skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is Hacker News. Do I really need to explain that sentences clearly delineated with punctuation, with clause-joining words like “either” and “or” are an atomic thought meant to be consumed in full?

You even quoted “either” and cropped off “or”.
> can you define incitement of violence?

No, I'm no lawyer but there is a lot of legal precedent for this, at least in my country.

This and hate speech against groups are the only limitation on free speech where I live.
And it would be one thing if Parler started out as a strictly free speech platform. No, they’re solely funded by the very same people who started the fascist movement. As such the whole platform is designed to give cover to this specific group of people.
they were there to "STOP THE STEAL" and "HANG MIKE PENCE". Those were their chants - verbatim. They wanted to murder the VP because he wouldn't accede to the President's request to block certification of the election and anoint Donald Trump as President again.
Free speech for a corporation is allowing them to ban whatever they want that's effecting their bottom line.

Hosting and publishing certain speech is a liability.

Why should the state dictate what a corporation must allow on their own servers facilitated by the services they created?

Should the state force YouTube to include videos no advertiser wants to be associated with?

EFF's statement is consistent with protecting digital rights.
MSNBC are an absolute disgrace IMO. 'The Proud Boys and QAnon supporters are the ones behind this.'

These are tiny bogey man segments of society cable TV bobbleheads terrify everyone with to help justify removing people's basic rights. The incoming biden crew have a Patriot Act 2.0 ready to go to combat 'domestic terrorists', which could include just about anyone who doesn't comply with the party line
I'm guessing this is in part due to the increased usage of services like website builders, and also just the simple evolution of the internet. Tried and tested designs like the hamburger menu get copied on every site, making things look more and more similar.
Thank you! I always mistype IPFS as IPSF (Irvine Public School Foundation).
Can you cite a source on the connection between Kathy Griffin and the guy who shot Scalise?
> If all my friends are on Instagram, Twitter, and Snapchat, then I am forced to use those.

You are not forced to use those, nor any social media platform. Nor are you entitled to the use of any social media platform, legally anyway.

You WANT to use them, but that's much different from being forced. Being forced would mean everyone who gets a US drivers license also gets a facebook account.
Agreed. The bottom line is very clear: do not (directly) cause violent attack. The society is already bearing with them, they may even be able to indirectly cause violent attacks.

You can't expect everyone to love everyone. But violence is the red line.
> A rapper sang about how to rob Chinese families because "they don't believe in bank accounts": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFxOsUe0I8o

Imagine if this was a white or asian person making a rap video about how to not rob blacks because they don't have any money. Twitter and social media would explode with rage.

Can people on HN explain why this double standard exists in America?

It's okay to punch up but not punch down. Doesn't that already say a lot about the racial hierarchy in America? Doesn't this suggest that society considers blacks to be at the bottom of socioeconomic order and need to be "protected" at a politically correct level but refuse to offer the same vigilance when it comes to their economic well being?
When and if that actually happens, we will have to figure out some way to deal with that problem.
Yes, after concrete evidence that the incitement is sincere, or being materially interpreted as sincere.

(For the record: I think the guillotine imagery is as offensive as the Pinochet helicopter stuff, which is to say, extraordinarily offensive, and I think less of anyone who uses it. That's easy for me to say though, because I'm also not a leftist.).
The ingredients for the Coca-Cola flavor are listed as "natural flavors". That's the extent of disclosure.

Trade secret just means that they don't share the recipe and make efforts to keep it secret. Calling it a "trade secret" is really a marketing strategy as much as anything else. Just like the rumors that coca leaf extract are an ingredient... something that is "neither confirmed nor denied". A marketing strategy.

