skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I agree, it can't function. I don't see another solution except:

1. Vastly improved education

2. Smaller governed regions (break up countries more).

I think the first is a given, but the second is because (big surprise) most people don't care to meet the needs of absolutely everyone because it's completely impractical and likely impossible.

Difference of opinion is why countries were formed. I'm amazed borders haven't changed more.
I think Mikrotik would be great as well. I'm currently running a RB2011UiAS-2HnD-IN and a RBcAPGi-5acD2nD-US (the cAP ac).
Yes exactly. Recycling is better than nothing in cases where reuse or reduction aren't possible (many medical products probably fall under this category.) But reduction and reuse are preferable where possible.
This was only to be expected.

Hard borders usually have very stringent rules regarding what you can bring in with you, especially organic materials to prevent damage to a country's primary produce industries.

Australia's rules are more stringent than most: https://www.abf.gov.au/entering-and-leaving-australia/can-yo...
Journalists are in the business of providing narratives, which may or may not be loosely based on an objective truth they met somewhere a few years ago at a cafe.

I'm pretty sure this has always been so.

> Obviously, the skeptics feel otherwise, but is that relevant and if so, how much attention should we pay it?

Again, this depends on your goals.
I haven't used LINQ but I have a good idea about how it works. It is certainly great to write concrete SQL-like transformations (be it based on a database, a list, ...).

Where it lacks is abstraction. To make that more concrete, let me ask: can you write LINQ that takes an arbitrary structure and selects every numeric field and calculate the sum over it? And if that is not possible, it should not compile.

I.e. can you define a function "numericsSum(...)" and call it with "List(User(salary: Number, deductions: Number, name: String))" and have it calcuate the sum (ignoring the name-field) but having it fail to compile when calling with "List(User(name: String, date_of_birth: Date))"?

Another example: is it possible to create your own special "join" function, that joins to data structures if they have exactly one common field (which you don't have to specify)?

In both examples, the LINQ compiler must be able to inspect the structure of a type (such as User) at compile time (not runtime) and do pretty arbitrary calculations. Most languages don't support that and I think even LINQ only works with concrete types in that sense. Which, by the way, is already better than what most languages offer - don't get me wrong here. But it is not as powerful as what SQL "compilers" offer - however those are then limited to SQL only, lacking the ability to do general purpose programming.
> plenty of violent behavior has been organized on Twitter or Facebook

Twitter and Facebook made a concerted efforts around 1st-party paid employees that are responsible for macro-moderation across their platforms. Parler instead just replied "our volunteer moderators will handle it". Even reddit has 1st-party moderation, despite their large volunteer moderator community.
I would also prefer to pay a fee for Gmail, Whatsapp etc so we don't need to participate in the advertising as a revenue model.

There are a lot of people who can't pay for the service (the next billion users). Would you be OK with paying a bit more to cover their use?
Workers should be allowed to share the fruits of the labor instead of having a rent seeker exploit them and steal it all.
Similarly, I found that OP's article provided an excellent primer on many concepts -- it certainly clarified the relationship between NAT and firewalls: that is, the latter being somewhat of an unintended consequence of the former.

Stumbling upon a great blog post that makes something click is always a pleasant experience.
Sometimes it takes more than 8 years for Twitter to kick someone off who Tweets racist conspiracy theories about Obama actually being born in Africa.
> Unlike online UGC service providers, bookstores can be forced to remove defamatory books in the US. There's a reason there's a law specifically for UGC service providers, and you cannot defend this while at the same time demanding that they get treated like book stores when it comes to compelled speech.

Sure I can, since the plain text of the law in question only removes publisher (which are not notice-based), not the notice-based obligations and liability of a distributor. As the article you cite here argues, the extension of 230 beyond what it says on its face to also remove those distributor-style liabilities is a strained interpretation that some courts have adopted that lacks support in the text of the law and is explicitly at odds with it's legislative history and rationale.

So it's quite easy to support the law that exists for UGC service providers and demand they get treated like bookstores and other distributors as regards notice-based removal of defamatory content because that's exactly what application of the law as written does.

The debate over 230 is not, mainly, about this one area where some courts have applied it out of line with it's plain text.
I'm 90% sure it's a account-based bug. My account has had this issue for ~6 years now (I've used steam for 15 years). It happens on any browser or device. No cookie clearing, doesn't happen to any other account, etc. Every time I bring it up, the majority of people say they don't have an issue, while a small handful of others chime in about experiencing it too.

It has to be a bug, or maybe a security feature for accounts of a certain size?
Agreed, to an extent. But some of the parts of QM seem like things reality demands (double slit experiments) and other parts seem like horrible mathematical artifacts that in enough years we'll come to regret (like the Schrödinger equation). But of course that's not a stance I can defend unless we figure out a better mathematical model for it. Just a hunch.
You can overwhelm a NAT in several ways.

