skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sure, this is why you shouldn't use these as metrics you care about. Look at sales/signups/etc.
Are you implying that each Californian should count for less than one vote?
2018, so it's been a couple years.
What if a US presidential candidate refuses to concede after an election?
This sucks hardcore. Essentially, Atlassian holds customers with confidentiality requirements for their data hostage - no support after 2024 for on-prem at all.

The key thing to remember is that Atlassian is an Australian company, they are bound to Australian laws, their cloud is not in the legal area of the European Union. For anyone who has sensitive information to store, all Atlassian projects just have died, because the vendor cannot be trusted to not abuse their position any more.

Hopefully alternatives will be rising, it's badly needed (especially given the ... shoddy state of the code/architecture behind Atlassian projects).
The people in those regions you mentioned are largely conservative. By that measure, isn't their issue with the Free-Market system which they prostrate themselves at the altar of? Conservatives also cite laws as being something that should be left up to the states. And they say that marginalized groups should simply move if they don't like the laws of the state they are in. So isn't the system working as they desired since people are leaving places they don't find suitable?
That’s super interesting, I had no idea, but I just meant malloc’ing huge chunks of memory at a time and freeing it all at once.
Those votes were segregated and Trump lost soundly without them. I’m not even sure they’ve been counted yet in PA but reports were that there were only about 500 late ballots.
They'll still fail fairly regularly if you have regular power outages (a reality in many IoT systems). Speaking from experience with several industrial card brands. Also they're as expensive as just buying a USB or even full SSD drive.
I am pretty certain Facebook has the data to crunch very accurate predictions in elections large and small.
Complete BS. The US has unilaterally kneecapped the U.N. and every other international organization capable of facilitating a fair world order. We don’t need the US to build a fair world order, contrary to the neocon ‘Pax Americana’ crap. Honestly I was surprised to see that phrase in a hacker news comment.
So, so often people only hear what they want to hear. From what we've witnessed over recent times, such thinking is so prevalent that it has to be a part of the human condition.
Score Voting is the solution -- give candidates a score from 0-99 and take the highest average score. Works great to decide Olympian Gold/Silver/Bronze medalists. Plus, no vote is wasted, and bicameralism is transcended.
> 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.

Yeah, same here, but that's because we live in progressive bubbles. Dem voters chose Biden over many other candidates that progressives preferred.

> We need better candidates who generate real support and appeal other than just not being their opponent. Not sure how to get there.

You cannot imagine someone actually liking Biden without being soft in the head. And other people cannot imagine someone liking Trump without being racist. But these assumptions prove nothing except lack of imagination.

People need to understand how heterogenous the US is...in every way. We have to regain the ability to see the world from other people's perspectives and extract the grain of truth from those perspectives.
I think its bad for Earthlings because it pollutes the planet and its bad for the people who lost their jobs because they can maybe afford to replace their consumer goods with crap made overseas but not save for retirement and its bad for the people overseas because they work in factories with no labor protections to make stuff for people in other countries that they cannot themselves afford. I think the whole thing is bad but inevitable.
“As we ever were” - I’m not sure what you mean by that. We’ve been involved in the Middle East substantially since oil exploration there started showing results.

Energy independence from the ME is a reliable quality by which the US (and others) will care less about the region. But this also means leaving the regional developed powers to manage the area with greater and greater autonomy (e.g. Israel and SA).

To that end, we are arguably less “involved” today. Our dependence on that oil and our direct action involvement there are directly related.

By the numbers, we are less involved than in, say, 2005 if the US body count is the metric. If civilian deaths are the metric, Iraq’s numbers have fallen off a cliff since 2017 [0]. I would guess the same for Syria but don’t have data at hand.

It’s tough to want it both ways - asking the US to intervene for peace but not spill any blood. If the ME tells us anything, it’s that peace does not come from doing nothing - it is not the region’s default state given the cultural animosities. Stability seems the best chance for civilian peace there. The US is increasingly delegating or abdicating that role to the most friendly options available.

How would you prefer that the trajectory change? More direct “peacekeeping” involvement? Total abandonment while watching a regional death match play out?

[0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/269729/documented-civili...
My point is that Trump was indeed aware of the danger to his election odds that a pandemic-related depression would cause, which is why he opposed lockdowns.

