skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> just drives sales underground

Yes it does drive sales underground, but it does not just drive sales underground: it likely also reduces drug consumption.

When you make a resource harder to get you decrease the supply, when you decrease the supply, prices tend to go up and access goes down. Despite all the other negative externalities of the drug war (and there are many), I believe there is still a good case to be made that it also makes it harder to obtain dangerous and highly addictive drugs.

Now we may be able to partially legalize these drugs in a way that still makes them hard to get, but then you still have the black market.
Very briefly, secrets should have maximum lifetimes. This is for multiple reasons - someone could be brute-forcing it; algorithms are regularly found to be less secure than initially thought; keys leak over time.

Any secret protecting anything you care about should be rotated. The schedule is dictated by specifics.
In my experience bigger companies seem possibly _more_ prone to a DIY approach than scrappy startup. Especially if there is a 'not built here' mentality.
I think you misunderstood my comment.

They care in the sense that: the whole world burns - China is part of the world - China will burn - their citizens will riot making 1989 look like child's play - the CCP will go up in flames, too. Cynical logic, but logic nonetheless.

They don't care in the "care bear" sense.
This article both points out, and is part of, the problem with American politics.

Candidates are full of hyperbole (Trump takes the cake, no doubt). The people who vote for them, do not agree with them on everything and may not even fully agree with them on anything.

Are we to believe the every Biden voter, agrees with most of his political record? Are we to believe that they don't have any misgivings about his ability to govern? No. It's the same with Trump supporters. They vote for him because they see the slimmest positive difference between what they think he will do and what his opponent will do.

Out in the real world, the majority of people don't magnify the things they disagree on. And they aren't partisan at all. They find common ground and focus on that. But in politics, things have become almost completely partisan. No Republican would ever dare to offer any kind of support for universal healthcare. No Democrat would dare to support stopping illegal immigration. Why is that? Why does the New Yorker fail to see that voters are simply using a risk reward matrix to cast their vote. At any given time the risks and rewards may look or feel different. Publications that boil these issues down to red and blue/black and white/yes and no are doing a great disservice. It just creates more divisiveness.

Recently, I was reading about Reagan's tax reform bills. The first one Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 passed in the Senate 89-11.

The second one, Tax Reform Act of 1986, passed 97-3 in the Senate.

Whether you think those bills were big mistakes or not, what impressed me was that a President was able to produce that much bi-partisan support.

I tend to lean heavily to one side of the political spectrum but I would gladly take some moderate compromises on many issues if it meant a more civil discourse in American politics.
For reference, a pig is 3-10 dogs, more if you're talking about the smallest dogs.
Speculation about the (unknowable) future is how we allocate all resources in the present. A lot of people on HN seem to lump the "buy because price is rising" speculators in with the "buy because Bitcoin will become the foundation of the financial internet" speculators.

Investors who understand Bitcoin's potential do it an indispensable service. They inform the public (through price information) of that which most of the public is unable or unwilling to figure out on their own: that Bitcoin has tremendous potential to change the world and warrants serious attention, both currently for certain people as a hideable, unconfiscateable, transportable, no-third-party-risk store of wealth and in the future for everyone as a transactional currency (and as the cornerstone of the financial internet).
"And especially not philosophy or psychology - only losers who can't cut it in STEM take those courses".

- Me, not all that many years ago
> I find writing like this to be incredibly patronizing. As if people aren't already having polite discussions about politics.

That's like saying it's patronizing to read someone saying "please don't speed" because there's plenty of people not speeding. There's also plenty of people that are doing it, and it's those people that it's aimed at.

> And that is where America is politically today. There are fundamental facts and values we disagree about.

There is benefit in exploring what those are. Just because differences are reconcilable doesn't mean there isn't progress that can be made. There's world of difference in a conversation that is about how "you don't care about children/women" and "we disagree on some fundamentals so can't come to a perfect solution, but perhaps some compromise on specifics is possible, even if neither of us is happy".

> As if people are voting and do not know what they are for and against. The funny part too is that we are at a point where that is least true. Voter's knowledge of their party's policies is at an all time high.

But that's only half of it, it's not always what your group is for or against, but what the other group is for or against. I would hazard a guess that voter's accurate knowledge of the competing party's policies are is at an all time low. Sometimes it's not about what your party will do, as much as what you think they'll keep others from doing, if you honestly believe those others are going to "take all our guns" or the equivalent.

