skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's hard to say for sure without having first-hand experience with the code base. But rewriting messy projects from scratch is often a pitfall, and I would be very cautious about taking that route (especially given "I feel that I'm in way over my head" and "I feel competent enough in ... but not in creating a feasible architecture"). The last thing you want is to spend months creating a new project that ends up being not much better than what you started with, a scenario that happens all too frequently.

I would consider using this as an opportunity to learn and refactor a large code base. That's an extremely valuable skill, and it's hard to get it without situations like these (whereas anyone can get practice creating a new project on the weekend). You might have to spend a lot of time staring at the code, feeling like you're not making much progress, but it'll (hopefully) be worth it.

On the other hand, it is possible that the code base is just horrible and should be nuked, so use your own judgment :).
Quickly Change Conda Env with Fzf
> i doubt you could make (or really, even want to make) `checkEUMembership` pure, I'm guessing it'd involve a DB lookup of some kind

Well that was kinda the root of my question. The core logic doesn't really care as such, as long as it could determine EU membership somehow, but actual code would have to use a DB lookup[1].

That of course spirals back to what would that really buy you. You'd write code pretending it's pure while it really isn't. I can see part of the appeal, but I can do that in my current language.

Of course I don't get an error if I do something silly in the middle of some otherwise "pure" module, so there's that.

Anyway, illuminating. I enjoy thinking about these things and challenging my self-taught ways. Thank you all for your contributions, much appreciated!

[1]: An aside but, due to an error on the government side, GB is part of EU today as far as one of their validation checks is concerned. So today only we have to pretend along, for just that one field. This stuff is fun!
What I love about this comment is how politically ambiguous it is. You cant tell which “side” it’s arguing for which is exactly the point - the same argument can be used by both sides. That’s what makes it so dangerous.
Haskell seems extremely neat, and I do like the ML family for compiler development, but Haskell just seems like such a steep learning curve. The amount of operators I've seen boggles my mind, are they user defined? Is there a good way to learn Haskell that preferably skips over some common functional concepts?
I’m assuming, but the USA then. What country is that?
My phone today is completely usable but the carrier has decided to stop issuing updates to the phone....

This is the worst kind of planned obsolesces
The person who did this calls themselves a hacker. It's just whoever wrote this article that decided to call them a "security researcher".
Google is not in control of the content on parler. Google does remove websites from it's listings.

There's no relationship in what you're saying. Parler is responsible for content on it's platform. It doesn't matter if it's supposedly "neutral" or not.

Parler is a social media app, not a messaging app like signal. People don't go to signal for their latest fake news, they would go to parler and be swayed by a mob of people that continually build off of each other's aggressive behavior. It was a closed loop of people that didn't like being told they're wrong.

There's nothing neutral about parler either, their user base is no mistake. It's entirely intentional, you can't hide behind "freedom of speech" when you're marketing your platform for this behavior.
They sided against the US government (and with Russia) years ago.
Show HN: Juliette now supports Angular 11 and React 17 :)
So the question is to find an arbitrary set of edges that partition the graph?

In a K_n with equally weighted edges this problem seems easy: just take a random vertex and remove the edges connecting it to the neighbourhood. Any attempt at removing more vertices would yield in having to cut more edges, so the strategy removes the least amount of edges while partitioning the graph.

In a tree with equally weighted edges, this problem seems easy too: just remove a leaf. Every tree has leaves.

I can't think about graphs "between" the two creating a property that makes the the "I just take the vertex with the fewest adjacencies and remove it" strategy moot. Is it trivial with equally weighted edges? Is the problem only interesting when edges have differing weights?
As I understand it, private and unlisted videos are often used as a draft mode for videos that eventually become public. Uploaders want to check everything, make sure all the transcoding is done, etc before flipping a video to public. Additionally, unlisted videos are sometimes used to run ads. This way, the ads can be played on YouTube without being listed on the advertiser's channel.
advanced proficiency in SQL and in any scripting language of your choice (C#/powershell, python) is enough to be a data engineer on any technical stack: windows/linux, on-prem/cloud, vendor specific/opensource, literally anything.
First reaction is that this is good news, but I think two things needs to be looked at:

One, what drives people to replace devices? I feel (not scientific at all!) that wanting a new shiny device and, if broken, cost of repair, are higher on the list than not being able to repair.

