skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Whether any impressions somebody walks away from this article with are 'true or false' is likely a matter of subjective opinion. Maybe they think twitter is doing enough to moderate their platform already, or maybe not enough. None of this has bearing on whether or not the article is misinformation of disinformation. The article is factual, reporting facts (correct me if I'm wrong about that) concerning a real lawsuit.

And you don't have to be a lawyer to understand the meaning of 'the lawsuit alleges' repeated a dozen times. Or is your position that reporting allegations against tech companies is always misinformation because you think only lawyers know what allegations are?
I know I'm in the minority here but in my opinion it is wrong to censor people from these platforms. What should be censored is what they say, not the person. This whole discussion going on everywhere misses a crucial point: Twitter and Facebook are American companies. If they blocked POTUS and where owned by China then what? I know POTUS likely wouldn't post there then but for the sake of argument. It shows that the government(s) lack control and enforcement options.
Decentralize
It serves to unite people around a clear and visceral goal. The anger that brought many of us together to remove the enslaver statues left behind networks that brought the son of sharecroppers to the senate in my state. And the networks are still around building more concrete day to day stuff -- money for families facing eviction, stripping of the budgets of some of the more egregious local police, bail bonds. You have to start somewhere. We have a long journey ahead.
I think "it's legal but not necessarily moral" is a bit of a dodge.

It's not just legal. It's explicitly allowed behavior according to the license that Elastic chose. This isn't like "yes it's the law but some laws aren't fair!". The only laws that are coming into play here are basically ones which say "you made your bed now lie in it".

Elastic explicitly said (by choosing a license) "you can do X with our software!" and now they are mad because... someone did X with their software?

If the Apache license allows morally unacceptable behavior... why did they choose that license?
I think GP meant that allowing for forks is the point of Open Source. Which I would argue is kind of a big point of Open Source -- the point isn't who's doing the forking or who's profiting -- but the point is that forks like this are intentionally allowed.
One of the interesting things about threadripper and epyc systems with a lot of PCI-E 4.0 lanes on one motherboard, if your goal is not NVME disk I/O, but rather network throughput, it also provides the opportunity for a DIY approach to very high capacity multi-100GbE ethernet interface routers.

Such as a fairly low cost 4U threadripper box, running VyOS (ultimately based on a very normal debian Linux) with multiple Intel 100GbE NICs in PCI-E slots.

The Intel linux kernel (and FreeBSD) driver support for those is generally excellent and robust. Intel has had full time developers doing the Linux drivers for that series of cards since the earliest days of their 64-bit/66MHz PCI-X 10Gbps NICs about 17 years ago.

Also worth mentioning that FRR is now an official Linux Foundation supported project.

https://frrouting.org/

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/docs/networ...
It would be cool to have a stick-shift in the car that was fake, and would just make the car play different sounds as you "shifted" and allow you to control your playlist and volume levels with it...
> Elastic used its position as an open source maintainer to grow Elasticsearch to be one of the most important pieces of software in the world (nowhere as important as linux or arguably lucene but still in the top echelon), and then once it did that it decided to lie to the community, pull the rug out from under them and switch to proprietary.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't really see the sense in the "pull out the rug, it's not OSS" anymore. Sure, I agree that The Open Source Definition doesn't encompass something like the Elastic License, but :shrug:

Who exactly is having the rug pulled out from under them? AWS? As they very clearly state in the article: "When AWS decides to offer a service based on an open source project, we ensure that we are equipped and prepared to maintain it ourselves if necessary" (presumably because they understand that the license could change, or the maintainers could just stop maintaining).

It seems like it made good business sense for Elastic to switch licenses, and it's not really clear to me who would (for business reasons, not philosophy) switch to solr/other just because of the license switch.

It also makes perfect sense that AWS would release an apache-licensed fork - they have serious monopoly power - they con offer this service cheaper inside AWS, and the integrations can be smoother/better.

So really why be mad at either party? They both made good business choices it seems to me, maybe elastic will end up loosing out, but if that happens, I can't imagine that staying on the apache license would have saved their bacon.
> Therapists are supposed to be blank slates, available
> for patients to project their conflicts and fantasies
> upon. Their distant father, their abusive boyfriend,
> their whatever. They must not know you as a person.

I don't read Slate Star Codex, nor do I visit a therapist. I don't know if this is something that's peculiar to the author, or genuinely universal among therapists. But it sounds nuts and... kind of creepy? I'm happy to believe in a culture of professional detachment among therapists and doctors, but to believe that you are a blank slate seems kind of delusional.

The therapist has some perceived race, gender, and age. They dress a certain way. They have a certain accent when speaking. Patients may prefer a male or female therapist, or a therapist who shares some other background with them. Patients probably want the confidence that their therapist will not dismiss their concerns and will actually help them make progress.