There are fundamental differences, but I don't think they are at the policy level, they are far down and inform policies. I've found little at the political level that I fundamentally disagree with anyone. Usually it's a matter of one or both of us not having good data, and instead going on what we think the data is and how policies should affect it. Nobody wants poor people to be in the streets starving and freezing and sometimes causing crime, but most people don't want to devote so much to that issue that others don't get attention or they can't live their own lives. We're not disagreeing on some help to those people, we're disagreeing on how much help and how much money, and the answer to that is highly dependent on what you think works, why you think people are in that situation, whether they can ever get out of it, etc. Those are beliefs, but I think most people would be willing to reassess what they believe based on data, so they aren't fundamental.
Decriminalization is a sham. It's still a crime, and I don't just mean federally.

Either it's okay to use cocaine or it isn't. If it's actually victimless then no harm was done and it should be legal.
I first got introduced to the concept by his talk, and this implementation here - http://sol.gfxile.net/imgui/ch01.html (latest archive I could find - https://web.archive.org/web/20200428143845/http://sol.gfxile...)

I've did some translations of the above C/C++ code to lua longtime here (actually luajit, as it requires the FFI) - https://github.com/malkia/ufo/blob/master/samples/SDL/imgui/... (simplest example) through https://github.com/malkia/ufo/blob/master/samples/SDL/imgui/... though my hack for C/C++'s __LINE__ macro was

local function GEN_ID()
return CURRENT_LINE()
end

e.g. you basically tie the state to the... ahem.. source code line (you need really something unique). Obviously Dear ImGUI has better approaches there (use the widget's contents, like text/label contents, or add your own with ##).
https://ugliest.app/docs/pages.html
As per the post you are replying to, choice of programming project is, unlike race and religion, not a protected class. It is perfectly legal in the US for a company to discriminate based on it.

A company could also freely and legally discriminate based on whether or not you prefer whole-wheat bread. That's not a protected class. It doesn't matter that whole-wheat bread is legal.
This is a really confusing product for me. Do they really expect laptop manufacturers to spend money on a niche GPU compute workload accelerator? I'd say it's because Intel wants to show something for their GPU-building efforts, but they already did that with Iris Xe IGPUs.

The linked Ars Technica article says it well, "who will benefit enough from an Xe Max-equipped laptop"? I don't see anyone.
Heres my ugliest messageboard. Warning: no filtering, no moderation, no protection against any kind of abuse.

EDIT: new link, new messageboard, slightly harder to break
https://ugliest.app/l/e93dbf19-2cf4-4f6e-82a9-a763bb8fde6f/m...
Cash does work pretty well for money laundering, except that it’s bulky. The $1 billion mentioned in this article would weigh 10,000 kilos and would require a semitrailer to move. And the big problem is that now you have to do something with it. You can’t buy anything worth more than $10k with it, without the government getting paperwork on it, so you’re kind of stuck with it.
From https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio...

When does the right to erasure not apply?

The right to erasure does not apply if processing is necessary for one of the following reasons:

to exercise the right of freedom of expression and information;
to comply with a legal obligation;
for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority;
for archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific research historical research or statistical purposes where erasure is likely to render impossible or seriously impair the achievement of that processing; or
for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims.

The GDPR also specifies two circumstances where the right to erasure will not apply to special category data:

if the processing is necessary for public health purposes in the public interest (eg protecting against serious cross-border threats to health, or ensuring high standards of quality and safety of health care and of medicinal products or medical devices); or
if the processing is necessary for the purposes of preventative or occupational medicine; for the working capacity of an employee; for medical diagnosis; for the provision of health or social care; or for the management of health or social care systems or services.

For more information about special categories of data please see our Guide to the GDPR.
Custom domains are in the backlog :)
But personal possession was also decriminalized so as long as you gave a way to get it then you're technically safe from there.
How School Reopening Plans Affect Back-To-School Shopping
Because heroin is a poison, and the whole "i do what i want with my body" hides the fact that young adult often will just try random stuff just because its available and / or their friends do it. Its not 100% rational free will.
Tell that to Scotland Yard, who have pledged to never publish the Jack The Ripper files.
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2011-sep-20-la-fg-br...
Your site doesn't provide any information about price or features. It just drops a box in front of me to enter my email address - not exactly the most effective way to turn me into a customer. I might give you my email only to find out that the "free" plan is very limited, you lock my data in your garden, and upgrading to a real plan is really expensive.
I see your point but the author of this presentation is speaking to C++ educators and suggesting a line radically different from "let's learn C, and then move on to C++" and giving very practical arguments in favor of such an approach. She doesn't claim people shouldn't learn C.
It's pretty telling that they "SHUT IT DOWN" last night after Trump won Florida.

Now they're conveniently finding hundreds of thousands of ballots in states Trump won, some tranches of which are 100% for Joe Biden.

