skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Wow, that sounds unpleasant, though as you note it’s hard to definitively attribute your condition to RC use. I agree with your last paragraph.
I agree, but I would suggest you use the same logic about labelling anyone in any part of the political spectrum then. Using terms such as "the left" might seem less antagonistic than calling someone a "fascist" yet come across just as harshly when read / heard by someone who hears "the left" preached in the 2 minutes hate of their preferred news source.
Reminds me of some test I read in a book (can't remember which one).

A teacher asks some student to stand up and raise his hands before him. The teacher stands in front of him and does the same, touching the students hands. Then the teacher starts pushing, and the student uses force to stay in place. Then the teacher uses more force, and so does the student.

Finally the teacher asks: "Whay are you pushing me?". "Because you were pushing me!"

This is exactly what is happening here. You cannot expect people to give in once you start pushing.
You can dialog with fascists, monarchists, communists, anarcho-sydicalists, theocrats, trans-human techno utopianists, and those who welcome our insect overlords.

You can't tweet at them though.
1) What metric do you use to define fascists?

2) How do you determine that a specific person you're dealing with can be specifically categorized into that bucket?

3) Are you calling them that name because it accurately defines that person's identity and behavior or is it because this tag is a really easy tag to slap onto people so you can deal with them very easily without having to think too much..

Like if I call someone a simp, beyond me insulting him and conveying I don't like him, it doesn't really mean anything..

not like he's going to become one (whatever that would mean) because I called him that..
This is what cripples most indie hacking projects. The idea that if you build it well enough the customers will come to you.

Right now, you need more selling than ever to get found and heard. Put this in perspective, even if you went down the low-touch, organic selling route of content marketing and you were building a MarTech product. You would as of my last check be competing against 2000+ MarTech SaaS all effectively blogging to the marketing department, every week. You then could switch to advertising but again, there's probably 200+ platforms already in your product area.

Slow growth is the best growth, technical debt is minimized and you can call the customer directly to learn from them what they like and dislike. Which is still considered selling and unless you 'ship' you get no feedback. I feel like people are too focused on the 'meaning' of words when really, it's sink or swim when most products launch.
What a great timing. I just built a gaming PC this week to go along with my Hackintosh and you wouldn't believe the amount of times I've locked Windows since Cmd+L in macOS selects the address bar but using the same key combination on the Windows machine does Win+L for lock.
Instant Game Approval on Facebook
I have made a game halfchess.

I have been trying to get a facebook messenger approval for months and they keep rejecting my documents. The process is super unclear.

Here is a link to my discussion - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1h6neL87-kT6oYmcJkZuoGuEsUj7GqowmCOGMU-ywakg/edit?usp=sharing

>> Back in Nov last year, I completed my development sprint (halfchess for facebook messenger). Then, I tried to use my brothers company to register my app, because I did not have one. There were issues with accepting the documents, so I registered my own GST (this took 2-3 months). Now I am facing the same problems even when I have a GST registration.

Can someone help me with the process?

-

I might be jumping to conclusions here but,

I am wondering if it is specially hard to get approval for my app because I am based out of a developing country. I just want to ask here if anyone in US or Europe has also gone through similar difficulties with Facebook. More of a curiosity question, but they have such a big dev team based out of India. Should not be the case, but I cant believe the process is so shitty!

Fun anecdote, when the process is shitty, it means we are supposed to bribe past it. Can someone put me in touch with a person I need to bribe?

Naval (Halfchess.com)
I know you are but what am i
The first is actually the fabric that modern society relies upon.

The second is what you are doing in your post.
Collections: Clothing, How Did They Make It? Part II: Scouring in the Shire
Science. Science is an excellent framework. This is where what you call “fascists” try to lead you all the time. We revert to science because leftist don’t recognize our lived experiences don’t seem to matter to you (e.g. a daughter raped by people who should have been already in prison, was liberated out of ideology, and said he had no good intention in our country), so we come back to statistics to try to sort the emotions out of rational thinking. It is as if leftists didn’t recognize our emotion towards the rape victim, so we come back to factual things.

