skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As always, the question is who's going to do better? The Americans already gave it their best shot and this is where they ended up. Certainly not any of the members of the EU, it'd get hobbled by regulation as they've never cared about actual free speech of the kind the Americans value. It's sure not going to be coming out of anywhere in SEA or NAME with the way governments in those regions tend to operate. So who's left to do better at a scale that matters?
Because you get drastically diminishing returns as you increase past a certain size, as a huge piano is a hassle in its own right. The linked super long piano won't work even in concert halls -- it's too long to move around backstage!
must be one of those AWU promoters
> It doesn't matter how meritorious you are -- if you don't have ownership you get nothing.

Tell that to the recent graduate getting multi hundred of thousand offers (with stock!) from FAANG companies.

Tell that to the entrepreneur owning 100% of his brand new company after filling a few forms and paying a small fee. Because that new company is worth exactly 0.

Ownership by itself gets you nothing. Making that property worth something is everything. And that’s why self made billionaires deserve their rewards.

> That people fall for the propaganda

It is funny to pretend to care about a category of people but then refuse them the right to think for themselves. Classical leftist: "We need to save the poor! From themselves…"
Alright, I'll try.

Last time you used an higher level interpreted language (like JS), did you have to worry whether or not the machine instructions it was generating were the right ones? Generating instructions at runtime sounds pretty unsafe, no?

You didn't, right? You can just mostly assume the language works and get on with your life. That's how unsafe feels to me when I'm programming in Rust, I never have to worry about it and pretty much never need to use it.

Sometimes you'll run into a problem where you need to use unsafe, but that only happens very very rarely, for example when creating an interface to a C library, but most people will never need that. When that happens, sure, you'll have to be extra careful and make sure everything works. But after you're done with that small piece, you're back into safe Rust.

So, how does it work in practice, if you really need to use unsafe? Suppose you have a C enum with values MyEnum {A, B, C} (but it can be any int in C!), and you want to use it in Rust. You can make an unsafe wrapper that tries to parse the enum, and it can either return None - if it was an invalid integer, or return Some(A), Some(B), Some(C).

But once you get the wrapper right (which is not hard), Rust will guarantee that values of type MyEnum have values A, B or C and nothing else, so you never need to worry about the exceptional case again.

You worry about it once at the boundary and that's it.
> Maybe you aren't winning hearts and minds because you aren't actually offering something people want.

I feel like most people have no idea what tech is offering.

There have been some special purpose projects (FreedomBox, NextCloud, &c) that have specific ideas, but the relatively new YUNoHost is a fairly new breed of examples to create an easy to run way to get people started hosting their own stuff. https://yunohost.org/

Federated model is interesting, in that it means not everyone has to operate their stuff. Instead, we have protocols of interoperability, and lots of hosts. That gives people the experience faster, but yes, it's still currently sub-par. And most importantly, there's no Competitive Compatibility (ComCom, formerly called Adversarial Interopability), so most things we write will not interlace with & work with people's existing networks.

> Maybe you aren't going to re-kindle any dreams because you are not offering anything worth dreaming about.

You're welcome to your opinion on that. Indeed right now is a good time to question this. General purpose computing is a very nebulous header, with a lot of different ideas. Certainly there's the negative-liberties we can see slipping away, as DRM, as cloud-computing removes us from power over our systems. The appliance-ization of computing is indeed the forefront of what people think about when they think about general purpose computing, and I tend to agree, that a far more revolutionary outlook with much further reaching positive-liberties is what we ought to be dreaming about. The difficulty is that these endless open frontiers are still unsure: each of us has to carry our own little light, try to figure out who elses light to join with, where-as the big huge forces of the world & their snuffing-of-the-light is much more visible, apparent, easy to rally around. So we need to make some traction on the big dreams forwards, we need something encompassing, and bold that floods people's imagination with possibility & excitement.

This is just my 2c, but the ubiquotous & pervasive computing world, I think, spoke to a vector of computing as cross-system, as connected, that currently is almost entirely anti-General-Purpose. We don't have good open general systems for working cross system. This is one hub of capability that we need to encompass into our dreams, that needs to be part of the General, for the General to get far. But it's just one piece, just one aspect. The dream needs to immerse us fully.

I think work's like Karli Coss's data-liberation is basically the ground floor of where we need to start. This is still early prototype stage, basically, but we need wide-spanning access to a huge cross-section of the digital (in much easier to pull off manners) to even begin to allow the interesting dreaming to begin, to begin to inspire each other: https://beepb00p.xyz/myinfra.html
Because there are an awful lot of knowledge domains where there is consensus among experts, and one can verify their own knowledge along those lines.
There's a lot more to the world than the US, and that's really missing the point. "We're out of masks" is a perfectly good answer to "why aren't governments giving them out" in March 2020; it's not a good answer a few months later.
You disagree with your own statement and you don't even know it!

