skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Then include that in your initial message.

Awful: "Hey"

Bad: "Hey, are you around?"

Tolerable: "I have a question about foo"

Good: "How does foo audit log requests?"

Great: "How does foo audit log requests? If you don't know offhand, no problem - I'll keep looking at baz"
"After 30 days, your account and all your information will be permanently deleted"
Don't be surprised if your colleagues start to very frequently say "sorry I didn't see your hello", six or seven hours or even multiple days late.
After Trump's election, journalists couldn't stop talking about foreign interference. After biden's election, nobody mentioned foreign interference.
Social score -1
Weird, I'm pretty sure I've sent and received nudes recently via FB messenger and nothing happened.
> I think we need a "Space New Deal", I'm honestly saddened by the lack of progress in space in my lifetime.

Space is making progress at incredible rates right now. It's moving faster than it ever has in history. So I'm not sure what the issue is.
What do you mean outlawed? Facebook.com is private commercial property, they can define rules and decide which customers they work with. The only thing they cannot do is restrict users by categories, protected by law.

The solution is to decentralize and connect our own facebooks.
> Every action of this kind should be accompanied with clear and very specific (including time and date) specification of the reason.

I can see Facebooks side of this - when you give a specific reason, you open yourself up to a lot of counter-arguments, possibly outraging news articles for a bad formulation or a not fully specific reasoning and you give intel to spammers on how you detected them. Additionally, having service reps find and cite the exact violated terms costs a lot of time and it would not even matter - FB is free to ban you if it wants, the specific reasoning would be more of a FYI.

And, of course, in cases like this, where the ban was presumably unjustified or unnecessary, this is rather cruel. I fully agree. But on the other hand, FB bans probably hit bots 99% of the time and, even if not, are usually justified [0]. Opening up such a large attack surface and spending large amounts of money for the few cases where it hits a innocent (?) person is just not viable, and, as bad as it is, I can understand Facebook here.

The moral of the story is, as mentioned in the article, that the actual error was to rely on Facebook.

[0] I have obviously no hard data on this, but if this would happen a lot, it would be quite bad press. So I'm very sure that FB would tackle this problem if users would actually become scared of a false ban.
When I used to work at Intel, the whole company AFAIK had a standardized way to check if someone is available for a synchronous chat: "IM?" or "May I IM?"

Everybody used it when synchronous chat was necessary. I thought it was great standardization over just simply "Hi".
I picked up a 2mm rOtring lead holder on a whim during a visit to Japan. Absolutely love using it and I've even come to enjoy sharpening the lead.
First, I would have to reply “Hi, busy atm” each time. Second, it's not true, I simply prefer asynchronous communication whether I have time or not.
The licensing still isn't that complicated.

This is a live view of a new generation learning about the difficulties of market competition.

We're seeing this pattern in several contexts in the industry: Rather than compete, which requires listening and responding to customers (talking to people is hard), they prefer a magic wand (a new license, or regulation or something perceived to be "easy") to force large successful companies (which they see as immutable fixtures that can never be defeated) to break up or neutered so that smaller entrants can succeed.

"Be careful what you wish for". Smaller entrants aren't necessarily more ethical nor do they offer a better service than large incumbents. It really varies.
Right, so you want other people to work around your forgetfulness? Your private messages are intended to be private. If you're knowingly displaying them during a presentation, that is very rude of you.
Technical Debt and Machine Learning
If you’re still using Facebook at this point:

You were warned.
Once you call climate change an 'existential crisis', you've pretty much lost your sane audience.
The problem is that if you read Greenwald during the Bush years, you'd see a very different person. And not just for partisan reasons. Greenwald during the Iraq was absolutely was an expert on the stuff he wrote about, and took shots that were well-aimed and decisively argued.

Now he whines abstractly about vaguely libertarian ideas and complains about democrats and establishment journalists almost exclusively. He used to be a serious foreign policy wonk!
Pretty sure this is a reference to the cases where Tesla has revoked different features (SuperCharger access, AutoPilot, extended mileage) from cars.

Sometimes that seems to be because they had the feature enabled by accident or the car was declared as totaled but I haven't been tracking the cases closely enough to be definitive. Not sure that anybody is.
Yeah, I know. But at least it addresses one more issue than the current state of the art ^^
Those belief systems also tend to have things in store for the individual after death, though. Why should one fear death itself if it's actually the means to travel to a place where 72 virgins are waiting for them? Not disagreeing with your second sentence.
"you got a sec?" and "you got a sec to talk about X?" are worlds apart. whether I have "a sec" can quite reasonably depend on what X is.
Fact is, US does not need dirty Canadian tar sands to refine - - - The Permian basin is WAY closer source of cleaner oil.

