skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You are allowed to call for the overthrow of the US government. Sedition is protected speech unless it is calling for "imminent" lawless action, as a result of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio. As a result, you are allowed to yell fire in a theater (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_the...).
Alt-right apps, sites and people weren’t banned for associating with the wrong crowd, they were banned for their role in trying to overthrow the government.
He's been ID'd already.
I mean, given the current situation, which company wouldn’t do something so that if another event as bad or worse as the Capitol storming happens, they can say “look, we did all we could! It didn’t happen due to our platform!”
Perhaps in China?

I support your sentiment, but most countries with strong software communities appear to have strong software patents (US, EU, Taiwan, SK). Maybe the only outlier is Russia (and possibly India)?
in before removed even though it's incredibly relevant
This is well-trod territory. See the war on drugs - society is very much ok with locking up a large (or even increasing) number of "bad" people. Being "tough on crime" increased electability
> that they either lack the ability to moderate or are only doing so as a temporary token gesture

Considering that Facebook and Twitter can't effectively moderate their platforms (algorithms don't work well and human moderation is too expensive) I doubt Parler could either, even if they wanted to.
And they think this because of the Q conspiracy, which describes an enforcement agency inside the regular one under secret control by agents against the "Deep State."

Reality comes at you fast.
> it appears to be in a bit of a feedback loop as well, since it's obvious that deplatforming groups will make them feel persecuted and even more upset

To me it seems obvious the feedback works in the opposite direction. Deplatforming disrupts the feedback bubbles that radicalize these people.

I personally think they should be allowed to have their space anyway, if they can refrain from inciting violence.

But I would certainly absolutely refuse to do business with them, and have no problem with others making the same decision. People have the right to their repugnant ideas. They don’t have the right to force others to help promote them.
Sorry. He would be indicted for causing the riot on Jan 6, and I think you were saying the Senate could use that to keep him in line until the end of his term. But if he starts destroying evidence or something and they go ahead with the conviction, he's effectively removed for something the House did not impeach him for.

So day 1 was an exaggeration but yeah, the House could indict a president much earlier on if ultimately the point is to let the Senate keep the reigns on him for everything thereafter.

And in addition to the fact that this aught to be illegal, I don't think it makes sense as a scenario. With this House/Senate/Presidency, the same threat of conviction by the Senate is always there, because as soon as the Senate signals they'll convict Trump the House'll impeach Trump.

And also the fact that all the other plans to "reign Trump in" over the years led Senate Republicans to exactly where they were on Wednesday, with Trump sending rioters to their chamber, gallows erected outside and a neo-Viking sitting in Pence's chair. If they're not going to acquit again then I don't understand why they wouldn't just be done with Trump and convict him on this rather than something later in the week.
Shut the fuck up jed

Reddit is the whole reason why 5 people are dead.

What will it take until the tech community realizes this comment couldn't be further from reality.

You are all going to wait until one of these deranged psychos does another Las Vegas?

You are all going to wait until your own kids are dead? Is that what it takes?

I'm not a huge fan of Reddit, but hopefully this pushes the government to force spez into hiring some expensive lawyers so he can get a slap in the face while half the country burns down and innocent people die.

so convenient for a techie to say they should be able to run parler.

Sounds like something a russian shill would say. What the fuck is wrong with you people. none of this bullshit is normal.
Pentagon’s Counter Small Drone Strategy
I'm sure they have, even city PDs do this.
Right after he finishes that healthcare plan that's been coming "in two weeks" for several years now.
Why 1920s L.A. Went Wild for an 18th-Century Scottish Novelist
It's also funny how the 'thin blue line' people ended up killing more police officers than all of the BLM protests put together and tried to crush one alive in a door. Very 'funny'.
I went back and clicked on one of the sliders and was presented with a button and a new tab.

That at least gives me some indication of something to do.

But it wasn't until I actually clicked the button that I got anything that might resemble content.

That's also when the walk-thru pop up appeared.

Don't make the user have guess.

Also, very unexpectedly I actually felt intimidated by such a blank screen being presented to me. It felt like being dropped into MS Word or an IDE for the first time. It wasn't until I had stuff on the screen I could interact with that the (slight) anxiety went way.
He said "March to the capital". He didn't instruct them to invade.

But he did -
Spend two months riling them with his grievance fantasies
Call all patriots to gather for a rally
Spend 70 minutes telling them their votes had been stolen and they needed to FIGHT!
Tell them to march to the capitol.

