skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
We might be better off without a centralised service - perhaps you are the one we need, to build a system-to-system app with no need for 3rd party assistance.
The Many Occasions Joe Biden Took Credit For Writing The Patriot Act

Biden has repeatedly claimed that a bill he wrote in 1994 was essentially the same as the 2001 Patriot Act.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/andrewkaczynski/surveil...
> we force companies not to discriminate based on Age, Sex, Religion, etc.

none of these qualities pose a threat to others in our civilized society. however, spoken words have a direct influence on anyone who hears them. so there is in fact a difference which is not simply arbitrary.
any modern functional programming feature was inspired by haskell, if it didn't invent it it sure proved its usefulness.
If the EFF actually cared about freedom of speech they'd set up a registrar and hosting service.
Is it ideological activism to enforce the terms of service which prohibit the incitement of violence?
If people are actually plotting attacks on an open platform, they should be reported to law enforcement. Deleting their accounts may actually give them a nudge towards using proper OPSEC.

Obviously, we aren't talking about people actually plotting attacks though.
Yeah, and 4Chan has about half a dozen mass killings to their name.
I was talking about the title.
Sure, move to the dark web. The extra layer of difficulty one has to go through to connect to dark web services is enough to deter the vast majority of people from ever trying.
You are severely underestimating how dangerous these people are. This was not a group of people hiding in a pack of demonstrators. The Proud Boys and QAnon supporters are the ones behind this. Chris Hayes has a segment that shows just how dangerous the situation really was. The motley crew was the exception.
My family fought in the American Revolution and I was an elected DNC delegate. This is cowardly and unamerican.
Bullshit, You have 0 proof of these statements
> hat I don't understand is why companies have double standards.

What is there to not understand? Theres a simple explanation that fit's all the data. https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anythin...
I don't understand something: wouldn't that be extremely bad for twitter? i mean they need subscribers for pushing their advertising, or so i was told.
Heart of democracy or historic conference center with attached offices?

If democracy does not beat in hearts of all and instead resides in an old building far away then truely its count of future days is not high.
(pre-covid) I had an older co-worker that told me he doesn't regularly supplement w. vitamins, but as soon as he feels himself coming down with something, he takes some zinc, and said he could usually kick most colds before they really got a hold. I'd never heard of that before, and would always try vitamin C or whatever. I've tried zinc once, (again, pre covid days), and I guess I kicked whatever I was about to get. Would it have made a difference, who knows?
I agree--they should be investigated and then charged with crimes. I'd just prefer if someone's going to be silenced that it arise from a court order, not some corporation's potentially-compromised sense of morality/decency.
https://thebaffler.com/salvos/all-effd-up-levine
Heh, they are quite thorough. There were a lot of video tweets on that account last time I looked.
Until they ban them too.
This is what the companies do who want to take down copyrighted content, and what governments do when they want to take down illegal content. Why should any other standard apply?

Typically in such cases posts are placed in limbo - still present but usually inaccessible while legal questions are answered.

Courts should be making these decisions, not companies interfering in other companies.

Why?

Because at the end of the day these are questions "the people" need to answer, not unelected managers at tech companies.

A few people do not have the right to silence the voice of millions. That's what's happening, fundamentally, and it is being cheered, and you all somehow think this is going to end well.
It’s kind if funny and ironic seeing arguments like ”they need moderation”, ”we can’t allow violent extremists yadda yaddah...”

Yet this was never a problem and still isn’t anywhere else except in the context of Trump supporters. Radical left wing terrorist groups and openly violent people are directly getting funded and praised by the owners of these platforms not only tolerated.
It says more: “don’t get caught providing a service for terrorists organizing violent acts”... AWS doesn’t want your business. Neither does anyone else. Nor do they want to be legally liable in any way. So if you’re in that business you probably should not host on US based providers of any kind.
Also hateful propaganda against Jews. For some strange reason, the official BLM platform denounces Jews and the indigenous peoples of Judea and Samaria.

See https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/why-did... for a balanced opinion on this.

While I'm sympathetic to some of the problems that BLM addresses--like the militarization of our Police Forces--I can't stick my neck out for them because of their hatred of Jews.
Please don't break the site guidelines like this, regardless of how right you are or feel you are, or how wrong others are or you feel they are. None of that justifies taking HN threads further into ideological flamewar hell, which is totally what we're trying to avoid here.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25708021.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Edit: in case it's helpful, here's an example of a comment with views similar to yours that doesn't resort to bomb-throwing at the same time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25708359
Please let them move to a Ukraine-based host. We can then watch as true patriots discover Hunter Biden's Burisma connections laundering oil and gas money through cloud hosting operations supporting Parler. Parler itself will then be unmasked as a major false flag operation perpetrated by antifa and well-known long-con artists "BLM". True patriots will identify that they've known all along, and were simply trying to infiltrate it and get the final dirt on Uranium One and pull HRC in prison.

