skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The comment you quoted was in response to this:

> Did you even read that paper? I doesn't say what you are claiming at all. It says they're going to hold a conference to determine if it's worth the risks, and says they should continue the moratorium while they do more research. Ah jeez.

A bad faith comment ("did you even read your link?") followed by a sarcastic "Aw jeez". Sure, two wrongs don't make a right, but only one wrong is being banned. For rthe record, I don't think the other poster should be banned, either.

> It doesn't change the ban, because that wasn't the reason for banning you. As I explained, we ban accounts that use HN primarily for political/ideological battle. Surely you're not arguing that your account hasn't been doing that? It plainly has.

I used HN for debate. It is difficult, if not impossible to avoid treading into political/ideological realms. I've gone through your comment history and have found numerous examples of you entering into the political/ideological yourself. If you need examples, I'd be happy to provide some recent ones. But I brought more than political/ideological debate to HN, I also submitted scientific papers, recently declassified documents and other materials that (at least to me) were of interest. But that's not the point, the banning of all "political/ideological battles" is a shortsighted policy that will eventually render HN a dead sea where nothing interesting is discussed because no ideas can be openly challenged.

> Everyone in this situation feels like we're only banning them because we secretly disagree with their politics, but the truth is that we do these bans regardless of what the account is battling for or against. We're trying to enforce the guidelines because the guidelines are the best blueprint we have for the kind of forum HN is supposed to be.

Well, you had to go back four months for a previous guideline violation and my account is only six months old. Two strikes and I'm out I guess, and the previous violation was a throwaway comment that wasn't targeting anyone. Seems like I was on a list (of sorts) and this was as good an excuse as any to ban me. But banning posters for expressing political/ideological viewpoints is itself a political/ideological battle. The political/ideological views that survive on HN (and they do) are nested firmly in your political/ideological blindspots. Which is why I suggest a more balanced approach to moderation would ensure that at least this poorly thought out policy is applied more evenly.

> If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. That means using HN for curious, thoughtful conversation, not getting into flamewars, not trying to smite enemies, and so on.

No, that's ok. I think I brought considerably more good faith debate to HN than anything else. It may not have aligned with your political/ideological sensibilities, but there's little I can proactively do about that minefield. The "rules" won't save me here.
Describing code review as an 'inefficiency' doesn't seem right. Developing code without review is not more efficient than with code review. It may be faster (at first) to skip code review, but the output is going to be lower quality. You're just cutting a corner, and it's going to bite you in the future. Nothing efficient about that.
I am not sure I understand the question. The brain "restarts" by itself if its otherwise normal and perfused.
Their explanation is reductive, but it looks like more than that. For example, in the standard library [0] the definition of the Map type is a function of other types.

[0]: https://github.com/yatima-inc/introit/blob/main/Map.ya#L10
The use case for buying groceries on the internet was clear (getting food without having to go pick it up yourself). It was just a question of things getting big enough for the economics to work.

The use case for distributed ledgers is not at all clear, after over a decade of tinkering.

You could be right, but I wouldn't be surprised either way.
Looking forward to trying out the new multitasking features. They seem to be an improvement of iPadOS 14, and require fewer gestures. The window management looks a little confusing, so I’ll have to give it a shot to see if it was just the presentation that made it seem that way.
So, at least in the US justice system it's one dollar, one vote.
Cheers, and thanks for asking. :)

> are there any papers on it?

None that I know of, but I have never looked. Hypnosis in general has a hard time being accepted by conventional science (going back to Mesmer and Ben Franklin.)

> the use of hypnosis to create unconscious “hooks” into conscious thought.

Yes, this was literally one of the first things I learned when I started studying and using hypnosis: a binary Boolean signal from my unconscious to my conscious minds (idiosyncratically we (my conscious and unconscious minds) settled on twitch of the right arm shoulder for yes, left for no. Technically it's a trinary signal, with no twitch indicating a "reformulate the query" or "does not compute" response.)

Really, the thing to do is improve communication and report between the unconscious and conscious minds, operating with deliberate cooperation (rather than the ad hoc programming you get from life.) E.g. when I play chess I do not think about the moves, I look at the board and "just know" which move to make. I can actually decide whether to beat someone or lose, and by what degree! (As you can imagine, it makes chess dull.)

> This could be useful if for whatever reason certain features of conscious are not easy to detect (another comment mentioned that it’s harder to get clear signals from the frontal cortex).

Yes, translating and amplifying signals is trivial, your brain does it all the time. However the entire point of having a "conscious mind" is tied up in being easy to detect. The ego is a communication device.

