skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>"Known as Psyops, the group uses information and misinformation to shape the emotions, decision-making and actions of American adversaries."

Hmm, now where have I seen that pattern before?

Ah yes!

Well, with the exception of "American adversaries", we see that same pattern in:

1) False Advertising

2) The Media / Fake News

3) Lawyers who do not negotiate in Good Faith; those who use tricks to trick their opponents/counterparties into unnecessary contracts and contractual obligations;

4) Cults; when the leaders lie to the people.

5) Politics; when the leaders lie to the people, or otherwise engage in "Political Theatre" (note that this is not localized to one group or party)...

6) Religions; when people tell you that in order to have X in the future, you must do Y in the present...

7) Self-help Gurus: when people tell you that in order to have X in the future, you must do Y in the present... <g>

8) Your Parents; when they told you "you can be anything you want to be in life!" -- but then you grew up and discovered that this was not so! <g>

9) Repair People: When they tell you that the plumbing (or whatever) is fixed -- but it's actually not fixed!

10) Doctors / Medical Professionals -- when they've sold you expensive medicines which mask the symptoms of whatever you have, but do not cure it...

11) Comedians -- when they tell you a joke is funny, but it's not actually funny! <g> ("I resemble that remark!" <g>)

The list goes on and on...

Advice: Become a Farmer -- it's the only honest profession! <g>

(Also, a word to the wise -- a whole lot of correct information -- mixed with the smallest bit, the tiniest bit of misinformation -- is misinformation!!!!! <g>)
Part 5 is not bound by ham radio rules, you can transmit anything according to certain rules, and if you use the Part 5 rules, you don't care about the rest of the rulebook.
I must of missed the section of the parler site that said it was a hate group or terrorist organisation..
And everyone else can exercise their freedom of speech by calling out the flaws logical inconsistencies in your criticisms of the content moderation.

> imo free speech is a human right and corporations shouldn’t oppress it even if they legally can. just like they shouldn’t discriminate even if they legally could

Private people and companies are under no obligation to offer their help and services to people who wish to use those services to organize killings or any other crimes. In fact, it's extremely common for businesses to have (and enforce) policies against such use of their products/services, since it's obviously not in their best interest to be viewed by the public as an accessory to crime.

The "stop the steal" and similar posts now being removed under the policy are intended for recruiting people to an upcoming armed escalation of last week's riot and invasion at the Capitol (using the false pretense of election fraud by Democrat officials). Their purpose is to capture or kill anyone standing in the way of their goal to overturn the election result, at some point before inauguration. This isn't conjecture; the posts and the commentary surrounding them have been out there for everyone to see. This was also noted by Twitter in their recent announcement on the suspension of the outgoing president's account.
An *actual* explanation of the Parler “hack.”
At least arbitrage provides some value by tightening bid/ask spreads. What about all the smart nerds who work on adtech instead of important problems? That's entirely irredeemable.
They're not wrong that it's different, Israel and Jews are two different things. You can be against Israel without being and antisemite, though I wouldn't guess that's the case here.
But society is tolerant of intolerance and I believe it has to be tolerant, if we are to be a free society, as opposed to engineered society controlled by elites.

For example, Western society tolerates to some extent (and it should) bigots, racists, jingoists, people who take religious texts as literal manuals to life, antivaxxers, antimilitary activists, anti police activists, anti globalist activists, environmental activists, etc. These groups are known to be intolerant of some things and some classes of people. And society should tolerate them and allow them the same guarantees of free speech as to other people. There may be exceptions like neonazi/supremacist propaganda in Europe etc. but each exception should be carefully introduced and accepted in the population.
With all of the current discussion I thought this was an interesting video showing the mechanics of "deplatforming" on federated networks like Mastodon.
They're not wrong that it's different, Israel and Jews are two different things. You can be against Israel without being an antisemite, though I wouldn't guess that's the case here.
Nicholas Pepe
I'm trying to read the terminal output. A static screenshot might be a better choice.
What’s the difference? Business interests include mitigating legal and regulatory exposure.
somehow, I doubt we’ve achieved high enough unity for coordination like that.
You can say anything is a coded message and claim it means whatever you want. The tweet that prompted the initial ban literally said "go home and be peaceful". That is supposed to be an incitement to violence?

Lots of violence happened during the protests this summer too. Should we assume that everyone tweeting about being peaceful then was also sending coded messages supporting the violence?

Are we really going to go with the logic that violence occurred, therefore anything tweeted prior to the violence was an incitement to the violence? And if it appeared to say the opposite of that, then it was actually a coded message that means whatever is politically convenient for us to have it mean?
> Because calculating the salted hash on the client side will just substitute the hash for password and render the whole hashing useless.