At this point calling the relationship a "blank slate" seems delusional. Sure, maybe the therapist is such a perfect mimic that they're not actually female, middle-aged, Black, or have experience working with trans patients. Maybe this is all just a mirage projected by their professionalism. Maybe there is no therapist, and I'm just sitting on a couch alone, in an empty room.
Going to start the first actual tech discussion here – the codebases can be naturally expected to diverge, but will AWS keep the APIs the same? I can't imagine the fork will be successful without leveraging the massive Elasticsearch ecosystem. And what bearing does Oracle v Google have if they do "steal" APIs from future SSPL-licensed code?
The idea of a curfew is that there are as few possible people outside, so there is some chance that the police has the capacity to check on those who are there. Yes, it's very unpleasant, but may be necessary in some cases.
No one is perfect but everyone is better off without a monopoly or mono-culture.
Apache Spark and Apache Kafka? It doesn't seem likely that the Apache Software Foundation would consider implementing the SSPL instead of the Apache License.
I wouldn't be surprised if at some point some manufacturer made a car with optional "stick shift" - with a stick that's just some switches and the effect on driving behavior/torque/... entirely done in software. (Right now electric is hot and new, so nobody is doing much to make an electric car pretend to be something it's not, but that could switch around when electric is the standard)
I downloaded many Doom WADs from ftp.cdrom.com
> Can you imagine what the cars today would look like if they hadn't and became a huge hit following the movie's status!?

They wouldn't need roads...

(Disappointed this one doesn't appear to have flight or time travel capabilities planned tbh. Battery tech obviously needs more work)
There is a —force though. I had to do it once because they thought I got a bad cert (don’t remember the details)
Yes, it does. But hardwaresofton convinced me his comment used 1, when I thought it was part 2 and it was his comment that triggered this conversation.

Perhaps you're confused because of the order the comments appear in? You might have to see the time stamps, and track the numerous replies I made in the tree of comments.
And frankly, I don't even buy the morality argument. It is a moral good to provide value to customers such that they voluntarily choose to give you money in exchange for that value.

These people have this bizarre fusion of capitalist and communist reasoning, I really can't reconcile it. On the one hand they seem to think profit is fundamentally evil, but on the other hand they seem to think the problem is that Elastic isn't being allowed to monopolize all the profit.

Well, which is it? Did Elastic release non-restrictively-licensed free software out of the goodness of their hearts, giving it away with no expectation of a return? Or did they create this codebase purely for profit, and thus have no claim to moral highground? It's all so silly and childish.

And the biggest irony is, Elastic is already a successful business. They're trying to pretend their business model is not viable as long as Amazon keeps operating, which is just gaslighting.
You're a pretty famous person, so we know you are smart enough to know that nothing above 50% matters.

"Favor" only matters to extent it helps a candidate get over 270 EV.
I see this as similar to Corretto. AFAIK they have done a good job supporting Java 8 well past what Oracle is willing to do.
That is aimed at those who don't pay UK tax like tourists from abroad.
What type of content?
I work at Intel right now. My laptop is serviceable but not the best, and it's loaded down with a bunch of spyware crap. Luckily, I just need it to SSH (either through VSCode or PuTTY) into my servers, which are nice and powerful.

I was helping an intern out, and they had him using literally the worst laptop I have ever seen. It had about as much power as a Chromebook, and it was running the same spyware that I had. No wonder he couldn't get anything done.
Building dual-screen web experiences with React
Part of the issue is lack of visibility into what is going on, you don't get a lot of ability to debug.

Company I was at switched from AWS's ElasticSearch to hosting it ourselves on top of EC2 instances so that we could control the memory/CPU/disks and see logging/understand more about the internals to help understand why it was slow for our use case.
This is why the macbook touchbar is so awesome. I know it got a lot of hate when it first launched, but I use it all the time and have with all sorts of customizations.
They don't only GET 40 TPS, that value is an estimate what they serve (above it was site/90 days).

They have capacity for much, much more with that hardware
I think I partially agree. It does not help that we are bombarded daily with variations of 'our side is awesome and the other side is the devil'. With sufficient indoctrination, it becomes less about discussion, but about spreading the belief further. It practically becomes a religion.

The other day, we talked with family members and all I heard was slogans (the 'energy independent','damn socialists' type ). And it is hard to talk about it, because you have to start by dispelling the slogans and that alone is an hour of deprogramming ( assuming you have receptive audience ). I gave up on that challenge.

And I feel like I failed there, because we DO need to discuss things. We will most assuredly not agree, but need to stop taking our news from one source. Diverse diet is probably the only way to go.
> Can only use expressions, not statements. E.g. `print`s, loops, conditionals are out.

print is a function (and thus can be used in expressions)

python has conditional expressions (<true-val> if <cond> else <false-val>)

loops are a limitation, though comprehensions, map(), functools.reduce(), and the itertools module can allow lots of looping functionality in an expression.
So one reason I choose open source is precisely because of the legal guarantee that there will be comptetition in providing services based on it.