Science is an excellent framework, leftists are very good at it when it’s about criticizing the opponent, and we are very good at it when we want to criticize the PC of the moment. Now we need to converge.

Please don’t despair. Please don’t give up discussing and trying to sort out truth from pollution.
4x5 is the optimal size on Instagram I believe. Gets you the most screen real estate as someone is scrolling past your photo
If you encounter a fascist in the morning, you encountered a fascist. If you run into fascists all day long, you’re probably the fascist.
It all comes down to the strain. High CBD & Low THC strains [0]

[0]: https://www.leafly.com/news/strains-products/10-best-cbd-can...
Ok well now you have to tell us. Nobel prize for what!?
The US has at least a dozen Paris-es, including one or two states with two.

The only reason there's not far more confusion over these things is that a lot of these places are too small to have airports...
I guess you have a problem with news editorial decisions then? For example, Fox News have a strong bias running through their programming. Isn't that a kind of implicit censorship of ideas?
Wow, all these Mussolini fans. Who knew?
If you are calling to silence people then you don’t believe in free speech. Simple as that.
According to the authors logic, we should stop censoring fraud, false advertisement, child grooming, defamation, doxxing, false testimony, etc. because "it doesn't work" and "erodes free speech". This is clearly nonsense. It works, and it should be done, the only question as with all laws is were the line should be.

We restrict freedom in general when it hurts other people (slavery, rape, killing, trespassing,etc) and we don't go around crying about slippery slopes and lack of freedom for it.

Clear examples of good censoring of free speech are the courts decision in the Alex Jones - Sandy Hook case and the Washington Post paying reparations to Nathan Phillips (the child mocking the native American). In both cases their "free speech" caused damage to people and the court decided that they didn't were protect under the free speech laws.
Yes, but because it has your data (and more directly verified because it's payment data) it can turn into making your the customer later on when their shareholder want mo' money (which they will do).
Note how “to defend your right to say it” actually makes sense in its normal context of positive and negative rights. One can in theory fight to defend every person’s right to say what they want to say, because saying something generally does not preclude anyone else from also saying something.

However, these modifications doesn’t work the same way: “to defend your right to be trending on Twitter” or “to defend your right to be on CNN tonight.” These things are still forms of speech, of course, and yet their exercise does in fact preclude others from likewise exercising. It doesn’t make sense do defend every person’s right to be trending on Twitter.
>Federal prosecutors and the Ministry of the Interior regularly move against organizations deemed far-right or hate groups.

On the contrary, the Verfassungschutz and other federal organisations built to work against enemies of the state support the enemies of the state! And that is where the 'vast and varied far-right network' comes from, it's supported by tax money.

The Verfassungsschutz is a special intelligence agency observing enemies of democray, which includes neonazis and the like. This agency uses 'V-Maenner', which is a network of paid informers within these structures.

In 2013, every fourth criminally active neonazi V-mann was receiving state payments: https://web.archive.org/web/20130405050440/http://www.tagess...

When the NSU murdered people in Germany, V-mann informants used the money paid for them by the state to support the group (https://www.zeit.de/gesellschaft/zeitgeschehen/2018-02/nsu-a... ).

Early 2000 Germany tried to outlaw the NPD, the then-biggest far-right political party. The outlaw process failed because the Verfassungschutz had too many of its members in the party's rank, so the judges could not say which party activities were anti-democratic, or what was the government's own doing ('fehlende Staatsferne' - not enough distance from the state).

Because the state taxes itself a measly 10% on these payments we have a rough idea on how much they pay - Tino Brandt, one of the NPD's party functionaries in Thuringia, received 200,000 DM over 6 years until 2001. In the same state alone (remember, Germany has 16 states) in the same time the government paid out 1.5 million DM.

