skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Refineries, mines, etc. don’t either.
> Nuclear requires a lot of concrete and steel, both sources of carbon emissions

Alternative sources of energy also require materials to produce them. Natural gas plants require similar amounts of concrete and steel but have lower energy yields. Renewable sources like wind and solar require immense amounts of materials, including heavy metals and other toxic, non-recyclable materials. Because they are far less dense (~50 watts per sq. meter versus 2000-6000 watts per sq. meter from nuclear), they have a substantially greater environmental impact.

> As for the "efficiency" of hydrogen, the only efficiency that matters is economic efficiency, and all indications point to hydrogen storage of wind/solar to be more economically efficient than nuclear.

Solar and wind are heavily subsidized, at least in the United States, while nuclear is subject to expensive and arbitrary regulatory burdens. There’s not a level playing field to support the argument that nuclear energy is not economically competitive.

From the perspective of physics, hydrogen is necessarily less efficient than other energy sources. Generating the initial source of electricity to produce the hydrogen has a given level of inefficiency. Then actually producing the hydrogen compounds the amount of energy wasted. Finally, utilizing the hydrogen as an energy source also loses some energy. There’s no scenario where it’s more efficient to use hydrogen as an intermediary than it is to use the original source.
I don't think a scandal will drive Bitcoin from $240 billion to 0. There's enough interest that Bitcoin will retain at least some value even when it's clear that it will never be picked up for general use.

A lot has changed in 10 years. Crypto has gotten worse. Multiple exchanges were hacked, or turned out to be entirely fraudulent. Black markets came and went. ICOs for non-existent and useless products. The discovery that major participants in the system were manipulating coin values and were engaged in multiple types of financial fraud. The uptake of cryptocurrency as the primary means of paying ransoms to hackers who have encrypted your website, database, or computer. Facebook attempting to introduce its own cryptocurrency. The Bitcoin Craze where awareness of bitcoin hit the general public and the techies who got in first exploited the rubes for everything they were worth(and cryptocurrency industry's response to the criticism: they should have known better!?!? That tarnished all cryptocurrency in the eyes of the public and they learned to avoid all of it, not just Bitcoin. That on its own was a fatal blow to the uptake of cryptocurrency in general use, anywhere, and it was only a few months later that Bitcoin started getting removed from e-commerce sites).

All in all, I'm glad I got out when I did.
The statement plucked from his comment was contentious (not anodyne) but reasonable, so you are correct that the widely bandied about snippet was, on its own, extreme. But the full sentence is not adequate context: it was part of a lifetime of behavior, comments, statements, etc. And to be honest he has defended child rape, denying that it is rape at all.

Were there people who didn't care about the issue at hand but just wanted him to go for other reasons who opportunistically seized upon the issue to finally rid themselves of the troublesome monk? Of course, and I have some particular people in mind. But the converse is also very much true. RMS is a complex person and you cannot pull but one thread from the fabric.

> And compare the treatment he gets to other people in position of power.

That's simply whataboutism, not an argument. The rms issue is the rms issue. I would be delighted if you worked on some of the other injustices in the world as well.

RMS has suffered a crippling emotional blow but he will get back on his feet. In these regards rms is hardly unique: he grew up in a community of people very much like him, many of whom routinely make far more shocking statements than he ever did. Leaving that environment for Harvard, and later MIT demonstrated and developed in him an ability to learn, which few apparently can see (and which even fewer possess themselves).
Same. I learned about thorium reactors a few years back from Kirk Sorensen. Purportedly, thorium is safer, readily available, and produces less radioative waste. "Kirk currently serves as the President and Chief Technologist at Flibe Energy..."[1]

1) https://flibe-energy.com/about-us/
I think the case here is songs that are legitimately on YT that they don't want people to download (and avoid ads, etc)
The logic behind the DMCA complaint is that youtube-dl is “marketed … for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a [copyrighted] work” [1], not that it “allows you to download potentially copyrighted material from youtube.”

[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201
My guess would be an inability on the part of those who wanted inconsistent signatures to be a valid reason for throwing out a ballot to show evidence that such a move would prevent widespread fraud, and a significant amount of data on the part of those arguing that signature verification would instead disproportionately throw out qualified ballots filled out by people whose signatures vary sometimes (my certainly does).
You will never get it completely right but at least do something with a true grounding in math aiming for the most precise outcome.

Every vote, in every election, should count for something and not only be a participation point on all other levels than local because you live in a gerrymandered district in Chicago.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webster/Sainte-Lagu%C3%AB_me...
Sounds like you’d prefer Python.
What if your intent is to shift to a time when Youtube doesn't exist?
yah, he lived on a trust fund for the first year. I've wondered why he thought it didn't apply to him. Perhaps, being a student then writer, work was never his inspiration, he had others.
AFAIK the features they're testing are only available to specific partners. I can't be sure, but it isn't obvious how they could go about doing this.
My hypothesis is signature verification where it’s minimally trained individuals doing the comparison seems quite open for inaccuracies. I couldn’t find any large scale studies though looking into this.
You have hand tracking. There's no elbow tracking so full arm IK becomes problematic.

