skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
So they did not fire bomb various police stations? Torch Businesses that refused to put up signs in support of their movements? Attack people in the street pulling them out of their cars and beating them? Literally stalk a man in the streets to execute him?

None of those things happened? That is your position?
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-capitol-in...
This stuff makes me really, really suspicious.

At this point, the reason for deplatforming is that someone accused a bad thing on the opposite party.

It would be ludicrous to ban anyone blaming the events at the Capitol on Trump and/or Republicans, even if you earnestly believe that's unfair.

There is no objective case for blaming it on anyone except the individuals doing it. Anything beyond that is subjective, and you get your hands dirty really quick (ie try arguing that the Scalise shooting - by a Bernie volunteer against Republican congressmen - is completely divorced from Bernie, but the Capitol events are completely tied to Trump).

Ergo this amounts to banning people - almost all on one side of politics, even if a fringe thereof - for saying things that appear to be untrue. Not even a hint of violence or a call thereto, just an opinion that is believed to be wrong.

Are we quite sure we're happy with people losing their income and livelihood and brand and platform, just because the tech companies don't agree with their claims?

Do you know how many smaller, left-of-centre groups will quickly get caught up in that once they join this discussion around unionising the workforce of the tech giants?

You may despise Bannon, and I find it hard to believe he's an earnest actor, but think through the steps for how this happened. He's being banned for an opinion, entirely separate from any risk to anyone, and to argue otherwise (ie an implicit call to violence against the blamed party) would open you up to the claim that blaming anything in the last week on Trump is a call to violence against the president and/or his supporters, and is thus equally bannable.

Is that reasonable? Should all opinions on this topic result in permanent banning and deplatforming?
So then what... Yes it’s been true and knowable for many years now but, not many orgs change to a highly leveraged style. So then how to succeed at it?

Hard to address in a comment, easier to check for some big red flags.

What percentage of people involved have lived it before? If 0%, then I’m not sure it’s even possible. Similar to trying copy Disneyland. You could read a novel describing it but if no one‘s actually been there it’ll be a rough ride.

What’s the plan for anyone leading people? Some people freak out when people are newly crossing the triangle below them, more so if they don’t know why it’s important or how to adapt to it.

What are the checks to make sure your org is not just choosing a fancy name (I.e. digital transformation) and merely mapping old processes back onto it but with more overhead?

It seems like maybe that’s the mistake is to think about this as a process difference when really it’s a systemic and cultural difference.

Take the example of a stakeholder talking to a new hire. If stakeholders do it to ‘do the new process’ it’s not there yet. If they do it reflexively because they expect they may get useful feedback, then that’s a good sign.
Not to be HN-typical but what do you think about Rust? I find it extremely interesting that some of the top language maintainers/designers are now employed at different big tech companies.
Gab isn’t being blackballed. Gab isn’t restricted from doing business. It’s just forced to do it’s business on its own because it’s not seen as a good citizen.

“We could better regulate our site if you gave us better tools to do so” isn’t valid. If they “care about the kids”, the cost for outside help with that is clear, also deal with the far-right/extremist elements on your platform as well. Gab doesn’t want to do that, so the other players are distancing themselves. This mean that the quality of their content moderation when it comes to child pornography is their responsibility.

“I’ll do what I want and you must enable me” isn’t a valid argument.
As a counterexample: The Pirate Bay have successfully dealt with this sort of thing for many years, and they were subject to much harsher and more sustained censorship. Including legal attacks by various nation states.

Is it really totalitarianism in this case? Or, just some private companies inconveniencing people by choosing not to do business with them?
Quite a few people fantasize about doing exactly this as a way to leverage political power. The main obstacles to the idea are the way the US food industry is highly corporatized, so that an individual farmer/agricultural contractor has little knowledge or say in where their product ends up, it just meets a certain grade that is worth a certain price and is them loaded onto trucks and taken away.It would be very hard to coordinate this commercial machinery for political ends, and if it were done the government could exercise existing powers to take control of distribution to ensure a steady food supply.

Supposing an extreme scenario where federal authority had collapsed and the country was int he process of Balkanization along ideological-historical rather than ethnic lines (unlikely but not impossible), most of the really big liberal enclaves are built around ports, which would allow both the import of food and a counter-blockade of essential and semi-essential goods that would have a slower but equally deleterious economic impact.
Bed property to rent in RONDEBOSCH EAST: R 17 000
I agree. They certainly have a valuable role to play. But if you play with fire like that, you can't get mad when twitter viciously dunks on you for being stupid.
This really strengthens/validates everyone who told him to attack big tech sooner.
Rust is currently in use for production now though.
>You are free to create your own far-right payment bank and payment system.