I think that it's basically flavored with vanilla, cinnamon, a few essential oils (orange, lemon, lavender), and some spices (nutmeg!). One you start adding that many flavors to a recipe, the exact flavors are no longer important, and I'm sure you could replicate something similar at home if you were willing to do enough experimentation. There are a few recipes online that you can use.
Have a try at adding some “good” speech to some of those extremist threads
That is the market deciding. Twitter's market is liberals and leftists, so twitter changes the platform based on their demand. If you don't like this, then you don't like free markets.
Probably many. Especially in countries where organized lynching is still a thing.

You can certainly find reports of people proudly sharing the videos of doing the lynching on social media. So I don't see why it wouldn't be organized via social media too.
Bunch of good apples happy to coexist with the bad ones? I accounted for that.
This is the winner. I completely agree and see this going exactly here.

The net result will be that this end to end encryption becomes a terror for all governments - even ones that ride to power using these tools.

This means that the pressure to add backdoors or even front doors to this kind of content will win out. I'll assume that 10 years is enough time for that?

I really cant see any solution other than embracing dystopia.
Except that in this marketplace, someone is wandering around, deleting the ideas that they disagree with.
Also, pre-deepfake ideals.
Hey! Leave us out of it. I can see the differences, too. The folks to blame aren’t colorblind. They are color indifferent. :-)
I'm not sure I follow?

If one year an apple costs 2 gold coins, but next year, that same apple costs only 1 gold coin - this would be deflation. I'm still trading gold coin(s) for an apple (fungible), it's just that the currency itself got stronger against the asset I wanted to purchase.
Thanks for your answer. Since you chose $1 since it is the least bet, I would like to increase your options. You can now choose any real value between 0.01$ to 100$. You are free to change your answer of $1 to anything you'd like.

You do not need to answer the question. The point I'm trying to make is that as an investor you can invest in an asset class even if you can imagine an Armageddon (crash to zero for BTC) scenario. You just have to allocate the right proportion towards the asset incorporate the volatility. Remember, the same scenario could also happen for any investment asset. The lesser the likelihood of the Armageddons the higher the allocation. You can simply reduce your asset allocation to what you perceive as the likelihood of the Armageddon scenario. I can tell you for sure that none of us can predict a scenario with a 100% probability. Given that, an allocation of 1$ or even 0.01-0.99$ is not a bad idea.

Oh, as far as BTC getting to zero - I can't imagine how that can happen without every government on the planet banning it [0]. Currently, you have governments in well developed economies consider it as an ordinary tangible asset [1] and even trading them from exchanges (9th largest in Europe) [2]!

[0] https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the-feds-balance-sheet-the-...

[1] https://www.winheller.com/en/banking-finance-and-insurance-l...

[2] https://www.bsdex.de/en/
Look at the examples from Amazon, they had single digit up votes. Amazon called them out for 98 posts over serval weeks. How many users and daily posts on Parler? I get the CEO comments but the violent content examples from Amazon seemed weak.
"Freedom of religion is not freedom from consequences, you can believe in X god but don't be surprised when we do not allow you into our shops and universities"

Do you see a substantial difference between your statement and the one above?
this is from left wing cancel culture organizations rallying to shutdown the platform where conservative audiences were migrating. Like Apple, Google and others, this is a coordinate effort to quickly silence opposing voices.
just for additional context the Taiwan people have no dreams of occupying China by force or any means, other than the dissolution of CCP on its own but even then most Taiwanese wanted to stay as economically independent as possible, since they can fare off better on their own as evident in this current pandemic, restraining ties with China is a good measure
To me, no.

My question was to the author of the commentary I was replying...though, since I posted they’ve gone back and appended a note to their comment providing their definition.
Many of the biggest companies in the world and they aren't going anywhere anytime soon.
Could you expand what you mean in your comment (just a little bit) by any chance?

I am very interested in this line-of-reasoning.
You'd lose a lot of performance, then, because the tank would have to separate while still containing enough fuel to slow down and come home. You'd make a little bit of it back because the OMS wouldn't have to use thrust to circularize the orbit of the SSME mass or to deorbit it...
Notice he won't commit to any quantifiable short-term predictions that could come back to bite him in the future. No references to any ML benchmarks at all. Just a lot of hand waving and vague arguments.

