something.

> Ultimately, we want your Urbit ID to feel like a civilizational key. If your Urbit ID were a piece of hardware, you could tap it to unlock a door, swipe it to buy a coffee, and plug it into any computer to log in. Your Urbit ID should be a unique, beautiful object that’s both an address and a wallet. It’s a key to a secret club and the ticket to your digital life.

So I guess almost half the current global population is excluded from civilization?
Microsoft’s new Xbox app lets you stream Xbox One games to your iPhone or iPad
Biometric data is leaked whenever you touch a doorknob.
It really depends on the details. I was having a conversation about this this afternoon. If you're trying to grow a community of (even) an open source project and your purist take is email and IRC or the highway that's probably going to limit your participation. Not 100%. Some will be committed enough to deal with not using Slack or whatever. But many potential participants will be F This.
It really depends on the context. If people tend to fire off every sentence into the channel as they think, the person who writes a paragraph is going to come off strangely. The reverse is also true.
Thanks for your response here. You mention that it isn't an "absolute reputation system" -- that makes sense. I'd like to know more about that because I think I'm misunderstanding the proposal.

I understand that it isn't a single dimension (like HN or Reddit karma) -- it seems your proposal is more or less a "tagging" system, but anonymized so that other users wouldn't be able to say, look at my profile and see how other users have tagged me. But other users or operators could apply a filter to exclude comments from users based on those tags? I feel like my understanding must be incomplete because that wouldn't be very anonymous -- e.g. if I applied a filter to exclude users tagged with "gopher-enthusiasts", and suddenly stopped seeing messages from a certain active members of a community I was in, that would "out" those users as "gopher-enthusiasts". So I assume the system you're proposing is more sophisticated than that. Can you clarify?

Based on my reading of what was proposed, I'm particularly concerned about these scenarios:

1. Say you have a community centred on the goldfish keeping hobby. It happens to be the largest such community -- many thousands of members. And (to use the example given by OP), suppose a large contingent of moderators (or perhaps even the server operator themselves) are super averse to guns enthusiasts, to the point where they'll either ban anyone they learn to be a gun enthusiast, or persistently tarnish any members' reputation score (for lack of a better word) until they leave, or simply won't allow anyone who is also in a gun community to participate (does this reputation system give others insight into what communities I'm in?). This is problematic because there aren't many other goldfish communities worth participating in -- all the experts participate in this one, and as a newcomer to the goldfish keeping hobby, I won't get very far "voting with my feet" here. Presumably the overwhelming majority of participants won't care or even necessarily notice that guns enthusiasts are "filtered" from the group.

Nothing stops this particular scenario from playing out today, but I guess my concern is that the proposed system would make this scenario super easy for operators to implement -- I would be filtered from the group without anyone knowing anything about me other than that maybe I had some association with a gun focused group at some point

2. Say you're having a mental health crisis, and you end up saying some stuff in a channel with many participants that you regret later. How does that impact your global reputation, and for how long?

3. Say you're a Marxist and participate in Marxist discussion groups. What kind of metadata will the reputation system generate about you? Is it possible that it'll put you on the same filter/tag lists as "terrorists" and people who advocate for the overthrow of governments, even if you don't personally hold such beliefs?

4. (Mostly a rehashing of #3) Say you're involved in some (legal, consensual, 18+) fetish community. Are you now globally on a filter list for sexual deviants that will keep you from joining, say, a parenting community?
IBM revenues fall but CEO promises imminent return to growth
This is something Marshall B. Rosenberg talks about a lot in his book Nonviolent Communication (the article even contains a quote as another commenter has pointed out).

I highly recommend this book to everyone. It's a little cheesy at times and reads like a self-help book, but the content is insightful and applicable everywhere.
Thank you so much! We're excited to build out a better player profile too! Really excited to make it a good resource for finding the right party members too!
This is my solution too--bonus the fan covers up the sound of my Labrador retrievers licking themselves in the middle of the night (which wakes me out of a dead sleep every time).
All it needs is a more intelligent setup-system, and possibly a (better) web version.
How to run code from a JAR file inside a JMeter project
Agenci to Create Apps
Hello eveyone, in this ariticle....
There's "Push to talk (Priority)", which doesn't mute everyone but does lower their volume while you hold it down.
These Game Theory MOOCs have been really useful to me, but the link in the paper is outdated. The courses are available here: https://web.stanford.edu/~jacksonm/courses.html
This sounds almost identical to how I was raised, even down to the age of transitioning between the two styles, and I was doing contract web development work by 13, too, before cramming for the GED and ranking 99th percentile in science. I'm now working in AI with a startup of my own.