I don't understand what you mean. Just in case I didn't make myself clear, I don't mean substituting the hashing on the server, I mean adding it on the client.

> Also it would require additional roundtrip to server in order to get the stored salt.

It could be salted with some constant/domain name.

> Then there is the UX problem where mechanism like that would have to be implemented on the browser level

What I am saying could perfectly be done with javascript, although I don't see why browsers could not integrate it too.

> which according to some leads to “ugly and confusing” UI.

I am completely lost, I am not sure if you understood me but I don't understand what you mean. Can you explain yourself further or provide a resource that explains this UX problem you're talking about?
Maybe they could consider regulating production if organised crime is a concern.
Totally, and then you have unfettered capitalism and corporatism, kakistocracies, oligarchies and lawn darts. Unfortunately, unlike all of those things, the FBI, Homeland Security[1] and Congress [2] actually found that white supremacists and other far-right-wing extremists are the most significant domestic terrorism threat facing the United States.

So, when social networks' legal/liability or moderation teams take action on the precise content that was used to foment a coup, it's not terribly shocking from a legal perspective.

1: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/04/white-supremacists-...

2: https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/s894/BILLS-116s894is.xml
My understanding is that quantization does come from the Schrodinger equation.

Specifically, it comes from solving the wave equation given the boundary conditions, and those boundary conditions are fixed by the constraint that the square of the wave function (the probability of finding a particle somewhere = 1.
AFAIK a "data engineer" at FB specifically is not quite equivalent to "software engineer specializing in distributed systems" which this article refers to--i.e. there is a totally separate job track for SWEs in general. The "data engineer" job title is definitely not standardized between companies.
Shadow banning is some real underhanded sh#t. On reddit I explained that mayor Pete's M4A wasn't the same M4A as the world understood it. A user immediately responds accusing of me editing my comment to deceive. I say prove it you f#cking liar, there are services that archive. Then I'm hit with the ban for being profane and harassing. Yup, turns out the comment had been very quickly shadow-banned lol. I should have known. But this might inform people that its not only conservatives who's speech is threatened; it's anyone who speaks contrary to the mainstream.
I'd put spark in both lists. Old is spark-sql, new is the programming language interface.
Please stop. He went on for two months about how the election was stolen (with no evidence), talked about the 2nd amendment and "how it could solve this", and then sent proxies to talk about "taking it to Congress," not to mention literally thousands of other lies.

Enough with the gaslighting - this was entirely justified.
Were either of those things attempted?
Right. It would take some act of compulsion to make them comply, or some clever hack to automate scraping and mirroring. While most of the customers accept FB's legitimacy, they still rule, and the effort to hack or legislate might not obviously pay dividends.

Will this last forever, or go the way of MySpace?

FB appears to be more robust than MySpace because of the inertial qualities of its comprehensive membership, but that may be changing.

2020 is the year "surveillance capitalism" entered the popular lexicon, and 2021 has kicked off with an ugliness that could well be transformative. If there is a revolution, new tools, infrastructure, and rules are required to establish new social media platform that avoids the pitfalls of the old.
I'd say if they don't have the means to stand on their own and build all their own mitigations against this sort of attack, then they've bit off more than they can chew.

If their goal is to be a free-speech-above-all platform that is definitely going to piss off both infrastructure providers and the world of people who might attack them, then they better have the technical capabilities to back that up or they're going to get torn to shreds. Nobody else is required to help them in their misguided (in my opinion) endeavor.

And yes, it's possible that such a grand plan takes more resources than they actually have. Not anyone else's problem.
John Horgan is a long established and excellent science writer, and given that he's commenting on philosophical issues here as much as anything, I don't agree his difficulty with some mathematical elements of the subject - which he's gracious enough to commit to learning, and humble enough to admit to struggling with - affects his point, which isn't without merit.

But can you call a theory true if no one understands it? A century after inventing quantum mechanics, physicists still squabble over what, exactly, it tells us about reality.

I think his question is a little loaded - it's a cliché that "nobody understands it", and I'm sure there are physicists who would bridle a little at that being true.

His following claim (disputes over what it tells us) - while true - is not quite the same thing, so the argument is flawed in that regard, but not because of a problem learning maths.
Govt publishes plan for the largest vaccination programme in British history
> You might not remember that in the Middle-Ages a large portion of intellectuals were spending most of their time debating religion such as is God really omnipotent and what a specific verse in Bible meant.

And that lead to establishing a whole new field of social sciences that is philosophy. Yes, i am aware that middle-age debates and musings like that were not solely responsible for philosophy as a field of study, we gotta remember eastern philosophers and others too, but they were still monumental to making philosophy what it is today.

