skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"To the families and friends of these victims it makes little difference whether the causes were U.S. military action, proxy military forces, the provision of U.S. military supplies or advisors, or other ways, such as economic pressures applied by our nation."

"The U.S. is responsible for between 1 and 1.8 million deaths during the war between the Soviet Union and Afghanistan, by luring the Soviet Union into invading that nation."

"Over the years we have repeatedly heard about the Khmer Rouge’s role in the deaths of millions in Cambodia without any acknowledgement being made this mass killing was made possible by the the U.S. bombing of that nation which destabilized it by death , injuries, hunger and dislocation of its people. So the U.S. bears responsibility not only for the deaths from the bombings but also for those resulting from the activities of the Khmer Rouge – a total of about 2.5 million people. Even when Vietnam latrer invaded Cambodia in 1979 the CIA was still supporting the Khmer Rouge."

"Some people estimate that the number of Cuban forces killed range from 2,000, to 4,000. Another estimate is that 1,800 Cuban forces were killed on an open highway by napalm. This appears to have been a precursor of the Highway of Death in Iraq in 1991 when U.S. forces mercilessly annihilated large numbers of Iraqis on a highway."

"Between 8,000 and 12,000 Nepalese have died since a civil war broke out in 1996. The death rate, according to Foreign Policy in Focus, sharply increased with the arrival of almost 8,400 American M-16 submachine guns (950 rpm) and U.S. advisers. Nepal is 85 percent rural and badly in need of land reform. Not surprisingly 42 % of its people live below the poverty level."

"Yugoslavia was a socialist federation of several republics. Since it refused to be closely tied to the Soviet Union during the Cold War, it gained some suport from the U.S. But when the Soviet Union dissolved, Yugoslavia’s usefulness to the U.S. ended, and the U.S and Germany worked to convert its socialist economy to a capitalist one by a process primarily of dividing and conquering. There were ethnic and religious differences between various parts of Yugoslavia which were manipulated by the U.S. to cause several wars which resulted in the dissolution of that country. From the early 1990s until now Yugoslavia split into several independent nations whose lowered income, along with CIA connivance, has made it a pawn in the hands of capitalist countries. (1) The dissolution of Yugoslavia was caused primarily by the U.S."

"Let us put this in historical perspective: the commemoration of the War to End All Wars acknowledges that 15 million lives were lost in the course of World War I (1914-18)." [But see the 1917-1919 flu pandemic, which may have started in the United States, making the US directly responsible for the deaths of 50 million people.]
I didn't know about this - thank you. I am overdosing on schadenfreude.
Where are you getting those numbers? I am looking at https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ and see only Spain at a higher death per capita of the countries you listed. Even so, I don't think anyone is pointing to the UK and saying they did it right! And the US has a 20% higher per capita death rate than France, which I would call more than "a bit higher."
JavaScript is very dynamic. Here I define a variable with `let` and then change it:

let foo = 10;
eval("fo"+"o = 10");

I could "obfuscate" that eval assignment as much as I like. So you can't completely statically analyse `let` variables.

That said, it's likely you'd end up with perf very close to `const` in a very "hot" part of your code, since a good JIT compiler like V8 will eventually make "assumptions" about your code, and optimise around them, while having (ideally cheap) checks in place to ensure the assumptions continue to hold.
Around the time the phrase "deep learning" came into vogue, the advances were indeed in training deeper networks, not wider. Later on it turned out that shallow wide networks are sufficient for many problems. (Also, it turned out the pre-training tricks that people came up with for training deep networks weren't really necessary either.)
Yeah. Worth noting that the Democrats helped make things significantly worse with the crime bill as well. Nixon and Regan got the ball rolling, but the Clinton admin doubled down on all of it.
Because vote counts in Florida 2000 were a) absurdly close and b) alone would have determined the winner of the election.

Neither is the case here.
Firefox is not a workaround for non-web mobile apps. Lots of them will stop working unless they do cert pinning / have their own CA bundle or simply stop using LE..
Section 230 does not make any difference in a case like this. What section 230 protects them from is failing to take down harmful things.

For taking down harmful things, they are just as liable under 230 as they would have been before 230, namely not liable.
Hey, thanks for taking a look at this! :) I kinda don't seem to understand you question fully, but if you are talking about usage in YT videos, then yes, it's possible starting with Standard license. Let me know if I got it wrong and you meant something else :)
If Kodak is any guide, there's a long list of business opportunities available to a company with knowledge of photography.
Perhaps you’re seeing hegemony that is only there given repetition of certain words and really it’s just people.
I disagree. I think it could use some improvements, but I like it overall.
Hitler used blatant lies, hate, stoke fear and division and used the weapons of liberal democracy and turn them against it to destroy it from within. Contrary to what you say, he didn't took power through violent means. His party was elected to the Reishstag and he was then nominated chancelor. Of course, I don't compare Trumpism to Nazism. We are not there yet. But your argument that giving context to Trumps blalant lies (I hope we agree on the lying part) like twitter do is leading to violence is an absolutist position that is very far from the liberal ideals of the founders.
Like many things in a presidency; this is clearly partially - probably largely - guided by external developments. Sure, the president gets more say that anybody else, but I'm skeptical you can ascribe too much blame (or glory) to the outcomes here; at best you can look at the details, and see if in a given situation (ideally in retrospect) a president made the right choices.

