skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
An argument is what it will boil down to because there will be a group of people who don't believe that it is "inhuman and barbaric". For the record - I agree with you, but I also recognize there are people who do not agree with us.
49% of Brits would support the reintroduction of the death penalty. I suspect that the same is true across Europe and that you are living in a bubble. [0]

[0] https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/should-the-dea...
My earlier post was a false alarm. I did a hard-reset on the phone (and a normal close-down-and-restart afterwards for good measure) and it has been fine since
I'm curious, what do you think those would be?
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41385015/what-is-bang-do...
Not the same, but there are similarities. The most obvious difference is that Self is a dynamic language whereas Rust is statically typed. In the Rust bibliography (https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/appendix/bibliography....) you find a link to http://scg.unibe.ch/archive/papers/Scha03aTraits.pdf which uses Smalltalk and also discusses the difference of their traits approach to Self. I guess they should also have added this reference: http://scg.unibe.ch/archive/papers/Nier05gTraitsCSharp.pdf, which demonstrated in 2005 how to add traits to a strictly/statically typed language.
Odds are, if an asteroid hadn’t crashed into Earth, we wouldn’t be here
Looks very nice! Is there a way to see logs? I'm not managing to connect to a MariaDB instance on Azure, and all it says is "Connect failed: An internal error has occurred."
I think that is an interesting coincidence. iSeek was a tool released by InfoSeek (a search engine). Seems like they came to a similar branding outcome as far as I can tell.
Yeah. Hard to see how the same argument wouldn't apply to the prison system as a whole. We can be sure there are people imprisoned their whole lives wrongfully as well even without the death penalty - why is that acceptable?

If the argument is that currently, the false positive rate is too high - then what would an acceptable false positive rate be?
Cooperative male dolphins can tell who’s on their team
This is very US-centric.

> at least 4% of people on death row are innocent.

I expect in Scandinavia these numbers are different. But they dont have death penalty.

From the news I learn that US cops also kill innocent people in the street. And it's military wages illegal wars killing 100s of 1000s overseas. I think the US has a weird relation with violence. The death penalty and how it uses it is merely a symptom.
You can verify it with less preexisting knowledge, and it gives you much more confidence that you're in the right place to see a signed certificate for "internic.net" than to see a signed certificate for "yes this is the IP you typed, hope you typed the right one".

And it can't go out of date as easily. Like you said, the IP changes sometimes. internic.net doesn't change.
Then it would sound like a female voice. That's how voice changers work
ListenData: Translating Web Page While Scraping
Moreover life imprisonment is far more of a punishment. The individual has to get up every day and contemplate what they have done - with no way to end that other than the passage of time and the hope of commutation.

If you're from a part of the world where the death penalty was consigned to history decades ago, it's quite astonishing that a supposedly civilised nation would defend it.

The USA has some odd hangups.
You are not wrong, but the original point was that GDScript is slow because its syntax is similar to Python's and Python is slow. That just doesn't make any sense.

> The default language in the engine is basically python, so it could cause a performance bottleneck.
This argument is garbage.

Of course there will be miscarriages of justice and this has been talked about since the beginning. There is nothing new here.

> 4% of people on death row are innocent.

This is not true, but it's irrelevant anyway since what is the acceptable level? Since it's not mentioned, we have gotten nowhere in this blog post.

If we get it very close to zero, is it then ok then? Is the single incidence of executing a guilty man ok? Because either that's what this blog implies or it's skipping the real issues.
Or, a bit more charitable interpretation is that they are trying to inject a bit humanity in a otherwise very inhumane process.

For the record, I'm not for death penalty at all.
Sure, from a persuasion point of view I agree. But from a "trying to understand another human" point of view, I'd recommend you to read the Wikipedia page on ethics [1]. My own education on the topic: a course in college (as a business student) and watching some of the Harvard lectures on ethics [0]. IMO ethics courses teaches people to gain a more fine-grained vocabulary on explaining their own positions and understanding other's positions.

GP clearly uses a deontological line of thinking on this matter. Something that GP considers to be "inhuman and barbaric" invokes a line of thinking in where he/she believes one ought to not do a certain action, because it simply is wrong.

I'm not the best at explaining deontological ethics, nor are the people who think like this. My point is: a lot of thought has gone into the types of statements that GP makes, and IMO it's worth thinking about.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBdfcR-8hEY

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics
I don't know. Even the constitution acknowledges the possibility of truths that are 'self-evident'.

I remember when the Guantanamo torture scandals emerged in the 2000s, how various political actors attempted to say 'Let's not get hot under the collar about this - let's put it on the table and talk it through.'

For me, there are some things that just don't warrant debate, and encompass such deep-seated truths about humanity that putting them up for debate is a repulsive and disingenuous act, as outlined in 'A Modest Proposal' . I agree with the parent poster that this is one of those cases.