"No speech should be illegal" - should I be able to threaten people then? That's speech. Should I be able to detail my plans for how I'm going to commit a crime? That's speech.

Should I be able to scream at the top of my lungs in a public space?
Should I be able to use a loudspeaker to broadcast my voice (or an advertisement) to drown out all other sound in a public space?

It sounds nice what you're saying, but it's not what you actually believe, so I kindly ask you to argue less in bad faith.
YouTube censoring Covid research not backed by WHO – Joe Rogan
I'm assuming you're in California.

Their property tax laws are absolutely insane but good luck ever changing it.
Indeed, if you skip this you're going to have a weird "bug" some time in the next years where a customer accidentally got the ID wrong and the system accepted it.

Google Analytics either doesn't do this or got really unlucky. But some day I had to troubleshoot an issue where the data for a totally unrelated website ended up in someone's GA data set. Not just the usual spam, but millions of visits to the wrong website which had an account ID very similar to the client's.
There is no illusion of safety. It's 100% safe, within the code you right, if you don't use unsafe. If there is unsafe in code you use (write or shared), it's a handful of lines which you can nearly grep for it's so easy to locate.

Rust devs (like myself) aren't illusioned into believing that my code and _everything below it_ is 100% safe.

However i can positively assure you my code is 100% safe. Well, assuming no bug in Rust-lang/compiler. My _programs_ are not guaranteed to be 100% safe unless no unsafe is used, but Rust lets you know for certain what is safe, and what is unsafe.

The point isn't absolute safety in your program. The point is absolute safety where you think there is absolute safety. To strictly know what is unsafe. And to reduce the total lines that are unsafe.

edit: I'm confused by the downvotes, what is incorrect or controversial about this?
they have a kick-ass ML team including David Barber[1] but could use a good web designer it seems.

I also wish it was 'one lesson from four years of building tools for ML'.

On a serious note, there is a book on Human-In-The-Loop ML by Robert Monarch, published just a few weeks ago [2], where concepts like "active learning" are elucidated. Also, Andrew Ng recently started 'Data-Centric AI' competition, focusing on improving the data but keeping the model fixed[3].

There seems to be a growing emphasis on data quality while models become commoditized and outsourced to 'ML as a service' (MLAAS) platforms. If I understood correctly humanloop project aspires to be 'all-in-one' MLAAS serving both the models/predictions but also taking care of data annotations, targeting the market currently served by e.g. Scale.AI and Salesforce Einstein.

[1] Bayesian Reasoning and Machine Learning http://web4.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/D.Barber/pmwiki/pmwiki.php?n=...

[2] Human-in-the-Loop Machine Learning https://www.manning.com/books/human-in-the-loop-machine-lear...

[3] https://https-deeplearning-ai.github.io/data-centric-comp/
Sure, but in the meantime the misinformation voters get to pick the textbooks. This is a bit like educating people in fire prevention when the forest is already ablaze.
> mention that he sold cocaine

which was a bald-faced lie.

entrapment is a thing.
A few percentage increase in a city of 8 million results in thousands of uprooted lives at the margin. I used Bed Stuy as an example because it seems to me a marginalized community. It is surrounded by poorer and richer neighborhoods that do not have the same housing problem I have described. In some sense Bed Stuy is the "frontline" where the processes I describe converge.

Much like in war, the people on the "frontline" experience direct disturbance to their way of life, while those who live far away from the "frontline" have their lives go on as normal even if they are aware of the problems nearby.
Media Lab, "Negroponte: Windows key to OLPC philosophy" https://www.cnet.com/news/negroponte-windows-key-to-olpc-phi... cha-ching!
This is one of the times I think Brazil manages to beat up the USA: we do not accept confessions unless they are confirmed in front of a judge. (Chapter V of the Brazilian Penal Process Code)

Also, if you report yourself before the authorities know that the crime took place, you get an automatic reduction in your sentence (article 65 inciso II item b of the Brazilian Penal Code)
Well by all means regulate, but realistically, for example, if we had a Google Drive run by the 'other side' of the political aisle (kind of like Gab v Twitter), then if Google banned certain content, it's unlikely the other would, and vice versa.

