skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think that many times people have a logical argument (perhaps flawed) underlying their stated positions, but they don't clearly articulate it.

Some good-faith discussion can often surface that tacit reasoning.
>There are hucksters in every industry, and if you ask me, crypto has some next-level hucksterism.

It's certainly hard to compare entire industries apples-to-apples. The worst parts of the cryptocurrency industry are definitely worse than the worst parts of the advertising industry. However, I personally feel like in an "average", "net", or "expected value" sense, advertising may be worse. But maybe it isn't; either way, all I was trying to say is I really just don't like advertising or ad tech, and I wanted to use a rather extreme comparison to viscerally convey that. (Perhaps a little like a kind of "bullshit-industry" analogue of Godwin's law - my comparison was somewhat tongue-in-cheek and bad faith, basically, but also kind of not, because I do like some aspects of cryptocurrencies while I like zero aspects of advertising.)

>that supports indie news publishers

Sure, and maybe someone else could've started one that supports starving children. (The originally posted article similarly mentions that one of their reasons for working on ads is "I give half of what I earn to the most effective charities I can find, and the more I earn the more I can give".)

These all feel like cop-outs to me. I could significantly support independent creators or starving children by running a cryptocurrency Ponzi scheme, but it still doesn't make it positive on net. The difference is that you and the article author simultaneously say that you feel like the work is inherently positive, too, which in my book just makes it delusional rather than dissonant or contradictory.

So I absolutely don't think you're at all behaving knowingly unethically; just unknowingly. I think part of the issue here is that it's generally only a tiny bit unethical, so it takes a lot for it to add up to being a-lot-unethical, and humans (including myself) usually aren't so good at perceiving these potential cumulative effects when they're upstream of it all.

>The core of advertising is just getting some message about your product or service to a relevant audience.

At the same time, I can't not acknowledge this. How can I fault a small business owner for wanting people to know they exist? There's some cognitive dissonance of my own, here. And at the moment I'm resolving the dissonance by disliking the advertising and ad tech industries rather than disliking businesses who place ads. (As long as the ads they place aren't annoying, deceptive, or malicious in any way.)

Maybe my opinion on all this will eventually shift a bit, though, because a lot of it's certainly more emotional than logical. At a very deep, subjective level, I just strongly dislike advertising and everything about it. It gives me nothing but negative feelings. Most of the cryptocurrency industry gives me negative feelings, too - but the industry as a whole doesn't give me nothing but negative feelings. Some part of it gives me neutral or positive feelings.
>It's also worth keeping in mind that living off plants generally kills more total animals (although smaller animals) than living off medium-large animals.

Your net consumption of plants is reduced when you reduce your consumption of animals, friend. How do you figure it would cause the death of more total animals?

>While I assign pretty significant utilitarian value to "stop eating animals", it still falls a few orders of magnitude short of "provide for the health and wellbeing of humans".

People get along just fine eating only legumes and grains and a few other plants sprinkled in.
It would be nice if they could develop a low/near-zero carb version of Beyond Burger. Beef doesn't have carbs, while these vegetarian alternates have around 9 carbs per patty. The dream would be able to do keto diet with vegetarian patties.
not sure we have enough bogs to do that -- it might be an expensive proposition. It would be nice if we could find a way to mass produce petrified wood, though.
I'm curious - what's an example of such an exotic combo?
No, and that’s why the fake meat companies are very careful from not mentioning anything about health benefits, and instead stress carbon nonsense and naturalness of ingredients.

Impossible is legume flour and coconut oil. Legume flour is rough on the gut, and coconut oil is 90% saturated fat, way more than butter. Beyond is soy and coconut.

If you have a moral or other objection to meat, go vegetarian or start eating vegetarian meals. It’s healthier and you’ll eat better. Fake meat has all of the health downsides of lousy meat, has inferior taste, and a questionable story around environmental nonsense.
Not everywhere that can sustain cattle can grow crops fit for human consumption.
The problem I personally felt was that the criteria used to filter out the people "not worthy of the degree" felt very detached from the idea of knowledge. The facts and methods required for minimal passing criteria felt very arbitrary and unless you were one of the people learning 100% of the subject it felt a lot like a system which needed to be gamed to get a good/passing grade. As soon as you need explicit and exact filters for grades and passing the learning resolves less around ideas and concepts and more about facts and techniques which is not what at least to me science and engineering is about.
You only end up with nonsense in the Newtonian model.