> Then there is the idea of using muscle twitched / GVS as an information channel. It seems hard to get a high bandwidth from this (compared to invasive or EEG-like approaches).

I actually have no clear idea of the bandwidth limits from the unconscious mind to some specific sensor system. Keep in mind that touch typing is already a form of this: the unconscious mind moves the fingers and a stream of text goes into the computer. Achieving that sort of bandwidth should be no problem: set up a binary signal on each finger and an "ACK" on the thumb and you can transmit bytes in parallel, eh? Build something like this "squeezebox" keyboard[1] or a dataglove[2] and use chords from greater bandwidth.

We also have the face, a high-bandwidth output channel, and I have no doubt that a camera (or two) with a simple neural net could be used to train the system to recognize facial tics and expressions. You would have to be a little sophisticated in how you set up the feedback loops: you want to settle on motions that are easy for the face to make and for the NN to recognize. That's kind of a neat thought experiment. (No pun intended.)

I don't doubt that you could get higher bandwidth from implants, I just don't think it's worth the surgery (for able-bodied folk. For people with paralysis it makes more sense.) Not EEG though (I know a neuroscientist who has experience with high density EEG and from what I gather it's just not that great. Like trying to find whales by analyzing surface waves.)

[1] https://peterlyons.com/problog/2021/04/squeezebox-keyboard/

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dataglove
> they will have to live with the injury for the rest of their life. Case in point - this girl.

I’m conflicted in taking this side, but if it’s millions — with an s — given just to her, then she’s basically set for life. Never has to work again to maintain a decent middle-class life, because her FB friends saw her nudes. That seems wildly disproportionate — most everyone I know would gladly take that trade.

If it’s a class action suit, or is constructed such that not all that money goes to this one victim, that’s a different thing. The part that disturbs me is whenever being a victim can become similar to winning the lottery.
A healthy, competitive reponse to a single former intern one-upping you would be something among the lines of "ok, kid see if you can replicate THIS".

Also a healthy response would be to issue a C&D - assuming they have a case here.

But this? We don't have all the details and Replit might well be in the right here, but still - that's not how you handle such cases.

And I should know, because I've been in trouble regarding my comments on HN with a company I used to work for, but the communication on their side was firm, polite and professional.
On one hand, SV is full of sociopathic founders who'd torture you for breakfast just for the giggles. On the other, being a founder is incredibly hard and very stressful, and when you are stressed lines get murky, and you sometimes do things that you wouldn't do if you took a moment to rest.

I wouldn't immediately assume bad intentions where bad decisions in search for good outcomes were made. To know which one it was, one has to first know the people really well, and know them both when the times were good and the times were bad.

Someone once told me: "Never assume, you make an ass of you and me (ass|u|me)."
It's really just a laptop without a keyboard, not really that groundbreaking. The inflation calculator puts the advertised price at almost $1000 today. So, probably the only reason it was "coming soon" was there wasn't much of a market. It's a bit disingenuous to pretend that "what we use today" is the same thing. Today you can get the same functionality for about $100, only with modern specs. Something of equivalent specs could likely be gotten for free in a landfill.
For every single one of my Open Source projects, having an exit strategy has played a central part. This included setting clear expectations and boundaries around what the scope of the project is, defining "feature complete" to be below what some users are happy with, and making sure occasional contributors can fix the critical bugs. Millions of people are currently using what I've built, and I spend zero time on those projects any more. Life's too short to be a slave to anything.
These are all latin-style words, there are much worse horrors in english importing them.

One of my favorites is "ingenuity", used as being clever or inventive. It share the root with "ingenuidad" in spanish, which means "naive" (-ity endings correlate with -idad endings in spanish, the same way than -tion goes with -ción).

The word that means clever or inventive is "ingenioso" which in english should be "ingenious" (-ious goes with -ioso, e.g. "precious" and "precioso"), so as a noun, it should be "ingeniousness".

It confused me a lot when I was learning english.
It's so funny that Microsoft copied Chrome's left space between the edge of the screen the the first tab, but they didn't realize that Chrome still counts that as part of the tab (https://imgur.com/a/hI2XrcX). So if you try to quickly mouse over to your leftmost tab on Edge, you'll end up clicking the menu section instead and un-fullscreening it.
While studying fine art I built a site that was intended to experiment with disrupting advertising by picking on a bullshit pseudo-scientific term, "bifidus digestivum", used by the company Danone as the live ingredient in their yoghurts, and ranking highly for that term on Google - it eventually got to the number 1 spot. Danone's legal team got in touch and we danced around each other for a bit. It was clear that the original domain used their trademark and that would be enforceable in court, so I gave that to them a couple of weeks after setting up a new domain that wasn't just their trademark and redirecting all the traffic until Google caught up with the move: https://whatisbifidusregularis.org/ (They'd changed the magic ingredient's name by that point, partially because of the ridicule the initial name provoked). I replied to their emails addressing their points - no, I was not making any money from it so there's no commercial harm, I was just laying out the facts so there was no defamation etc. and after two or three bits of back-and-forth they went away. The site's had something like 500,000 visits since I built it in the late 2000s, which isn't a lot in the large scheme of things, but I hope it helped people who wondered whether it was bullshit know that it was bullshit.

