skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Which were moderated, or at least attempted to be moderated, by Twitter and Facebook.

Parler openly allowed the planning of this violent anti-democratic insurrection and has been deemed bad faith in their moderation.
Malwarebytes shows this website is compromised. wtf?
You don’t realize what happened in the years following?
I fiddled with a toy project that was basically RSS-powered Tumblr. Seems like now might be a good time to pick it back up
Wouldn't waste my time with anything besides it, or Calyx.

Lineage etc break the Android OSP security model.
I think we should worry less about those users who are already radicalized, and more about those who would have been if Parler remained.
Good point.

If ISIS made an App to communicate and organize, nobody will have a problem for it to be immediately removed.
How will they reduce the latency? 300-500ms seems about an order of magnitude slower than centralized CDNs.
Trump won 74MM votes, I think it's safe to say for that all intents and purposes a conservative is a Trump supporter.

https://www.cfr.org/blog/2020-election-numbers
The Philippines are the most extreme example of logistics difficulties. Even so the issue isn't the spread out population but the fact that ecomm penetration in the Philippines is significantly less per capita therefore the profits simply aren't there yet. Compare that to Indonesia where infrastructure is similar but penetration is much higher and 3PL deliver literally to the middle of Borneo.
1. Nuclear capabilities by North Korea or Iran.

2. Snowden-ish conspiracies by unelected, unaccountable intelligence agencies.

3. Large-scale conflict with China.

4. High-fatality disease: SARS or similar (COVID but more deadly)

Terrorism, foreign or domestic, doesn't even scratch the list of "existential threats." Terrorist acts don't win heats and minds and unless aided by state actors (dirty bombs, etc) are tiny in the numbers game, even for sometime like 9/11.
The point is to make it significantly more difficult to recruit and spread. Doesn’t change the people who are already committed, but probably prevents people from discovering it.
They are extremely afraid, freaked out, or paranoid that people are going to use Parler to somehow overthrow the government. But, they were not afraid that people were going to use unverified mail in ballots and ballot stuffing to overthrow the government. In reality we all know their fear is a ruse and this is a power grab.
The founding of America was based on insurrection. This western liberal value of speech you speak of is in your imagination because there's no where in the US constitution that says free speech is defined as anything except violence. Any decisions we made on interpreting free speech since its inception are purely arbitrary.

It may be true that those companies don't want to platform sedition, but what if rightful sedition cannot be achieved without being provided a platform? In that case, is it then up to companies to pick and choose which sedition movements they support by virtue of allowing them on their platform?
Anyone using the place is a fascist by definition. If they haven't been involved in politics until now, their perspective doesn't deserve to be heard.
FWIW I only discovered reddit because I was "deplatformed" from Digg due to sharing the image below.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AACS_encryption_key_controvers...

Can't be the only one. Reddit was a libertarian cesspool at the time, a crime for sure. RIP Mr.Swartz <3
With business requirements that you never reduce speed.
People like to talk about their rights, but rights can only exist in a society where people fulfill their duties as citizens.

For example, you have the right to be treated with dignity, but it is also your duty to treat others with dignity.

You have the right to not be discriminated, but also the duty to not discriminate others. And so on.

As a citizen, you have freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom to vote... but it is also your duty to develop critical thinking and stay informed so you can exercise those freedoms for the greater good.
Creating accounts to break HN's guidelines like this will get your main account banned as well, so please don't do that.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Your comment is prescient, I think. The race against the clock has begun. If we haven't seen the last of these extremist groups, then they're on the fast track to the crypto underbelly of the internet (whether they realize that or not). I hope the inevitable federal and international crackdown sees wide success before these groups go dark.
Didn't realize this was built on Sia. Interesting! I used to follow their development closely back in ~2017. I like how this product seems to be pretty straightforward to use. Hope it leads to more.
Courts can only adjudicate based on the law. There's little to adjudicate in these matters because the law protects platforms for content posted.

The real shortcoming in these matters is a total lack of legislation that reflects the world today on the Internet. Section 230 and the rest of the CDA were passed in 1996. The world looked a lot different back then.

Until legislatures act, private companies self-policing at their own discretion is the best we get.

> For all we know there was a limited group of users of that service that caused this action, however we don’t know and likely will never know the facts in this matter.

To my knowledge Parler was in part blocked due to a total lack of a moderation policy. It was the policy of the app, not the mere action of a minority of users.
Same here, Wikipedia sources were a great life hack for uni on easy mode.
This comment makes it sound like AWS controls web hosting for the entire planet.

There are literally thousands of web hosting options; Parler can go find a different one.
Oh, I see. Any shit you don't agree with is "Trump's propaganda" Fuck off.
>Where's the line?

Harm.

