skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Given the original (lossless AVIF) and AVIF tabs match up and the others differ, I wonder if things went wrong with converting to the other formats? I don't have the time to look into the detail here right now, but it could simply be a case of the conversion between the formats losing the the colour space data from the image?

The one group highly unlikely to blame here is web standards bodies, who don't have anything to do with how image formats are rendered (it gets as far as defining the default colour space when none is provided, but that's it). But I'd guess it's likely an image file problem rather than a display problem.
The OpenGL interpreter was a lot of effort, but the bash scripts that feed it were basically the same problem you worked out: how to implement 3d vector math in a language of integers, array variables, and functions without references or return values.
The Constitution does not impel corporations to provide a platform for hate speech. It is mostly about limits to government powers or rights of citizens vis-à-vis their government.
Agreed. Twitter should enforce this more consistently.
AWS Boots Parler
If the whole world is against you, maybe you are doing something wrong
> “BLM, the people who want their tax dollars to go to alternatives to policing”

You’re coloring one ideology all good and another all bad. Not all MAGA people stormed the capital any more than all BLM supporters burned down a police precinct, took over city hall in Seattle and literally seceded from the union.

We have a lot of problems. The primary one is our inability to see that they are spread evenly across the ideological spectrum.
My app: Jraft – the best publishing platform ever
There were three people with Trump flags in my neighborhood on Monday. Those people all took their flags down.
The forks aren't widely used and there doesn't seem to be much reason to switch from bitcoin to them. Network effects are quite important here.
Give the kid a secondhand Thinkpad running OpenBSD, teach him basic shell, and tell him about the man command. He ought to be able to figure the rest out on his own.
> is not a slippery slope.

One action is leading to another and leading to even more actions. That quite clearly falls under the principle of a slippery slope.

That is what people mean when they say "slippery slope". Imagine like an actual slope. That is slippery, because it has greese on it. And you slip down the slope.

Clearly, we are slipping down that slope very quickly.

First it was action X, which everyone agrees was done against someone who deserved it, then it was action Y which was an escalation, and then it was action Z that was another escalation.

Surely you should see how it is an escalation to go from "A couple nazis get banned on twitter", to where we are at now which it important computing infrastructure kicking major services off of the platform?
Echo of majority view on incident. Clarification of legal basis for censorship on private platforms. Support of section 230. Concern about bias in private censorship. Call for transparency and consistency.

It's as neutral as can be.
There will be pressure to add backdoors, but even without them it's not a complete loss — police methods used since time immemorial are able to get information on private groups (undercover infiltration, confidential informants, plea bargains, etc.)
You missed the point. Scale is what matters, not privacy.

The Supreme Court has ruled that free speech on private property is still protected when questions of scale are introduced. There are circumscriptions on that, but it is still protected.
In your imaginary scenario, the shop owner would get to safety and call police to handle the matter.

The shop owner wouldn't be the one who judge and come up with punishment. The justice system would do that.

That's my position. Twitter is an important communication platform. And there should be a due process for banning an elected leader.
Any brands or features to look out for in rollerblades?
Personal attacks are not ok on HN, regardless of how wrong someone is or you feel they are. If you break the site guidelines as egregiously as this or https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25698892 again, we will have to ban you. We're trying to avoid hell on this site, which kind of requires not jumping straight into it.
Seems like Facebook should play a bigger role in preventing that than it does.
The incoming VP spent all summer doing exactly that
Bios for Minimal Presence Online
It's because people on this site are largely sympathetic to the views espoused on Parler. If this were something else, we would hear them railing about "property rights".
Minecraft modding seems like a great start, I have no idea what resource would be best.

May be something like this: https://www.learntomod.com/features.html

It might worth to look into robotics platforms such as:
https://www.amazon.com/Raspberry-Pi-Robot-Kit/s?k=Raspberry+...
Can someone with more familiarity with Ugandan politics comment? My understanding is that outside developed states, lawful democracy can be very brittle especially in states containing multiple nations and tribes, and when there is a long history where the people tend to put their own nation and tribe before the others in the same state, leading to conflict.

The rationale and measure seems to be a better evil if the politics are thusly brittle.
Trump says of the Democrats, "They’re never voting for anything, not even one vote". In context, it clearly means that the Democrats never vote the way he wants them to, not that the Democrats shouldn't be allowed to vote. (Note he then goes on to talk about whether the weak Republicans will vote the way he wants them to.)

I'm not aware that the demonstrators were toting guns.

Really, give it up. If you want to argue that Trump incited violence in this speech, you need to find another quote from it in which he does. The one above is absolutely not incitement, as is completely clear to anyone who is not blinded by partisan rage.