A has been that has nothing to contribute towards ML or AI. Ignore him.
is it possible for sitting President to order an executive order to breakup these companies that are openly challenging Trump who still has two more weeks left?

even more worrying is the Cheynne complex where Trump flew to, I have a feeling he is planning something unthinkable.
>I am not commenting on deplatforming.

That is not what I said. Selecting a subset of my words in order to change their meaning is not intellectually honest.
I assume you mean unprofitable as in bad for business, because I suspect if Parler is able to exist at all it will be highly profitable.
>That is a completely absurd false equivalence.

Except it's not an equivalence at all. I'm simply saying (and evidently correctly at that), that your justification would also apply to this other situation.

> It would be a dumb decision, as it would turn away a huge number of their customers, but it would be within their rights.

Well, that's where I totally disagree. The vast, vast majority of customers wouldn't be in violation of it, so they have nothing to gain from switching and morality is at best an afterthought.
> we challenged their fundamental assumptions about the world or proposed alternatives they called us “cucks” and what can you do at that point

That's not true at all for most Trump supporters. If you have trouble finding answers to your questions I can give them to you. I won't call you a cuck and will engage in a proper debate. Even though I don't subscribe to all of Trump's policies I'm a right winger and a conservative. Another point to note: I don't subscribe to all of Trump's policies because the right wing in America is different from right wing in my country in many respects. But there is sufficient overlap to be able to say I can agree to many of the conservative points in US politics as well. So if you have questions regarding my ideology fire away and I'll try my best to answer.
Please feel free to start your own closed door company that is not accountable to host the violent political opinions of your choice then.

Much like gay wedding cakes or nazi cupcakes, you cannot force a company to host your content if they choose not to.
A “government information bureau?”

Wow! Another bureaucracy that'll have its own factions with their own agendas that will never work against either their superiors or the electorate.
Bake the cake.
Host the site.
Engineering teams that aren't building apps for terrorists of course.
For live streaming, the p2p is very interesting. I will try to link a very interesting test where a lot of server bandwidth was supplied by p2p. That can be very useful. About regular videos, even if only 1 other person is watching, p2p is in effect.

Edit: https://framacolibri.org/t/fonctionnalite-live-retour-dutili...

Check this link. It has a user test the live. One screenshot shows 1 GB from server, 9 GB from peers. 15 GB upload.
You do know that the Republicans repeatedly dragged tech CEOs in front of their kangaroo courts to air their entirely fabricated grievances, right? Why would technology companies be worried about Democrats after surviving four years of that?
Less than 12 hours warning? Amazon had clearly previously communicated with them before today, even having a phone call with them in the last 24 hours. Clearly provided them with examples of problematic content, which Parler didn't even do the bare minimum and remove.

A bunch of companies deciding that unmoderated violence should not be given space on their platforms, or using their tools, is not a slippery slope.
I don't particularly like free markets but I have a very specific qualification for Twitter.

If an American platform hosts public officials who use that platform for political purposes, then it should follow that all American citizens should have access to engage, comment and react.

Public officials relying on private platforms for public policy purposes, fundraising etc seems absurd and grotesquely undemocratic.
Build app on some sort of decentralized blockchain ... though it might be a hurdle to get the average person to use it
Nazis, fascists, and white supremacists already have a safe space that nobody seems to care about knocking offline. It's called Stormfront, and it's not Mozilla's fault if a web forum running since the 1990s isn't good enough for ignorant hitlerjugend who mistake corporate-owned social media platforms like Facebook or Twitter for "the internet".
If you guys know where one could secure those types of put options, please fill me in. The only avenue atm for me seems to be a spread bet on margin... Which I'm not that keen on as "market irrational for longer than solvent" and so forth.
I completely agree, 2 separate issues, one was successfully finished, as there are no new Stasi members joining the police ranks - but the other issue is ever present. I think there should be "radicalization" checks for any people in position of power (Police/Military), and if they don't uphold the values of the country anymore, they should be let go from their jobs.
This comment does not deserve to be downvoted. A decentralized platform ensuring people can communicate with who they want is a net positive for society.