It's a very fine line, and the outcome very predictable, even if he didn't explicitly tell them to invade it.
CCP can win a successful invasion, but turning Taiwan into dust will backfire hugely.

Starving Taiwan into submission is at best case scenario a massive hit to China's foreign and economic relations (ensuring a block analog to NATO just to counter China) in order to get an economically devastated province, with possible internal stability hit since eventually Chinese citizens will know what it cost.

This isn't a good tradeoff for the CCP, unless they are so strong 15-30 years from now that they get the same dominance US had in 90s (in which case they probably can get Taiwan anyway without paying that price), or if there's an internal threat that must be appeased ASAP.

E: China can do your scenario physically, and probably avoid the world's wrath in the immediate military term. Nonetheless, the world will see a popular first-world society reduced to rubble, and other first-world societies will see themselves in the wreckage.

No matter the excuse, there's no way there won't be a mass reaction afterwards. Sure, other countries may well avoid taking direct part in the immediate hostilities, but soon after you'll see a counter-block if only due to realist concerns (after all, if China can get away with that the world is already multi-polar).

If war happens, I expect an attempt at a quick military win and slow starvation if and only if the ordinary military efforts outright fail; And the alternative being humiliating defeat which the CCP can't afford, and the CCP doesn't get some face saving way to climb down.

IMHO, at any other scenario it's better for the CCP to sacrifice men and win in an ordinary manner than to get much of the world to unite against it.
Curiously, the page you've linked explains that it isn't normal to use it in this case: "can only be used with a morphologically and syntactically singular antecedent when what it refers to is semantically collective and/or generic and/or indefinite and/or unknown".
It’s really annoying as someone interested in hearing what fringe voices have to say even if I disagree with them. I’m constantly having to try to figure out where to go if I want to break out of the liberal echo chamber.
Dup: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25706993
Is that the video where it appears she's rubbing an onion into her eye?

Anyway, for another example of "they also didn't seem to understand it was serious," the quote from the feet-up-on-the-desk guy:

> "I'll probably be telling them this is what happened all the way to the D.C. jail," Mr. Barnett said.

He's glib about it the same way you might be about spending a night in the drunk tank after getting a little too crazy at Mardi Gras.
“Funny” how inbred arses purposefully misrepresent what “defund the police” means, and what issues people are “#resistance”-ing.
But the truth is that while Google might not _like_ paying the MPEG LA for these costs, it would be a foolish business strategy to do so. Obviously Google would rather pay zero dollars for a video codec, but if it means losing out on a profitable source of revenue, it's a no-brainer to just grumble and move on.

As a sibling comment mentions, Apple actually receives money for their role in the MPEG LA, but I doubt that this is anything more than a tiny dribble of money compared to the rest of their business. They're sitting just fine not having to pay out.

Not to mention that getting the entire Web ecosystem to adopt a different codec can take ages - new hardware has to support accelerating it, and software implementions need to be added to thousands of different ecosystems before it becomes worth using on the Web.
It is either a substitute or a complement as they both are in the automotive industry. A complement is like peanut butter and jelly -- buying both makes life that much better. Clearly this isn't the case here. So let's drop the misapplied definition for "substitute" and move on. Your point is better made by identifying perhaps unjustified cost increases in purchasing (i.e. Toyota unionizes and causes a 0.002% increase in the car price, analogous to the increased difficulty in communication these insurrectionists now have in communicating with their proto-terrorist cells).
Oh you must mean [the one holding the onion in her towel?](https://youtu.be/vcaJFGQHdnA)
When your governing philosophy relies on “plausible deniability” more than any other concept, it should maybe disqualify you from higher office.
So you downvoted it because the word terror might upset other people?

This is a post about an attack that killed at least 5 people.
I'm not even talking about hate speech/incitement. I'm talking about the whole year's haggling over so-called fake news whenever there were opinions that did not match the official narrative. For example, if there was an opinion posted that contradicted the WHO or CDC on Covid then it was flagged, despite in some cases the obvious dissonance like the "masks don't work but they should be reserved for health workers" guideline.
ΜChat (2011)
No, the reddit app is great.
His name is Eric Munchel... they already got him. Try to keep up.

