skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The problem is that GNOME is not just a DE. By virtue of being a project that's used by RedHat and Ubuntu, it's the closest thing to the standard DE that desktop Linux has at the moment.

Worse yet, its developers consciously make design decisions that make it hard to write applications that play well with GNOME without taking a dependency on it - their take on it seems to be that GNOME is a platform, and their main interest is supporting "GNOME apps", even to the detriment of all the rest.

Between these two things, deficiencies in GNOME affect a lot of people who didn't necessarily choose to be affected.
I don't have a twitter account and login to Facebook once a month. If both went away tomorrow, my life would continue, very much as now. And I think this is true for most people.

If my water, power, or internet was cut off, I would immediately suffer real, life changing inconvenience and hardship.

To me, the difference between these things is incredibly stark.
I don't see how it's anti competetive. The free market advocates on HN would say that other people will create other companies and gain the market share current companies have turned down. Or that existing niche companies will find an expanded market serving them.

It's also important to note that companies aren't cutting ties with Trump because of his political ideology, they're cutting ties with him because there's a strong argument he broke the law, and they don't want to be in the awkward position of facilitating that, especially as it could open them to their own legal liability.
If I had a dime for every time I read some pearl clutching comment about the big brother slippery slope on HN, I could have retired by now.

In all these years, the only actual existential danger to society to materialize are precisely the entities that are now being deplatformed.

Excuse me if I don't take all this hand wringing on behalf of unstable insurrectionists seriously.
It's funny how that works. Having run the college gambit before getting an associates degree in business, I learned what was important and what wasn't in college. I knew an internship was practically vital if not required. So like another class I put in a lot of time to apply to as many positions as I could. Many students I'd talk to would always seem frustrated the moment I or someone else would bring up an internship and that was because they were more worried about working at their current job and graduating debt free. I at least had the foresight to know that the experience in this field was worth more any amount of interest I'd have to pay simply because you're income potential far outweighs the maybe few thousands in interest you would've saved working full-time.
That sounds like the ideal situation for RedHat's business model.
This new trend in identity politics is more disturbing than anything the left or right has done.
What would that have to do with Black vs white doctor?
I’d see the option to maintain multiple profiles if you so desire, choose what level you’re comfortable with per instance. The key is that the clauses are subject to individual scrutiny.

Another component would be the ability to rigorously diff agreements as they change, only those components that change or are in some way dependant are presented for attention.
I think their hesitation was less from missing out on the trump supporter ad traffic and more from fear of retribution of the trump administration and its congressional allies. That faction has now all but lost their political power for the foreseeable future, making it much less risky to undertake the censorship measures.

Remember, two things happened at once: the riots, but also the result of the Georgia runoff which indicated a complete shift in governmental control. One cleared the runway for the reaction to the other.
We could speculate on how modern society would react if it was established that some people really could harm telekinetically, were doing so, and incarceration couldn't stop them.
Counterfactuals are hard, and I'm spitballing here, I think it's useful to consider a scenario where that would be true: for Republicans to have maintained control of the Senate would likely correspond to more public support for Republicans in general, which means it's less likely there would have been run-offs in Georgia; the outcome of the November 2020 elections would likely have been settled much sooner, and less motivation for the unrest that culminated on January 6. So, as to the narrow "would these bans would have happened" now? Probably not.

All of this is conjecture, thought experiment off the top of my head that I will not do much to defend. And, of course, none of that is what actually happened.
Hospitals in my area enforcing higher levels of PPE are having problems with staffing because of PPE fatigue and staff don’t get sick less then hospitals with less PPE.
Have you ever heard Kara Swisher go off on this? She's vicious on the topic.
Capitol police found and defused three pipe bombs, and seven people in the mob so far were arrested for carrying illegal firearms.

And as an aside, "armed" versus "unarmed" is largely immaterial. I don't care if you and five hundred of your buddies show up with supersoakers and pool noodles with the intent to overturn a vote count, it's a direct assault on democracy.
Protesting electoral fraud is also absolutely required, even if I am extremely extremely sceptical that it actually happened.

Some of the protests that happened in the civil rights movement were indeed violent although this has been rather aggressively whitewashed in government approved public school classes meant to teach students the way to affect real change is to stand around with signs and sing songs and have racist white police officers beat you until you win (Kings flirting with communism and advocacy of reparations doesn't get much mention either). Ever hear of this guy called Malcolm X who wrote quite a bit about violence, he's definitely not somebody who could be allowed on social media. Race riots happened, people got beaten, some were killed largely by the police (just like in this most recent protest) but also by protesters (just like in this most recent protest). Did this delegitimize the civil rights movement? No, it was a noble movement, people just whitewash and dramatize it instead to prevent any degree of cognitive dissonance, and then compare modern day movements to the whitewashing to whitewash the modern day equivalents.