If this is something you're interested in, I am as well.
Are you talking about "stable" repos? Do you know anyone who sticks to those, for personal use?

(A lot of people use "testing" for reasons I have not been able to comprehend. The main difference from "unstable" is it takes a minimum of 2 weeks for fixes to show up in "testing". Or did, last I checked.)
When I was 11 years old I learnt to program starting with text based games in Turbo C++ or something.

Just setup a pc with constraints, pick a language, teach the syntax and let your kid make a game you can play with.
Oh so basically every Democrat in 2020.
The degree to which people here are willing to support these actions is quite unsettling, now corporates are judges and people love it.
Interesting comparison. Dignifying with a simple example:

Child porn != Video promoting peace by President Trump

Child porn != Speaking freely about election fraud, and spreading information as such.

The difference is child porn is clearly illegal, while the other things are clearly not. Children are being hurt, which is illegal. These comparisons are stretches, just like your logic.

Hope you watch now! Stay open minded :-)
I'm pretty sure there is no button which could cut off all my social relations.
Why is a moderation strategy required at all? If I wanted to create a platform which followed US law and nothing else, I would be instantly deplatformed. Really, all I need is a legal department.
> you cannot force a company to host your content if they choose not to.

Thats actually not true. There are numerous businesses that are absolutely forced to distribute your content, even if they don't like it.

The obvious example is the phone network, and other common carriers. There are a whole set of laws that do indeed force these companies to distribute your content.
It’s private property. As is AWS. Granted a private home has some additional legal attributes, the point remains the same.

Are you allowed to screech racist diatribes to call for a riot at my bar’s open mic night?

Are you allowed to scream political speech in a shopping mall?

Are you allowed to use the PSTN to organize your criminal enterprise?
Agreed. But ~some variants of socialism consider officially blessed outlets for change insufficient and accept that violence may be a part of circumventing their limitations~ is a very far leap from ~socialism is inherently violent~.

Edit to add: it’s probably helpful in illustrating the difference to remove political ideology and highlight other movements which have drawn similar conclusions. As an example, in the Civil Rights era, many people trying to effect change according to officially blessed outlets were sprayed with fire hoses, beaten, attacked with dogs, even murdered. Often in plain sight, sometimes symbolically as a warning to others who might follow their lead. Others drew the conclusion that the officially blessed outlets for the change they sought were a facade, that they’d be similarly violently excluded from shaping the world they lived in. Some of them determined that the only way they could achieve any kind of justice was to reserve the right to use force to achieve it.

Were they inherently violent?
I love how you ignore the last 3 words of the comment.
Which is the core problem with the no fly list. Most times people don’t even know they’re on it till they try to fly, and even then they don’t know why.
As previously established, intent is a key element of incitement. When you say:

> "giv[ing] them the kind of pride and boldness they need" (not by intimidating them with threats of violence, which would of course be illegal).

You are immediately excluding lawlessness, which defeats the complete exercise of the test (unless you have additional context to provide, which validates Trump's mental state convincingly excludes unlawful behavior). The point of the test is to examine if there was intent for unlawful behavior. Again, that would transcend the text. We would have to place ourselves in Trump's mind, and examine further, and then create a compelling argument for or against mens rea.
AWS to ban popular 'right wing' social media site
I believe this is borderline cartel behaviour, is stuff like this illegal in the USA?

For new social media startups now you have to bootstrap your global cloud infrastructure.

