skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
On a site like HN, those kinds of behavior are moderated and known to be unwelcome. On Parler, it’s well known that they’re tolerated and implicitly welcome. Participating without challenging that is giving it a veneer of legitimacy, sheltering it, and lending plausible deniability to a platform clearly designed for them.

Even a completely galaxy brain position on speech that promotes private platforms which must allow completely unmoderated content actively promoting and organizing violence... hanging out with the people doing that is tacit endorsement.
Weekend Edition #153 Query-Block, Page Builders, WordPress Site Editor L
MySQL pronunciation can be "My S Q L" or "My Sequel." I think most people in the community probably use the latter, but truthfully most of us don't really care. The "S Q L" vs. "Sequel" split has existed almost as long as SQL itself. The original name for the language was "SEQUEL." [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL#History
Would you agree that it is Twitter and Facebook's responsibility to ban all BLM-affiliated groups? After all they have organized numerous events that involved mass rioting that resulted in billions of Dollars in damage, many deaths, and disruption to the lives of hundreds of thousands. In many cases, politicians like AOC or news pundits like Don Lemon have condoned this violence, and even encouraged more such action. At times they have gaslighted us by claiming those events were "mostly peaceful" even though there is evidence to the contrary showing criminality far larger in scale than the recent capitol riot (example: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/31/fires-light-...). Those individuals and groups who organized, incited, and participated in such events were not reprimanded and not banned.

So why are they all given a pass? It's because these tech companies are comprised mostly of left-leaning staff and are willing to now exercise their power against everyone else. Until Twitter, Facebook, and Amazon deplatform every single person and group involved in the hundreds of events in 2020 that involved criminal acts, these new acts of censorship will remain discriminatory and unacceptable.
>whatabout BLM

So then you agree that the Republican insurrectionists invading and looting the nations capitol this week were bad?
Singapore: Why these defiant 'nail house' owners refuse to sell
I support "this kind of censorship" because I'm not an extremist and don't like extremism, especially the violent kind. I hope even the ISPs get involved if that's what it takes to prevent an insurrection from any expression of extremism.

I may reconsider this position if they ever "come for me"; but frankly, for now, I value stability and longevity for our nation more than its abstract ideals about freedom of speech.
Also, at least for Apple, I recall them giving Parler an ultimatum to moderate their platform. For example, if an app was full of child porn or ISIS videos, I would imagine Apple would take the app down. Similarly here, due to the lack of moderation, Parler was full of doxxing, call to violence and recruitment and planning for attacks on the Capitol (both the one that happened and future ones).

That's the reason for why it was removed, not simply because Apple doesn't like conservatives as they will claim.
I really do hate Wikipedia and almost never use it. It's a collection of poorly spun word-salad stolen loosely from third-parties. And the aim isn't on quality but to satisfy the editors compulsive need to contribute to Wikipedia's ever-growing rat's nest of non-sense... just because. In every article there will always be a historical section probably about 3/4ths the articles width that you just skip over (it's useless.) Then, maybe if you're lucky there will be some notes of value.

These notes are almost always useless for two reasons:

1. They are never detailed enough to do anything with.

2. They usually assume massive amounts of prior audience knowledge. To the point where said audience wouldn't need the website.

So they have the unique distinction of being useless to both beginners and expert audiences (quite the feat if you think about.) In the end after you've realized whatever article you're reading is useless (mostly all of them) you'll leave and do what you should have done in the first place: your own research.

I really do wish there was a way to block results in Google. Wikipedia and it's merry band of 13-yo editors would be the first to go.
> 5 or 6 GB for a 1080p movie instead of a nice lean 1GB HEVC file

Woah there, HEVC and VP9 are not that good. Both are 25-30% better than h264. See Netflix's benchmarks. We're talking 4gb vs 6gb

A 1gb movie will always look like crap, even with an even better codec like AV1. Pause the movie during an action sequence or explosion and it'll look like you're watching the video on YouTube with all the compression artifacts that entails.
Yes, that is true. Why do you people keep saying that? You're 100% legally correct. There's something else that people have and they're called morals and ethics. I, and many others, share that it is moral and ethical for someone to be able to say their repugnant mouth breathing garage however they choose. Then I get to decide if I want to interact with that person. Not some supposedly open to the PUBLIC service.
Ask HN: How do you manage your ML experiments?
For work, I need to run many PyTorch/TF/MXNet experiments in parallel on a cloud instance with multiple GPUs. Currently, I use Tensorboard (and its variants) to log results and tmux to run experiments simultaneously on multiple GPUs.

