skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's the other end of a technology curve, when a civilization ceases use of an outdated piece of technology. In our case humanity is looking for radar because we're currently broadcasting it. Why would anyone continue using radar to communicate within a few years of quantum entangled data processing, capable instantly transmitting data instantaneously across vast distances? There might be a few living that rock star lifestyle of HAM radio operation and messenger pidgeons, but at that moment our civ would go narly completely dark to our sister civ's SETI program. All humanity's existence so far has been nothing but spark swallowed up by the darkness of time. Our use of radio a fart in the wind.

This theory is incredibly type-zero-civ-pocentric. A species capable of interstellar travel will have mastered technologies we can't even comprehend. By the time humanity is able to meaningfully reach across the stars, we'll have spread life across our entire solar system and everything we'd ever need. Unlimited energy from our sun, a lush and verdant Venus and Mars, mining colonies across the solar system producing vast quantities of any desirable element, not to mention an Earth whose biosphere is a shining jewel - perpetually locked-in at peak biodiversity.

Begs the question of what we would ever need from another civ, and furthermore what a similar civilization would ever want from a bunch of squatting troglodytes such as ourselves.
Wouldn't it be a problem for the restaurant if people were contently sending food back or being disappointed by the product because it didn't look like the ad? I mean, the difference is striking! (see https://i.imgur.com/e9EaVbu.jpeg). If I genuinely expected the first burger in that image and got served the second one I'd demand my money back and maybe never step foot in that restaurant again! Wouldn't most people? It seems more likely to me that most people accept that the first burger is a fantasy.
> It's their problem if they miss changes, but it's your problem if you used deception to cause them to miss it. This exact thing that you suggested is what he told me I shouldn't do if I want it to hold up in court.

I did not at all suggest trying to cause them to miss the changes. I suggested (with the caveat of asking a lawyer), "Don't say a thing; leave it to them to bring it up". That's a common negotiating tactic, even in amateur or interpersonal negotiations. I'm not imaging they won't see it, I'm imagining they won't want to create problems for themselves by bringing it up.
Hmm not a bad idea. or may somebody could just maybe you know, pay the $100, rehash it and sell the summary/rehash of the book for $20? Even different translations of it.

On a more general note, I wonder if a group effort/initiative exists to "open source" the rewrite of contents of these unbeleivably expensive text books? While content can be copyrighted, the re-explained content versions of these cannot be right?
I doubt ppl would want to give github all their actual secrets
I was so pleased to hear that the cock was a later addition. I feel a tiny bit of national pride to know that my ancestors, seeing the Cerne Giant, thought "you know what that needs? A big old stiffie."
I'm serious. Or someone from another country's intelligence group went rogue and leaked it. I doubt Russia would be looking that hard for the leak, and there's no reason to assume the leak was from someone British.
No more CNN clips. Got it.
> Essentially if an administration comes with an agenda to start a new war, they put the right people inside the State Department and then those guys just need to comb for anything (validated or not) to find "informants" to make the case for cyber attack. Followed by making the case in media that cyber attack is military attack and it requires military retaliation.
This will bypass the entire US intelligence system to validate the source of threat. It just needs one person to claim they were involve in cyber attack against US and it was sponsored by the government of Iraq, Iran, Venezuela, or any other country we want to go after.

That’s a very oversimplified odd narrative. Unlike Iraq and mysterious nuclear related material objects, cyber attacks are happening. And it’s quite evident US is lacking in this area. The US doesn’t need “one person” when there are clear signatures and traces that are substantiated not only by the US intelligence system but also by non-government entities.
Show HN: Unavatar.io – Get unified user avatar
I'm not defending Google's policy here. But imagine for every lab leak that Google falsely blocked, it also blocked many dangerous conspiracy theories before they got out of hand. I think is boils down to numbers and I think Google is probably in the best position to have the most accurate numbers, the question is are they also making a decision that is most consistent with those numbers.
what is the difference to drawing him on a fictional painting? or edit a photo?

People who complain about that sound a bit like those mythical tribes that are afraid of photographs because they may rob their soul.

EDIT: i'm not sure that this is wrong, only confused
Corona did this to me. With all the mental stress I did not even miss it for a few months. Until I did and went back to normal.

Glad it helped you! And interesting to hear that stopping isn't the only way too ;)
What?! "Kowtowing" has absolutely no racist connotation whatsoever! You're a lunatic.
Apple removes ‘Fakespot’ app from iOS App Store following Amazon request
Because the issue isn't where the data is stored, the issue is what the data is used for. In this case, it would be used in a way that still reveals personal information about me -- for instance, in a FLoC-type setup, it's still being revealed which cohorts I'm a part of.

