skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't agree with your prescription, but your diagnosis is correct. Big Tech (which in context is practically shorthand for "Facebook and Twitter" excluding all the rest) didn't write the content. They didn't even create the groups or channels through which that content is distributed. As the moniker implies, they provided only the tech. In what other context do we blame the tech itself or its makers for how it's used? The only example I can think of is guns. Before someone tries to make more of that analogy than it deserves, guns are fairly unique in that their only purpose is to destroy things (even if it's for a good reason). Social media clearly have purposes beyond the political (hint: it's in the name), let alone beyond the toxic miasma that defines politics today.

There are far more examples of not blaming the maker for the use - microphones, TVs, hypodermic needles, cars, etc. Why do we make an exception for one kind of tech? There are answers that are worth discussing and which might inform our responses, but Swisher doesn't even try to make one and nor do most who just rush to "solutions" that won't actually work.

Users create the problematic content. They were creating it before "big tech" and will quite likely continue creating it even if they're disallowed from using "big tech" products and services. What is achieved, for example, by moving Donald Trump's content from Twitter to trumpmaga.com where there's no moderation or terms of service to enforce? Would his reach really be reduced that much, at this point? We'd just get to have the same debate about whether his host or DNS provider or CDN should deplatform him, with even dimmer prospects of an affirmative answer.

I'm not saying tech companies are blameless, by any means, but let's blame them for things they themselves do and not for the mere presence of users who create problematic content. That lets the kinds of people who organized the January 6 insurrection attempt off the hook too much, along with many other kinds of miscreants. Going only after the platform providers seems a bit too much like looking for the keys under the lamp-post.
Paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2006.01855.pdf
Yes – if I was writing a longer comment C++ would have been my first choice for a contender in the competition of which language has been worse served by complexity fetishists.

My point to the original poster was that it was too simplistic to criticize people for not using Java or the JVM without acknowledging the many legitimate reasons which motivated people to adopt alternatives, and many of the recent features the language has acquired were added because they’d been popular elsewhere. I consider that healthy since competition benefits everyone and especially in programming languages many partisans are loathe to admit that different people have different sweet spots because not everyone does the same work.
It's low orbit pollution with high speed space junk by any technological civilization,resulting in an inevitable self-interdiction of space flight:
https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2000/03/23/...
For anyone who doesn't know:

Wiki:
In modern Hebrew and Yiddish goy (/ ɡɔɪ /, Hebrew: גוי ‎, regular plural goyim / ˈɡɔɪ.ɪm /, גוים ‎ or גויים ‎) is a term for a gentile, a non-Jew. Through Yiddish, the word has been adopted into English (often pluralised as goys) also to mean gentile, sometimes with a pejorative sense.
I'd strongly argue that having an editorial staff has proven to be a catastrophic error for newspapers since it poisons the culture of the newsroom, assigns a political brand to the company (which creates a flywheel where only people of the same ideology are attracted to and eventually accepted at the company whether it's Fox News or NYT), and blurs the lines between opinion pieces and reporting. Today at least, there is no justification for newspapers to have editorial staff at all. Having every media organization drop their editorial department would be an excellent first step in repairing our dysfunctional media.
1984 is about government censorship and psychological control.
This is absurd and infuriating that people are sheepishly agreeing with a mega-corporation as they literally attempt to change the definition of something in front of our eyes. Has no-one read 1984? All based around selectively curated emotional political topics. Do you really think the gun won't be turned on you as soon as it suits them? Time to tear the entire fucking system down and redistribute power.
That's right, there is no good alternative at the moment.
> Nothing about federated services that make it intrinsically less usable.

I didn't say that. I would say that Signal is more usable than Element, though. While I was commenting, I installed Element and the UX is just not as smooth as Signal - even the quick start instructions aren't as simple: "go to matrix site, click through to Element, read instructions to return to site to configure, install app, register username/pwd, forget about configuration step because it's apparently not necessary after all (?)" vs "go to signal.org, install app, verify phone number." It's not terrible for technically capable folk, but the friction is why it's not as popular as Signal.

And while argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy, practically speaking it is a boon to be popular in most things.

Judging by your last paragraph, it comes down to a matter of values - is decentralization important to you? Then hands down, Signal will lose. But for a large number of people who don't care about decentralization, they will do what's popular and easy. OWS, I presume, wants to make sure the easiest, most popular solution is also secure.
I find it depressing. People talk of an AI revolution but it is super hard just to setup some baseline infrastructure on these "AI" providers infra.
Can you share what interviews you enjoy more?
The extent to which conservatives now believe this utter nonsense is pretty crazy.

For decades they've talked up how businesses should be able to decide whatever they want for their business. Their business, their rules.