However, I often run into these issues:
1. Some experiments fail due to run-time errors and tmux allows them to fail silently

2. Some experiments cause a GPU to run out of memory, and I have to dig through many tmux sessions to find and re-run that experiment

3. If many GPUs are close to full, I have to revert to running experiments in sequence, and have to wait until experiment_i is over before running experiment_i+1

4. When running different experiments, I have to manually estimate how much GPU memory a specific experiment will consume before I can deploy them onto multiple GPUs

5. When doing a particularly tedious task (eg. hyper-parameter search), there will often be on the order of a hundred experiments; this becomes extremely difficult to manually maintain using tmux

Ideally, a perfect solution for this workflow would be a tool that could 1) profile memory consumption for a set of experiments, 2) automatically deploy experiments onto a cluster of GPUs, 2) re-run, queue, or re-assign experiments to other GPUs if needed, and 4) send notifications/keep track of all experiment progress.

I currently know of other tools like PyTorch Lightning (which only works with PyTorch and requires a significant code restructure) and Weights & Biases (only has experiment progress/logging ability), but I have yet to find something that is lightweight and flexible enough to handle all of these requirements.

What's the best way to manage experiments like this?

P.S: I'm not an engineer, I'm a researcher, so I would really prefer solutions that don't make it difficult to keep focusing on the research and development side of things
Illegally searching might mean that you can look for any evidence for any reason anywhere. That means you can plant evidence anywhere, because you never need to justify how to find it or why.

On the second one: you might be surprised but it is likely the vast majority of people are breaking the law. Might depend on country, but there are more laws that can even be counted in the United states: very likely you are breaking some!
The article about the conspiracy theory has a disambiguating note pointing to "Marxist cultural analysis" as a more common term for the non-conspiratorial use of "Cultural Marxism". The remaining question is whether the conspiratorial use is significant/common enough that it deserves to be treated as the "default", and that's an editorial question that could be argued from either side. It's an uncomfortable situation to be sure, but there's no blatant political bias here.
We force e.g. racist bakers to sell to black people. Outside protected classes, however, we do not force Apple or Google to associate with Parler. Political affiliation is not a protected class. That’s freedom of assembly.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parenting
Nothing, which is why billions are flowing into Ag
you are right from a constitutional perspective, but it's somewhat misses the point.

Private censorship is still censorship, particularly when the public square is privately owned.

if we can't stop the tit for tat between left and right from escalating further I truly fear for this country.
Know someone who pitched Shaq for an investment. They didn't get it but came away favorably impressed with the guy. I didn't know he made an early investment in Google, but they said he really understands tech.
Establishing air superiority and creating a beachhead would be a matter of one day or two, at most. It would be impossible for a US carrier strike group to intervene by then. Same for Aegis.

As for Japan, it is much too far from Taiwan to contribute. South Korea will not get involved for obvious reasons.
> Yeah, I’d wager the vast majority of Parler users are either involved in the kinds of shit that finally tipped the scales or giving it safe haven.

Where is the data please, instead of wild guesses?
I believe Firefox will support H.264 for videos only using the operating system's own support (so on Linux, if you have it supported in gstreamer and/or ffmpeg then it's supported in Firefox).
Its delusion only if you think truth matters.

For them, "group strength" and tribalism is more important, so their behaviour is not is not delusional within that paradigm.

Thats what no one understands
The tone is perhaps a tad melodramatic, but that keeps it fun to read!

I think there’s a question worth asking here that I don’t thing gets asked enough: what are the decisions we want to leave to humans? What decisions do we want to leave to individual humans?

This article reminded me of Neil Postman’s Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology. I’ve written my thoughts on it here.[^1] His primary thesis is that all technology has a trade-off and an agenda of how it wants to be used, and more importantly, we are often blind to that trade-off and agenda.

For simple technologies, like hammers and spoons, the danger is negligible. For more powerful technologies like writing, telegraphy, and statistics, the dangers are much harder to see.

I highly recommend Technopoly if this article struck a cord with you.

[^1]: https://lambdaland.org/posts/2020-08-16-book-review-technopo...
Just going to get my prediction in now: This is going to result in top-to-bottom divergence of tech along political lines. Someone will make a right-wing AWS, and then someone will make a right-wing smartphone.
I was a su-dough person until I realise that sudo stands for 'super user do' or 'su do', so I switched to soodoo - it makes a lot more sense that way.

f-suck is a new one for me though. I would say F S C K to someone else, but I call it fusk in my head.
I think Trump's obsession with 230 was clearly retributive. In top of that he spent very little effort trying to gather consensus.

I'd like to see it debated on its own merits, but that seems unlikely in the current climate
There is an accepted and partially implemented RFC [1] that can improve proc macro error messages a lot.

Sadly it hasn't been worked on in years.

[1] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/54140
Perhaps I'm using the word "censor" in a way that points to the government being the censor. But I mean it to be more encompassing of any entity that has the right to remove content from communications channels.

Currently the platforms are private (as a peer comment points out). So right now there isn't technically a "freedom of speech" issue as it's a private matter and private entities in the USA don't need to respect the 1st amendment.