When the expression of speech causes harm, then the line is drawn. This is the general interpretation ranging from SCOTUS to free speech philosophers like John Stuart Mill.
They sort of have to be. In the fight to preserve electronic freedoms, freedom from censorship and freedom to operate a service as one pleases come at odds with each other in cases like this.

If instead, the government had confiscated Parler's domains, or enjoined Apple, Google, and Amazon from booting them, I think EFF's response would (rightly/expectedly IMO) be very different.

As an EFF member I think they made the right call here.
Free speech concerns government suppression, the government hasn't been involved in the banning so principles concerning Free Speech have no place.
Backdooring encryption reduces the privacy of every iPhone, not just the iPhones that are owned by terrorists
>It was a protest gone off the rails, with a few bad actors, and an embarrasing lack of preparedness by the Capitol Police on that day of all days, given what has been going on all year.

Those "few bad actors" had weapons and tried to interrupt the certification of the new president. They may be idiots because of their poor planning but their intent was obvious to anyone who hasn't drank the kool-aid.
Meanwhile, you can conditionally serve AVIF with Nginx

https://blog.uidrafter.com/engineering/conditional-avif-for-...
100%

They were literally threatening to kill Twitter employees and elected officials. How on Earth should anyone defend that as free speech.
The fake submarine ride was surprisingly effective. The sub was on a track and never more than about 3 feet below the water, but it simulated descent through the strategic release of bubbles, lighting, underwater scenery, and a very light dip in the track. Even though you knew exactly what the technique was, you really felt like you were going deep underwater.
They could just go plain text no?
There were 600,000 to 800,000 people there. Two had zip ties. We just had a whole summer of being told the vast majority at a protest do not represent the worst couple of actors. Time to apply the same thought to both “sides”. Ideological consistency.
I think even many of Milo's fanbois realized he had jumped the shark even before he got deplatformed.

I think shutting down Parler is a necessary response to an immediate and concrete existential threat to the long-term functioning of the American democracy.

However, the deplatforming of Milo was part of the impetus for the creation of Parler. Keeping Milo on and suggesting center-left content to his viewers would have been a better long-term solution, along with suggesting center-right content to viewers of extreme left content. (Edit: actually, come to think of it, you'd want a mixture of center-right and center-left content suggested to both extremes, to make the medicine taste a bit less bitter.)

Deplatforming may be necessary for immediate threats, but it's not a good long-term solution to the problem of polarization. Long-term, deplatforming feeds the conspiracy theories and pushes viewers further from the reach of mainstream platforms.
What's lazy about my argument?
I think they are fighting for survival, they might be taking this court action that was pushed by some ten republican states very seriously - this case has a strong legal basis. I suspect that its all business.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-16/google-su...
I guess there is something unique to social media. If someone is using its own website + bbs (hosted on its own sever) to communicate those messages, I am not sure what the tech companies can do.

In theory, Apple + Google + Microsoft can ban the website at the OS level, so nobody can really access those messages. Technically, they can do this to Parler now.
Agree, and will add that this should be backed by LEO's tracking online posts inciting violence to people's doors, arresting them, and letting courts decide if it's a free speech issue.
I think (but not sure) this thread was combined from multiple separate threads, some of which were only about Apple or Google or Amazon's actions. It seems like several threads with a few hundred comments each disappeared, and this one with 2k comments appeared out of nowhere.

That might explain why it looks like all of the comments are about one or the other.
White-bread American Midwesterner. :-) Not sure where I picked this pronunciation up.

I think what I’ve learned today is that no one pronounces any of these words even remotely the same!

...and while we’re at it, let’s do “char.”
It's a good reference, though. Even the articles that are obviously copied and pasted from someone's homework tend to at least be useful places to find references.
What's a literal neo-nazi? I guess nazis who aren't declaring their support for Hitler are not "literal" neo-nazis and are ok? I mean where you draw that line? Nobody likes them? Lots of people like them.
> My point was credible threatening speech is already illegal in America.

So we agree. Trump’s tweets were pretty credible, don’t you think?

This whole mess this week happened because of one person who incited violence.
> One of those groups has a moral right to riot.

The trouble with morality is that if you ask someone if what they are doing is morally justified, they will pretty much always say yes.

It very quickly devolves into might makes right, which is more or less where we're headed.
Let's take it for what it is: a completely unacceptable act of violence by a few people instigated by the constant delivery of blatant lies.

At first the lies were shocking: "Biggest inauguration ever? What the hell is he talking about? Didn't he see the pictures? Oh, alternative facts.. LOL. Well, good thing they're incompetent and not dangerous."

Now the lies are dangerous. So many were complaining 4 years ago because this arc seemed inevitable. Let someone lie and verbally attack anyone who slightly disagrees with them without repercussion and they'll keep pushing to see where the line is.

