skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Never really understood the vilification of companies that are following the rules.

Your statement is based on a false axiom. Much of the ire is at companies not following the rules. It's just really really hard to untangle all of the shells and subsidiaries and internal transfers of a modern medium-or-larger corporation, so even when they do get caught they end up paying pennies on the dollar of what they owe. Or nothing. Did you hear the news this week about a certain Mr. Trump, who paid zero taxes on hundreds of millions of dollars of forgiven loans (i.e. gifts)?

But hey, let's pretend for the sake of argument everyone does play by the rules. Does that make everything OK? Of course not. Those rules are a sociopolitical construct, and do you know who has an outsize influence on what those rules are? Why, the very same corporate "persons" they apply to! From lobbying to regulatory capture to the "revolving door" to outright graft, corporations use their assets to secure laws more favorable to them than any of us mere humans could get. And they make a great return on that investment. Several hundred percent minimum IIRC. Most of it's legal (true graft is only a tiny fraction of it) but that doesn't make it OK.
Good thing gold doesn't shrink.
If China ever bans FB in Hong Kong, will that be the single largest drop in users in a single day for FB?
WSJ has pretty biased opinion section though where they have almost no standards.
> “Isn't it worth investigating why? What did he do to be worth this salary?”

No, it really, really isn’t. The FBI already did and found nothing worth prosecuting. There is no reason to even loosely speculate it has a connection to Joe Biden.

It is a 100% non-story, period. Unless some vast new source of information was obtained, there is nothing in it.

“This info contains no wrongdoing and no indication of Joe Biden being involved” is not at all valid pretext for “but shouldn’t it be investigated?”

If that were true, all possible facts that are ever gathered showing no wrongdoing would be justification for constant investigation. Every time someone with noteworthy parents spouted off some immature nonsense, it would be the pretext for never ending persecution by investigation.

This situation truly, truly is not noteworthy. Hunter Biden did some business deals and ran his mouth. In doing so, there is no evidence of anything questionable or illegal. Why would go around opening up big investigations into pieces of information that don’t prove, corroborate or even suggest wrongdoing?
What's more interesting is that the sum is periodic.
Or how wings work.
The "under God" was added after the fact: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance#Addition_...
Nobody answered the first time
Very nice. I use some very expensive cad packages and for training and certain applications i think this is better. In my opinion you hit a home run. Nice job
>Also it's a just a little unrealistic to expect something that will have taped out 6 to 9 months ago to have extensions that aren't even at draft 1.0 status yet, let alone ratified. Any chip with those is going to be 18 to 24 months away.

This was based on SiFive's recent announcements.

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200914005108/en/SiF...

Together with claims earlier this year that there'd be some ratified V (a 1.0 draft?) by September and they'd have chips ready pretty much immediately.

What I understand at this point is that this simply hasn't happened, but I do not know the specifics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O'Neill_cylinder

These are possible (if not remotely practical) with our current level of materials science and solve for both the gravity and cosmic ray/radiation issues. There's lots of other designs that should go larger, but require further advancements in things like carbon nanotubes, etc. to be possible.

As for why it would be better - control. No worries about pollution. No worries about earthquakes, volcanoes, or other natural disasters. No droughts, no hurricanes, no tornadoes.

No one is talking about living on space stations like the ISS - we're talking about building purpose built large scale structures that are designed from the ground. And these aren't things that are the realm of science fiction authors and futurists with no grounding in reality or physics - they're things that have been and continue to be seriously researched by NASA and other space agencies.
"Like riding a rollercoaster in VR"
Very succinct
That hasn’t worked recently. Look at NPR. It’s been captured.
I disagree. See the latest GDP report.
What does creating a PR even need in terms of functionality? It's effectively nothing more than a big HTML form with some inputs, something that's been around and working perfectly fine in browsers for decades.

The other comment here about how it's like complaining it does not work in IE6 is really pertinent: Yes it damn well should, because I should not need the latest technology just to do something that would've been perfectly possible with the technology of TWO DECADES AGO. It should be entirely possible to use GitHub with a text-based browser because none of its interactions require anything more than that.

It's sad that I could probably write a more accessible interface in less time and resources, and I haven't even done much in the way of web development, yet dedicated web-developers with uninhibited trendchasing mentality will fuck it up so badly with this constant need for useless breaking changes.

Seriously, fuck this "modern" bullshit.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23136688

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19664509

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18486124
Thank you for the clarification, I'd note this is a bad analogy but the edit window seems to have passed.
> It's far too easy to chase that high from app to app, method to method.

Likewise for languages and frameworks.
Or how reentry heating is apparently caused mostly by friction. (Compression of air is the main cause in actuality)
I think Section 230 is a distraction from the real issue.