By the way, your country could do with less partisan rage right now.
Meanwhile Twitter lets "Hang Mike Pence" go trending with 14,000 tweets (that oh so peaceful, non-violent Twitter, not deserving of being removed from the Internet, unlike Parler).

Everyone knows what's going on, the nature of the blatant double standards and bias that have gone on for years now (with eg left wing celebrities openly, routinely calling for violence with zero consequences). The Republicans were dumb enough to not do anything about these speech-controlling monopoly platforms while they had a chance. Now we've got big tech CCP censorship rolling through the virtual streets.
The question:

“Why is it that Leftist terroristic threats are given a greater level of leeway versus Rightist threats?”

has a companion question which is equally pertinent:

“Why is it that Rightist violence is met with restrained law enforcement responses versus the heavy handed responses during occasions of Leftist violence?”
Wow that article was a real eye opener..
It has always pissed me off that popular proprietary / walled garden type platforms like xbox, playstation, smartTVs, smartphones etc. cant play HEVC.
Since they are so popular it means that the most popular and most heavily seeded torrents of films and tv are always crappy x264 encoded.. so 5 or 6 GB for a 1080p movie instead of a nice lean 1GB HEVC file.
I used to think it was simply because those platforms are computers but crippled ie. you cant install codecs (or VLC for example) on them, you can only install whatever is available via the walled garden store.
But now I know that HEVC support is expensive so Sony, MS etc really dont want to support it.
Organizing a putsch to decapitate a branch of government and stop the certification of a fair and democratic election is pretty fascist to me.
And stuff like #killallmen and #killallcops was trending for months, but nobody banned Twitter from their infrastructure.
Supporting Trump, no.

Then again, if you were filmed taking part in a violent insurrection at the capitol building, please don't bother coming back to work if you work for me.
Or uh, ahem, y'know, Twitter.

How quickly we forget the Arab Spring.
I thought that MeWe was supposed to be the new "free speech platform" but then Parler sprung up, and the really vile stuff went over there.

although MeWe had quickly attracted racists and actual nazis too, though.
Do you think politics is a sport where people score points? Bizzare
EDIT: not, you know, improving livelihoods or anything else important
I haven't used Parler but I'd wager the vast majority of its content isn't. If you want to pick out content, I guarantee I can match post for post with something identical on Twitter.

So why isn't Twitter being targeted?

If the organizing purpose of Parler was incitement and insurrection, sure. But it isn't. And that means they still get 230 protections whether you like it or not.
Maybe you just didn't any ETL things lately. :-)
Look I think you’ve got the spirit but in practice it’s not as simple as that. If transgender people could simply choose not to be their lives would be instantly markedly improved. Nobody signs up to be part of a class of people met with disgust, mockery, routine violence, sexual assault, job discrimination, losing their friends and families, crippling loneliness, and huge medical and therapy bills. They do it because they literally cannot live as their assigned gender.
Amazon cuts off Parler’s web hosting following Apple, Google bans
Weird for a libertarian to believe that a private corporation should be forced to accommodate potential customers...
> I don't think you're refuting me

I wasn’t trying to refute your point. Only offering a recent historical perspective where an actual terrorist organization was considered as... not that. Where the perspective is set by who is in charge.

>It's a far stretch to even imply the highly limited interactions between Ayers and Obama were in some way responsible for his rise to the presidency

I also didn’t imply that at all.

Perhaps you are just too used to arguing with people on the internet?
Is this true? Software patent is a gray area in the EU and I would not recommend to take for granted that European companies do not have to pay the h.264 license, even if they only distribute in Europe.

Concerning VLC, their FAQ [1] does not mention the EU aspect: they say that they cannot pay for the license because the software is free and that "the end-user becomes responsible for complying with the licensing and royalty requirements" (whether this would be defensible in court is debatable)

[1] https://wiki.videolan.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions/#What_a...
Stop being so afraid.
A guide to SQL interview questions
> The market has judged that “pro violence” speech is to be de-monetized.

“The market” seems to reach this conclusion en masse immediately after it’s clear that the political and regulatory winds have changed.

I don’t know much about Parler, and for the record am about as opposed to Donald Trump and his supporters as one can be. I view these moves by tech companies quite cynically.
And yet Amazon managed to get a plan out of Parler that promised to increase moderation of violent content manually with the help of volunteers. Whether or not that plan was workable is moot now, it seems.
Maybe the EFF has an anarchist political philosophy and doesn't think the state should have a monopoly on violence and that these types of positions of power shouldn't exist?
Assembly is a small part of the production process, and assembly is what is being moved away from China for now.
Netflix surely spends less compute power encoding videos than sites like YouTube though, right? Netflix skews more towards fewer videos, higher view counts, more money per video.
https://twitter.com/balajis : there are some interesting viewpoints being espoused on balajis' twitter feed. one of them cut and paste below. (there is a 'thread unroll' feature on twitter.. too many retweets. but it makes for an interesting train of tweet thoughts)

quoting balajis

[..]How would countries build sovereign apps?