You might disagree with that action, but there's no question he knew (and was motivated by) the threat to his campaign.
On a related note, this was interesting to watch about what happens if a candidate refuses to concede: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZWRhLW7Y8w
It would be a mistake to take some % increase as general approval from a demographic. If the demographic already had very little support prior, all it shows is that wasn't as bad as expected. In this case, Trump's policy having fewer discriminatory outcomes than expected doesn't mean they aren't racist. That's not to offer additional commentary on if him or his policy is racist, but that increase in support doesn't contradict the possibility.
The amount of votes submitted via a given method hasn't changed that methods vulnerability. Given how much money is invested into elections to propel a candidate to victory you can be almost guaranteed that any weakness that could have been exploited has likely already been identified, exploited and patched or is sufficiently difficult prove (i.e it's not ballot based) as to be continue to be used.

i.e the ballot counting system is like iOS and a reliable way of getting fraudualent ballots counted is an iOS sandbox 0day. It's so insanely valuable that everyone is hunting for it and huge resources are deployed to protect it.

On the other hand other attacks like voter suppression, propaganda, social media manipulation are sufficiently hard to prove or patch they continue to be used.
haha, yes you are right, I meant to say "with moderation"
I've had people literally tell me they didn't care if it was Hitler, they would vote for him over Trump.

And they're weren't making a joke, they were dead serious.
Wouldn't you want to look at the Google executive, rather than the full set of employees?

Would you invest in a company that changed CEOs every month week?
If court picks weren't political, political parties wouldn't fight to their last breath for them.
> That right, then, cannot be upheld if half the country believes it's ok to silence the other half.

I don't understand this. Donald Trump can say whatever he wants. Alex Jones can say whatever he wants. Why are you saying that their rights are being trampled? Why paint them as victims? As it happen, the right to speak is not a right to be heard and Trump's supporters can hear him as much as they want. Twitter decided that it would not be through their product.

If I invite a bunch of friends at my place and one of them start spewing hatred and lies, I'll kick him out. He can continue in the street as far as I am concerned. Just not in my house... What right were denied here?

I never heard those arguments a few years back when Fox news used to invite liberals on their show just to cut them in the middle of a sentence because they didn't like what they were saying. It infuriated me alright. But I never went as far as to think it was illegal.

Do you propose that Twitter should be forced by the government not to give context to tweets? It seems that the supreme court disagreed with that idea when they decided that a company cannot be forced to sell a cake to a gay couple.

> What one CAN do and what one SHOULD do are very different things and I think people's pragmatism is blinding them to how this will work out for people 100 years from now.

I completely agree with you. The President of the United States CAN instill doubt into the very heart of democracy using all the cynicism and lies he can muster. But SHOULD he do it? What I am saying is that between the theoretical threats of having a private company exercising its right to manage its products in its own way and the president of a country going for a power grab, the urgency, to me, seems pretty clear.

Let's agree to disagree.
>That line of thinking died a ling time ago.

Hopefully companies go back to it. Hopefully I can have a positive impact and maybe that will cause others to try it.
Yeah, there's a lot of really dumb straw-manning going on.

A good phrase I ran into is "strategic empathy". Like Sun Tzu teaches:

"If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle."

Sadly, humans seem allergic to this kind of thinking. As Orwell writes in "Notes on Nationalism":

"The nationalist does not go on the principle of simply ganging up with the strongest side. On the contrary, having picked his side, he persuades himself that it is the strongest, and is able to stick to his belief even when the facts are overwhelmingly against him. Nationalism is power hunger tempered by self-deception. Every nationalist is capable of the most flagrant dishonesty, but he is also – since he is conscious of serving something bigger than himself – unshakeably certain of being in the right."

The smart (if mistaken) reasons to vote Trump were always trade and the Democratic Party's abandonment of Labor.

And Republicans, on the other hand, who think Biden is a socialist are delusional.

It's possible, though, that people aren't as dumb as they seem. For an individual, pretending not to empathize with the opposition is probably safer in a tribalized society. So perhaps that's what we're really witnessing.
I said that he lost the popular vote.

My point is that many of his 2016 votes were "anyone but Clinton." If he had a more appealing opponent, it wouldn't have been close.
Vietnam was the US standing to a foreign power trying to take over. It is not a war on the nation, but a war on an aggressive faction. Same for Korea really.
They actually weren’t allowed to vote at all.
The number of politicians handling the pandemic badly.
It's probably because so called centrists don't stand for much of anything beyond trying to gain a social edge by pretending they're above it all when they aren't. It's an excuse to attempt to distill belief systems into a very narrow point of view precisely like you've described with the whole "only reason" nonsense. I'd really appreciate it if one could describe why they consider themselves one since it's totally meaningless to me when someone self identifies as a centrist.