Back then like today, the degree of violence was greatly exaggerated, disproportionately by the media and by racist segregationist's. Protests are mostly a dull affair filled overwhelmingly with non-violent people and only the exciting bits hit the front pages. The extent of violence by Trump supporters too is greatly exaggerated, mostly by media and their political opponents. If one police officer dies and 4 protestors, the only reasonable reaction is a speech crackdown against those who blame this incident on democrats dubiously. Since obviously cracking down on the free non-violent exchange of ideas and advocacy of peaceful protest is what prevents violence from happening.

Point I'm driving at is that if the entire argument is based around the idea that any violence, or even violent mobs, delegitimizes a large movement than virtually all movements from BLM to the Civil rights movements to... whatever this is.... are delegitimized. Really the issue people have with the Trump supporters, above all, is that they're wrong and unpopular. As such they're a good test for exactly how much people REALLY support freedom of speech and the right to protest a cause that isn't broadly supported.
Am I understanding it correctly?

It's like a 'reset trade' button you can press and if most of your guardians approve, then they can reset your pubkey preventing the crypto from leaving your vault?

Sounds like a good idea, and could make people feel a lot more secure with their crypto. Definitely a tradeoff a lot of people would gladly take. You must admit it would be cool as hell to have a physical version of a key to turn simultaneously with your business partner to let your funds flow out somewhere.

This is my only real anxiety with the crypto I hold, and a good solution.
Self-preservation was certainly a part of why there was inaction, as was financial motive. I also think they were rather naïve about their roles & responsibilities and the real world consequence of their own platforms, as well as lacking in a sophisticated understanding of how to do content moderation or even politics. These topics are both very old (social organizing, radicalization, usenet), and very new (primary medium for global discussion, recommendation algorithms, etc).

This is definitely a moment that will define social media specifically and tech more broadly. Before Wednesday, social media was one thing, and after, it will be another. This is also a bit of a backlog being flushed; many of these decisions were likely made months or years ago, and only accelerated by Wednesday's events.

I see this a little like safety regulations - every regulation is written in blood. Perhaps soon so will every major shift in the tech landscape.
No quarter.

Free speech limited by inciting violence, OK, but should be applied evenly. Anrifa, BLM, weren't deplatformed, right?

The politics of the new right are for some reason considered an existential threat by big tech, and the global security and intelligence faction.

We can't have a situation where Trump can actually deliver results and give the people hope and risk upsetting the control system, so we need to remind everyone they belong to a global control structure, introduce a virus, and coordinate an exaggerated curfew response to remind everyone to be afraid and that we're really in control, not some new fangled ideologue making promises of renewed greatness and destruction of the control system
Give me a time stamp. I JUST rewatched the livestream as people streamed in, it’s for a project I am working on. I did not see anyone armed. Maybe some were armed but it was not clear and irrefutable.

Edit: https://youtu.be/OiaWd5gVDvg
I’d say the first step is find someone with a working one - and see if the various disks are readable. If they are - move forward.

If not, it’s more a theoretical excercise.
A few issues:

1) The most radicalized are by Q. Which itself is a disinformation campaign, contributed to by government entities.

2) Bernie sanders brags about occupying government buildings. Would he be held to the same standard? OAC praised BLM protesters marching on the White House a few months ago, with Antifa trying to breach police lines and storm the White House. Should we throw her in jail for sedition. How about Pelosi that asked the army to ignore orders from Trump.

The US might be a democracy. But just because you can vote, does not mean you have any meaningful amount of power. The powerful cabal of corrupt politicians, and their rich backers, they have power. And they have been there for a very long time. They are almost impossible to displace. This breach shook them, because it was common, everyday people that did this. The same people that have had their livelihood destroyed, and have been hurt by all the COVID rules, rioting, trade deals with foreign countries, and so on.

Trump is great for democracy. At every turn he exposes the hypocrisy of the current system. He needles them, and each time they over react. Exposing all their flaws. The amount of backstabbing he gets just from the Republican party, is waking up millions of people.

Thanks to him, we found out how convoluted and non transparent the election process is. How biased the media is. How the Supreme court cowers to political pressure.
And now how big tech is working in collusion.

All things that a democratic movement can help to fix.
That would make sense —- I was looking at California all together. Edited my parent comment to address this.
I don't use Twitter; at least I don't have an account with them. I do view some public twitter feeds others publish.

Does hacker news count as social media? This might be one of the only social media accounts I have.
2017 flu season: 45 million infections, 61k deaths

2017 death rate: 0.14%

2020 covid: 91 million infections (as of dec 11 2020), 294,535 deaths (as of dec 12 2020)

2020 death rate: 0.32%

Covid is about 2-3 times as bad a bad flu season. The vast, vast majority of people under 60 do not die. There is no reason to shut everything down and ruin businesses, the economy and people's lives. Yes people will die. People die from coal plants, cars, pollution, and many other things that we do not shut everything down for.