You can still wave your hands and point at things so its more natural than the photo appears.
> They've been around longer than we have and take up more of the planet.

It looks like that to us, because our influence is visible over 80+% of the ground, but there's fungus IN us and covering more surface area than you can see. Imagine anywhere there's water (including from the air and including the oceans), there's fungus over a % of the land and organisms that you can see with a microscope. Fungus influence covers far more of the surface.
Even if the examples in the source code point to the code as deliberately enabling copyright infringement, I thought the DMCA takedown process was for actual copywritten content. Even if they are found, in a napster-like way, to be "illegal", it doesn't seem like a DMCA takedown notice is a valid mechanism to enforce the law here.
I’m 40 and trying to imagine what my signature looked like twenty years ago. Probably rather different.

It would suck to have my vote thrown away because some overworked election worker looks at it for a second and decides the letter P is bent the wrong way compared to the 1999 version.
Counterexample: Large infrastructure projects that take >10 years to build. Big Dig, trains, et cetera. They take so long to build that people only work on a very small number during their career so the ability to learn lessons from one to apply to another is small.

Nuclear plants are in this category.
The first "final" chart pans and zooms wrong. It appears that it pans roughly half the distance that I move the mouse and scrolling to zoom zooms on a point that isn't the mouse.

However the d3fc-zoom chart near the bottom works perfectly.
> when someone says "big tech" it's Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon, not MS

For what it's worth (and this is mostly seperate from your point I guess), most of the time when people say "big tech", they're talking about the negative cultural, political, and economic impacts of those companies. Maybe its not so bad to not be lumped in with Facebook?
How long does the gas cloud last, in various wind conditions?
I get the sense you are expecting a Trump win, correct?
Oh man, I will have to try this. I have a TON of stacks that I made as a kid, would be fun to play around with them in a better environment than SheepShaver.
Most people would call them unemployed.

Calling oneself Founder and CEO doesn't have much, if any, cachet outside of the tech world, since on its own it doesn't mean anything. What matters is what you actually did at the failed company.

You know what a plumber in charge of a plumbing company calls himself?

A plumber.
Stand-up comedy routine about Spreadsheets (2016)
“The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.” —John Gilmore

“The Internet interprets the absence of censorship as wickedness or weakness and attacks it.” —me

Please note that the above two statements do not contradict each other.
Zillow Employees Want to Stay Home WFH
I like the comic.

It's almost like all intelligent life in the universe was put into escape-proof cages.

We need to rage against this! Do it for all the others who can't.
Nothing in that list was "negative". They were all dry factual statements. Tone policing people for being "negative" when they're not is in and of itself quite a negative thing.
We'll never know. This is inherently subjective. Philosophers might suspect zombies...
I think what many are missing when they say youtube-dl was created with the intent to download copyrighted music is, and I quote:

youtube-dl started off as a pet-project (...) all the way back in 2006 (...). It long predates a lot of these “authorized” channels, like distribution networks such as Vevo (2009) or YouTube Music (2015). youtube-dl was never intended to circumvent these, because at the time that it was first released, these channels did not exist or were in inception.
Anybody has a fork on the dark web we can all start using? (tor, i2p, whatever)
And there's 2 million more oil/coal on earth than uranium, quantity wise?

Don't get me wrong, being an informed human being, I'm obviously pro-nuclear but if humanity main energy source become uranium then we will note have enough by the end of the century, at least by the current estimate (more funding will enable to find more uranium but it is an unknown which imply an existential risk).
The solution would be thorium based nuclear reactors which would feed humanity for at least a millennium! But by design they must be less cost effective (how much?) and needs R&D funding today.
It's ripgrep https://github.com/BurntSushi/ripgrep
Have you actually tried that lately? Particularly with a DASH stream? (Not that DASH itself is intended as DRM, but just that it's no longer anywhere near as simple as querying a single URL.)
I doubt there will be many pro-RIAA perspectives here so as someone familiar with their leadership and goals, I might as well add some perspective.

Imagine yourself stumbling upon some incredible technology breakthrough. Let's say, it's some magical script you wrote that automatically improves the efficiency of any container by 70%+. You've worked for years on this specific problem, went broke a couple of times trying to figure it out, and finally struck gold. You form a company, issue that IP to the company, and start getting rich.

Then one day, literally Google comes along and posts your script to some website they own, without your permission. They did this illegally, without your permission, by using this other neat script called gofyourself-dl. You have a problem now. Every is improving their containers or whatever for free. Your company loses revenue every day because why would anyone pay you for tech they can get for free from Google?

