skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> What is "fascist" stuff?

Most people have absolutely zero idea what Fascism is/was; they have a Hollywood confabulation in their head, perhaps mixed images of Star Wars and Harry Potter bad guys, anyone in a uniform, etc. Zero historical understanding of what Italy was all about in the early 20th century, no understanding of the modernizations and cleanups Mussolini brought to his country. I would hardly defend his every act, but the idea of nationalism combined with an aesthetic informed by history and myth has proven to be a very powerful one for galvanizing a society into action.

Evola's "Critique of Fascism from the Right" is one very good place to get an understanding of what the underlying ideology of "real fascism" is, separate from the inevitably-flawed implementation. (We don't need to pretend that perfect implementations of anything are possible, of course, and we similarly forgive communists their lack of a proper implementation of their own idea, which at its heart still has the same impetus of improving the state of mankind by changing the structure of civilization.)

Nobody is bringing that back. In a young and multi-cultural country like the USA, the founding mythos is neither powerful enough, aesthetic enough, or common enough to be a driving force for change any longer. There may be small pockets of adherents, but numerically they are insignificant, non-violent, and not worth worrying about in comparison to other drivers of change.

Instead of that specific and mostly-dead political ideology, the word "fascism" has become a standing for "authoritarianism" of any kind - whether it's left-wing, right-wing, or even what I think is more properly labelled as Totalitarian Liberalism, which is the era we are heading into now.

Remember that term: Totalitarian Liberalism. It is only under this system that you're ostensibly free, except everything is controlled by corporations, and people who pretend to be left-wing and "of the people" will defend the rights of billion-dollar corporations to restrict freedoms that were enshrined in law hundreds of years ago.

This action by Youtube is a perfect example of this. Each precedent they set is met by a legion of comments on sites like HN and Reddit that defend their actions, because of course it's only Fake News badthinking idiots that are kicked off. Nobody seems to notice that the scope of control increases each time, slowly but continually restricting free speech on the platform, in concert with efforts to make it more difficult to host things elsewhere, more difficult for locked-down walled-garden devices to be able to access unapproved content, etc.

It takes a real fool to think that this will never be used to suppress something legitimate.
I can’t tell if this is satire — can you clarify your point?
I completely forgot to mention that what I was saying was scoped to the Ads org, which has Angular embedded within it deeply.
I remember the Mueller Report being kind of a big deal...

Dems didn't delay transition of power, but they did spend a huge amount of political capital trying to convince the country that Trump's victory was invalid or fraudulent.
Government censorship, yes. Fortunately, that is not happening here.
Wait whaaat
If only popular business books presented their limited substance in your bulleted format instead of dragging out 20 supporting anecdotes for 200 pages!
No, please read my other comments here—the point is that this thing doesn’t solve anything, but introduces various problems.

The only tenuous claim it can have is that the document is JSON, so if you want to parse the data, maybe you’ll find it easier? But in practice this is not useful: you can already embed or link to a JSON representation in the HTML, and that JSON representation then won’t be constrained by having to embed the renderer, either.

Not all inventions are useful.
What's tricky about it?

Regarding the former situation, the president is one person with clear, self-serving motives. His actions are constantly examined under the critical eyes of the media and his political opposition. The public itself can also use social media to provide additional scrutiny (with varying degrees of quality and professionalism).

The public has to search through garbage to find the truth. It's all easy to access, but there's a lot to go through.

In the prior situation, businesses are trying to denying the public access to provide scrutiny based solely on the content of the message, regardless of quality. Those same businesses also happen to facilitate content discovery for the overwhelming majority of internet users. There are still political opponents and a few media organizations which might broadcast the message, but it will unquestioningly reach a much smaller audience.

The public still has to search through garbage to find the truth. Now, though, some of it is much harder to access.

Neither is good, but the prior situation sounds much worse to me.
Here we have many social platforms effectively colluding and setting common standards for curation.

Concentrated power is scary. I'd agree it's mostly being used for good here...
All praise to our information gatekeepers!
You're absolutely right: it's a massive transfer of wealth from the young, productive class to older people and to commercial landlords. But it can't be changed: it's the "third rail" of California tax policy.
I'm certainly not arguing that. What I'm saying is it's complicated, and we (the people & our governments) need to have a discussion around youtube/facebook/twitter and private companies that are basically used like public utilities. It's not their fault, but the fact is there is no real alternative to yt/fb/twitter unless one wishes to avoid a large part of the human population.

