skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Perhaps we should see it a different way.

Software development forces us to be more precise about what our process is. Sales wants to automate their pipeline - oh but what do you mean I have to tell you who to call next? Just call the important ones. We can no longer 'fudge' things.

Agile methodology is causing this problem in many companies. Asking senior management to stack rank their projects is an intensly political issue. Saying the project timelines will vary based on team velocity takes away simplicity of project management.

As software eats the world then more of the world must be upfront and precise about what it means. This is going to lead to a lot of soul searching. The most obvious example is the Trolley problem in autonomous cars - do you program a car to swerve to avoid the child, killing the driver, or save the driver, kill the kid.

This sort of devils own choice will become more rampant as more of the world becomes automatable.

Online speech is just one of these. Now that every pub conversation can be spread to millions of listeners, we need to find ways to agree on what is and is not acceptable.

The problem people are finding is that what was tolerated by people in the 19th hole in Alabama is not acceptable by people listening in Delhi.

The human species is going to have to find ways to get along together. I think that will (eventually) be a good thing.
The sexual harassment apologists are out in force, and it's depressing as hell.
Signals slower than the speed of light (or even at the speed of light, e.g. radio signals in space) are ordinary and have no paradox, so there's nothing to debate.

Unless you're thinking of "loopholes", e.g. "the Rocinante travels through the stargate to the Illus system, and since it travels through the gate at 100 km/h with respect to the gate, it's clearly not superluminal". The answer is that light takes 104 years to travel from our solar system to the Illus system, so yes it very much is superluminal, there's no way around that. Same applies to "the Enterprise travels in warp bubble where it's at rest". If it's 8 light years to Wolf 359 and you get there before lunchtime, it's superluminal regardless of warp bubbles. Debating how your signals or spaceship carrying a message travel is pointless - the only question is, did it get there faster than light would or not?

You can't have your cake and eat it too here.

BTW: I already said off of that:

> Literally any method of getting from A to B faster than light would, has a causality paradox. it does not matter if you cover the miles between FTL, or pop out of a hypothetical wormhole gate: If you end up outside of your own light cone, no matter how, there's a causality paradox.
I would go for the hAP AC or AC2, rather than the lite versions, which are specifically the low end of the range and can only route ~500Mbps and don't have 5GHz wireless.

The difference in price isn't even that much, the AC2 is less than $70.
I understand the point but Khmer Rouge?
I disagree that developers don't like to pay for their tooling, I think the issue is that fewer people will be using the tools if they are not free and that means that languages that are bound up to expensive tools (e.g Delphi) are going to lose the network effects other languages gets.
Thus even if the language itself is inferior, that will be made up for by the much larger number of people who can create libraries and tools and answer stackoverflow questions.

Note that there is a free IDE for all the languages Jetbrains makes IDEs for.
The Russian 'Information Warrior' Seeking to Discredit Covid-19 Vaccines
Forgiveness technically does NOT require those things. That’s the point. It’s fore-give-ness.
Many individuals can also chose to become drones or be become part of a Mind as well instead of dying.

A minority also choose to be effectively immortal, although most get bored at some point.
Bitwise's comment says that it's the open source community which is being harmed. FSF is Free Software - the FSF don't view the Open Source community as their support base. But open source broadly views free software as part of themselves.
A big source of problems with IPv6 replacing v4 is related to the same issues that plagued running the same applications on OSI protocols.

Being tightly coupled with temporary port of a temporary experimental API that happened because DoD wanted what was effectively "Emergency Capability IPv4 for Unix".

Once the broken design caused by BSD Sockets shows in one's program, it got progressively harder to fix it, especially given how ideologic the fight over APIs got. And then you had a growing installed base and vendors that lobbied against change because it cut into their profit margins, so requirement for OSI support was moved away and away.

"Good enough now" won over "won't stop working two years from now", so we built bandage over bandage over bandage.
My degree course is split across my university’s Computer Science and Engineering departments, so I often get to hear both of the discussions you described. I would say that CS supervisors talking to their students are more direct in saying that the ideas that they come with won’t work or that their mathematics is incorrect, whereas engineering professors seemed to be a bit more subtle and guiding where their students falter, as though they perhaps had the exact same ideas when they were younger and want to gently discourage the same mistakes.
That’s not to say Engineering professors wouldn’t tell you you’re wrong, it just feels that the knowledge gap between the experienced and inexperienced engineer is larger than that for the computer scientist, and so there is more room for small errors to grow into bigger problems if ignored.
Paid content is awful. Even worse when the notice for paid content is very small. The whole thing feels dirty. Sometime in the last two years, The Financial Times wrote and featured (front page!) paid content for Saudi Arabia's Aramco as a company that is helping with the climate crisis. Truly, it felt like FT's reputation was for sale to the highest bidder.