Just like in marketing it's all about how you frame a question to a person. Realistically most people share common beliefs at the fundamental level in what they want to see out of the power structures in our society. In other words, the vast majority of people in this country want to improve upon their material conditions. The rest of the circlejerk is just grifting.
Its column-staggered, not ortholinear.
The Trump presidency put a spotlight on the damage that can be done by a combination of:

- Concerted attempts by press and others to create a filter bubbles

- An electorate that's unwilling to look outside their preferred bubbles

Those problems don't go away with a new president. What's the solution? How do we prevent the next election cycle from being worse?
The domain and big words had me expecting a scientific paper; the fact that they jump from topic to topic without driving toward anything or saying how it's connected had me thinking GPT-3; the fact that the conclusion is "we can conclude with this reflection: Breath has patterns. Schemes create behavior. Breath is a behavior. Behavior represents the person. Breath reveals the person." has me thinking it might be some kind of planted article for fake yoga marketers to cite. Maybe I just skimmed too fast and didn't give it a chance.
> For all the negatives of what the US has done with its military since then, they're not a hundredth as bad as what went on before by any objective measure.

I owe that to hundreds of years of human progression and development, not to the US.
> all it shows is that wasn't as bad as expected

Yes.
I'll believe it when it's said and done. As of now, nothing has changed to his day-to-day, his life is continuing on as if the election happens. As everything winds down, and it sets in that he will be vulnerable to the investigations from NY along with loans coming due that he simply can't pay he may lash out. I've felt the interregnum period will be the most dangerous for the country, moreso than the previous 3+ years.
100% but the media is free to project a winner at any time.

I didn’t vote (both candidates were too conservative for me) but I’m deeply suspicious of the results and would like as much verification as possible.
A random third party owning the trust root doesn't help you in any of those situations.
What really saddens me is that both sides recognize this problem in their opposition but never in their side. Or if they do recognize it, it's quickly hand-waved away because when their side does it, it's for the "greater good". The political double standards keep reaching new heights.
I agree that Trump is right that something more needed to be done with China. But like most of what he did, his execution was terrible. His need to take credit and inability to work with anyone wouldn’t let him get out of his own way. Hopefully Biden takes the idea and works with legislation and our allies to put more pressure on China.

Globalization and isolation have two sides, neither of which is all pro or con.
I mean Trump's China tariffs have been paid for by Americans. Because that's how tariffs work.

Have they deterred business with China in favor of moving that business back to America? Or have they just passed the price along to the American consumer?
Great leaders often work entirely from hunches and gut feeling. I think his whole life he did that and so far he got away with it. So along comes COVID and he simply went with his hunch even in the face of an overwhelming amount of contrary scientific and medical evidence.
That has happened in basically every election. Errors in polls tend to be correlated across states. If they were independent, 538 would have been predicting a ~0% chance of Trump winning instead of ~10%.
STOP TEH COUNTS
https://thediplomat.com/2020/09/pentagon-releases-annual-chi...

> Back in reality, it's true [China] could ... sink 15 aircraft carriers [in an hour].

That is unlikely. The Chinese military relies on a combination of overwhelming manpower and tactical positioning, not aircraft superiority and tactical missile deployment (although they are equipping with more and more ballistic missiles). This puts the US at a distinct advantage in almost every conflict with the Chinese military. This includes the South Seas.

The presence of the 5 US carriers* off Singapore has deterred the staged Chinese invasion force for the last few months

https://www.stripes.com/news/pacific/china-sends-two-aircraf... - 3 carriers sent.

2 More were sent by Trump in September (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvgKgLVPckA). .
No one is implying that, that's how it works and is intended to work.
As a dad and an United States citizen, I am proud to call Joe Biden , my president.

When he was sworn in as a senator - after his wife and daughter died in a car accident after he won the seat. He said:
“If in six months or so there’s a conflict between my being a good father and being a good senator, which I hope will not occur, we can always get another senator but they can’t get another father,”

As a father, I understand the feeling. It also shows me he is a fighter, he has always been. We need someone like him to unite us and move us forward.
I was intrigued so I read the page.

"the CIA's Office of the Inspector General which ultimately concluded the allegations were unsupported."

"Webb's series led to three federal investigations, all of which concluded there was no evidence of conspiracy by the CIA or its employees to bring drugs into the United States.

.. sounds to me like it was investigated and nothing turned up?
The electoral college had nothing to do with fraud. It was a check against a misinformed populace, or a candidate that died. Both of those things have been made irrelevant by faithless elector laws. It now serves basically only as a bias towards republicans, as the founders of this country chose to value land over people.
> I realize that these articles are well intentioned, but I really wish the authors would take a more measured approach. My general advice prior to switching to Linux is: use open source applications under your existing operating system first and ensure the distribution works by testing it on the installation media prior to installing it.

They do. From the article:

> Like any serious upgrade, start with making a complete backup of your Windows system. Installing Linux shouldn’t hurt your Windows setup in the least, but I don’t believe in taking chances.