EDIT: This was supposed to be a response to the parent comment of the one it got attached to (for some reason).
I don't think anybody really supports/opposes the death penalty because of a rational analysis of facts and statistics. It's usually an emotive decision - the notion that "revenge must be taken" or that "life is sacrosanct". These are pretty core parts of people's identity and it is hard for them to let go.

Either way, stories (e.g. miscarriages of justice by an uncaring state) are likely a more effective way to convince in this controversy, not statistics:

https://digest.bps.org.uk/2016/02/23/why-is-it-so-hard-to-pe...
I also like traveling and getting info from other bloggers on mobile. Great app idea.
It isn't really over, even now it pops its head up now and again. There's probably more people who believe in it than you realize.

For example in the UK 58% of people believe that the death penalty should be allowed for some crimes (e.g. terrorist attacks). Only 32% oppose it (presumably with 10% undecided):

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/legal/articles-reports/2019/10/0...

So far from being the majority view, often anti-death penalty stance is the minority view but the political elite suppress it.

Let that really sink in, most of the comments here are very wrong in thinking the debate is over, with twice as many of the public still supporting it in a country where it's been abolished for over 50 years. Always remember to fight against capital punishment, the deal is not done.

I believe they do this as they understand the nuance better and realize that overall it causes more problems than it solves, so don't want to open that can of worms once it's shut. Looking back in history there's also significant political fallout every time someone is found innocent after their execution. Some hard-right politicians will band it around for easy points with their base, plus obviously the wider public too for more extreme crimes.
For a trivial example like fading out, you're right, but if you want to make dynamically generated animations, hyperscript's features are very helpful (The Web Animations API is a boon, but browser support isn't there yet).

Separation of HTML/CSS/JS doesn't always mean separation of concerns. Every application has a different definition of a "concern", and if it doesn't align with the separation between languages, you don't get decoupled code, you intensify the symptoms of tight coupling.
> Two people with a laptop are more and more equipped to take on the goliaths of the industry (or get acquired by them) than they were in the past.

This is how it works now. But if hardware manufacturers start working more like gatekeepers (see app stores) then the two-person-disruptive-startup becomes less of a possibility.
Incarceration also is irreversible as each of our time is finite. It should concern us when we downplay the risk of false incarceration, it also is unacceptable.
What's up with the rest of that website?
People themselves choose death over long prison sentences [1]. Which is less humane is a matter of perspective.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz
I guess one has to consider what's more costly: temporary service disruption, or an inflated bill? There is also the option or rate limiting per IP: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38444923/aws-api-gateway...
Right up to the point where you explain what that means in practice.

As ever with polls it depends how you frame the question.
Short answer: You don't.

Long answer: As soon as a highly emotional topic is under discussion, humans feel like an attack on the idea is an attack upon themselves personally. Once that happens, their higher reasoning gets short-circuited and they begin defending "at all costs", including rationality. The more of an identity-belief it is, the harsher the response. They will say anything, even untrue or unfair things in order to "defeat" their attacker. Pointing out flaws in their reasoning only makes things worse. Bringing up evidence only strengthens their resolve (the backfire effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belief_perseverance).

Engaging in a debate while emotions are flying is a fool's errand. Wait for things to calm down first.
I really wish I hadn't open this link. So much grief and wasted lives.
Stop Sacrificing Good American Nuclear Jobs for Cheap Chinese Solar Panels
I believe that it's immoral to pay for, and thus support, DRM-infested content to begin with. Just pirate it.
> There are strong incentives for GCP to listen to its customers.

I really want to believe this, but my experience as a Google customer (not GCP, but Suite, Fiber, Fi, GMPAA, etc.) leads me strictly away from considering a business dependency on Google.

I want to love the products but they vanish. I want to love the Google but they're not around when I need them most.
They actually called their software Proctorio !??!?!

From the Greek "anus"

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/procto-#English

I am dying lol
inhuman and barbaric why? You sound intelligent so go on: why is it inhuman?
Sure this is understandable when we are building an OS.

But here we are using Docker so we have full control over the application we are building. Why this craziness of having these huge images containing who knows what?

Is it just because we can? And the cloud providers like us when we do it?
Yeah, this sucks massive monkey balls. That being said, I really want easy GUI emacs on WSL, specifically because I'm stuck on Windows for work.

So, I've signed up for this at home to figure out how it all works. I'm not happy, but this is the world we live in I guess :/.
Run SSIS Packages in Azure Data Factory
And only recently this number dropped below 50%! Wow!
I can somehow understand that argument, "Eye for an eye" and all that, kind of makes sense.

Later on is where things gets scary though, where even death is not enough and it needs to be agonized death!

