skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>My current understanding, and I'd like to be corrected if I'm wrong here, is that Mr. Stallman's primary role at the FSF over the past decade has been to raise money for that organization, much like Rafael Reif's primary role at MIT is to raise money for the university.

Richard Stallman's primary role was to be honorary head of the FSF, a figurehead and inspiration rather than an active participant, far more interested in upholding its philosophical and ethical basis than in practical matters.

There is a conflation here between 'role' with 'motive.' While one should expect the leaders of an organization such as the FSF to be concerned, even if only indirectly, with raising money, it does not follow that RMS had any such concern. Given his spectacular disregard for tact, diplomacy, interpersonal skills, and even bodily hygiene, RMS would appear to be singularly unsuited to any role resembling that of a lobbyist or fundraiser. Mr. Stallman is simply far to unworldly to care about money.

>were any of Mr. Stallman's statements intended to persuade Mr. Epstein to donate part of his $500 million estate to the Free Software Foundation?

Again, that is a leading question which invites the hearer to assume the truth of what is being asked, reversing the burden of proof. This is a mere rhetorical trick, not a serious question.

>If his sole intention was to defend his dear friend Mr. Minsky from false accusations of raping a underage girl who was allegedly being trafficked to him by Mr. Epstein on "Pedophile Isle," then why is he attacking the law that protects underage girls from people like Mr. Epstein rather than the accuser who you claim that Mr. Stallman is not prepared to believe?

This is another attempt to impute a motive to RMS which he simply did not have. Yes, his unguarded, over-analytic, response to the accusations against his friend provides plenty of ammunition to those who would misrepresent his position, but it cannot be said to follow that his intention was to provide cover for Epstein, and his response to the ensuing controversy linked elsewhere in this thread makes it clear that he had no such motive.
Cloudman: Manage EC2 Instances from the CLI
Name shadowing should be an operator
Pop OS:

- Well integrated with my System 76 laptop.

- Never a problem with drivers, wifi, bluetooth, etc. It all just works.

- Good looking, out of the "box".

- Good availability of packages.

- Never had a problem with package upgrades.

- Excellent support from System 76 (although that's not a property of the distro).
There exists a quote ( probably from Mark Twain or Aristotle ) that one should put away the daily paper and read it 14 days later.

If somebody can help out and dig up a link : please do.
I came here to recommend subtrees. They're pretty good.
Hang on.

So I'm not supposed to throw my drink glass at the wall because I just read "University of Oxford considers scrapping sheet music for being 'too colonial' after staff raise concerns about music curriculums' 'complicity in white supremacy' after Black Lives Matter movement" in the Daily Mail?

Oh hell, now you tell me.

Besides all the crazy people running around, who are best not read or watched, my general take is that any sufficiently large step in technology results in a shaking out. Agriculture, gunpowder, mass production, now communications networks.

The time is nigh for not just ignoring negative value media but for hunkering down generally.
Ask HN: How do you switch domains later in your career?
I’ve been wondering about this lately. Save you’ve been working 5-10 odd years in Domain X and you want to switch and work in Domain Y. They’re completely unrelated, outside the fact that they would both involve software development.

Your resume, containing work experience mostly is irrelevant because it’s in the wrong domain. Now let’s say you’ve done some work in Domain Y in preparation. That could be significant projects, open source, community involvement, etc. You could put that on your resume, but you only have so much room, and you don’t want to downplay general YoE.

To avoid pendency and make more clear what I’m asking. Assume Domain Y jobs mostly require domain experience and are not just something eager to bring anyone with general experience on board.
Honestly, this is pretty trivially avoided. My parents drilled it into my head to look both ways before going into a street. I always look ways before going into the street. It's really not difficult.
IME, Not getting feedback from job interviews is mainly because 1) recruiters are incentivized for closing candidates, not cultivating brand awareness, and 2) giving actual meaningful feedback is hard, so it seems worthless to give a canned response.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Veritas#Incidents
Afghanistan Sits on $3T in Minerals
You post made my day! Wish you all the best!
I have heard conservatives get on board if the word ‘all’ is added before.
> If they had managed to produce the tech they claimed for the price they claimed, would $10 billion be crazy overvalued?

Yes, but in the same way that a company that promises faster-than-light travel would be worth $10 billion dollars.

Theranos' tech was so far beyond the realms of any reasonable science, yet people still invested.
For a developer and a user it's nearly the same, for mainframe programming it's 99% the same, but yes no LPAR's and no z/Linux...sure. But to learn how the core of mainframes work (as of today), that's the tool/distro.

BTW LOTS of MVS code still lives in z/os
The Hardest Adjustment to Self Employment
"That is what scares me the most about this job. Like most people, I have lived an entire lifetime conforming to schedules. They exist like the Greek gods: you didn’t ask for them but they are there, there is no negotiating with them, and prolonged association means you are likely to get your dignity violated by a bovine.

