skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The Ottoman Empire banned the use of the printing press for 270 years.

"This opposition to the printing press had the obvious consequences for literacy, education, and economic success. In 1800 probably only 2 to 3 percent of the citizens of the Ottoman empire were literate, compared with 60 percent of the adult males and 40 percent of the adult females in England. In the Netherlands and Germany, literacy rates were even higher. The Ottoman lands lagged far behind the European countries with the lowest educational attainment in this period, such as Portugal, where probably only around 20 percent of adults could read and write."

(excerpt from Why Nations Fail)
If face detection defines them as not a person, then things that rely on there being a person in the field of vision will not work for them. (Like the racist soap dispenser that went viral a few years ago)

If face recognition makes the old racist "they all look the same to me" declaration, then peaceful protestors get arrested for looking like criminals.
Leadership qualities: a list of skills to become a good leader
List of the most effective leadership qualities and skills that can make you a great, trustworthy, and confident leader for both your team and your organization.
It's pretty crazy that you can now serve hundreds of thousands of people on less than your grocery bill.
I disagree with the author: tucking away our head from the future is not how we deal with the challenges of such future. We need new perspectives and ideas to cope with the unknown.
While that is likely true, there's value to staking out your position clearly. It reduces speculation and can help you at least claim a side in a fraught conflict that could quickly turn both sides against you.
I think instead of deplatform them, it's trying to force them off onto their own platform.

When racists (or similar "undesirables") share a larger platform they've kinda got to be on their best behaviour, they can't be too obvious instead they've got to be subtler and in doing so they likely attract more people to their cause because susceptible people tip toe in their direction gradually.

If they're all forced out onto their own platforms because of "muh free speech" the users won't tolerate being policed and so the absolute worst comes out and anyone stumbling across the community is going to be repelled fairly quickly.
What about transplants? You don't need to digest everything to be incorporated to you.

I don't know if there are research about one's behavior changing after receiving an organ (but there are anecdotes about it). Considering that many donors are people who suffered transit accidents, some of those caused by impetuous driving...
Not to be confused with Radicale; an Open-Source CalDAV and CardDAV Server

https://radicale.org/3.0.html
Of course they do, they want you to keep racking up fees and interest so you end up paying even more. You'll pay until you're dead.

They don't have programs like this for other loans because they don't need them. If they look at your finances when you apply for a mortgage and think you'll need an income-based program, they don't loan you the money.

If something happens and you can't pay, they can repossess your car or foreclose on your house to get some of their money back that way. For unsecured debt, even if they don't have special programs, you can usually negotiate a settlement if you can't pay the whole thing. They'd rather get something than nothing. And again, you can discharge it in bankruptcy, so that gives them some incentive to work with you. For rent, there are income-based rent assistance programs in every city I'm familiar with, not sure how it is where you are.

We wouldn't need these programs for student debt if you could declare bankruptcy and have the loan discharged that way. It wouldn't be something you would do lightly, but the threat of the possibility would incentivize the banks to make sure that paying the loan is less of a burden than declaring bankruptcy.
Ants store short and long term of their memory on different sides of their brain
Please stop pretending that USA are not a violent country where mass shootings don't happen all the time

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_th...
Just when you thought animated GIFs couldn't get any more annoying!
No, please don't use escape codes in your output. Use the library that is designed for this purpose: terminfo.

Explicit escape codes is problematic when using any terminal that isnt' fully compatible with the xterm control codes, and doesn't allow me to turn those codes off by setting TERM to dumb.

Far too many times have I redirected output from a program to a file only be be bombarded with escape codes, breaking grep and other tools that process the output.

Not to mention the fact that using terminfo is much easier than manually outputting the control codes.
Would your attitude be different if you were agreeing with what he says? I disagree with him but he's absolutely free and welcome to make such blog posts. If you don't like what you read, don't read more. Unfortunately you cannot ask for a refund of your time when reading blog posts.
Key bias is that when you read old stuff and people seem to be well read it appears that way also because canons have shifted so it appears as if they read „more than the literature canon“
Reading this from way above the Arctic circle, I smiled ;-)
Large media outlets like The New York Times were instrumental in convincing the public that Saddam had WMDs and thus justifying the Iraq War. That conflict led to something like a million deaths (and counting), which is 1000x more than all the "Internet forum"- related terrorism put together.

Yet I don't see anyone calling for further control of The New York Times or implementing restrictions on the corporate media.
Imagine a world where you can create a blog and write anything, even discuss ideas against the "status quo". That's the world the OP lives now and he's arguing against it.