What can you do? Sue Google? Good luck with that! No, you would complain to a regulator, which is the only real power (sort of) against that kind of money. You would try and convince that regulator to stop Google from stealing your IP and getting rich from it because it is YOUR IP and YOU should get rich from it. In the meantime, since gofyourself-dl is the way people are stealing your IP, you naturally try to get that taken down because IT IS BEING USED TO STEAL YOUR IP.

Stealing IP is exactly what YouTube is - and has been - doing, for years. There is this weird idea that the major record labels (who fund the RIAA) have unlimited money and are just as evil as blah blah blah, in reality the entire music economy is a minuscule fraction of Google's market cap, power, size, influence, everything, and large tech companies have no real incentive to deal with them in the standard cases because why would an elephant concern itself with an ant.

It sucks to do this to an open source repo, but everything they are saying in this memo is true - this technology is obviously being used to STEAL IP. Its primary focus is the THEFT OF IP. DMCA is a shitty blunt instrument that no one likes, don't for a second think the RIAA is thrilled with that mechanism, but what else are they supposed to do? What would you do if it was someone stealing your proprietary code and posting everywhere after having stolen it from you?
Generally to do that you have to be willing to aggressively pursue your position and be somewhat ok with being unethical, which I doubt will be youtube-dl's position.
We should be wary of it, but we should be more wary of the true alternatives to it.

Not having cheap electricity in America is an existential threat to humanity, not having clean energy is as well.
> In the ordinary course of using YouTube you cannot save copyrighted videos.

On the contrary. Any ordinary use of YouTube (that is, using it to watch videos) necessarily involves making a local copy of the video. That's what you watch.
"Science advances one funeral at a time" - Max Planck
I think you have a good case, if the copyright holder/author is also someone else than the uploader.
Of course the supreme court could force PA to throw out ballots at the eleventh hour on election night.
Here's a quote from the relevant statute: "primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure"

OBS very clearly isn't. youtube-dl arguably is.
An alternative: https://github.com/soimort/you-get
Some 20k Former Camp Detainees Working at Xinjiang Factory Tied to Forced Labor
I'll admit, I spent some time on 8chan both before and after jim Watkins took control. The story behind it all is actually pretty fascinating.

One big thing I did notice though after a hiatus browsing there and going back. Watkins did something to that site.

It was always pretty bad, a lot of the people there were pretty awful, but there wasn't an organized right wing presence pushing Nazi ideals and anti-Holocaust propaganda.

Most of the people there just tended to be misfits who didn't even fit in on 4chan. A lot of people I remember talking to in those early days were pretty normal people who just liked the idea of a censorship free anonymous community.

Don't get me wrong, there were definitely some pretty deplorable people and posts back then, I mean they were the people that got banned from 4chan after all, but it wasn't the same. I even remember a few threads where hotwheels came on and joked around and stuff. Overall it had a more harmless, if a bit sociopathic and hateful, vibe to it.

Fast forward a few years to just a few months before it got shut down, I remembered it existed and went and checked it out again. It was fairly different. Every board got constant spam from white supremacists and Nazis, the content was 99% race baiting type stuff, there was a huge MGTOW presence on there. The hate towards women had sky rocketed. Everyone on there was just angry and totally hateful towards society.

Jim and his son would pop on and off spouting nonsense, the nazis would regularly go unbanned and were allowed free reign.

I'm fairly convinced Jim and Ron purposely led the site that way. Whether by their own decision or maybe even government persuasion.

The fbi had an active presence on there by that point

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20201868

And were even caught out instigating what ended up being and active shooter.

The whole community there and all this saga around it has always kind of fascinated me. The people there came from all places and walks of life with more beliefs and ideals you could shake a stick at.

And it's surprising the kind of actual heartfelt stuff you could find on there filtered between all the shit if you looked.
I don't think saving things is in general a copyright violation?

Knowingly and intentionally obtaining unlicensed content is a violation. Unauthorized redistribution is a violation. Saving and copying things isn't (AFAIK) a violation.
Right, but the client is loading "https://yt-dl.org", which currently does a 302 to https://ytdl-org.github.io but could be updated to point elsewhere even if github is uncooperative.
Humor is just held to higher standards compared to other forums. Most of us can't attain that standard so we don't make humorous comments.
I don't think you'll find universal agreement that python is "coherent, cohesive, well thought out"...
Same here. People make fun of me when I buy DVDs/BRs, but I'm too attached to some classics to take the chance that they'll be censored, removed, modified.
It seems kind of the same to me if the result isn't being distributed again: "I want to view this YouTube video on the airplane when I don't have internet access." (Let's assume no international travel is involved to avoid questions of regional licensing rights.)