I don't think Trump was tested in this area, and I don't think most wars were trivially the fault of the presidencies they were started in (sure, some exceptions like the most recent iraq may jump to mind). I mean, "just don't participate" is also equivalent to ceding influence to whoever feels like a bit of shelling would do them good, so that's not always a good choice - under the assumption that the US (and world) was well served by some measure of imposed order.

Course, maybe I'm misinterpreting who had agency in those situations - do you think it's largely presidents' at fault for for the post-WWII military engagements?
Globalization transfer middle class jobs/wealth out of America allowing the upper class to gain a larger share of the profit, relying on the state to support the growing lower class but without a large middle class tax base.

Don’t you see the problem here?
I wanted to answer with an angry reply but I decided against it, I would however love a little more context to your comment so I can understand.

What does it mean? Do you think this person is lying about the taste for some nefarious reason? Do you think they have some condition where they feel sweeter drinks as more bitter? Where and when did you last check? What are the differences between the last check and the previous one?
Personally I think we are watching the slow death of the USA. May be from France I am not getting all the subtle details about the situation on the ground but the country seems to be completely divided.

There is almost nothing now that holds America coherent as a country. It has too much variance to form a sensible cluster. It went from a basically almost racially homogeneous, English speaking, Christian - with a lot of flavours I recognise but still - and ideologically united country to a multi racial, multi confessional, and now in some part multilingual with radically opposing views and interests country.

There is more in common on many points between Estonia and Ireland than between California and Arkansas.

Trumpism was not an outlier but an indication of how strong the centrifugal forces became...
but sadly if you do this. The police will keep information of this.
I wish it was more official. I consider myself an engineer 10 years later; understanding what it means and what it takes to ensure properly developed and maintained software over many years, even via multiple teams.
I love to think that it's because 1) nobody else would take them 2) the campaign is out of money so this is the only Four Seasons they could afford.
If you have issues with the ideas or know of similar ideas with different names then let's have it.

But what is it with this mind reading and character lynching?

What could be your motivation and why do you even bother?

> spanktheuser

Oh, nm.

What a shame. You seem like a smart bloke.
> It was incredibly close, so close that we waited for days to figure out who's going to win

We didn't wait for days because it was close; races which were much closer were called much sooner.

We waited because calls are made by projections, which are based on statistical extrapolation, which are sensitive to patterns of comparable comparable ballots, and the high mail in count and partisan divide in mail-in ballot usage made projection much more difficult than it normally is.

> Biden has ~50.6%, if that's not close I don't know what is.

A >3 percentage point margin isn't close by standards that make any sense applied to US Presidential elections.

That said, even if it was particularly close, the bigger point is that that wouldn't be evidence that it wasn't tumultuous, since “tumultuous” isn't in any way opposed to “close”. That it also wasn't particularly close is a secondary issue.
Sticking to just the topic of chaos, let’s attempt to quantify it. At 91%, the turnover in his “A” team is the highest among the last 7 president. At 100%, the turnover of cabinet posts is 20% higher than the next highest, HW Bush’s, which itself 20% higher than Reagan’s which is itself 20% higher than Clinton’s. Bush had the lowest at 20%. [0]

I curious about other documented quantitative measurements of presidential entropy.

As a side note: I disagree with most of what you wrote, but I respect the thought you put into it and your effort and remaining civil.

0 - https://www.brookings.edu/research/tracking-turnover-in-the-...
I applied to PhD programs, all of which should have a stipend and cover tuition. I was very lucky in where I ended up, and while my pay dropped a lot from an industry engineering job, I was still able to live comfortably by my standards for the duration of my degree. I'm now a postdoc, which still pays poorly relative to alternate options, but that's not why I do what I do. It's a privileged position to be in, and likely does constrain my thinking about starting a family, etc. but works well enough for me. Postdocs should be paid more across the board, however.
> perform sexually explicit dances while in revealing dress for the enjoyment of adults

If you interpreted what was done in that movie using this description you're just projecting your own sick fantasies on it. When the girls finally performed for adults, they disapproved of it... a normal movie watcher would also have been a bit shocked (which was the intention of the movie makers) and would not enjoy their dance sexually unless they have a freaking pervert mind.

