skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What you've said would make sense if there's broad agreement that there are multiple opposing viewpoints/explanations all of which have some roughly equivalent level of credibility.

So for example, despite me not agreeing with it, and believe it to be completely refutable by looking at the evidence, I will concede that the concept that welfare payments might make at least some people lazy is a position that needs to be accorded roughly the same level of credibility as my own position (it doesn't, and the amounts of money and moral hazard involved make it largely irrelevant). Someone reporting on social policy questions and discussing the pros and cons of a welfare system would be remiss in not mentioning and examining both these perspectives (and others, probably).

In the case of raining/not-raining, this is clearly (to me) absurd. One of the POV's is right and one is wrong. There's no need to say "some people say <wrong thing>". It's just wrong.

The problem IMO is that many issues fall into the gray zone between these sorts of examples. For example, I'd say that people who claim that tax cuts for the wealthy lead to an improved economy really don't have any evidence whatsoever in their favor, and that reporting on their position as if it is somehow a credible economic policy is giving credit to something that is demonstrably false. But there's enough wiggle room there that a journalistic organization might still feel, even after myself or Krugman have shown them the evidence that this view is demonstrably false, that they should cover the position of those who make this claim. They can enuniciate their perspective eloquently and clearly, and they sound as if they have a legitimate position that deserves consideration. Journalists are very reluctant to make this judgement call.

The real problem, I think, is something I alluded to up-thread. It's not really about presenting particular perspectives. It's about critical thinking, both on the part of the audience but also the journalists. It's about challenging the claims made with perspicacious questions, and pushing for answers until they are given, or it becomes clear that someone is unable to justify their beliefs. The problem in the current media landscape is that if someone actually does this, they will rapidly be unable to bring these skills to bear on anyone who actually matters. So they don't. They do what NPR does so often - put the voice in front of the mic, and "let the audience decide". Don't challenge, don't ask difficult questions, don't follow up, don't call out obvious and common logical flaws and fallacies, don't ask for evidence.
They definitely are selling generic devices.
I do honestly think the devs would have preferred to keep the “when it’s ready” launch date and probably not release the game in its launch state.
It's worth noting that Poland has no strong tradition of class action lawsuits, and consoles like Playstation 5 are not yet available. I mean, I can see one selling for the equivalent of $1208.
I was thinking about designing different chat bot. Instead of analysing given current question, it would instead prepare code/data for all possible next questions given current question and answer. So when the next question would come he would already know the answer as all data are ready.

And that got me thinking. What if our brain does this with our memory when we go to sleep. Our conciseness dies, but brain carefully prepares memories in a way that in the morning the new consciousness doesn't notice and consider itself to be the same as yesterday.
> the company states that two-thirds of customers asked for Twitter and Facebook to be blocked.

I really don't see how that's possible
But it has influence. Since the warning about GDPR is made only in cases which impact data of EU citizens, the EU position seems reasonable.
>creating money out of thin air

Taking it from less skilled traders, actually.
Sunspot: An Implant in the Build Process (How SolarWinds Got Breached)
Uh, whose interpretation is that? Constitutional tribunal ruled itself that three judges were correctly appointed by previous parliament. (case K34/15)
Don't editorialize. Real title: "Save the Constitution From Big Tech".
FYI, the political scientist Frank Wilhoit didn't write this, although he has written similar things.

The quote was made by a different Frank Wilhoit on the Crooked Timber blog / community.

Investigative work here: https://twitter.com/Delafina777/status/1183470106816331776
Why are people who want to play soccer allowed to be upset when the opponent scored a goal?

I don’t know how to answer your question outside of anology. It’s possible to want one thing and not another.
Or they should be regulated in some ways but not others. There's a big distance between "run by the govt" and "totally free of govt meddling".
I'm a Freemason. Some people don't like that. They think we worship the devil (we don't) and that we control the world (were that wishing made it so but, no, we don't).

It's not out of the realm of possibility that enough people have that view and decide that I and/or my company need to be shamed, shunned, and shut down. What do I do then? I've done nothing illegal, immoral, or unethical but a group of people have decided I need to lose everything simply because I joined a fraternity.

That view in particular has already happened once, by the way. It could easily happen again.

I say all that to say this: I think OP's question is what happens when it takes less than criminal activity to get kicked off of vendors such as AWS?
I had trouble getting into the characters, especially Jackie. Outer Worlds characters drew me in much more but the gameplay was dry. I'll definitely go back to Cyberpunk when they turn on PS5 ray tracing.

Well the only side quests I got so far are go here and kill people grinds, but the bar is low. I consider a side quest interesting if it gives you some speech options or has some kind of immersion to the side quest environment. Having novel puzzle solving or forcing some kind of reasoning skills, revealing something fascinating about the world that adds depth to what is going on, those are great side quests.