YouTube's paid offering in some countries includes this feature on Android and iOS, but for computer users there's no built-in way to do it. Wouldn't it fall within the spirit of the private copying rule for a subscriber to YouTube's paid service to use youtube-dl in this way?
Since the cap is known, that's already baked in. And since the coins are constantly lost, it is de facto deflationary.
A german court ruled youtube's obfuscation of video request signatures is an effective technological protection measure. YoutubeIE._decrypt_signature in youtube_dl/extractor/youtube.py bypasses this.
https://github.com/cryptix/git-remote-ipfs#readme is pretty close, I think
Is this if you already have a basin to pump into? You can't just build pumped hydro anywhere. Do you have a reference you could share?
"The stupid thing is hosting youtube-dl in the Untied States. "

It's not like a million people don't have youtube-dl's source code.

It can be hosted anywhere in the world in a heartbeat, and by now probably has been a thousand times over.
Sure thing Moz' just make sure it works in Chromium.
I don't think Mozilla are playing the long game here, VR in it's current form is not going to get "big". Headsets and three dimensional experiences on 2D planes is not virtual reality, as such I don't think innovation here is well placed. There's no point competing with Oculus, I hate how tied in the FB ecosystem is with Oculus, but Mozilla in it's current form isn't suited to exploring novel ideas to compete with Oculus.

As an engineers passion project, I'm all for it but this will inevitably get dropped.
Unless the RIAA is actually going to take the owner of youtube-dl's domain to court, there's nothing (for now) stopping yt-dl from setting up another development platform of some sort. DMCA takedowns are cause for concern but they're not quite the be all and end all of a dispute.
Owned is the wrong word, then. Possessed is probably a better term.
Most of what I hear about the new one is how incredible the pixel density is, but Facebook account I agree with you on.

Just got a Horizon beta invite today but I'd presumably need to merge my Facebook/Oculus accounts to use it. Instead, I'm thinking about nuking my Facebook account (dating back to 2005) and having to create a fresh one for Oculus useage only when they force me to for the Quest 1 to keep working.

I guess it's now or never, since once the account merge is required I'll have a bunch of real money purchases tied to my Facebook account and can't just up and delete it anymore.
If, for example, you bought a movie and downloaded it to watch on a plane when you can't have access to streaming, why wouldn't it be legal?
> automate the process of bringing women he liked everywhere he went

So what is that exactly? Somehow these women would show up to meetups or something? Or were the sockpuppet accounts 'women'?
Perhaps not coincidentally the same can be said of chemical warfare -- not so great in large scale war, but fairly effective against poor, untrained militia and enforcing order through fear on civilian populations
Ask your state legislature to adopt a new system!

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/

Especially if you live in Michigan, Arizona, Virginia, or North Carolina.
Believe it or not you have to disable the progress bar to speed some things up. Downloads alone are at least 10x faster if you disable progress bar.
Sure, but the URL that needs to be requested is encrypted even if the stream itself is not.
The victims in Rotterham went to the police and were turned away because the police considered what they were reporting to be potentially offensive. You're right that it wasn't exposed by conspiracy nuts, but that's because it was a real thing and the people with flimsy evidence were ignored. That it wasn't exposed by people with flimsy evidence is my point. In a different context and with different laws they would have the circulated the story and it would have gained attention, credibility, and scrutiny. There is a reason why "Grooming gangs" are common in the UK compared to the US. I think the suppression of speech is one of those reasons.

It's basically gaslighting to praise the work of the government by saying "It was exposed by real investigative journalism and law enforcement work". Absolutely not. Multiple victims reported it to the government and were turned away. The government and journalists ignored it for decades. That's hardly "real investigative work". The government and journalists managed to detect the organized rape of hundreds of children after only 30 years!

The other reason to bring up Rotterham is to point out that conspiracies like this aren't purely fantasy. Sometimes the government is involved in the organized rape of children. Prohibiting people from talking about the possibility because you feel their evidence is insufficient is not a trade off I think should be made.
Right, but that's not the heart of the matter.

It's one thing if a tool designed for legitimate archiving use results in incidental violation of copyright.

It's another thing entirely, legally, if a tool is designed for violating copyright. In such case, it doesn't matter if there are also legitimate fair use uses of the tool.

And that's what the README showed: that youtube-dl was built primarily to violate copyright.

EDIT: based on other comments, it turns out the offending evidence was in the unit testing code not the README file, which legally makes it a bit worse than if it had just been in the README file.
Would suggesting a port to web be crazy?
Sort of off-topic but I recall the first time I ran a scan on an atomic force microscope back in the early 90’s. I was totally blown away by the ability to “see” individual atoms.

The whole system was so high tech for its day; including the computer hardware which I think was a Sun workstation. It even had magneto optical drives for storing images and a high resolution color printer for printing images out. Given that I had only used DOS up to this time, it felt like to I had been teleported into the future.