The Canadians need our Gulf coast Texas refineries WAY more than we need that dirty oil.
> flying is already an inherently expensive, niche hobby. it's cool that it exists at all, but I don't think it would be some enormous injustice to price a few more people out.

Yes.

> a reasonable solution might be to grandfather in all existing engines that are only certified for leaded fuel. as long as the use is non-commercial and/or doesn't exceed some number of hours per year, you can keep using that engine until it dies. once it does (or you want a new plane) you have to use unleaded fuel.

I'm not sure that's workable. Apparently a large fraction of the piston engine aircraft fleet is decades old, and the replacement rate is very low. So you'd have a very long transition period. Further, GA is such a small niche market anyway that smaller airports are very reluctant to provide more than one gasoline variant.

I think it'd be more realistic to set some date after which sale of leaded AVGAS is prohibited. That's what was done when leaded automotive gas was banned. Those with cars unable to use unleaded gas just had to suck up whatever expenses were needed, or stop driving.
Never learned to use code navigation tools and respective IDE filters?
Well there is bunch of situations where:

I can ask something and if someone can answer immediately I am done.

If I send the question and wait for response I waste time.

If I send the question and work on it, I will be halfway done or in some other state then I got stuck so when person answers my request, it might not be a valid question anymore.

If I start working on something else I break my context and sharing screen what else gets harder.

When I ask "Hi are you there.", keep working on thing I am stuck I can ask more specific question when person replies, because then I might have checked two or more things.

Most important thing is, if person does not reply, I am not getting mad or annoyed, she has more important things to do so OK.
> No, the bullshit copout is showing that you are available when you are not, to give the illusion that you are working

I think you're ascribing a bit too much intention to what most people just ignore as the default setting on an application. I've never once touched my slack status settings, and I leave a slack tab open in my browser while I work, so I assume it probably shows me as online all the time when I'm working; I can't imagine I'm the only person like this. It never even occurred to me until reading your comment that this could somehow be interpreted as a signal that I would always be able to respond immediately to a slack message. If people started assuming that I would be able to respond immediately whenever slack showed me as offline, I would probably just configure it to show me as offline 24/7 (even at times when I am online). Keeping a slack tab open is just a way for me to save time from having to reopen it every time I _do_ actually want to check it (the website often takes several seconds to load), not some way to send a signal to my coworkers.
Who is Ryan Mack and why does he have facebook.com/r?
Old discussions about old compilers and old bugs :-(
This is a serious issue with the massive increase in video calls and screen sharing (and people being oblivious to or not caring about this). Not just chat but also email notifications with previews. This has become something I actively consider before communicating by text instead of calling someone.
It would be great if teams, zoom etc could automatically and by default prevent any notifications from popping into a shared screen.
And then there’s still the people who leave their mail and chat opened and just cmd-tab through them or leave them on screen while sharing... oh well :)
Mike doesn't need to share the details. He just needs to tell me what it's about and ask when I'm free. I'll be happy to carve out time in my schedule and offer up, say, 30 minutes at 2pm. If he needs to talk sooner than that, he can make a counter proposal and say "this is really urgent, can you talk sooner?" and I will weigh it accordingly

Overcommunicating is better than undercommunicating.
While the electrons do form a cloud and aren't entirely well positioned in space as far as we know, it's important to remember that there still are a fixed number of electrons which can be detected one by one, even though they may interact with themselves or each other at multiple positions at the same time before our detection.

Furthermore, it is not yet proven that reality behaves the same in classical settings as it does in quantum interactions. For all we know, wave function collapse may be a physical phenomenon that happens at specific conditions, yielding purely classical behavior. Your explanation is one popular view of QM, but it is not the only possibility that would be consistent with observations.
Where that breaks down is that I literally never reply to “hey”. It just sits out there, unread, until the sender follows up or we start another conversation.
I've waited my whole life for this moment!
If your status is "Online" it gives the impression that you are simply online, sure. If you are "Online" on an team-based instant messenger application, it also gives a certain impression...

Life happens, focus on work happens, bathroom breaks happen... Almost no one is available "immediately" all the time. But if you regularly show yourself as online and cannot respond within a reasonable amount of time (a couple of hours?) to questions/concerns that coworkers send to you, then why are you "Online"?

Is it difficult to close the app, change your status, or simply respond with "Hey, super busy today. I'll get back to you on this tomorrow", simply for the sake of building good team interactions?

> Clocking in physically at your job tells your employer you're working, but it doesn't mean you're available immediately for their attention.

Interesting. I figured that typically when you "clock on" for an employer, it signals that you are now engaged in a contract by which your time is now dedicated to what your employer needs you to do, including giving them your attention. Hence the term "clocking on"
Have you never been involved in an effort to counter spam, either via email or comments?