I honestly can't say I've ever met (or even heard about) anyone with such a similar story -- care to chat sometime?
Couldn't help but giggle at the inserted [GNU/] in that quote.
I can't even go fullscreen in a Teams meeting anymore after a "recent" (read: months and months ago) update. My small laptop has 1/4 of the screen taken by UI and taskbar, even in "focus" mode.
Yeah! We naturally sort on upcoming session, with all times being in your browsers local timezone, but we need to make that more apparent. We're thinking about better sort options, but also trying to balance the amount of space that search takes up!
>I don't understand why people even ask for account creation. Now days the devices are personal, you don't have to have accounts to be identified.

Why would I want every single thing I do online to be directly linked to one physical real world device?

It's not so much about data loss for me but I don't want anything real world linked to me to be used to authenticate me in any way other than monetary transactions or things with tangible physical value.

Other than that, I have a range of email addresses and usernames I use depending on the nature of the site and the amount of personal information i'm willing to disclose.

I have a fairly fine grained system for managing my user accounts accross various platforms and i'm personally finding it more and more aggravating the amount of places that require some kind of google or facebook sign in, let alone the idea that my phone should be my universal user account/name.

The internet should be like the rest of public life. For the most part, in my day to day life, I get to choose the amount of personally identifiable information I disclose to others. Managing multiple user accounts with differing levels of personal information is the internet equivalent of this.

I do not wish to be linked to one 'universal digital me' my real life interactions are not like that, why should my internet interactions be forced to be that way?

I have different groups of friends, acquaintances, coworkers etc. I don't act the same way with all of them, I don't talk about the same things with all of them, they don't all have the same level of information about my life, yet increasingly, online interactions are being pushed into this 'one you for everyone and everything' paradigm that is completely antithetical to the original values of the early internet and human interaction in general.
Matrix lets people host their own servers and in doing so put the metadata anywhere they are comfortable.

One can have metadata for sensitive internal corporate channels stay on a network they own in whatever country they want while still being able to chat with outside parties on matrix.org or other servers. Several friends host their own servers and more recently matrix p2p is rapidly maturing to dump the need for servers at all for many use cases.

Federated systems allow people like me to choose to host a server for my own family in my own home closet rack so data shared between my family and I never leave our network.

Still others can host matrix as a Tor hidden service where it will be very expensive to even learn who to target.

If all participants are using Tor and not using identifying information like a phone number, then bulk deanonymization becomes very expensive, particularly if many small highly targeted social circles roll their own.

Signal does not give users a choice but to trust one SPOF setup built under a one size fits all threat model that flows all IP metadata to one place which can leak information regardless of any encryption.

I don't want a world where one central party holds all communications metadata in one place under one legal jurisdiction with one proprietary memory isolation technology under one threat model.

Moxie here likes to point out that email demonstrates all the things that can go wrong with federated systems, but if had chosen the popular alternative of letting a single party take over this whole class of communication, we could all still be using AOL.

Internet messaging will outlive us all, and if we advocate everyone lock up their communications with one (even benevolent) dictator, it won't end well when the next dictator is not so benevolent.

See: pretty much every social network in China and Russia that is now under state control in spite of early promises of privacy by founders.
Sounds like the old trick of "write down your question, and you'll probably know the answer".

I think it works because writing (or talking) engages different parts of the brain than thinking.
If you print a lot of color and want cheaper ink, also look at Epson's EcoTank line. They fill up from ink bottles, like the continuous ink supply systems that people had been rigging up to avoid ink cartridges.
One tool I use is called greylog for postfix. Effective for me.
Autistic girls going undiagnosed due to ‘camouflaging’ behaviour, study claims
i' mdoing the same. question is how do you find clients?
Totally fair. Though the only way to solve spam control in a decentralized way is probably to put in a system that no one will actually use.
I’m not a Matrix user, but it seems like Matrix does in fact handle contact metadata: https://matrix.org/faq/#what-is-an-identity-server%3F

I think there’s a difference between what you’re saying, which seems to be that you personally don’t upload your contact metadata to Matrix, and what I asked / the previous commenter was describing, which is the idea that there are messaging platforms which have decided to not support storing this kind of metadata.