Here's the crux:

Q) Can AT&T censor texts or cut service if an AT&T employee gets triggered by the content of speech?

A) Not just no, but hell no.

The same applies to Twitter for precisely all the same reasons.
A problem is that public figures don't make a difference between scientific theories based on how likely they are to be valid. They just take some theory, say it is "science" and then go on with "science is on my side!". This abuse of science is why we have so many science denialists today. And not just on the right side, so many on the left denies things like biological factors of IQ.
Tools for learning Hoon, the language that runs Urbit
Except, the GDP is up 33%?
Why Are We Living in a Golden Age of Historical Fiction? (2019)
keeping in mind that was in 2004 and a bunch of further research has happened.
I still don't trust giant tech companies with my data. Google is just a good choice among others.
Only 1 set of ‘primary’ colors
NOIA Pre-Launches Network with 500 Locations, 150 Providers
Kind of unfair that you didn't include the `else` or the braces in your version, just to make it look shorter.
I have sorrow and compassion for all humans who have had a hard life, but I don't feel any obligations either to or from my ancestors.

I was questioning your assertion that centuries of "terrible lives" (which, to me, seems a regression for most) would be an acceptable price to pay for "better times" later on. Compared to the past 1000 years where life has, in the main, improved gradually generation after generation, I feel this assertion at least deserves to be questioned.
Even if you buy a DVD, you are still licensing the content. All that you own is the physical DVD.
The argument that less advanced societies are more racist or acceptive of racism, strongly supports the claim you are dismissing.
It's been about one and a half "11 year" cycles since this was published. Here's a recent paper from the same group, which covers those years: https://www.mps.mpg.de/solar-cycle-25-has-begun?c=2169

My reading is the most recent cycle was relatively "tame" but I would love for an expert to weigh in.
I hate to see this, as I've been following Glenn since the Snowden affair and remember the start of The Intercept. But what strikes me is that this is the difference between being a founder, and being an owner. An owner, of even a (non-trivial) minority percentage, would have had a very different relationship with the editors and would have had significant influence on the publication's policies.
Every time I tell people I don't watch TV, they immediately ask me what I do, as if watching TV is the only thing to do.
Those two deserve each other.
The US is one of the most democratic nations on Earth.

The NSA spies on its own citizens, and won't even tell congress how.

https://ca.reuters.com/article/ctech-us-usa-security-congres...

The CBP is buying location data on US citizens, tracking them without a warrant, country wide (not just at borders), and won't say why/how:

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/dems-call-for-cbp-location-data-in...

Police, the FBI, and more use stingrays without warrants. The NSA works extensively to destroy encryption, and even have back doors into products for full, unlimited, real-time breaking of encryption.

I could post endless stories about this. Different US agencies, different data, different purposes for that data.

Put them all together.

Now consider that some of these agencies are "fighting" with democratically elected officials. Refusing to comply with democratically elected senators, congressmen, officials. State officials have even less sway.

This data is quite simply too powerful to be in anyone's hands. Literally, too powerful.
Netlify Background Functions
If you only care about the creator's cut, sending them the cost of one month of premium directly would vastly outweigh any loss from your use of adblock. It's probably not even a dollar, across all the time you've watched their videos.

Now, does youtube also deserve a cut? Probably, that's up to you. I'm just tired of the guilt trips.
> Why can't a print magazine do that, but a website can? Did 230 say anything about why those are treated differently?

The law itself doesn't, because laws generally don't. The discussions around the law offered a number of reasons; one basic deontological idea, as I recall, was that a website moderating user content was functionally more like a choosing which third-party publications to offer than actually publishing. But probably the more significant argument was consequentialist, that if companies were liable for everything if they tried to moderate at all, the into viable large scale sites would be completely unmoderated, with no attempt to preemptively identify illegal and offensive content. And that's why it was included as part of the Communications Decency Act.
Vega-Lite: A Grammar of Interactive Graphics
If behavior is just the aggregate of individual actions, and actions are an output of (the black box that is) the brain, and the brain is an output of genes, then why shouldn't behavior be selected for?
Greenwald writes:

> it is clear to me that the trove of documents from Hunter Biden’s emails has been verified in ways quite similar to those.

and then he doesn’t really explain how he came to this conclusion or the specific ways that it has been verified - he just asserts that others have verified it, and he trusts them.
> "non-binding, virtue-signaling nonsense" is a politician's wet dream. If it made the US look good without actually requiring them to do anything, why did Trump withdraw? Do you even logic?

This is the problem, you value appearances over reality.

> In that case, make sure you go out and vote.

No problem, already voted for Trump.

> You can help MAGA by voting out the buffoon currently leading that nation. As a bonus, a republican party without Trump and the white supremacists he emboldened would be a party more people will find palatable.