If I become dependent on it, one company can't control the pricing of people offering hosted services, because it's open source, nobody needs their permission to host it. "vendor lock-in" does not exist with open source.

If that was incompatible with ES's business model for a main stream of revenue, as the project IP holder they are welcome to change their license terms.

But what they're saying is that open source was incompatible with their business model.

It is what it is, but users clamoring for the ethical superiority of vendor lock-in and thinking that's somehow open source values is... weird to me.
Looks like a lot of people made new names or posted for the first time in years just to say how great this is and how excited they are. Some even posted the same message.

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=nico_bst

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=t_smith

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=Aurorsf

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=enazheng

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=nfsiddiqui

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=p92xy

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=booyasf

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=JohnExley

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=nmb

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=shinkim0914

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=jmadler
I generally agree, but isn’t the ability to do unforeseen things one of the powers and major wins of being a user of open source ecosystem?

I don’t disagree about, what I would say charitable, instead of decent thing to do is.
Pretty sure that >95% of Elastic's code is created by the company and not external contributors.
I am so delighted to hear this. Open source wins again. Open source is the right for you to do whatever you want with the software, AND YES, that includes monetize it. I've been sitting on the sidelines reading the different perspectives, but I just cannot see how you can be on the side of Elasticsearch. How can they take all the work from the OSS community and add a clause that THEY only can monetize it? I will tell you right now, I have NO desire to ever contribute to the closed version of Elasticsearch and I will gladly jump on board and contribute to the AWS version. We are watching in real time the OSS community being degraded by these ridiculous licenses.

The greed here is on Elasticsearch and not on AWS. If you wanted to have a closed source piece of software that you have the only rights to monetize, then you should have closed it off from the beginning instead of taking all the work from the OSS community and giving the rights for ONLY you to monetize it.
I think Radio Yerevan wants you to be chief announcer.
Precisely why GPL is the way it is. If a company released Apache or BSD code they must understand that the code can be used and extended for commercial purposes and they don't have to offer those extensions back to the community. If you want to ensure those who derive benefits from it also contribute back, you choose GPL.
They had to lose by 7 million votes to actually lose, I would say they have quite advantage.

As another user said: "The Senate is split 50-50, but the 50 Democrats represent 41 million more people than the 50 Republicans"
No more backwards than Windows Subsystem for Linux!
And that's why there's a lawsuit. Who knows when that will be resolved though. In the meantime Amazon could keep doing what they're doing and just ignore whatever Elastic is asking of them. So Elastic drew the consequence and have stopped extending goodwill to Amazon.
Outages during scale out, weird insurmountable restrictions on cross region replication, cost, backup and restore doesn’t work properly, cluster irrecoverable corruption and it is 100% opaque whenever something goes wrong. This results in escalation to AWS support who barely understand it.

The big sell was easy deployment and cost management but the negatives outweighed that.

We tried Elastic themselves but the sales and technical process was a nightmare. It was virtually impossible to work out what we were going to have to spend. We needed X-Pack (RBAC and SSO) but the enterprise licensing is all over the place for it.

Ergo we didn’t bother and stuck with our DBMS FTE stuff. It’s crap but the ROI is better.
Perhaps the Brits could lend some marble stone to the Greeks...
A few newsgroups are still reasonably active. I still frequent comp.lang.lisp and comp.lang.ada. Though they now have tons of spam in them so the interesting parts are somewhere in the garbage. I think most groups have moved to other discussion boards/systems as their primary forum now, and newer groups don't try to create a newsgroup. For instance, I doubt there's a comp.lang.elixir or comp.lang.rust.

As a discussion system, it's pretty much defunct at this point.
In the Netherlands many of the musea are semi public, and especially the Rijks get a lot of tax money and also a lot of donations. The Rijksmusem is actually the national museum, Rijk is another word for State or maybe closer to empire. It's entire collection is the heritage of the Dutch state. So in this case it's not a bad argument to make that it shouldn't be hidden in a basement but shared with the public. Although since the nineties the Rijks is officially an independent foundation.
Silencing someone elected isn't the same as silencing someone self-appointed.

Silencing is silencing. It the act of censorship which is wrong, no matter who is silenced.

Who sets the criteria? I used to laugh at people who cried out about censorship, until it happened to me several times on social media. (And one of those times was when I merely commented on a photo that I hadn't seen that particular piece of hospital equipment ["iron lung"]for many, many years.)
> Elastic is derived from Apache Lucene, it’s unclear if anyone involved in its’ development could legally have made it more restrictive, though they apparently are trying to.