It was my impression AWS was fairly apolitical unlike google cloud
Will usa see an American spring? Ala Arab spring? I dont care about that. I am asking the technology. How will it handle such stuff
Is there a paywall workaround? I can't find one.
They shouldn't put "sentient" and "soon" in the same sentence.
There's a contextual history of Trump wishing violence on people: journalists, apprehended criminals, etc. -- it suggests, and it does not have to be "beyond a reasonable doubt", that Trump is OK with having violence deployed against his enemies and that, with the context of speaking to a bunch of gun-toting reactionaries, he is speaking through a lens where the employment of their guns is thus reasonable.

Further, in that speech quoted, Trump specifically says to his followers that Democrats should not be voting.

This one ain't hard to parse.
Personally I think this is for the best, keeps extremism at the fringes instead of easily accessible.
Fact check: false.
My only quibble with this is that “the left” is a bit broad — SESTA/FOSTA was bipartisan legislation unfortunately spearheaded by my Democratic representative, Carolyn Maloney.

Other than that, this is spot on. Conservatives have been happy to tell everyone to let the free market decide, only to cry foul when the market makes a decision they don’t like. Turns out you can’t have it both ways.
The most striking thing to me is the presence of his family (good relationships). Seems like such a contrast with the case of David Goodall, the 104 year old Australian who traveled to Switzerland to kill himself. He lived alone and lost his ability to see others regularly when he lost his office space at the university he was associated with. Says he traveled to see his family before killing himself. I think in general the important thing is to have good relationships on one's own terms, which Mr. Goodall did not seem to have at the end.

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-australia-43957874
In Capitol Riot, Communications Between Agencies Hampered Forceful Response
My goodness this thread is crazy....

Many HN posters: "We love free markets, every company should follow their own rules and do what they want"

Company bans violent and insurrectionist speech as is their legal right

Many HN posters: "No, not like that!"
I'm amazed that this is so difficult to understand especially on a site like this.
This is hilarious.

We're all so worried for those fair, upright, excellent Congresspeople, whose day's work was delayed by almost five whole hours.

During which the leader of this "insurrection" appealed for peace and the day after completely gave in.

If that's the insurrection you people are afraid of, you're gigantic wusses.
The meme is 4 out of 5. So yeah, most of them say sugarless gum, then there's the ones that ignore the rules of the poll and say don't chew gum. Those aren't the dentists we are talking about.

There really are dentists out there that will tell you that if you chew gum, the sugared stuff is what you want. Not a lot of them, but probably about the same percentage as people that have a great deal of trust in congress or television news.

Hard to believe, but these people exist.
Maybe, but I'm not even sure if there are many Zoroastrians left, much less whether they're racist or not.
It is simple really. Don't have "wrong" political opinion. (Not my POV in case it is not clear)
One of the weird parts of this is just how damn good x264 is. I have a bunch of videos on my website, and because I'm some kind of basement-dwelling cretin, I manually encode them with FFmpeg to MPEG-4 and WebM.

Encoding to MPEG-4: Easy, fast, high-quality.

Encoding to WebM: Much slower to encode, requires tweaking the parameters, video usually looks noticeably worse at similar bit rates.

I don't know how much of this is caused by the encoder, how much is caused by the codec, and how much is caused by poor selection of parameters on my part. I use "recommended settings" that I find online and H.254/HiP.
I have a hard time understanding why people feel like this is a new thing. If I start shouting obscenities during a live interview on ANY major media outlet, they will immediately kick me off. Is their refusal really the end of Free Speech?
The paradox is that when you treat people you disagree with as extremists, you create more extremism.
It seems to me that one of the main reasons this sort of instability is now happening is precisely because we view elections as win-or-lose. I was rather young, but I don't ever remember people having this much affection or disdain over individual candidates like Kerry, McCain, or Romney. Viewing the other side as the devil and yours as angels only causes stuff like the Capitol riots.
Is the guy in custody? Who is he? What's his background?
Bland, waffly "we support this but bear in mind...".