skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Gameification of investing can only be a bad thing, because it turns investing into basically legal gambling. And gambling very much leads to addiction and financial struggles. Making investing easy due to a low entry barrier, combined with the advertising, seems to very much have that goal.

For long term investments, low fees per trade don't matter. And with day trading the retail investors will always lose against the HFT guys. The only people profiting from average joes doing day trading are the HFT funds and companies like Robinhood.
I look forward to seeing this on https://killedbygoogle.com in a few weeks.
You are still not thinking of it as a browser. Consider a use case where Deno is the client, not the server. One example is a replacement for piping random curls into bash:

deno run --allow-write=~/.myapp https://myapp.io/install.ts

It works quite well as secure scripting runtime.
did 1 million deaths occur within the 6 month time period? I think we already have a winner
How would breaking up Facebook into three companies fix this though? Suppose Instagram is a separate company and a new competitor starts getting popular. Why wouldn’t Instagram still just copy the competitor’s features?

It’s hard to compete with Instagram because everyone is already on Instagram, not because everyone is also on Facebook. (A lot of IG users don’t use FB much, and vice versa.) A freestanding Instagram could still easily copy and crush competitors.
It has been more than a year since SARS-CoV-2 began spreading in China and the WHO is still too busy cowering to state that it originated in China. That's the first pitch of the first inning and they can't even do that. It's absolutely a safe bet the zero-credibility authorities will never provide an answer as to the origination of the virus. Their entire obvious goal is to never - not under any circumstances - blame China. They still dodge and evade that at all costs. They've collectively humiliated themselves and should be mocked frequently for it, for a long time. Every other sane person already knows where it came from: Wuhan, and likely inadvertantly escaped from their biolab after having been sampled from bats. It's the only credible, rational explanation given what is known (including about their sampling program and horrific lab security); every other explanation requires farcical, laughable stretches to go far out of the way to avoid blaming China (it was India; it was imported via frozen food; it was the US army; etc).
Pinker is a jackass and a jerk. Why anyone listens to him is beyond me. Just another New York Times know-nothing shouting psudo-liberal.
My point was that having any doubts at all is not necessarily a sign of personal failure or lack of reason in our current political envirnment.

I personally hold that Biden won. Our election system is far too decentralized to allowed for large-scale, coordinated election interference to be viable while also being covert.

I also believe that there was likely an uptick in rule-bending across the board. This was in no way a 'normal election', given the mass-adoption of mail-in voting, and heightened polarization of our political environment.

Unfortunately, the US has shown a remarkable lack of historical introspection with respect to election integrity, so it's impossible to tell with any certainty whether this is truly the case since it's I believe it's safe to assume a low level of fraud in an election at the scale of the American federal election, with so heavily federated a system.

The doubts people have aren't entirely unfounded, and YouTube making an executive decision to perish the thought on their platform only adds fuel to the fire.
Cardiovascular risk factors and lifestyle behaviours in relation to longevity
I would have agreed with you 5 or 10 years ago, full stop.

Today, we live in a society where crackpot ideas are being shared by acquaintances, but unlike 10 years ago there is no common sense and logic being applied at the value and factual nature of the information. The systems are designed and layered in such a way that a person gets a bit of information, that information is highly compounded in their world view, other ideas are not in their funnel. Even if they go and try to validate it (which they may not because everything else in the funnel on their information streams supports/compounds the view) there are whole markets of pseudo news that are entertainment channels masquerading as news supporting the same insane ideas.

These systems act as badly as a schizophrenic thought process slowly detaching the participants from reality as the information they see compounds their world view.
For reasons such as "should have filed before the election". There is a significant volume of claims pending action before the supreme court, including one rather large case filed by the Texas AG, and joined by a number of other state AGs. This rule prohibits the discussion of unapproved narratives about the merits of any of those cases. In any case, anybody who believes they have no merits can happily wait for the supreme court to confirm that. No need for mass partisan political censorship.

I'm not at all sure why you think my comment is so ironic either, so please feel free to explain.
It's really hard to think from reading that memo that they have any intention of making changes related to the core issue. It more or less read to me "look at all the things we're already doing" + "oops this really was a fuck up wasn't it, but too late I guess so we're going to try more things we were already doing to fix this".

In context, it only makes sense. Google is not going to admit in a memo that they have a structural problem with either race or ethics, but it still is ever so slightly disappointing to see this treated more or less as an internal PR issue and not a moment to look in the mirror.