There was definitely world building in the computer messages which was good. You can hack a computer to skip some side quest requirements, it's not bad. To me the world is kind of cliche and dreary, again contrast with the playful inventiveness of Outer Words sci-fi world.

Actually I started playing on hard but switched to normal and then got super bored because it was too easy. Hard was kicking my ass and I couldn't do anything but it does emphasize the hacking you are talking about and probably is how I would make the game interesting for me.

I got dejected after I ground out the money for the doctor who helps you and it had no impact on anything and realized my craft deconstruction perk was tearing up valuable sellable things and not giving much XP (you can't turn it off). If it had scaled XP to value that would have been cool.
Good catch. Since USG is Unifi Security Gateway, I kinda just mixed it up with Unifi Protect. Still a troubling development IMO.
if Brave blockers are not enough you can get uBlock origin.
> a belief ought to be based on facts and sound reasoning

What is the basis for this belief?
Nobody is switching sides, I don't care one bit about corporations getting hit with regulation. In fact, I'm for it.

That has nothing to do with enjoying watching this chickens come home to roost.
isnt the irony here that with net neutrality in place an ISP wouldnt be able to block FB, TWTR?
Thanks, I was not on the same page as you, but I take your points.

I'm very skeptical of this approach, but I don't think I have anything else to add to this thread
Trump’s gone quiet, Parler nuked, Twitter protest never happened
Thanks for this. I was under the impression there was some difference between relativistic electron-electron dispersion and the Casimir force - after reading your comment I googled some recent papers and convinced myself.

My first thought after knowing this was that maybe micro/nano-fabrication won't be as kneecapped by this force as I thought - as it is not an intrinsic/unavoidable property of the vacuum, but a tune-able property of the materials.
Companies with a monopoly often have them because of government regulation. Copyright being the best example of shutting out other players in the market.

Pure markets are impossible in these environments
At this point "stop the steal" is essentially a rallying cry for militant action. Civilized society rapidly stops functioning if that action comes to fruition.
There is more to Section 230 than commonly mentioned. There is IMHO a nice tutorial at

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200531/23325444617/hello...
The abstract problem is that the market is imperfect due to insufficient customer knowledge. I know my last washing machine lasted X years, but how that will compare to the new one from the same manufacturer, I don't know. The manufacturer also won't (really) tell me, just the usual fluff about quality.

So as a consumer, I am unable to decide objectively, just using rumours if there isn't a hard guarantee or a trustworthy evaluation of the quality of all products I could pick. In that situation, I will price in the uncertainty, I will evaluate the rumours and the tendency to produce crappier stuff over time. And when in doubt, buy 4 cheap short-lived washing machines instead of 1 for 4 times the price.
They literally erected gallows on the grounds of the capitol, they literally marched through the building chanting "hang Mike Pence". The entire basis of the Q Anon conspiracy is that Donald Trump is preparing to destroy the deep state and retain power. Spend more than a few minutes browsing around Gab (you can just look at the top posts) and you'll see explicit references to overthrowing the government.

You can absolutely argue that this was a laughable attempt to install an illegitimate government and you can absolutely argue that they have no chance of succeeding, but you can't argue it isn't the intent -- it's the entire basis of the Q Anon conspiracy. The laughable nature of their attempt doesn't disprove the intent.
Full title: Trump’s gone quiet, Parler nuked, Twitter protest never happened: There's an eerie calm – but at what cost?
> I have personally witnessed violent statements on Twitter over several years usually coming from leftists such as AOC.

I am very curious for an example of an AOC tweet that you considered a violent statement.

I am thinking you must have a very different definition of "violent statement" than I do, and I'm curious to learn more about it by example. Because I read a lot of AOC, and have never seen anything I would remotely consider a violent statement. But you may consider things differently, what exactly "violence" means, let alone in a statement, is to some extent not entirely set in stone, I agree.

Can you provide an example (or three) of a violent statement from AOC you have personally witnessed, as you say?

She is a real person, it seems only fair to provide an example when making such an accusation.
Parler was paying Amazon for hosting. Amazon wasn't doing it for free and hoping for ad revenue.
The submitted title is arguably better, because it's less click-baity.
Read the impeachment papers
Are you aware of what other things have led to deadly consequences? Communism, socialism, green terrorism, and self driving cars come to mind.
I think you're setting an egregiously false equivalence here. BLM didn't openly plan to kill 80 people on Facebook. And if the right-wingers had merely planned to have protests and some crimes happened to be committed at those protests, Parler wouldn't be shut down now.
That's a good way of putting it. I think this happens often - the progressive/leftist/etc. position involves multiple points of departure from our current society, and if you try to look at the merits of any single strand by itself, it falls apart.