But schedules are structure, and structure helps. Be at school at nine AM. Seminar starts at 10:30, do not be late. Work starts at nine, Patrick, waltzing in at ten annoys people even if you are contractually permitted to do it and even if you will still be here at 2 AM. (Regardless of start time. If you thought the gods were rational, you have been reading the wrong mythology.)"
Probably more like doing what you're better at. Maybe one had the idea and the original vision, so they became CEO by default, whereas they might actually better at developing the product and should do the CTO role instead. But since it's their idea, they are relatively good at evangelising it and relating to the public, investors, and customers. However, the other might be much better at that than at CTO, so the company would benefit by swapping roles.
Then why post from a throwaway account?
2 is not unlikely just because they haven't found the intermediate species.

It took 4 years to find the immediate species in the case of SARS (2002->2006)
Yeah, and everyone is guilty of it IMO. I would love to see an analysis of news articles over the last few decades where someone counts the adjectives.
Because you can’t make every tool you’ll need to program effectively. Unlike bread, which only takes hours to make, good tooling will take months to years if done yourself.
Even knowing the term GRID dates you. :) Per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_HIV/AIDS#1981%E2%80... , the "GRID" moniker was only used for under two years, forty years ago. I think it's unlikely that the name is to blame.
That would be great. I read that there are secular masses that actually do that.

The ones you mentioned do not meet to talk about ancient philosophy. They meet to talk about an imaginary entity you come to kneel to and pray it does not bring the end of the world.

The managers of these groups also expect the participants to tell them what they did wrong (confession) and when they hear that a guy is going to rape someone because he feels that need, they cowardly cover for him. Mostly because they put their comfort above the life of someone else (secret of confession).

So yeah, that wood be good but for now this is just a meeting of people who learned this from their parents and do not want to think about the whole craziness of the idea.

The charity work is nice, though.
I disagree. It's far harder in towns where the degree of separation is 3. Everyone knows someone close to the matter. Never heard of a local news outlet making up quotes or began an article with "according to a source near the official in question". And it might not be true for big cities, but hearing that regulation is hurting a well known company of your town will usually trigger swift changes from officials. This happens a lot where I come from.
New York Launches a Blockchain-Powered Covid-19 Passport
> Spoiler alert. I do not hate submodules. I do how ever have an instant oh oh response when people mention they want to solve a problem with Git submodules.

First line of the article explains the title.
I could transcribe entire conversations here and you would still accuse me of making them up. What I wrote I heard almost precisely word for word; but in the end, exchanging anecdata until the end of time will do precisely nothing to persuade anyone that such mindset really exists (and indeed prospers), apart from making me a candidate for cancellation.

The main point is that, unless you’re talking physics (maybe), nothing is so “fact-based” that it cannot be perceived in the “wrong” way by someone sufficiently determined to do that.
A “sudden strong wind”: the worst excuse Ever Given?
You see this on Reddit all the time, every day.

Someone wants to disagree with whatever nonsense the hivemind is raving about in the moment, but in order to do so they have to prostrate themselves and make it clear whose side they're on before they make their (often very valid) point.

e.g. "I hate Trump just has much as the rest of you but..." or "Look we need to be super supportive of X group and my dad is actually X but..."
I understand there are 100 million members of the CCP. if society as a whole is quietly unhappy with the result of actions by their government I think they would have the influence to change the course. Maybe some are loud and disappeared but all of the institutions are made up of people. Just like the "adults are in the room" editorial when Trump was president there can be quiet dissenters who just don't work as hard to get the officially desired outcomes and then they don't occur.
The author's question reminds me of a pivotal scene in "American History X". Sweeney, a black high school principal, visits Derek, his former student and a white supremacist who is in jail for murder. Derek has just been hospitalized by other white people in a prison gang, and Sweeney asks Derek, "Has anything you've done made your life better?" In my own words, what is the point of anger if it does not result in better outcomes?
> No-code for simple wiring/boilerplating once good enough/widely adopted enough, will kick our asses.

By "our asses" I assume you mean programmers'? I don't buy it. People think coding is hard because they think thinking is hard. No-code doesn't remove the latter part, it'll only make things easier for programmers.

If anything it makes getting into programming easier, but that means more programmers not fewer.
Also hate them. Far better to have a dependency pulling shell script - no overhead of git yak shaving - just maintaining the URIs.
Activision releases online-only game without online content, cracked in one day
Theres a medlar tree growing in Waterford city (near the Bishops palace) I know an old guy who picks the fruit from it and makes jam.
Out of curiosity we picked a couple once, left them for a long time and tried them. They were ok.
>Surely something comparable has happened in the past where a big reserve of some rare mineral has been found and monopolized, and its price didn't go to zero.