Or just write a check to the Trump Campaign.
Thats why Facebook are targeting them.
Yeah it is this. I believe there is some config option to turn this behaviour off, maybe browser.download.lastDir.savePerSite
How does "focus follows mouse" work? If I'm understanding; your desktop is a collection of various sizes windows, maybe overlapping and stacking. If your mouse goes off the side of the one you're focusing, it will auto focus the one you're now hovering over. Won't this lead to accidents where you'll have a larger window suddenly gain focus, with no way to see the old one and re-focus it? Seems easy to make a mistake.

This maybe would be solved by a window manager that enforces never allowing windows to stack depthwise? Which OSX doesn't have of course. Just size-and-position-hotkey workarounds
I know some of them, and no, but they're getting there.
I hope the same.
Orwell's book actually described 3 super-states, all of which share same ideology and, presumably, have their own "ministries of truth".
That's what Taobao did to WeChat before its rapid user growth.
I Worry About Venture-Backed Mental Health and Addiction Startups
What are you talking about? There are videos of this:

IED: https://youtu.be/dm_lZxmPxUU

As for that chants: go to any of the videos of the various occupations from the summer. If that really does come from a 2015 march instead of 2020, fine, but go to any video and find the same activity (arson, assault, IEDs, lasers) and chants like "no justice no peace".
Meanwhile, on the other side of the aisle...

>There is no "opportunity" to be had here and thinking that way wastes resources that are better spent elsewhere.
The "left" doesn't act on "policy" and never change their votes.

>When the "outrage" dies out because it's not being fed by propaganda, the "left" will completely forget about elections, demonopolization, free speech, etc. and will go back to opposing all those things because they are proposed by "The Conservatives".

>And those of us working toward those things will simply continue to slog through the hard work of slowly building support.

But hey, who are we kidding, there aren't two sides. It's crazy all the way around.
Emacs has rainbow-delimiters and rainbow-blocks (and show-paren).

https://github.com/istib/rainbow-blocks
We have lost every fight
Compelled? No. Financial orgs are not compelled to be moral.

But as the left loves: freedom from prosecution is not freedom from consequences
Since some of the biggest Biden supporting areas of the USA are also some of the most densely populated, I suspect this would backfire very quickly.

States targeted by these food blockades might feel some pain at first, but if that pain persisted the states would just start looking to get their food from other sources and that could even mean from suppliers outside of the USA.
Probably because their Chinese overlords told them to. Memes and conspiracies aside I do think it’s a little suspicious that Zuck asked Xi to name his friggin first born child. And the amount of information including beliefs and location that this guy has on our families is mildly terrifying.
That doesn't mean the person's view will change. I've seen nurses on Twitter talk about how when they inform someone that their relative has died of Covid, they'll still insist it's fake.
If it is fair for Apple to sell ads inside App Store’s search feature, it is perfectly fair for someone to buy a competitors keywords. This is also done all the time. I find the App Store to be the one to fault by making the ad look the same as a search result
At this point all of this is just an old-fashioned witch hunt. Rowan Atkinson was not referring to Trump but his exact words apply here.

People's mentality has not changed even a bit since medieval times.

Wouldn't be surprised if people downvote my comment here too because they cannot accept that statement.
Please provide the well sourced news article, or video with the beating of the police officer to death with a flag.

I'm asking because it was claimed it was a fire extinguisher, but other sources said it was a heart attack or stroke that happened many hours after the fact, and the cop had already had well-known health issues prior.
There was a bomb planted in the capitol... how is that not a terrorist activity?
A million ways that look like money laundering. Are they going to tell Coinbase that the 10 million they are withdrawing is from the local laundromat?
I agree with this, instinctually. However, I think the political calculus here is that it's better to really piss off a "small" amount of people than allow a potentially larger group to get radicalized.

Vice did an article on this recently, when Telegram tried to kick off ISIS: https://www.vice.com/en/article/vb55bd/telegram-deplatformin...

It's interesting to consider whether the (soon to be former) president of the US deserves similar treatment to a terrorist organization responsible for tens of thousands of civilian deaths.
How would that have helped him?

He relied on "big tech" to deliver his world view.
The argument that he gave marching orders is hyperbole.
I respectfully disagree. When a politician and party are inciting violence, encouraging a coup, and undermining the foundations of democracy then I think we’ve crossed over the line from needing to be accepting of different views.
This is a great example of where OOP and FP necessarily part ways.
Sounds like the UX and the concept needs more refinement. Also I wouldn’t let Google anywhere near such a product.
I think things like that happen more than people realize and are pretty funny.

Like Steve Perry was replaced as the lead singer for Journey.

In the beginning of the 2nd movie of Back to the Future, they replaced Michael J Fox's girlfriend with someone else. (did anyone notice? I was ... hmmm... I swear something's different...)

I wonder what the risk is when dating a twin.