Having the data stored locally is certainly better than having it stored in someone else's database. No argument there, that's an improvement. But that's just making the problem slightly less bad, not solving it.

These sort of schemes just strike me as being sneaky ways of continuing to engage in the abuse that the adtech world loves so much. The major difference being mostly what machines are doing the tracking.

Also, of course, your browser history isn't exactly private even though it's stored on your machine.
This was raised as a bug back in 2004, but the thread shows the contributors didn't consider it so: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20040419231413.EE480CF...
Exactly as azernik says. If you are interested in a lot more detail this reports spills the tea: https://www.ssl.berkeley.edu/~mlampton/AllenReportHST.pdf
> Perhaps the tokens on the blockchain can't be tampered with but their real value is manipulated by small groups of people all the time

One of the only reasons people focus on its exchange rate against the dollar is the dollar has disproportionately more adoption. As adoption of cryptocurrency increases, its volatility against other currencies will decrease

> I really don't think that cryptocurrencies are saving us from speculative bubbles and poor investments

People messing around with defi get-rich-quick schemes don't fundamentally affect my ability to buy a house. The FED keeping interest rates near zero, along with QE, does. It is driving up the prices of houses and other assets, which effectively punishes people who prefer to save as opposed to taking on debt.

This is hard for some people to wrap their head around, but not everyone wants to take on loans to buy stuff. Contrived example: if a house sells for $300k with interest rates at 2.5%, but $600k with interest rates at 0.1%, I'm in a worse position in the latter situation if I want to pay cash for the house from my savings.

We could have a whole separate discussion on the usefulness of debt financing, and ways to profit off investing money in assets that appreciate faster than debt interest rates.. another time.
I'm not really qualified to go into this, but maybe read a little bit about the Pauli-Exclusion Principle works. I get the feeling that might be illuminating.
That was the Sicily episode- Bourdain wanted to show the ugly, scammy underbelly of Sicily I think. This kind of thing is there in a lot of the Mediterranean, but it unfairly makes all of Sicily look bad. I had a bad impression of the whole island until I learned more about it years later. Sicily is mostly nice with a few pockets of unsavoriness like anywhere, not a mafia island. In my opinion too many episodes are like that- projection of a certain fantasy about a place while ostensibly engaging with the real authentic experience.
I’m disappointed that no comment yet below is concerned about the morality of such a thing.
The march to implement the TPP as the de facto policy of "private" monopolies continues unabated, with full support from our completely amoral and lying intelligence community.
> guess who is stepping into the regional great power void: Russia

Russia is a spent force. It's population and military are aging, its resources are stretched; it's more a nuisance than a menace. (This is fine. Britain was, too, after WWII.)

China is the real threat in the region, and it's likely moving into the vacuum. (For reasonable reasons. The Taliban can help secure their western border.)
You can start to see the restrictions creeping in. It seems inexpensive tablets don’t play videos from the the major vendor (Netflix/amazon/hbo) if the hardware/os don’t support
“Widevine” drm solution.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widevine
It was surprising to me when I learned about McGraw-Hill considering how many of their textbooks defined my schooling in the '90s and beyond: https://www.nytimes.com/1989/05/18/business/mcgraw-hill-and-... (https://archive.is/bZKuA)

> McGraw-Hill Inc., long the subject of takeover speculation, quieted those rumors somewhat yesterday when it said it had signed a standstill agreement with Robert Maxwell, the British entrepreneur whose empire includes Macmillan Inc., and would form a joint publishing venture with him.

The username "maxwellhill" also makes total sense knowing this.
Interesting article and discussion.

I always wondered how the focusing actually works. It happens „automatically“, but what is involved? Are all cone types used for the focusing, or mostly the green-type ones? Or are there even special, dedicated cells for the focusing only? Does the control ober the muscle controlling the lens shape goes via the brain, or is there a more direct mechanism?

Is there an expert around to explain or give some links to explanations?

(as a side comment: as a teenager I learned to control the focus point to a certain degree. There were these pattern-3D images, „Magic Eye“, and since the perceived depth does not correspond to the actual distance of the image, they eye needs to correct. I guess the same applies to 3D cinema, and may well cause the eye strain reported by many)
> Edit: Within the law. To be honest, there is very little I see that should be censored beyond CP.

The thing is, people are never going to agree where the line is drawn. So I’d rather let individual companies decide where they draw the line and if that happens to be not where you’d agree, then you can go support an alternate, if this there are many, who draws the line elsewhere. And for those who don’t want a private entity owning the infrastructure, there is always solutions like IPFS.
I think if you're opposed to people obtaining that much wealth is, how do you stop them? How do you prevent Elon Musk from investing heavily in Tesla, growing the company and ending up owning billions of dollars worth of it's shares?
Hi Andy,
thanks for the feedback on the site! We're actually redesigning at the moment so it should hopefully be fresher soon :P.
Also great pointer to Rob Munroe's book. He actually used to be CTO at figure 8 before they were acquired.