UDP is connectionless, but typically a UDP communication is bidirectional. This means a NAT needs to inspect UDP packets and retain a mapping to direct incoming UDP packets to the right place. With no connection information this can only be done as an LRU cache or similar.

TCP is connection oriented, and a NAT might rapidly free up resources when a connection is closed (ie, when the final FIN has been ACKed). But if there's no FIN, the NAT is in the same case as it is with UDP. Making a lot of connections without closing them fills up NAT buffers.

When you have a home NAT and a carrier-grade NAT you may get an impedance mismatch of sorts. The CGNAT might have insufficient ports allocated to your service to keep up with your home NAT, resulting in timeouts or dropped mappings. Your home NAT will have one set of mappings and the CGNAT another, and the two sets probably won't be exactly the same. This means some portion of the mappings held in memory are useless.

As a specific example, many years ago Google Maps would routinely trigger failures. Using Maps would load many tile images, which could overwhelm a NAT or CGNAT. The result was a map with holes in it where some tiles failed to load.

Browsers have long had limits on concurrent connections per domain. Total concurrent connection limits are also old news, but are not quite as old as per-domain limits. You probably can't make a NAT choke with just simple web requests (even AJAX) any more. You might be able to do it using, eg, WebRTC APIs, though I would be surprised if those aren't also subject to limits.
Just as a FYI/aside, it is fairly trivial to root AT&T home gateways, pull the certs and use your own hardware to authenticate to the network, removing their hardware off your stack entirely except for the ONT. (goodbye internet downtime due to random uncontrolled gateway "upgrades"). You just need a router capable of 802.1x client auth.

Throughput both ways actually gets really close to what I am paying for with this configuration, where as before with the default gateway (regardless of configuration), I was lucky to see 1/2 of the gigabit speeds I have been paying for.
This is a nicely done article. One of the issues with using a z-score for count data is it assumes the data are normally distributed. This implies values < 0 are possible. However, since counts are lower-bounded at zero, they’re asymmetric unlike the normal. This means that practically this method would produce too many false positives for most applications. Whatever threshold is chosen, is likely to have too narrow an envelope between false negative and false positive to be reliable for count data. However, for normally distributed data, this would work perfectly.
Publicly wearing company-branded clothing signals to others that you're associated with said company. I'm not sure if it's ever a good idea to do so unless you're deliberately representing that company (i.e. when you're at work).

If you must hide your nakedness with logos, then it may be better to stick with ones that can be construed as relatively politically neutral fashion statements (e.g. sports teams).
> they actually review and actively publish the information

They do it to save their own ass. Since they publish it, they are responsible. Facebook should either review the all content they publish, or they should stop being a publisher.

> Do we honestly believe that between ML and a real person Facebook is validating and approving every comment on Facebook?

I never said that; here's my point: if, say, the New Yorker replaced their human editors with AI ones, then the outcome is the same and they are still publishers. Alternatively, say they made human-run personal curations---each subscriber gets an individually-tailored set of articles which are suggested---then they are obviously still publishers. So if they replace these human curators with AI, are they still publishers? Because that would be what Facebook is today.

And on your Gmail point, Google is not a publisher, it acts like a phone service. You send your email, the recipient receives it, unconditionally, without modification. Facebook actively shadow-bans, time-delays and puts fact-check warnings on posts. Since that show they disapprove of some posts, it kind of implies that they approve of all the others.
First of all, you are painting a false dichotomy. Plenty of people were "de-platformed" in the 90's. AOL, Geocities, MySpace, etc. banned or removed people all the time for perfectly legal actions. [Random Geocities example https://www.cnet.com/news/geocities-takes-down-site-rating-s... ]

Second, if you are building your business based on relying on a certain vendor then you should re-build your business.

Third, if your business cannot survive on any platform then you may want to re-think your business, but if you still truly love that business then go build it on the decentralized web and put in the hard work to make it work.
That's the real tragedy of this uncontrolled fiat money printing. Any way you cut it, the poorer one is, the lower the % of assets to cash one owns (all the way to 0). Small bouts of token helicopter money don't fix this. Bitcoin doesn't fix this.
> it's a failure of our imagination or exertion that we can't find closed-form stable solutions

You better not say that when any solitons are floating by...
Why? I wish it paid a salary too but it isn't worthless. At the end of the day the businesses that best allocate their dollars for internal vs. outsourced talent are going to come out on top.

I certainly don't see room for adding regulatory requirements here. And, about public pressure, this type of work is in its infancy, relatively speaking. Going straight for the throat is too much.
Yup, and people on HN at the time argued it was bullshit. All the prison sentence did was turn him into a right wing extremist - the us criminal justice system mostly makes offenders worse rather than better.
sounds like a joke but it's really true.

edit: and all of r/anarchychess
Thanks!

