skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's more complicated than that.

For example, rates were lower under Obama and the economy didn't perform as well.

But -- the truth is, presidents just don't matter as much as we think they do when it comes to the economy.
If the tariffs with China are suspended the stock market will probably go up. The trade war with China has been a disaster.
> You are free to [...] make whatever deal you care to.

Again, the problem is specifically that you are not free to make whatever deal you care to, because the counterparty has been permitted to amortize the costs of adversarially designing one particular deal across a large number victims, and consequently is able to refuse to negotiate.
I would expect them to have a team actually doing this in a more principled fashion, instead of Jack Dorsey calling the shot from his ivory tower.
> Clinton was a pragmatist;

Maybe, more significant was that he was ideologically a center-right neoliberal, the same as the dominant faction of the Republican Party at the time he was elected.(but not the same as the right turn the Republican Party took in response.)

> he shifted to a more moderate position after 1994

Not really. Overall policy outcome shifted from what a center-right neoliberal with weakly progressive stands on social issues could agree with a Democratic Congress that was to his left on both economic and social issues on to what athe same President could agree with with a Congress that was slightly to his right on economic issues and far to his right on social issues.

Welfare reform, for instance, may have passed after Republicans took office, but it wasn't Clinton “shifting to a more moderate position”, as it was a major part (though not as significant as health care, on which he was defeated by Democratic defections before Republicans took control) of his 1992 platform.

But the point is, in either case, while you can find excuses for each of the exceptions to the supposed “divided government is normally total gridlock outside of unusual emergencies” idea, the history of divided government has far more exceptions than cases which support the rule.
The US does not prevent wars. It is a cause of most of the wars in modern times. It has done something like 100 military invasions. Toppled countless democratically elected leaders and undermined democracies.

US hegemony is to set be the US, not to serve the world.
@gpm what I’m arguing isn’t for replacing good with perfect. I’m saying these don’t make it to the level of good. They provide no relevant or valuable information to the public.

If weather forecasters were wrong nearly 100% of the time, would they provide value? If a hurricane was approaching and they couldn’t predict probable paths within any margin of error, would they provide any value.
The election boards of each of the 50 States and the District of Columbia do in fact conduct regular audits, and frequently purge voter rolls of registered voters that have been sufficiently inactive as to be suspected of having died or moved out of the state. You may have read about such events in previous months in the national news.

I don’t see why I would care much if there is voting fraud if I can be certain that it did not influence the result. What does it harm me if an election decided by a margin of tens of thousands of votes had some few hundreds or even thousands of illegitimate ballots cast? It’s a tiny amount of noise in a very strong signal. It’s easy for a state to estimate what percentage of the vote could possibly have been fraudulent, and when the signal seems to be at risk of being lost in the noise there is a robust process of signal recovery. But recounts are expensive and a waste of time and resources when they are not needed.
You are being rather demanding, but I'll bite anyway.

When a synchronized clock is accelerated, it will experience time dilation as compared to the stationary clock; they will no longer be synchronized. You might think: ah, I'll just correct for that using relativistic calculations. But you'd be wrong again because Einstein explicitly states that everything in his theory assumes that the speed of light is uniform.

Really, the video does explain all this and more.
Yup, I don't mean to disparage your product but masking third party cookies is not great from a transparency perspective.
Same here in Germany. But everything eventually get handed down from the US to everywhere else due to cultural imperialism. A good thing in this case...
I would love if something like this caught on.

"5% royalties due on profits derived from this product."

So if something is given away free, nothing would be due. But if something were used for profit, part of that profit would have to be paid upstream. And that would be profit for that node which, if used the same license, would have 5% of that trickle upstream.

This could be an automatic process and handled through an open registry. Anyone could take anything, register, and then pay their "taxes". If you wanted to donate anything you made, make that an option also.

Of course there are an infinite amount of "what if" scenarios, but that's the gist of it based on the following philosophy:

No one should need permission to copy anything or profit from anything. But they should share their earnings if they "opt in" to capitalism.
That was blocked for privacy violations. And Twitter allowed discussion of the story, just not hotlinks to the story itself which was publishing stolen private content.
I think this is an advancement of SLA 3D printing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereolithography).
There were already Republican observers in NV (as per state law) and in PA, including Philadelphia. The argument lawyers are making in Philadelphia is basically incoherent. See the excerpts from the court transcript for PA case.
The end of this video[0] explains some of the historic context:

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUS9mM8Xbbw
The sad part is that the popular vote has a much cleaner margin, and going forward this is what medias should report if people want change.
> but you can fix some of the issues, like tracking on the backend to get around ad blockers or by setting up a CNAME record and serve the script from your own domain.