The real mismatch here is what people think the core issue is vs what Google thinks the core issue is. From the memo, Google seems to think that some processes or policies would have prevented this. What it seems to me is that the general public sees a misalignment / direct conflict of values between Gebru's work and points and Google's profit / business. I think Google knows this internally but can't say the quiet part out loud.
Yes that's how dlna works.
The comment you’re replying to addressed your concern about the genetic factor. As I said, by controlling for smoking behavior, you sever the statistical link between tar deposits and genetics in hypothesis (2+A), hence you also sever the indirect statistical link between tar deposits and cancer which is due to genetics.
No, there are clearly other limits as well.

You can also see it with in retail and agriculture. Producers get exploited in the name of the customer. Retails wants as few suppliers as possible and left unchecked, it just reaches unsustainable proportions that certainly are unhealthy in a lot of ways.
Taking "engineered in a lab" to mean modern genetic technology, there are possibilities beyond that and all-natural. Remember that we modified wild polio to create a vaccine many decades ago, long before modern genetic technology. Passing bat viruses through human cell lines would not leave any kind of mark to indicate intentional modification.
Do you actually know of any good "take out" only restaurants that don't have people eating there? I don't.

I live in a city so maybe that's the difference, but one things for sure, if people could be in there, sitting at a table enjoying food with their friends, they would be.
Well. The FDA and similar agencies banned many vaccines that were very likely to work, leading to over 1M dead. Seems like a "bio error" to me.
Public libraries serve the public good in the way I'm proposing: no search there yields any spam or "optimized" results that serve ulterior agendas or biases. A government service, especially one whose design and contents are fully open to scrutiny by any interested party at any time -- this would be a big win in terms of encouraging trust in that service, as Wikipedia largely does now.

No corporation will ever agree to serve solely that mission, especially under those constraints. Yet residents of an open democracy deserve nothing less -- open access to unbiased data. If ever the US needed such a thing, it would be now.
What does that even mean when leadership is hostile and untrusting to you? IMO it's better for society to provide remedy in terms of opportunity lost than to make people who no longer trust each other work together.
> No evidence

You're making it sound like a witchhunt but it was in fact extremely fishy.

"The investigation found there were over 100 contacts between Trump campaign advisors and individuals affiliated with the Russian government, before and after the election, but the evidence was insufficient to show an illegal conspiracy."[1]

I'd encourage you to at least read through the Wikipedia articles on the Mueller report before shouting "zero evidence" so loudly.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mueller_report#Russian_interfe...

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_Tower_meeting
Measuring page performance – Learn Puppeteer and Playwright
True. Just ask Xerox.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Alto
Thanks, may I ask how you are processing visitor locations? IP through some geo services?
What? There are a crap ton of laws that protect democracy. They are laws that decide how the votes are reported, where the votes are stored, even how the electoral college electors should vote. When you go into a court and swear an oath to tell the truth about democracy, that is our legal system censoring speech about democracy. Incidentally this is why Rudy Giuliani said in court that there was no fraud in the election. Because we have laws about what you can and can't say. Michael Flynn was prosecuted for lying to investigators about his conversations with the Russian ambassador; the heart of that investigation was the election and the Russian threat to the democratic process. No, you cannot legally say whatever you want about the election to whoever you want for self-serving ends. Even if it's in limited situations, there is a ton of censorship to protect our democracy.

And private entities should go even further, at least to protect their brands. I will always think of Facebook as the place where the Rohingya genocide was organized and carried out, and Facebook is where violent protesters like Kyle Rittenhouse gathered before killing multiple people. I think about the platforms that allowed ISIS to radicalize people. Google doesn't want YouTube to be the video hosting site where you can watch the world burn. Reddit removed the sub where you could literally watch people die. You might see these actions as against some dearly held political beliefs but it's pretty clear to me that these are just adults trying to act with a modicum of responsibility.
It is too weak a guarantee.
We already have seen as risk of revenue losing did not stop Kaspersky.
Maybe for pagination purposes the multiple pages could be enumerated right after the opening header and we could spot right away the prolific set of comments a given post has attracted. That would make things pretty discoverable right off the bat.
Crunchyroll acquired by Sony, BD acquired by Hyundai, Slack acquired by Salesforce...

Our economic system seems to have a natural tendency towards monopoly. This is happening before our eyes and we don't even realise it.
Yeah that was a bit orthogonal but was going into the point that Robinhood is more than just payment order flow selling.

Robinhood payment order flow selling (PFOF) is just the "limited hangout" they want people to focus on and how they make most of their money. I wouldn't doubt they even pay people and have false opposition to focus on the PFOF aspect over other things they are doing.

Robinhood use PFOF more effectively than other retail brokerages with the larger system they are in. The type of investor can more easily be manipulated as well as the volume is key.