Regardless of how much their musings on god contributed to creating philosophy as we know it today in comparison to efforts of others working in that field (e.g., eastern philosophers in old China or middle eastern philosophers of about the same time period), their efforts accomplished a lot in terms of generating actual value for the society through philosophy as a field of study. Unless you are dismissing the entire field of philosophy as it stands today as "useless", then the value of those discussions is pretty obvious.

Not even mentioning second-order effects, like those debates making people question prior assumptions and embarking on important scientific endeavors, like trying to prove that Earth might be indeed revolving around the sun and not the other way around.
Praxiswissen Online-Marketing: Affiliate
Praxiswissen Online-Marketing: Affiliate-, Influencer-, Content- und E-Mail-Marketing, Google Ads, SEO, Social Media, Online- inklusive Facebook-Werbung
A neutron is a particle but also a wave. You can’t have one without the other. If a neutron is a wave then is it countable?
> and there was no other way forward than repeal the whole resolution

That's not what happened though. The Constitutional Court ruling[1] deemed the appointment of three judges constitutional, and two of them unconstitutional - and, according to the Constitution, those rulings are final, immutable and to be immediately published. However, president Duda didn't swear any of the new judges, despite of being legally obliged to (the president doesn't have the right to decide whether the judges were appointed legally or not, it's the Constitutional Court's job) and once PiS appointed five new judges (instead of two they were legally able to) the president swore them all.

[1] https://trybunal.gov.pl/postepowanie-i-orzeczenia/wyroki/art...
> Something that always seems to be accepted without question in these conversations is that censoring violent language will reduce violent behaviour.

Are we sure this is the case?

Yes, there have been studies on the correlation and causative links between the two. Ethical experimentation to prove causation definitively is difficult to say the least, but there have been various "natural experiments" that can be learned from.

At the very least, an extreme skeptic would still have to grudgingly acknowledge that violent speech is a leading indicator for violent behavior, and that interventions that reduce violent speech also reduce violent behavior, but the evidence is strong that the link goes beyond mere correlation. Here is one recent study: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10584609.2013.85...

A quote from the abstract: "Across all three experiments, mild violent metaphors multiply support for political violence among aggressive citizens, especially among young adults."

Not really a surprising result, but those who wish to employ violent speech for their own ends are of course quite resistant to the notion that there is a cause and effect link to be found.
The problems are more precise as stated in the article :

Where is my community of people I want to publish and subscribe with ?

Alike Twitter actually losing half of its userbase.

What do I share with whom, do I give out much private information, would I get stalked or banndd, is there moderation, how is gatekeeping done ?

All these points seem taken care of by federations like Mastodon and alike where everyone is free to chose and quit an instance if not adapted.

Even the Twitter split is showing only different platforms for different people endeavours work.

Now from an OSS point of view, Mastodon and alike are complicated to keep track of.
Protectlii isn't paying for software development or testing, either.
Excellent and beautiful explanation.

I've been wondering if Elon's TSLA comp package was designed with this in mind. It really would be perfect SEC like move.
No, it’s free, you couldn’t even pay for it if you wanted.

You might be confusing it with Aether Pro, which is a different app for a different purpose (remote collaboration) and is not P2P.
This is quite similar to why Christian theologians eventually had to give up the idea that doing good works could lead to salvation, because someone could force God to save them by doing good works thus limiting God's omnipotence. The protestants tried to come up with some hocus pocus about being able to know that you were one of the elect by reversing the causality here "Oh I'm not forcing God to save me, it's just an indication that he already did." It is amusing to see that it is the human that takes on the role of God in the AI box game.

This is also Hume's "is does not imply ought."

From this we conclude that only idiots get tricked by the AI in the box, because it is only possible to prove that you _are_ a superintelligence, it is impossible to prove that you are not. This is also a simple application of Russell's teapot. Now, the point of the story is pretty clearly that human beings are idiots when it comes to this kind of thing, but didn't we already know that?
Yup this is coming. The "slippery slope" is real and recent actions confirm it. This is scary and these actions are unprecedented. The USA has never seen such restrictions on free speech in its history
Actually you can't, because although that part of the article is wrong, they get to the real point after it.
Same issue from one of client location. Didn't bothered with debugging but switching connection to over Wireguard vpn resolved it.Just 2c in case someone has similar issue.

EDIT: Also see Mosh (https://mosh.org/)
> only used for hate

This reminds me of "BitTorrent is only used by illegal downloaders", "bitcoin is only used by criminals" etc.
Brexit: UK driver has ham sandwiches confiscated at Dutch border
>For ~3 years democrats claimed trump only won 2016 because Putin helped him.

