skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Most of your comment is correct, except:

> The biggest question will be whether or not the AWU gets large enough and chooses to use the power to strike. Basically the one power any union has, that individual members can't employ without simply being fired.

That's not true, strictly speaking. A group of people could theoretically strike together without being members of a formally-recognized union. In practice, it's tough to coordinate that, and they may have a more difficult time actually enforcing those rights without a legal and financial structure of support, but it's not true that people have to be members of a union in order to engage in a strike.

The law unambiguously grants that power to workers acting in concert with each other, whether or not they are doing so with the formal backing of a union.
IMO not enough "useful" content is not reachable via "normal" DNS for anyone to care about the alternative DNS systems.

Sure, sites like TPB and Sci-Hub need to switch to a different domain from time to time bringing some annoyance to their users, but that's about it. Only if all domain registrars at once started actively removing "shady" domains would an alternative DNS ever come to spotlight.
i'd be curious to know more about the technical aspects of the material but its new so we're stuck with the marketing speak
People complain that this violates free speech rights but what about the rights of those at AWS, Twitter, etc? They have the right not to do business or associate with these people.
Like how they prevent people from getting the ISIS websites, Hamas websites, neo-Nazi web sites? Looks like they have more than a decade to do so and still nothing. Maybe your hyperbolic slippery slope argument is wrong?
You could presumably statically link in the runtime. Also, without the dynamically-optimizing runtime, it would run just fine, just a bit slower than normal native code due to the extra indirection. Lots of indirect calls also increase the chances of address mispredictions due to tag collisions in the BTB (Branch Target Buffer).

Function calls/jumps through arrays of pointers are how virtual method calls/optimized virtual method tail calls are executed. Though, in this case, the table offsets would be held in a register instead of immediate values embedded within the instruction. I'm not aware of any instruction set where they've decided it's worthwhile making instructions specifically to speed up C++ virtual member function dispatch, so I doubt they'd find optimizing this worthwhile.

Also, if things go according to plan, your hot path is a long strait run of code, with only occasional jumps through the table.
Thank you! Yes this is a big solo project now. Didn't have time to do a write up yet. I am a big fan of Clickhouse, so I use it for log storage. To collect server logs, it is not exactly a simple file parsing setup - I have a gateway daemon that stays in front of the API server. The daemon receives all the requests from subscribers, authorizes that this specific connection has access to specific API, rate limits, and proxies all the connections to upstream API, dumping HTTP logs to Clickhouse once in a while. Then Vue.js & Laravel powered dashboard queries Clickhouse to generate various stats, which is later used for analytics and usage-based billing.
I think the issue is that the town square that the first is supposed to protect doesn’t exist anymore. The town square is now Twitter, and valid or not, the de-platforming of a lot of conservatives is going to have a lasting backlash against tech companies.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see GOP resurgence in 2022, along with another very real attack on section 230.
are lenovos still any good? I've heard a lot of people say that the quality has gone down dramatically
It's not about crying for Parler.

It's legitimate concern that we have passed new thresholds of power, that the power can be exercised, and there's not much anyone affected can do about it.

Furthermore, it's disturbing how much those in power think -- and act -- alike. Isn't it weird that nobody has really broken ranks here?
Going with this comment and the idea that only the courts can decide if content is illegal. The idea that a hoster can't take down a child porn website because they haven't been to court is completely outragous. There are things that we clearly know to be illegal and we don't need the courts to tell us.
A note that if you use Telegram, there is @scihubbot which you can talk to and will send you papers if it can. In my opinion it's faster/easier than using a web interface also.
We're on the precipice of a civil war that's being fanned by this hate speech. I wish it were hyperbole.
LV stuff being leather the costs of an equivalent quality knockoff(if such a thing exists) aren't dirt cheap like cotton. The heavily branded stuff(monogram canvas) tends to be on the lower end, entry level luxury aimed at a more aspirational purchaser.

Upper end LV and more expensive luxury leather good concerns are more understated, sort of a 'if you know you know' thing -- Hermes, Celine, Bottega maybe, etc. A Birkin in a non exotic leather with normal hardware is not a very flashy loud bag(unless you know it). There's still a lot of status signaling and striver insecurity in this(it is fashion after all) but it's slightly more covert and these people are nominally concerned about ostentatious branded stuff being 'tacky.' The social ideal is less about flashy spending and more imitating serious old money who "just want to pay for the highest quality"(though this is, imo, fiction). Can't look like you're trying.
> Lin wood called for the execution of the Vice President and many of his followers attempted to do just that.

I am in Europe so have not been paying too much attention. Your quote sound like hyperbole, can you show me some evidence that people actually tried to execute the vice president.
> Daily Stormer

futurama_fry_not_sure_if.jpg

This is actually an awesome tip for sci-hub though that I'll be using.
> In August, 2018, they created a social media platform similar to Twitter but which promised far greater privacy protections, including a refusal to aggregate user data in order to monetize them to advertisers or algorithmically evaluate their interests in order to promote content or products to them.