Of course youtube can remove whatever it wants, it's a private company. This doesn't mean that people can't find this objectionable, and it doesn't mean the only argument has to be "well, just use another company/site/provider".

I think people here are -reasonably- concerned about YT censoring particular information and the precedent it sets. In this case you and I might agree with YT's stance. Will we agree the next time YT decides to take a stance and censors a topic?
Space manufacturing startup Varda, incubated at Founders Fund, raises $9M
> But the different divisions don't talk to each other as much as you'd think. Why should they?

Because they are a customer with real world usage?

I don't think anyone is asking for "special access" or "special Google only APIs" or anything like that. However, if the Angular team isn't even looking at how parts of Google themselves are using their framework in out-of-the-box configurations and making the Framework look terrible on performance at scale, then is the Angular team looking at any customer's performance?

Facebook and Microsoft here both make a huge deal of dogfooding one's own frameworks because when you are your own first customer you get a lot of direct, immediate feedback. There are performance characteristics of today's React that we know come from needing to work at Facebook scale. There are performance fixes to Typescript that we see get mentioned that Microsoft internal teams experienced pain points with and let the Typescript team know that a hand would be useful there.

At least from external appearances, almost all of Google's largest scale usages of Angular perform poorly. I don't understand how anyone would want to use Angular knowing that even Google can't get it to perform at scale. That either the Angular team isn't prioritizing performance at scale or the Angular team has built it in such a way that even supposedly smart people "in the office next door" can't figure it out. In neither case does it look good for Angular.

What's the point of even having the Google name behind the Angular brand if Angular isn't taking production performance feedback from Google? (Obviously, it's still good marketing because so many people outside Google are using Angular, sometimes against their own better judgment. But it feels like a bait and switch.)
If you want a bit of reading: https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2019/11/06/early-te...
Using targeted microbubbles to administer toxic cancer drugs
It seems like all modern business books, those released in the last few years, are nothing but a vomit of name drops of famous people and companies and how they do things. I’m sick of hearing about them. I know their stories.
Cloud providers and enterprises are afraid of AGPL being "super-viral" so they'll either pay for the non-AGPL version or not touch the software.
> Unless you are an HNW yourself you aren't going to hear about it.

Like I've been alluding to, I'm at the place where I want to either know about it because I'm in the place to know about it, or push as much money into the imbalance as quickly as possible because I know about it and can convince the people that matter they should care

I think it is fascinating when others do and I like seeing how they think.

I'm not asking for how. Just having a conversation about what I like.
Generally, a company need not be the only one on the market in order to be considered dominant for the purpose of anti-trust laws. Anti-trust laws apply to non-monopolies as well.
Jesus Christ that website runs about 30 more scripts on my computer than it needs to. Under the root domain, no less.

You fell for a honeypot, bud.
I have a raidz2 that I keep everything on: (A) Personal, (B) core media, and (C) all other media.

I backup A and B on a workstation drive, and I further backup A to S3 Glacier for $1/month/100GB, syncing every few months.

It isn't all or nothing, 3-copies vs. striped pool. Mirrors are fine if you have quick access to fix dead drives, but I like the idea of being able to lose any two drives vs. only one drive in a given mirror. And while I currently have a 4 drive RAIDz2 (same disk utilization as a mirror) I wish I had a 4+2 array, which I'll probably build next year.
I feel like Texas is basically California in the 1980s. Back then CA definitely used to vote in Republican governors, etc. San Francisco and downtown LA were surrounded by very Republican suburbs. As they grew into the surrounding suburbs, the voting trends changed.

The "dysfunction" is more likely a function of population density as it is a unique California thing. Watching local Austin news - definitely some familiar problems - gentrification, what to do about the homeless/crime, pollution, desires to raise taxes, traffic.
Cambridge University votes to safeguard free speech
As a Canadian, the republican "side" of politics in the US has made it so that debating with them is no longer necessary.

When the moment arrived that facts were no longer on their side, they chose to alter the perception of reality of their voters instead of changing their behavior. They band together and adopt a narrative which they then spread through the networks which are aligned with them and in other public tools like youtube and twitter.

This is so incredibly successful that the only thing guiding their behavior is a change in polling with their base, rather than any philosophy based on values, convictions or general sense of morality.

Hell yes their outright lies should be banned from places like Youtube. They have no basis in reality and contrary to other types of false information, their information has the single goal of maintaining or increasing their power and delegitimizing democracy in the US.

