skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
To balance things out, consider also that 20 minutes into his speech, Trump said "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard." I think it's important to take a charitable interpretation of what your opponents say, and to not assume malice. It's also worth keeping Hanlon's Razor in mind (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor).

Regarding the "trial by combat" line - an article on Giulani's speech (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-electio...) describes it like this:

> While baselessly claiming that Democrats won elections because of fraud, Mr Giuliani bellowed to the crowd: “Who hides evidence? Criminals hide evidence, not honest people!”

> He continued: “Over the next ten days, we get to see the machines that are crooked, the ballots that are fraudulent, and if we're wrong, we will be made fools of. But if we're right, a lot of them will go to jail.”

> Mr Giuliani then suddenly yelled: "Let's have trial by combat!" to lacklustre cheers from the crowd.

To me this does not sound like a call to violence. It sounds like a bad joke or poorly-worded bluster or an attempt at hyperbole. Giuliani was quick to condemn the riot at the capitol, for what it's worth (https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1347149858000556032).
Exactly. It's just another thing to learn, and usually something you easily pick up through immersion. Jargon files (like The Jargon File [1]) are pretty amusing and can help illustrate where some of the quirkier conventions originated, but you can get by without them.

[1] http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/
Is that REALLY a bigger problem than a murderous crowd trying to overthrow democracy, egged on by the president?
> I will add that even with regards to the government, there are limits to free speech — falsely shouting “fire” in a crowded theater is the archetypal example.

Note that when this phrase was originally used, it was to justify imprisoning people who distributed flyers opposing the draft in WW1, and the supreme court later partially overturned it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_the...
The mainstream media was complicit in arguing for the Iraq War, which resulted in the deaths of nearly a million people and is still ongoing in the form of the Syrian Civil War.

Are you for shutting down the New York Times, then? The violence they’ve facilitated dwarfs that of the recent events.

Edit: in case you doubt me, here’s a pretty damning article:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/iraq...
> Not when you have millions deluded, angry, violent and ready to use any means to incite violence, take down gov, threaten governors

That's exactly what our tyrannical Russian government says about those who don't like Putin being in power for 20+ years. Thus, they limit our rights for free speech online, prosecute for extremism, deny us rights to peacefully gather and protest.

If you Americans go down this path any further, you'll too find yourself living under the tyrannical dictatorship no better than ours.

Oh, unfortunately, unlike you, we don't have 2nd amendment rights, so actually rebelling is harder. So I suggest you clinging to your guns as strong as you can: all points that you are going to need them.
Not only does Parler have the option to set up their own infra like the old-school days of the web, they even have the option of promoting their speech via modern mobile only apps.

It’s not impossible to have the entirety of their community communicate solely via Signal, WhatsApp or iMessage. Or any theoretically equivalent end-to-end encrypted messaging app where the “message group” is the entirety of the current Parler community.

Apple, FB or anyone else, have no way to separate those users from others.

Of course, one could argue that Apple & Google could institute new policies to prevent the spread of misinformation on apps. But nobody can argue that it is a definitively more difficult problem to solve than on a user-content based, server-driven social network such as Twitter.

WhatsApp has implemented feature such as limited forwarding to combat misinformation.

But still they haven’t (and technically cannot) prevent Parler users from expressing their views.

In other words, I don’t see any instance of Parler users losing their right to free speech anywhere. Sure, they don’t enjoy the luxury of _convenience_ driven speech. But depending on how you define it, none of us have universally convenient means to express our speech.
The way to gain weight is just to eat like crazy. You eat dinner and before you feel full you drink you gainer. Repeat for all meals and you should be able to gain weight fast. The hardest exercises are best: squat, chest press, deadlift, rowing etc.
It's not about deciding what's acceptable for one's kids, it's about limiting the range of programming so that one can choose if that range is acceptable. This is a difference from traditional channels which have a distinct flavour and are subject to watchdogs (in my country, UK, at least).

No parent has time to watch TV with their child all the time up until they're 18. You might say 'well don't let them watch TV' and that's a valid choice. But other parents want to choose safe ranges of programming and have someone else police stuff to make sure it stays in that range.
Probably an Americanism? I'm American and I've been calling it 'etsy' since the late 90s. I hear 'E T C' and 'et cetera' on occasion, but the speaker is usually someone new to unix.
I kind of dislike progressive loading; certainly the type that's used as an (hypothetical) example in the article. The squashed blurry bad-quality image isn't all that useful, and you're never actually sure if it is or isn't loading a better version in the background. I'm not so sure if it's really better UX, because either 1) you care about the image quality in your use case and a blurry version just won't do, or 2) the image quality isn't all that important and you should be serving smallish images anyway (like the Guardian), possibly clickable to load a high-res version for those who desire it.
I haven’t considered this. Thank you for your perspective.
I would like to see wikipedia move it's database to a decentralized model, something similar to a blockchain ledger.