Clearly you aren't aware of what the principle of general relativity is. It is not a good idea to argue about a topic where you lack basic knowledge.
and 95% less testosterone
New safety section in Google Play will give transparency into how apps use data
You're right. The water discussed here is just the total rain water that was in the grass the cows ate. Its not taken from aquifers or rivers like you need to irrigating crops.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sGG-A80Tl5g
Which is crazy, but often does happen. I have a nephew and niece, so I've bought baby / small-child stuff, but mainly just around major holidays and their birthdays. And yet I still get plenty of random product suggestions on Amazon for kid-related products, even during the 95% of the year that I'm not looking for that stuff.
I get the intention but wouldn't it be better to just forget the taste of it if you're doing so for the sake of the animal's suffering? To put it bluntly, the suffering ends, but the taste of suffering is still delicious...
The methane output issue is also pretty much total BS.

First off, there used to be over 60 million buffalo in North America, producing similar amounts of methane. We have only 50% more cows today.

Second, whatever cows don't eat is probably going to be metabolized by fungi, which also produce methane (although it's not well-quantified how much).

Third, the half-life of atmospheric methane is only on the order of 9 years (it's a fairly unstable molecule in an oxidizing environment), so its long-term effect is much smaller than CO2's, even though it's a more potent greenhouse gas.

> simply because the taste

It's about nutrition and health. "Taste" is a strawman.
I like how burgers taste, so I want to eat them. But I don't want an animal to experience horrific treatment and slaughter just for the taste, so I seek it out in plants. That makes sense, no? I can like the salty, fat taste but opt-out of the subjugation and slaughter of another being.
Persistent Siri
> I'm watching people in the same breath argue that racism is solved and that Blacks are genetically predisposed to being poor. How does this pass muster?

Because if they genuinely believe that blacks are inferior, then racism truly musn't exist from their perspective. They think that blacks will naturally be worse off and thus elevating them from there to a level where they're equal is actually unfair and racist to whites.

It's insane, I know, but it really is how people like that think.
Systemic racism isn't intentionally deceptive. It's self explanatory, but just like anything the more you investigate the more layered and multifaceted it becomes.

For me it's 3 main things.

1. The way historical oppression can set a group behind another group even after any specific policy has been repealed.

Poverty is often a cycle that can go on indefinitely for generations especially depending on things like upward mobility which has coincidentally been getting weaker since the period of official apartheid ended in the USA. Strange that we seem to be uninterested in spending much on the uplifting of our people now that such spending would need to include all people.

2. The way that bias against a group can result in that group being disadvantaged despite there being no rules or laws in place that require that and even in spite of it being contrary to policies.

Like the way that black people are half as likely to receive a callback for a job interview as an identically qualified white applicant or that despite being less likely to be found with contraband black people are twice as likely to be searched by police.

3. Would be laws and rules that do not target racial groups, but unfairly benefit or disadvantage racial groups.

This would be local property tax based school funding resulting in poor neighborhoods getting inadequate funding for schools resulting in predominantly black schools being underfunded. This is also drastically harsher penalties for crack compared to cocaine.
What you're saying a little silly, given that if people had decided to stop eating cows 20 years ago, the cow I ate a part of today would never have gotten to exist in the first place. An argument that cows are abused and are better off never existing would be a reasonable one.
Bryan Caplan is a charlatan
Curiously, where would you draw the line for violence?
> I don’t consider the slaughter of animals for food to be particularly more violent than the wholesale shredding of plant fibers at harvest

You probably think of "violence" differently than most people then.
If we all moved to impossible beef, cattle populations would plummet. However, despite popular perception, for most of its life before slaughter, a cow is raised in large open ranges for grazing, like in the California foothills. Only the last parts of their live do they get put into crowded feedlots for "fattening", which might be described as inhumane. Perhaps, it would lead to the advent of wild cattle in the California hills, as land owners stop caring.
The unfortunate part is that there is a non-significant number of people who are allergic to contents of these faux-meats.

..but nobody is allergic to meat.

There is a theory that benefits mostly ascribed to keto, are actually due to reduced inflammatory load in the diet.
> Why make an apple taste like the death of a cow?

I’ve been “vegan” for the better half of a decade and I don’t think this is confusing at all: because it’s familiar and it tastes good.

Familiarity and tastes can change over time, but it takes time and effort, and people are already putting effort into being open-minded when they try a veggie burger instead of a beef burger.

Sure, a quinoa salad might be healthier, but most people aren’t choosing between a cheeseburger and some ultra-healthy vegan cuisine.

We should aim to make these choices easy and comfortable instead of criticizing folks for taking baby steps in the right direction.

Just my two cents.
My interpretation was more: nature doesn't have morality, animals don't have morality, other animals aren't worried about killing each other, the only reason we are worried about it is because we are projecting the horror of death that comes from being a cognizant being onto animals that are unlikely to even have a concept of "death", so it's not a moral conundrum for an animal that has evolved to eat meat (humans) to eat meat.