Sure, Parler isn't going to serve you a custom feed with that data, but what are they doing with it? They collect an insane amount of PII to create an account, when compared with alternatives Reddit and Twitter.

On another note, this whole article is written in bad faith:

- The AppStore screen shot shows Parler at the top of the social media list on Jan 8th, when it was trending because the impending ban, but the image is intended to show Parler as a more popular app. Bad Faith.

- The claim that there was a united attack is unsubstantiated, and, in order with Occam's Razor, it is far more believable that these companies banned their support of Parler as a response to violations of ToS from those companies than any sort of conspiracy.

- In referencing the Congressional report on anti-competitive practices, the article seeks to conflate the actions taken against Parler with anti-competitive behavior. This doesn't come close to being anti-competitive. ToS were violated, and private companies have to right to not host whatever they want, and the right to moderate it however they want.

- The article seeks to conflate the actions of some mega corporations with _all_ liberals, claiming all liberals cheered for this. That is also unsubstantiated mudslinging.

- The article overall seeks to conflate freedom of speech with access to private platforms and mass audiences. This is not the reality. Parler itself may have promoted itself as a free-speech platform, but that was only true if you agreed with the common opinion on the platform, and anyone who promoted dissenting ideas there were banned.

The whole article is a bad-faith farce, and should be treated as such. Ignore it.

There are real points to be made about how the behavior of these companies might impact discourse, whether they have too much power, and more. However, this bad faith argument is a distraction from meaningful discourse.
> This is a distinction without a difference.

I disagree, there is an extreme difference there. Freedom of speech is specifically in regards to the government giving you the negative right of being able to say whatever you want without government prosecution (aside from some edge cases like direct threats and the like, which are closer to actual violence). What they do not do is guarantee you a platform. You are free to say whatever you like, but you are not owed the right to be listened to. Removing someone from a platform is not silencing them. A private company does not owe you anything, let alone service.
>Twitter and Facebook don't allow the same kind of violent rhetoric, lies, etc.

You must not be paying much attention..this is simply not true
I agree with you 100%. There is absolutely no reason to care. Nothing we're seeing from these tech companies is a threat to our liberties.

Getting banned from Twitter for violating the ToS is not censorship.

Getting your Twitter clone kicked off of AWS for violating the ToS is not censorship.

Companies refusing to do business with you on ethical grounds is not censorship.

Anyone calling what we're seeing this week "censorship" is carrying water for fascists.
Since I run a lot of 10G fiber and use proper 10G switches (none of this Ubiquiti garbage) layer 3 routing from the router itself was an absolute must. I decided on the PaloAlto Networks PA-220 https://www.paloguard.com/Firewall-PA-220.asp .

Yes, I know - it's expensive. However, their support is fantastic and my employer agreed to pay for a portion of the licensing since I mostly require this for WFH. Zero issues, passive cooling, top notch security and this thing just freaking purrs.
I use it for a long time now, nice piece of software. The only problem I have is related to requests per app.

For example, a Sublime Text plug-in (TabNine), even if I allow permanently outgoing connections the plug-in has to make, LuLu will keep asking me for permissions next time.

There is an issue open for that matter but no fix yet apparently: https://github.com/objective-see/LuLu/issues/147
Satélites VisorSat de SpaceX: malas noticias para los astrónomos
Fusion articles could always include temperature comparisons in kEV.
I have a ten year old TODO text file which contains almost everything I have left unfinished. The top of the file contains the latest task I have to finish, and the details, including the device/machine involved, files, what I was doing, and what needs to be done.

When something of higher priority comes up, I enter that at the top.

When things are done, I add "DONE" against those tasks.

Once in a while, I clean up all the "DONE" tasks.

It is a mangled mess, but it has helped me survive for one decade now.
To be fair, the founders established the federal government to be a government for/of the states. It was established to manage and negotiate the affairs and disputes between the states (like the EU today). Each state was it's own sovereign "country" and upon ratifying the Constitution voluntarily gave up limited sovereignty to the federal government. There's a whole ton more to unpack here and yes, the original folks allowed suffrage (at the federal and individual state levels) were the "nobles" (landowners) who from what I know and can ascertain where almost exclusively white men.
Trump was a kleptocrat.
Where is the effort to get these articles published freely without having a private entity act as a middleman?

This problem of publicly funded research only available behind a paywall is a bipartisan issue. The main issue is that there appears to be no movement or effort to push this forward so the public is largely uninformed.
Why would anyone quote or expect others to follow a guideline if they didn't believe it was true? Please provide a counterargument instead of using thought terminating clichés[0] like "not in good faith".