The last head of the agency, Hans-Georg Maassen, is now retired after it became apparent that he was ignoring evidence. He has since opened a Twitter account where he's spouting Fox News-level far right nonsense. This was the head of the agency 2012 to 2018.

The OP's whole argument falls down if you consider that the German state is saying they're fighting Nazis but then they go and fund them very well with tax-money. It would be much easier to fight Nazis if they wouldn't get millions in funding.
Can confirm, friend from New Mexico was in town. We were checking out and making small talk with the clerk. He said “your English is excellent.”
You pay a subscription to the library (or taxes that fund the library) and the library pays the right to rent.
Both of them.
The Cost of AI [pdf](2013)
At the risk of entertaining the no true Scotsman:

A leftist that doesn’t empathize with the masses, is not a true leftist.
According to the authors logic, we should stop censoring child grooming, fraud, false advertisement, defamation, doxxing, false testimony, etc. because "it doesn't work" and "erodes free speech". This is clearly nonsense. It works, and it should be done, the only question as with all laws is were the line should be.

We restrict freedom in general when it hurts other people (slavery, rape, killing, trespassing,etc) and we don't go around crying about slippery slopes and lack of freedom for it.

Clear examples of good censoring of free speech are the courts decision in the Alex Jones - Sandy Hook case and the Washington Post paying reparations to Nathan Phillips (the child mocking the native American). In both cases their "free speech" caused damage to people and the court decided that they weren't protect under the free speech laws.
To be honest, the less the referees are involved, the better.

There's a much simpler answer: increase the size of the net. Hockey sticks are pretty incredible these days, and the torque generated from flexing the stick is pretty unbelievable. Playing in net in hockey is mostly about setting up at the right angles and blocking the highest percentage of the net that you can, combined with athleticism and instinct.

But a bigger goal would lead to more goals, if that's the end goal for the NHL.
Ah, is that column still called “One of our fifty is missing”?

(Memories from the late 80s, when I spent a year in Albuquerque)
> Are powerful monopolies (or near monopolies) wrong to censor? No, because they have the same speech rights as others, the problem there lies in the market power of the monopolies, not their speech.

This doesn't work if every platform - whether they have market power or not - are compelled to censor by mobs. Most recently, Glenn Greenwald wrote about journalists trying to get Substack to censor its authors [1]. Well before, Signal employees tried to make their company have an anti-extremism policy [2].

The fact of the matter is, most people don't know enough about censorship to fight against it, and so small groups of dedicated people can create enough of an uproar in their circles about something to make it untenable for any major platform to speak about it, simply because those platforms now have to contend with a vocal minority pushing a narrative. This has been a very common tactic in India, where I'm from: interest groups will object to a movie or a book loudly enough to de-facto, and even sometimes, de-jure censor it. Most recently, a Netflix series lead to a controversy as it dared to show teenagers doing drugs. This lead to Netflix being notified buy the Indian equivalent of the CPS, and was directly caused by people complaining about the show on Twitter. [3]

There is a pardadox of tolerance with respect to free speech. We cannot expect to maintain freedom of expression if we treat everyone who actually expresses themselves as a sinner.

1: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/journalists-start-demanding...

2: https://www.theverge.com/22249391/signal-app-abuse-messaging...

3: https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2021/mar/11/netflix-...
I think it's a function of employee growth, moreso than turnover. They grew from 35.6k employees in 2018 to 58.6k employees in 2020, so almost 40% of their current workforce was non-replacement hiring in the past 2 years.
What the left also needs is a realization that some of its beliefs are akin to extremism. And some of the left inspired policies have really really hurt and isolated a significant population. The left needs to soften it's stand on such issues.
I have used Tailwind on multiple large production sites over the years and seen pretty hard core CSS devs learn it. Every time they start off with skepticism. One week in they love it. To address your points,

1. Tailwind Makes Your Code Difficult to Read

Not sure why the styled-jsx examples at the end are easier to read. Tailwind is semantically obscure like any language you don't know is semantically obscure. Also with the intellisese VSCode gives you, learning is super easy.