Oh no! Emboldening muh white supremacists, aka literally nothing. I think you're consuming far too much biased media from wherever you are in the world. If you're looking for problems in the US currently, look no further than the endless looting and rioting by left-wing agitators, not some bogeyman white supremacist lurking about.

> would be a party more people will find palatable.

You mean a party which a Democrat would find palatable, no thanks. I had no love for Republicans until Trump came along. The best part about Trump is that he doesn't simply bend over whenever met with criticism. I recall Bush, McCain, Romney all being called Nazis at some point. These attacks no longer hold any meaning.

On another note, it would be nice if foreigners like you would stop trying to influence the US election.
That traits of human physiology are heritable binaries.

https://udel.edu/~mcdonald/mythintro.html
>(and hopefully never will be)

Do you have a rationale for this? I understand that:

* The unix platform standard is a relatively fat selection of extensions already.

* The nature of V's flexible width allows it to be implemented in very small scale to very large scale, so it would have little impact on the complexity of the minimum platform, while allowing great benefits as it scales up to larger platforms.
Not in the minority at all. Problem is that it's hard to get your rear in gear for something so far away in many people's lives.
Thanks! If you already have experience building things with cad you probably can build super cool things using this, I can't wait to see it.
How are they a tax dodge? The owners are taxed whenever they try to get cash from the business.

It’s like claiming a house is a tax dodge because the owner isn’t taxed every quarter in the increase in value. In both cases the owner gets taxed when gains are realized.

Corporate income is mostly a way to get incremental cash for govt. But the tax comes gets paid by stocks, effectively taxing pensions, 401ks, etc., without people thinking about it.

As a way to check it, there’s academic papers demonstrating every dollar held by a company is matched in market cap - company loses X in cash, market cap drops X.

So the company isn’t really paying - it’s shareholders that pay. They ultimately lost the value.
Personal information under these laws are defined as:

age, name, ID numbers, income, ethnic origin, or blood type;
opinions, evaluations, comments, social status, or disciplinary actions; and
employee files, credit records, loan records, medical records, existence of a dispute between a consumer and a merchant, intentions (for example, to acquire goods or services, or change jobs).

How does video of people passing by meet such a definition?
It is like an anchor because the main ill you have claimed is that someone will lose reach to a large audience- and TV anchors show that we have no right to reach the audience enjoyed by a platform in at least that medium. Why do we need legal protection to ensure we can reach the audience enjoyed by Twitter? Why is reaching out to journalists via phone and email insufficient? Can the public not be informed by someone's website? Is it a question of degree and size?
Sorry about your wife. It sucks to go through with that. Let me give you the other side of the story.

My father is slowly succumbing due to frontal-temporal dementia. In the span of 10 years he's gone from a social, independent man to a an extremely mentally challenged man with cognitive capacity of a 1 year old child. He is prone to ever increasing psychotic fits of violence and actual epileptic fits. Medication helps but they bring their own challenging behaviors. His body is still physically strong. He can still run if he so pleases. He has no problems getting into bed and standing but he needs help 24/7 with every single daily task. He cannot use the bathroom well so several times a day there is pee and poo to clean either from a diaper or the floor. Giving him a bath or shower is a delicate dance that 9/10 times is no problem but once in a while he can come out swinging. He has physically struck in the face, bit, headbutted, scratched and kicked all of us during these episodes.

My mom alone cannot deal with him. I, have to sometimes physically restrain him using quite a bit of my strength, in a way that doesn't hurt him. I try to read as much as I can about how to approach him as a patient and learn what triggers him, what scares him, how to calm and distract as an attempt to de-escalate these things. There were times when violent events happened multiple times a day, every day for weeks regardless of what the dosages of his meds were. He is also prone to insomnia and sometimes wakes up at 2-3am and refuses to go to bed disrupting my mother and I's sleep multiple times a week.

On top of that, he is completely vulnerable and helpless just like a 1 year old child. It's heartbreaking to have to deal with him when he gets violent. When he gets a full seizure and falls is always a traumatic thing for us. After talks with his neurologist, psychologist etc we put him in a care home.

It's callous to say, but honestly having him at home was simply not worth the cost to the entire rest of the family. As cold as it sounds, I stand by our decision to get him out of our daily lives. Mine and my mom's mental and physical health has taken a huge in the last 5 years. My career has essentially stopped since our whole day pretty much revolved around his care.

Your comment comes off as a bit too one-sided IMO. I know when my mom and I were at our wits end, she on the verge of a mental breakdown, I watching her slowly unwind, felt like a terrible person for even considering putting my father in a care home when I read comments like yours. My story is neither extreme nor unique. Having reached out to other people caring for dementia patients, caretaker fatigue is a real thing. Dealing with violence is common.

Not everyone who considers putting a loved one in a care home is a terrible person.
It's because the user on a website is understood to be representing themselves, not the organization that created the website. The intent of section 230 was to codify this distinction in representation into the law.