1) Clone the features of WeChat, FB, or Twitter, which is much easier than developing from scratch

2) Encourage or requirr citizens to sign up, which is much easier if you’re a state

That’s product and distribution respectively.[..]

essentially..decentralised web.
For anyone interested here is the Parlor CEOs “parlor tweet” about this:

Sunday (tomorrow) at midnight Amazon will be shutting off all of our servers in an attempt to completely remove free speech off the internet. There is the possibility Parler will be unavailable on the internet for up to a week as we rebuild from scratch. We prepared for events like this by never relying on amazons proprietary infrastructure and building bare metal products.

We will try our best to move to a new provider right now as we have many competing for our business, however Amazon, Google and Apple purposefully did this as a coordinated effort knowing our options would be limited and knowing this would inflict the most damage right as President Trump was banned from the tech companies.

This was a coordinated attack by the tech giants to kill competition in the market place. We were too successful too fast. You can expect the war on competition and free speech to continue, but don’t count us out.

#speakfreely
https://parler.com/post/009ba435b68c46d4955e1cd7737fa27c
We are all smart people no? Can we not see what's going on, Twitter in their early days was very proud they started civil wars in the Arab spring.

This is clearly a power move to block competition, all places on the internet where many people group together start out as trash. Content moderation is only possible when you have network effects that people can't leave. Its similar to not putting ads on your new trending startup.

Moderation will now be used to block all new social media startups because you can not bootstrap moderation.

I'm very concerned what is happening. These companies have far too much power.
Freedom-respecting governments are bound by the rule of law. A government official tweeting "leave your house and me and my boys will stomp you" in the absence of a lawful policy directing as such is not really acting pursuant to the government's "right and responsibility to use violence", so there's hardly any reason to treat them differently from a random person doing the same.
Dr. Goebbels is alive and well inside these tech firms. His tactics are being dusted off, updated and put into action. You say it doesn't bother you, but tomorrow or a little down the road, you may wake up and find you don't have a voice either. What happened at the Congress was unfortunate, but I don't think the Horn Man was going to overthrow the government, or that idiot sitting in Pelosi's chair.
This has been and is already a thing: neo-liberal(ism)
The idea that this particular U.S. president is exceptional underpins the policies and actions of the platform companies. The EFF has to respond, as this is specifically what they were set up to respond to, sort of what the ACLU's original mandate was.

However, that major platform companies are working on behalf of a (still) opposition party to obstruct and suppress a (still) sitting president with some 10 days left in his term, could have unforeseen legal consequences. It will be a very interesting week.

The problem is that if well meaning people break the rules, there is no reason for less well meaning ones not to ignore them.
This story got me feeling all sorts of feelings.
Well, Trump might not. But it would be an EXCELLENT grifting opportunity. He personally pulled in hundreds of millions of dollars with "Stop The Steal" donations. No way he can't pull the same thing out of office and make money of off people.
> It’s a violation of the constitution for an individual state to change voting laws like that

I mean, while we're making stuff up, lets say it's a violation of the constitution to allow for a Democratic government. Article IV, Section 4 requires Republican party rule. /s
Strangely, the "motley crew out of central casting" got arrested. Are you claiming that these are "paid actors"? Damn dedicated actors if they are.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona-breaking/...
can you describe what the product is like from a users perspective? why would I use this and when ? I'm not so sure after looking at it for a couple mins.
A lot of it hinges on judgement. What is a "good faith moderation" effort? That ambiguity would make many uncomfortable.

It is very hard to write a clear set of rules about where the line is.
No.

Reappropriating funds does not mean abolishing the police.

You can reappropriate funds without abolishing the police, for example by reducing their duties.

He is saying both abolish the police and reappropriate the funds.

They are plainly not literally the same thing.
> the local electric and water companies are not allowed to turn off your service as long as you are paying the bill.

Public utilities are required to guarantee service as a condition of the monopoly granted them by the state. The server hosting market isn't a monopoly at all, let alone one mandated by the state.

Maybe your point does stand at the ISP level. It probably should since in most places there are just a couple of them, and Internet access is close enough to essential today.

https://www.nclc.org/images/pdf/older_consumers/consumer_fac...
Does antifa have a social network hosted on AWS?
https://gigatron.io may be a start toward this, too.
Did it actually occur if no one is actually charged with this?
Just realized they were taking about encoding anyway. I’m not sure if that’s usually performed on the same chipset. I don’t know if iPhones have a dedicated chipset for H264, I would be a bit surprised. I could probably look it up later.
The funny thing is that HN wants to get rid of Section 230, yet when these services dispense rhetoric that might bite them in the ass, HN gets upset.
you cannot shout fire in a crowded theatre which at this time, this essentially is.

i hope this isn’t news to you but there are all sorts of restrictions on free speech built up over the country’s history...
You look at the context, he’s saying a person in the act of a violent insurrection should expect lethal force in response.