Now from the point of view of the brainwashed conservatives, people like me are the brainwashed ones. There's pretty much nothing we can say to them to convince them otherwise. We can try and prevent the bad actors from saying the things which lead them down the path to dismissing reality.
I've seen people take apart them on YouTube for silly mods before, should surely be possible? Maybe with a heatgun?
The book of Naval’s thought, tweets and podcasts all in one place:

https://www.navalmanack.com/

Really helped organize and structurize my thoughts on living, investing and managing stressful situations.

2nd book is ‘Direct Truth’ by Kapil Gupta. Really direct, bold and honest answers on big questions we ask ourselves. The book is short but you have to read every conversation few times, because we are programmed differently for some questions and we don’t really know the truth.
Users flagged it. We can only guess why users flag things, but my guess is at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25362819 if anyone cares.
Btw., I understand that with OpenZFS 2 and its new "sequential resilvering" feature ( https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/12/openzfs-2-0-release-... ) rebuilding should be faster or should at least put less pressure on the drives (less random I/O)... .

Edit: sorry, just noticed that this was already mentioned in another subthread.
Credible by repetition only, at this point. They've shown themselves at the same level, and the most self-righteous networks have proven the most hypocritical, and they don't even seem to see it.
Yet another sign that Google has too much power.
Your objection seems to be: I can't move a component from a TW project to a non-TW project, and it would be difficult to combine a TW project and non-TW project. Is that a fair summary?

On the first point, moving a component from one project to another one that use a different CSS framework is sort of a weird thing to do. I've seen cases where people combine Bootstrap with a bunch of random personal styles, but I haven't seen anyone combine Bootstrap with e.g. Material design. ISTM if you're combining projects, you'll get a lot of CSS bloat and unexpected interactions.

On point two, you actually can tell TW to use a prefix, so instead of margin-left/right: auto being "mx-auto" it would be "prefix-mx-auto". Doing that would let you combine TW with another project that used the same class names (though obviously, you're going to have to go back and fix all the class names in an existing component).

TW's niche, ISTM, is for people who want to make small-ish, highly customized sites quickly. I don't you'll be happy with it if you need to integrate with a lot of legacy CSS. I also think if you don't really need custom styles, then you can just use Bootstrap/Material/Bulma/whatever and it will be much simpler than having to make all your buttons yourself or whatever. But for things like isolated landing pages, TW is great because you get an experience that is like writing a new CSS file, but quicker (no need to switch between the HTML and CSS or make up names) and better guided (preset variables for the sizes, colors, and breakpoints).
The "is houdini ready yet?" section is dishonest even though it's factually correct. And this shows that Chrome is the new IE.

If you're not careful, you may come away reading that "is houdini ready yet?" section thinking it's mostly supported by most browsers except for some laggards like Webkit and Firefox. Except that, if you exclude those two, the rest of the browsers displayed in the chart are basically Chrome forks.

Normally in the past, something like this would have been packaged as some "Google experiment", but now their "blink engine" trojan horse has penetrated other browser vendors, they are using that to paint a misleading picture to push their agenda.

Just to be clear, sure this technology is cool, but this is defacto "Google chrome experiment", not a web standard supported by various independent browsers. It's basically Chrome and other small fish browsers that depend on Chrome. Google should stop misleading the public about browser support of whatever they're releasing. It's dishonest.

On the other hand, I really think time is ripe for the next disruption of web browsers.
It is not "one person" it is 75% of one half of the population.
Session cookies don't have to do with whether you stay on the site or not. They are tied to browser processes.
Historically in the US there have been only a handful of cases where voter fraud overturned an election, and it was in small elections with very narrow margins. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, the likes of which will not happen in a GoFundMe. The effort was meant to sow distrust and repeat the weaponized cynicism.
Your stated fact. Assume we are intimately familiar with the various governmental reports, the intelligence agencies, and CrowdStrike.
Yes, it's mostly Florida where New Jersey's pensioners have gone to.
This is the same platform that is the backbone of the information for flat earth and every other conspiracy theory based on ignorance that becomes widespread. But when they decide they don't like people to know about some some legitimate ongoing litigation they take it down.
Ask HN: AWS rejects my request to close my account, is it legal?
In short here is what happened:

- Signed up to AWS and created AWS Organization.

- Created member account in AWS Organization and made a typo in root email domain. Resulting email happened to be on a valid domain I have no control of. There is no validation step when creating member accounts, it is just an API call.

- Decided to stop using AWS and close everything down.

AWS provides one way for customers to stop using AWS service offerings - by closing all AWS accounts. Account closure is done by signing in as root into every account, which for member accounts requires password reset with new password sent to email. Due to typo in a member account email I can't access it.