Or, said another way: if animals being killed to be eaten is inherently bad, should we not be trying to replace the diet of all lions on earth with BeyondMeat too?
Yes, it is pretty awesome. I am was sort of sad to hear that it is slated for deprecation and removal. After the Java focus shifted from running in the browser to running on the server, the security manager was seldom used.

There was a lot of interest in early days of Java and the internet in mobile code that could move between devices. It seems that interest in such systems has waned. I suppose this was more of a solution looking for a problem. However, I still think that there is potential there in some way.
Social justice is totalizing as an ideology, I was not referring to past racial discrimination.

In social justice activism "racism" is redefined to mean "inequitable outcomes". So of cause with this change of definition you can say the "group" experience racism when you really just mean that one group does better than another. DEI is the prescribed social justice solution, ignoring how the equity doctrine has destroyed every society it touched.

If you use the colloqial definition of racism then affirmative action, diversity quotas, DEI preferential hiring&promotion are all widespread policies that discriminate against white people based upon their race. DEI programs also use negative racial profiling and stereotyping. The claim that white people do not experience racism is therefore objectively wrong.

So social justice is arguing for explicit racist policies to fix "implicit racism", which really means "equitable outcomes"
Your video is pure garbage. The detailed rebuttal is false....
There is no such thing as slaughter without cruelty. The animals do not want to die, and they are killed. That is _always_ cruel.
Yeah once you go to six bits (five is weird because it’s an odd number) you really start looking at seven - and seven is also odd (which is why seven + parity took off for awhile). But now you have eight and that should be good enough for anyone.

Interestingly enough B talks about how the new computer can address a “char” and not just a whole word at a time.
> is they require no violence against animals.

And you wonder why people can't take absolutists seriously. The marketing power of the moral superiority concept is no new thing. Pivoting the crux of success of your ideology around an incredibly poor burger filling makes no sense either.

In the UK restaurants are being allowed to reopen in 10 days. In London there are an incredible density of steak restaurants which happen to already be booked out completely.

I think your appeal to squeamishness around slaughtering animals will feel entirely cringeworthy to most emotionally intelligent persons.
What part of “ without the slaughter of living, feeling, individual being is so unbelievably important and incredible” is not emotional? The words “feeling” and “individual” are purely emotional in this context.
I had clubhouse for nearly two days on my phone before I removed it, and that was a day more than Tinder managed to survive.

I simply could not find anything interesting to listen to on Clubhouse.

Perhaps I am not an "App" person.
It’s hard not to think of this twitter thread from almost 2 months ago which laid a compelling case for how it would go down.

Threaded:
https://threader.app/thread/1371972261004070913

Twitter:
https://twitter.com/shaanvp/status/1371972261004070913
I’ve been starting to look for alternatives TBH. I’m really starting to get ‘Reddit 2015’ vibes from the type of knee jerk low quality cynical uninformed comments I’ve been seeing float to the top recently somewhat more frequently than usual.

Not jumping ship yet, but I always like to be ahead of the game a bit.
bitcoin development is basically dead.

javascript is universally hated, yet everyone uses it. I don't understand why.
My main concern is how the insects are raised. My main thought with this is that if they're using any type of chemicals that it would travel down the food chain to us.
Uniswap already has mainstream adoption lol. V2 has had more volume than Coinbase for almost a year and its less than a year old.

People that want alpha learn that interface, the end.

If you want limit orders and big ole' chart taking 3/4ths of the screen so that you can pretend the Bollinger bands are suggesting a breakout, then you have to use third party GUIs, it is all possible and there are plenty of github projects about it. Uniswap V3 makes that even easier.

HFTs already exist here, they provide a service mostly liquidity depth. Crypto exchanges are fairly unique in that they operate many conflicting roles when in other markets they would have fiduciary duties.
In 1974 (when the eco movement was ascendant), California passed a series of laws regulating the cutting of trees - even on private land. You now need to file these 500 page "timber harvesting plans" (THPs), pay expensive fees, and wait a few years for approval. Although legally the state is obligated to approve all compliant THPs, practically speaking they can find flaws in the THPs, drag their feet on approval, and you may need to take the state to court. So yes, it's incredibly hard to harvest trees in California compared to other states, which is why the amount of trees harvested in California is much lower than in other states.

