skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The source code licence has nothing to do with the right to access a particular service. Additionally, the organization behind signal is not bound to the licence, they can do whatever they want with their own code, it's their code after all.

If the server code is licenced as AGPL3 that grants others particular rights in addition to those granted by regular law, under particular constraints, to use and modify said source code, and thus enables e.g. Molly to provide their own servers.
> People are not making up illness for the fun of it. Their ailments are very real and they have a cause.

I have absolutely no doubt that their problems are real. I fully believe that these patients are honest and that they really suffer, and they need treatment. I do not believe at all that they are "making it up".

But they don't suffer from "chronic Lyme".

There's just no evidence that it's a real thing. But just like with electromagnetic hypersensitivity, Morgellon's disease, "Wind Turbine syndrome", or any of a legion of "diseases" from medical history, you can't treat them medically if there's no evidence they exist. It would be malpractice for doctors to prescribe real drugs for fictitious syndromes, and it wouldn't do anything to convince their patients either.
> Such false-positives could easily be co-opted by anti-vaxxers

I'm less interested in how anti-vaxxers think, than the fact that the HIV test will need to re-target a different protein.
There are various options in the client for this.
Open Source Architecture Review – Express
> For AGI, do you really think there are detailed proposals out there today that can achieve AGI but are only missing the computational power?

Yes, I really do. It's neural networks, nothing more. All that is required is more power. Despite its lower power the brain is much more computationally powerful than even the largest supercomputers.

Although it is not necessary, imo, to have a much more efficient computing substrate to achieve GAI, there is work in this direction. Look into optical reservoir computing. Or more generally thermodynamic computing. https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.01968

Machine learning is progressing rapidly mostly because the computational power is increasing rapidly. Read this for an understanding of how important computational power is to progress in machine learning: http://www.incompleteideas.net/IncIdeas/BitterLesson.html

Time and time again computational power trumps complicated technique. It is fairly obvious to many now, after the continued scaling of the GPT-x series models, that genuine intelligence is an emergent property of the kind of systems we are building. It is an emergent property of systems that are driven to predict their environment - no more secret sauce to discover.

I think a major objection people have to the idea that machines are already a little intelligent is that they cannot understand how intelligence can emerge from pure computation. They imagine that there must be some magic between the operation of neurons in their mind and their experience of the world. Qualia where does it come from, how can it be just neurons, just inanimate physical matter? Combine this philosophical objection with the emotional response to the threatening nature of AGI and you have a milieu that refuses to see what is directly in front of its nose.

There are plenty of philosophical positions that allow you to understand how consciousness might emerge naturally from computation. Consciousness is emergent... Panspermia, consciousness is found in everything. To imagine consciousness in the movement of 1s and 0s within a machine is not too hard, to see the consciousness inside the "chinese room" is not really so difficult.

But none of this is relevant to the original argument I was making which is: trying to tell the future is very hard. Because it is simply a fact that before most great breakthroughs there is a common opinion that such a thing is, if not impossible, then in some distant future.

I think there are very very good reasons to think that a general intelligence of genuine utility is not more than 10 years away. I think people will look back at GPT-3 as the first proto form of the general intelligences that will exist in the future.
So I can manage my time with pomodoro, write ravioli and spaghetti code, test with the swiss cheese approach, and of course all is running with wine.
Janet Yellen isn't a powerful person because of her reputation on the speaking tour circuit. If you hire Beyonce it's because you're paying for the performance she gives. If you hire Janet Yellen, no person credibly believes it's because that hour talk she's giving is hugely valuable. It's because you want to establish connections with her to influence her in her actual job where her power comes from. It's a pretext for paying her money that, were you to turn up to her office and hand it to her at her day job, would be a bribe.
How can you make a profitable store on Shopify?
Text chat that doesn't suck. Right now Mumble condenses all text messages in a single box.
They have a premium membership that gives a few extra features like game analysis.
This is a bad example. The intelligence needed to carry out your described outcomes is more or less AGI already, and that is advanced enough that describing it as a dumb optimization machine is likely naive.

Further, if you want to optimize stamp collection, you don't tell a model what it can't do, you tell it what it can do. It can make trades on stampcollectors.com, for +/- 20% of asking price, max 30 trades per day. Yes, there are some funny examples of RL algos finding weird hacks to beat their simulation, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. We will not see an AI that, from scratch, can learn how to hack bank accounts to buy stamps. The number of nth order observations you need before one can even consider trying to hack a bank account to purchase stamps is ludicrous. If it is even possible, it pales in comparison to the likelihood of someone just making a bot to hack banks to begin with.
Some readers could prefer the story-telling style, but others prioritize getting the information. To contrast, a novel wouldn't give away the ending on the first page, but a scholarly article absolutely has to give the take-away in the abstract.