It depends on what one thinks the foundations of free speech are. For a long time, hate speech has been used to suppress particular groups. In practice, if people with social power can scare disfavored groups into staying quiet, free speech is harmed. Harmed more, in my opinion, than by hate speech restrictions.

In practice, any platform has to choose between hosting abusers and hosting their targets. They will only get one or the other. Given that choice, I would rather boot the abusers. To me the goal of free speech in a democracy is about a maximally informed populace so we make optimal decisions. To the extent that any group wants to convey information, they can do it without abuse. But allowing abuse, especially that targeted at particular groups, limits speech more deeply.
To my knowledge, Paypal continues to randomly and often very opaquely freeze people's funds for months at a time or longer, so if you have a link to this FTC ruling, im honestly curious to see it.
It's not an issue with the app, it's in the browser only. I like using the browser for browsing since tab support is better, bookmarking and also extensions such as Steam Enhanced.
I agree that people are more educated than ever. And more literate. And more college educated. However, they are not more educated on the topics related to the context of this discussion, like how to filter what's seen on social media, or how the government actually works, or economic systems, or most of the things political discussions are made from. Those topics aren't taught effectively in school anymore, at least not in the areas correlated with alt-right extremism.
I don't think it's reversible. I think we are where we are, for better or for worse. The web will never be the same, and the world is worse for it.
Intro to React Server Side Rendering
There is truth outside of mathematics, as philosophers have fought toiled with this idea. Famously Descartes with his root of skepticism being a kind of Identity/Existence truth.

I mean in some ways Mathematics is just like a completely made up world that is internally consistent so saying it is "truth" is the same as me saying "in a made up world where truth exists, truth exists"
Arbitrage is fine. This amount of arbitrage, and the subsequent fighting over microseconds from the exchange, is completely fucking dumb, and I want to live in a world where there is zero money in it.
That's quite a straw man comparison to the scenario I describe.
Based on the article you would be prevented from removing such content. To use land as an example, if someone rents your land you cannot subsequently create restrictions or actively moderate unless they are violating the law. The nature of most social media has been “anything goes” and then we moderate... Given social media is often viewed as a form of free speech for laypeople it doesn’t seem unreasonable to have strict standards for removing content. I could see social media sites requiring much more personal information, real ID, bank/CC accounts to provide these services in the future similar to how rental contracts are governed. I can’t even use real candles in my apartment without violating my rental agreement.
Physical theories often go beyond just predictions, and attempt to specify a correspondence between a formalism and physical reality.

Quarks are an example. Quarks were conceptualized as a mathematical simplification, and only later were recognized as real physical things - or at least as real as protons.

In QM we have physical quantities (an electron's mass) and unphysical quantities (an electron's phase). But there's open questions, like the wavefunction - can that be placed in correspondence with reality? We don't really know. This is the "ontic" vs "epistemic" debate.
The Rise and Fall of Knight Capital – Buy High, Sell Low
I think it could also be the type of information being taught. If people aren't learning about biases, fallacies, basic logic, etc, then it can be easy for people to fall victim to false information. In that sort of scenario, more access to information could be more dangerous.
Sounds like a good argument at first but you're talking about running afoul of the law. You can't make a career of that. The better you get, the more people are after you.

I don't mean that the US would chase you in Russia but you are digging yourself a hole and limiting options as you go.
Naive. Such law can only exist on paper, because the corporations still have the de-facto power and users don't.

Normal people can't host content themselves. In theory they may, but their home Internet connection does not have public IP because of cgNAT, and they need to bow down to DNS registrar to make their website work. Attacking web hosters (e.g. AWS) and DNS registrars is the primary way to silence free speech, yet this bill does nothing about that.

If Polish really need freedom speech on Internet, they have to mandate public IP addresses and disallow non-commerce clauses for all ISPs. And shield DNS registrars from responsibility for actions of their clients. Those things would be enforceable. This law isn't.
Without getting into the pedantics of the specific examples, I'm sure you intuitively understand the difference between a exact value and an approximation, likewise discrete values and a fitted curve.

The argument is that models are only useful tools and should not be taken to be a full or only representation of the thing being studied.
I’m not sure how it is that they still don’t have a hardware update to the USG3P that can enable both IPS and DPI without throttling network speeds to sub-80Mbps speeds. It’s been years now.