As a thought experiment -- suppose the social media platforms were turned into "utilities" and completely absolved of the responsibility (or even the authority) to "censor" speech. In the same way someone's phone doesn't turn off if they make a threatening phone call. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Would losing the ability for anyone to remove content be fundamentally bad? Given that we have social mechanisms that existed prior to digital communication for countering bad speech?

As to your question, the fact that some people do support the suspension by the platform controllers (currently private) of accounts that post inflammatory speech would suggest that yes, some folks do think that censorship is a good idea.
Pretty stupid to think about sentience let alone consent with robots. This would be a Westworld situation which should be encouraged for people who would like to use/prefer robots
That doesn't seem at all plausible to me. Further, I don't think you can point to lots of serious "behead Trump" chatter in the opposition; conversely, I can easily point you to "hang Pence from the tree outside the Capitol" postings that were not kidding.

Anyways, we probably understand each other at this point and don't need to belabor this, even if we don't agree with each other.
I see no choice but to resign from this Death Star as it begins to explode
Is Programming for Me?
While so many comments are applauding this move to me this entire deal has been a massive wake up call. I always knew in the back of my head, but now it is right in front of me just how much power these tech platforms have. It's not about Parler (have never used it). Or any of the specific people banned. Just the fact that we have had a president addicted to social media shows how bad things have become.

For me, it's time to unsubscribe. It's not like they have brought me great benefit anyways, if anything the opposite. I wonder if any others will come to the same conclusion.
I’m completely missing the government suppression of speech. Can you point it out?

Section 230 repeal fixed things how?
But violence is being planned on Parler, today. It is an incubator for the escalation you’re talking about. We’ve left the realm of the hypothetical.

If there’s a bar where the owner lets a gang hang out and recruit members and plans crimes, the thing to do is shut down that bar. Not let it go unchecked because the gang will be mad about it.
Yep. BTC boys will be in for a rude awakening when the all-seeing eye turns their way.
Net NoTrality
Knowable free audio course: Launch a Startup by Alexis Ohanian
That's a tough job to be a mod, for sure, but there is also a thing called free speech which grants even lunatics like the scientologists, freedom of, you know, speech. And it doesn't mean 'free speech you agree with'.

What happens now is that Capitol protest is used as an excuse to exclude half of the country in the conversation before the inauguration (and most likely after), silence their voice, the voice of opposition.

And that doesn't smell kosher to me, to 75M people who voted with me, and thankfully many on the left, the classic liberals.

I don't think it's good for the country to derail to this level of totalitarian censorship, even temporary, no matter what yours or mine political beliefs are.
There are limits to what kinds of meetings will be allowed to be held in a town square, or a McDonald’s franchise, say, to pick some random giant company that provides a space to socialize.

Facebook and Twitter are like giant newspaper companies that, unlike paper newspapers, which can get in trouble for reprinting someone’s illegal words, are free to distribute others’ words, moderated or unmoderated. No website that you post content to has to distribute that content for you if it doesn’t want to. Twitter is not air.

That said, I don’t know what Facebook and Twitter should do, if there is such a thing as that. I think Twitter could easily justify not blocking Trump, by making the argument that they are a communication service, and they don’t want to start editorializing, but clearly that is not their stance! Facebook curates and bumps content up and down by its very nature, so Lord knows what it “should” do with itself.

We probably just shouldn’t have these giant monoliths.
Fish and Freedom are completely different concepts from tolerance. They're not as substitutable here as you think.
No one was up in arms when Twitter removed 125k Isis accounts. Deplatforming terrorists, and if you think there aren’t there then you willfully ignorant of what’s going on on that platform, is a legitimate action for any private citizen or company to undertake. This isn’t state censorship in any way.

Ignoring your TOS and not moderating terrorists is complicit action by the owners to get ahead of “but they aren’t all terrorists!”
> Didn't stop the attack on the Capitol being organized there.

If it were organized on Telegram would you ban Telegram? If it was organized by phone would you ban phones? This is just silly.
This. Wikipedia severely locks out content creators to provide balanced views on politics.

It’s no secret the current content creators lean towards one side of the isle.
Signal isn’t a social network. It’s just encrypted text messages.
Conservatives have set up their own version at http://conservapedia.com/. I can understand why a lot of that material isn't found in Wikipedia.
The number of deployed CRDs is not likely to be an issue. The number and size of custom resources (CRs - instances of CRDs) is potentially an issue.

Scalability is relative, and depends on many factors including but not limited to:

- the resources available on the hosts running apiservers and etcd members

- the number and size of resources (custom and native) that controllers will maintain

Relatively speaking, a cluster of a given size might be perfectly capable of handling on the order of many thousands of resources . Push that an order of magnitude and the overhead of serving LIST calls - marshaling json from etcd to golang structs for apimachinery and back again for sending over the wire - could exhaust an apiserver’s memory allocation. And since the impact of resources is cumulative, any one application relying on lots of CRDs might not destabilize a cluster on its own but might well contribute to an unhealthy cluster when running alongside similarly CRD-heavy applications.

