skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Somehow I doubt Playboy cares about a cropped image that's been used everywhere for the past 50 years, as evidenced by their lack of action for 50 years.
If the image is too low resolution to showcase your work, you would not use it in the first place. The resolution was good enough to showcase a whole range of state of the art work I was reproducing 5 years ago though.
What could have been:

If Nixon hadn't started the process, if carter hadn't recognize the communist government of China.

- Offshoring/globalization may not have been the boom it is today, due to the lack of a major source of cheap/obedient labor force. In the 70s offshoring occured in Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and others SE Asia countries but they didn't have enough cheap labors to continue. American companies would have been timid to shift operations to Indonesia and India when they lacked severe infrastructure, with no totalitarian government to enforce cheap labor.

- As a corollary, GE/Intel would not not have shed all its capabilities to Asia, and be greatly diminished today.

- Wall street might not have been able to push companies to greatly shed cost and ship capabilities overseas due to national security issues. As a result, US unions would have been intact somewhat and the jobs would not have been shipped to China. Flyover states would have enjoyed greater strength as they did in the 60s and 70s.

- the great crash of 2008 would not have happened (Chinese entry into WTO greatly reduced manual jobs in US and Europe, crashing both economies)

- Trump would not have been elected. Trump was a reaction to much jobs lost and much sufferings in flyover states caused by China.

- Coronavirus spread around the world and all the deaths that occurred may not have happened (China would have been still a closed off country, not unlike what Xi Jing Ping is trying to do today). No mass flights out of Wuhan or Beijing.
“Recently, we’ve seen a steady increase in this violent content on your website, all of which violates our terms. It’s clear that Parler does not have an effective process to comply with the AWS terms of service,” the email reads. “[W]e cannot provide services to a customer that is unable to effectively identify and remove content that encourages or incites violence against others,” the email reads. “Because Parler cannot comply with our terms of service and poses a very real risk to public safety, we plan to suspend Parler’s account effective Sunday, January 10th, at 11:59PM PST.”

If Amazon and Parker havnt commented, how can an email be quoted?

Is Amazon monitoring the content of all the services on its platform?

While my first impression is that this looks like the US turning into China, the fact that large scale private industry is doing this in apparent coordination with political forces make it seem more fascist than commie. Maybe Trump really did usher fascism into the US. What a pity.
It's not about political ideology. It's about preventing what seems to be a clear case of violence inciting posts (many websites are sharing those screenshots). This should NOT be allowed in the garb of "free speech".
Great observation, thank you.
Most smaller hosters won't do this as their upstream will give them the boot when they do.

Hosting parler with one of the Chinese alternatives would be pure irony.
Just one thing to note about section 230. Amazon is protected from civil liability for content on Parler, but it is not protected from criminal liability. In practice the feds don’t go after isos from hosting criminal content (frauds for instance) with the exception of child pornography, but there is a lot of very illegal stuff on parler right now (calls to kill the Vice President, conspiracy to sedition, etc). It’s not surprising parler is being banned
Private companies are free to ‘censor’ what they believe is either bad for business or exposes them to liability. Maybe the free market has decided extremism is bad for business.
“Just build your own hosting platform”
It is not disingenuous, Iphone legitimately offers no major feature you can't get from Android.

You're arguing that feature parity is required for subsitutition, and that is an addled argument. It's not even temporally consistent, as you have prior versions of applications with features removed.

You can carry a laptop in your pocket. Sony VAIO had a mini edition around 2007. You can also use a bag, which has big pockets, and you can connect to networks and even cell networks.

Point is -- your argument here is very weak that the two platforms aren't substitutable, and there really is nothing left to say. Have a pleasant evening or morning, as the case may be.
So, the only content that a company should be able to remove should be illegal content?