> Two other thoughts: choose Linux for what it is rather than choosing it for what it isn't.

The article is targeted for people who are on Windows 7 and can't run/afford Windows 10 and stuck with an operating system that no longer gets any security updates. That's a given for the target audience from the outset, so we need to keep that context in mind when prioritizing.
The page explains it pretty well:

> So while you’ll probably get better gaming performance from a OneGx1 Pro or GPD Win Max, the Pyra may still be a better option for folks who value hacker-friendly hardware with an emphasis on privacy and software freedom.

If you’re willing to pay the premium for fully open hardware and privacy, then it’s worth it.
Just stick a secondary USB drive in and do your log writes there. Then your SD card won't have the wear and tear.
US hegemony is also called Pax Americana. A global peace that has lasted for an average lifetime now.

Would you prefer China or Russia instead?
Couple of points.

1. The link you provide is indicating there was no voter fraud in the 2016 election not the, 2020 election.

2. As for "widespread" I think we are disagreeing on what it means, in this case you seem to indicate I am talking just about 1000s of people going out and voting multiple times, there are also concerns around counters through some means, providing a different number for the counted whether by introducing false ballots, lying about the number they counted, etc.

For example there was a machine in Detroit that read in 8,000 votes that were listed for Trump as votes for Biden [0] now that could very well be a simple technical error but it indicates how easy it is cause voting totals to not match the reality of the voting.

As for the final rejoinder, I think maybe we are having different opinions in mind as to what we are discussing. For me I fully support having many polling places that are easy to get to for many people in multiple locations and that on election day we should make it as easy as possible for people to vote; however I also think there should be tighter integrity checks on who is voting and on the counting of votes itself.

[0] https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/...
Do you realize how much fucking power is at play here?
Rural areas are not disenfranchised in the House though. If anything they're still over-represented because the House hasn't been allowed to scale with population.
As the author of a far less ambitious hacking-themed platformer (currently in development), this looks flipping sweet. Thematically it reminds me of Rez, in which you also play a digital construct exploring the metaphorically rendered insides of an incipient AI, and Rez is like my favorite game ever. I can't wait to see this new take on the theme. I bet even Tetsuya Mizuguchi himself is watching this with interest.
And? There are/were plenty of GOPers even in "blue" states, and they counted in the PV as well. Further, it is generally not states that "are blue", but rather more urban areas:

* https://www.city-journal.org/html/real-engine-blue-america-1...

> There's a decisive break between Democratic and Republican support at a population density of 800 persons/per square mile.

* https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-04-01/how-the-d...
> There is no democracy on a privately owned platform.

Interesting. Would the right-wing be better off if Twitter were a government-owned entity, thus ensuring that their right to free speech would always allow unfettered access? Would we ever be able to convince them to trust the government enough that that was actually the case? Would they be able to overcome their impulse in favor of privatization over nationalization to allow something like that to happen?
Most would argue that what the right saw as flawed was not based in reality. For example, most terror attacks in the US are conducted by white supremacists[1].

The point is not about trying to prevent other viewpoints, which is obviously bad, but to preserve the rule of law and patch holes in the laws and other customs where they exist. Trump showed where the holes are. I don't think you would be happy if Biden and Democrats started using the same loopholes that Trump and Republicans have been using. By the way, research has shown that conservatives are less likely to be able emphatize with other viewpoints compared to liberals[1].

I want to point out that Trump and the Republican party has taken dishonesty to completely new level in America. The party even came up with a new term to call lies: "alternative fact". Trump has lied more than 20,000 times since taking office.

The issue with the modern Republican party is that they are not going to compromise on anything. It is either their way, or no way. That is not the right way to govern a country. Well, I guess that is the way it is in dictatorships, but I would like to think that most Americans do not want to live in a dictatorship.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/24/us/domestic-terrorist-gro...

[2] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339568853_Empathy_a...
Michael Barbaro: So this winner-take-all system, this is not something envisioned by the framers. It seems like it kind of came to us in a pretty haphazard way.

Jesse Wegman: Right. People like to imagine that the system that we used today was handed down to us from the framers. And in fact, the framers didn’t talk at all about the winner-take-all rule. It didn’t come up at the convention. And when they saw it start to be adopted in the states in the early 1800s, they were horrified. James Madison, the man we think of as the father of the Constitution, tried to pass a constitutional amendment prohibiting the use of winner-take-all rule because he saw how corrosive it was to erase up to half of voters in the state.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/podcasts/the-daily/electo...
What does this have to do with CNBC discontinuing Trump's press conference? Do you think he said something illegal?