skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Don't be disingenuous. The problem is viewpoint discrimination. Spam isn't a viewpoint. Porn isn't a viewpoint. Libel isn't a viewpoint. We can limit the ability of tech companies to arbitrarily censor points of view while still keeping the platform free of spam.

How? Create a cause of action whereby if a tech company removes someone's content, that person can go to court and ask that a judge determine whether that content removal is some kind of anti-spam operation or viewpoint censorship. You don't let the company have the final say.
Damn, the Reddit commenter is very casual about being non-consensually filmed while showering. That's a harrowing tale all through if it's true. I totally get why they decided to keep quiet, though.
> EDIT: A non-lawyer's suggestion (talk to a lawyer before you do this): Skip signing or edit documents (cross out and initial sections you don't like, add words - and initial each change) and then sign and send it back. Don't say a thing; leave it to them to bring it up - most people won't bother disputing it with you.

My actual lawyer's advice is that doing this can be viewed by a court as "fraud" if it looks like the intention was for the counter-party to miss the changes. 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 ended up signing a contract that said "cannot work for any customers, competitors, or suppliers for twelve months" of a global company that worked with every industry and most companies. I went the route of hiding my next jobs in LinkedIn after I left.
Issues with ISRs are different. They'll sorta appear when rust is used inside the Linux kernel, too.

For example, can rust make sure some kind of function is not called at any level when called from certain kind of context (say atomic context).

Can rust help detect/prevent you from accessing some multi-register SFRs or memory locations from main context without making you disable interrupts first in the main context?

And this constraint is only relevant if the SFR or said memory location is ever accessed from some ISR, and the access is not atomic, otherwise disabling interrupts is not necessary.

Do you have to wrap all these accesses and keep track of all this manually just like in C or does rust have some concept of "colored" functions, so that you're forced to wrap accesses to certain memory locations only if these accesses are shared between differently colored functions.

I'm not a rust person either. Just wondering how rust would help me with the most complicated aspects of concurrency in low level programming. Allocating/deallocating memory and keeping track of it is easy compared to this.
I don't think it's a bad argument. The UCC defines money as something that has a government attached to it. If people treated leaves like money for simulated drug sales, it shouldn't get them jail time.

"Money" means a medium of exchange currently authorized or adopted by a domestic or foreign government. The term includes a monetary unit of account established by an intergovernmental organization or by agreement between two or more countries.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/1-201
And normally in the UK and a believe Europe the more senior you are the more likely a NC would be valid.
Because I realised that the marketing about it being mostly harmless and the happy go lucky attitude towards it is wrong.

It was having very real, very serious negative impacts on my health.

It's an addictive drug with negative health implications and a withdrawal syndrome.

Negative effects: lung dysfunction, brain dysfunction, poor sleep/REM suppression, inability to remember what "normal" is when you're high and a lack of awareness of the negative effects until discontinuation.

Withdrawal syndrome: low mood/depression/irritability, insomnia, lack of appetite, brain fog/slowed thinking.

Additionally research has now shown that chronic daily use leads to permanent brain damage in the form of reduced reasoning ability.

It's a parasitic plant that diverts your motivation towards its own preservation and propagation. You fall in love with it while it takes away your ability to realise what's happening.
Who succeeds in maintaining weight loss?
I once paid an exorbitant[1] amount to fly in a glider. The pilot used a Kobo for navigation. After the flight I talked to him about it. He's a C/C++ SW developer, and he actually ported a popular navigation SW to the Kobo. It was quite cool - not sure if it was this particular SW, though.

The Kobo is probably one of the best ereaders out there if you want to hack things.

[1] It was a very short flight as my stomach couldn't handle it.
That doesn't answer the question though.

I could understand the objection if one objected to the concept of infinity in the first place. Like "infinity is not real therefore any logical statement you make about it is non-sense".

What I don't understand is the mindset that would accept to be presented with an infinite number of sets but then not accept that you can choose an element from each set, because "the procedure will never be done" or something like that.
> But after the government built houses for each former FARC member and their families, everyone started cooking at home, where kitchen duties have fallen on the shoulders of women, unlike their time in the guerrilla, when men and women cooked as equals.

What a terrible shame. Without passing any judgement, going from an equal society created from desperation, since being given what they need to survive, returning to one of traditional roles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIt-l2YmH8M
It’s nice that Facebooks enables you to reach customers and make your businesses viable and profitable.

Doesn’t mean that Facebook isn’t a cancer on society, enabling a skyrocketing in polarization, setting groups up against each other against their best interests, giving megaphones to the most vile humans turds imaginable etc.

The nice and civil “Mount Pleasant baseball league” Facebook page that your ads run on and that make your business profitable are at best an unintended side effect of that.
> I know there are a ton of people who, like you, want alternatives. Unfortunately nobody is willing to pay for it.