Think through that a bit. There is tons of content that we remove from services constantly that isn't illegal.
None of that is technically censorship. They are all private companies and they have the prerogative to give the users a TOS, which they can accept or not. That said, I do think that having more options is always good, a decentralized Internet is a richer Internet.
>You can quite easily use mainstream social media as long as you aren't posting about how someone should be beheaded.

Is that so? Curious, because I was seeing a lot of guillotine memes from leftists last month.
I wouldn't worry too much about things you can't change. The way Trumps voters (72 million of them) are being treated by the Democrats, will likely destroy the country in civil war.

Just get some popcorn and watch the shit show...
Corporations get to choose who they do business with, who’s on their platforms. If they don’t want to do business with a platform for hatred, violence, and fascism, they shouldn’t.

Of course they should have done this 4 years ago...
That sounds amazing. Good idea. I think you’re describing the next step in user-generated content. Amazon has repeatedly proven that AI algorithms can’t save us from computer-generated trash and Twitter and Facebook have shown that algorithms can’t save us from malicious hate mobs and military psyops. Human moderation was the right solution, and we’ve tried for two decades to dodge that duty. Welcome back at last, reality.
Stanford scraps plans to invite students back after reaffirming them repeatedly
Right. This isn't a "can't moderate, too much!" problem. This is a "won't moderate, the CEO says so" problem.
If you think you can time the top, why not try Tesla?
My sibling here has the official response but I'll just add that "inciting violence" probably refers to a very out in the open effort to interrupt Biden's inauguration
Right, it's about time the secessionists who left the ROC in 1949 get treated appropriately.
So because Twitter and Facebook are larger and have more resources to stamp out illegal activity (which they still do poorly), that means the violence, death, and algorithmic propaganda should be acceptable to host on their platform vs another? Makes no sense.

Rules GAFA creates do not apply to themselves.
How about we look into censoring family environment? Why not to take kids away from the family and transfer them to the state so they are not exposed to racist parents? Where's the end to it?

PS I came from Soviet Union and this is not a theoretical idea.
My family has had to live through the Nazi invasion of my grandparents' home country, and my parents had to live through multiple military dictatorships. Throw in Umberto Eco's essay on Ur-fascism and yeah, I just might have an idea of what I'm talking about.
I think it's good for some things and really terrible for others. Forcing brevity is often really useful for encouraging more succinct, clearer writing. But sometimes the inherent complexity in what you're trying to say can't be compressed down to 280 characters, and things get really bad.

I think twitter tends to be good for sharing relatively uncontroversial information, making jokes, quick "shower thought" type things, but really bad for anything that requires a deep conversation with someone else.
Programming [Graphic] Design Systems
A few thousand people just had a big protest, I think it's easy enough. Also, covid-19 will end someday. The hot takes here are getting rediculous.
'We really shouldn't deplatform these terrorists because they might just do something extreme' get the fuck out of here.
Exactly this - otherwise inventions in physics would not be patentable (such as the laser - a purely theoretical construct long before it was engineered, same as the transistor), or chemicals (chemistry follows from physics, which is made of math..)

And on and on.

Using math to engineer solutions to problems is patentable.
> If Apple, Google, Facebook and Twitter were acting in concert to raise prices, everyone would be up in arms. But acting in concert to repress speech, no big deal. Aren’t civil liberties supposed to be more important than money? [1]

[1] - https://twitter.com/DavidSacks/status/1347961063707471873
As I became aware of at the time that Goya was in the news, it isn't actually a Mexican company. It's a New Jersey company founded by immigrants from Spain.
Sure - but we’re not in that policy place with regards to social media, and they will fight any attempt to exert that kind of requirement.
Just build your own website bro

Just build your own host bro

Just build your own financial banking system bro

Just build your own water and power infrastructure bro
EDIT: I mistook you for SpicyLemonZest

> Why is that an unreasonable assumption to make?