Notably, last I looked, Signal does allow users to opt out of SGX metadata storage, though the initial implementation didn’t cleanly allow for that.
If you thought it was dumbed down in 2014, you probably will still prefer another roguelike.
Evo said he wanted to be a dictator for life?
Of course there is, simply make it a crime to use coins that at any point in their history touched a mixing service.
> passive-aggressive

Well, you weren't lying...
Yes, by quite a decent margin.
Any bullying or power abuse situation may easily exploit biometric authentication against the victim. Kids bullying other kids, domestic abuse, authorities etc.

Now, if biometric authentication becomes the norm, how will a wife suffering domestic abuse justify using a password?
Sojwal is certainly a disgraceful racist, but in our neo-racist culture, it's taboo to say so.
Within the app, sure. But they can’t arbitrarily exfiltrate information from other apps or from your file system since each app is sandboxed.
Yeah, just take your FAANG base pay, and don't add on any of the large bonuses or stock grants. In my experience this holds pretty true for more senior roles, It seems to go down much more sharply as the roles get more junior.
I don't turn all off. But it's a pretty high bar and those I have notification on for are pretty low volume that I typically do want to respond to or be aware of in a timely manner.
Changing the default port takes a lot less effort than finding and using a country-level block list, and is just as effective in cutting down intrusion attempts.
But... surely you could then also use OTR on Discord?
Does this imply something about discoverability without stating it outright, that Facebook Is The Internet for some web surfers?
A bit late but that's what I don't understand, there are discussions around the inflating of the money supply in the tail end but it looks like it's just on target and prior was deflationary. This is making an assumption on the target being correct.
It honestly delights me to see someone correctly point out that churn is a classic example of survival analysis problem.

It's shocking how many data scientist I've known how no idea how to correctly model churn, typically trying to build some predictive model, which is just a more sophisticated extension of first formula in the article.

It's insane how many business problems are really survival analysis problems where you have some hazard function and censored data. In my experience having data scientists that can correctly identify this is very rare (and a great sign of how broken that entire field is right now).
Get an all-33 chair seriously. Every other chair is non-sense. My previous office had 50~ different types of chairs and none of them worked from $100-$15,000. If you don't have the money there are these pieces that come for chairs, and it creates a cup for you to sit on which makes you sit straight.
Why does that app not allow to change an unconfirmed email? This is the design failure, not that it doesn't let it be confirmed right away
There is no solution which isn't equivalent to censorship, because "spam" is just a category of speech.
Is there a phone version of ThinkPads and Brother printers?
Sure, but the phrase "it's a force with a magnitude that is proportional to the mass" is like me asking "how heavy are you?" and you replying "75 liters", expecting me to know that humans are basically the density of water.

I don't see how. A "force between two bodies with a magnitude proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the displacement between them" seems no different in principle from a "force between two bodies with a magnitude proportional to the product of their electric charges and the inversely proportional to the square of the displacement between them".

My point is that it really seems like "gravity" is not a force, it's an acceleration, but there is something you could call "force due to gravity" that you reverse-engineer from the known acceleration, and that means you need to multiply by the mass. Clearly different masses will just cancel, so the resulting acceleration is the same.

We're talking Newtonian physics, a model of the world where an acceleration is the result of an unbalanced force applied to a mass. You don't have to "reverse-engineer it from the known acceleration", you can calculate it as Gm₁m₂/r².

I'm fine with saying "force due to gravity" or even "gravitational force". Which is what you're describing in your first sentence, and I have no disagreement with that. "Force of gravity" starts to sound a little off, and I bet if I ask "what is gravity at Earth's surface?" I'll get back "9.8 m/s^2", which is an acceleration not a force.

You can equally describe the magnitude of the gravitational field as 9.8 Nkg⁻¹.
Yes. I don't expect anyone can simulate that at real-time speed though (unless they take a lot of shortcuts, e.g. simulating at a higher level, which becomes a bit pointless).
This is a big reason for Trump’s appeal - being able to rally behind someone who can so effectively withstand constant derision from all directions. Moreover, the apologists on this site and elsewhere will continue to excuse this behavior until they are backed into a corner and enclosed into a tomb of their own making.
I have a custom domain that uses Gmail as its mail provider (for legacy reasons related to the other users of this domain), and my Gmail account is configured to never mark anything as spam and to forward everything to Fastmail. This means that no matter what I do with my email, I can log into the gmail account and see every email I've received for years sitting in my inbox.

I don't really recommend this setup, I'd really prefer to cut Google out of the path entirely, but I can't do that without abandoning my email address.