You seem to be pretty clued up on the area, what do you see as the pros and cons of an end-to-end approach?
I think I'm confused here.

I don't mean to be pedantic, but stomping an anthill wouldn't be 'winning' you would be pressed into your own retreat pretty quickly.

I believe the quote holds true, leave an out they will retreat or at least try. Cutoff all egress and it's a fight to the death.

Or was that what you were saying and I misunderstood? Or was I just wrong on all accounts?
The situation I've described would involve raising prices 6% and doubling the money many workers actually earn. Inflation wont rob this workers of these gains.

Nobody is interested in you proving that minimum wage is the primary force driving down pay by virtue of you making up the numbers for what portion of the labor force immigrants make up and then concluding since its a really big number of workers it MUST have the effect you describe and then busting out the wikipedia entry on illegal immigration.

This isn't moving the discussion forward.

If you want to avoid a billion businesses paying shitty wages for mostly unnecessarily part time jobs the path forward is simple.

Increase minimum wage and make it a function of total dollars AND hourly. The greater of 600 per week or 15 per hour. Make it expensive to rely on part timers. Meanwhile we can make benefits especially health benefits not the employers problem by rolling out universal health care.

Everyone's costs WILL go up but they will go up evenly and if we end up with a few less Taco bells the world will probably be a better not a worse place.
Google Drive is a global content delivery network. A document flagged as "Share with link" is reliably hosted worldwide.
That really should be generalized to support N algorithms. Some sort of quorum protocol, maybe.
Ask HN: How do you organize your “useful stuff” in an appartment?
I have lots of stuff (various small equipment, cables, sharpies, small screwdriver, velcro, ...) that is scattered across my apartment.

If I had a house, I could devote space on my garage to gather all of that, but this is more complicated in an appartment (I do not have a spare room).

Do you have some clever strategies (boxes, labels, ...) that ideally force you too keep all this organized?
This is basically the same as the Y component used in JPEG, right? Could the phenomenon described in the article be caused by the fact that they used JPEG images? I.e. would we observe the same thing happen with raw/uncompressed images?
So have your replicators approach a system from an unexpected vector; one course correction in interstellar space should be enough.

Also I'd expect the probes would communicate with the homeworld via relays (where they were replicated) rather than directly, so it'd take a fair amount of effort to unravel a replicator network unless you caught one of the very first probes.

And also it'd be conspicuous if there was a volume of space in your network where your probes always failed.
Chobham armor is just an informal/generic name for composite armor. The actual designs vary from tank to tank and are highly classified. There's no singular style of 'Chobham armor'.
There's a difference between disagreeing with a position and finding it "abhorrent".

Your evidence with regards to interracial marriages does not support your point. Whether "something can be discussed" is an entirely different question than than "do you support position X". The very fact that they were able to take a poll is strong evidence that talking about it was not verboten.
> What's the problem with that?

> If you hold strong believes that can be met harshly by the general public, you better be ready for the pushback and think of ways to make it accepted. That's how it has been done since ever.

The problem is that we're not talking about the general public. Let's say I'm Jewish. Someone on the internet may "doxx" me by finding a group of neonazis and spreading my information there, resulting in me getting threats and hate.

The internet seems to specialize in this sort of "doxxing". Why? My theory is that the internet, even if you have a real name for a handle, still distances and dehumanizes others to the point where it's hard to understand the pain you're causing.

It's hard to walk up and slap someone because you feel the slap and see them wince in pain. It's easy to DM someone on twitter something far more hurtful than a slap, laugh about it with your tribe of neonazis, and forget about it the next day.
It is going to depend inagine. Very expensive and easy to transport lumber, purchased for cash with the same people buying a million a week. Maybe should raise some flags.
My go-to place in a collapse scenario has been Delta, Colorado. Good farmland, good water supply, not much surrounding society to collapse, surrounding desert and mountains form a barrier to armies or armed gangs, mountains for timber, coal nearby. You might even be able to use hydro for electricity. The downsides are oil and metals - I'm not sure either would be very accessible.
Former Googler here (11 1/2 years, including in Ads)

The idea that algorithms are "neutral" is laughable. There is a loosely organized group of activists out there who are aware of how these algorithms work and actively manipulate them.

"Engagement metrics" are nothing more than these people pushing the buttons.
It’s not clear to me what you’re asking people to critique.