Your statements are fairly reasonable, and you have awareness of when you are speculating. If more people were like this, perhaps this tailspin could be averted. But look through threads like this and judge for yourself how many people are as reasonable as you.
They still believe it. And yes, when these times come, people get forced to get off the fence and prove they aren't part of the problem.

But these times do come. Congress was attacked. Threats need to be identified, and quickly.
More to the point, Trumpism is synonymous with authoritarianism. (A particularly lazy and incompetent authoritarianism, fortunately.)
> don’t think these people had or have any interest in being anonymous. They are standing up for what they believe in

There are many people who stand up for what they belive in. What is clear, to me at least, is a group of people that belive they are protected from their actions because of what they are or what the belive in
For the record: I don't know if "shut down" is the optimal outcome. Credible moderation --- "no appeals to violence" --- would take it from dangerous to mere odiousness. But I don't know that anyone has a right to demand any private business host odious content, either.

But it's Parler's problem that they've hit this point with so little time to build credible moderation, not anybody else's. Me sowing, me reaping, &c &c.
You're missing my point. It will be far easier to get laws changed than to develop a whole new phone.

The party that will control Congress in a couple of weeks does not like trillion-dollar companies like Apple. They believe that Apple and others should be considered monopolies, and if there is a court case they believe Apple should have the burden of proving that they aren't a monopoly (unlike current law).
parler.ru or parler.nk might be available.
Modern naval mines are torpedoes waiting on the sea floor for a carrier swimming by. Place a few where you know the carrier will drive over by sub, carrier sunk. Or just use the sub directly, modern small electric subs are undetectable in exercises, the sub will only be sunk when firing torpedoes. By then it is too late for the carrier.

Saturation by long-range antiship missiles is also possible to work, if the Falkland War is any indication.

And then there are the "deorbit a tungsten telephone pole" kind of ideas that just might work on a carrier, have no defense and are within the realm of possibility for both China, Russia and basically every state with the capability to get a few tons into some low orbit.

Against sophisticated enemies, carriers are giant billboards with "shoot me" written on them.
Do you also support terrorists planning and announcing attacks openly? Because that’s what was contained in Amazon’s letter to Parler - 98 instances of real threats against minorities, press, legislators, etc.

Discourse has always had limits of decency, and when that cannot be ensured - the very tool or network becomes a national security concern. Conservatives aren’t the issue - it’s the batshit crazy terrorists that aren’t contained.
Negative Programmer, Negative Code, Negative Impact
When the real world and the stressful coding world collide, what are the consequences for your emotions, job, and society?
Here’s the irony: Parler has been banning “liberals” and “leftists” for months. It’s an overtly political platform and clearly for a particular political ideology.
When Egyptian government turns off internet during a revolution, we call them tyrants and celebrate Twitter for allowing people to communicate freely. Yet, when US turns off a side of an argument the marginally elected majority disagrees with, we praise it.

Everything is fine...
Those claims were dropped because they were wishful thinking and didn’t stand up to even the slightest scrutiny. The non-expert who made those claims caused the author of the tool he misinterpreted to write an entire blog post about it:

https://medium.com/@micallst/misusing-osint-to-claim-electio...

The other key thing to understand is that Georgia had a full hand recount of the paper ballots which those machines tabulated. Even if they were completely hacked, they couldn’t rewrite the paper records and there’s no credible evidence of even a single ballot being changed much less the many thousands of them which would have been needed to make the electronic and hand counts match.
I think the difference is signal is private, no? Parler people are just airing racist and threatening shit out in the open. I would personally rather it take place in such private online places instead of in front of everyone.
Aren't all these things already regularly done in response to copyright violations, spam, child porn, etc? Seems like the precedent was set long ago.

> Obviously actual terrorist group sites can and should be taken down, but this feels more murky than that.

Considering the perpetrators of Wednesday's attack had guns and bombs[1] and declared their intent to kill US political leaders... what exactly distinguishes them from "actual terrorist groups"?