Most people wouldn't notice.
Huh? You're really trying to compare what some randos do on Twitter to what the President of the United States did on Wednesday?

Really think about it: the President of the United States incited a mob to attack the Capitol to prevent the certification of the vote of his political opponent.

He did this by pushing constant lies and propaganda for months, and urging his followers to "fight" for him. Go watch his speech and then try to tell me he didn't know exactly what he was doing.

> Trump saying to head down the street

I'm honestly flabbergasted that you can see the culmination of Trump's actions from the past year (or however long he's claimed the election would be rigged) as just saying "head down the street".
> ... otherwise they’d have to admit that they just don’t feel smart enough to use what would otherwise be a perfectly good programming technique FOR SPOCK.

Is how I feel about Haskell.
After thinking it through a bit more, I will concede that there is a reasonbly high chance I was wrong with my insistence on absolutely keeping principles being more important than dealing with actual demonstrated bad actors.

As long as this doesn't lead to a slippery slope of more censorship (both by the state and private entities), and more power to non due-process witch hunt, I would be wrong. I don't think there are a way any of us can say for certain what will happen, so let's wait a couple of years and see how it turn out.
Like, if you search for Firefox on the Play Store, you get an ad for Brave.
I don't agree with the sentiment. You cannot be responsible for people's opinions/reactions for actions you take that you feel are right. Moreover, by placating the very people you would upset otherwise by punitive actions you send a signal that their actions can go unpunished and further entrench the idea that they are right in their actions which is much more dangerous than a temporary outrage.
yes but practically big businesses can get away with these types of things without much fuss. even in the case where Apple and Google were caught wage-fixing, and there were emails from the CEOs blatantly colluding to prove it, all they got was a slap on the wrist. So it's effectively legal in my view
he didn't. He thought they are by his side.

How Tim Cook Won Donald Trump’s Ear> https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-tim-cook-won-donald-trumps-...
Less than a minute and my assumption already proved to be true. Fascinating how people crave for echo chambers.
I agree with your theory. For instance, I’ve tried Anki and found it incredibly confusing to use. However, a lot of folks online comment on how it just works for them and how they can’t see how you’d improve upon it. I’m convinced that if you work with something enough and absolutely need to work with it, you find workarounds and eventually forget that you’re using workarounds.

I use Inkscape regularly and have issues with its UI. If I click and drag an object fast enough, often the object beneath the one I want is selected and dragged. It’s absolutely frustrating but I eventually learned to click, pause briefly, then drag to get around it. I’ve invested too much time learning the tool to move onto something else at this point.
I have similar thoughts. I finally swapped to desktop linux last year and tried to be very mindful about all the little niggling issues I ran in to.

I think the difference between an okay piece of software and a great piece of software is how cognizant the designers and developers are of these things. It's partially why I use an iphone now over android. Even if I disagree with how something is done it's usually evident that Apple at least _thought_ about it. It's not perfect, there's still the occasional interaction that's just plain bad, but those moments are much rarer than I encounter on my PCs (Xubuntu/MX Linux).

If I ever have the resources to retire I think I'd dedicate a solid chunk of my time to just work on those quality issues.

Just to preempt the replies, this is how most of these conversations go:

Alice: I dislike [x] because I can't do [a].

Bob: Oh, why are you trying to do [a]? You can accomplish that by doing [b], [c], and then [d]. [a] doesn't really make sense, let me explain the model behind how this all works.

Alice: Thanks for explaining the model to me, but I still just want to do [a]. Could we expand the model, or handle this as an edge case?

Bob <any of the following replies>

: No! [a] breaks the model! Things are much simpler if you just embrace the model.

: If you want to do [a] go use this other product that's broken in other slightly annoying ways.

: If you want to do it, you can open a PR adding it. But we probably won't add it because it doesn't fit the current model, and we consider that 'bloat'.

It's difficult to get into contributing to some of these projects because you come in with a change you want to make, but you have no standing in the project to effect that change (or are out of your depth and need to convince a more established dev to help you). Which makes perfect sense, a project with random contributors adding their own preferences is anarchy.

It really seems like the best projects have a very strong guideline/interactions framework, or a BDFL (benevolent dictator for life) who takes UX very personally. Most open-source projects are founded with a strong technical vision, but not a strong UX one.

The closest I can think of in the open-source desktop space is ElementaryOS. Which is lovely, but I dislike a few of their core decisions enough that using it is a pain.

The dream is a DE that enforces strict UX paradigms...but also lets you customize them easily. But I'm not sure if that's even possible. Even Apple isn't perfect and they're just trying to enforce one 'Apple way' to do things.
Turchin has also correctly predicted that the elections would be very close :

http://peterturchin.com/cliodynamica/america-in-november-202...