I also read some Singaporean print media. Various ministries in the single party gov't regularly pays local media to write "paid content". Without fail, the notice about paid content is not obvious or hard to find. What a shame.
"What do we do about this? "

I would start with having debates based in reality and not ideology, like this:

"Richard Stallman single-handedly created the free software movement, and he's the reason we all have jobs. "
Yes, and the mechanisms for removing the false memory were: 1) Making the subject aware that there were independant witnesses (family); 2) Reminding/making the subject aware that the memory may have been created during the interview.
I wonder thy this god downloaded. I share an opinion about a book.
So, I don't have time to read the entire paper, but I thought it would be interesting to share my experience from the other side. I lead the engineering for a company that does the "data work", we gather terabytes of data, mostly photography and lidar, every day.

So far it's been a crappy industry to be in, it seems the only way to make money is to provide the entire value chain, and this is the business model we're pivoting to.

Just a bunch of photography and lidar scans isn't worth much to anyone, and it's very costly to establish a quality data stream. We had enormous capex on sensor gear, training personnel, running the operations. All this to save a couple bucks on sending an inspector physically to the site.

If you do the entire value chain, you gather the data, you process it into information, and then you turn that information into actionable reports. So that means that besides running our operations, we're also doing the modeling work, and we're providing the industry specific expertise for the actual inspection. So our customers pay for knowing what is broken, where it's broken, and what the impact of that defect is.

In the end, I believe we'll be very successful, but it will be because our investors were willing to take us all the way, where many other companies have simply given up on the concept.
> Richard Stallman single-handedly created the free software movement

The "Free Software" movement (cap F, cap S), yes.

> and he's the reason we all have jobs

No.

There was a sizeable movement for public domain software before Stallman. Stallman brought along a particular ideology and one which resonated with a lot of people, as well as coding a bunch of software himself. But it is an incredible reach to say that, without Stallman, there wouldn't have been the option to "spin up a server for free and compile code without paying a license". How do you know that?

I ran a "public domain library" back in the 8-bit days, as did many others. It was code you could distribute freely, and where you could play around and build upon the source. You could argue that Stallman's Free Software was another descendant of the early '80s public domain software culture, but you cannot presume that public domain software would have withered and died without Stallman. I think it's vanishingly unlikely, in fact.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_free_and_open-sourc... is worth reading.
Many ships, and certainly all large oceangoing vessels, transmit both course over ground (direction of motion) and heading (direction the bow is pointed). Sites like MarineTraffic and VesselFinder use the heading to draw the vessels on the map in the correct orientation, but in the vessel details they only display the course over ground as far as I can see.

Inland-only vessels don't always have a gyrocompass or GPS compass, or don't have it connected to the AIS transponder, in which cases they only transmit course over ground and not their heading.
This is true. I worked for a company that ran X.400 commercially, before the Internet really got going.

It did, indeed, have many things that we wish email had, these days, like true read receipt and routing management.

But it was a complex beast, and that is why it lost out to simple SMTP and POP.
Stretch from Boston Dynamics
That’s cos it sounds heavier but the key is relative.
I think they are being generous here:

"Yet in some cases, as in working with Purdue Pharma, maker of the addictive painkiller OxyContin, their moral compasses go haywire. That is most likely because of the lure of lucre."

Does the author really think that in only 'some cases' partners put their own financially benefit ahead of morals and ethics? I have yet to work with any big consulting firm who's number one goal was anything other than running up billable hours.
> Pretty much all of it is.

My point is that how the US Code and how the US Constitution are amended is fundamentally different: amendments passed to the US Code say things like "insert this section here", "delete this section", "replace this one with this one". And then the edits are applied, and the US Code is published with that edits applied. The amendments of the US Constitution aren't even made in the form of textual edits.

> My understanding is that the UK still mostly does uncodified law

Even though UK law largely isn't codified, they still mainly print Acts in consolidated form – repealed sections are omitted, amendments are incorporated into the text, etc. The main thing that stops it being a code is you have lots of acts on different topics listed alphabetically, whereas codification would imply merging all those into one big act (or a few big acts) with its contents being organised topically

> The US Constitution didn't replace a Westminster-style parliamentary system with a presidential system; the system the US had under the Articles of Confederation wasn't a Westminster-style parliamentary system.