I would definitely consider contributing and donating to an effort that opened up it's content and moderation further.
I don't think that at this point in history, right now, there is much trouble identifying who is evil.
Helm Best Practices
Ignoring their terrorist record, 'democratically elected' in that case means 'one man, one vote, one time, and no elections ever since 2006'. We don't call people who win one elections and never allow another 'democrats'.
you are right it was giving a platform to a mass murderer.
Its not a spam filter.

I am not posting too fast in trying to reply to responses.

The reason I am blocked is because my opinions are not popular and they are downvoted.

This is the issue: HN is an echo chamber. Those who can downvote (those with 500+ upvotes) can downvote others and maintain the echo chamber. A function of the design is to take away the right of reply from those whose opinion they do not like.
Because a clone would have to be significantly better to convince the community and users to switch.

There simply was none. And it is a huge amount of work to try and as far as I know, mainly those people try this in seriousnes (and some success), who are not happy with wikipedia because they don't like alternative facts. So I think I have seen alt-right and esoteric wikipedia clones somewhere, but for some reason they have not wide success.
Or, of course, how with Google AdSense the entire world must live under the U.S.A.'s notedly quaint aversion to nudity, because allowing it on a website will severely reduce advertisement revenue.

It's quite interesting how many international websites would forbid me from posting scenes from Dutch television programming because the adult U.S.A.-man is apparently more damaged by nudity than the præpubertal Dutchman.
That is an absolutely nonsensical argument, that twists both the meaning of words and completely ignores large swathes of actual history.

Do better.
> Bernie never incited a mob to storm the Capitol Building, while Congress ratified the votes for his political opponent.

His supporters most certainly include a fringe of people prepared for violence. I've even seen video evidence of such people working for his presidential election campaign.

Bernie Sanders also endorsed the (thankfully failed) Portland mayoral candidate who was an open Antifa supporter and worshiper of Stalin and Mao.

The question, for any political movement that has violent fringe, to what extent can the responsibility for that violent fringe be set at the feet of either the members of the movement or the politicians who lead it?

Bernie and his followers have never been broadly considered responsible for his radicals, despite his extreme rhetoric.

All summer long we had "mostly peaceful" BLM protests that included a significant minority of violent radicals (both BLM and Antifa) and yet no one took responsibility. In many cases people weren't even prosecuted.

Consider this: on election day, D.C. was boarded up, and it wasn't in preparation for rioting Trump supporters. These are people who generally speaking don't want to over through the existing order. They just want to see the existing order working.
> If NASA had an unlimited budget, then by all means do it all. But unfortunately that's not the reality right now.

It doesn't feel like NASA has a budget at all. Sure, they probably know how much discretionary cash they can spend this year, but for large projects, don't they pitch them to Congress and get them approved or denied?

Congress has effectively an unlimited budget, so if NASA have multiple exciting ideas, they "just" have to sell them each to the real bosses.
Americans seem to feel much the same way about censorship these days as they do about their own personal privacy:

"It doesn't affect me or my life/views presently, so I don't see a reason to object to it." - The "I have nothing to hide" sort of thing.
> a) 50 years is enough for "institutional memory" to go out of the window. This may change with longevity breakthroughs, but 50 years is currently enough for a complete generation exchange, so the new leaders have no memory of the previous upheaval and will make the same mistakes again. Or at least the same kind of mistakes, details are always different.

That's why education is the most important pillar of democracy. Education is everything.
I wish more schools taught us the tools to deal with social media.

At my school we're just given stale advice about cyberbullying and about posting things we'd regret.

People don't even question the legitimacy of things often or think critically about it. It's as if their critical thinking is numbed. I don't know how else to put it, but it's rather interesting.
A social network that hosts terrorist content.
even if you don't subscribe to the social criticisms, Lena simply isn't representative of imagery nowadays. The colour balance is wrong, its from film and the dynamic range is limited.

You're better off montecarlo sampling 20 images from instagram using different geolocations.
Parler does have the TOS that you speak of, but the Parler CEO also says that Parler is “just a neutral town square that just adheres to the law” and leaves moderation to volunteers and takes no responsibility for what’s posted.

In other words, the TOS is effectively useless.
No idea why this is downvoted, there's no better example of censorship than this.

We would be in a better situation right now if voters had the facts about these four FBI investigations back in 2018, so perhaps the Democrats could have nominated a candidate that isn't a criminal.