> because they are being coerced into performing a sexual act

You need to understand that dancing with the supervision of parents and honest adults, all the while given support and freedom to refuse to do anything they or their guardians did not approve, is NOT being coerced into a sexual act. There was no coercion. there was no sexual act. They absolutely did not perform sexual acts or anything close to it. Dancing is NOT a sexual act... if you think it is, you need to seek help.

> I shouldn't have to explain this!

When you start thinking that your own beliefs are so obvious you shouldn't need to explain them, is when you know you're no longer using reason in your arguments.
See also things like Sharepoint
The const keyword also guarantees that once a value is assigned to its slot it won't change in the future.
As a result TurboFan skips loading and checking const slot values slots each time they are accessed (Function Context Specialization)

https://github.com/thlorenz/v8-perf/blob/master/language-fea...
> the Israelis still deny Arabs rights of citizenship

This is an outright lie. About 20% of Israel's citizens are Arabs, and there are Arabs in the Knesset, the Courts, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel#:~:tex....

@dang please don't allow HN to become a platform for spreading absolute lies.
Is breathing truly volitional? I somehow doubt it and even if we can control it at times, it largely defaults to automatic mode. We have the power to modify the automatic mode through practice and the power of habit.

When I was younger I had a really bad experience with practicing breathing exercises, I was doing them unattended by an professional and perhaps excessively. It was a very very bad experience, momentarily I lost the ability to automatic breathing and was either forgetting to inhale or was hyperbentilating. It took about a month to go back to normal and made my life miserable during all that. I’ve since done it in a controlled fashion at a yoga center and the experience is different: one is aware of their breathing but doesn’t attempt to control it for more than one minute and if so perhaps gently for the duration of the exercise. Our brains pick that up and automatic breathing can and does get better
Skimming through this thread, it certainly verges on flame - but I'd just like to remind you all that officially, Biden hasn't won yet. Several (not all) media outlets have called the race, and it sure looks like he will; but the elections haven't yet been certified. With the coming legal challenges, it looks a lot like 2000. Patience.
>Being centrist I can relate to parts of both sides but my experience is they both dislike centrists.

Is Biden not a centrist? He seems to be a right-of-center christian democrat like Merkel for example.
This. The 2008 collapse converted large populations of young, rural and urban middle-class people into wage slaves, while both the Bush and Obama administrations printed money to prop up the financial institutions whose behavior caused the collapse. This propped up the stock market nicely, which kept retireees happy, but inflated away any assets and wage growth younger people might have seen.

The real trick, though, was the MSM and social media using bubbles and doubletalk to convince those angry un-/under-employed urban and rural folks that they should blame each other.

From that, you got the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street and (the angry seeds of) the alt-right and the populist left.
He probably received a lot of votes from liberals like myself who see China as the greatest threat the world is facing today, and were thus forced to vote against our interests (since Biden has a history of being pro-China and even said he would end Trump’s China tariffs during the campaign).
Cf https://covid.observer/per-million/#failed for a more comprehensive list.
To me what this election (as well as the 2016 election) illustrates, is what a poor set of choices we have had.

In no sane world should it have been difficult for the Democrats to defeat Donald Trump in 2016. He had no history in political office, and he lost the popular vote to just about the worst candidate the Democrats could have put up. Had the Democrats put up anyone who was less divisive than Hillary Clinton then we are not where we are today.

Likewise this time around, nobody I have talked to seriously voted for Joe Biden on his own merits. They voted for him because he's not Donald Trump. I have had people tell me they don't care if there is fraud and cheating, it's worth it if Trump is defeated. Put up someone with more genuine appeal and you not only get the "anyone but Trump" vote but you get enough undecided votes that there isn't any room for questioning the result.

We need better candidates who generate real support and appeal other than just not being their opponent. Not sure how to get there.
> "I'm all for preventing the tyranny of the majority, but these features of US government haven't resulted in moderation, they've resulted in tyranny of the minority."

The alternative is effectively disenfranchising rural areas. Remember that whole "no taxation without representation" thing a couple of centuries ago and how badly that turned out? Rural areas are where all the food, agricultural and mineral resources of the United States are produced, not to mention the source of the majority of its armed forces, so trying to disenfranchise them isn't going to end well.

And the minority isn't small either: the last time I checked, even in archetypically left-leaning California, about 1/3 of the vote went to Trump; for the other two west coast states, the tally was closer to 40%.

The answer, of course, is to focus on uniting the nation, not division, even if it means not all the changes people want happen as quickly as they would prefer. "Politics is the art of the possible" after all.
As an attorney and technologist, words and code are my stock in trade. So, accuracy in vocabulary and expression is important. If you are here, presumably you are a technologist, and so correctness should be important to you, too.