https://twitter.com/jsrailton/status/1347760352705052672
You mean the stance which has led to China having its best net exports to the US in over 15 years. The stance that has led China to deepen trade relations with Pacific nations, European nations, African nations, South American nations, because the US sanctioned, broke off agreements, ignored, and insulted those countries. The stance which had him imposing sanctions on all his allies so when it came time to find support in sanctioning China no one was willing to join? The stance which led to China basically taking over Hong Kong and the US responding with “if you do that then we will treat Hong Kong as if it’s part of China?”. The stance which had Trump threatening China with sanctions, but not imposing them first because they gave his daughter some trademarks and had a beautiful dinner with him in Mar A Lago and then they convinced North Koreas Kim to write him some love letters? The stance which had the US finally impose sanctions, which cost the US more than it did China and led to a trade deal that was barely different from the situation before the tariffs, besides the fact that China had now found alternatives to American agricultural exports in South America. The stance that had Trump too busy screaming Wuhan flu to actually do something about the virus which has led to the entire world losing any respect they still had for the US and hurting its relative position vis a vis China in the eyes of the entire world?

Has the EU a been cowardly? Absolutely. But not a fraction as pathetic as the US, and a large part of their cowardly response is Trump threatening and taking steps to undo the EU-US alliance on which the EU has been dependent.
They could ban Signal too.

Edit: Signal is now #1 on the app store. Speech that was removed will obviously just migrate and be encrypted. Though not as public, the actual speech is still going to be communicated between people and groups. So why wouldn't Signal be next?
I'd say China, India, Russia all have pretty strong software communities and are good candidates.

China also has a strong hardware community as well.
Some people cannot read. Apparently that includes you.
Mozilla, with their $50M annual budget, can't pay the fees.

Okay.
I'm sure Twitter loves to be seen as a small indie platform because then they can shift the blame elsewhere when in fact they have far more influence than is reasonable for a healthy democratic society.

I agree with your point about Fox et al.
> where they ban some accounts like Trump but allow others (like the Chinese or Iranian government, like BLM associated rioters, etc.) to post whatever they want

The removal of the "governments are exempted" rule appears to be beyond just Trump. Twitter notably removed a tweet last night from the Chinese government promoting their abuse of the Uighurs: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/01/twitter-takes-do...
Erm. What kind of logic is that? Are you from a parallel universe where time machines exist?
“i trust the feds and intelligence community”

thought you guys learned from the patriot act and iraq war and iran contra and million other examples but guess not
The Berlin FP group on Meetup just finished the haskellbook.com , you're just in time to join in with the next reading group!
It has to do with not having edge nodes. In theory, Cloudflare is in a good position to address this disparity…
Even if that's what would happen (and I don't think it is), an insurgency is better than those people being authorized agents of the state. Better of two bad alternatives, but deradicalization of in-power authorities while they still hold power is an impossibly tall order.
Do you legitimately think the patronizing is effective, or do you just do it to feel good?
Must say, I'm surprised it's not more like 10%, or 1%
Why do you say this as if that single person and his enablers haven’t been revving up this mob for years? The mob is angry about totally counterfactual nonsense that only exists because it was deliberately spread using the platform. That is the “underlying cause”.

Don’t confuse what this mob is angry about with all the actual legitimate reasons there are to be angry.
Developers using mmap broke the utility of strace for me.

Using mmap makes it pretty much impossible to debug what a program is actually doing!
I mean they can use safari to access the web app. Might be harder to get push notifications but...
Before asking those questions I think we still need more context, because you can't assume mutual understanding of what the symbols in the answers might mean from the elders and the listeners perspectives.

My central hypothesis here is that globalization and the high longevity we can achieve nowadays takes a toll on the quality of the understating of what's being told by the elders. Where once not too long ago we mainly heard from elders directly available, in the village, city or country, now we have access to more people but we don't share similar cultural backgrounds as before. And to overcome this, a little immersion in the cultural context of that elder is necessary even before posing these questions.
The best thing is that your suppliers are right there... need a box, or some sort of charger? factory's right up the road from yours.
> Anyone arguing against singular 'they' may as well be arguing for a gender neutral 'he'

That seems like a flawed analogy; many people abuse the traditional generic usage of 'they' but I've seen few people abuse the traditional generic usage of 'he'.
(2018).
the argument you're presenting, at its core, is "if you dont give an evil person a chance to be evil then they wont succeed," which is correct, except how are you to interpret who is evil and who will be successful at being evil? and how do you do that fairly?

it seems to be an impossible problem to solve from my POV and removing comms from various groups willy nilly because we're too scared that humanity is too stupid practice critical thinking and not give in to evil thought is a slippery slope. there has to be other ways?
dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25696511
Yup. Twice I have done 12 hours of pretty much solid walking, although some of it was pretty slow (fairly steep + around 11,500' and of course I had my pack) and my Fitbit says I haven't broken 50k. I gathered nothing, stopped only to eat or because I had to catch my breath (5000' of climb).
They would have to apply that metric to ALL communication apps. I don't think it would fly.
> Instead, people would have to self-host their own content on their own infrastructure. (230 provides no protection for people that do that.)