However, so far he has been "wrong" about his "prediction" that after that the events would be completely unpredictable. In fact, so far events have been very predictable - this might change after the inauguration though?
> not an organized thing

Do self-identified Antifa just spontaneously and simultaneously decide to engage in identical acts violence? Is there some remarkably prominent commie Schelling point us outsiders aren’t privy to?
I have no idea what you are trying to say. (I am not even sure if you are on my side or not. I'm not accusing you of anything at all.)

But "Last hired, first fired" is not and has never been exclusively about "Hiring managers are just racist assholes who look for bullshit reasons to not hire Blacks."

It's an observation about general trends that result in worse unemployment for Blacks. Some ways that can play out without any hiring manager being blatantly racist and intentionally wanting to exclude Blacks:

1. It's harder to get a job with a criminal record and you are more likely to have a criminal record if you are Black.

2. It's harder to get a job if your criminal record is for certain kinds of crimes and Blacks are more likely to be convicted and do hard time rather than get probation for the same thing.

3. It's harder to get a job if you have less education and education costs money and Blacks tend to have less of that than others.

4. It's harder to get a job if your education is from a less prestigious institution and the prestigious institutions cost more money.

5. Certain classes of jobs may be cut at a big company to save money because they are deemed "less essential" and those classes of jobs may be typically held by Blacks while the "essential" jobs are typically held by Whites.

At my corporate job during a recession, they cut janitorial service to save money. They stopped having all trash removed daily and had it removed every other day.

Janitorial jobs and cleaning jobs are very often held by people of color.

You don't have to be a racist piece of shit to go "Oh, the company is not doing well. We need to make some cuts. Um...let's have the trash taken out less." You can do that for completely good reasons that aren't inherently racist and it can still result in higher rates of unemployment for some groups than others.

I don't really want to argue this further. I cannot believe I am being given so much grief over this as if no one on the planet has heard that "racism is alive and well in the US of A."
If you can't ban a fascist for instigating violence and a coup attempt then your ToS are worthless and all moderation on every website must be made illegal.
That is very much in dispute, the reports [1] have been revised [2] and it appears that the officer may have had a medical issue and was not attached by anyone

[1] https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-nw-capitol-po...

[2] https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/us-capitol-police-a...
Is there any proof they are not already banning left-wing hosts? I feel like at this point they are banning everyone against the status quo.

Anyway I feel like this is a blessing in disguise, stuff like this can cause Tech giants to lose huge market share in the long term future.

It is good that people are forming other organic communities completely separate from Google/FB/Twitter.
>It is not the extremists who are receiving the brunt of this purge.

And if the extremists hadn't stormed the capitol and been supported (Trump literally said "we love you.") by certain folks, those who are being inconvenienced (and yes, it's just an inconvenience) wouldn't be.

If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.

Edit: Fixed wording of old saw.
Very, very sad idea.
Bannon said on this podcast that he would mount Anthony Fauci and Christopher Wray’s “heads on pikes” outside the White House as a “warning to other bureaucrats.” This was a few months ago. I presume he has been saying similar things since then.

For years, the defense of these assholes has been “Oh, that’s just rhetoric, it’s not meant to be taken literally.” Well, we’ve just seen what happens when it gets taken literally.

Good riddance to bad rubbish.
That sounds not great. Two years into your career you need a better experience and great mentors. Get any job that is writing code. What's great is that you're only two years in, I see people like this 10 years into their career. They get laid off and can't find a job because they don't have any skills others value;
To the extent that these separate companies are actually coordinating a takedown of a third party, they could run afoul of anti-racketeering / RICO statutes.

Not that I would hold my breathe waiting for the Department of Justice to press charges.

But private companies do not actually have the right to coordinate takedowns of other companies.
You make a really good point. It’s basically the Streisand Effect. A bunch of people who didn’t even know who Steve Bannon is are going to go and find out now.
> if you are a developer and you disagree with someone's choices, you are free to take it in your own direction.

That would be best said to persons named above.

They were free to fork GNOME into their touchscreen based imaginary future, and experiment with it even more freely as a minority group, rather than trying to hijack the project, and getting stalled half-way because of popular pushback.
> Attempts to turn this into a debate about political censorship are not being made in good faith

But it is political. This summer saw widespread political violence, including attacks on government institutions, not to mention billions in property damage, but the mainstream reaction to that was "Show me where it says protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful"[1] with massive support for the riots from Silicon Valley companies. Kaepernick praised the violence and Dorsey gave him $3m.[2] The double standard is just sickening.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-zb58uiFjU
[2] https://i.imgur.com/uM1iQ5R.jpg
Couldn't you have made a similar argument for Twitter not being a public forum (prior to the court case)?
If they stopped providing services to all political campaigns that’d be comparable.
If that was the only criteria we'd need to remove quite a few of them, including Pelosi.