I personally think for informative reporting, it's maximally respectful of the reader's time and attention to give a quick summary up front. Then they can decide if they want to continue for the full details and story-telling experience. Many people won't, but those people would probably skip the story in the first place and click through to the comments for the punch line.

Thanks for bringing up this discussion!
I mean, Canada did produce a Shopify, which while not FAANG sized is still a >$100B public tech company that for all intents and purposes is competing with one of the FAANGs (Amazon).
It is precisely this that mass-produces the sort of angry young white man that attacked DC. People thought I was being too dramatic when I had been saying this for the past four angry years (for everyone): Stop frivolously accusing young white men of being "racists," and being "Nazis." Don't use those words to beat people over the head with it. The political mindset that enables the use of those words as blunt weapons against those we hate is resentment-based and vengeance is its goal.

The use of these terms as bludgeons in a lot of these youth cultures combined with a culture that makes young men feel increasingly isolated with its habitual treatment of them that is at best arid and at worst psychologically abusive. "They'll be alright," everyone reasons. "They have everything given to them by default." By whom?

In my guesstimation, it amounts to gaslighting. Young angry white men feel deprived by society of anything to grasp, or to believe in, or to look forward to, or to work toward. Then they're told that, even though they were among the first generation that was wholly ready to forget about race and ignore it as a social factor... they were told, oh no, you're always racist. In fact, irony of ironies, you're racist by blood and birth. How sustainable is such a social environment before legions of terrified young men start picking up the label that has been thrown at their feet and wearing it as a badge of honor because it's the only possible identity they have left? "Fine, I'll give them something to treat like shit."

Plus, those are not the sorts of words (racist and Nazi) we should risk over-using and numbing people to... We kinda want them to keep their sting. So, let's not morph them into a weapon to justify treating our fellow humans poorly. I think doing that might actually mass-produce neo-Nazis.
So provide the evidence rather than mere assertion. And, is there no way to do this without Twitter or Facebook? Have we no television news? No newspapers? No court system with judges amiable to the President’s party?

It’s a farce.
You can still pull the database from an iOS backup on your Mac or created from `idevicebackup2`.

The file is named `1b6b187a1b60b9ae8b720c79e2c67f472bab09c0`, `275ee4a160b7a7d60825a46b0d3ff0dcdb2fbc9d`, or `7c7fba66680ef796b916b067077cc246adacf01d`.
Yes, yes! But...that are human scientists. Why would anything from them apply to something which we can't even imagine? Isn't that what all this rambling is about? Something emerges, morphs(maybe unseen/unintended) into another Gestalt/shape/form which for all practical purposes is unconstrained.

Most of you: We are sooo fucked!

I: Are we really? How do you know?
I think pretty soon we'll see a movement for national ids to have an electronic component to them, which would be useful exactly in these kinds of situations.
> there's less and less available jobs for working age men, those men will find something to occupy their time

I am going through lists of Capitol stormers. I am finding cops, former firefighters, former officers, teachers, real estate agents, professors, lawyers, CEOS, etc. If anything, these people have some of the better jobs. I am sure there are unemployed people in there and there is selection bias, but it is hardly exclusive.

Some articles of employed people:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-protests-fal...

https://www.newsweek.com/here-are-people-that-have-lost-thei...
> freedom of speech(Redefreiheit), the latter doesn’t exist as such in Germany.

yes it does! article 5 of the constitution

http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/art_5.html
My suggestion is maybe you can customize the length of your Pomo, which means it doesn’t have to be 25 minutes. Prolonging it to fit your own focus flow, and to do that, you may have to observe first normally for how long your focused time can be. Wish that helps:)
Yeah clise shop because you tried to run it on hobby hardware.
The backup issue makes Signal infeasible for me to suggest to family/friends as a serious alternative. It's just not up for discussion. People care about preserving their chat histories and I'm not about to put myself in a position where I'm at fault when that stuff goes lost because something or other. There's a lot of sentimental value there that is non-negotiable.

Unfortunately, that leaves me with ... nothing to recommend people switch to.
This looks intriguing! Though, very niche: I'm both a JS dev, and an Emacs user - but I'd personally prefer to stick with Lisp... buuut, couldn't we have a LISP->JS transpiler and get the perf benefits without the JS? :)

Ok, actually, having thought about it some more - this project seems really weird: I need have a play with it!
Brain Training Games
Salesforce says it has 'taken action' to prevent further U.S. political violence
It's almost surprising that it's the case, considering where ads appear in google.com results.
It may have been. But I wouldn't be surprised if the people who started it actually wanted a properly federated standardized XMPP.

Of course then leadership got to it :'(
You mean features like encryption?
You joke, but the real world version of that exists and involves children and divorce proceedings.
If you're homeless it's hard to get a bank account, it's hard to get a job, it's hard to get someone to trust you.