The key takeaway is that the kube api is best thought of as a specialized operational store rather than a general-purpose database. Anyone wanting to rely on CRDs at non-trivial scale would be well-advised to test carefully.
The "virtue" of totally unmoderated speech is just another value you hold that you're misleadingly not categorizing as a "virtue": You're doing it right now.

The very idea of "virtue signaling" is delusional. There is no practical difference between twitter's intent and their action here.
That is not free speech but the 1st amendment to the US constitution. Obviously related but not the same thing.
OK, but given that all of the above is true, do you think that deplatforming Parler helps or hurts the overall situation?

What do you think the "deplatformed" people are going to do? Just quit because "oh no our website is gone"?

This event is just fueling the fire IMO.
It's interesting to contrast that with the article on Neoliberalism.

Both are terms that are generally used to disparage views of others. Except for the new 'Neoliberal' clique who are centre left most people described as Neoliberals don't describe themselves that way. Just as what many right of centre would term as 'Cultural Marxists' wouldn't describe themselves that way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
They had zipties, bombs, weapons and gallows. Can you imagine if one of those people who've spent 2 years reading hateful news about AOC would've done if they managed to make it to her office? Honestly January 6 could've ended much worse, and if something isn't done to put a break to the vitriot going unchecked on Parler, it very well may happen.

These people were recruiting and planning everything on Parler, doxxing and sharing information. This is what happens when a platform goes unmoderated. People like to think that a 100% free speech platform is great, but every instance of it I've seen has devolved into child porn, doxxing and violence.
YouTube rolled out AV1 support quite some time ago. Many YouTube videos are AV1 encoded. Here's one example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3Yk6FrjMkQ

You can tell if it's playing back in AV1 in your browser by right-clicking on the video and selecting "Stats for Nerds" to find out the video and the audio codecs. On my system in Firefox it's AV1 for video and Opus for audio.

For that video the file size savings are a bit hit and miss. AV1 saves a lot versus H.264 at 1080p, saves a little bit at 720p and 480p, and saves a bit more at 360p.

The 1080p results for that video are:

- AV1 50.28MiB

- VP9 69.12MiB

- H.264 106.68MiB

So a clear win at 1080p for AV1 versus VP9 and H.264.

Sometimes YouTube's AV1 encodes can actually end up being bigger than the H.264 versions due to the vagaries of automated transcoding.

When AV1 support was newly added to Firefox I used this 1080p60 video as a benchmark for my system:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fmdb-KmlzD8

Over the course of the development of Firefox's AV1 support and the switch to the dav1d decoder (https://code.videolan.org/videolan/dav1d) that video has gone from being unwatchable due to too many dropped frames to now playing back smoothly.

My system still struggles with AV1 above 1080p in Firefox though.
It's not censorship in the least. The government isn't chasing them because of stuff they said. And it's weird that you are using a quote that was coined with respect to the Nazi period, in defense of a group where members are wearing shirts saying "Camp Auschwitz".
It’s not very good as a learning resource for mathematics.

That’s pretty minor, but it is the main point about Wikipedia that I wish were better (I know, I’m free to help out...).
I've considered it carefully. I didn't expand on it because I know my opinion is usually not welcome (eh) here and also there is no way to come out looking good when arguing with people who position themselves as fighting against prejudice even if you care about social issues and it's exhausting.

As you say, it's the most limited interpretation of the problem. It's to the level of the master-branch or black-list/white-list controversies. I believe sexists are unwelcoming (to say the least), and sexism breeds a toxic work environment. I'm sure this image has been used by sexists, as has every resource in every field up to this day. I do not believe this image is sexist or unwelcoming nor that changing it will do anything to improve the work environment for women in tech.

I think these requests are overall harmful: They're a rhetorical mirage that does nothing to help the people they claim to stand for while disenfranchising normal people in the process by reframing them as bigots. They are part of a broader pattern of ideologically motivated battlegrounds in (SV) tech and serve only to classify people as allies or enemies. You yourself frame it as dichotomy between people who care about injustices and people who care more about preserving an old joke (clearly assholes if they put a joke over the inclusion of their colleagues). I'd ask you to consider that people who share your beliefs do not have a monopoly on kindness and mercy and the human heart, and to consider furthermore, given the polarization of the American political discourse, whether this is the right way to build a welcoming environment.

I say all this from personal experience, as a minority who's unlucky enough to have the most privileged people on earth fight for him (but not really) one well-meaning frivolity at a time. I say unlucky because in the process every space for us online has been hijacked and paradoxically I have less of a voice than before and meanwhile everything is still pretty shit to be honest.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experts_Exchange