The "status quo" in the dark ages was: bigotry, fanaticism, supremacism, conspiratorial theories, anti-science, slavery, and so on. At this time, writing anything against the masses beliefs would lead to persecution and death. People died trying to educate others and at the same time others extremist ideas were born but the society learned to ignore them. The good ideas were victorious.

Remember: On May 10, 1933 around 25,000 books from 34 university towns in Germany were burned! Some of those books were unique, their ideas will never be known by society.

If you go back in time, 50 years, 100 years, 1000 years back, whatever, the society always approved horrendous ideas and few people fought back. You should never trust the "status quo" or the "justice warriors" of the internet, as they could easily be on the wrong side of history. The access to information is the solution not the problem.

In my opinion, asking for censorship shows no respect for the ones that died trying to change the world.
Looks cool. Has anyone actually used it?
All clothes will fall apart from wear, there really isn't a way around it. Some fabrics — such as tweed — are famously long-lasting, but they still wear out eventually.

The best thing you can do is buy quality clothing, take good care of it and repair it when necessary, before it wears out completely. That can extend the life of an item significantly, but not indefinitely.

Buy good quality wool, wool blends, thick cotton twill, heavy selvedge denim and similar fabrics. They're durable and take repairs well. I've never had much luck with hemp, and linen is too fussy for me, but I'm not ruling them out.

If you don't mind synthetic fibers, you can get some very light yet durable clothing. The drawback is that a lot of it will come from outdoor brands and look like it.
Once a month?

Free speech has never been free, some limitations has always existed. So I'm not sure what observable consequences you are talking about.
Another textbook "free speech" hypocrite lecturing what someone with a different opinion should do instead of exercising their free speech.

Consistent with the fact we all know that the noisiest advocates of "free speech" in 2020 think the term simply means far-right/hate speech.
Sure it does.

const ONE = 1;
const MILLION = 1_000_000;

Even without non-whitespace it's a problem:

def foo(arg1,

........arg2,

........arg3)
I've been working on a decentralized discussion platform for the past 2 years or so. My view is that the issues that the OP is concerned about arise from an absence of functioning reputation and trust systems. After all, fake news and conspiracy content proliferates on centralized platforms such as YouTube, Facebook and Twitter.

While these platforms do moderate some of the worst content, they are reluctant and the problem is too large for them to solve. Only a decentralized approach to trust and reputation will scale well enough to regulate decentralized content. I believe it is the decentralized platforms that will solve this problem first - they need to, while the centralized platforms will continue muddle on with half measures.
I just tried it. It doesn't:

Hey Siri, set a timer for 5 minutes. "OK."

Hey Siri, set another timer for 10 minutes. "A timer is already running, do you want to replace it?"
Almost all of these look to be local-level disagreements or semi-organized crime, not radicalized teenagers on 8Chan.
Source? They never hinted anything like that.
To have a truly fair evaluation, you would also need to know all the cases where science has not self-corrected yet.
> Just spare us the long description of how other people are lesser human beings that should have their rights restricted for their own good

That seems like a particularly uncharitable reading of the post. From the article:

> Many of you reading this will not agree with me, and that’s fine. I’m not going to try and change your beliefs with this blog post. Rather, I’m looking to explain why, while I respect that others might have differing opinions, I stopped doing anything that would actively advance a technology whose ethics I question. To put it in other terms: your freedom of speech isn’t my obligation to enable you and give you a platform.

The author isn't advocating making the distributed web illegal? I'm not sure what rights you think they're advocating restricting either? The article simple raises the question of if this technology would on-balance improve or harm society based on the experiences we've had with the web so far and the kind of content that can _already_ be found on IPFS.

The author says it doesn't stack up for them, and so they aren't working on it any longer. They call for others to put more thought into what they work on and how it may be used. Seems pretty reasonable.

By all means, disagree and explain why you think the scales are different than the author. But when you say something like:

> Just spare us the long description of how other people are lesser human beings

I don't know man, you clicked the link to read a personal blog. If simply reading someone's thought process as they come to a different conclusion than yours is such a sufferance for you maybe exercise some of that freedom and don't read it. As it is you're just coming across like a troll.

Hacker news discussion should be of higher quality than that.
I disagree with the author in very strong terms - but only with their premises, not with their conclusions. The conclusions are accurate - if you believe that the ability to censor public discourse is necessary to maintain a stable and desirable society, then of course IPFS and similar projects are counter-productive.