So many thought: "I'm sure he's learned his lesson this time!" In reality, you'd have to be blinded by naiveté or something worse to think he was going to change or moderate his behavior or tactics.

It's not that people are scared that a few hundred people storming the capital will actually overturn our almost 250 year old democracy. It's that if we don't respond with intense rejection of this behavior, this behavior could easily become an existential threat to the republic. What's to stop the next President from bringing an armed secret service or a willing FBI SWAT team into a Senate proceeding?

The line should have been drawn long before this incident. But now, for sure, if you violently attack the halls of democracy you should be banned from far more than a few private digital platforms.
Thanks for the explanation. I was thinking about how I would do it, but always ended up reverting to Netlify. Good to have some different approaches.
You've been using HN primarily for political and ideological battle. We ban accounts that do that because it destroys what this site is for (intellectual curiosity and thoughtful conversation).

I'm not going to ban you right now because it's not that long ago that you were using the site as intended (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25362757), but please review the site guidelines at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and fix this going forward.

Just because everywhere else is bursting into flames and descending into the hell realms is no reason to destroy this place. Every community member here should be protecting HN for its intended purpose, and we'll ban as many accounts as we have to to get it back on course.
FWIW, much like a linguistic accent or regional dialect, using "sequel" tends to make you sound more like a Microsoft developer (definitely to people from my generation). This has been merging a bit in the last decade (mostly as the linguistic traditions of subcultures in general have been eroding from Eternal September and an entire generation passing), but it is still notable enough that people bring it up occasionally.
I think we can't overstate the deep impact Wikipedia had in the past 20 years. The initial idea was so counter-initiative. I thought it would fail due to vandalism. But despite that, it thrived, and somehow it became a great source of knowledge.
From what I understand, deplatforming actually works to deradicalize people because every time you deplatform, the actual radicalized group lessens. For example, randos from twitter who went to parler to follow their favorite alt-right opinion producer but otherwise don't care about politics probably won't want to follow them a second time and will end up entering less radicalized spaces and then deradicalizing themselves.

At the end you have a small group of severely sick people who can only be helped by therapy, but prevent mass unrest of otherwise normal people who got radicalized only because getting radicalized was as easy as joining a platform.
You are not eradicating anything. You are removing people them from your view AND pissing them off in the process. A time tested key for success.
No police wounded or even fired upon. Only three white militia members got hurt, and their lives don't matter to me.
>That is not free speech but the 1st amendment to the US constitution. Obviously related but not the same thing.

Your right to free speech does not oblige private corporations to provide you a platform to speak it.
Any shit Trump keeps claiming but can't prove in court because it's simply not true is Trump's propaganda, and you're parroting it, and acting touchy and hostile when challenged on your false claims. If they weren't all lies, you charlatans could simply prove them, instead of throwing tantrums and farting in court without wearing a mask.
I'm guessing you mean /fɪsk/ -- almost all -isk words (whisk, disk, risk) are pronounced with /-ɪsk/.
>I'm distressed and saddened at how many of the free speech proponents on HN are treating the events of January 6 as if it was just another protest and not an existential threat to the republic.

Could you present an explanation for why?

> If the mob had managed to find and destroy the electoral certificates,

Then nothing different would happen because this particular part of the vote is a formality. Well, the news would be even more one sided on this, but nothing else.

>or if the flex-cuffs guys had captured members of congress

Assuming worse case and he actually killed someone, why would it be much different than attacks in the past like the one at the soft/baseball game. As you said, that it failed is irrelevant to the intended goal.

>The western liberal value of free speech has never extended to incitement of violence.

Yes it has.

First, there is political speech which is going through the most proper channels to enact violence. If you get a law passed, you are forcing people to comply under threat of violence. Talking about changing laws is very central to free speech and includes protecting people pushing even the most cartoonishly evil laws.

But on a more general since, still sticking to US law, the courts have allowed for calls to violence in general and have been very limited in how they restrict it. For example look at all that was said during the summer that was encouraging of riots (not the things said in support of the protests, but said in support of the riots). That is still largely protected free speech.

And on an even more general scale, the concept of free speech does apply to what the founding fathers were discussing leading up to and during the revolutionary war. Sure, Britain's laws would have punished them for it, but the value of free speech that let them rebel is something that was understood and accepted by those forming the new government.
Why is that if I may ask? This was in direct response to the point on neo-imperialism and American foreign influence by the parent.
If you are using `avifenc` try with `--speed 0`. If you are doing that, or using `colorist` then tune the quantizer.

After experimeting with the quantizer, these are the settings I use for screenshots with text and sharp lines:
https://blog.uidrafter.com/engineering/convert-to-avif-progr...
Do they truly know what they believe in and consequences of what they are actually doing?