Two, the law of unintended consequences: Making devices more repairable may increase their footprint in terms of material and thus waste. If people do not have their devices repaired more (e.g. because of (1) above ) then the net result might be worse than the current situation.
Your interpretation (that you claim make Durov's statement not fully honest) is doing actually the exact opposite. It shows that if anything, Durov didn't write information, that - if written - would have shown Whatsapp in even worse light.
Spot instances, though.
Are Experts Real?
That's right the limitation is Data. You can't effectively use the extra compute if you don't have enough data to train a bigger neural network. https://jperla.medium.com/why-tesla-autopilot-ought-to-be-aw...
There are lots of those types of comments. Did you read?
I tend to agree if we consider current use cases. Issue comes when we add new use cases which require more processing power or new components.

Also, we’ll have to figure out how to manage with a sort of stagnation.

Essentially this entails curbing change. Curbing change means slowing progress (initially in this niche), but if we extend this into other areas it can mean significant stagnation because since things are good enough we don’t need to improve and progress (ie. we’re at equilibrium )

We'll have to grow comfortable with that outlook.
From the original article

> This may include things from deleted/private posts.

I think people would be alarmed if private DMs were leaked from Twitter, yes.

The data also includes the geolocations of posters.[1]

Another comment also suggested that the photos of the driver's licenses that were used to verify users were also being downloaded, though I'm not certain if this is true.

1. https://gizmodo.com/every-deleted-parler-post-many-with-user...
Where do you live ?

You are making very bold claims about solar being unreliable, but I'd completely expect reliability of solar to vary significant from one location to another.
If I can play devil's advocate for a moment:

1) "Pro-life" conservatives believe that fetuses are human lives (persons) worthy of protection and prioritize that over the right of the mother to control her own body. That might sound bad, but there is a logic to it.

"Pro-choice" advocates would argue that the fetus is not a person and that ultimately the mother should have full rights to her own body. Leaving aside the argument about the definition of personhood, outside of cases of rape (even among pro-lifers opinions differ on whether or not that changes anything), the mother had engaged in activity fully cognizant that creating a human life was a possible outcome. By engaging in the activity anyway she can be said to have accepted the risk and that acceptance further diminishes her right to avoid the consequences. Pro-lifers would argue the right to life of the person (fetus) outweighs the mother's right to control her own body in this circumstance. There are of course many other arguments to be had either way because this issue is an enormous one and is ultimately about many fundamental philosophical issues.

2) Anti-immigrant conservatives would argue that immigrants (specifically illegal immigrants, mind you) are not citizens of the United States and therefore do not have many of the same rights as citizens of the United States. The argument is largely over which rights are inalienable human rights and which are rights exclusive to US Citizens. They would further argue that illegal immigrants are actually criminals by virtue of being here illegally and restricting the rights of criminals is not exactly unprecedented or unreasonable.

3) Conservatives would argue that many[0] of those cases are not being reported factually, and that the officers involved were not actually violating the rights of those citizens unduly.

What I'm trying to say is, the selection is not arbitrary.

[0] Floyd is not among these. At least I can't find anyone who makes a good-faith argument why that wasn't basically straight-up murder.
The headline makes it look as if the regulators are out to ban crypto trading or liquidating (be prepared to lose all your money?!)
Indeed, that would work too. But since the author was talking about the world as one...

Also, to preempt other comments, I know that purposely is a word. I just hate the sound of it :)
buy bitcoin then, go ahead, you can buy everything with bitcoin right?
While I recognize the value of W3C LDP and SOLID, I also fail to see anything in SOLID that prevents B from sharing A's now pod-siloed information.

Does it prevent screenshots and OCR?

So it's in standard record structs and that makes it harder for the bad guys?

Who moderates mean memes with my face on them?

It is my hope that future Linked Data spec tutorials model something benign like shapes or cells instead of people: so that we can still see the value.
Why did you include that “the media told me” part? It dramatically weakens your argument. If you think you’re right and are arguing in good faith, why add this throwaway strawman to imply that everybody who disagrees with you must be brainwashed by the media and not thinking for themselves?
As a person who is living in EU, I didn't know that there's even a discussion about whether you can or can't repair the things you own. Sounds pretty weird. Repairing things is a common practice since I can't remember when.

Did I miss anything?
> Part of the problem with electronics is often a brand new unit costs less than replacing a faulty part

This is only partially true. The true cost is hidden and at least by average people like me immeasurable. We are putting a lot of cost out of sight if you consider the environmental impact of e-waste.
What is that claim based on? Plenty of companies use Haskell to great success scaling to well beyond 10 people. It may be a niche language, but in a remote-working world, and with a truly massive number of developers in the workforce, there still end up being a sizeable number of professional Haskell developers available to most companies.
Most of the world including New England still locks people up for moral infractions, even if no longer using stocks.
I am offended by the recent actions of digital giants and I never called for repeal of S230.