I’m a big fan of the ecosystem and I’ve recommended it to many people but I’m constantly astonished by the slow pace of hardware updates.
That relies on the existence of systems too complex for humans to understand. We may eventually build machines that can in turn build other incomprehensible machines, but we haven't passed that point yet. Superintelligence can't surprise us until some point after computers become self-improving.
That presumes only people in the US fear my being a Freemason and, so the question remains.
> “Remember the password” barely ever works, even on desktop

Is that for browser or client? I had issue with the browser for the past 6 or so years. Every time I bring it up, a few others mention having this issue but not everyone. I think it's an account based issue since it happens on any device I use. It only happens with Steam and no other site.
Yes, there is a risk of a bad reaction from the vaccine. Or something we don't know about yet. But there's also more we might not know of the long term effects of Covid-19 exposure. Waiting for proof of 1 to spite the other may not work out so well when the virus is on its own schedule, jumping from person to person.

Avoiding both the vaccine and Covid-19 exposure may not be viable long term. Everyone's getting exposed at some point. Corona's have never been eradicated in human history, so I wouldn't count on the new corona going away. Eventually that virus is finding a way to hop into your body. Best to prepare your immune system.
This sounds like a good way to go to jail.
No armed protest is going to be planned in "church groups" or "softball teams". Social networks have been significant players for 15 years now and the internet longer. If there are "armed protests" being planned they will likely be happening on the internet on various message boards on fringe sites.
It's very application-specific. If I'm building a message board/forum software where I'm paginating tens of thousands to millions of rows, I'm probably going to do my sorting in the DB. If I'm working with a smaller data set like a users music playlist or favorite movies, I may opt to bring that data in unsorted from the DB and do everything else in app code. Even with small result sets, databases often over-allocate memory for sorting (sort buffers are usually pre-allocated) and even though it's often tunable, a lot of concurrent sorts on small data sets can waste memory.
Faster A fast concurrent persistent key-value store and log, in C# and C++
Without pricing the externalities, we're basically taking on debt, a debt against the future number of years the planet is habitable. I imagine it probably started at 1M years of supporting human life. I wonder if that number is now down to 50000 left. And I feel like it went from 1M to 50K in the last 50 years.
There's something like a 256 count limit on total websockets, and 30 per domain, in Chromium.

A malicious website could open up 256 websockets and as many HTTP connections as the browser allows, and that might be enough to swamp cheaper NATs.

See https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=12066 for some 2009 discussion about people having troubles using the web when background tabs held connections open for polling. That wasn't a NAT issue, but it does highlight that a decade or two ago we all thought we only needed to manage tens of connections for a host to be online but that rapidly spiralled into hundreds.
Eliminating government will favor whoever is best equipped to become one.

Similar, generic libertarian: means handing over all power to the biggest corporation. Big corporations exercise so much power already that it is only where they disagree that any civil governance is even possible.

Principle is that a power vacuum is always immediately filled by the strongest party.
> Modern economics encourages waste

Correct in one sense, but assumes we know in advance what will be waste and what won't be. Central planning has shown itself to be far less effective, both in overall quality of life and in meeting specific demands, than more wasteful competitive economies. So although its easy to point to retrospectively wasteful activities, life without them would be objectively worse.

Tangentially, when covid was in early days and people were beginning to develop vaccines, I saw someone comment asking who was going to coordinate the many disparate development efforts to make sure resources were being effectively used. I can't think of a more starkly absurd idea - it's only by allowing free activity, incentivized by some external, real forcing function, that we can expect to see consistent success. Any central definition and sanction of what should and shouldn't be done instantly distorts incentives towards pleading some central arbiter, and fails.

So all the scuzzy businesses and pursuits that the GP thinks are wasteful, are part of the rich tapestry that overall feeds us and keeps lifting us up. The only way we'd should be signaling they are not helpful is by not using them (and just for greater certainty I'm not talking about tolerating things that are exploitive, harmful, etc, just "wastful")
Perhaps! It might be that these people were unfortunate to share a network with someone malicious (maybe a university, or a company) and this dooms their initial comments.
There are thousands of other registrars out there. GoDaddy doesn't want them, they can move to someone who does. Once they've gone through them all and been rejected by every last one I'll accept that maybe maybe something should be done. Then again if you are being rejected by every single registrar out there maybe you should look inward for the problem.
It is already explained in previous threads: the government does not tax for CO2 emissions. That's oil, gas, and coal's subsidy.
Increased financial literacy is precisely why people are drawn to Bitcoin. If Bitcoin didn't exist, there'd simply be a mad rush on stocks and gold (well, there has been one).

The media has spent years teaching people about what happens in countries with high inflation, and people are now rightfully scared it's coming to their countries too.
This is true for existing installs. But recently ATT moved to XGPON gateways with integrated ONT. You can no longer bypass these gateways. Also to my knowledge you can’t extract the certs from Pace gateways.
As a libertarian, he accepts that Facebook has every right to do this. Right?