[1] https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/08/politics/us-capitol-riots-arr...
Are you saying this speculatively or because you understand that your hypothetical is already the functional end of our media landscape?
In three years, the slippery slope has gone from deplatforming a tiny handful of online Nazis to deplatforming the President and an app with 10 million users.
I think the criterion is pretty clear: this stopped being a matter of speech or rhetoric, and started being a matter of real-world violence and unrest.

For the record, I think all extremists should be banned, including the Taliban and Iran.
Yes, that is exactly what I am implying. If you follow an egomaniac, misogynist, sociopathic coward who wants a personality cult at the cost of democracy, and you're dumb or ignorant enough to follow that guy, by definition that makes you a fascist.
I host a site with lots of videos so am curious about this.

If I add this and another peertube syncs with mine it sounds like I would still be responsible for bandwidth to their users watching my videos from their peertube?

Does any have experience with how much bandwidth is saved from p2p part? Given my content I imagine most users will not be watching same videos at same time so p2p is negligible benefit.
It's a joke, understand. Carver demonstrated that he could build a transistor amplifier that matched the transfer function of an arbitrary tube amplifier. It didn't sell and annoyed the tube fans. So he built this thing to shut up the extreme audiophiles. It still sells.
"Almost assuredly" is different than "obvious and blatantly and not being moderated". Obviously. You're making the same argument the government has made against encryption. Moderating a private conversation is obviously different than moderating a public one.
Source of any tier1s doing this? Hosting on platforms whose employees are like 95% “libs” is already ironic
For spam / malicious traffic / botnets, our answer to all of those is historically "Yes," and it's worked fine for the growth of the internet so far. It's of course much easier to get a lazy cloud host, registrar, or ISP to take someone offline if the FBI is involved and gets a court order, but it's always been the expectation that there's an abuse contact who will respond to reports from the general public. Every domain or netblock entry in WHOIS has an abuse contact, implying there's some consensus standard of "abuse."
If you want this to be the case, you're going to need to push for laws to be changed. AWS is absolutely _not_ forced to host code it doesn't want to host.
Because the Taliban doesn't commit acts of real-world violence and unrest...?
Ask HN: Slack's (hypothetically) down for the day again. What's your backup?
With the recent Slack outage, I've been thinking about back-up team-wide communication systems.

What would your preferred system be to revert to? Keep in mind that whatever you pick, you're going to be paying for, or putting in the effort to host.
> US politics this week knocked the story of 55 democracy activists in Hong Kong being rounded up

Among arrested is at least one US citizen (purely US, no dual citizenship with HK). I suspect there will be more fallout from this.
As we have discovered, the sad answer to all those questions seems be be.

"Yes when it agrees with my political agenda"
Ah, but gender (and by extension, sexual orientation according to SCOTUS) is a protected class under the Civil Rights Act. Political affiliation is not a protected class.
>It's obvious that the comment was pointing out the double standard and hypocrisy that pervades this discussion.

What mental gymnastics led you to this conclusion? It's obvious his comment was attempting to justify the insurrection on Capitol Hill.
> The vast majority support overturning the election to install their own leader

That's an opinion and a generalization of tens of millions of people.
Ok, well my parents for instance are on Parler. They are the furthest things you would ever know from fascists and have friends from all different backgrounds. Lets stop painting 70 million voters or even an entire platform with 6 million people as facists. Twitter has a lot of shitty people on there as well but we dont use mass labels.
To be clear, it isn't being shut down. A private company has chosen not to host it on its servers. They can invest in servers and host it themselves, if they so choose.

It may seem like splitting hairs, but it is an important distinction to make.
Probably have a different TOS by customer type and governing legal auth. It’d be interesting to boil away the broiler plate and see the differences between them.
When the leftists guillotine someone, this will become a more persuasive argument.
I do not doubt that Tesla will be able to produce a $25,000 car for the Chinese market, but I very much doubt that that car at that price will be sold outside of China and other emerging markets.