On the other hand, a print magazine hires employees to produce a bespoke product sold to the public, so whatever they publish in the magazine is understood to be a representation of the magazine company. In fact, the owner of a website would indeed be liable for posting infringing content if it were understood that the site owner was representing themselves (e.g. if I posted stolen photos from your laptop onto my self-hosted blog).
My grandfather died in one of these facilities earlier this year from COVID. My great grandmother (his mother-in-law) died of a kidney infection in one about 15 years ago.

He had a heart attack in 2019 that crippled him, so he was in a physical rehabilitation facility because he could barely move on his own. He was making progress right up until the pandemic started. No visitation, and then the staff neglected him, which resulted in him developing pneumonia from laying in bed so much. He recovered somewhat, but then the pandemic hit the facility. He died a few weeks later.

I'll miss the time that stubborn man and I spent together. Rest in peace Pépère.

Hopefully by the time my parents are unable to care for themselves I'll be financially well enough off to make sure they never end up somewhere like this unless I truly can't provide the care they need.
On prem will take more time - but kanban and calendar views are on the roadmap.
Don't get your hopes up. All the creative heads at HBO have left and HBO Max is on the way to become way more Netflix like than ever.
Could site owners freely decide who's allowed to post to their site without 230? Seems to me the ability to ban unwanted users would enable a decent degree of moderation without direct control over what's posted. It wouldn't have to be all-or-nothing, you could always give an offending poster the opportunity edit or remove a post to avoid a ban. Would that be a viable way to moderate a community?
The reason I said "at least trust somewhat" instead of just "trust" is because your comment is so predictable and played out that I thought I might be able to save everyone the time. Guess not!
Polestar recalls its newest EV for the second time this month
I didn't see any articles at that link written in the last two years. I did find a more recent one by the same author elsewhere. [0] I'm not sure if I'm allowed to read anything at that site...

[0] https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-1619-pr...
I've stopped caring about institutions' reputations because I don't need them to gatekeep for me anymore.

If I want to read about finance, I can read Matt Levine. If I want to read about law I can read Eugene Volokh. If I want to read about about security I can read Bruce Schneier. In every category I care about, there are writers who are experts who make their expert opinions known without me having to subscribe to the Economist, FT, or the WSJ, all of which are great, all of which I grew up reading.

But I think I'm done with their gatekeeping now, I don't need it.

WaPo and NYT are trash and that was made nakedly obvious in 2016. It's more blatant now than it was then, but I guess if you didn't notice it then, you won't notice it now.
Point #1) Sure you can say email is as important as twitter. Good catch. Although taking my words too literally. But none of the other technology artifacts rank even close. And BTW if Google started censoring emails they'd be in BIG trouble just like Twitter is. Thanks for helping prove my point.

Point #2) Twitter itself is not a news "source". News Networks however ARE. News is reliable on Twitter because you follow only who you trust, and you make the assumption that you're feed isn't being monkeyed with by Twitter. You're out of touch if you don't realize you can get more accurate news faster on Twitter than thru News Networks. Trust me on that. Plus what you get from the networks is all propaganda anyway, and generally not worth my time.
The area is under-explored because AFAIK there is no introduction for someone adept in machine learning to learn the basics with coding projects in for example pytorch and showing how causal inference is bringing added benefit. If you want to advance causality research, lower the barrier to entry just like it has been done with deep learning.
The neat thing about Rails is that going from zero to a running database-backed app is done in a ridiculously few number of keystrokes that invoke quite a bit of under-the-hood magic in terms of routing, form and view scaffolding, etc. Django is kind of similar, in that you don't need to write a ton of code to get a basic app in the browser, but it exposes a bit more of itself as you get going right away, and you need to work a bit connecting things together. As far as mature, large Django and Rails apps – the similarities outweigh the differences, in my opinion. I would recommend doing the basic Rails tutorial, it really doesn't take that much time.
I got that same card (8800GT) and used it for many years, mainly because it was under £200. I think it was just a great deal at the time.

Very likely prices pushed back up after Nvidia grabbed any market share they lost to ATI that caused them to give us a good deal.
The success of Medium has proven that lowering the barrier to write content is extremely valuable. If you're asking people to "work for free" then it should be as easy as possible and not feel like an errand. When you're inspired to write something, you just want to write it and not have the computer get in your way, or else you'll understandably give up. Wikipedia also proved this a couple decades ago.

Also rolling your own wiki is beyond stupid in this day and age. Just import all the MDN articles to MediaWiki. Making a script for this is a one-person weekend project. As I understand it though, Mozilla owns the copyright to all the content and they might shut you down for doing so.
I think we would just integrate with an existing tool for this vs building it ourselves.