skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I don't think I'll ever get to request it, because I'm pretty sure it's going to fail, especially with my parents and other from this age group - having them download another app, signup, etc. will be too complicated.

I moved my whole family to Signal, and its surprisingly easy. It asks for their phone number, name (it's autocompleted) and a pin. You can create a link to your family's group chat so then can join without needing someone to invite them.
How are you sourcing that conclusion? I'm not well versed but I enjoy watching finance related UGC and analyses on Bilibili. There's certainly tons of in-depth content and discussion about Ant's leveraging practices and the involvement of financial regulations.
What's your wishlist of reforms?
Twitter is not a monopoly. You are the person advocating increased government intervention in social media, not me. And I definitely don't agree that adding blockchain snake oil is the best solution to any problem.
Can you offer some hypothesis that explain what happened?
> Anyone not using these hosts to promote terrorism

The power always changes hands, and people who were passing laws calling random things "terrorism" end up on the other side of their laws. I guess for now you can have fun watching how Patriot Act championed buy republicans gets used against themselves. Sadly with full control over all branches, democrats will continue eroding freedoms and laws restraining the government, which eventually will be used against them too.
Parler has a moderation policy and they don’t apply it. Content that promotes illegal activity is not protected free speech and is also prohibited by Parler’s policies. They selectively applied that moderation after they became popular with MAGA.

Also, 4chan exists why can’t Parler find a host?
I'd challenge the assertion you're making here -- again, it is reductive to reduce the entirety of the nationwide protests against police murders to a handful of cherry-picked instances of violence. You're doing that and then dismissing the entire issue because of it, which is intellectually dishonest, which you already know.

You aren't giving the same treatment to the the other side here -- you're not saying "if keeping people safe means the police should be allowed to murder folks / bludgeoning a police officer to death when storming the capitol" so I find it difficult to believe you're merely concerned about the use of violence.

You did, several comments up, state "the assault on the capitol was an unprecedented attack on democracy," which it was, but that's after posting multiple links where you're posting links and evidence trying to discredit the nationwide BLM protests by painting them as violent, so again, your bias is evident.
You have a copyright protection against other people posting your messages for their benefit.

Anyone who wanted to claim their posts could DMCA them.
It's a special bolt. I would have to buy a lathe. I have a 3D printer at home and I taught myself 3D design so I already made a bunch of replacement parts out of plastic.
At some risk of stepping into a controversy I have nothing to do with... Aaron was not an original co-founder, and when his company merged into Reddit (with a "co-founder" title as per agreement) every indication is that that arrangement didn't work out for anyone. So I don't blame Reddit for not including Aaron in the company history, as it wasn't his idea, he didn't start it nor grow it, and his presence apparently never "clicked" with the others.
I agree theres a lot of people who want to overthrow the government, and that politicians are trying to incite them to do so, and that we me yet see a real attempt to do so.

But its naive to think the most heavily armed and powerful government in the world was nearly overthrown by a mob of people armed with fire extinguishers, zip ties, pepper spray, and little to no guns.[1]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25706437
unfortunately, "hate speech" seems to be defined as "whatever makes me upset" where "me" is a group accepted by tge platform

e.g. there are prolife groups that say nothing negative against any people, but get banned for explaining the facts behind abortion and who does it
It also potentially protects the passwords from their web servers if they implement it like that. They can pass the encrypted password to a separate service that has the private key and decides to give you a session or not.
I decided to look it up

>The Court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action"

I would say it's pretty clear that the speech we're talking about incited or produced imminent lawlessness. If you were following the various platforms that these groups were organising on it was very clear that they were inciting lawless action on the 6th- which of course was demonstrated on the 6th. It's also important to understand this didn't stop on the 6th, those same people are now talking about the 20th with similar suggestions.

Brandenburg seems to protect basically idle talk - but that's very clearly not what's happening here.
Fair enough. At least be dependent on somebody without a near monopoly on the service you need.
> I reported them when I noticed. I checked back after the

> Capitol Riots and the posts were still there. If they had

> any moderation it was not at all effective even for the

> most obviously unacceptable content.

That's clearly a failing of the moderation system. I imagine they were very overwhelmed that day, as all social media platforms probably were (including Twitter and Facebook from what I saw).

One problem Parler specifically are up against is that they were already unofficially blacklisted in multiple places that would allow them to raise the funding to hire moderators, due to cancel culture and the fear of it. They already couldn't get advertising, investments, etc. Now the situation is even worse, and when it reappears, it will likely have even less resources for content moderation.