I've been in contact with AWS Support and basically they said, that because I can't close account, which I created myself, I can't leave and terminate services. They keep me hostage.

Best they could offer is to apply IAM controls to "suspend" everything, but technically accounts have to stay and should AWS introduce new charges for accounts, however unlikely, I'll have to pay.

Not asking for a leagl advice, obviously, wanted to ask is there anything in law you know of which can be used to end this engagement. I could just cancel credit card and be done with it, but it really rubs me the wrong way and I want a clean way out.

I am in Europe.
Decision diagrams in general are really neat (and approachable in many contexts).

My current employer, nextmv (YC W20), has built our solver in Go and it uses decision diagrams[2].

Just today we launched our free cloud platform[0][1] which exposes our fleet routing model via an API. So if you’re curious about modern uses / systems around decision diagrams take a look at our site, app and blog[2].

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25361372

[1] https://cloud.nextmv.io

[2] https://nextmv.io/blog/how-hop-hops/
not as visible as california
One pet peeve I have is getting to prime video. They own primevideo.com, but it just tells you to watch on Amazon. It's also the first result when you search (on google) for amazon prime video. There's no direct url to get it (afaik).
Iridescent snake with shimmering scales discovered in Vietnam
> and be willing to take a whole-page refresh when the user transitions from one page to another.

This should be the default! What a world we live in.
Why don't you just flag it and move on? Why even click on the link?

Not trying to be combative or argumentative. genuinely curious
Genuine question: how many of them do you think have ever thought about this?

Thinking about it would also not necessarily result in the conclusion you want. Even they did think about this, a passing thought to the effect of "I should protect the people against tyranny rather than do what the boss says" is most often not enough to change a person's general disposition. This kind of benevolent action requires a person of moral character to begin with.

I suspect (with no evidence) that it is often the case that they're just there to get a paycheck.
My impression is that most of the open standards upon which the web is based such as HTML, HTTP, IP, etc. are mostly government funded either through academia, CERN, military, etc.

Things are a little different now that private industry is funding most of this stuff
except that you aren't stealing a service.

try harder.
Show HN: Native JavaScript Document API for Cassandra
I never paid for that option though. I think you misunderstood what I said.
When the tax bill comes to pay, the billionaire moves away.
Fingers crossed, then!
Europeans are no better than Americans.

Source: am European, speak Czech, German and (worse, but usable) Polish. We are all human, with all the expected flaws.
The current Tech Companies news narratives makes no logical sense to me. Here is why:

We were told that Russia interfered in 2016 elections and helped to elect Trump. Now, we are told that 2020 elections were of the highest integrity. Why wouldn't Russia interfere in 2020 elections? Were they scared of Trump administration? But wait, we were told that Trump was Russian puppet, so they would be scared of him, right? So again, why wouldn't Russia interfere in 2020 elections? Or did Russia interfered in 2020 election, "just as they did in 2016", and elected Biden this time?

In short, Tech Media narrative does not make sense to me. And all censorship eventually fails, just take a look at the Fall of Socialism in the Soviet Union.
Because it is both kind and safe to be charitable, and many problems can be explained without having to assume idiot developers.
I think the presence of court cases, frivolous or not, is completely orthogonal to Google's content moderation policies. An appeal to "this is pending in court" is a deeply unprincipled argument; plenty of things that a court would certainly countenance are forbidden by Google's policies.
Except when it's not. Often being cynical will give you accurate expectations, but sometimes not being cynical pays off.

https://thehustle.co/hot-cheetos-inventor/

> In the video, Enrico encouraged every worker at the company to “act like an owner.” Most employees brushed it off as a management cliché; Montañez took it to heart.

> “Here’s my invitation… here’s the CEO telling me, the janitor, that I can act like an owner,” he later recalled. “I didn’t know what I was going to do. Didn’t need to. But I knew I was going to act like an owner.”

(Predictably, his manager was pissed.)
Labour laws are a nightmare in every country due to bureaucracy but that doesn't mean it's always difficult to fire people. Most companies be it in FR, DE, wherever, have good lawyers on the payroll to advise them o the easiest legal path possible to get rid of undesirable employees. If a company really wants you gone, they'll make it happen one way or another.

France was famous for their approach of making an employees' life miserable in order to make them leave as they couldn't fire them easily. Honestly, I'd rather just be fired and get on unemployment than be subjected to psychological torture every day in a poisonous work environment.