If we find that the scenario you have described has come to pass, you are more than welcome to come back and hit me over the head with it. However, you should also be able to stand by your own claims, especially when there are mathematical probabilities attached to them.
Thanks for the link.

There was a good post here with a link to all of the meme'ing trump claims of statistical anomalies (benford's law, turnout numbers, president vs senate party differences, etc.). Was going to reply to it but upon submitting it was gone / flagged.
"Trump has been a very effective chaos monkey"

I'm still in shock over how Trump actually managed to get into power. To me, it's still unclear why so many actually voted for him (it woke me up as to how a large percentage of the American electorate actually thinks, and for me that's a worry).

You're right, the chaos Trump's created has seen a paradigm shift in the way politics is carried out everywhere, and that's likely not a bad thing. Often things need to get worse before a wake-up call turns them around for the better. We'll wait and see.

Trump's initial success, the lemming-like addiction to smartphones/Facebook mania, and the swathes and swathes of crazy, mad and irresponsible behaviour I've seen over the last seven or eight months in response to COVID-19 has truly shaken my view of humanity. I used to think we humans were smarter than we actually are.
I am not aboard with this type of "both sides are problematic" thinking.

Only one side denies climate change. Only one side denies medical consensus on vaccines and pandemic prevention techniques. Only one side is okay with mocking a disabled reporter (to pick one egregious example among countless).

Yes, if you're red/republican/conservative/right, you're voting for those things, you're signing off on them.

We don't need to "come together and find common ground" on those issues. We need to figure out how truth and decency lost their footing and slipped off the center stage.
lol probably less than 5% of people actually gave a crap or thought he was from Kenya.

it was more like, "liberal president who wants to do more, pushes through mass healthcare and finance reform without bipartisan support bad"

the narrative that all republicans are racist is way more convenient though, go for that.
Are you trying to suggest that if a news network interviews someone, and that person lies, the network is responsible?
In 100 years we’ll say the same thing when Planet Earth says “it’s not our responsibility to promote the interests of the Mars people”. People just inherently suck.
Despair deaths will be off the charts as people are unable to return to work: we never should have locked down.
I think huge lockdowns would have pissed off his base to a greater degree than it would have reassured wavering conservatives. But just shutting up and making sure that his name was on the stimulus checks would have been enough to see him home.
> if someone wants to live in isolation, then they probably don't care and aren't affected very much by society's policies

Or they care too much, or society has driven them away, or they just don't like the population density, or it's cheaper, or they like the countryside better. See: the increasing number of people moving to the country and the popularity of Musk's Starlink project, indicating that remote people are invested in society.

I think that making the assumption that the people who live closer together have a better handle on how to run the country (society != country) needs a lot of justification. The large fraction of the population that lives less densely should not be disregarded as somehow 'less valuable'.

As I referenced above, the last time we tried to weight the value of different people it didn't turn out to be such a great idea. Skin color (the 3/5ths compromise, if you didn't get the reference) or geographic location, the value of a person or their vote shouldn't be tampered with.
>The founding fathers recognized the dangers of populism and subsequently made sure that the government is a republic.

Yeah, umm... about that...
>why he disagreed with betting markets

Because betting markets are kind of dumb? Nate Silver has uttered those words a few times, anyway.
Fair enough, I addressed that part of your comment too.
Really so what? This obsession with dignity in politics is peasant, like most of them are half ass decent.
That’s correct. This was the only way for the world to pay for WWII and for the US to stem the tide of communism and Stalin’s Russia. Now that the Cold War is over, the US middle class isn’t sure it wants to foot the bill for maintaining this system that no longer seems to provide it much benefit and, in fact, has seemed to harm it. I think the world will see a decent amount of chaos as the US pulls back from protecting global trade routes. Unless all of the other countries of the world want to agree to a global socialistic society, I think the US will likely focus on building back its manufacturing base, opening and maintaining markets for those goods to flow to, reducing the Medicare and Social Security overhead so that this isolationist system can actually survive, and then politics will be focused on traditional values vs progressive ideas. Of course the internet will make this conversation much messier than it used to be in the pre-WWII days.

I’m interested to see how the shifting demographics affect this conversation. The three biggest things that shaped history are demographics, geography, and information flow. Two of these three are going to be significantly different since the last time the US moved towards isolationism.
Wolbachia is one of the most fascinating and scariest life forms on earth
http://archive.is/bNzgY
Apple isn’t claiming to have adopted it. The author is.
That isn't a consequence of globalization. I don't want to downplay the seriousness of this, because I agree that is a problem, but not one caused by globalization, but rather NIMBYism. And this goes into my point about security and government.
About 4 orders of magnitude fewer than have died from COVID this year.
It's up to Biden because this is the hand he's been dealt. He doesn't get to cry "no fair, Trump should have done this" and sit on his hands.