Or maybe just stop trying to come up with new sleazy methods to track people who don't want you to stalk them?
How is their platform on mobile? It's web only, right? Push Notifications? Thanks for the info!
> Just curious, can you Please give some examples of his authoritarian tendencies?

Do you have a source for this question?
From the GOP party platform for 2016 & 2020:

> Our laws and our government’s regulations should recognize marriage as the union of one man and one woman and actively promote married family life as the basis of a stable and prosperous society. For that reason, as explained elsewhere in this platform, we do not accept the Supreme Court’s redefinition of marriage and we urge its reversal, whether through judicial reconsideration or a constitutional amendment returning control over marriage to the states. We oppose government discrimination against businesses or entities which decline to sell items or services to individuals for activities that go against their religious views about such activities.

https://gop.com/platform/renewing-american-values/#Item2

> Traditional marriage and family, based on marriage between one man and one woman, is the foundation for a free society and has for millennia been entrusted with rearing children and instilling cultural values. We condemn the Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Windsor, which wrongly removed the ability of Congress to define marriage policy in federal law. We also condemn the Supreme Court’s lawless ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which in the words of the late Justice Antonin Scalia, was a “judicial Putsch” — full of “silly extravagances” — that reduced “the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Storey to the mystical aphorisms of a fortune cookie.” In Obergefell, five unelected lawyers robbed 320 million Americans of their legitimate constitutional authority to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The Court twisted the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment beyond recognition. To echo Scalia, we dissent. We, therefore, support the appointment of justices and judges who respect the constitutional limits on their power and respect the authority of the states to decide such fundamental social questions.

https://gop.com/platform/we-the-people/#Item4
No it isn't. I'm quite sure you know it isn't.

Being _unable_ to censor the president is what would be anti-democratic. Only in authoritarian regimes would a leader be able to force private companies to spread their message.

In a democratic country, you have the freedom to choose what you want to support and not support.
Yes, the basic human societal unit is the tribe, as evidenced by Dunbar’s number. Within tribes, interconnected extended families used to facilitate the social cohesion. In the US, both the small-scale society and the extended family have been harmed by atomizing and dispersing people for mostly economic reasons.
Six Struggles Surrounding Status
I don't know what the word "plausible" means to you, but to most (and in the dictionary), plausible means "reasonable or probable." If something is unlikely, it is also implausible. It is imaginable, of course, but anything is imaginable.
Thanks for sharing the link! I am targeting to have a external access over next couple of weeks. I will either message you here or you can sign up for the newsletter ;)
There's something upsetting and sad about this approach to the world.
Coke doesn’t tell you that Coke is better. It seeks to link the sight, sound, smell and taste of Coke with things that make you happy. The only thing they say about flavor is that it’s classic - your granddad drank the same stuff.

Many people associate 8oz glass bottles of Coke with Christmas. Fizz commercials are part of the movie theater experience. A happy meal is paired with a Coke.

Pepsi usually has a different message; they used to peddle taste, but usually try to assert that cool people drink Pepsi.
Is it flagged? Mostly, I think people just don't care that much because Benford's law is a curious pattern that applies to some kinds of numbers some of the time, so it's interesting as a first diagnostic of fraud, but without an argument of why it applies to this particular kind of data, and without further investigation of what might be causing the irregularity, it's not a smoking gun by any means.

See also https://www.eipartnership.net/rapid-response/what-the-electi...
That by itself reveals A LOT of meta information that could be used to gauge outcomes and for a campaign to react accordingly. A campaign that knew which voters had returned ballots could look up their party registration and district and then use that for highly targeted voter turnout or suppression on the day of the election. Enough to turn the tide of a close election like this.
That's not true. Regrettably we have the nationally televised words of the president on the matter:

This is a fraud on the American public. This is an embarrassment to our country. We were getting ready to win this election. Frankly, we did win this election. We did win this election. So our goal now is to ensure the integrity for the good of this nation. This is a very big moment. This is a major fraud in our nation. We want the law to be used in a proper manner. So we’ll be going to the US Supreme Court. We want all voting to stop. We don’t want them to find any ballots at four o’clock in the morning and add them to the list. Okay? It’s a very sad moment. To me this is a very sad moment and we will win this. And as far as I’m concerned, we already have won it.