2. Tailwind Is Vendor Lock-in

Vendor lock-in is a really strong word for what is going on here. Would you say React is vendor lock in because switching to another lib is hard? I worked at a company where we switched all of our CSS modules to Tailwind, and it actually cleaned up the code quite a lot.

3. Tailwind Is Bloated

It's actually the opposite. Large companies use atomic css approaches because it keeps your CSS bundle small. Especially with purgecss, you can get bundle sizes super small. I even saw a company switch from CSS modules to Tailwind to reduce they CSS size for AMP.

4. Tailwind Is an Unnecessary Abstraction

@apply is the equivalent of composing functions together in any other programming language. Also @apply lets you keep using the scales and color palette you set in tailwind.

5. Semantics Is Important. Tailwind Forgoes It.

Naming things is hard. It's a problem in regular programming, and CSS is no different. Needing to name less things makes life easier, especially when you component system name is already descriptive.

6. Tailwind and Dev Tools Don’t Play Nicely

Usually I just click .cls in dev tools and check or uncheck styles as needed. Or if I start typing a style dev tools intellisense helps me.

7. Tailwind Is Still Missing Some Key Features

pseudo elements are being discussed. As for it not being possible because of bloat, see above (PurgeCSS)
I think we should negotiate with Hitler too. He's not such a bad guy, eh? I don't like parts of his philosophy, but i'm sure if we DIALOG with him, he'll come around to our side, right? Or maybe concede a bit of ground with a compromise, right?
This article is written by a famous retired goalie and it contains a lot of good points in it. Everything the author says about the modern method of scoring goals being to "scrum" in front of the net is pretty accurate, and it honestly takes away, at least in my opinion, a lot of the aesthetic enjoyment that hockey used to have. Sure goals may not be going down in number, but they're definitely less fun to watch being scored.

But I think that the title, and a large part of the article, ignores or at least only pays lip service to the other half of the problem, and I think that by focusing solely on goalie equipment, we actually limit the probability of the problem actually being solved.

And the other half of the problem is that players can shoot way too hard now. Its a chicken and egg problem, and I don't know which came first, but any attempt to cut down on goalie padding is going to have come up against the very real safety concerns caused by modern hockey sticks. Anyone who has used one of the new $300+ composite sticks can tell you they aren't just for showing off your income, these things actually work, and they honestly work too well. Goalies have a legitimate point that goaltenders of old could wear the equipment they did because players were probably shooting 20%+ slower on average. Right now every hockey player is walking around with the equivalent of a corked bat or an aluminum bat in baseball.

And so I think that any attempt to scale back protective equipment to something that doesn't strangle the game is going to have to be matched with a similar regulation to go back to plain wood sticks or something similar, to prevent any sort of composite material voodoo. Matching up a decrease in protective bulk, with controls on stick material and I think that you still have a faster, more skilled game, but you'll really open up the ability to express that skill and still keep goalies "safe" (I use quotation marks because they're still crazy people putting themselves in front of a rock hard rubber bullet, but hey some folks are just different). Just addressing the equipment is going to be a non-starter and even if it did get forced through I think it might open the game up too much and lead to too much scoring. There's definitely a compromise to be struck on both sides here.
There are usually two steps here:

1. Declare people who disagree with you fascists
2. Declare that it's impossible to dialogue with fascists

Then it all becomes very easy.
Those efforts are quite different, focusing primarily on the design side with a focus on digital, while our effort is on ML-accelerated simulation of continuous time analog domain problems. I've met Chris Latter many times, and I'm pleased to see him work on tooling improvement in this space. He has a very good design sense for what compilers ought to look like. I've also met Patrick Li and we had an extensive discussion around the design space of multiple dispatch, which is of course Julia's core paradigm. I hadn't realized that Stanza was in use at JITX, but I'm glad to see it since there's enormous room for PL-based improvements. They are very different efforts though, so I'm somewhat confused by the off-hand dismissal of our work, without seeing any of the details.