> I also think that pain should be part of the death penalty [...] rather a healthy period of searing agony

It is beyond fucked up to not only wanting to execute people but also make sure they feel pain while doing so.
I'm not from the US, so my knowledge on the death penalty is quite limited. But I clicked on a link posted below listing executions in Texas, and I was shocked to see that the most recent execution was last year for a crime committed back in 1993. Why?? You've already locked the guy up for almost three decades, what possible benefit is there to executing him now?

I get that he ruined (well, ended) someones life, but what does society gain from ruining his life in turn, to the point of what feels like mental torture: Being locked up for such a long time, all the while knowing that you will eventually just be executed.
And how can you tell the difference between a high pitched male voice and a female voice? It's resonance, and it has a big effect on audibility especially in environments where the lower mids are crowded.

https://youtu.be/21ZfGPp-Ves
Orwell is the modern Machiavelli. In about 100 years, people will be wondering if 1984 was satire/criticism or an actual blueprint for effective government in the digital age, in the same way the real aim of Il Principe has been endlessly debated for centuries.
> opting for spectacles

All while insisting on the humanness of those sweet pharmaceuticals.
It still blows my mind that it was created by one developer and how powerful it is, _while_ also being incredibly snappy.

Also, IIRC, it is fully built on vanilla JS last I read about it.

If someone doubts the potential of JS, VS code and Photopea always tops my mind as examples.
That has been my problem with both podcasts and audiobooks. I can't multitask and have the content be much more than white noise.

The first audiobooks I tried listening to were books I had already read myself. Just to see how it would be if someone else narrated them. Despite having a feel for what the story was already. I'd lose track of it constantly. Akin to reading the same line over and over when tired.
Which is arguably harder to rewind in audio form than in text.

Watching shortish videos on youtube or some livestream is fine for background noise. But to retain much from what was originally a 300 page novel or whatever. Having large parts of just be remembered as static feels really bad.
Another solution is having a no doubt standard needed for the death penalty as opposed to a beyond a reasonable doubt standard.

No doubt standard would require some set elements. DNA + visual recording + electronic records.

I used to be anti death penalty but would be ok with it under a no doubt standard. Not for vengeance but simply society can spend the money on other things instead of spending money housing and feeding individuals who have caused such horrific pain on others.
Sorry, but Vox is not fake news, and you cannot spin decriminalization into full legalization.

My point remains.

Biden is a larger obstacle to full legalization than Congress.
I don't think what has been done here is comparable to other forms of "finding vulnerabilities". Linux and everyone else would be happy if people find vulnerabilities in their code and report them back. And it is not like linux team is unaware of this "vulnerability"

This is more comparable to DDOS ing a web server to test their capabilities of handling DDOS. And they are aware of the issue. And they told you to not do it when you did it before. You just don't waste other people's time/money like that unless they give you the permission.
The software sounds faulty. The black screen is terrible UX; it should just silently set a bookmark and let the student continue.

The overall outcome (and the student's experience and stress) is ultimately a staff issue.

The professor should have been on call, and should have been able to get the student back into the questions, or, failing that, to offer another sitting. I have done both of these, among other remedies, and setting student expectations ahead of time is crucial for avoiding massively stressful problems (stuff like "If something goes wrong, stop and email me. I can add lost your time back and get you into the test again, no matter how long it takes to sort out. You won't lose marks from this." and actually follow through). Software inevitably fails sometimes, and it is just a tool. Staff need to make their own decisions.
What if they did the murder because of a brain tumor messing up their impulse control ability? Humans are just complicated machines that go wrong sometimes. I do however share your emotional position and it would make me feel better to see (actual) murderers get the death penalty.
Society, businesses and families fail when there is no ground truth, right or wrong, historical knowledge and are based on the most recent FUD or feelgoodery.

Arguments and negotiations need to have common grounds on how thing are interpreted. Else the most immoral person flourishes.

Me following this US debate from the other side of the world I mostly see it framed as “the innocent people getting killed” and not the “immoral to kill” debate as per this article. I don’s see it getting anywhere.
Very much agreed. The left and intellectuals have won the debate in most (all?) of the west and the US policies are widely considered barbaric, inhumane and corrupt. The current state of affairs in the US is unfortunately a testament to the US society.

Having said that, the US is quite a specific case and the truth is that the current approach of the left doesn't seem to work there. Progress is being made, but as an outsider, there seems to be too much partisanship on both sides. Too much us versus them. There is as much derogatory and hostile attitude in the left leaning forums as the right leaning ones, with a small sliver of moderates who get lost in the noise.