If you're not mentally ill or a drug addict, good luck getting someone to think otherwise and give you a job.

I remember this story of this homeless man with an amazing voice. Some radio host gave him a job, it looked like a success story and after a few months he lost everything again due to his addiction
Oh I didn't know that actually. Thanks.

Also, for anyone who is not familiar with Duncan's work, Moon is an amazing movie!
I think you may not be worried about targeted attack here necessarily.

Suppose for example that Amazon wants to know how many people talk about some topic or brand, and wants to sell that information, but they think that the mute switch will get in the way of collecting the data.

All it would take is a relatively small sample - maybe 1/1000 Alexas randomly built in such a way that the mic can't be muted - and they would be able to sell these aggregated statistics with reasonable confidence intervals.

Not that I think this is happening, but it is a possible reason I might not trust a single teardown, and it doesn't require worrying about a targeted attack against me personally.
The name of this product, Threema, is going to be a significant detriment to its adoption.
New mobile security analysis environment for advanced technical reviews
Current locale determines what the case equivalence rules are for many characters.
I guess it is mostly a problem for RedHat: The RH kernel is nominally an old stable version, but with fixes and hardware support frankensteined on from the later to latest kernel versions. If new kernel versions now start to expect features and behaviour of newer compiler versions, those backports become more difficult.
> there was a monopoly on phone service in the 70s that exceeds the monopoly on cloud hosting today

Yes, and as part of that _regulated_ monopoly, they were required to provide "universal" service: it didn't matter how remote the customer was or how inconvenient it would be to provide them with service, telephone service had to be provided to anyone who was willing to pay the (regulated) monthly fee.
There were a few months more than 10 years ago when you could use one XMPP client for all your various social/chat accounts. I want to say around 2008 ?
Ok. Give me the positive spin on 9/11.
I haven't seen any UK news outlet that attempts to paint trump in a good light, not even sky news
I recently learned that even blackholing the entire /8 block of Apple's IPs at the router, after they bypass your provided DNS servers, after they bypass your /etc/hosts file, macOS then tries to phone home using IPv6.

These attempts* go on 24/7 even with 0 apps open and the computer being idle.

* https://i.imgur.com/md2ykLl.png

helpd, geod, locationd, cloudd, the list of apps phoning home when your computer is idle goes on and on and on. Nevermind that they have the metadata to track every launch of every app on your OS.

Then you've got Adobe who is apparently convinced that by virtue of installing their software, they own the resources on your machine and network to their heart's content and spam non-stop phone-home messages to adobess.com adobesc.com adobe.io etc etc
Replying to the edit:

"Which is why content removal/moderation must be only for those things that are clearly defined as illegal by the State"

Twitter can't decide what is illegal only a court can do that. Irregardless of how clear the law is, there will have to be an appeal process and anyone unhappy with Twitter's moderation decisions will be be able to sue them. So in practice content moderation will have to be handled by a government agency. IMHO that would be much worse than the current situation because (besides being huge waste of resources) now when you're unhappy with what Twitter is doing you can still (at least theoretically) move to a different platform.

"Wouldn't it be better if this is legally defined in the Constitution of the country where the user is from"

So if someone in (for example) Thailand posts something negative about Thailand's king Twitter would be required to remove that post, while if someone in the US does that they would take no action. Do you really think this is a good idea?
> All these actions from platforms is to prevent, limit, curb violence. That's it. There's no grand conspiracy. You're either for non-violence and a civil, reasoning-reasonable society - or you are living in ignorance is bliss and you don't care if there's chaos and the world burns.

I guess these platforms were on "team: chaos and the world burns" throughout the BLM riots, and were on "team: conspiracy theories" throughout the 2+ years of "Russian collusion" coverage.

And if you can't see parallels to this same statement you're making and echos throughout history when someone decides what's OK and not OK to say, I'm not sure what to tell you. Literally every authoritarian could make the case that silencing their opponents is worth it for the greater good.

> Also, no one's freedom of speech has been taken away. These are private platforms, they're not the public space - the internet itself is the neutral platform, likewise these people have other means to communicate. They don't get the automatic right to using the most convenient technology provided by private companies though.

People said this when it was just Facebook / Twitter. Then it's the App Stores on mobile devices, and now we're down to cloud infrastructure providers and payment processors.

That's fine--just be prepared to move your goalposts when people start pressuring ISPs to block the content, because that's what's happening next.
I think it's a fairly large assumption to make that they all voted for him specifically. I don't think it's too crazy (given he won <50% of the popular vote in the 2016 primaries) to assume a large number of those voters voted "Not Democrat" or voted Republican instead of voting Trump specifically.
Responded to wrong comment? (I have no opinion on what you’re talking about)
HIV does not mutate in the body. Viruses mutate over tens of thousands or millions of patients. It does not evolve within the space of a single person's infection and does not use mutation to evade the immune system.
There is an additional FAQ page for european users [0]

Via Tweet from Niamh Sweeney, Director of Policy for WhatsApp, EMEA [1].
>It has been incorrectly reported that WhatsApp's latest Terms of Service and Privacy Policy update requires users in the European Region to agree to the sharing of data with Facebook for ads purposes in order to continue using the service. This is false.