I still voted for Biden, already aware of his family's influence peddling, because Trump is a repulsive moron in addition to being corrupt... just to be clear.
Paradox of Tolerance is a hypocritical bullshit. If you are tolerant with exceptions, you are intolerant, period.

People who refer to it hypocritically pretend to have a higher moral ground than their opponents. In fact, they are more or less the same. Truly tolerant people should win the other side with their virtue, and yes, it insanely harder. But it's not hypocrisy.
Isn’t there a US/UK difference? It seems to me that English people pronounce this closer to (though not exactly) a as in “jar” than to e as in “very”, though I think I’ve heard both ends of the spectrum.

To my (admittedly non-native) ears, an open and long sound is strange in such a word, and the closed a sounds better. Same with i versus ai in bin or lib.
You would be right, if Wikipedia would not cover the opinions/subjective topics as well. Nowadays it is often used as a column for some higher-up contributors/journalists.

It is still valuable for the scientific topics and I would not call that superficial at all, but you need to be very critical of anything that goes further than that. And actually even for the scientific topics you need to be aware if PR is involved with the article, because then you have to take anything with a grain of salt as well.
> Think about it this way. If the primary importance of something is only apparent from the big picture how is a user supposed to decide whether to use it or not? The big picture is rarely available to most programmers.

Maybe a user isn't supposed to. I believe that's the premise of Paul Graham's Blub Paradox [1]. I certainly didn't learn, say, Common Lisp, because I was doing a feature comparison. I had no idea what a lexical closure was at the time, and a couple of toy examples wouldn't have convinced me of their worth. I'd been programming quite happily without them for some time by then.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blub_paradox#The_Blub_paradox
You're not answering to his point, though. Anyone can know all this without posting "...insane conspiracy theories about microchipped pedophiles who want to eat your brains."
If Republicans start firing rockets directed at Mexican(?) civilians, then I guess that we can start claiming that they are terrorists
Parler CEO must be personally sifting through posts seeing which death threats he is OK with and which ones he thinks will bring legal liability.

Thats fine the entire site's purpose is a Mercer family vehicle for right wing radicalization it is not like there is a shortage of threats.

Parler Reportedly Backed by Mercers, Same Family That Funded Cambridge Analytica: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/parler-reportedly-...

>People familiar with the matter told the Wall Street Journal about the Mercers' ties to Parler—an American microblogging and social networking service launched in 2018 that has a significant user base of Trump supporters. Parler CEO John Matze confirmed that Rebekah Mercer was a lead investor in the early stages of the company and that her funding was conditional on the app relinquishing control to users on what they can see.

Some choice content for Parler's CEO to clean up for the Mercers:

>"Take journalists down by any means necessary."

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErVotZwXAAIRqSf?format=png&name=...

>"we need to start systematically assassinating liberal leaders."

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErVorLLXcAEzKXX?format=png&name=...

>Rebekah Mercer explained on the app that she launched Parler with Matze to "provide a neutral platform for free speech, as our founders intended."

I would say I hope the users here defending Parler are doing it out of a wish for carrying out freedom of speech. But I doubt this. Many of the users defending this stuff also have been saying things like the election was rigged or that antifa was behind the Capitol attack.
Ask HN: Website on Wordpress (Clonage)
Can I clone my website - not migrate, but create an exact copy on another domain (and get a stand-alone new website)?
Are you British? I (American) have been pronouncing it "etsy" for over 20 years. When I hear something different it's usually from someone who is new to unix and just hasn't learned all the jargon yet.
I know nothing about SEO either, but a quick search gives: https://moz.com/learn/seo/google-panda
You are right, it isn't. The situation is complex though. After WWII the Bavarian state claimed copyrights of "Mein Kampf" as Hitler was registered as a Munich citizen. Based on this copyright, publishers were not allowed to print and import it. Sales of books printed before 1945 were still allowed, based on a ruling of the German supreme court. The copyrights have lapsed recently, so technically, the book can be printed and traded again in Germany, as long as you are not using it to promote otherwise illegal activities, like exhibiting the Swatiska as a political symbol. Also, it has been put on the index, this means, you cannot publically advertise it and sell it to underage persons.

In the meantime, the Bavarian state has brought it to market again in a commented form. The original text is reproduced together with comments on the text. This issue is freely traded and even used in historical education at schools.
I think you overestimate human intelligence. Surely, as of yet we are the most intelligent thing in the known universe, and the human mind can seemingly discover/invent/understand everything.