For instance, many progressives are advocates of people losing their jobs for harassing coworkers. If you look at this position in isolation, it looks like they're arguing for a cold corporatism, that anyone who threatens the reputation of the corporation should be thrown onto the streets. However, many progressives are also advocates of stronger social safety nets for people who lose their jobs, whether by their own misdeeds or misfortune - from increased unemployment (or even UBI), to stronger tenants' protections, to government-provided healthcare. Firing someone for their misdeeds is much less cruel once those safety nets are in place, and the moral calculus very rapidly shifts to protecting their coworkers.
You did fine. There's just a lot of down-voting for poor reasons. I've had comments down-voted about three seconds after posting them.
I have no stakes in defending Steam, but—you realize that if someone were cracking passwords left and right for years then the web would be full of complaints like yours? Everyone would know that it's a thing that's happening. Eternal questions would be pondered to the sound of Guard notifications, lovers would gaze at stars with faint notificationing in the background, and musicians and poets would compose songs to that tune.

Frankly a keylogger on your laptop sounds more plausible.
I'm not comfortable with the idea of "reverse boycotts", in which businesses can hinder candidates by denying them services. That gives business owners far too much power over elections (and Citizens United already gives them too much, IMO). I want democracy, not plutocracy.

> Which candidate do you hate the most? If what you were saying was reasonable, then you could be forced to provide material support for that candidate. How would you feel about that?

Absolutely fine, if that "material support" was merely providing the same business I provide everyone else, at the usual cost. To me, paid services are not "material support", a phrase I would only use to describe in-kind contributions (that is, services provided for free).

And 99% of businesses already act that way. The local office supply store doesn't discriminate based on politics. What's backwards about expecting big tech to act like other businesses?

> Stripe is not a utility like electricity or the phone company. Nor are they anywhere close to a monopoly... [candidates] have other options for online payment processing

That's an important point, and here's the rule I would propose to account for it: treat refusing to do business with a candidate while doing business with their opponent as an in-kind contribution to their opponent. If the cost of finding an alternative is small, denying services will be allowed as a small in-kind contribution.

I'm not a lawyer and I'm talking about how I think things should work, not what the current law is, but I believe that's the legal principle behind the Equal-Time Rule, so it's not entirely legally unprecedented.
Because calculating the salted hash on the client side will just substitute the hash for password and render the whole hashing useless. Also it would require additional roundtrip to server in order to get the stored salt.

Then there is the UX problem where mechanism like that would have to be implemented on the browser level (and in fact it is as Authorization: digest is mostly what you are proposing) which according to some leads to “ugly and confusing” UI.
Does this put them in the unenvious position to take down any up-to-then unproven allegations?

Does it mean any group seeking remedy against BigCorp with slogans like “Stop the Stink” to oppose a new dump can be shut down through lawyers if the group cannot prove their allegations?
I just don't understand the double standards.

What about the antifa/blm mobs that swept the country these last few months?

As a matter of principle, they would have to ban them as well.
I'm not really sure how it would damage them though. Normal customers buy an iphone and it comes with the locked down ios as normal, now you just let people who know what they are doing mess around.

We can see from android, letting people install custom ROMs didn't really have any effect on the average user who will never try it. The hurdle of having to factory reset your phone to unlock the bootloader keeps normal people away.
Coincidentally, it was also the same day insurrectionists invaded the nation's capitol, after using social media to coordinate the violent attack.

"Stop the Steal" is one of their rallying cries.
What is particularly difficult here is that the election is not the source of the problem, it was just the straw that broke the camels back (so to speak).

Even if the election results were accepted as 100% correct by everyone, the grievances pre-date the election and even Trump's entire term in office. Trump used those grievances to get elected in the first place. They aren't going away because Trump goes away.

I wish I had some good words of wisdom at this point but the only thing I'm sure of is that if Congress goes ahead and attempts to impeach Trump things will get worse not better, it will make him a figurative martyr.

The best thing that could happen would be for Biden and Trump to somehow suck it up and come out and jointly make a speech urging everyone to take a deep-f*ing breath and perhaps add a joint to go along with everyone's stimulus check.
> Poettering's stance seems so oblivious (get a better hardware or fix from manufacturer)

or just disable rdrand.
I’m starting to get a bit tired of so many posts at the top of HN being in some way tangentially related to this question of “should social media companies have the power to censor politicians?”