The only way out for them will be to distribute the problem of content moderation as some other platforms have apparently done (I am told Minds do this). Of course you have to rely on randomly selecting a fair jury in order for it to work - something that won't happen now.
Unsure. But perhaps more important than yes or no is that the internet shouldn't be so centralized that these companies can make a choice with such a big effect.
Intention is besides the point. The only thing that matters is impact. For example, in US case law, there is the concept of Involuntary manslaughter: killing as the result of negligent or reckless actions.
It let all of these active discussions and organisation proceed knowingly. The policy does not exist.

Edit: I love how I’m being downvoted when quite frankly there are enough screenshots out there and on /r/ParlerWatch of their shit show of moderation. You’re deluded if you think there’s a moderation policy other than ignorance by design.
It's not just the Qanon/Alex Jones folks. It pushes center-right people to hold ranks.
I support Apple and Google. I'm hesitantly on board with AWS and I'm worried it's a slippery slope when infrastructure companies give the boot. I then thought about other instances where I'd support it. If an AWS instance was being used to spread malware, I expect them to take it down - even though it's all just bits and cycles from an AWS perspective.

I do hope we push back hard if this ever gets out of hand.
Well, US institutions are being attacked. But I agree that the mob is just a mechanism in the system that was wielded poorly and got out of control.

We don't need to crack down on the mob, but we do need to address the situation which led to it's rise.

The electoral college is an outdated piece of government 'software' that has been repeatedly exploited in recent years. Through 2016, there were 58 presidential elections. In 5 of these, the popular vote didn't match the electoral vote. About 8.6% historically.

But for the last couple of decades, excluding this last election which is apparently still being argued, that percentage has been 40% instead of the 6.8% historically.

If Trump's re-election argument fails, that life number will likely drop to 33.3% in my recent subjective experience compared to 8.5% historically, or rise to 50% in recent experience compared to 10.2% historically.

Either way, these numbers mean something's wrong. "That's just a statistical variation you see in any set of data when giving it enough numbers" is not likely with 58 and 59 datapoints. Particularly with the inclusion of other data.

If you check the history logs, you'll see a technological explosion the last couple of decades that coincides with these electoral results that suggest exploitation of the system. Technology allowing fine grained microtargeting is only getting better, and it's being used to exploit the electoral system.

This time with disinformation campaigns and fine grained behavioral tracking and analysis (eg, Cambridge Analytica).

"Yes, we say we're a democracy but technically we're a republic so that means everything is fine and we don't need the numbers to always match up with the voting majority." I mean, I guess. Sure. Until we decide to push exploitation further, beyond the boundaries of the game we've set up.

This time it looks like the actors in the system missed the margin of exploitability within the game and went searching for new exploits. Instead of acknowledging the loss, they spammed every court they could find with useless lawsuits.

Like a malware bot checking every port to try to fingerprint services and check for vulnerable versions. And they turned the disinformation dial up to 11, inciting their base to keep their political machine operational since it's got a 4 year reboot cycle and it'd take time for their port scanning to finish.

This tactic led to a mob rioting. And it's unfortunate, but the mob were ultimately a system mechanic that got out of control. They were the tools or were 'acted upon' in a systems thinking perspective, rather than actors in the system. The actors were wielding them as a tool, and like any tool, irresponsible handling resulted in injury.
> Democratic leadership is full of corporatists.

No, its full of corporatocrats [0]. Corporatism [1] is a political position (Wikipedia calls it an “ideology”, but it may be better to be viewed as a facet of ideology found in lots of very different ideologies; e.g., fascism includes corporatism as a component), but its not one that is particularly popular among Democrats, either in leadership or the base, neoliberal or progressive (though there definitely is a progressive corporatism that has some support.)

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatocracy

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism
> The west has invested a lot into the Chinese economy hoping to translate the corresponding equity into growth

Chinese people are jointly invest in that venture, by (not limited to):

* Sacrifice family and personal time, by hundreds of millions of passent migration workers.

* Sacrifice health and life quality, even today 996 still a norm, and you can imagine what have been since the opening up

* Environment, early pollution has harmed the people's health and well-being

* Mental health, stressful working time, lack of support

At the top, it was CCP and Western capitalists grabbed most of the profit, but leaving the waste to be suffered by the people.

Case in point, Alibaba's success is a CCP sanctioned monopoly and unfair market competition. I pity Jack Ma's treatment from CCP, I don't pity him as a citizen, he already enjoyed too much beyond what he actually deserves.

As such, I do welcome campaign like the poverty elimination [1]. If CCP does nationalize alibaba and use that to help rural areas to gain access to market, I consider that a positive thing for the vast majority of the poor.

[1] https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-11-27/china-...
Amazon may have the right to deny anyone service - but can they do it 'immediately' on whatever grounds?