I'm half-joking, half-serious, but I'm not sure which half is which at this point...
Maybe it's better that the discussions are happening where they can be seen? The other half of the problem on Wednesday was how unprepared and weakly defended the Capitol was, in light of all this planning was going on on Parler.

If it had been happening on GPG-encrypted email, would that be better?
Whether or not speech constitutes incitement is governed by the imminent lawless action test.

"Under the imminent lawless action test, speech is not protected by the First Amendment if the speaker intends to incite a violation of the law that is both imminent and likely." [0]

There's two sub-tests: intention and imminence. Let's start with was it imminent: the plain text is clear, the time was now-- undoubtedly, the call to action was not an obscure point in the future. Supporters were to immediately go down Pennsylvania Avenue to the Capitol complex. But what was Trump's intention? That analysis transcends the text as written. Therefore, we can't outright dismiss the speech as categorically not incitement, because the text alone is not sufficient in determining if the speech is incitement.

I posted his speech because my original comment's parent poster claimed Trump had not suggested his supporters make their way to the Capitol, which is false.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action
>Yep, same here. I am bad about other sugars though

Start by cutting out high fructose corn syrup completely but still allowing other forms of sugar
No one has a right to incite violence.
One of the things that changed my training in the gym(after many years of off-and-on) was doing college judo classes for two semesters, because it indicated what things were missing in my training program(mobility, shoulder strength, stamina) and I think the same is relatively true of body composition - there are a lot of ways to benchmark your physique and weight is one of the least reliable, a kind of "you get there when you get there" type of deal.

You can't expect physique to deviate hugely from your starting point without pharmecutical assistance(which is, defacto, how all the celebs are getting their transformations, on top of extensive training and nutritional oversight), but there are a lot of easily overlooked details that do compound towards a goal over time: how often and when you eat, as well as type and quantity. How well you sleep. Stress levels.

Sometimes it really can come down to just adding another meal or finding something to graze on.
Your house is not the same thing as Twitter or Parler or Amazon or Apple.
You can't put the ActivityPub ecosystem back inside its bottle. While it seems like (this is a commonly heard complaint) "no one is there", this is simply untrue. The ecosystem is vibrant, healthy, and will keep growing.

in my mind there will eventually be a tipping point, but it doesn't need to happen immediately. It would be nice to see more media establish a presence there though.

edit: one of my favorite PeerTube instances is https://tilvids.com -- an edutainment video community.
Correct all around. Lots of room for optimization.
Republicans want to deregulate ISPs but regulate .com because the most influential .com companies lean left. It's as simple as that. They were happy getting rid of the "fairness doctrine" for broadcast TV but want it back for .com platforms.

Trump is just the most ugly manifestation of this attack on non-right wing media and platforms: he threatened to veto an unrelated military spending bill unless Congress repealed Section 230 in hopes of heaping a DMCA-like level of liability onto Twitter et al. The actual result would be the neutering of the Internet for everyone: no comment sections if discussion was not the major feature, heavy moderation of anything that might offend anyone.
I didn't claim anything about the premise of the article, I commented on the content of the title/headline.
In the US, protected classes are well defined in law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_group
Like "seditionist" or "terrorist" or "insurrectionist"?
The Faster, Cheaper, Better Way to Charge Electric Vehicles
But, per your original post, wouldn't deplatforming then just be pushing it underground again? While letting it get to the point the ideas can spread and radicalize others?
If they actually enforced their TOS 90% of their extremist userbase would leave, which is why a post about shooting Mike Pence by one of their most followed users could stay up for days until Apple threatened them.
When will people ask Twitter, FB etc. to do the same?
Dupe of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25707959
> destroying your communities in fire is legitimate protest while being angry at and petitioning your federal government at their seat of power is sedition.

Do you seriously actually believe this is a balanced representation of the events we're talking about? A simple yes or no, please.
Trump’s “political views” include inciting violence to overturn the election.
even ACLU managed to squeak a protest via their counsel. weak squeak..but a statement nevertheless.

https://www.newsweek.com/aclu-counsel-warns-unchecked-power-... :

[..]A legislative counsel member of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) warned Friday that the suspension of President Donald Trump's social media accounts wielded "unchecked power," by Twitter and Facebook.