He’s not inciting violence, he’s stating why the violence occurred.

He could also be simply saying treason carries the potential for the death penalty.

Either way not inciting violence.

He isn’t saying go use force against all the insurrectionists, unlike some politicians who were actively saying use force to overthrow the election.
Wait... so Zuckerberg is totally cool if he goes and censors anything and everything that speaks ill of him or Facebook? Cool if he censors anyone who sues FB or him? Is that your position on a medium that is built for people to post diverse opinions?

What if he suffers a stroke and suddenly becomes a religious nut, cool if he only allows promotion of his religion on his medium and bans all others?

Good god, we’re effed!
But the problem is that for any rock large enough it will require a lot of energy and time, thus expensive and gives advanced warning.
Please don't post political or religious flamebait to HN. This comment is seriously not cool—it's basically starting yet another fire where there wasn't one already burning. HN is burning in 17 different places right now and we need users like you to refrain from arson and/or criminal negligence. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use the site as intended.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25708006.
No; won't stop him from trying, hasn't stopped him in the past.
> Of course, it also mean, people have the right to criticize what someone else says, too, that is also important to have.

The right to criticize is part of the right to freedom of speech. However, you are not obligated to listen to your critics. You still have the right to ignore them, regardless of the merits of their criticism.
Supercooled water isn't quite the same thing you're asking for - I doubt it could be done with a shower without special equipment - but here's a video of spontaneous freezing in two ways: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fot3m7kyLn4

The first, pounding it inside the sealed bottle, is creating some sort of disturbance to crystalize around (an "unsuspecting nucleus"), and the second is pouring it semi-shower-like.
The only parallel is how a Mob boss speaks.
No one who is in a benign industry like insole inserts, or automotive parts is looking at Parler, and thinking "that could be us". Don't be ridiculous.
Any rule by any group ultimately comes down to enforcement through some variety of force. I have never seen it as a particularly useful talking point to highlight that governments are also subject to this foundational principal of the enFORCEment of a rule/law etc.
ISPs are businesses too, so that's not really the relevant distinction here. Why would you be okay with AWS deciding not to do business with you based on something you said, but not your ISP? Seems rather arbitrary to me.
Collecting Classic Macs in the 90s: My Childhood Macintosh Collection
"The only question next is when will the escalation stop?"

When Armed idiots stop attacking the capitol building and calling for the assassination of duly elected public officials in an attempt to overthrow a democratic government.

Your freedom to swing your fist ends where my nose begins.
That's my point. Most criticisms of Tesla are superficial comparisons.

Yes the paint and interior aren't as good as a comparably priced BMW or Audi, they had to cut corners somewhere to hit their price point. I'm glad they chose a simplified interior and crappy paint over compromising the power train or telematics.

It's like complaining that a 26.73gram gold nugget isn't as shiny as a brand new silver dollar.
It's actually pretty easy to fix those artifacts in a JPEG decoder at the cost of making it a little too smooth. The text artifacts are only partially a compression artifact and partially from a poor quality YUV>RGB conversion, so you can do a better one.

Blocking artifacts can be reduced with a deblocking filter; JPEG/MPEG1/MPEG2 are so simple it doesn't take much work to guess what was supposed to be there.
I think you're probably looking at this from the opposite side of the coin that the EFF is. The EFF is looking at people on social media who are government officials and have gotten away with condoning violence because of some high ideals that say having a cancer in the sunlight is better than hiding it away in the dark while normal citizens are held to a different set of arbitrary rules that are often not enforced equally.
most things you quote do not apply to a society where you can reach 70 million people, effortlessly and immediately with 0 cost. 200 years ago there was no way to easily impersonate via a fake video, photo, or recording. wax seals were used to prove authenticity of official mail.

> However how would you feel if newspaper printers elected to no longer print specific news papers backing one candidate or another?

like they have been doing since they have existed?

i assume you mean if all newspapers decided to stop printing the same side of the story. if that side of the story was suggesting the vice president needs to be assasinated, then i think that's an okay viewpoint to marginalize before it reaches the entire country.
By your logic, the 'start' of all of this was platforms banning Trump.

Do you actually think that "AWS terminates its relationship with a forum for violent extremists" is downslope of the President of the United States being barred from two of the largest social media platforms?

There's no slope here. There's multiple platforms drawing a line on acceptable speech, and taking actions to remove the worst offenders. Parler, in particular, thought that they could ignore Amazon's request for moderation and not even take action against specifically flagged posts that violated Amazon's AUP.
What rules are you alluding to being broken?