The wounded souls crying about greedy timber companies clear cutting forests in the 17th Century or whatnot are strangely silent about the Ohlone regularly burning down 10 million acres a year. Because the Ohlone realized that in the arid western U.S. (what used to be called "the great American desert"), trees were dangerous elements that needed to be suppressed.
Emotion might not be a good basis for argument, but neither is "X is also non-zero amount bad so why should I stop Y even though it is more bad"

Ex: "Donuts are bad for you because they are sugary" "Well, apples have sugar in them too! Should I stop eating them as well?!"
Hey, I agree with pretty much everything you just said. One other obstacle that is worth highlighting is that (at least where I am) the cost delta between beyond/impossible and plain-old beef is pretty massive, and the #1 thing keeping me from eating more of it.
Yew, Rust / WASM client web app framework
You do know that most of the founding fathers were far from religious people (especially Christian religious), and the whole church and state separation thing was there from the beginning because about the only religious thing anyone could agree on was generally A god (and depending on the founding father that was controversial) - not the specific flavor/interpretation of the god?

Unlike some European states, the United States has never been particularly Christian in any solidly identifiable way - more a hand wavey ‘as long as we don’t talk about which sect or really think about it too much’ way.

Quakers? check. Protestants? Check check. Catholics? Check check. Unitarians? Check evangelicals? Check. Gnostics? Check. Sunnis? Check. Jews? Check. Baptists? Check. Mormons? Check. And a whole lot more.
Appreciate the thoughtful commentary.

I'm curious if you're suggesting that the only way for a new social network to overcome the "cold start" problem is to restrict access along some strata at the right ratio to incentivize the largest audience at the bottom to join?

Do you think a social network that starts off as entirely "open" to everyone would be challenged due to lack of a "fomo" factor, or is a quality product with the right vision enough?
> But for advertising as a whole, it's not a massive industry because it doesn't work.

Though I don't doubt that you are right on the whole, this is a poor argument; homeopathy and other snake-oil are a massive industry as well.
> How do you figure it would cause the death of more total animals

Cattle grazing causes less animal death than industrial plant agriculture (land clearing, pest control, insecticide usage, etc.).

> People get along just fine eating only legumes and grain

No they don't. Healthy vegans are few and far between. Not that the SAD is much (or any) better.
Your problem with Vim is that you don’t grok vi
I'm finding the S2 instead of the Watch X, is that what you meant? Or if you mean watch X, do you have a link?
Not really, Netflix definitely wants to have you use their platform frequently so you value it enough to keep paying for it. But this is balanced against the cost of making sure you don't run out of content and cancel anyway. They also pay a bit more for bandwidth and servers if you watch a lot.

So while Netflix wants all your TV time, they derive no extra benefits if all your time us TV time. This is absolutely not true of advertising supported services that make more from you the more time you spend.
There is a mountain of academic study on the subject. I don't blame you for being unfamiliar with it, but without doing the research I don't know what you think you would have stumbled across by accident that would have proven things to you. Especially if you're already primed to think it's not real.
I do other sysadmin now but the job of getting whatever random vendor's installer into an SCCM deployable state required tools to see just WTF they were doing.

I recall one .exe installer, unzipping to an MSI, which installed the program files but then ran .bat file to run three separate driver installers for the associated hardware. And I had to get it all working in AppV.

I don't use Procmon much now as my work has changed, but I still consider it a good friend.

I am glad linux has other ways to do it but as a linux noob, I'd try procmon first if I had to.
> The technology to prevent wildfires is controlled burns. ... A combination of anti-controlled burn mentality, building expensive homes in forested areas, and an antipathy to "greedy loggers" has turned California into a tinderbox waiting to go off.

Agricultural and Prescribed Burn Notices are currently approved in the vast majority of the state [1]. and you can see from the historical data [2] that only Aug - Oct have significant restrictions.

[1] https://ssl.arb.ca.gov/pfirs/cb3/cb3.php?id=16

[2] https://www.arb.ca.gov/smp/histor/histor.htm
How does that calculation work? Prairies were inhabited by huge herds of large grazers: bison. Thats how they stayed as prairies.

There were about 60 million bison on the American prairie before 1800. There are about 90 million cattle in the US across all states - with large numbers outside the bison’s range, in states like New York and Tennessee and California. So - roughly in the same ballpark.

Pasture-raised cattle don’t seem so different to me - but I am not very informed on this topic, maybe I am missing something?
The lack of basic website maintenance makes this project appear abandoned.

Their stencils and templates a _very_ old.[0]

[0] https://pencil.evolus.vn/Stencils-Templates.html
I value your perspective. Thank you.
In that case I'd rather subscribe to/pay the author directly. (Who's to say an ad impression on some company's website will even help the author in any way? Maybe there's a chance it could indirectly, or maybe there's a layoff or pay cut planned soon anyway.)

For that and several other reasons, I strongly prefer independent solo journalists (or very small independent self-operating teams) rather than ones that work for publications. I think Substack and Patreon are far better solutions here than advertising is, for example.
I’m exactly like you, I love the taste of meat and I love animals. Whenever it is an option I choose beyond/impossible meat. That means virtually no one has to die for me that day.