However, PFOF is merely a node in the Robinhood system of influence. Ultimately Robinhood itself is a node in a orchestrated investment system that is greater than Robinhood. Anyone in investment or even knows a bit about geopolitics knows that it is greater than simply an app that sells PFOF. Robinhood would love people to just focus on PFOF because "everyone is doing that", but they aren't going further but Robinhood is.
Just the kind of disingenuous commentary that led to the policies that have turned the state into such a sad state of affairs. I'm glad you're fortunate enough to not realize the plight of so many others but clearly there's no discussion to be had here.
I'm afraid it's like forbidding drugs.

It definitely somehow limits their use, but anybody really interested is able to obtain them illegally, or produce them themselves.

I'm afraid the same will be true about micro-drones or whatever else the post suggests.
They are pulled out of a hat. That is the point. A bet needs to have a defined end date to be paid. The date itself is arbitrary.
oh I was reading downwards, and what I thought was "Exhibit 2" was actually "Exhibit 3".

Not sure about that.
> I think it's generally not worth paying attention to renowned experts opining about stuff outside their field.

I disagree. It is actually sometimes quite illuminating listening to an expert using heuristics outside of his field of expertise. As a mental excercise.
Peak lithium?
Yeah some higher end security chips have passive mechanisms that make the microstructures more delicate and harder to reach and therefore harder to physically read. This is on top of active mechanisms that try constrain operation to well defined range of temperatures, voltage and power conditions to prevent brown out and booby traps that trigger effacement.

You have to disclose a lot of info during the cert process though so I don't think this is too much of a hurdle for big players like the NSA.
Yang is part of the democratic party and therefore a democrat politician, there's no debate on this. The same can be said for ocasio-cortez.
It seems like a poor business decision to be so heavy handed on this. They have made it black and white where a shade of gray would've been much better. For instance, they could leave the videos accessible but exclude them from their recommendations engine or apply a "misinformation" ranking factor that will be in effect for those videos.

Now that they're disallowing videos containing this information, why wouldn't broader Google exclude from web search webpages containing the same misinformation? What is the principle that applies to videos about this topic that doesn't apply to webpages about this topic?

I don't agree at all that the US election was rigged, but removing this content entirely still feels heavy handed when they could continue to be a platform for it, but without pushing/recommending it.
Companies pay him to give in person classes and create customized training material
> Sadly we never released the game on Linux to the public.

That is a bummer indeed :/
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/new-email-shows-dnc-boss-gi...

Is it?
> There is no evidence that Russian influence changed the outcome of the election

The alleged Russian actions are by themselves criminal. It makes no difference whether they had any impact. An attempted theft is still a crime.
If GP looks for a general purpose computer for their kids, M1s are a clear yes but for DL? No way, as long as PyTorch is not running on M1s and an Nvidia GPU in some cheap PC shell has the same price tag.
Can’t find it via DDG or Google.
This is the only comment I feel like I can meaningfully respond to (and agree with). Much of the rest of the opinions expressed (especially in the most upvoted comments) are done so in such a way that makes it seems as though there's no debate to be had. You're either for or against free speech. No in between. Of course, counterexamples abound but it doesn't matter in this discussion. Truly a sad thing to witness. As the Chinese proverb goes, we certainly do live in interesting times.
I don't argue against it because it seems to be a necessity according to people more knowledgeable than me but I'm shocked at how easily it's hand-waved away as a non issue (morally) by most people.
I find the act of castrating an animal horrific, first because of the violation of its bodily autonomy and second because genitals are not just a piece of meat but alter how the brain works which to me means it's also a violation of the mind. I think people who care about animals should think twice about having a pet if it means forcing that kind of procedure on a living being.

That's my general take on the subject. To your point about anthropomorphism, I disagree, I think assessing one's health and bodily integrity is a primal instinct that is most likely shared by most animals. I can't say for sure but I have experienced a lot of body horror myself (torn & deformed limbs) and it was never higher thoughts that prevailed, even in situations without pain (like after surgery).
She has the (public) sympathy (of some fraction) of her direct (subordinate) team.

You can have the loyalty of a couple of close coworkers and still be toxic for the company as a whole, if you don't have professional interactions with other teams, or with your own managers.
The kernel isn't super secure. There are way too many CVEs, and the kernel now has 28 million lines of code. That is a massive surface area for bugs and exploits. Even with LTS kernels, you can still expect to update your kernel a couple times per year with security patches. Each time that happens, you're gonna need to reboot.

You're right that LTS work doesn't go away...bugfixes will still need to be backported to old software versions. But that work is actually quite a bit easier when it is not so tightly coupled to kernel versions and repositories that are unique for each distribution and release version and architecture.

That complexity is a combinatorial explosion. Instead of having a different codebase for each (PackageVersion,KernelVersion,Distribution,Release,Architecture) combination, you would only need to maintain a codebase for each (PackageVersion, Architecture) combo...and maybe for packages which are trivially cross-compiled, even fewer.
You can do it via snapcast. I have basically that setup. A Raspberry Pi that just has a snapcast client. Then there is a snapcast server with MPD, DLNA server etc, that streams via snapcast.