I know it’s a hugely important question that’ll have repercussions for years to come, and I know if you want an intelligent debate on the matter, HN is probably the best place for it, but politics sincerely gives me stress, and I use Hacker News because it is (or was) one of the few places that generally avoids it

I’m of the position that the human brain isn’t really geared for dealing with dangers on a geopolitical level

This is a little amateur psychologyish, but when you perceive danger, the brain releases chemicals that won’t let you rest until you’re convinced you’re free of that danger - the fight or flight response. So far this is essentially common wisdom, but - and here’s where I stray into the region of am-psych - I suspect that our unconscious mind finds it difficult to distinguish between immediate dangers and threats to our life, and geopolitical dangers that, while important, are rarely a threat to your life

The problem, for me, lies in the fact that in the news media, with a few exceptions (Reuters, BBC News), and social media, with almost no exceptions, the political content which rises to the top is the content that is most capable of triggering that response in you

If this wasn’t the case, then it would be okay, as the content would be easy to avoid, but I am weak to it, most of us are. The news media has what’s getting on for centuries of practice in triggering these emotions, triggering your unconscious mind to chemically scream at you to fight or run. Who am I to withstand that?

What I think this means is that if you keep up with politics consistently, and allow it in, you will either be in a near constant state of fight or flight, or you will become numb. Either state, while both useful in certain circumstances, is not pleasant. It’s not conducive to a happy life. It’s stress or jade

So this is my impassioned plea to the mods: Please prune back the constant political content. It’s unhealthy, it’s not what I’m here for, and, I suspect, although I may be wrong, that others feel the same way. Of course, if this comment gets heavily downvoted, (assuming people even read it) then I accept that I am simply in the minority, and that’s okay
> People don't seem to understand how close we are to an unrecoverable fall into fascism.

You're right, but not for the reason you think.
The problem is classifying "trans rights" as left wing, while those have (almost) nothing to do with the left/right spectrum.

Another example, on that spectrum this time : Trump's anti-immigration stance is a very typical leftist position. If this sounds preposterous, see this :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Workingmen%27s_A...
>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.

Right. And through all that thinking about silly stuff, people eventually came to the idea that a LOT of this religion stuff is silly and not worth wasting time on, so smart people could skip worrying about it for the rest of human existence if they chose to. (Whereas beforehand, it was considered a super-important thing to think about).

You seem to imply all this effort was a waste but ultimately it led to the Reformation, various Renaissance periods and, most importantly, Douglas Adams.

I suspect that the same thing will happen with HFT. Either people will stop bothering with it eventually, or they will discover some fantastic new quantum effects that pay dividends for humanity forever more. :)
Sometimes the trick isn't so much about the technology, but about the regulatory environment and your agility within it. The Pirate Bay is still online, so getting around this kind of thing isn't entirely unprecedented.

Something to consider on the tech front would be Starlink. What happens when the orbital layer is independent of terrestrial backhaul under ideal routing conditions? Consider the implications of a datacenter that is in space or located at a geographic location that is incredibly difficult to access. Just a decent desktop PC hooked up to a 100mbps pipe can serve a lot of traffic if the application is built properly (i.e. text-only).
I had forgotten about this, thanks for the reminder :)
Taking into account they had to take extra steps to enable this "feature", they probably don't consider it to be "misconfigured", at least from their point of view.
I'm not sure why this is on the front page now - this isn't new, I bought mine 4 years ago, I believe.

It's a fun little toy but as far as I know it is abandoned, and the app to get the content off the device is quite unreliable.

Ubiquiti reused the case of it for the "UniFi Access Reader Pro" - an NFC/bluetooth reader for physical security purposes.

https://store.ui.com/collections/unifi-door-access/products/...
What about Wire (groups up to 500, e2e, handles photos etc, Swiss firm, easy to use)?

https://wire.com/en/products/personal-secure-messenger/

And why's Threema out? You can hardly complain that there is no solution to your needs, and then, when one is offered, say "no need for yet another solution"...
1st.gov would be a neat domain name.
I would really hope the capture software did some major shake/motion reduction. It's not even shown as secured to a person like a GoPro, so imagine a video on a swinging medallion...
Most free marketers don't think the government should enforce all of their moral beliefs. You can be morally against an act of a private company and still believe they have the right to do it. If a company is behaving poorly, and we have a free market, there will probably be alternatives for people to take their business to.
Those ipads could be perfectly useful as dumb streaming targets or dashboard displays.
People really need to understand that democracy and free world begins and ends with America. There’s no backstop. If the US falls there’s absolutely no one else out there to stop Russia and China from taking over. This is not fear mongering. It’s a simple calculus based on nuclear weapons. So while this may look like relatively harmless political games being played, it’s a lot more careless and dangerous than we are led to believe.