When Trump prevails in court (as he ultimately will), he needs prosecute the Democratic Party establishment and the "journalists" who conspired to steal this election
I actually love that - it's very personal, fun, loving, something that you've endured and made it happen. Simply love the naming. Just "imgui" is not going to make it, although "imgui" now is mostly associated with exactly "Dear ImGUI".
This is a good first step in reducing suffering for the people of northern Mexico, Colombia, Afghanistan, and other places with brutal cartels supported by American drug users.
Just that it’s a long time for a billion dollars to sit around.
Yes, Panelbear doesn't use tracking cookies, so one of the advantages is that you won't need a cookie banner for it.
The correct response is to change the wording on the ballot so if collected information is used for a crime the organization who leaked it is liable - even if the leak is unintentional (that the leak happened through a zero-day exploit doesn't isn't a defense against the leak)
Can you give us an idea of what kind of samples sizes you are dealing with here, and any adjustments you made for confounding variables and that sort of thing?
Funny you should say that because the Tory election promise for the referendum was that they would give a referendum on the deal they arranged ... so, not "what [they] promised" in a pretty key way.

Also I'm pretty sure they promised not to break the Good Friday Agreement; and it seems clear they don't care.

That aside, the whole point of having a representative democracy was supposed to be that expert politicians could act on the public's behalf in complex arrangements. The vast majority of MPs (including ex-PM May, for example) supported UK staying in the EU ...

Then there's things like how almost all countries have rules requiring a supermajority in any vote leading to major constitutional change ... but the advisory vote of the referendum was passed on the slimmest of margins. If the vote has been "leave with no deal" then the Leave, camp (funded heavily by a Russian oligarch as we now know) would have lost the vote.

The whole point of our UK democracy was supposed to be to allow complex decisions to be made without simplistic populism.

The economic experts, the scientific experts, the political experts, the legal experts ... amongst these groups the consensus was very clearly for remaining in the EU. It was an act of subversion to arrange a referendum with no clear aim (contrary to the election manifesto) in which the population could be swayed with simple lies.

It hasn't even brought the much maligned sovereignty, instead we had an unlawful prorogation of parliament and because of the removal of oversight the current Covid19 crisis has been used to route 100s of £millions to Tory owned corporations under the guise of buying PPE which simply hasn't been delivered (or has and had been deficient ... but that's no surprise, none of these companies were previously PPE suppliers).

What constitutes rationality in a democracy surely is open, fair, and democratic as a first step. It's truthful and forthright. These words do not fit this process at all.

Convincing people through lies to vote against their own interests isn't democracy.

Convince me.

[These views are my own and do not relate to my employment.]
I would say this is true in the vast majority of cases, except where the parties involved are intellectually honest enough to really consider different views. I myself have contributed to other people changing their religious views, and my own personal views on things have drastically changed thanks to discussions with other people.

However, the key thing is that it's not something you can really aim for. If you're in a conversation where both sides are sincere, each sides will eventually learn something from the other and it may or may not happen to be religious or political or something else. But if you go up to a distant coworker, stranger, or someone like that, you're just going to be a bunch of statements that they reject from the get go. So aside from those few exceptions, you're right, people will just disagree and aren't really open to considering different beliefs.
Its even worse when cities use 6000k pure-white LEDs to eke out an extra 2% efficiency. This color temperature shocks the body into thinking it is still daylight, leading to sleep disturbance.
Its a false difference. Most people take mdma for the feeling of happiness, not to get wasted.

Of course you will take a substance for its effect... the real distinction is wether you are addict / overconsuming, or not.
Can We Finally Agree to Ignore Election Forecasts?
If you have this printer, print out this comment and then stuff it under the printer or tape it to the side or something (stuff it in the owners manual, etc.).

Home-office stuff got better when started taping shit to the side or under my printers / monitors / homelab servers. Same deal as a label maker in the data center...
> which is why I keep to a vegan diet

Animals are killed to provide for your vegan diet too, though you can argue they are indirectly killed. And then there is the moral issue of murdering plants and consuming them.

> Minks weren’t meant to live in tiny cages all cramped together

The same goes for plants/vegetation used to feed vegans. Unless you are grazing the great plains like wild buffalo.

> just like raising nothing but corn and killing everything else on farmland will eventually deplete the soil.

What about clearing the land for avocado, almond, etc? Also, do you know what helps replenish the soil? Animals...

> the evidence is all around us that industrial-style

Except that the only way vegan diet works is through industrialized farming/transporting/etc. There are no such things as a vegan homestead. You cannot live harmoniously in nature via a vegan diet. Whereas an omnivore diet can be supported by a homestead.

You can argue industrialized farming is bad. But that's the only kind of farming that can support vegans. An inuit in alaska or a homesteader in vermont cannot survive on locally produced vegan diet.