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-2020-elect...
> I think there is a partisan slant that they are not accounting for that includes a "propensity to answer a polling survey in the first place"

They're well aware of that slant, and try their damndest to correct for it. But apparently they just don't have a good model of how large or how volatile that propensity attribute is, and how it relates to political leanings.

I was polled this year. One of the first questions I was asked is if I was answering the call on a landline or on a cell phone. They weight those differently. Also of course my basic demographic info (wage, race, marital status, education level, home ownership status, etc.)

I think your whole comment is correct, but instead of not accounting for the propensity factor, they do... just badly :)

I have no idea what the solution is to this. Maybe there isn't one, and instead we can get a silver-lining effect: If people trust the results of polls less, they're hopefully less likely to think the results are preordained. More voter turnout?
The Constitution of the United States is a document written to preserve co-equal sovereignty of a bunch of states that wanted to be closer to nations than provinces, while avoiding the then-very-apparent risk of centralized absolute governing authority.

The framers of the Constitution didn't get everything right, but it's very useful to keep that perspective in mind when trying to understand the form of the US government.

If you take the perspective of states as sovereign, with federation between them, then the Electoral College starts to make a lot more sense. The goal was to preserve the power of a state in the federal government, as much as to represent the collection of people from all states - both concepts were critical. The idea is that people from the nation deserve representation and that each state (and the people from that state as a sub-population) deserve representation.

If federation of states is a core concept of the subdivision of governing responsibility, then it makes sense to build a system that ensures each state has meaningful weight in the governance of that federation.

None of this is an argument for or against the Electoral College, nor should it be interpreted as arguing for the correctness/effectiveness/righteousness/morality of the institution. It is simply an attempt to share perspective to help understand why the system is the way it is.

As originally defined, the House of Representatives was the only piece of the federal government intended to directly represent the people of the nation. Senators were originally chosen by state legislatures. The Senate was intended to represent the states, not the people directly.

The Electoral College was an intermediary to represent both the states and the people - as a compromise, it has many failings that seem obvious today. There is no federal mandate as to how a state's electors choose to cast their votes. Each state is responsible for regulating its own voting - this includes how people vote and how electors are chosen and how those electors vote. It is mere happenstance that the majority of states have a winner-takes-all allotment strategy for their electors. Maine and Nebraska notably assign their electors proportionally.

It is also interesting to note that the tie-breaking mechanism for an Electoral College tie devolves to the House, not with one vote per representative, but with one vote per state. This is another example of the concept that states are a concept deserving of representation.
I wouldn't rule the GA senator red absolutely until the runoff but it does seem the more likely result to guess at the moment (IMO). Remember if the Senate is even the VP acts as tiebreaker.

Here is a useful chart for anyone wanting to look at historical senate share https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Combined...

On the "change" side I'd throw in I'm interested to see how the FCC commissioners change over the next couple of years and what impact that has on things.

On the "not likely to happen" I never understood how packing the supreme court was supposed to be possible in the first place unless members of the court started dropping like flies all of the sudden.
He said on stage multiple times that he can do whatever he wants thanks to article 2.
Yes. Probably the worst thing about this election for me is that it seems to demonstrate conclusively that 2016 was no aberration, no temporary mass hysteria, no failed experiment in electing a political outsider to “drain the swamp”. This distorted world view of us-vs-them tribalism seems to have totally consumed our political system. Objective reality is dismissed by the majority of the population—most blatantly on the right, but also, increasingly, on the left. Even more shocking to me, highly regarded election data scientists have twice now somehow been blinded to this, releasing poll after poll that fail to capture what is actually happening in the minds of the electorate.

Carl Sagan, in his 1995 book ‘The Demon-Haunted World’, wrote:

> I have a foreboding of an America in my children’s or grandchildren’s time — when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the key manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what’s true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness.

The moment he prophesied now appears to be upon us. I don’t know how we can restore this country to one where people mostly act in good faith and try to base decisions in science and fact. I see so many incredibly compassionate people supporting the most despicable politicians. Right-wingers on Twitter repeating false talking points that the left are trying to destroy the country while tweeting about how proud they are of local youth offering free lawn care to disabled and senior citizens. Left-wingers openly insulting rural and conservative people as the scum of the earth while relentlessly supporting policies intended to improve those same peoples’ lives. How does this happen? What do we have to do—as individuals, as nations, as humans—to get it to stop?
Download the official Messenger application for messaging friends without limits
> because of the above i don't think those two things are comparable at all.