[0] https://faq.whatsapp.com/general/security-and-privacy/how-we...
[1] https://twitter.com/NiamhSweeneyNYC/status/13471849630163394...
It's been on Twitch since 2013, but now it can be streamed it's become all the rage.
Jared Mauch didn’t have good broadband, so he built his own fiber ISP
The Ship of Theseus is a quite old thought exercise. At that time, science and philosophy were not as separated as today. Actually, after reading the nice comic book Logicomix [0], I learned that the philosophical thought exercise of Wittgenstein, Russel and others, on trying to rationalize the world at the beginning of the 20th century, is actually what lead to a fundamental axiomatic redefinition of mathematics themselves. So it seems far stretch to call philosophical thought experiment not scientific.

I agree that it is not scientific in the modern sense, after Karl Popper introduced the concept of falsifiability in 1935 [1], shortly after Hilbert advocated for rigorous proofs in mathematics in 1917 [2]. Although at that point, it is mostly a matter of vocabulary, thought experiments seem necessary for the advance of science.

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

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bold_hypothesis

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert%27s_program
Hm, why didn't they join https://www.redox-os.org/ instead?
The Canadian startup bureaucracy is real. I find it kind of funny that the main requirement for IRAP funding is that you don't actually need the money.

It's extremely frustrating when you see a punt like Element AI get 20 million from the government, despite not having any product direction or seemingly any idea what to do with that money. It feels like people are rewarded for navigating the bureaucracy rather than actual startup success.
Sorry if I was a wee bit harsh in my comment.

If these patients get a diagnostic, even if it is not Lyme, I am sure that would help them very much.

It is true that the medicine is more than often not yet capable of giving satisfying diagnostics, and that misdiagnostic is counterproductive...

However I remember I saw some sound studies on biofilm protein immunity that was triggering autoimmune disorder, in relation to the borreliosis. This is why I had this strong opinion. I will report here if I manage to retrieve the exact reference.
I had this exact discussion in another thread here on HN less than 24 hours ago. Being supported by a non-profit is great, but how is that non-profit funded? They still need to pay their bills. Wikimedia get around $120 million in donations each year, can Signal get close to that?

According to Telegram's Pavel Durov, "A project of our size needs at least a few hundred million dollars per year to keep going." [0]. Telegram has close to 500 million monthly users, how will Signal pay for their operations when they approach the same numbers, which I assume is the goal? A business model will be needed, Telegram only recently started talking about how to bring in money from other sources than the personal savings of the founder.

Edit: Is it really relevant to compare to SSH? Does SSH have user signups or servers that handle large amounts of real time communication? How many developers does SSH have employed?

[0] https://t.me/durov/142
Yes. Since the various platforms dropped Trumps there have been threats made that were not being made beforehand, and those are threats to cause harm to people or property not just threats to leave the network (which is generally what people threatened after the other recent scandals like CA).

Those threats are probably just idiots sounding off and will never come to anything, but given recent events being careful just-in-case is quite prudent. An idiot sounding off can easily turn into an idiot taking action.
> One of these is for the little known Nipah virus.

I just submitted about this:

* https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210106-nipah-virus-how-...

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25741798
I wouldn't wear West Ham gear at all. They are rubbish!
That’s just not true at all. 
Okay maybe not specifically logos
 (Edit: actually no, the statement still stands even if we talk specifically about logos) but many luxury brands have very distinct patterns covering their apparel, so much so that an entire item would be a sea of “logos”. See Louis Vuitton, Gucci, Chanel, etc. for example.
I think what Facebook is very good at is developing features and app elements that Increase User Engagement(TM). Which is some thin PR language on top of the truth: Facebook develops their apps to maximize user addiction and subsequently enact a lot of de-facto peer pressure to constantly expand their install base without them even having to try. Built-in word of mouth plus peer-pressure.

Facebook conditions their userbase to need the app in their life, whether because your pictures are all there or because your family is on it, and beyond that it doesn't really matter if they listen to their base. They've got them already.

Maybe the userbase thinks facebook addresses their users' "needs" (strong word for it), but that's more of a commentary on FB's propaganda team and black-hat UX than anything else.
Still, I can't help thinking that it took opening this particular Pandora's Box to have this discussion. The last point in your response might not have been visible until the Capitol attack, but the rest was visible to anyone sufficiently pessimistic about the modern tech/social/legislative landscape.
but how can we tell...?