This is fairly clearly an antitrust case, which has nothing to do with S230. Behavior of the digital giants is very similar to the behavior of railroad oligopolies of the 19th century which actually led to antitrust legislation.
Erste Group is where it was 5 years ago (and 40% off all time high). Maybe the parent poster is just overexaggerating?
> But you have to acknowledge that interpreting is what you are doing

And interpreting is what the people who stormed the capitol did.

If you know you’re going to be scrutinised by your words, choosing them carefully becomes paramount—you’ll want to make sure you send the message across while being able to deny it, and the people who the message is targeted to understand and accept the compromise.

If you always consider only the words, you’ll be weaselled out. You have to consider not everyone is acting in good faith.

> You can of course argue that a plain reading of this words is not enough

The people who stormed the capitol might agree.

In this case, a well-established pattern of behaviour forces one to consider the intention behind the words and not just the words themselves. A lot of people acted in unison on a specific interpretation of those words, with consequences the speaker is aware of and (as far as I’m aware) didn’t admonish.

In sum: both sides agree on the interpretation of these words and the person who wrote them is aware of it and didn’t offer any clarification. Thus far, everything indicates the interpretation is correct.
Hi there.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200531/23325444617/hello...

Your thesis is flawed. You can't define "good faith" in any real way. You either have to accept that sites will be moderated and some number of people will disagree with the moderation, or you have to swing HARD in the opposite direction and decide all sites are now publishers and responsible for all content on their sites including user created content.
It's a target - plain and symbol. It was the target of the 4th plane on 9/11, and it will likely be a target again.

Given the importance of the building and the people inside, it absolutely needs to be protected.

Is it sad that we need to protect things that are important to us? Yes. Should we do it anyway? Yes.
Configuration Channel

There are an added pair of pins/single wire in USB-C cables that allow the devices to a) detect the orientation of the plug and b) do extended power negotiation for the increased power capabilities of USB-C.
> With this type of access, newly minted users were able to get behind the login box API used for content delivery. That allowed them to see which users had moderator rights and this in turn allowed them to reset passwords of existing users with simple “forgot password” function. Since Twilio no longer authenticated emails, hackers were able to access admin accounts with ease.

Can anyone make sense of this? In all the "forgot password" functions I've seen, you click "forgot password" and they email you a link to reset the password. How does "Twilio won't send our emails any more" lead to the "forgot password" function allowing account takeovers? I'd have expected it to just make "forgot password" no longer work because nobody can get a reset link any more. I can't figure out how you could configure things for this to lead to a security flaw this bad - other than "write all emails that fail to send somewhere public" which I can't imagine anyone doing. I can't imagine Twilio writing rejected emails from a closed down account somewhere public either. How does Twilio shutting down the account mean password reset links leak?
Has anyone leaked something about Russia that was then denied by Wikileaks? It could be that the US has a more active community of investigative journalists.
You can't yell fire in a crowded theater... Can you incite a riot, or hatred? What about representing fictions as fact in the news? What are the limits of satire?

The American answers to these questions aren't the same as they are in other nations.

While I don't fully agree with some of my nation's answers to these questions, at least I theoretically have a democratic voice in what those standards and laws are. But some private company in a foreign nation with foreign beliefs is unaccountable from my perspective.

Even if I boycott it, it doesn't mean much so long as my neighbors, friends, and family are using it.
Deutsche Bank: a high of $146, it now trades at $11. AIG went from $1,913 to $40. HSBC 75% loss, Barclays 85% loss. All across the world its the same story.
Then maybe AWS should just come out and say "We disabled our services for Parler because it's very unpopular and we don't want to be associated with it."
Oh, I am not firmly claiming that it's not a backdoor. It very well might be!

But that's what mostly what I was saying (granted, I got worked up at one point because the blind stereotyping puts a black mark on HN's reputation in my eyes) is that indeed the situation is ambiguous and both possibilities are [mostly] equally likely.
I wonder if "4-5 useful hours per day" is per sunny day, so you can cut your number in half again for cloudy days.
exactly, law rules, not Twitter or Facebook, they aren't justice, they aren't judges
They aren't, or did they get much better at it in recent years?
I agree that is an issue, and should be discussed. I didn’t mean to imply Twitter’s decision was plainly correct.
>generate green fuel or green natural gas

Do we wiggle our magic fingers and generate gas out of nowhere ? Renewable gas accounts for about, at best, 10% of gas consumed in a year. As in, that's about as much renewable gas we could make. And it's not exactly an instantaneous process, so we would still be wasting energy. The best existing solution is storing that energy as water that we would pump up a basin, to be released later and used in a dam. That would work, if we did not need to flood areas where major cities are to make it work.
Scala, when it's not used because it's just what someone learned the ropes with, is the Haskell of data science and machine learning: it's what people use when they want to inflate their credentials and/or egos.
"Android mandates 4kb page sizes"

I think the language they used is misleading. It's more likely Android has introduced some bugs from assuming page sizes are always 4kb.