[0] Sorry for the jargon but there isn't a better term.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought-terminating_clich%C3%A...
The rest of the world didn't have to because if the Brussels effect. When the EU legislates it is basically cheaper for companies to just fall in line rather than create separate production lines.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brussels_effect
Whack-a-mole. Users will move to decentralized platforms or other providers in no time. In the past 72 hours alone, more than 25 million new users from around the world joined Telegram, an app built by Russians.
Thanks, I didn't intend to mislead. Ianal :) It's my understanding that most US state-level libel laws don't have a lot of teeth, and that they are quite a patchwork, which is why I didn't mention them.
The EU is not a country nor a federation. Companies that want to operate in EU countries need to abide by each countries laws. The EU just provide a minimum set of laws that must be abided by all countries, but that's pretty much it. Each country uses these laws as a base, and provides its own super set of laws on top.

The EU doesn't really have many tax regulations, so a country like Ireland might think "How else will I attract industry here?", and decide to allow companies to put a mailbox there in exchange for operating in the EU tax free.

This double-screws all other countries, first, because these companies pay zero taxes, so their tax contribution to the EU is zero. Second, because Ireland remains poor, because these companies pay almost zero taxes, so other countries need to send them money.

France didn't like this, so they introduced a tax that both French and non-French companies must pay (it is illegal in the EU to discriminate by country, so this tax affects French companies as well).

And that's pretty much it. This tax is high because it needs to compensate for the lack of taxes these companies pay in France, and for the money France needs to send to the tax heavens in which these companies operate.

TBH I hope other EU countries will follow France's example, and that at some point, when most countries have these rules in place to avoid getting double-screwed, the EU as a whole can agree on a set of regulations to forbid tax heavens within the EU.

Such a set of regulations needs a pretty high buy in from all EU countries (essentially unanimous consensus), and countries that cannot otherwise attract industry are incentivized to be against it.

With these new taxes, Tech companies will be more incentivized to move to the places in which it makes most physical sense for them to be, instead of a freaking mailbox in the artic. At that point, the incentive from Ireland and other tax heavens will be small, since there won't be any point for companies to move there in the first place.

---

Also, while the EU usually negotiates as a front, the EU itself is a union, so it has little to absolutely no power over what any EU country does. Within the union, you have federation republics like Germany, presidental republics like France, monarchies with kings like Spain, and... without really stretching it... some EU countries aren't even democracies and are more like dictatorships. Point being, getting something done at the EU level requires widespread consensus, but the EU is extremely heterogeneous and consensus is really hard, which is why the EU gets nothing done, and why each country does whatever it wants. The EU doesn't even have a constitution.

It might be easy to criticize, e.g., the federal response to COVID in the US, but that's because people actually expected a Federal response to it, because there could have been one. In the EU, the federal response was almost non-existent, but nobody expected any because the EU has no power to do anything in this case. I don't really know whats worse.
> I honestly don’t think it will change anything. Like I said to one guy who asked a similar question, songs like that, they’re like tiny marker buoys. You know, ‘This is where the ship went down.’ The song’s not a party political broadcast, there’s no manifesto.
Oh neat, they're still maintaining Little Snitch 4 for Big Sur for people who want a kext and don't mind approving it.

They say "that option could go away at any time", but that would require Apple to make SIP mandatory, and I still don't see that happening. There may come a time, however, where you need to actually disable part of SIP.
German carmakers outpace Tesla with electrified vehicle surge
Good for him. Not every business needs to last and grow forever. That's a mandate that can't be met without selling your soul to VC.
I'm searching, but I'm finding things like this: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/22/parler-maga-electio...

"Hashtags on Parler denoting Trump’s favorite conspiracy theories — #Dominion, #Sharpiegate, #QAnon — trend freely, without the restrictions Twitter and Facebook have instituted to suppress them."

Hashtags trend freely. Oh no! I might be exposed to free range hashtags! I may have to actually think for myself.
He was under threat of prosecution from the FBI.
Which is about as much as more specialized, but brand new hardware, like the PCEngines APU2.
If banks and a score of major tech companies independently decide not to do business with someone, maybe that someone is the problem.
I'd been looking into beancount and fava earlier, but somehow it took your comment for me to realise why the latter tool is called fava (=beans, referencing beancount). I'd previously ignored it as just another pronounceable-nonsense-name on the web.
I tried OPNsense as well, but I'm getting to a point in life where I'm okay spending money to not become my own devops guy when I don't have to. Running a Saas company as a side gig will do that to you ;)
A Cheap Simple 3D Printing Hack for Improving Your Online Classtime Experiences
I think this may be what you are asking (sorry if it isn't)

https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html
Does the AMD Jaguar GX-412TC SOC really handle full Gigabit with non-trivial rules and/or SQM? Also the 6W is the minimum, it goes up to 10 under load.
Not banning political discussion, it's about not supporting hate speech.