Unfortunately, the issue here is companies responding to something other than the market.
You seem to be making an argument from authority by leaning on experts, and I don’t fully disagree with that approach either. But trusted authorities regularly betray trust, and use their label of expertise to push their own agendas. A recent example is found in the false attribution of the PNW heat wave to climate change (https://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2021/07/flawed-heatwave-repor...). They also can be wrong solely due to making a mistake (COVID had many examples of this with rapidly changing guidance). So you aren’t free from the need for critical thinking skills, because in the most important matters you have to still challenge them. To be able to do so, you need to have trained that muscle beforehand.
isn't that what they do here? https://iterative-refinement.github.io/assets/cascade_movie2...
Maybe simplest is best: Google, the company with pockets deep enough to develop and market Glass, couldn't see the business proposition in Ara.
I don't get why this is controversial. Documentaries constantly have someone reading a written document while imitating the voice of the author, and none of them come out and say "This is not the actual voice of Abraham Lincoln". Why is having a computer imitate someone's voice different from having a person do it?
>adding to the fact that the way official inflation/CPI numbers are calculated seems to keep them artificially low.

No they are not. How do people even come up with this idea? The official CPI is 5% which is exactly where it should be. Even if you change how they are calculated it doesn't change anything except make it harder to do proper monetary policy. Keeping inflation down doesn't even make any logical sense because interest rates depend on how close you are to full employment rather than the current level of inflation. Inflation tends to be a useful indicator for full employment in normal times but we know the exact opposite is happening right now.

If anything central banks want higher inflation because the zero lower bound restricts the influence of monetary policy and persistently low inflation and deflation requires unconventional monetary policy which has a huge track record of failure. Getting off the bad monetary policy requires that evil inflation that so many people fear. It's kind of funny. All that "hyperinflation" in stocks, housing and Bitcoin is actually the result of low inflation.
According to this theory, the resource consumers in the universe are just as vast as the universe itself. At the end of the series the final resource constraint they deal with is running out of physical matter in the universe. Once the civilizations depicted in the book are done mastering survival in this universe, they all turn their attention to surviving the death of the universe. Stability simply moves the survival goalposts, and “we could probably last a few billion years” (or rephrased, “we will probably perish in a few billion years”) becomes the new existential crisis to solve.
Can't ignore the usage rates, too. How many Mac users keep regular backups by separately buying/setting up/maintaining extra equipment vs. how many iPhone/iPad users keep regular backups by opting into iCloud Backup at the prompt during setup?

I don't have statistics on it but it seems very likely that the latter model gets hugely more uptake.
I enjoyed the running gag (based on many episodes) of Bourdain going on a local fishing/hunting trip and failing to catch anything, and then having to scramble to some other local place and make up for the lack of a catch which some times were some of the highlights of the episode. And then on rare occasions when they did catch their prey, it made for a nice juxtaposition.
Interestingly enough this also would seem to play against the common narrative that right wing views are being immediately shut down on FB. It seems pretty clear they're trying to shut down extreme conservative discussion but it also seems like they're failing pretty hard.
Those convoluted supply chains are a recent phenomena. Some international trade is necessary but large countries like the United States are capable of producing almost everything they require domestically. Trade is only preferable if you can import something for less money than you can manufacture it locally.
OK, but does that affect my point? I didn't delve into that because it seemed irrelevant.
How could we tell the difference without knowing the motivations of the people responsible for it? Has their conduct been likely to inspire confidence that they were on the up-and-up? Gain-of-function research is used for offensive as well as defensive purposes; it is inherently dual-use, and it can be hard to draw a line between the two. We aren't in a position to be able to exclude the possibility that this research was being carried out with the intention of being transferred to pure weapons development once suitable candidate pathogens had been developed.
I don't know why that project died but I'm not surprised. It reminds me of how smart phones used to have removable batteries and were easier to replace parts for but many consumers preferred to buy slim phones that couldn't be opened.
Norway is sort of like a drug pusher who is trying to wean themselves off of getting high on their own supply.
> in Stable (what you call Stagnant) vulns get backported.

This isn’t always possible. And sometimes creates more problems than it solves or ends up not mitigating the issue completely.

In any case, backporting is a slower process. And back ports for non-stable are not done by the security team but volunteers.
The answer to your question is that people in Bed Stuy and NYC in general organize against ALL new construction.
I have not personally seen this! I will check it out, thank you!
Link isn't working for me. Stuck on a captcha.
It doesn’t matter if competing platforms are built. Normal people don’t care one way or another, especially outside of how those other platforms are popularly characterized, so those other platforms will never take off. Only a minority of people are conscious of their liberties and subsequently any potential infringement to them.
In the other hand, government agencies are not saviors either.
In America you can count the number of public sector 'companies' on one hand but in others you cannot.

And every once in a while, government does take over a company, like GM for a long time was a public company.
People have been saying we are reaching the end of improvements to battery chemistry for decades, and yet every year we keep pumping out small improvements and we double production capacity. PV solar continues to get cheaper as we increase capacity and apply the previous generation of chip technology to the production process. None of this is 'breakthrough' technology, just the slow and constant grind of iterative improvement.