(FWIW it's refreshing to actually see this being argued openly and honestly, instead of the usual "of course we support free speech, but ..." tripe.)

The parade of horribles presented as evidence is not particularly convincing, though, although bias (either way) can make a big difference here. But while we're at it, since the blog post mentioned the Christchurch shooting in 8chan context as an example of the case where censorship would be desirable, I want to talk about the censorship that happened after - specifically, the attempts to take down copies of the terrorist's manifesto that were floating around. NZ apparently had some emergency legal powers to criminalize distribution outright, which is bad enough. But the real mess was Australia; they didn't have any legal pretext to ban it, but there was a strong social consensus - among people who make decisions, anyway - that "somebody ought to do something".

So, the Australian ISPs made a synchronized private effort to censor it, to the point of domain-blocking several large forums where the manifesto was posted and not removed by the local admins (because it didn't violate their lax rules, nor local laws!), while the government caught up on legislation. Effectively, it was a private censorship cartel, and the citizens that didn't like the outcome had no recourse - not even the usual democratic mechanisms to repeal the laws etc, since there were no laws involved. This is the kind of stuff that the present non-decentralized structure of the Internet makes possible, and the inherent power makes it a near certainty that it'll be abused eventually, whether for cynical political suppression or a do-gooder witch hunt. I'd rather take my risks with more decentralization - some parts might stink more than others, but at least I'll have a choice.
I don't understand how using Radicle will free my code as they say in the site.

So,how is using Radicle better than:

1. main repo on https://github.com

2. mirror repo on https://repo.or.cz

3. mirror repo on https://codeberg.org

4. local backup on my device and hard-disk.

peer-to-peer is beautiful concept but note that git is already distributed VCS. you can have many remotes and mirrors. Just that p2p is not necessary here in git and using Radicle doesn't free my Code.
Why do I have to give them my email to even download the client? Is this a product or not?

Sure sounds nice though, hope it turns out. Hope they are considering a web frontend for the network as well.
"Work securely offline"

Is... is that a problem with GitHub that stops you from doing that?
> Take for example a term like “LatinX.” This term has been proposed and is used by certain people, but is extremely unfamiliar and often alienating to Latinos themselves: https://www.vox.com/2020/11/5/21548677/trump-hispanic-vote-l... (“[O]nly 3 percent of US Hispanics actually use it themselves.... The message of the term, however, is that the entire grammatical system of the Spanish language is problematic, which in any other context progressives would recognize as an alienating and insensitive message.”).

For example, here is Hispanic Congressman (D) Ruben Gallego on the subject:
https://twitter.com/rubengallego/status/1324071039085670401?...
This is a good point that I did not think of. Google maintains the paper was not up to their standard. The authors submitted the paper to a conference. And now, one of the author asks MIT Tech Review to not publish it because it is an early draft. Gives some credibility to Google's claim IMO.
So multiple timers only work if I get a HomePod and talk to Siri on that?
Interestingly, they had similar results with just giving mice saline mixture with albumin.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/200615115724.h...

Which sort of indicates that it is not young blood per se that plays the important role, but dilution and removal of "something" that accumulates with age.

Albumin is expensive, at least so far, no one thought about an industrial method to produce large quantities, because there was no demand for them. Aside from price, no ethical problems there.

Also, frequent blood donors tend to be much more healthy. A study from Kuopio, Finland, showed that they are almost immune to heart attacks:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9737556/

Ofc, the question of causality is strong here, no doubt. But maybe - if the body of a blood donor is forced to produce new blood frequently, might this new blood be "healthier" or "younger" in some sense.
The Columbia River is a major route for Coho Salmon. There are highways on both sides of the river from the mouth of the Columbia to hundreds of miles inland. I-80 especially is a heavily trafficked road since it’s one of the few E-W highways through the Cascade range. And this is in a region that has rain the majority of the year. I assume tons of this chemical is being washed into the river each year. I’m not sure what can be done about it. Shut down the highways in Washington and Oregon along the river? Cut a new highway from Boise to Portland through the Cascade range somewhere south of the Columbia? Somehow restrict vehicular traffic along those highways? The cheapest and simplest solution might be to build some sort of catchment system along the roads that collect and cleans all runoff water. It would cost billions, but would be cheaper than building a new highway through the Cascades.
https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/200.html CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor

https://akondrahman.github.io/papers/icse19_slic.pdf The Seven Sins: Security Smells in Infrastructure as Code Scripts

https://opensourceinfra.org/

https://infra.apache.org/

https://wiki.debian.org/ServicesHosting https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DSA#Infrastructure

https://www.jenkins.io/projects/infrastructure/

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25275637 Amnesia – High-Accuracy Data Anonymization

https://www.apereo.org/communities/learning-analytics-initia...