Aluminum. Initially so expensive that the tip of the Washington Monument was made with it, then price plummetted after new refining methods.
Not saying I do this, necessarily, but friends of mine who are active in policy circles write for various publications under pseudonyms now for this reason. The development of the idea happens in private group chats, where everyone is using their IRL name, but the publication happens under a pen name.

I really don't know if this is a positive change for how policy gets made, but it is happening actively right now.
I'm not sure what that means but like the OP, I think any information transfer at FTL breaks causality. ref: http://www.physicsmatt.com/blog/2016/8/25/why-ftl-implies-ti...
Been using the standard macOS Mojave desert background for 3 years and counting. Not planning on changing.
Also,

'Be careful when you cast out your demons that you don't throw away the best of yourself.' — Friedrich Nietzsche
The media didn't treat #4 as a conspiracy theory. If you mean Tom Cotton's claims, he first implied it was intentional (later walked it back). He also was claiming it was a biological weapons lab. That's not what #4 is. It's always been accepted that #4 was possible.
Basically the same in Denmark, I believe many other European nations have a similar situation.
I think the key paragraphs in the article are:

"Jhaveri wrote that she was fired after she faced criticism and harassment online over a tweet she posted "responding to the fact that mass shooters are most likely to be white men." The tweet in question said, wrongly, "It's always an angry white man. always." Jhaveri admitted in her post that it was a "dashed off over-generalization."

She said she apologized and deleted the tweet. "It was a careless error of judgement, sent at a heated time, that doesn't represent my commitment to racial equality. I regret sending it," she wrote"

So a journalist whose primarily job is to attempt to convey the events of the world in a factual way made something up without fact checking and then was fired for it. How about just not making broad over-generalizations in the first place, especially if your job is intended to combat that? Pulling out the "persecution" card seems disingenuous here and speaks the reporters lack of judgement especially in light of the "Alexi Mccammond" situation.
I went into this article thinking it was going to be an outrage piece about men being sexist towards women. Instead it's about men being afraid of being accused of being sexist.

This is a very real issue. It's already gotten to the point where the people behind the movement are hysterically unreasonable and irrational. Literally even feminists who are integral parts of the movement itself aren't safe from their own vitriol.

Below is an TED talk about the story of a activist feminist who had her entire activist career destroyed simply by saying something that the cancel culture disagreed with:

https://youtu.be/3WMuzhQXJoY
It could be called the Ministry of Truth.
The WHO team has already reported new information about their recent investigation. I'm always surprised that that's entirely left out of these conversations.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/14/health/WHO-covid-daszak-c...

Apparently China's disease-control center had done a great deal of investigating of the Wuhan market, a WHO team member told the New York Times:

They'd actually done over 900 swabs in the end, a huge amount of work. They had been through the sewage system. They'd been into the air ventilation shaft to look for bats. They'd caught animals around the market. They'd caught cats, stray cats, rats, they even caught one weasel. They'd sampled snakes. People had live snakes at the market, live turtles, live frogs. Rabbits were there, rabbit carcasses... Animals were coming into that market that could have carried the coronavirus. They could have been infected by bats somewhere else in China and brought it in. So that's clue No. 1... Some of these are coming from places where we know the nearest relatives of the virus are found. So there's the real red flag...

There were other markets. And we do know that some of the patients had links to other markets.
Because proclaiming that all lives matter was interpreted often and publicly as racist against black people.
Well you instantly become a white supremacism if you say "All Lives Matter" so you can't blame people for feeling like they're getting mixed signals.
Me too, and that's why i work whenever possible with BitKeeper and nested repositories.
> while doing nothing tangible to address the real issues

Doing things to solve the real issues would run into difficult real-world problems both symbolic and logistical/physical. Overcoming them require having conversations where people

1. Do creative problem-solving

2. Say “well, actually...” about practical implementation details.

3. Speak honestly about the real difficulties and risks of unintended consequences.

4. Admit to failure and error and even inattention.

All of which is blocked by similar social dynamics to the ones discussed in the article.
This seems like a classic problem of trust, more than a discussion about gender. I can't imagine investing in a company I didn't trust enough to be candid with, but I guess that's happening, the money in it is probably good.

It's worth saying that people who have no capability to betray you in a certain way are easier to do business with. It limits downside. I'd prefer to have a reputation for defending my friends, but not being credible for a certain attack is an interesting advantage. Perhaps vulgar and obnoxious people will be easier to work with too. I will look for a way to get mobbed that doesn't violate my moral code, might as well break the seal on that so I never make anyone nervous.
Wasn't most "legitimate discussion" already happening in private already? This article is pointing out situations where even in private people might not want to give out candid feedback, which seems like a different concern that what you are saying.