The technological progress of the next hundred years will make the previous hundred look like we were all standing still. In the 20th century GPS was a bulky device, wireless comm was power hungry and slow, and any sort of real computing required an expensive lump at least the size of a small book -- two decades into the 21st century and I have a device in my pocket that is magic and for $10 I can put a SoC into an existing device (or something new) that has good GPS, fast cellular data, and sips power to give it “smarts” that would have been unprecedented in the late 20th.

The 20th century may have seen big changes in aerospace as we first learned how to master the field, but it was the dark ages when it comes to computing, materials sciences, biology, and solid-state physics -- every one of those fields will deliver results over the next 50 years that will make the 20th century look like the 18th century in terms of technological advancement.
TBH I was totally in the dark about this. With the article having put this in focus for me, I now feel a little blue about the whole affair, though in a diffuse kind of way.
I've quit keeping it on hand and won't buy more than can be consumed within a single day. The dose makes the poison. Nothing good comes out of being constantly stoned.
The reason a distinction is drawn is because government has more rules it must follow when interacting with the public than google. Non-governmental entities in the united states are less regulated than the government.
I can't believe this awesome joke is getting downvotes. It's like pearls before swine, but I'm leaving it up so you can find out which amongst you are objectively bad people.
> I’d much rather you could see the score, but still be able to read them easily.

I agree. Actually I'd almost forgotten they did that since I use the StyleBot extension and have ".commtext { color: black; }" in the CSS for this site, which overrides the fading. I also enabled the setting to show "dead" comments; they aren't always worth reading, but it happens more often than you might think.

Actually that's another aspect in its own right—HN doesn't just fade downvoted comments but removes them altogether if they're downvoted enough. And sometimes comments are actually deleted by the administrators and not just marked as "dead" and hidden from the page by default. It's their site, and I would uphold their right to not be forced to host comments they object to against their will, but there is some actual censorship going on and not just convenient "curation" of what shows up clearly in the default view.

I don't see downvotes as censorship when the downvoted comment is still available for those who care to read it, and not actually deleted. To me it's more of an indication that, in the reader's opinion, the comment was perceived as not contributing to the discussion. In general I prefer to upvote the good comments and save the downvotes for trolling, flamebait, etc. which would be likely to derail the thread. To put it in words, an upvote is like saying "check this out" while a downvote is either "don't waste your time" or "this thread belongs somewhere else". But you can still see the downvoted comments if you want.
Some religions have hurting people codified in their main directives - so some should be stopped from being shared.

Ponzi schemes? Crypto investments? Drugs? Gambling? Alcohol recipes? Sugar?

i-robot protect us all with truth! (except hunter laptop, and lab leak theory - hide those haha)

Actually - I am kind of okay with this new kindergarten gloves way of treating the people - let's give them the sharing a ability they deserve. California knows best what's good for everyone - just don't talk bad about beef. Well you may have to censor that in some other parts of the world.

Different kindergarten for different countries? different states?

Think how much better and safer this internet world is going to be without all these bad things!
Pretending free speech was only about the town square is ahistorical.

Free speech has always been about distribution as well - publishing a book or a newspaper, distributing pamphlets - those had similar reach to a random FB post or YT video today (in terms of percentage of the population).

Of course newspapers had no obligation to carry anyone's message, but, far more importantly, a newspaper couldn't be censored by government for printing stuff the government didn't like.

It's also important to remember that there used to exist many more newspapers - factories would have newspapers, most towns would have one or two, many clubs and similar organizations would have one.
Here's a link[1] to the original article - that might work better though the archive version is much more pleasant to read.

1. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/facebook-axes-team-far-ri...
"I absolutely do not subscribe to the idea that the purpose of society"

Your moral impetus isn't an important factor in trying to understand underlying dynamic of the situation.

There's a basic operating competitive dynamic going in small business & services that is almost as old as time, or at least it goes back to even before antiquity before we even had the language to describe the economics of it all.

Huge swaths of the economy operate on this basis.

Most small business owners are not particularly rich, and if you add up the risk premium they take on, they're probably not that far ahead at all, if at all.

Wages are what they are due to input costs (including labour) beyond their control.

They have no market power and they are 'price takers' not 'price setters'.

There's generally no situation in which they can magically raise wages and give longer hours as the OP fantasized.

The only thing they can do is hope to be especially prudent, intelligent, conscientious and of course lucky.

Larger entities & chains (i.e. Starbucks) probably could raise wages a bit. Regulations such as minimum wage will obviously have an affect but have side effects. And of course large pools of illegal migrants who's presence hugely skews the above board market for labour (this is major factor in Texas and Cali).
Soapbox, Zine, Flyer, Specialty Forum, Usenet, Civilian Radio

You aren't censored if you can't generate a link to Bits on a google server.