Parler could very well make more money suing Amazon than anything else.

This was a huge moment for Parler, and AMZN may have grounded them.

There's a difference between 'we don't want to do business with you' ... and 'we will make you dependent on us, but the we'll drop you like a rock and put you out of business'.
Well yeah: There can be 4 monopolies, monopolizing 4 different things.
Para 4 and 5 for those wondering:

>AWS’s decision to effectively terminate Parler’s account is apparently
motivated by political animus. It is also apparently designed to reduce competition
in the microblogging services market to the benefit of Twitter.

>5. Thus, AWS is violating Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act in
combination with Defendant Twitter. AWS is also breaching it contract with
Parler, which requires AWS to provide Parler with a thirty-day notice before
terminating service, rather than the less than thirty-hour notice AWS actually
provided. Finally, AWS is committing intentional interference with prospective
economic advantage given the millions of users expected to sign up in the near
future.

Remember, these are unchallenged claims from Parler.

I think the only interesting bit here is the 30h vs 30 day notice period. The cynic in me is interested to see the contract: if there was a 30 day notice in it, I imagine Parler could have gotten an emergency injunction to stay online. Unless there isn't or parler preferred to be "taken" off line for PR reasons?

Sorry if that view is a bit conspiracy-theory-esque...
Paragraph 5:

Thus, AWS is violating Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act in combination with Defendant Twitter. AWS is also breaching it contract with Parler, which requires AWS to provide Parler with a thirty-day notice before terminating service, rather than the less than thirty-hour notice AWS actually provided. Finally, AWS is committing intentional interference with prospective economic advantage given the millions of users expected to sign up in the near future.
That's true but annoylingly it doesn't always take you up one folder. For example If you click it from Desktop, it takes you to the whole PC instead of to your home folder.
"Handing control over." Seriously, do you have a realistic alternative? If we are going to have social media, at scale, in a capitalist society, it's hard to see how there's much of an alternative to for-profit companies. Do you want the government to run Twitter?
Who Amazon does business with is their own decision.

But terminating Parler with such short notice that they had no chance of moving to an alternative without major disruption of their business. Well. That is deliberate destruction.

Without knowing anything about US civil law, I would expect Parler to have a strong case.
"The cloud" is irrelevant to this.

Get your own servers -> datacenter won't host them

Get your own datacenters -> no bandwidth providers will connect you

Make your own ISP/bandwidth provider -> nobody will peer with you
Not sure we want to set a precedent for tech companies getting to silence whoever they choose, but tech companies should have the power to effectively censor SOME things (child porn, for instance).
That sounds nice and all, but they have yet to issue a real mea culpa, although I think there was a "mistakes were made" noise later on. At some point, organizations have to accept accountability if they also want praise for their accomplishments. One without the other is a recipe for disaster.
I mean, I watched as people on Twitter and Facebook Live coordinated to torch one of my favorites neighborhoods in L.A. this summer. I saw looters tweet about breaking into a drug store in Sherman Oaks. You can't say it's just talk there. The damage to Melrose and DTLA had to have been in the tens of millions, if not more.
>I don't know if they can hold that true that people will be signing up per "skyrocket" metaphor. They can use past data, but cannot use unknown future data.

They can show that it was the #1 most downloaded app on Apple's app store and make a reasonable inference from that.
What if we just went to email? “Follow my mailing list”
Interesting. I wasn’t aware of this. Perhaps I got lucky, but the effect was immediate and life changing. I’ve never quite experienced anything like it, so I try to at least mention it.

Not really sure how to proceed knowing it can make the situation worse for some people though. Perhaps I’ll cite your comment in the future; thanks.
How does stuff like this work in Germany, as I believe they have a lot of anti nazi laws against hate speech etc?

Like this should would have been shut down weeks in advance in Germany.

Have we learned nothing from history?

I can't believe people are fighting to give racists, mentally ill, brainwashed extremists a platform to organize and plot violent acts behind the disguise of free speech.
The difference being that BLM movement actually has many decades (centuries?) of concrete evidence of racial injustice and oppression compared to the baseless claims of voter fraud and a supposed stolen election.
We've banned this account for using HN primarily for ideological battle. Please don't create accounts to do that with.