But given that they have other direct-playing applications it is a strange omission.
I love nix and this mgmt thing looks cool but I really wish everyone would stop demanding I learn an esoteric new syntax to use their shiny useful new tools.

I simply cannot agree that their benefit is somehow inherently coupled to their DSL's syntax, and could not be equivalently modeled in an existing language's syntax so that users don't have to learn the Weird New Thing Of The Month.

Wrestling with the nix REPL is currently my bane, despite being somewhat in love with NixOS and running it on my desktop and in containers.
I misread the terms of the bet. So Pinker won, even with hindsight!
Wells it's a niche, for something where the entry cost seems high. I recall some low-estimate of how much a 25 minute episode costs that was around 80k$ for entry-level quality. It's hard to know if that's right, but if it is, that puts a season into the million-dollar investment range even for low quality stuff.
There aren't that many potential buyers plus entertainment in Japan is expensive, so they price it high. So even fewer buy it.
But due to fans being ready to spend those amounts, I wouldn't be surprised if they found a maximum for profit at those price tags.
Technically you can, but should you?

Your sharing your FB friends data with third parties, could be seen by the friends as impolite or even hostile. It's a matter of trust between friends, not technical ability.
Presumably it would be framed as "I will get my affairs in order and transition my projects to colleagues. This should take about X weeks" (where X gets you past the payout date).
If COVID turns out to be an accidental lab release of a virus that went through gain-of-function experiments, Rees wins. Otherwise, Pinker wins.

However, a consensus on the true origin of COVID may not be reached for years (or decades).
Landing safely was
an unexpected outcome, so it’s remarkable (thus making it into the headline) that it came close to doing so. The right wording is highly context dependent. Here the “nearly landed” phrasing appropriately acknowledges the realistic expectations for the launch by those most in the know, the SpaceX team.

“Crash” would be totally appropriate in a different context with different expectations. But it would make less sense in this case.
Modern ciphersuites are mathematically bulletproof but rife with implementation hazards like side channel leakage.
Because handwriting verification is deeply silly.
I worked there. I can assure you that they contribute very very very very little in terms of what they use. They also have very strict gatekeeping about what they allow to become open source. I've seen multiple projects get prevented from going into open source despite their devs requesting it. Fuck Amazon.
Is that not significant though? All of the people eating together in one setting are tested multiple times per week and screened each day. All of the people eating on the other patio have no oversight of testing and screening. Whether I agree with it or not, I can't deny those are very different risk profiles.
I don’t understand this. You think getting the disease itself would be better?

If you’re going to have this kind of reaction to the vaccine, you’re likely highly vulnerable to the disease itself.
Read up on the facts. The investigation found tons of wrongdoing by inept people who really didn’t know election law or the rules around government dealings, and consistently lied under oath. But it didn’t find any evidence of the alleged collusion with the Russians. People were fired or went to jail, but mostly over lying to the investigators and obstructing the investigation.

Note the Russians certainly did meddle in the election. But collusion requires active, willing collaboration by Trump’s campaign, promises of quid-pro-quo, etc. None of that happened outside of a handful of isolated, rogue or accidental, and not very impactful instances.
A collection of recipes in a cookbook (copyrightable) seems the same category as a collection of recipes on a site.
Japan is the same DVD region as the EU, but you can’t play EU DVDs because Japan players are NTSC instead of PAL in the EU.

Which is probably what the GP was referring to?
I don't know all the issues but AFAICT wasm is just executing code. The libraries you provide for it are up to you. So if you so, for example, thinking of node, if I expose `fs.openSync` `fs.readSync`, `fs.writeSync` and `fs.closeSync` what's missing that wasm can't write to disk?
Even if that were a satisfactory incident under the terms of the bet, there would not have been sufficient casualties due to that error alone.
Including this line from the previous NYT article as some seem to be confused about firings: "The company responded to her email, she said, by saying it could not meet her demands and that her resignation was accepted immediately" - https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/03/technology/google-researc...
> exceed caution

FYI, a much more common and less ambiguous phrase is "exude caution". To exceed caution might mean to go proceed beyond where you feel comfortable.
Yes, it works well. The main caveat I've found is you need the rustls feature of packages rather than openssl. Though perhaps that was more related to cross compiling for Arm.
Engineering also has a disconnect between what managers think are good quality employees and what actually constitutes a good quality employee, so the hiring process is piss poor in most cases. Having worked across aerospace and software sectors, it seems like the higher ups usually get there through non technical merits and thus don't understand what it takes for a technical guy to be a good contributor.