Now when it goes against them, suddenly private businesses making decisions for their own platforms is now "authoritarianism". Funny how people getting mysteriously fired when bringing up unions with colleagues wasn't authoritarianism. Getting fired from your job because you're gay? Also not authoritarianism, obviously.
Apple could just make 2TB MacBook price cheaper instead of bringing back SD card reader into new models.

I didn't like having only 256GB SSD either in my Razer laptop and just bought a 2TB one, changed it in a few hours myself, and never thought about SSD space since.
Miss the matte screen on my 2008 MPB
Nothing you said is relevant to what they're talking about. This is about Apple trying to redefine commonly used words to avoid any discussions about limiting free speech. It's like when Verizon claimed that "Unlimited" is just a marketing term, and doesn't actually mean no limit.
I agree all the way up to the 16” pro. When you hit that form factor it now has plenty of room for more ports and I find them useful.
>But if you followed the complicated procedure for installing the file manually (the one they just made impossible), then you were clearly on you own, and if you have a bad user experience it's on you.

We'd like to think that, but in reality the people doing the complicated stupid things are not always the same as the people using the product and complaining / demanding refunds from the developer. True story, back when the intel macs first came out, I was working for Apple retail. I had a customer come in angry as a hornet and demanding a refund because the computer they bought was crashing all the time, it still had viruses all over it and nothing worked any better than their old PC so why did they pay extra for a mac? Thing was, what they were describing seeing and doing on their computer didn't sound like they were using a mac at all. I asked the customer to show me what was going on, and when they pulled it out and turned it on, it booted right into windows.

Turns out after they bought their new computer, they gave it to their nephew to help set it up. Well apparently the nephew decided that what they really needed was to run windows on their new intel mac, and went through the process of installing boot camp, repartitioning the whole system to shrink the mac OS partition as small as boot camp would let them, and configure the computer to boot to windows automatically. My customer had effectively been using an expensive windows laptop for a few months, with all the problems that entailed, plus the additional problems of not getting proper system support. This was around the time that macbooks needed firmware updates to eliminate a crash, a firmware update that was only delivered via OS X software update, which the customer had no idea even existed on their computer.

So even though boot camp was a complicated procedure at the time, with lots of dialogs explaining exactly what you were doing, and what was and wasn't supported, the end user wasn't the one who went through the process. They were the one who was pissed off though. And I saw (and have seen elsewhere in tech) the same sort of thing play out over and over and over again, where someone's clever tech friend sets them up with some unsupported setup, and leaves them on their own to then try to get support from the manufacturer who rightfully doesn't support the issue.

Apple gives iOS developers a way to mark their apps as compatible or not with mac os, and they're implementing an actual check or block on that. I fail to see how that's any worse than Apple offering a "minimum OS version" check in their frameworks and enforcing not running an app that a developer specifies isn't compatible with an older version OS either.
His point that conspiracy theories are acting as a substitute for religious community and purpose is interesting. I guess there are a number of different belief systems that can fill a void of purpose.
Is there any way in which people can help her here?
Nothing about SLS makes sense to me economically.

F9 Launch Cost (without reuse): $65mm
FH Launch Cost (without reuse): $150mm
SLS Launch Cost: >$2,000mm

How does anyone square this arrangement? What saving graces does SLS have (from an engineering perspective) compared to the SpaceX programs? There are certainly a lot of downsides and I would be really disappointed to learn that there are no upsides.
I read this "definition" of philosophy elsewhere: we all share the exact same set of moral values, but their relative order is different. It's the order of the moral values that determines a philosophical stance.

The article starts by recalling this, but then it describes each project by the principles that it holds, but not by their order. This is a bit strange.
It's measured boot with the TPM getting measurements of the system state during all steps up to the Windows Boot Manager. (and including the Windows Boot Manager configuration data)

If all the measurements match, the TPM releases the volume encryption key and the system can boot.

If you boot from an external volume and then modify the boot configuration or the OS loader, or reflash the UEFI firmware, the measurements won't match and the TPM won't give the key.

Of course, if the login prompt, which runs way afterwards is buggy, drive encryption in Windows won't save you there.

An advantage of this system is that when you reboot, all your services can run before you input your password, and you can login remotely. That's an absolute must for a lot of business use cases.
Yet the orange elephant will continue to dominate the room.

We can factor out That Five Character Symbol, and point to the fundamental discussion of whether "We The People" actually matter anymore.
As always: It depends.

Better be proficient in command line tools and a simple editor than not being proficient in an fancy editor.

But once you are used to the fancy editor it can be very efficient to be able to lookup a definition, do some refactorings, get an code outline view, auto completion, editing helps (text templates or the automatic } and indention) etc.
I'd love to know more what you mean by 'life-affirming.' Based on context, sounds like you mean, be an authentic person, don't sugar coat things, be imperfect, show vulnerabilities. Is that right?