I'm a pretty active person online and I genuinely do not understand your concern. If you want to say something controversial online, just do so anonymously like you are doing now. If you want to give somebody candid advice I'm not sure why you'd do that in public anyways.
Female founder here. Just wanted to say I'm much more interested in advice and feedback from other successful founders than investors.

It also seems like investors are more concerned about reputation than founders.
You are right, seems I had a bad source—density is closer to 1.1-1.5 g/cm^3 than the 0.5 I used. So only 50 cubic km...
1. NATO expanded by various countries voluntarily asking to join. It's not like NATO conquered a bunch of countries, or even threatened them. The countries joined because they felt threatened, all right, but not threatened by NATO.

2. NATO is a defensive alliance. A defensive alliance is only a "provocation" if one regards the ability to invade other countries as an inalienable right.

Oh, and look, we got here by way of talking about Ukraine. Who was the invader there? Not NATO.

Given what happened to the Ukraine (and Georgia), are you going to heap blame on NATO? Blame belongs on the ones who actually invaded.
Not here in the US. The IRS has been crippled by previous Republican administrations to the point of uselessness, as another method of giving free unlimited tax breaks to the millionaires and billionaires that bought them in office.

But god help the poor people who file simple tax returns that can be easily audited, however.
>The Culture is neoconservatism on the greatest imaginable scale.

Exactly this. It was one of the first thoughts I had when people introduced me to the Culture and pitched it to me as a sort of socialist utopia.

I don't even think Banks is aware of this himself given his own takes quoted in the article but the The Culture fundamentally isn't a futurist utopia but a socially engineered, materially abundant liberal 19th century experiment in the broad sense of the term extrapolated into the future.

All difficult problems are effectively outsourced to the Minds, even language is understood in a Sapir–Whorf way as a tool to exercise social control. Criminals aren't punished but ostracized and neutered in an 'enlightened' way. Individual hedonism is basically the only activity left for people to engage in.

A lot of the problems of the Culture haven't vanished but been outsourced to a kind of space CIA in the form of 'Special Circumstances' which does all the ugly stuff the happy people of the Culture don't want to deal with. Outwardly the culture is very aggressive in its attempts to assimilate everyone incompatible with the Culture. Contact between the Culture and other civilizations often leads to covert conflict. Player of Games being probably the best example, where the Culture basically sends a Bobby Fischer style character to a 'backwards' empire to use a game competition as a means to topple the regime from within.

And for democracy in the Culture itself, even though in the eyes of the people the Minds are supposed to be a sort of magical democracy solving technology that just builds consensus in fair ways, we also learn that the Minds very much have minds of their own (no pun intended) in the book (can't remember the title) that tells the story to us from their perspective.

Banks in general seems to me like Trotskyist who turned from Communist to Neocon (a very common phenomenon), with the twist that he doesn't really seem to be aware of it at all and thinks he's actually writing a genuine utopia. I've always liked that about the books the most because it actually in many ways to me makes the Culture a really good dystopian work where the author rather than trying to write one is actually trying to trick you into liking the Culture.
That’s not right at all. Lies are false statements about your own knowledge. Even if the fact your lying about happens to be true, you are still lying about your knowledge of it. It’s important to distinguish between the act of lying, the intended result of the lie and the relationship to the true facts. Those are all independent things. You can’t “fail to lie”, though you can fail to deceive with your lie.

Suppose my daughter is accused of stealing the sweets. I might lie by saying I saw her in the garden at the time they were taken. Even if she was actually in the garden then, and didn’t take the sweets, I’m still lying about my knowledge of these things because I didn’t see her in the garden.

Even if I lie about remembering something, such as that I saw her in the garden (maybe it was a long time ago), and it turns out I did see her in the garden I’m still lying because I didn’t recall the memory when I said I did.

>“If what you say is accidentally true, then you tried to lie but failed.”

No, because you still misrepresented your own knowledge. You did not deceive someone with your lie and maybe led them to the truth, but it was still a lie.
Basically the me too movement and the way in which men cannot defend themselves from sexual accusations back fired. Very predictable that this happened, there’s no easy solution.
So that is more likely than a level 4 biolab that happened to be IN Wuhan and was being warned about by US State Department officials years before this happened?

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/03/08/josh-rogin...
I'm sorry, but I'm having a really hard time comprehending what you're saying here. Can you elaborate?
now that you're saying it, it does read like you say. I and probably 99% of people read it the way it's meant: it uses just 1% of the energy needed for an equally big LCD, which means it can stay on 100 times as long. They should've used a better wording, yes.
Train to (almost) nowhere in Mauritania (2007)
Is it possible that the virus got there due to it floating around in the air, and not because it originated in animals?