Actually in a lot of ways the Articles of Confederation was closer to a Westminster style parliamentary system than the US Constitution is. The defining feature of a parliamentary system is the executive is practically subordinated to the legislature, rather than being an independent seat of political power. The Articles of Confederation had that – the national executive was quite limited in extent (there was a treasury, the army, navy, foreign affairs, and the postmaster-general) but it was wholly subordinate to Congress and had no independent seat of power.
No. His writing is still prescient but his leadership seems to have no upsides I'm aware of in the last few decades or so. GCC Plugins leading to LLVM come to mind, Chris Lattner even offered LLVM to the FSF (not sure of the exact chronology here, can dig up the emails later if desired).

Oops
That sounds like you'll need a committee on every piece of advice you might give out and that would be extremely inefficient.

> The advice comes from a group of diverse people and is then far more defensible against accusations of sexism, racism, etc..

You'd by insurance against accusations, but you'll either just have people in that advice-committee for insurance reasons, or you need to have 10-15 people to do one person's job, because you need to represent all the larger groups, and their intersections.
You can mitigate that pretty easily by checking whether recent commits from this person are linked to that GitHub account.
RMS claims not to be Austism Spectrum / Asperger's.

Conversely, plenty of people who do manage not to behave in the way he has.
That's a nonsensical question, there's not enough nuclear or fossil fuel in the world to increase our energy consumption 100.000x for any significant time period. We'd need to build a dyson sphere.
https://istheshipstillstuck.com/ = yes, sort of
MGBA 0.9.0
> Even worse, we'd build a "proof of concept" that ignored all the engineering, and then try to get other researchers or companies interested in the system as though it was complete.

This is far from unique to academic circles...
Creating new free software has nothing to do with RMS. (From the software side, he had impact on licensing) People did it before him and will continue after him, many without knowing who RMS is. More likely effect is closer to "This conference invited RMS? No thanks." from both potential attendees and speakers. Supporting FSF will also be less likely.
Here's the Wayback Machine archive for the original MSDN location, with comments and somewhat more functional links: https://web.archive.org/web/20180418231114/https://blogs.msd...
> a) take care not to bring up any facts (e.g. say that someone touched you inappropriately), because as soon as you do that you have to either provide a proof or face slander suit

Surely you would face slander suits in the US as well if you lie about being touched?
The footnote of that policy allows you to persistently call a trans man "they", even if his preferred pronoun is he. That is, the policy endorses you misgendering.

Calling a he/him person a "they" is a way of saying that you don't think they're a real man. It's really not much better than calling a trans man "her".

Finally, the previous version of the said guidelines used to reject singular they. Singular they is a great way to refer to somebody whose pronouns you don't know. Moreover, it's the preferred pronoun for many non-binary people.
>But for some reason people online can't stop themselves from diagnosing him with it.

Doing so makes it easier to excuse Stallman's behavior and demonize his critics by implying their only motivation is hatred of conventionally unattractive and neurodivergent people - an argument designed to strongly resonate emotionally with the tech community and serve as a thought terminating cliche.

It's ironically exactly the sort of bad faith strategy they constantly accuse "the SJWs" of partaking in.
> Richard Stallman single-handedly created the free software movement, and he's the reason we all have jobs.

WTF? I had a job long before RMS came on the scene, and I still have one. Whatever my feelings about Stallman, he doesn't get credit for that.

And I was giving away source code way before FSF existed. We didn't have fancy names or licenses back in those days, we just called it "public domain".
Dr;tl: you can't.

'They found no evidence that people were any better at detecting lies told by criminals or wrongly accused suspects in police investigations than those told by laboratory volunteers.'
There is very little electricity generation from oil anywhere. I doubt that oil had or has a huge impact on the electricity energy policy.

What had an impact was 'cheap' fracking gas, which is used for electricity production in the US. It has a share of roughly 40%. Coal adds roughly another 20%. That makes around 60% gas + coal in the US for electricity production.

For Germany gas + coal has 40% share in electricity production (2020).
I hope that I'm wrong here and there is evidence of actual bots, but as far as I can tell you're making this judgement based on the fact the people signing the RMS support letter have Russian sounding names. First off, yes I don't doubt that the totalitarian oppressive and oppressive governments are using this type of technique, in fact they are probably using it a lot because it is highly effective. However, it seems exceedingly unlikely that they have any interest in a spat in an, on the whole, insignificant professional organization.

I think it is worth reevaluating your opinion, as understanding the other side of an argument is useful and helps us understand the world better. Generalising, a bit in my experience Russians tend to be slightly technocratic valuing pragmatism over ideology, which seems natural considering that it was beaten out of them by a series of absolutist despots.

Still their opinions are valid even if most people in Europe and the US, no matter their political beliefs, will consider RMS to have perjured himself as an ideological leader to the extent that trust can not be mended, and consequently must resign.
Being on the autistic spectrum does not require you to act like an asshole.

I know a couple of autistic people. The main difference between them and RMS is that they give a shit about what other people think of their behaviour.