Of which there was concrete proof of election meddling by Russia. Obviously we can't litigate what-ifs, but I'm not sure how the two can be separated.

>Stacey Abrams was the actual winner of the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial race.

The guy she was running against was the secretary of state at the time and passed several laws that were very clearly meant to suppress voter turnout before an election that he was standing in.

>Now Republicans are the devil for not accepting this election?

Yes, and for inciting violence and beating a police officer to death with a flag of the steps of the Capitol while saying the pledge of allegiance. Either work to make sure it never happens again or be inextricably linked to it.
Or slower traders.
Using MinIO as a Know Your Customer Object Store – Money Laundering Example
Last night I tried takeout from a new restaurant in town. The food was awful, the food late, the order wrong and the prices way too high.

My hoped-for solution isn't for the government to step in and fix the problem. ("There oughta be a law!") It's for the company to be replaced by competitors with new and better products. (Or for the company itself to improve under competitive pressure.)
the rate of occurrence of the golden ratio in nature is really overstated. snail shells follow approximate logarithmic spirals, and while you can certainly finds ones which approximate the golden spiral, it's not the mode or even the mean afaict. the reasons for this aren't really unknown; these patterns occur in very simple growth models.

even if the golden ratio were as prevalent as it popularly thought, it still wouldn't really situate math (the map) in a causal role; rather it would suggest a common physical factor which the math models.

in general, it arguably doesn't seem terribly surprising that lots of things in the world have share simple patterns, even without causal connections, simply by virtue of that there are far fewer simple patterns to go around than complicated ones, sort of a generalized 'law of small numbers'
> Would you really prefer to have the US government decide what can and cannot be censored?

Seems fair- after all it is voted by all citizens, not just by the ones that make more noise. Also, there are the citizens' representatives in the parliament, who openly discuss issues and try to establish widely agreed-upon rules.
It is well known that an educated, free people are necessary for the functioning of democracy. It's part of the justification for the 1st Amendment.

We have new technologies which are being leveraged to intentionally misinform people, in a society that has degraded public education and raised the cost of higher education to levels prohibitive for the majority of the population, and as a result, the society (as a whole) is no longer sufficiently informed.

So, how can democracy function if the citizens are not educated? It can't. We are now seeing the results of the effects mentioned above, and the tech companies in question are starting to realize it, and respond in only way they can, while still maintaining their own wealth and power.
So you agree that unmoderated communities result in cesspools? We took the scenic route, but I'm glad we arrived at my point eventually.
> When am I allowed to discuss them without "inciting violence"?

Next election. Depending on who gets elected.
Since this is just a lanyard, how do you prevent it from randomly flipping to the other side?
Or you know, as US based companies with large US citizen workforces and executives, they possibly have some actual strong opinions about a despotic regime taking over their country.
Certainly sounds like more than three people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fag0aC_M0_U
> My point is that the tools for organizing an insurrection are being removed, and that's at least a little scary.

Don’t think this is even vaguely true. We know that one of the primary tools of activists (or insurrectionists / terrorists depending on your point of view) in other countries are WhatsApp groups, and other encrypted chat platforms.

If one is organising a serious insurrection, then I believe one does not normally broadcast their plans to the enemy. That’s kinda strikes me as op-sec 101.

Only in a free and open society could you possibly hope to organise an insurrection in public, on broadcast platforms, without direct and immediate consequences brought down by the state. We must be so pampered to believe that the right to organise in public is a requirement insurrection.
The solution is IPv6.
> The whole point of sovereignty is to say where laws apply.

No, the whole point of sovereignty is that if you have it, you are ultimately the arbiter of your laws, including the bounds of where they apply.

You may have practical problems getting your hands on people to apply them, of course, but that’s a separate issue.
SoftBank backed tech real-estate brokerage Compass files for IPO
I can't read German, but maybe it's a bare Mikrotik router board in a custom enclosure?

That said, it also says 'Pfsense', so I suppose more likely it's a typical 'Chinesium' listing.
6 or 7 years ago, my own wishlist for such a network would be similar.

My top item these days, however, is actually bot or troll farm detection.

Social media is cool because you get to participate and overhear conversations that you normally would never have anything to do with. However, bot abuse on website like Twitter and Facebook means that every interaction sooner or later gets brigaded by bots amplifying their message.

The technology exists, and as far as I understand, it isn't particularly complex. Projects like BotSentinel do a surprisingly good job of identifying these bad actors.

Perhaps all this falls under the "Customizable moderation" header, but part of me thinks this would be best addressed in combination of some sort of "proof of work", be it as simple (and inaccessible) as a $5 fee on sign-up or something more accessible but more complicated.