I'm speaking from a UK perspective, so perhaps in the US it's different. While ignoring lawyers is stupid, waiting until they actually get in touch and looking at the merits of their case is not stupid, as the parent comment says. Then if they seem minded to pursue it anyway then fine, back down. But companies don't want to spend loads of money suing someone with no money either. The people who really lose are the people who entirely ignore the lawyers or are determined to take a case to court when they don't have the money for it out of some misplaced sense of righteousness.
Signal: developed by a non-profit organization, free and open source, end-to-end encrypted in all regions, no encryption key hosting arrangements with any government-owned third party firm
That's great that you are doing your own resiliency testing.

Having someone other than those officially on the Jepsen project run the Jepsen test is a good start. However, many databases have claimed to run the Jepsen tests themselves and pass, but when there is an actual paid engagement for a distributed database there are always issues that are found. That's generally true even for unpaid official runs as well although Zookeeper did pass existing tests. Every database is different and the paid engagement will design specific tests designed to break the database in question.
My kind take on this is that the author is more social than a lot of developers. Some people like water cooler conversations at work and a lot of informal meetings. That makes sense for some jobs in some companies.

My less kind take is that the author is not at all a self starter. Structure is something that absolutely can be applied to life even without an office. The example of faster feedback loops was supposed to be positive, but it was a pair of developers who very quickly broke their production environment.

It's clear the author is better off working in an office and I think that it's good they can. I'm also pretty sure that I wouldn't want to work in _that_ office.
Afaik tablet weaving doesn't really scale, neither in the complexity of the pattern nor in the width of the fabric. Also tablet weaving is fully manual process, whereas the key feature of jacquards is automation.
If you follow Amjad on Twitter, it's evident that he is incredibly petty.

Repl.it is a company with no moat. They are features are literally used by dozens (check the number of runs of the repls)

Only companies which are so insecure about tech get into petty fights with college interns.
What's broken about the contact list?

What's wrong with ringing all your Apple devices?
> copying it

"it" could refers to the feature, not the code. That sentence is clearly ambiguous, the meaning slightly change based on what it refers to.
Incredibly, in my native Belgium, there's an old lady turning 100 (!) come September. She helped save almost 1000 jewish children by moving them to safe places. Many were hidden amongst other children in catholic boarding schools.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andr%C3%A9e_Geulen-Herscovici
The flip side of that is, any smart contract that has stood the test of time (say compound, makerdao, etc) should be expected to be rock solid, because the incentives to hack them are very strong.
All of what I write here is my opinion based on what I have seen referenced in the original post. There could be facts or circumstances that I am unaware of that render such opinion ill-informed. Please don't sue me or take offense -- I offer only insight from quite a bit of life experience.

From the email exchange posted [1], I would say Amjad was right in asking that the repository be taken down. Regardless of intent, Radon's actions had given the appearance of unethical behavior. Bear in mind that, when considering ethics, intent is not as important as appearance. While Amjad's statements were not necessarily optimal, I would not fault him for what he said. There are so many other adversities in life -- we should not make ourselves adversaries of one another.

A couple red flags that stood out:

(1) There is an implication that Amjad's time is owed to Radon. Radon's meticulous documentation and other content posted on the Internet is suggestive of overachievement and perfectionism, traits that can be very valuable in many technical domains. Unfortunately, personal correspondence usually is not one of those domains. One should always be most respectful of other people's time. Time is a non-renewable resource of unknown quantity.

(2) Some of Radon's statements and expressions, whether they do or do not contain truth, are quite adversarial and should be avoided in correspondence. Those that stood out to me are "You are categorically in the wrong," "... you have no legal or ethical basis ...," "... I have acted in good faith ... [and] your conduct ... has been grossly rude and unprofessional," "Despite repeated inquiry on my part, you have refused to point to any specific feature ...," "... your characterization of the morality of my actions is baseless and in bad faith," and "It's a shame that you decided to terminate our relationship this way." In all things, regardless of the circumstances, the first rule should be "Be respectful."