They may see it as diluting their brand in USA and Europe, but I think more than that the margins on a car that will pass muster in the US will just be too low. Tesla was never able to make the original target price of $35,000 for the Model 3 and that is with the, ahem, streamlined interior and "aero" wheels.

With that being said, Tesla may need to try. With where their stock price is at they are going to need to keep increasing revenue YoY and the only way to do that is to expand into new markets and introduce new car models. There are only so many customers in the midsize luxury car and crossover market.
I understand why, but I'm still frusterated threads like this are flagged
A problem here is that the default configuration automatically follow back any instance that follows it, making all their content appear on its frontpage. I think that is a pretty unsafe default.
It was only two hours ago when I wrote: "I'm curious if this will also escalate to low-level platforms (will hosting companies, registrars, or even ISPs start taking similar actions on a regular basis?)" when Apple removed the app, following Google Play from yesterday.

It would seem this cycle is certainly not done perpetuating itself as of yet. I think we are going to have some rough times ahead of us unfortunately. I have no interest in this app or those on it, but they are probably going to get much more upset and feel much more persecuted.
> Moderation as a Service the new shovel to be sold during the gold rush?

I've been wondering about that as well, given the chances that §230 will be revoked

Can someone spin up a competent ML based/human moderator hybrid to moderate comments at Internet scale? (Disqus?) and perhaps offer an insurance plan to webhosts?
hope someone has been archiving posts there, for evidence, etc.
"Soft drink" refers to soda.
Not all of their grievances are crazy. Like asking for an independent audit of votes totals in the contested states. I'm not even American, and I would have loved to see that happen for the sake of transparent elections in the world. Instead we got Gaslighting from the media, and governors that absolutely refused.
When I was 10 I could already find The Anarchists' Cookbook on newsgroups trivially. Back then it was trivial to find thoroughly illegal porn, racist forums, and all sorts of things that never decanted into the current state of affairs.
I am terrified that Trump supporters will respond to attacks on their ability to peacefully communicate with direct violence. We are entering an era where nobody believes in peace anymore.
I see it more as a bunch of disparate entities all deciding Parler are a bunch of assholes and not doing business with them. Nobody's forcing their hand.

Also, you drew the line at actual terrorist group sites, and I think Parler is one of those. It doesn't matter if you agree or not, enough people at AWS (and other corps) agreed with me and took it down. Sucks to be a minority, huh?

As far as whether giant corps should be censoring content, it's nothing new. The fantasy of everybody running as an independent node of a distributed network is just that. Look how centralized Bitcoin has gotten.
If your voice is not fed to other people's ears through a recommendation algorithm, do you even have a voice at all?
> You can quite easily use mainstream social media as long as you aren't posting about how someone should be beheaded.

https://thehill.com/sites/default/files/blogs/kathygriffintw...
Such vague AI predictions.

“Academic rumblings about the limits of Deep Learning
BY 2017”

“The technical press starts reporting about limits of Deep Learning, and limits of reinforcement learning of game play.”

“ VCs figure out that for an investment to pay off there needs to be something more than "X + Deep Learning"”

... a few more.

Every single AI related one had to do with what people were saying and thinking. No hard statements about what a system will not be able to do? Such as, fool humans easily into thinking text and videos are real by 20xx? Or any other concrete statement that isn’t just what people talk about?
January 6, 2021.
I can't believe people are cheering this on.
Parler is also full of people who aren’t plotting assassinations. And there are plenty of terrorists on Twitter too, but nobody wants to talk about that.
Parler.ru is up for sale for roughly two grand
I do not support violent threats issued by leftists or rightists. However, I do see leftist terroristic threats given more berth than rightist threats. ("Let's burn that mutherf*er down")

That said other speech that may contain lies and deceit, etc, should be protected free speech. Because, as we know, facts change. Just like Vitamin D & Covid. Oh, now it's okay. Before it was a lie.