http://khan.github.io/
German EV Market Rockets Above 20% Share in November
Literally nobody uses it as cash. nobody
That's a straw man though, no classification system assigns a "criminal" score. Here's another quote that points out exactly what I was talking about:

“There are two ways that this technology can hurt people,” says Raji who worked with Buolamwini and Gebru on Gender Shades. “One way is by not working: by virtue of having higher error rates for people of color, it puts them at greater risk. The second situation is when it does work—where you have the perfect facial recognition system, but it’s easily weaponized against communities to harass them. It’s a separate and connected conversation.” [0]

[0] https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/06/12/1003482/amazon-s...
Black holes; dad biology; Bulgarian pop cllps; poor ancestors; Covid vaccine exp
Do You Need to Edit Real Estate Garage Door Images? – YouTube
Complete lay person here, so please bear with me if the question is very silly. Can this help the work on Perovskite solar cells [1] by any chance? I ask because it appears AlphaFold has applications in crystallography and (to the lay person) it seems that finding the right crystal structure is key in making a Perovskite solar cell that can last for decades.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perovskite_solar_cell
So let the beatles pocket their billion, and we'll collect most it back at the end of the tax year. How's that?
you don't need to give your email to download the client no.
Has she calculated the oposite alternatives?

They didn't say they shouldn't make them, they said "prioritize energy efficiency".

normal language, that people use

As they said, language changes. Do we want a model that acts like the average person of the last 20 years? Or do we want a model that acts like a person who has just been through 2020?
I think that's also why it makes sense for girls to play with and compete against boys.
Same, but I think a computer might be my first use of a menu.
while not the norm, there are places in Europe where student loans are relatively common, e.g. Norway[0] and Sweden[1].

Just mentioning because I was very surprised when I discovered it, and it offers an interesting alternative on how student loans could work.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_loans_in_Norway

[1] https://www.collegefinancinggroup.com/student-loan-repayment...
Input Events in Qt 6
She wasn't fired, she offered her resignation.
What is wrong with hackingwithswift.com?
Thanks for clearing that up.

There's one more thing not addressed by the RFC: how to check for a particular enum to exist. The way I see it, a new function "enum_exists" would be needed and validating a QCN would become this ugly:

class_exists($qcn) || enum_exists($qcn) || interface_exists($qcn) || trait_exists($qcn)
https://radicle.xyz/downloads.html
>-- Has she calculated the oposite alternatives? People driving to libraries, to search for something?

Driving to the library, that is the alternative to training these models, really?

> -- Ok, basically she is pissed as AI is picking normal language, that people use, and not using the vocabulary that is in vogue on certain political circles. Basically censure, and forced speech.

If you had a model trained on a large corpus of data from the pre civil war southern American states, it would have been deeply racist, and would even view black people as possible property. If you had one that was trained on data from the 1950 it would be less racist but still problematic viewed by people from today.
Is there really something special with today, that removes these kind of concerns with a model trained with current data?

> I think social engineering b.s. should be kept as far away as possible from science. This is turning true ai research into a masquerade to push certain political agendas.

It seems to me that it would be impossible to do any social science research, and specifically any research on racism. With this kind of attitude.

Some of the concerns brought up in the paper seems less consequential than others. Especially the pollution one seems weak to me, that doesn't make it false, and fair enough that is was brought up. I find the racism issue a lot more problematic, and is something I've run up to working on deep learning solutions myself. Even if it worked fine for my group, and most of our customers, that is definitely not fun, and something practitioners should consider when building these things.
What about cars versus trucks? There are a ton of trucks carrying goods traveling alongside the Columbia River on I-80 and WA-14 everyday. Do the cars or trucks traveling those routes pollute the Columbia more?
On which OS/DE?
The issue is with how GitHub (and most PR / CI systems...) relies on stale CI results.

Master/Main changed between the tests running for that PR, and it merging. Why should those test results be considered a useful indicator for what happens after the PR merges anymore?

GitHub does have a setting you can enable to help with this, essentially, when any PR merges, it forces the developer to rebase any open PRs. A huge waste of effort, so nobody turns it in.

There are far better systems out there, e.g. zuul-ci.org which was designed to handle this exact problem at scale. Others have mentioned GitLab merge trains, though I've never used them - so hard to tell if they really solve this :)