Leaving aside how incredibly illegal your proposal is, it's also unworkable and would make the internet worse if even attempted.

If I have to communicate to every bad actor how I identified them as a bad actor, that only helps them sidestep my prevention mechanisms.

I'm sure it can be frustrating to face a blank wall, but fortunately, Facebook is a waste of time that nobody should be using anyway.
You talk about planned economy shows that you learned about it from third-party sources. There was an abundance of creativity, it just wasn't aimed at creating consumer goods, because they just could not be made in the planned economy at all.
America Has a GPS Problem
From the article:

> 1) Facebook is a free service. Users are not customers. And although Birch was outraged by the “terrible customer service” he received from Facebook, he shouldn’t have been. Facebook is providing an online social community free of charge to the user. The Facebook Team is not a “customer service team,” and users should not expect the type of personalized attention a complaint would receive from a company of which they are actually paying customers.

> 2) When you sign up with Facebook, you agree to its terms and conditions. If you violate any of those terms, you can get banned — with no clear-cut methods of appealing the decision.

> 3) Facebook doesn’t owe you an account. There are no current laws that require Facebook to allow anyone to participate.

Please try to make your friends, family, circles understand this, and offer an alternative by setting up interest based services for them. Let that be a messaging service (Prosody XMPP server + Conversations on Android or Siskin on iOS); an image board (Pixelfed); a file sharing service (nextcloud); an email server (mail-in-a-box); we can do it, we can move them. Appeal to them being their friendly neighbourhood IT person/sysadmin, and that if they have any problems, they know an actual face to turn to with their problems.

The network effect is somewhat overrated in the light of interests, especially niche ones. Give people what they want - image of grandkids for grantparents, etc - but in exchange, ask them to use your service.
Facebook.com is not a simple private commercial property anymore. It obviously has other attributes which make it different from any other. It's too influential and too important for too many people.
I could do that personally, but I don't think telling other people to do it would very effective.
> "to be effective at async communication, you have to not only ask your question, but also anticipate all the context that person will need to give a good answer. then you do your best to condense that into a clear and concise initial message."

I'd argue this skill is also what makes a person good at basically doing anything and the better you are at it, the 'sharper' you'll be. Thinking clearly and accurately modeling surrounding context is a prerequisite for doing it well. I'd guess it aligns with being generally smarter.

I agree with what you're saying, I just think it's even more evidence that it's tied to general sharpness.
Not only will it be used as you describe, other far more nefarious upgrades or "enhancements" will be added on. It's not enough to identify the kids at the protest, now you can even send retribution their way from the comfort of your own couch.
Haha, are you serious? Instagram, WhatsApp, Snapchat... Instagram's Systrom explicitly said that he sold because otherwise Facebook would snuff him away.
I don't do Spring, so I am spared from that.

That is to be expected, given how Spring is now hyping Kotlin as they did previously with Groovy, Scala and Clojure support, and Kotlin folks tend to push for Gradle due to its use on Android.
You’re right. Aptronym.
There are a number of claims being made which are inter-related, not all of which are claimed by all proponents

1. CO2 is the primary global warming gas, and other gases contribute also
2. CO2 precedes temperature change
3. The warming trend is unique to earth because of human activity
3. We understand the Climate science and carbon processes well enough to make accurate predictions
4. Climate modeling is accurate, and contributes to knowing what will happen
5. Our temperature measurement systems are accurate and scientifically valid
6. We understand all the interplay between albedo, cloud formation, and water vapor at different altitudes
7. We understand why the earth appears to be getting larger
8. The earth's warming is due to human activity and is not a natural process of warming and cooling driven by solar activity and events
9. Solar activity levels play no part in global warming; these changes are from human activity
10. Green biomass has decreased, not increased due to human activity

Alternative claims exist such as:

1. CO2 is primarily plant food
2. CO2 is a trailing indicator of temperature change
3. The warming trend exists among multiple planets not just earth
3. Climate science and carbon process knowledge are in their infancy
4. Climate modeling is inaccurate, and has been very inaccurate thus far
5. Our temperature measurement systems have been contaminated by the heat island effect, and are not accurate and scientifically valid
6. We do not yet understand all the interplay between albedo, cloud formation, and water vapor at different altitudes
7. We understand the earth appears to be getting larger but we do not know why
8. The earth's warming is to a natural process of warming and cooling driven primarily by solar activity and events
9. Solar activity levels play the most significant part in global warming; these changes are not only from human activity
10. Green biomass has increased due to human activity

Regardless of position, I don't believe name calling will convince people either way.

I have no personal interests in either idea though I have some investments in green energy & petroleum. As green energy is not self-sufficient, I expect that petroleum will continue to be around for many years as we transition to future energy sources.
Drives me nuts too.