I find myself drawn to these types--they may have asshole-ish moments or nice moments. That doesn't matter as much as my personal connection to them, the sense of whether I am rooting for them or not.
I believe so, looking for definitions of functions you’re using and being able to jump to their implementation is great, starting a debugger, getting errors as you type... it all saves time.

Being able from the same interface to visualize your database and state of the program is also good !
You are missing the point here. There is no argument here that the corporation should be able to monitor communications going on or out of their systems (though some limits how and for what purpose that monitoring can be done do exist, especially in the EU - it's not unlimited), but that is not what the calling the technique for what it is is about.

Use of MitM by the corporation as part of Data Loss Prevention interferes with any hardening you or your vendors might be making against a MitM attack attempted by anyone else - it breaks if, for instance, the application vendor your enterprise has decided to use (let us call them "Example plc") has pinned their own CA certificate within the applicaton as the only one that is supposed to sign certificates on the Example domains - say, for "content.example.com" - following example that e.g. Google set. Or, worse yet for this example, as specific certificate to be used instead of the specific trust anchor. I've seen both examples in the wild, so it is not an idle discussion.

Not only you need to override that pinning with your own CA in the application for the content to be inspected, to retain the same level of hardening you'd need to implement the same checks the application did in your DLP system, so that it verifies that the system is legit - and that costs money and time and remains fragile over time, so many enterprises simply do not bother doing so, falling back to the well-known list of public CAs instead (that includes my $CurrentCorpo, much to my annoyance). It weakens the whole system, which is already fragile enough thanks to actors like Symantec, WoSign and StartCom - and possibly others.
US states brace for violence as Joe Biden plans to reverse key Trump policies
No one has an infinite supply of any of the three. They are problems. You say they "don't apply" but then you explicitly acknowledge that you lose "cheap" or "fast" in your examples.

> problem (n) 1a: a question raised for inquiry, consideration, or solution
I don’t know. I don’t think the author paints him in a particularly bad light. It mostly seems to be trying to point out why neovim was made, specifically that its authors valued different things than the author of vim.

I also think the amount of work that’s gone into neovim is way more than enough to call the authors authors at this point. The forking of vim doesn’t seem to me to be “tak[ing] over code based in order to cruise on other people‘a hard work,” but open source working as intended. The neovim authors were able to take a project, adjust it to fit with their values, and let people decide which they prefer.
Yes. You must have at least two keys registered. However it’s worth noting that most services do not offer priority. Meaning you can use either one. I think it makes sense to designate back up keys and only to be used when user reports lost/stolen primary key.
You can't achieve what a modern IDE can do using a simple editor and the command line.

Autocomplete, hinting, type checking, navigation, documentation display, automated refactoring, interactive debugging, and integration with other tools like test runners and databases, are some of the major features which yes, are indeed force multipliers.

This all becomes even more important when working on large codebases, and/or code you didn't write all yourself.
Religion is on the decline.
Covered on "Seeking Out Mentors" and "Finding the Correct Mentor" parts here: https://wallstreetplayboys.com/how-to-win/

Also here: https://wallstreetplayboys.com/find-a-mentor/

Personally from my experience it's a lot of doing your own research first, then making your own attempts, then asking for feedback in a way that isn't borderline creepy / disturbing / time-wasting (as covered in above refs)
> until enough of their post get approved for rightthink

People keep posting this bullshit tweet but it's not getting any less bullshit. From my previous reply [1]:

> Based on the screenshot you linked to, their "moderation" categories are "spam", "ads", "impersonation", "defamation", "nudity", "pornography", "illegal", "terrorism", "trademark" and "threat".

> Can you please explain how they use that to "ensure ideological conformity in their posts"?

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=tomp&next=25731453
This is similar to what modern-day smartphones do: they encrypt your data so that it cannot be taken at rest, but assuming that you can hijack the OS you can still read it. Also, BitLocker does have a much more stronger mode where you are actually required to enter a PIN before you reach the regular lock screen that is physically uncrackable*. In other words, this is the state if you have a) done nothing and your device is eligible for automatic encryption or b) you actively selected "TPM Only" despite clear warnings that it will be weaker than PIN.

Much more in depth info: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25810639

* Unless you have cracked AES
How many other instances are out there where authorities "can't say what someone is charged with" until they're in custody. This smells like a CYA deal with DeSantis and his partisan bungling of the COVID crisis.
I think awareness helps alot with these kind of issues.

It's not about people not liking you. It's about the implication of this fact which is that you might be a bad person. Are you a bad person? Or are you a good person which happened to have a behavior which turned others against you?