I can't claim to have a solution to this. The US seems to be a feudal society at this point, where a large portion of the serfs are actively undermining efforts to lift them from their serfdom, and a large portion of the liberators consider the serfs uneducated peasants who refuse to accept what's good for them. They are both led by a political elite whose incentives are to maintain (even entrench) the status quo because it gives them an easily manipulated voter base and a clear enemy to rally against.
You can never 'match' the crime. Even if you go justicing around 'an eye for an eye' style, the perp will always have taken the initiative. You can never get that back. Everything you do is just a reaction.

That is what makes crime so heinous.

So your focus should be prevention at any cost first and foremost, then justice as prevention (= rehabilitation) as well. Murdering a murderer is pretty solid prevention though, I give you that.
"for the murder of a child" - this isn't about the death penalty. This is a "won't someone please think about the children" dog whistle to the "murder all the pedos" brigade.

Again, no-one is seriously suggesting bringing it back. My bubble is secure.
Is it time to admit that simply storing everything as an image is the future?

Sure, it isn't technically as neat, but it gives far more flexibility. It happens already in memes (where text is usually part of a gif)

Text and text encoding dates back from the days when every byte of storage space mattered. Now lossless high resolution images are the norm, and wouldn't constrain what symbols could be included. If you want to make a word be slightly bendy for style, you can!

Accessibility, relayout, etc. can all be done with images too - you simply have a tool which extracts the text, transforms it however you please, and then puts it back as an image.
I don't see any corruption article on the BBC page.
Il take the real person who does the French announcements a St Pancras any day :-)
The equilibrium is based on the hash rate difficulty which increases as more miners are added to the system. Miners can choose to jump into the system at any time with no restrictions. If a hash block is mined 'too fast' then the difficulty is increased proportionally. Of course as miners leave the network the difficulty also occasionally drops. The power needed to run these miners is entirely arbitrary. Just like how an old computer used more power for less computation so too is it possible for asics to get more efficient and there's ultimately a huge financial incentive to do so.

You can't block it or ban it. Like bittorrent it's nature is essentially to be free. Eventually someone somewhere will obfuscate the traffic just enough to get through any firewall or detection system. Ultimately the bitcoin network is actually low bandwidth so sending results from a miner is possibly even with garbage internet.

Even if you 'ban' it all you've done is banned exchanges from converting to and from fiat but anyone who already had bitcoin can go somewhere else in the world to trade it or simply trade it for cash in person. Any jurisdiction that does that will be just sitting out while the rest of the world moves on with the new world economy.

Complaining about bitcoin is peak "old man yells at cloud". Blocking or destroying the network is literally impossible short of destroying the whole Internet.
There is a misunderstanding I'd like to clear up. By saying "Calvinball" I am
not being condescending. I am calling you out for trying to invalidate my entire
line of reasoning by introducting a new rule to Occam's Razor, that it must be
used in a comparison (between two hypotheses). This is a rule that is not there
in the original formulation of "entities should not be multiplied beyond
necessity". It is also not there in subsequent interpretations, including the
interpretation you quote from wikipedia. It's a rule that you came up with and
it is a rule that you came up with for the sole purpose of helping you win the
internet argument. So it's a Calvinball rule.

Besides which, as I said before, there do exist many hypotheses that we could be
making and the Razor is useful in prunning many of them away before we have to
waste our time formulating them and exploring them in detail. For example, all
the hypotheses that start with "Suppose there was a third person in the car"
need not be considered because "there was a third person in the car" is
"multiplying entities without necessity", and so hypotheses that make such an
assumption are less likely to be true than hypotheses that do not.

The misunderstanding I'm pointing out and that I advised you to read wikipedia
to clear up, is that you seem to understand the Razor as requiring at least two
competing hypotheses to be fully formed to the point that they could be written
down, perhaps even in a formal language. There is no such requirement. That's
your Calvinball rule, made up on the spot and for the sole purpose of winning
the internet argument. Or, perhaps, only for the purpose of forcing me to waste
my time by considering all the unnecessary hypotheses that start with "suppose
there was a third person in the car".
European AI law proposal calls out harms of biometric mass surveillance
We had an iPhone before the iPhone around 1995 (?) - Internet Phone was a pretty incredible voip application by VocalTec (?). Incredible that it worked - not so much by today's standards of quality.
> barbaric

Sorry, but that's exactly the kind of world we live in. The world simply is barbaric no matter what we would prefer. When people mess up a little bit, we put them through a process that, despite its massive inadequacy, is intended to rehabilitate them so that they can return to society. The death penalty is for when someone commits a crime so severe that they cannot ever return to society. If you are not able to think of this kind of situation, I suggest you may not be very familiar with the details of truly horrendous crimes. If we don't have the death penalty, we end up in the strange position of housing and feeding and providing medical care for the most harmful people in society at the expense of their victims.
I thought they were called Epsilons.