Actually, you can totally use Apache 2.0 code as your kernel and then make the whole thing a restrictive license. In fact, that's why we're having this discussion right now. Elastic just made their Elasticsearch/Kibana codebases entirely proprietary, even though they rely on Apache 2.0 Lucene as their kernel. Which to be clear is totally fine, I'm just pointing out the obvious.
please also email dang those links if you haven't already.
do you think that would have hurt adoption from the get-go? How about ability to get unpaid community code contribution?
> I dislike the people that support facist, racist beliefs, but I 100% will defend their right to say such things.

Even if allowing fascists and racists to express their speech actively harms or silences you in turn?

Relevant: https://twitter.com/nathanwpyle/status/1031008855210123264/p...
By the way, what happened with "Ohio Becomes First US State to Allow Taxes to Be Paid in Bitcoin"? [1]

[1]: https://www.coindesk.com/ohio-becomes-first-us-state-to-allo...
Stem Jobs: 2017 Update [pdf]
Instacart has a heavy presence in HEB, at least in Austin.
> Each state gets numbers by its population.

This is false, and the core of the criticism of the EC. Each state gets 2 votes independent of its population, which is biased toward small population states, and for over a century the definition of states was constrained by a compromise to protect slavery.
What do you mean about going full gigs? Does that mean that the contracts that their engineers are working on now are no longer full-time engagements?

We'd love to learn anything we can from their journey. We know that growing can be challenging, so we want to start thinking now about the strategies that will be most successful for both our talent & our hiring partners.
> but I think you should also explain another way for companies that develop these frameworks to be financially viable.

Ironically, it is exactly Amazon that seems to be demonstrating a way to develop an open source ElasticSearch fork and be financially viable, right?
My wife has done some work with child exploitation organizations around this exact problem. Sadly, this is not a surprise at all. I’d venture that maybe 5% of the posts they report are removed, and the offending accounts are essentially never punished.

To make matters worse, given that pedophilia and child porn is now tied up with QAnon, some of her peers have started to have their accounts banned when they report this stuff, as apparently they’re being caught up in an anti-conspiracy filter.

Sigh...
I think that says more about the domain you own than anything else. My last name is fortunately rare enough that my email is firstname@lastname.com, and the only comments i’ve gotten are from nontechnical people who didn’t know that was possible and are impressed. I suspect technical people understand how easy it is and just think “must be nice having the .com of your last name still be available for less than tens of thousands of dollars”
If CSW wanted to prove he is Satoshi, he could easily do it by signing a message with the private keys of one of the early blocks. A simple message "CSW is Satoshi" would be enough for me.

But he absolutely is not Satoshi. And neither is Adam Back.
I see a few problems with this framing: First, professionals in government can and do often get into turf wars about their research. I think anyone who has ever worked in government knows this is the case. If you doubt me, ask government researchers to publish their hypotheses ahead of time before running a study, and see how many government researchers are willing to do this. (I'd be surprised if you got an email or even a tweet back.)

Second, decision making is always inherently political; it cannot be assumed away by throwing "professionals" at the problem. This is a consequence of "value" being entirely subjective. When economics was "political economy" (or even a field within "moral philosophy"), the field understood this. But that arrangement didn't give the professionals and academics enough status or prestige, so American economists in the late 19th century who had studied in Bismarck-era Germany rebranded themselves as "economists" who were practicing a form of science not too different from, say, physics.

Third, business leaders have to make a profit and maintain positive cash flows in order to sustain themselves. If they don't, the business dies. This is an extremely hard constraint that disciplines any business leader regardless of statistical literacy. States, on the other hand, can always subsist on the use of force to extract revenue. Central planners can publish metrics till they're blue in the face, but what constraints are they under to make the metrics any good?
That would be quite unpythonic. Down that road lies Raku.

EDIT: To be clear, I like Raku. But Python has its own distinct aesthetic.
A few months ago, Emmanuel Macron's government deported hundreds of people and closed at least a dozen mosques for extremism. So it's pretty hard to view his statement as a general endorsement of free speech, rather than a dispute about who gets to decide to restrict it. (That's not to say their position is unreasonable; I just don't agree with their implicit assumption that the government can be better trusted to use the power of speech restrictions fairly.)
Fundamentally, these people do not believe in the core principles of capitalism, such as the notion that free trade makes both parties richer and that profit is not an evil but a necessary and healthy phenomenon. Thus because Amazon is a huge company, they view it making profit as fundamentally evil. They've also basically been brainwashed to think that the word "monopoly" means "any time a large company competes in the same market as a smaller one".

Which is ironic because, they also at the same time believe that Elastic is entitled to all the profits, and wax philosophical about "but how will any company be built around open source if we don't carry Elastic's water for them?"

It's just all so farcical.