Parler wasn't banned, the market decided they wanted nothing to do with it.
You know how thick I want my laptop? Just thick enough for an ethernet port with no dongle.
They have a page with links to privacy policies
https://www.privacytools.io/providers/search-engines/
According to Dutch news [1] the EU and the US have been in a trade conflict for years now, with the EU previously (in November) instating its own tariffs on American aircraft parts and agriculture products.

[1] https://nos.nl/artikel/2362596-vs-komt-met-heffingen-op-fran...
...and I don't give a crap about that.

Does it get noisy? That is the really pertinent question. My last job required me to work on a Lenovo T490 and that thing spun its fans to 3300 RPM the moment you looked at it and asked it to do a 5 second CPU-intensive task. Hated those machines for life but I suspect at least 90% of all laptops are like that.

Now all that I've heard about MacBook M1 models, that's what sounds appealing. Nearly zero audible fan activity.
I agree: you can definitely make it generic in both arguments. I was just arguing that this order of arguments makes more sense.
The Lies that can Undermine Democracy
>I get it that if you're a Trump fan or a Republican, you may be willing to give more of a benefit of the doubt.

I'm neither.

>But to a non-partisan (I'm not American, but deeply concerned by what I can see from my part of the world) it's plain as day.

I am an American, non-partisan, who shares mutual deep concern.
Discord also has a big lead in video support that, IMO, now exceeds anything else. It has flexible group based video chat that naturally extends voice chat. It has broadcasting support so you can stream your gameplay to each other, as well as player-in-player, pop out support, and side-by-side view. Almost all of these features work on mobile as well, including PIP/broadcasting (e.g. I streamed Genshin Impact directly off my phone.)

These may seem like gimmicks, but I use all these features extensively in a server of ~8 regulars to the point we reflexively broadcast to each other and regularly watch each others gameplay, comment, or just use it to hang out. I think this stuff will probably significantly solidify Discord's lead, especially considering the technical infrastructure necessary for features like this.

Before all that though, the slack-like features, and definitely the moderation features for bigger channels, were - still are! - major attractions.
The boot up sequence does an audible musical tone and says "Hello", so an attacker is not silently going to reboot it and listen in
How come you always hear this kind of stuff from Google but not a peep from the other FAANGS, especially Apple.
> It's not just free speech that is at issue here. It is innocent until proven guilty and due process. All of which are Human Rights issues. Or at least used to be.

Due process is inefficient and slow compared to letting unelected mega-corps determine what other businesses can exist and what speech can and can't be heard.

Imagine how awful a system with a 'burden-of-proof' and 'oversight' would be compared to just trusting the invisible hand of the market and profit motives determine the optimum course of action! Adam Smith proved that it would all work out fine anyway - there was a graph with some curves that proved it I think.

Now if only we had a way to merge all these mega-companies into one, bigger super-mega-corp. Imagine how much better that would be! Hopefully over time with market consolidation we can achieve anything.
I've seen a lot of people say Parler was intentionally designed to host morally objectionable content and that they refused to moderate it. Many arguments supporting the de-platforming of Parler hinge on those assertions.

I have not seen any evidence backing up those claims, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. If you're aware of any such evidence, could you please post it? I'd honestly just like to understand the situation better.

In the absence of such evidence, I see two plausible explanations:

1.) Parler was a small-scale operation (30 employees from what I've heard) who built a social media platform intended to appeal to pro-Trump conservatives by tolerating a higher degree of free speech compared to the likes of established social media platforms. It became very popular very quickly and speech on the platform became increasingly violent. Parler's relatively small team was unable to keep up with moderating so much content, which enabled a lot of extremist calls for violence to propagate. Since they could not keep up with AWS's requests to moderate their platform and it was facing public scrutiy after events at the capitol, AWS pulled the plug.

2.) Parler was intended as a platform for violent, pro-Trump extremists and used "free speech" as a week justification to not moderate their platform. It became very popular very quickly and speech on the platform became increasingly violent. Parler still refused to moderate the platform even after events at the capitol, so AWS pulled the plug.

AWS is not necessarily in the wrong in either case. However, the optics for Parler looks very different between the scenarios.
I think (hope) everyone would agree that antisemitism and racism have no place in the world. And it's easy not to care when you earnestly believe the ends justify the means.

But in practice, the risk is that these labels will be applied much more liberally by self-interested parties precisely because they are unquestionably bad and hard to refute. If power hungry forces have access to a weapon which can be used to shut down discourse with no due process, it will most assuredly be used and create undesirable outcomes.

IMO we should all take issue with the ability of a small oligopoly to take these actions without any legal due process or recourse. History shows us that this kind of power without restriction in the hands of very few will lead to abuses.