Evans, IIRC immediately deleted his video where he id'ed himself. It was too late, but he tried. It indicates to me there is at least some level of realization and regret.

Honestly, looking at the interviews, it seemed to me that they simply were following the instructions of the person they revere with no thought about the 20 year jail term they might face.

Honestly, even myself looking at Trump's call to his base, didn't think too much of it first. This is a prime example of normalization of deviance.
Many people derive great benefit from being able to organize peaceful protests via social media. Disengagement might be right for you, but I would hazard to guess that a lot of people benefit greatly and tangibly from the existence of platforms such as Twitter and Facebook. Perhaps what we need is better social media, with interests that are more closely aligned with consumers, rather than no social media.
Nice that you chose to focus on that and not on the police officer that got killed or the video of another police officer that for almost crushed to death while being repeatedly punched in the face.

One would be forgiven for thinking you are a dishonest hack.
Oh, interesting, I didn't realize. This is a faster timeline indeed compared to Sputnik V which was registered in May 2020, and I don't know the date for the Oxford/AstraZeneca one.
Same here. I miss Usenet. Hacker culture really has changed.
I was asked the correct pronunciation of /etc in an interview once. Diabolical, if you ask me.
I really find it fascinating how the US media finds the exception and pretends it's the norm. It's something out of psy-ops.

ONE demonstrator had zip ties, therefore "they had zip ties".

Sure, many were armed and who fired the sole single lethal shot that day? Law enforcement. How is that for peaceful?

The "four people died" narrative is also very telling. One demonstrator was shot by police. One law enforcement officer died of injuries - although details have been very vague. The other two deaths? One heart attack and one unrelated condition. At this point I expect the US media to attribute every single death in DC on that day to these demonstrations just so they can pretend it was an extremely lethal event.

The people "stormed the Capitol" and what did they do once they had it? They took selfies and then left peacefully. That's not a coup or an insurrection, that's a disorganized demonstration that went too far because Capitol police could apparently not keep doors closed.

But I understand. The US media has been priming people for 5 years for this. They've been running influence campaigns and promoting violence the minute Trump won. They spent 3 years talking about Russian collusion and then didn't say a thing when it was proven false. Could you imagine if the Russian collusion narrative had been treated the same way the electoral fraud narrative has been treated?
The wikipedia page make it seem like PNG is "better".
FWIW, I have always said "F stab" (for over 25 years now). I doubt I have never even heard anyone else say the term at all, though, so I am a glorious outlier ;P.
Is there any plans to officially add a runtime reflection system to Rust standard library? It feels really weird to me that a relatively new language doesn’t include reflection out of box.
I’m currently work from Asia so I follow the local and regional news quite closely.

What’s fascinating is that many countries are using the whole tech censorship to justify their own behavior. It’s a bit of “see, even the US agrees dangerous speech should be censored” or “do you want to end up like the US? this is why we have laws about speech”.
#1,2 and 3 in the Presidential line of succession were in the building when this happened.

How is this anything but serious?
” The western liberal value of free speech has never extended to incitement of violence. My assumption is that the leaders of Apple, Google, and Amazon don't want to provide a platform for sedition.”

This illogical lie get spammed here on every single news discussion about this event, yet no one has still answered why did those platforms allow leftwing/blm terrorists and other violent organizations spread their hate for years?

”Western liberal values” seem to only apply when it doesn’t harm the agenda and interests of the people who vote for the ”right” party.
That "protest gone off the rails, with a few bad actors" would have absolutely executed a member of Congress or the Vice President if given the chance. And they got unbelievably close to being able to do that. They had weapons, armor, bloodlust, restraints, and smaller organized extremist groups.

How can you not see that as an "existential threat to the republic"?
The courts have allowed it, buddy. Who are you to say it was unlawful.
There is a vein of this that is highly partisan in nature, and it is this: faced with a single-party majority government, these censorious moves can be made now with complete impunity, and even without so much as a challenge.
Indeed - I got lazy with the characters there.
Last time I wrote an intelligent argument... I was voted into oblivion because HN is a liberal, white male group think echo chamber. Silent downvoting is not exactly conducive to productive conversation with different opinions.

So I’d rather not waste my time...
> Venture capital seems to be more and more invested in entertainment, lifestyle, and content creation rather than deep technological and material innovation.

We've reached the maturity point in technology where innovation isn't really necessary for a successful business. It is possible to build a successful, scalable site/platform using commodity engineers. A team of three or four competent engineers should be able to put together a backend platform in AWS to support a site and a few mobile apps in six months.

The difficult part today is the actual business. These people are smart to get into VC, since they understand the hard part and can afford to pay for the easy part.