But knowing that our math itself has a limit, and we are already pushing that limit with some problems it is naiv to think that the human brain is all that much capable. (Interestingly enough we are intelligent enough to somewhat know our limits - like the complexity of ZFC)
While once singularity happens, an AI has basically only material limits to the complexity it can manage (though what I found beautiful is that even that would hit a limit not necessarily higher than we do - like there will be a busy beaver number it can’t reason about)
Excellent post. Why is this riot causing bans whereas in May it was encouraged? I want to see an informed rebuttal here, does anyone have it?
if you find it acceptable to watch ads (I don't), use it
Oh, please. People have been "afraid to speak openly" for all of America's history. The notion that there's something drastically different about "cancel culture" in terms of severity is historically ignorant. Look at the comedian Lenny Bruce's arrests for obscenity, for example. Or the anticommunist panic of the 1950s. To say nothing of how women were controlled up to and after suffrage: deprivation of rights, marginalization, beatings, and rape. Ditto the free speech of black people, who faced lynching for as little as whistling.

Social actions will always have social consequences; that's a necessary corollary to freedom of speech. What's different today is that social conservatives and especially the radical right are starting to experience those same social consequences. If people are going to use their freedom of speech and association to, say, support Nazis, then other people are free to use their freedoms of speech and association in response.
Very well said. I have the impression that some of these fights against injustice are turning into fights against a set of labels and are effectively just sweeping the real problems under the rug. It's very well possible to be a racist even when totally avoiding the use of master-slave terminology in software, as it's possible to be inclusive and non-racist when using it. Having a binary view on concepts or people is never good in my opinion.
I think even more than deplatforming ISIS was the physical defeat of ISIS in the real world. If ISIS was still having success like it had when it started with quickly overrunning Iraq and establishing a "Caliphate" all the deplatforming in the world would not have mattered all that much.

In the same vein, with regard to the alt-right, the big event that happened was that Trump both lost the election and the attack on Capitol Hill was a spectacular failure. The Senate and House voted overwhelmingly to certify the election. Joe Biden is going to be the next President.

I imagine that if Trump had won re-election, or that somehow Congress had managed to nullify Biden's electoral votes and send it to House delegations that made Trump the winner, all the deplatforming would be pointless.

Deplatforming combined with demoralizing defeats is probably synergistic and effective.
You should be aware that if you can read messages on the screen with an open source app they can be exported. There's no way around this, if the app is closed source it might be initially harder to export but just as possible.
What a hypocritical article. No country in the world would allow a website that systematically doxes their police officers. And for good reason.
Your local pub might be trying to offer an alternative to local people staying on their homes watching tv instead. Linux and peertube are trying to offer an alternative to something of a much bigger scale, and most likely with more pressing ethical concerns (they often want to drive people away from the current mainstream option for ethical reasons). Not everyone might share that view, but they are definitely different situations. Not saying you don't have a point, but we can't ignore the differences in context.
Buggy code, fragile legacy systems, bad projects cost US businesses $2tr in 2020
I think there are simply some ideas that are too repugnant to not rebuke.

Then rebuke them, don't try and silence them. First off, you won't silence them, you'll just drive them to another platform or underground and in fact, likely give them even more credence (similar to the Streisand effect) - big tech just created a bunch of martyrs and "forbidden speech" and we all know how well it goes when things are "forbidden", it just attracts more people who want to be martyrs as well.
> - Removing it in any capacity should be done with extreme care and free of any bias one way or another, with a lot of thought put into any future consequences

I agree with basically your whole post, but I think it should be emphasized that extreme care has been taken. Things have escalated to the point that Trump supporters violently attacked the legislative branch in order to subvert our political process. There isn’t much worse than that. Parler is being actively used as part of a system to plan, coordinate, and build support for more attacks (e.g. posts referring to journalists as soft targets).
This does seem like the obvious outcome. We just witnessed the self-initiated shutdown of Voat, which was different in concept but similar in intention. Maybe they saw the writing on the wall?
About 20% polled said it was justified so..
Are you suggesting "fake news" doesn't exist? That people shouldn't be skeptical of information regardless if it comes from the mainstream media?
Wait.

The President of the United States has spent the past several weeks trying to get anyone and everyone to: throw our legitimate votes, conjure new illegal votes, getting the Vice President to reject electors, getting the Senate to reject electors, sharing doctored videos, telling his supporters that they need to hold traitors accountable, telling his supporters to March in the capital and show strength.

Yeah, those rioters did not effect a coup, or even come close. But it is definitely true that someone is attempting a coup.
Ask HN: Where to get cheap VPS with big storage?
I am currently working on a self-hosted image sharing platform as my January side-project (Will post a Show HN when it's done).

Can you recommend VPS providers that offer cheap/reasonable plans with big storage?

SSD is not needed for this.. I would even prefer conventional HDDs if that saves money/offers more storage. Processing power and RAM should also be secondary as long as it's enough to scale images in a reasonable time.