Without Section 230, hosting providers, registrars and ISPs would be held liable for your "self-hosted" content. It would be too much of a risk to host your content, unless you had deep enough pockets to assuage that risk.
It's largely been the House side that has taken the lead so far, but a new Democratic Senate would also be interested in regulating Apple's "services" including the App Store.

They can easily get enough Republicans onboard to stop a fillibuster. After the Parler situation, Republicans would no longer feel the need to defend Apple's App Store margins (regardless of whether or not Parler can come back under the proposed laws, the political damage is done).
Record number of Japanese startups at CES 2021
So? There are still alternatives on good old laptops/desktops.

What application of computing (not specific compiled binary, but rather generic spreadsheet, ssh, chat, etc.) is not available on Android? You may have found your next business opportunity if you get moving. You'll simply be responding to capitalism as Parler did when they started, and as Google and Apple are doing now.
> how does this part not just turn into the first part after a time?

Probably would need a USA govt type setup...a core set of baseline rules (i.e. a constitution), a setup where changes aren't possible unless multiple parties agree (i.e. checks and balances), and a system of voting that doesn't allow a simple majority to make decisions irrespective of minority interests (i.e. an electoral college).
> funny how all the #resistance and #defundthepolice folks are actively working with the feds and law enforcement and cheering them on

I don't know why it's funny that those groups don't conform to the right-wing propaganda about their goals.

The defund/dismantle/abolish movement thinks, broadly, that law enforcement gets too big of a slice of local finding with too broad of a remit, and that there are structural and institutional defects in present local law enforcement, such that funding and functions should be shifted to other organizations, and (and the dismantle/abolish end of the spectrum) existing local monolithic paramilitary law enforcement agencies should be disbanded entirely with all of the lot responsibilities reallocated to other new and existing entities with different structures.

They don't oppose the law enforcement function, nor do they, IME, generally oppose cooperation with existing law enforcement entities, within bounds of care around dangerous institutional biases one may play into with danger to oneself and other innocents while so doing.

Similarly, #resist isn’t anti-government it's specifically anti-Trumpist-extremism. Cooperating with law enforcement rolling up Trump coup participants is pretty much the most on-brand #resist thing ever.
You can argue there is a distinction to be made, but you can’t argue that it isn’t a form of censorship.
If I could change anything, I would codify interoperability and access equality into law. If you have an API on your device and any app has access to it (1st party or not) than all parties should have access to it. It's fine if you want to have private system APIs, but if you're publishing apps for your platform than all apps should have access to the same APIs.

Maybe even specially call out that anyone can install any app they want on their mobile device, and this must be made accessible. You could even add in some weasel words like "after reasonable precautions have been taken" so that Apple can make you jump through some hoops to install an "unapproved" app. Let the courts sort out what is reasonable or not.
Ask HN: Help me find who is leaking my data
Recently, during work I opened a github issue on the Skaffold project called "Skaffold fails when a container's status code is 1".

Yesterday, during a private video call with my family (using Line on Android), a popin appeared containing roughly this text:

Skaffold fails when a...
Start sharing your screen

I dismissed it and since wasn't able to reproduce it (sorry I don't have a screenshot).

I find it extremely creepy and concerning, especially since I usually am very careful with my privacy.

I already checked some possibilities but didn't find yet who leaked this and why.

I do not know if it is a feature from Android or Line either.

- I don't have the Github application installed

- I have email notifications for Github, but Gmail is not installed on my phone (but Google accounts linked)

- I have all privacy-invasive settings disabled on my private Google account, but it wasn't the case with my professional Google account (which is linked with my smartphone)

- I am never using third party logins, including Google

Does anyone have an idea how this happened?
> If this guy is lucky, maybe he’ll get tenure by the time he’s 120.

Nah - I'd wager he'll be an eternal postdoc.
I think the last 4 years of left wing propaganda from mainstream outlets was the main cause of radicalization on both sides.

It’s hard no to be radicalized when you and millions of other conservatives are being labeled ‘racist’ and ‘fascist’ for no reason other than having different political views.
I think browser could be a logical next. It’s not more rational for Apple to censor the content of the apps you run on your device than the content of the Website you browse on your device.

In a way this is a form of death of net neutrality. What your ISP couldn’t do, Apple and Google happily will.