One additional point: Julia depends on OpenBLAS not because Fortran is faster, but because doing the architecture tuning for all supported architectures and sizes is a bit of a pain and for standard BLAS problems there's very little reason to switch. We do have pure Julia packages that outperform OpenBLAS, but nobody has gone through the effort of replacing the base usage of BLAS usage and completing the pure Julia packages to achieve 100% API coverage. There's just no good reason to as long as the vendor BLAS packages (or OpenBLAS) work fine.
Calling yourself anti-fascist does not make you immune to totalitarianism, tribalism and othering any more than, to borrow an analogy, writing "cool" on a box makes it a freezer.

edit: Oy! The downvote is not for disagreeing!
We don't have a "moral duty" to force corporations to allow Nazis on their platform, though.

The Nazis are perfectly capable of building their own platform.
Linting HTML using CSS (2017)
It doesn’t type it into a buffer, iirc. I removed that from my config because it annoyed me that when I press j alone it only appears in a buffer after a delay.
I know the article spends its time describing how anti hate speech laws in Western Europe are not working. But frankly they’re not enforced. I think this is why they don’t work.

I see censorship has putting dirt under the carpet. People will try again. There’s no accountability. Social media censorship would ban flashing boobs with the same enthusiasm as Nazi propaganda. The latter is not a breach of terms and condition, it’s literally illegal over here, in the same way punching someone in the street would be.

Why not put these people in court? I understand it won’t entirely eliminate right wing ideology, but at least it sends a clear message that racist, homophobic, and threat to use violence are illegal.

If you look at right wing parties in France and Germany, their speech is a lot more nuanced. They can’t go about and say things like “all Mexicans are rapists” (a Trump quote) because it would lend them in jail or worse to be stripped of the right to run for elections. So it works!

The only problem is that it is not enforced for anyone else. People can go about and write things like that on social media and face no consequences whatsoever. At worst, their accounts will be disabled.

Edit. Typos
20 years of vim user here. I learnt Emacs for just one thing. Magit!

Except that I don't have any other use for Emacs.
so if we don't have "actual nazi's" right now, in 20 years we 100000% will, and it will be "the left's" fault?
Maybe that’s true. But you can program and neutralize would-be fascists with upvotes and downvotes. Like seriously literally.
Watching Hockey in the states is very different from Canada. I grew up near the Washington Canadian border and so I was able to watch all the Hockey games on CBC. I didn’t know Hockey wasn’t regularly aired on TV until I moved. Going to a Hockey game is really fun.
Huh, Fancis Bacon's Three Studies of Lucian Freud is the most expensive on the list at $89 million. I can't comprehend these dollar numbers, but it's a stunning painting.

There is a good doco about Bacon's life on YT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgrO5za0lSY
Or Sean Walker (of the Los Angeles Kings) from this season. It's the worst puck-to-face shot I've seen.

Warning, graphic and not for the faint of heart: https://mobile.twitter.com/AugieLens/status/1355249355507163...
I don’t think the goal is necessarily to have more goals, but to reduce the pile up of players around the net.

Maybe it’s my goalie experience speaking, but the highlight of hockey to me was always the direct confrontation between a shooter and the goalie. The more chaotic the goals, the less interesting the sport is.
I definitely think more work on serialization is welcome. For me, memcpy is fast - but handing off via shared memory is even faster, and then dereference; Zoned pointers are always the secret sauce to fastest ser-de.

I think the real issue that one really needs to solve is to add support for various languages and bother about wire compatibility between little, big and other messy endians. Add those things, the benchmarks start failing. The point of serialization is interop, not just rust-op. :)

Don't get me wrong, I was working with the colfer project on Github, and I definitely love all good work on serialization. Especially compression during serialization. Do start creating a spec and invite more language implementations. Thanks!
Answer emails and Slack messages, review PRs from colleagues, read books/articles, write docs, check the markets, walk my dogs...