Kate Ruane, a senior legislative counsel at the ACLU said in a statement that the decision to suspend Trump from social media could set a precedent for big tech companies to silence less privileged voices.[..]
The number of exceptions to that supposed right are so numerous it’s almost not worth discussing.
You do realise that this is the exact behaviour that caused such a deep divide in the first place? You have already decided that half of the World is unethical and deserves no platform. Just because we support a political ideology that you do not agree with? Wow! And I thought you guys are the free speech advocates!
as they say, the best time to build this hypothetical platform would have been 10 years ago. The second best time is now.
Maybe try reading some actual postings on Parler? It might surprise you.
Kind of seems like you detected it at step 1.
I don't think any ML languages are going to be able to qualify for best language for fast development. They are a paradigm shift for too many developers, which means you're going to pay a price getting up to speed.

Compilation time is generally not the bounding factor for development speed these days. Theoretically, compile time is zero for scripting languages so that's at least one point against weighing compile time heavily. I think the key benefit of OCaml and other ML langauges over Rust right now is actually higher kinded types, dependent types, and things in that realm of abstraction -- which you're probably not going to be using unless they're built into some library you're making use of, so the benefit is kinda moot there. Feels like the best power/weight for abstractions in codebases is the typeclass (or Traits in rust), most of the stuff above that is not great for fast development unless it's already in place.

And if we're talking about ML languages, I'm firmly in the Haskell camp because I think it has a better ecosystem (more than any research language should), an incredibly good runtime system (they've got the best native+green thread implementation I've ever seen), and fantastic abstractions for working with shared memory (when you need that). The whole "if it compiles, it works" is generally true. No need for a holy war, but if OCaml is in the race for fast development (which means that ML is in the race), then I'd pick Haskell over it to start on ecosystem/adoption, production readiness and features -- if you can manage to keep your developers from climbing the ladder of research-level abstraction.
So you're saying censorship has no threat to civilized society?

>“Republics and limited monarchies derive their strength and vigor from a popular examination into the action of the magistrates,” Benjamin Franklin declared. By sharing knowledge and sparking debate, a free press invigorates and educates the nation’s citizens. Freedom will be “a short-lived possession” unless the people are informed, Thomas Jefferson once said. To quote John Adams: “The liberty of the press is essential to the security of the state.”

However you want to define these apps, they're basically falling under the first Amendment. Obviously there are limits which are carved out in law. However how would you feel if newspaper printers elected to no longer print specific news papers backing one candidate or another?

In an ideal world, the market would separate the wheat from the chaff, and these platforms would dry up and die on their own.
https://cloud.yandex.com :)
No more aiding and abetting conspirators of mass-assassination events?
Parler is a 33-person company, according to LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/parlerllc/insights/). Although they punch far above their weight in publicity, they are a mere afterthought compared with Twitter when viewed in financial terms.

The AWS ban will most likely end this company. Anyone who pops up to replace Parler will eventually face the same scrutiny and fate. Ultimately, my personal opinion is that the Parler ban is a tremendously good thing for the world. The people who are subject to being radicalized by social media are less likely to become radicalized if they are not exposed to content. Removing Parler removes the content; this will reduce the radicalization.

If you think that the typical conspiracy theorist on Parler is capable of critical thinking, you're mistaken.
They were dancing around in viking hats! That is not people almost pulling off an insurrection. What is with this lunacy?
Also, false equivalencies are stubborn... A powerful political figure (the effing outgoing prez) whips up a crowd to invade Congress (not just any federal property) while a critical session is in progress, with armed nut jobs announcing they're here to kill lawmakers and the veep. I don't see anything coming nearly close in recent memory. Professional whataboutists are even out there claiming this was an antifa false flag...
The votes were never there, the electoral college convened and the votes were counted. What attempted theft?

You don't know what you are talking about.
> Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition

Well it's a good thing the government had nothing to do with this decision then!
>The market has judged that “pro violence” speech is to be de-monetized.

No is just the rich elites who fear getting the rope (which they know its deserved)

Liberal vs conservative is just divide and conquer
NASA’s HiRISE Camera Captures Close-Up of Mars’s Enormous Canyon
Seems to me the natural market forces of this declining market are not as vulnerable to the market distortion forces as traditionally applied.

Ships need to keep moving, for those who do they can suffer not so much.

Lots of ships have also stopped moving so some people are getting a zero who never had this happen.