Yes, the rules are the same regardless of which side an account is battling for. There's nothing worse for HN than accounts which have abandoned curiosity and entered here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Your suggested strategy isn't mutually exclusive - consumers could have the right to repair and manufacturers could be billed based on the value (negative or positive) of waste material that they generate.
I think the least bad option is to let allow people to make mistakes and learn from them. How would you feel about sending people to prison for eating junk food, smoking a cigarette, drinking a beer, wasting time on social media/watching netflix? And afaik countries that have decriminalized drugs and focused on harm reduction actually end up with less drug addicts. Its also worth noting that most cases of overdoses are caused by the drug either being cut with something stronger or the user just taking too much due to high inconsitinsies in purity with each purchase
unreservedly no. This is ridiculous. These people won't be happy until all sites are democrat sites saying the same thing.
Parlor is NOT Amazon competition.
A terror attack was literally live streamed on Facebook.
Quizbowl questions have a particular structure that makes them generally not work with these other approaches. For instance, it needs to generate paragraph-long questions with the clues that go from the most to least difficult. This is hard skill for a human to learn, much less a machine.
Same, I got very tired of Mozillas woke bs so I stopped my financial support and switched to Brave. Basically no one uses Firefox anymore anyway, so this just cements it.

At work we don't even care to support firefox since no one uses it lol. Sad af, but true.
Ron Paul blocked from posting on Facebook
This is just modern day colonialism - as a leader of a country do you resign to paying a tax to foreign powers forever, or do draw a line in the sand and say enough is enough.

What is interesting is China is even powerful enough to do this. This isn't new - it's what Iran tried under Mosaddegh, and it's a story oft repeated in South America, and each case there is suddenly a CIA backed coup who fights against nationalization.

I don't think China would see any blowback from this - the idea that it would prevent future investment in China is like saying Europe would stop investing in the US after the American revolution; as long as there is some alpha to be made in an economy as large as China's, I'd expect them to still see foreign capital.

I think what it more interesting is the concentration of power in the CCP elite and how that power is wielded. On one side you have the "communist" dream where the nationalization of Alibaba is felt by all Chinese citizens who are given more through socialization - one can imagine what China would look like in another 15 years if they focused on further educating and strengthing their citizenry; its the progressive left's "dream" for America. On the other hand, it's also likely you end up in a situation where power corrupts and nationalization is just an excuse to enrich Xi and his inner circle.
Your first paragraph is technically right but in actual reality cables with only 2 superspeed lanes exist. Also, the article (and comment) aren't solely about Type C; USB3 cables going to good ol' A/B will only have 2 superspeed lanes.

Your second paragraph is half-wrong. Thunderbolt cables must have an e-marker: refer to https://www.usb.org/sites/default/files/USB%20Type-C%20Spec%... Figure F-1 ("SOP'"). If the cable has an e-marker but doesn't have the Thunderbolt ID, you get passive Gen2. However, the problem is that USB3 TypeC-C cables aren't required to have an e-marker at all... in which case you drop out at the very first fork in the flow diagram.

This also leads to the funny situation that any 5A USB3 cable should work for Thunderbolt (because 5A requires the e-marker), while 3A cables may or may not work. I mean, of course the power rating makes complete sense to determine TB3 capability, right? :D
Well that's when you get a lawyer to review it for you. I realize there is a cost involved here, but when you're talking about something like this it's usually well worth it - if only to know exactly what you are agreeing to.
Agreed. Maybe the problem is that everyone uses badly organized and ambiguous Twitter threads as citation sources lately. It’s not a good platform for that, you literally don’t have the character counts to explain something
Glenn Greenwald has been investigating the planning of the Capitol protests and says "it was largely done on Facebook". So far he hasn't been able to identify a single person who was arrested and active on Parler:

> Do you know how many of the people arrested in connection with the Capitol invasion were active users of Parler? Zero. The planning was largely done on Facebook. This is all a bullshit pretext for silencing competitors on ideological grounds: just the start.

> For those asking the basis for that last claim: I spent the weekend reporting on the removal of Parler from the internet, including reviewing lots of documents and interviewing people associated with the companies involved, including Parler.

> The article will be up shortly.

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1348619731734028293

I would be more interested in hearing if all these prominent figures in the Capitol protests were active across multiple (or all) social media platforms, which often seems to be the case. If that is true, then it makes for an even stronger argument that Parler has been singled out.
I think there are too many downvotes. There are toxic comments, but most of them are downvoted and already dead or gray when I see them. Do you have two or three examples of toxic comments that didn't get downvoted?
This isn't "things that aren't exactly popular". This is organizing an insurrection against the government and advocating for violence against groups and individuals.
I would absolutely disable my access to that community market if it meant I could use a regular TOTP.
Your right. Carrying zip ties, knives, guns and planting pipe bombs is how you start a peaceful dialog.

I mean after you beat numerous police officers and murder one.
I can affirm that at least part of the "hang mike pence" discussion on twitter it was a shocked discussion of the threats, not threats.
Quite a lot of people (myself included) do actually pay for Wikipedia.
If you're looking for porn, try bing