"Early data from COVID-NET suggest that COVID-19–associated hospitalizations in the United States are highest among older adults, and nearly 90% of persons hospitalized have one or more underlying medical conditions."

People in this thread: "I just wasted a year of my life not being able to interact with people so for sunk cost this covid stuff must be really bad"

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden-averted/2017-2018.htm

https://archive.is/knguz

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burd...

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e3.htm
Social media is anything but traditional. It is alien to how traditional human discourse has evolved over millennia. And not alien “in a good way.” It is a monstrosity.
I'm guessing here, but this likely doesn't remove bias. Could they simply refuse to air certain facts?

Oftentimes that's all it takes. Pick the facts you report. You aren't reporting anything "false", but the truth isn't being depicted.

From what I've heard Fox reports that millions believe there was fraud. Not that there was actual fraud. I haven't fact checked this, because it came from a left leaning source and I believed it.
Semi on-topic: This site really wants to track me. It doesn't let me read with an AdBlocker, but also doesn't let me read incognito, which was my solution to the first problem. Creepy!
> The CFR of COVID is less than 0.5

The CFR of COVID—and everything else that might be require ICU care—goes way up when hospitals are overwhelmed because the infection rate isn't controlled. CFR isn't a constant.
If you were cut off from social media, payment processors, web hosts and mail providers, would you practically be able to launch a political campaign?
Sorry, but no. CNN, MSNBC, etc are far from perfect, but let's not pretend that "both sides are as bad as each other".

Fox (to say nothing of the absolute swamp that is OANN or Newsmax) are an order of magnitude worse than the so called "left" channels (only in the US would CNN be considered a left wing news channel).

The reason that CNN, etc are "biased" against Trump is because reality is bisaed against Trump. He's just a terrible president, a lousy business man and an awful human.

Again, only in the US would that be considered a controversial statement.
OK. The dems ran around for 3 years claiming the Russians somehow handed Trump the 2016 election.
My bad. I edited my comment. Nothing intentionally, just realized my comment was not actually appropriate for the context.

Regarding your second point, I agree it was not substantive, noted.
Would it be permissible to place a giant billboard on the sidewalk right in front of your competitor's store?

It's unethical and anti-competitive to try to drown out your competition because you have enough money to be able to do it.

IMO both Google and Facebook should be punished for allowing it and doing it respectively. It shouldn't be possible to bid for your competitors' names.
> shadow-banning ... this was pretty much confirmed after the Twitter hack last year

Citation? Also, Twitter says otherwise: https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2018/Setting-t...

To have the technological capability to do something does not necessarily imply that it is being used for the wrong reasons. Without proof, all there is is speculation.

> To allow conservative views but reduce their visibility is just a more subtle form of censorship

You're moving the goalposts. I was referring to allowing speech - you're talking about amplifying it. There is a huge difference between tolerance and amplification, and nobody should expect Twitter or any other media you don't own to amplify what you say for free. If you want people to follow you, say interesting things and influence people (but don't cross the line of inciting violence or calling on people to overthrow the government).

How the hell did we get from "this platform should allow me to post what I want" to "this platform should broadcast what [person X] says with equal volumetric distribution to non-subscribers as it does [person Y]?"
Cool idea!

I also enjoy the double entendre of “flame graph” here for the flame war that you chose :).

It’s not clear to me that I’d label the “functions” with the username. I’m not sure what other very short summary you might use, but I’d prefer something content related rather than poster.
> Thousands of violent posts were in the "Hang Mike Pence" Twitter trend that was going on the other day.

That trended because Trump supporters built a gallows and chanted “Hang Mike Pence” at the Capitol on Wednesday.
You're right, all very good points that contrast my cynicism. I am even more worried that if an authoritarian government takes hold of power, corporations would go into survival mode. Look at AliBaba/Jack-Ma situation in extreme case, not sure if that's a fair example.
Gather.Town is interesting, but it has its own issues. We just used it last Friday for a company offsite, and these issues killed the experience for myself and a few others:

1. You don’t see who is speaking when there are many people present— you have to scroll through participants to find the person talking. Lots of new employees, I didn’t know who was talking about half the time

2. Connection issues. I couldn’t hear the speaker but others could, for extended periods of time. Missed entire presentations due to this unfortunately, as I couldn’t hear or have any means of connecting to the speaker.