"Whilst Ubuntu and other standard distros don't care?"

Many of the various different architectures Linux runs on have page sizes that aren't 4kb. It's typically defined in a constant called "PAGE_SHIFT" in the arch/<ARCH>/include/asm/page.h file for the architecture.

For example, PAGE_SHIFT is 13 for OpenRisc: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/fcadab740480e0e0e9fa9...

A quick way to convert that to the page size:

$ echo "2^13" | bc
8192
Telegram Open Network. I drscribed the idea in another comment above.
> It's frustrating to see that a private company's bad behavior wound up being a stain for the government like this.

Definitely! Sorry if I came across as defensive, I'm just used to people using Solyndra to criticize the whole program. On the whole, the DOE made a big impact. It's just disappointing that one bad actor reduced that impact by turning into a political hot potato.
Bed bugs are an awful scourge that you don’t want under and circumstances. I was an exterminator a lifetime ago and dreaded when I’d see those telltale track marks of blood.
Well... My headphones are 10 years old, my phone is 3 years old and all my previous ones including my Galaxy S2 (my first smartphone) are still in use by family, my kitchen doesn't have anything younger that 15 years - most stuff is 25+ years old - except the fridge, I replaced it because of power efficiency and the old one is at the cottage, nearly 35 years old. None of it was bought from a kickstarter as most of that stuff predates internet.

I really don't see the problem. Like you're saying people are buying new stuff because they want the new stuff, not because old is broken. There are tons of extremely cheap second hand things that could do the job and yet people keep buying new things.

How will this right to repair change anything? How much money was spent making it reality that could've been spent productively?
Sorry but no 'security researcher' is supposed to be gathering such a massive dataset in the first place. The moment you use a vulnerability to download any private information, even as proof of concept, you are on very thin ice - both legally and (in my view) ethically.

If I were twitter user @donk_enby I would be very worried about an imminent visit by law enforcement.
Feel good that you were able to extract 6K or so of value from it. If you held it until it busted, you would feed dumb.
Interesting, thanks for pointing this out! Do you have any insights on how hard it is to implement? I'm not familiar enough with ADSS to tell whether it's worth the innovation token. [0]

[0]: https://mcfunley.com/choose-boring-technology
But individual deposits were guaranteed were they not?
I've heard this before, and I'm so confused by section 230. Where can I read some reliable info on it?
It's amazing isn't it? Principles, ethics.. all talk for a lot of people, situations like these show it. Watch them spin it as a good thing for humanity as a whole. Amazing.
VVVVVV has been out for a while and made a ton of money already, I can definitely see a use case for that. If he chooses to go open-source-first with his next game that would be more notable.

I've got a game I'm working on that I'm sure would benefit from open source, but I would like the chance to make money off of it first. I have debated making a separate open source version of it at times, though, and seeing where that goes.

I also might open-source a different game I'm working on (an even smaller abstract game). Need to get a bit further in developing it first though.
Right. Repairable hardware is just the one side, security updates needs to be available as well. We need mandated open sourcing of device software (including firmware and drivers + unlocking of the bootloader) after the support timerange, or at the very least alternatively the obligation to continue security updates for decades.
So they could have just filled their site with GPT3-generated nonsense to reach the acceptable percentage of nonviolent content? Cool!
More speculation on my part: I wonder if rather than a fail-open decision, it’s just how they designed local dev to work and the failure of the provider caused the app to behave as if in local dev mode.
The point you're trying to make isn't actually one anyone (rational) is trying to disagree with. Obviously (IMO) differing viewpoints should be allowed to coexist.

The problem is that you're not really addressing the actual issue, which is whether or not I can enter into agreements or not contingent on my own actions.

If I can, then it's fair for the other party of that agreement to exercise that part of the agreement and end our relationship. If I can't, then I'm not allowed agency over my own actions, nor is the other party...

Are you suggesting that groups shouldn't create terms of use that are contingent on how a service is used?
"the lesson here is that restricting people to the OS vendor's software repository doesn't prevent malware"

This was a side-loaded app on an unlocked phone. What am I missing?
The threshold is if the management at Amazon etc. feel that it would generate too much bad publicity and/or potential legal liability for them to provide service to an organization mired in such controversy.