Second, is good to meditate on this idea of the image you are trying to keep consistent with everyone. It's almost like slaving away to make all people like you. But that's impossible because whatever you do someone might think you're an asshole anyway.

So just focus on being a good person in your eyes and the rest will follow. And be kind to yourself, we all make mistakes.
Suspending a social media app for having shit moderation is bad now? Jesus, people.
Hacking Instagram Giveaways
I keep hearing people say there is an attack on free speech, on platform after platform after platform. It's like a canary in a coal mine, It seems perfectly alive to me, I'll be concerned when I dont see that statement any more.

Personally, I find the government censoring the CDC, and not getting accurate information from government agencies a much larger imposition on free speech. The silencing or the Florida data scientist sharing public information that conflicted with official reports.

Why? Because the government is using legal threats to silence someone on every channel.
Next-level India: the secrets of Sikkim
I think the developers explained the reason for this in a Reddit thread: Collectively a bunch of 1100 players are stronger than 1100. Imagine that a 1100 player will play one bad move for every two decent moves. However, different players miss different moves so the most picked move in each position will usually be a decent move.
> If a mugger points a gun at you, no form of 2FA is going to save you.

https://xkcd.com/538/
Aah, that explains the name! I was banging my head trying to understand what was “jingoistic” about this OS...
I always thought, if a vendor ever wants to encroach into Apple's territory, literally all they have to do is the same formula: Commercially supported Unix operating system with a polished UI + hardware. If you want to approach the enterprise market, you need an excel and word clone. For the consumer market, a polished and solid (crash free) browser with GPU acceleration is probably the #1 feature.

Obviously not that simple in practice but what certainly _doesnt_ work is sexy hardware running the turd that is windows.
It's not "SPLC's money" once they've paid it to someone else for labor, any more than it was Planned Parenthood's money when a Catholic donates it to a church that gives sermons against abortion.
Show HN: Sneklist helps you go through a plain-text checklist one line at a time
In your own text you interchanged they to mean trump and his administration and then his supporters and then insinuated his voters. You are unable to distinguish the three. I don’t care about trump, I do care about how we handle the claim of election fraud. I do want to see a congressional hearing just like we did with Russian interference.

Would you agree at this point in time the two events are similar? A bogey man messing with the election that was only proven after the fact? I don’t care about trump losing and you should not either. You should be concerned that a lot of people think there is election fraud and as such the American government has a duty to investigate. Democracy?
The HYPERFIDO Mini keys (8 GBP[0,1]) are certified by the FIDO Alliance: https://fidoalliance.org/showcase/hyperfido-mini/.

[0]: https://www.amazon.co.uk/HYPERFIDO-MINI-FIDO2-HOTP-Security/...

[1]: https://www.hypersecu.com/products/hyperfido
Lex is bringing CS nerdiness to mainstream culture by mixing poetry/music/fitness/philosophy and I don't get why are you so bitter about it.

Yes, he didn't ask the nitty gritty questions we'd like to hear from Donald Knuth or Jim Keller or dozens of quantum computing, computational biology etc researchers he has interviewed. But if you read their blogs, that's what they like about their appearance on the podcast.

The content the HN bubble is interested in would be understood by ~5-10k people but he has 870k subscribers. If you want research-level interviews, there's https://www.quantamagazine.org/, there are research blogs, journal commentary articles, etc.
>The extra port competes with USB-C. If Apple wants to make USB-C more valuable to users, they must ensure companies make more products for it and, therefore, remove such redundant ports.

The userbase of all tech products is too big for this to be reasonable now. This attitude was only successful during a time when fewer people overall each owned fewer devices individually. USB-A won and it will be around forever. HDMI won and it will be around forever.
I believe this is her gofundme

https://www.gofundme.com/f/DefendScience
Thanks for the link - I've had trouble finding pretty much exactly this in the Go ecosystem after a few brief looks, and codegen is really the only sensible way to do openapi in go. I wouldn't be surprised to use this soon
> costs could only go down 1x but your revenue can go up almost infinitely.

Love this.

The one caveat though, and why it's
important to keep costs low (maybe
wait until after you sell the startup),
is because when you are profitable, then you are
in control of your time and get to
set your own schedule. Or, in the form
of the above quote: your revenue
can go up to infinity but your time
left is capped at 100.
You can do all of those things in all four of the editors discussed.
VSpaceCode: Spacemacs like keybindings for Visual Studio Code
YouTube. Honestly it’s pretty scary how perfectly they tailor the echo chamber to fit me.
The extent to which commenters don't understand the principle of free speech is truly shocking here.

> The ACLU even defended the right of nazis to march through the streets.

Gee, I wonder what the difference is between this and Apple banning an app on their own store? Truly, it is a stupefying mystery.