Don’t get me wrong it’s fun software, but it’s not ready to be your rock solid all-hands replacement quite yet. Had the pleasure of experiencing Welcome at one of the YC networking events, and that worked really well, curious to hear if they’re interested in filling this gap
45% of republicans according to one poll (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-electio...), 18% according to another (https://thehill.com/homenews/news/533452-poll-18-percent-of-...). That's not all republicans but it's certainly many of them and probably enough to decide who the next presidential candidate will be. It's mainstream in the republican party, not some lunatic fringe.
I recognize that you were being facetious, but this is work a look.

Greater decentralization, smaller polities and a less powerful federal government could be a workable solution. It doesn't have to go to the point of secession. It is possible to respond with tolerance and let all sides live according to their wishes.
I wish this was the top upvoted comment. It's the root cause behind so much of all this.

Engagement algorithms are driving extremism. Outrageous, inflammatory, even seditious political speech is more "engaging" than reasonable speech.

So until we can reform engagement algorithms, we will indeed have to keep playing whac-a-mole. With uglier and uglier moles.
The default DE should be "sane and boring". I think the one that best fits this description at the moment is MATE.
I read things like this and it really makes me sad. I don’t agree with Steve Bannon or Rudy Giuliani on a lot of things. I also don’t agree with their equivalent person on the left. In fact I am skeptical of most “career politicians”. I really wish we could switch what politics is about. Currently we (meaning news channels and Twitter/internet folk) want to dunk on the other tribe and show them how wrong and stupid they are. Can’t we all try to find consensus and compromise? I know that I personally don’t have enough knowledge and experience to know what’s right for all people at all times. Life can be complicated. Let’s have some compassion folks.
Now I see that I indeed was snarky and I'm not happy about it.

I should have simply said that all three points are completely unsubstantiated.
Film festival invites fans to watch movies alone on a Swedish island
You seem to have made up your mind, but for the benefit of others: yes, we use many AWS products and are having a fantastic time of it. AWS services are more reliable, less buggy and have more stable APIs than any of the alternatives. Specific services that made a difference to us are Fargate, Spot, Batch, SQS/SNS, Lambda, ECR, EFS, ELB/ACM, CloudWatch Logs, IAM, Aurora RDS, SSM/Secrets Manager, and Step Functions - in addition to EC2/VPC/EBS, Route53 and S3 that you already listed. Each of these services does a lot to free us up to do more value added domain-specific work.

Terraform has emerged as a key tool to manage AWS resources - so much so that it really adds a lot to the value prop of AWS itself. I can do stuff with Terraform that was only aspirational until it existed.

Personally, I wouldn't plan on using on-prem except for niche applications that involve heavy data streams from local hardware. In the time that I've spent with companies working on AWS, I've seen a number of other companies waste lots of time and resources on heterogeneous strategies while complaining about their AWS bill - which was high because someone got so fed up with IT dysfunction, they went and used AWS but left behind inefficiently configured resources that were on all the time. Cloud often ends up being an escape hatch for teams that are not adequately served by dogmatic IT departments.
They weren't criminal punishments. They were enforcements of ToS agreements. There's no need for an arrest, a conviction, or even a crime for them to ban users who violate ToS agreements. And, it being their own ToS, they don't need a court or any 3rd party to render judgment: they are the arbiter and interpreter of their own ToS and the enforcement actions taken.
You can contribute all you want but it's not going to be enough to stop Pottering or RedHat from hijacking the project and breaking everything. I used to contribute but these days what's the point?
False statements aren’t protected? Then why was “Russia Collusion” speech not banned? Why didn’t Twitter label all of the Russian Collusion nonsense as false? The Steele Dossier was a complete fabrication, but Twitter did absolutely nothing.

Are false statements not false if they come from Democrats? Because that’s certainly how it appears. Sheila Jackson-Lee in 2016 led opposition to the electoral count — even said the election was faulty and unfair. Seditious statements using the current standard of sedition being tossed around.

The hypocrisy is astounding. Can ANTIFA use Stripe? Because they burned down police stations and even assaulted elected officials. The US has become fascist in a hurry — and it isn’t because of any Trump policy.
No, no, no. I literally made an account to comment on how wrong this is. Both sides are biased ignores the little matter of degree. One side is completely unmoored from reality in a way that the other simply isn’t. One side promotes conspiracy theories and lies from the top down.

Both sides is a way to make yourself feel smart without critically examining on a deeper level what those biases are, how widely they’re consumed, and how seriously they’re taken.
I hope Stripe gave them a week to find a new payment processor.
thanks - not sure where i got the burning from
yeah, it's a big problem. If you're going to allow political discussions you should remove voting and flagging for those posts.
Yes, very few people are motivated BY racial hatred, far more can be motivated TO racial hatred.
What is it used for
Probably doesn’t quite count as retro, but I recently purchased a mini PC pretty much exclusively to play Diablo 2 single player.

Prices were quite low so I wanted to make sure the specs were adequate. Looking into it, I got a laugh that the game requirements were less than Windows 10 itself.