Life coaching and cognitive behavioral therapy are both already things, and there are people who definitely find them useful, as well as people who don’t find them useful.
Cool, now do the western intelligence community. Let's analyze what kinds of "troll farms" they might be setting up, e.g. comments here and on reddit (by which I mean the entire website). Let's see if we can figure out which super PACs might qualify as "troll farms," while we're at it.
In capitalism ownership also extremely easy to acquire and readily offered as a great motivator.

> a legion of employees

In a newly created company? With what money?!
Yeah, that's an absolute joke. They'll either put massive qualifications on "uncensorable" right out of the gate or pretty quickly have their hand forced by court orders or PR disasters. I wouldn't even be shocked if they wind up badgered into it by their own users (how likely is it that a few dedicated developers decide to publish a whole lot of atheist, socialist, and LGBT advocacy apps?).
kde linux is popular.
>Who the hell gets to judge what is 'to be payed for' in this world you're talking about

Those who demand the payment, obviously.

Denying the existence of the god or being gay could be something to be payed for in some places and obviously that is horrible thing but anonymity doesn't solve that.

Fighting for a change or leaving that place solves something. Alan Turing himself was subjected to these things in the United Kingdom. A few decades later things changed in the UK and had nothing to do with the anonymity.

Now those who think that gays deserve equal rights demand payment. Again, anonymity it's not helping the anti-gay folks but simply creates low quality discussion and stress and nothing more.
>The issue is that we know from experience, after 20+ years of the modern Internet, that if you make a 'free speech' drive/repository place that's widely available, it will host the absolute worst of the human race.

And that's just fine. People have the right to be assholes.
Are solar storms and coronal mass ejections are underrated as a danger to society?

It seems to me like yes. Anecdotally, every time I've brought the topic up with people who work in fields like electrical engineering or for power companies, it's not really something that anyone's considering or planning for. Hardly anyone even knows about the Carrington Event.

A Carrington Event in 2021 could be so crippling.
Google has property rights.

They don't want BS that is harming everyone on their property.

I would ban the same on my property.

That said, there is no reason to ever use Google. Nothing they offer is so critical that you must use them.

I don't use Google for anything and never will because they are a spyware company.

You willingly work for a spyware company and are trying to claim personal morals? How does that work in your mind? Genuinely curious.

> We should be able to implement services like these, that are free of ads, on globally distributed infrastructure, with no central authority, to have truly free-flowing information.

How does that work?

Who pays for it?

Who manages it?

You realize that would create a de facto government if an actual government wasn't running it.

Look at any website that has truly "free-flowing information".

They all end up being a cesspool filled with racists, sovcits, terrorists, and pedophiles.

Even places like Kiwifams has rules and deletes posts and bans users that violates their few rules.
Go burn a Koran and see what happens.
The famous legend of NYC is that they had the vision to build infrastructure beyond current needs.

Now, it's trendy to view any investment by democratic government as wasteful, and to reduce the taxes by which the community makes that investment to nothing.

What will happen to future generations, who have us as their forbears rather than the visionary New Yorkers.
Woo! Yeah!
I don't think "Good" is unambiguous enough to trust the platforms to promote it. How about simply "related"? Show people the content they've explicitly asked for. If people explicitly ask for outrageous content, then fine, but we needn't force feed it to society.
"Dangerously untrue" is entirely subjective. NSA director testified that Snowden revelations were untrue. Snowden revelations cost US credibility, and probably has hampered our ability to "protect the globe". Does that make Snowden's revelations dangerously untrue?

Is there a specific legal test you could propose to distinguish actually 'dangerously untrue' information from info which just threatens existing power structures?
What makes you think this is the first time anthropologists have studied military food? That’s quite an extraordinary claim.
The one thing I wouldn't expect from electrical engineers is a focus on nomenclature - I do love electronics but I am perpetually annoyed by similar niggles as you are (it seems) + a tendency to teach the same equation 3 times in 3 different regimes even though I have spent years training myself to be able to identify these approximations myself.
Science isn't a god with priests telling you what it says. It's a process that anyone can and should do.
> A downstream consumer might not need to use the keyword unsafe, but by calling such a function, they have de facto lost memory safety.

That's a silly definition of memory safety. You can't write a non trivial rust program that doesn't use unsafe in it's dependencies. No interior mutability, no allocation, no containers.

The point is these uses of unsafe are checked by the author to ensure they can't introduce unsound behavior through the exposed safe API.

> Rust in practice is likely not as safe an ecosystem as C#, because Rust users are more likely to use unsafe blocks for performance tricks.

Sort of agree with you here. Unsafe code is rare in C#. But C# has race conditions so some kinds of bugs are more common. But C# isn't as suited for systems programming type of problems or really high performance code.