When someone does that to me, I ignore them.
Does Your Code Pass the Turkey Test
There's also a nascent jailbreak community that will eventually crack it.
> multiple notifications for messages arriving in short sequence

Oh god, I know people who average three words per line, and I just have them permanently muted so my screen doesn't fill up with a giant stack of shit. But then I never hear when they message me, which isn't ideal either, because sometimes it's important.
No - too small.
The Takedown of a Dark-Web Marketplace
I am actually ok with Daily Mail these days. Can’t tell the difference from main stream media except for the occasional typo and annoying ads.

I am not a news/media elitist anymore. Things have changed in the past few years.
This means that you can also be permanently banned from using hardware you purchased if you were naive enough to believe you actually owned the Oculus headset you gave Facebook money for.
We Need a Better Algorithm
That's what msync() is for.
How many off-the-shelf GPUs are needed to replicate GPT-2 in a year?
Since there's virtually no drag between the planets, the distance doesn't linearly determine the amount of fuel. What matters is velocity changes. It's about 10km/s to get into orbit, and 5km/s or so to transit to Mars. Coming back is a lot easier because Mars has less gravity and atmosphere, and you don't need to bring as much stuff back. So maybe let's call it 20km/s total? Fuel has mass, so it takes fuel to bring fuel. If you were to bring all the fuel you needed along, it's probably going to end up being 5-10x the fuel for getting just to low earth orbit. Either you build one giant rocket, or more realistically you launch a few smaller rockets. Alternatively, if you can manufacture fuel on Mars, you only need to take along 15km/s worth of fuel. A single falcon heavy launch could probably handle that.

Said another way, such a mission could probably be completed with one or two falcon heavy launches. That's basically equivalent to 3-6 falcon 9's worth of fuel, and a falcon 9's fuel cost is something like $200k. So, $600k-$1200k in fuel.

A spaceship system actually suitable for going to Mars would probably use cheaper fuel than falcon heavy. By the time it's actually built, though, inflation and politics will have made the fuel expensive again. So my best guess is a cool $1million!
I'm so tired of seeing these posts. Facebook can do whatever it wants with your account and the data you've giving them. Facebook isn't some "free speech" place or a decentralized protocol.. It's a for-profit business optimized to make, guess what, profits.
How do you suddenly go to "not working" and "taking time off" from this? That's a massive strawman.
I agree with most of your reasoning but intrigued by the diversion bit. Any theories on what this was a distraction from? What got less/no attention as a result of this?
>So the correct conclusion is not necessarily that most climate change skeptics are bots, but rather that climate change skeptics are likely to be characterized by the software as bots.

Yes, that is as much as we can deduce from the data presented in the paper, given that they apparently just took the 'Botometer' verdicts at face value without taking the extra steps to see if they were indeed accurate. It may, of course, be absolutely true that the 'denier' accounts are just scripts, but further investigation is necessary to establish this.

> I wonder what else makes you more likely to be characterized as a bot?

That would best be established by examining the bot-detector's algorithm. Another commenter on this thread noted that he received a high rating based on the fact that he rarely logged into his account.
If you have a boss that conditionally blames you for messages you haven't seen based on the content of those messages, I think you have a bigger problem than Slack decorum.
A ML model giving a single false positive is generally uninteresting and meaningless in evaluating its overall performance. Also, note that the details clearly state that, even for high bot scores, some non-trivial percentage of examples in their training data were still labeled as human.

As an aside, for those interested, the GitHub page for the tool's Python API (https://github.com/IUNetSci/botometer-python) lists relevant papers regarding the functioning/design of the tool.
> 1) they don't feel they can NOT police content

True.

But we should be explicit here-- FB isn't some neat, nerdy social graph software that just happened to get really popular, like git for regular people or something. They have a business model to shake up their social graph to maximize engagement, and the implementation achieves this by keeping everyone maximally mad as hell at each other. It spreads conspiracy theories efficiently. It and its users are easily exploited, and they continue to be exploited by any nation-state, nefarious actors, or even just some dude looking to make a buck spreading fake news. That all feeds into the same destructive behaviors for the users as the system desperately tries to keep them engaging more and more. Facebook's own software and UI exacerbates these problems.

With that starting point in mind, I agree with your 1, 2, 3, and 4 above. But this is less like email having to deal with new sets of problems as it scaled to the entire world. It's more like a drug cartel trying to figure out the maximum amount of their fundamentally destructive product they can sell before the government finally decides to comes in and break up their enterprise.
> Thanks, I might, eventually.

It's very boring to revisit the topics and translate them after a few years/months/weeks. Just write them now unless you are getting so much many traffic in Spanish that your server is on fire.

If the post is interesting, some amount of bad translation is tolerated in HN. [Hi from Argentina!]
github link: https://github.com/Cargill/splinter

written in rust :D