While I can imagine myself in Radon's shoes and empathize with what he did and why, experience has taught me that certain norms of civility, whether they be shallow or even illogical, are expected in discourse. My advise to Radon would be to let the whole thing slide. Life will bring so many more unexpected twists and turns; save time energy for life's truly important battles that are yet to come.

[1] https://imgur.com/a/OaEOwu2
That's also the approach that we took in the GenDocu project - instead of writing the whole essay, you just generate code sample and the short descriptive comment. Less writing for developers, less reading for consumers.
First, no need to apologize!

Then, I don't think this is a specific problem with open source. My view. The lack of knowledge about how to delegate work is a real problem. I mean, I worked with junior developers on the edge of breaking down while being on same team writing pointless games to pass time.

I think this is more of an issue with young people enjoying the heights of the Dunning Kruger Effect.
That's complicated. I work at a very large health care org that employs ~1000 radiologists. We definitely would love to have a good solution, but there just aren't good enough vendor solutions and even working with vendors it's hard to get things to an acceptable state. In that sense I have more hope in derm.
The new SharePlay feature is actually quite cool. You wouldn't think it would be terribly difficult to share a movie or TV show on a video call, but actually due to the DRM that everyone uses it's almost impossible.

Using the normal screen sharing feature of most video conferencing apps simply doesn't work and shows a black screen instead of the video. The workaround that people I know have been using during the pandemic is the torrent the media and play from a local file which works fine, however it would be nice to have more legitimate means of doing it.
U.S. Recovered Millions in Ransom from Colonial Pipeline Hackers
Facetime is for users who think videocalls are called "Facetime"
"FaceTime on Android(browser) is such a brilliant way of guaranteeing your Android friends will always have a lesser experience without completing excluding them. The video chat version of green bubbles."[1]

1. https://twitter.com/russellholly/status/1401950208133632004
I've been familiar with "tank man" as a meme specifically in reference to the famous photograph. PBS Frontline ran a great documentary in 2009 on the photo and its subject, titled "The Tank Man":

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tankman/
This change single-handedly defeated communism
Besides Notepad++ making a statement (which I think does matter), their code change will be relatively ineffective, as DuckDuckGo gets lots of results from bing anyways.

I see this really as more of a social statement and less as a technical solution.
El Salvador to Make Bitcoin Legal Tender
> I couldn't find the "tank man" censorship problem, and I looked.

You can just search for tank man to get a picture of it: https://sm.pcmag.com/t/pcmag_au/news/b/bing-image/bing-image...

> I'd never heard of "tank man" as a meme; I'd have looked that up under Tienanmen Square.

It may not be the ideal search, but look at how there are no results. Clearly some kind of censorship mechanism triggered.
Swift Playgrounds for iPadOS 15 lets users code and submit apps to App Store
So, tens of millions of people. Seems like a reasonable strategy for attracting non-iOS users to the iOS ecosystem by enabling their massive user base to exert social pressure.
I don't think it's productive to equate the green/blue color thing with the accessibility or parity of experience between web apps and native apps.

The green/blue distinction is very meaningful. It tells you whether your chats are encrypted, which is not a default to SMS technology. In fact it would be more honest or accurate for Apple to display a padlock to inform you that you're secure; instead we have colors.
First, no need to apologize!

Then, I don't think this is a specific problem with open source. My view. The lack of knowledge about how to delegate work is a real problem. I mean, I worked with junior developers on the edge of breaking down while being on same team writing pointless games to pass time.
> In most industries it seems to be a good thing (i.e. space shuttle)

It really isn’t the case in most industries. There are a couple of industries with inherent complexity and where the cost of failure justifies some kind of over-engineering (you could add particle accelerators, medical imagery devices, aircrafts, and things like that). In these cases, you throw a lot of money and very good engineers at the problem. Most industries are not willing to do that, because dit is expensive. So they produce unreliable crap that breaks all the time.

In the vast majority of cases, over engineering means more parts that can fail in more “interesting” ways, and that are more difficult to diagnose because the thing is more complex than it needs to be. “Over-engineered” is really not a compliment applied to a car or a house, for example.

Engineers are not gods. Sometimes they are stupid just like any other human. They also need to stay humble and recognise that a system needs to be as complex as needed to fulfil its purpose, but not more.

> We seem to have a knack of taking positive attributes such as clever, and flipping them!

“Clever” is a compliment. But you can have too much of a good thing, as in “too clever by half”. If you depend on something, you don’t want it to be clever, you want it to be reliable first.
This sounds dumb

I have never heard of "tank man", and Tienanmen square is not my first thought

And what about google? It is still there after several recent controversial issues
Xcode Cloud
How to Integrate IPFS with Ethereum