He's an incredibly intelligent man, who is quite capable of understanding that people don't want him to act like a creep. Many different people, at many different times, have explained it to him, and have asked him to stop. He's already been given far more patience and leniency and second and third and fifth chances in this respect than any other person would have. Even if he is incapable of understanding why his behavior is wrong, he is an adult that is capable of understanding that he should stop it.

He just doesn't care.
So .. you propose people should be able to say anything free of consequences, because of "aspergers"?

Because no one ever made that claim. It was always about sexism and co. Or is sexism related to asperger in your opinion?
I'm 44 and I've been a professional web dev for more than 1/2 my life. It's wildly different now compared to when I started. It never stops being exciting. I can build the coolest stuff with so little effort these days. It's ace.
That depends. E.g. if it costs $100bn to build enough of these to store the power needed to go from 97% to 100% then it may just not be worth it.
Whats the speed limit? In Australia there are a lot of 60kmh roads near parks
There's plenty of diamonds around and they're still doing OK. I guess it depends on someone's ability to drip feed it into the market and fix the prices. Kinda like bitcoin whales too.
PHP Git server compromised and attacker added backdoors to PHP source code
Pushing a person from his life's work and from the organization that exists only because of him is effectively destroying.

This won't stop with him resigning again.

What do you think, this mad cancel mob will tolerate rms to appear at some Libre Software conference? Hell, no! They'll harass organizers till they quit, threatening with boycott and pressuring all the sponsors and venue providers. We've seen this in action many times. This mob must be stopped.
That policy has since been updated to allow singular they, despite Stallman's objection to singular they.

But now the footnote of the policy would allow you to call a trans woman "they" and never "her". That's not something transphobes (or anybody else) would ever do to a cis woman.
Wow, I submitted one, then scrolled down the queue ... there is a /lot/ of porn requests, and some ... rather disturbng ones as well!
Yeah, I saw the headline thinking this is just a feature every Japanese dictionary offers. Surely I must be mistaken, because there's no way yet another person remade this feature yet again.

But no. It's literally one of the basic features of every kanji/hanzi dictionary.
> By telling people not to use singular "they", RMS is harming, offending, and driving away nonbinary people

Are we really at a point where a pronoun is persecuting people...?

This sort of attitude is seriously disrespectful to people who are actually being harmed, offended, and physically chased away from real spaces.
Sure you could count every instance of someone not getting their will, which is unavoidable when decisions affect more than one person, as tyranny. But I don't think that's a very useful definition.
Then again, if you are of a divisive personality type, you maybe should not lead an organization as others might not want to work with you, companies might want to withdraw funding because they don't like to be associated with the controversy around you. And lastly, you might reduce the reach of your own ideas.
That would be like believing in original sin for squirrels, instituting the bad end of 'affirmative action' on them, all in the name of fairness of course.
Norbert Weiner is a standout of modern computing/mathematics because he took a principled stand on the consequences of his research, and decided to move fields because he didn't want his work to directly relate to military applications.

There are very few people of his standing in science at that time, and I believe since, with the fortitude to resist temptation to take the high paying gig despite the moral implications. Joseph Rotblat comes to mind.
It'll be much more useful when we want to build a ship in space rather than assuming we'd want to bring it back down into our gravity well.

Imagine the cost of launching that much iron into space...
#1 - People want to follow you.
Stallman is not the pillar things are build on. Yes, he's had a monumental impact on the software world, but it's a mistake to bind the concept of Free Software to him and pretend it needs him personally to be involved. It doesn't, and hasn't for a long time. Today, it's likely better off without him involved at high level, if the past decade of the FSF is anything to go by.

And it's not that we "live in a world where we can't be forgiven", but there is little to suggest that there is any meaningful commitment to change, instead RMS is just back somehow for some reason, without warning (i.e. nobody at LibrePlanet apparently knew that was coming, including the organizers and participants that had explicitly requested to not be involved with him). Not surprising that doesn't satisfy people.
Its execution is just abysmal

It's not really good, but calling it abysmal is just too negative in my opinion :) It does get a lot of things right after all, especially in the "not everything is text" department. Also a lot of things wrong (my main gripes would be a lot of the syntax in general, case insensitive, usually more than a couple of ways to achieve the same thing). So in the end the learning experience/curve for me was the same as for bash (or languages like C++) and just as long/steep probably: feels like suffering until you've learned all the caveats by heart and in the process of doing that also learned how to actually use it, then it becomes ok to use. After that process I'm leaning towards favoring PS over bash though. Now it's possible there are already other shells which get more things right but I really doubt that in my lifetime I'm still going to spend (waste?) time on learning yet another shell. Or it must be convincingly good and provably fast to learn :P