I'm not attempting to compare to them, I'd like to know how the person I was responding to feels about these things. I originally asked "What is your opinion of Alcohol, lower grade stimulates (Caffeine), and pre-processed unnatural addictive substances (pure sugar)?"

I'm not saying to do one thing or another, I'm attempting to ask what that specific person feels about other chemical substances that are in high demand which are also addictive and disproportionately consumed by lower income individuals.
Then why didn't it happen with faithless electors in 2016?
> All the complexity of managing REST calls was simply pushed from the client side to the GraphQL resolution server

That itself is useful. It is much easier to manage complexity on a server that you control in the same datacenter as your DB in a language of your choice than it is in JS with limited bandwidth.
That doesn't mean anything legally either. It's not like you give up your electors when you concede. It's just part of losing gracefully. Technically the only thing that matters is what the electors decide to do.
"America has never elected 4 consecutive 2 term presidents."

This seems like one of those facts that is so arbitrary as to be basically statistical noise. How many times have we had three consecutive 2 term presidents anyway (i.e. an opportunity for the 4th president to be a consecutive 2 term president)?
I wish Hacker News would do the same... Any lie in the name of "sarcasm" which is not explicitly labeled such should be flagged. There is too much of a chance of translation issues not making it clear that the lie is intended for "humor".
Voting in the USA is such a joke for it being a first world country. One would expect blockchain based systems or at least a cryptographically based system to exist. The fact that they don't even have a national voter ID. Like seriously how much does it cost to have one and give it for free to every person? Poorer countries have done so with more success. The calls arguing voter suppression are the dumbest, if you are not smart enough to get a card and vote, then maybe that vote should not count.
Which points to a terrible handling of COVID19 by Trump. Given the low population density of the US, the rate should be similar to other low density areas like e.g. Norway and Finland, yet it is more than 10x higher.

The US has numbers comparable to high density countries with extensive use of public transport. That is just terrible outcomes for a country where everybody drives and live far apart.
It wasn't even that well-intentioned. It was a necessary concession to Southern slaveholders. It's always been anti-majoritarian.
How on earth you got to thinking OP is Tramp supporter?
Based on what I'm seeing, unrestricted real-time social media (with "likes" and "retweets" and easy commenting) appears to have led to serious violence in some parts of the world. Perhaps based on the tendency to amplify rumours, or even bad jokes, until they are widely believed regardless of truth.

In places where it hasn't resulted in obvious violence, it appears to be pushing people towards polarisation and distress, with violence looking plausible if that continues.

We have a real dilemma around this one. It may be that certain forms of "speech" that have emerged in modern society also push people towards violence.
I cannot answer your other comment, but Pirsch won't use cookies. That the CNAME trick doesn't work anymore is not too much of an issue.
Similarly, it was 8 years of "Kenyan man bad" by the right.
I passed no judgment about the effectiveness of Trump's actions.

Just my confidence he was fully aware that the pandemic-affected economy would be an enormous issue (in fact I believe he was hyper-aware...perhaps overly so).
My mistake, it was CNBC[0]

0. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=012BzDoFqiY
And its actually much worse in most of the states that voted for Trump. IIRC MO was +8ish Trump in the polling and ended up +16 in the election
Interesting that in your “nation ruled by cities” ranchers in Wyoming would still have about 50x influence in determining the make up of the US Senate when compared to folks in NYC, SF or LA.
Wow, that's unbelievable. Had no idea people still parroted this BS. Thanks for pointing it out.
I think the events of the past week have really highlighted the divide, or rather the gaping chasm. And it's a gulf that seeks almost impossible to bridge, any time soon at least - it encompasses race, education, financial status, social class, even history.

Trump's actions this week have been utterly shameful. He and his cronies have lied and lied in an organised effort to sow discontent among the huge segment of republicans that appear to believe their every word (regardless of how baseless or ridiculous they may be).

It seems like such a blatant attempt to subvert democracy - the kind of thing we'd expect in a tinpot dictatorship, not the "land of the free". This is not only shameful, but downright dangerous, especially with the level of gun ownership in the US.

As a European, it seemed utterly incomprehensible how he has been able to get away with his actions, inactions and lies over the past few years - and I have not the words to describe how incomprehensible it is that many of his supporters are behind the past week's events.
Right, so the media can crow for four years about Russia, Russia, Russia having overturned the election but a few days of ensuring that ballots are legitimate is to be dismissed without warrant? Fuck outta here.
More People Dipping Toes into Web Monetization
He did one better, by signing the stimulus checks and branding the CDC guideline mailer. If those stimulus checks kept coming, I think he'd have won handily.