As a matter of fact, no human can survive in nature on a vegan diet. All humans on a vegan diet would die of starvation/disease in nature. It's why no vegan human society has ever existed.

You can't be against industrialized farming and be for veganism. You have to be one or the other because they are necessarily contradictory of each other. Omnivore can be against industrialized farming because we can survive without it, unlike vegans.
Or, you know, dealing with China...
I agree with some other commenters that these are very pared-back icons, but I don't see that as a bad thing - they might not be quite right to use as-is for many projects, but they're a great starting point that a design system could use to build out from.

If the starting point has too much personality, it becomes very hard to integrate with existing designs and risks making everything using this icon set look like everything else using this icon set.
my 0.02 - We can abstract this advice beyond stack overflow et al.

And apply this advice in the offline world (e.g. workplace).

tl;dr

- Be resourceful (explain what have you tried? What are your expected vs. actual results?)

- Say what (not how) you're trying to do

- Realize you might be asking the question to the wrong place (or person)

- For code, and this is me personally, but I look at _why_ one method may is preferred over another.

- Basic respect (don't flag it urgent), and don't complain

- For example: I forgot my password is urgent for you vs. a system shutdown urgency for sysdmins

- Answers take a while to get. Respect people's time.

- If people don't understand your problem, you may not be describing it properly.
I didn't say that.

Rather, that decriminalizing is good for some, but I'm glad we haven't legalized all of them.
I don't know of any evidence that suggests God exists, but Nature exists, and humans adapt to it.

Facial recognition has an obvious survival advantage to humans. It's a core part of how we decide behaviour. We recognise our family, friends, and foe, and act accordingly.

But writing? It doesn't exist in nature.

What does exist in nature is something similar, of the size, detail and information content of letters and words. These are animals such as birds on trees, in the sky, or on the ground in the distance. They are only a few pixels high, like letters, and their body language tells us a lot. Imagine a couple of crows on a branch 50 feet away. Or a flock of seagulls on the horizon at dusk. What do they tell you? It depends on what they are doing. Are their wings flapping Y shapes, K shapes, or is it a smooth, gliding Y shape? You can tell in an instant what's going on. That's because your brain has this module to analyse their behaviour in real time.
Measure twice, cut once is a good guideline.

I learned desk checking my code (and other people's code) early in my career when computer time was expensive and I had to wait to run my code. I still do a lot of desk checking. I find that process helps me understand the code and data structures better. After a while it becomes second nature, you can learn to "run" code in your head.
“No wonder kids grow up crazy. A cat's cradle is nothing but a bunch of X's between somebody's hands, and little kids look and look and look at all those X's . . ."

"And?"

"No damn cat, and no damn cradle.”
Oh man. No protections against abuse for sure!
well... that was spammed pretty bad in less than 5 minutes. mission aborted.

edit: annnnnnnd it's back!
How is a capitalist monopoly communism? These operating systems are the companies private property, they can do what they want with them.

The only way to prevent them is by abolishing their property and putting them in the public domain.
>but do they ban the private use of facial recognition by individuals on public property? Does failing to specifically ban this constitute authorization?

I bet that would easily be considered unconstitutional by the courts.
No its on the addict / per user.

Its not because almost no one takes heroin and that it kis no one that its not dangerous.

How dumb is that reasoning..
> A few people suggest re-licensing from AGPL back to MIT. Others say going with unlicensed. We'll think about that.

Don't go unlicensed. In most countries it means "all rights reserved". Let alone modifying: no linking, no copying, no distributing, no executing, no nothing.
https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/jo0sj4/dozens_o...

Rampant fraud.
That died quickly, sad. :(
I used to keep mine in the kitchen where I could see my birdfeeder out the window when I was a kid. being in the SE US, we get a lot of migration crossing through and the seasonal variety is awesome.

I started using eBird when my daughter got interested in birds. But I fumble with it too much and went out to Amazon and got a new field guide just for quick access.

I could totally see her in the same scenario you were in :). Mostly now she gets strange looks when she refers to a female red shouldered hawk that hangs around the area as "Emma".
Because the feds allows California - only California - to set stricter standards than the rest of the country. Several other states (5 last I checked but that was 10 years ago) require California standards for all cars in their state. They don't have the option of creating their own standard as the feds haven't given it to them.
This reminds me of my post back in 2017 of a very similar topic - Get eyes in the sky with your Raspberry Pi
- https://blog.alexellis.io/track-flights-with-rpi/

Someone mentioned dit to me today, so I thought I'd stop by. Good post Brian. I haven't actually got mine connected anymore, but still find it fascinating.
I truly want to believe that you just wrote "not found"