That could put downward presure on prices just to get a little movement going again.
Do you know how long it took VW to erase the Nazi stench off of its brand? Beyond so many moral reasons for doing this, no one wants to be associated with a fascist movement. Hit to your brand is only exponential from here on out.
Good point. Though a lot of the backlash against public health emergency powers actually being used when necessary is of a fairly knee-jerk, borderline anarchist nature (reminiscent of some recent anti-taxation movements that have been similarly vague). There's a difference between calling for government to have stronger protections on a particular right or freedom, vs simply rejecting any instance of government having a direct impact on your life.
> CMake has working FindXyz modules for most major libraries

Unless you have that library installed anywhere that is not /usr/include
Then you have to just hope and pray that there's some magic incantation that will make it find the right one (especially if your system-installed version is the wrong version and you'd really like to use the newer version you installed to $HOME)
Yes the left and the (often far) right will recognize the same problem but then put forth very, very different causes of and solutions to those problems. Both contrast with the center that doesn’t even agree there is a problem (e.g. healthcare).
I'm curious to see how far things have gone.

Does anyone here believe that an employer should be able to fire an employee for supporting Trump?
> 3. DO NOT treat exercise as a priority. Because then it is subject to your other priorities. Instead, make it a habit.

That’s a good little hack there.
And somehow it managed to have LESS shaky-cam than the official animation.
That was the number provided by Bitfinex’s lawyers at a time when there were about 20 billion fewer Tethers in existence. I’d be shocked if it was over 10%. But since they won’t do an audit, we’ll only find out after everything collapses.
Again I'm talking from sovereign point of view. You don't want Silicon Valley companies to control your country's information flow. There's no guarantee that those companies won't ban the account of government apparatus for whatever reason.
Please don't respond to flamewar comments by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That just makes things even worse.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Edit: your account has been using the site primarily for political and ideological battle. That's the line at which we ban accounts (see [1] for more explanation), regardless of which politics or ideology they're battling for. We have to, because this sort of use of the site—or rather abuse, given its intended purpose—destroys what HN is supposed to exist for. I've therefore banned your account. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.

[1] https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
The most extreme elements of the Trump movement basically proved themselves to be not much different than Al Qaeda on Wednesday. Given that, it seems perfectly appropriate to not allow them onto airplanes.
You know you are a moderate when both sides want you dead.

This guarantees a renaissance for new p2p technologies, or a war, but still hoping the former mitigates the latter. It's very important to provide people with alternatives to violence, and every platform removal reduces the number of options by one. Discourse is the only alternative to violence. Remove discourse, and you literally walk right into it.
Twitter isn't going after extremists at all. Terrorists continue to post on Twitter right now. Totalitarian regimes carrying out genocide continue to tweet happily away on Twitter.

This is about going after anyone they think they should ban in order to keep the Democrats happy.

This is not about Trump for the technology companies. It's about bending the knee enough towards the Democrats to ensure that they retain as much of their freedom as possible. They are sacrificing others' freedoms in order to hopefully secure they own - although I think this is a Faustian bargain.
To directly answer your question, I would say no - however it is ideological activism to only enforce those ToS for specific services. The #killallmen hashtag has trended more than once on twitter, for example.
I'm really rooting for JPEG XL. AVIF is good but it's clearly a video codec adapted to fixed images, whereas JPEG XL covers a lot more use cases important when dealing with images (ie palette images, progressive decoding, more bit depths options, JPEG lossless recompression, etc). Adding to that producing large AVIF images takes an ungodly amount of memory and time right now.
Donald Trump is only the 3rd U.S. president to have access to social media.

He does not need Twitter or Facebook to reach his constituents; he has a press briefing room in the White House and 24/7 access to reporters. And guess what, whatever he says will get covered by everyone, posted and discussed immediately.

When people argue that social media is too powerful because the President needs it, they are according these companies with way more power then they actually have.
I predict 2021 is going to be the year of conservative media hammering on censorship, causing their audience to distrust the media even more than they do, and conservative politicians using it to score points with conservative voters.
Yeah by the fact that the free market created these platforms and gave them power.

Us on the left have been fucking telling everyone for years that these companies are dangerous but everyone else embraced them.

These companies yanked the plug on many leftist communities and dozens of social media networks for sex workers. To this day VISA and Mastercard don't allow payments to come in if the website is mainly sex related.

Where the hell was the outrage then? We begged people to support us and tell these companies to back off but no one did.

The inaction of everyone has lead to this. Welcome to how "free market capitalism" actually just means dozens of small unaccountable governments with more power than hundreds of countries combined. You asked for this. Take it.
>I am not commenting on deplatforming.

>there is a danger in turning deplatforming into a weapon

Seems like a comment to me.