I don't know, I pay for O365. I know a lot of people that do. And remember; Google Drive is not free either. To get more than a minimal amount of storage you have to pay. As a result, most serious users of these services are already paying for them.

However, we end up paying AND keep getting judgement on our data. It really should be E2E encrypted and these conditions should only apply for files that are actually shared with external people.

However, I've heard many stories of people getting their accounts banned for having copyrighted content on their drive that was never shared at any point.

If it wasn't for the fact that I mainly have O365 for other stuff (email in particular), I would never pay for OneDrive under these conditions. Imagine your computer suddenly going like "oh hey this is a downloaded movie, you shouldn't have this!!" and deleting it from its harddrive. Or worse, even forbidding you to log in and access any of your data.

Ridiculous of course but this is the situation we now have with online storage. I back my OneDrive up every day for this reason.
Information record media itself should be durable.

Digital informatioin storage has represented a compromise between speed and flexibility of access against durability of media. It stands in marked contrast with numerous other examples. Commercial CDs last decades --- I have several which are among the first produced in the mid-1980s, which still play perfectly. Vinyl and shellac records go back 60--100+ years. I've numerous decades-old books and at least one volume within easy reach dating to 1897, I suspect there are older in the house. With suitable preservation, paper books last centuries and there are extant copies of the first moveable-type texts ever printed, over 500 years old. Papyrus and clay tablets date back millennia.

We can do better than three years. A suitable durable digital archival format is badly needed.
It's way too early for Topol to be counting his chickens like this. Hospitalizations are rising in Israel and the UK and always lag cases.

Not much info in the Topol tweet you linked either, just some numbers with no sourcing and unsupported assertions ("the unvaccinated are infecting each other and the vaccinated") which are completely at odds with what's actually being observed (lots of clusters have occurred in fully vaccinated groups).
One theory I've heard is that hunting for fruit was probably a major driving factor in human color vision, as well as that of other primates. Good red/green vision would've helped our ancestors search for ripe fruit (usually red) by being able to easily distinguish it from foliage and unripe fruit (usually green).
Just to be clear, this is about the "Report Abuse" button. This page lists categories of things that, if someone clicks on "Report Abuse", Google may decide is indeed abuse, and take action. So this does not apply to private files, but to files for which someone with access to the file decided to complain. Note the page title, and that it says:

> After we are notified of a potential policy violation, we may review the content and take action…

There are a lot of comments here. Many may indeed hold the opinion that even when someone clicks on "Report Abuse" for a file being distributed via Google Drive on the grounds of "misleading content", then Google shouldn't take action like "restricting access to the content, removing the content, and limiting or terminating a user’s access to Google products". That's a valid position, and legitimately a criticism one can hold, and this discussion makes sense. But there are also quite a few comments imagining this to be about Google proactively scanning everyone's private files, so just making this clear. (The submitter probably understands the distinction as they put "distribution" in the title, but clearly, some comments do not.)

(Disclaimer: I work at Google but just posting as myself; have no special information here but this is just my obvious reading of the page.)
For anyone still following, the theorem is perhaps best described like this:

We model spheres as collections of points, and given a collection of points there is a fairly obvious way to model the idea of moving that collection around in a way that reflects moving a physical object. The problem is, given a sphere, we can partition the points into six sets, move those sets around, and recombine them to give us two spheres the same size as the initial one. In a very real sense, in this model we can "cut up" a sphere, then rearrange the pieces to make two spheres. We've doubled our volume.

Clearly this is nonsense, and it shows the limitations of the model. But equally, it tells us something important about the maths we use every day to model buildings, bridges, fluid flow, and more.

All models are wrong, some models are useful. -- George E. P. Box

I would add:

Some things are nonsense, but sometimes the nonsense can tell us useful things about the way the models are wrong.
In America it shifts it to the US constitution, which provides a more principled approach to speech than the biases of tech companies. Is it a perfect solution? No. But it is closer to it than the present situation.
Tbf, anything can overtake those garage decorations.
Can you elaborate on the grad student NDAs?

I'm surprised, because this seems like it would undercut the whole point of grad school (i.e., publishing) and it's very different from my experience (NDAs limited to patient data, etc).
Don't worry the the unlimited capital has an expiry date in september. I'll be there to watch those wages crumble into nothing.
Facebook axes team over far-right data
You're just confused about how marketing works. The fact that you're dissociating tracking sophistication from performance tells me all I need to know. To learn more, dig a bit into the iOS14 impact on the Facebook performance results.
The term "private company" has no relation to whether or not it is traded publicly. It simply means the company is not owned by or controlled by (in some sense) the government, but by "private" individuals
Binance crackdown widens in Europe and Hong Kong
More, as in 10 times more for green, and 3 times more for red. So it's true that we're pretty blind to blue, just the "focusing" explanation is not correct...
I'm really not sure I see this. Enterprise devices are more portable than they used to be, not less. Gone are the days of science relying almost exclusively on supercomputers that could only run specific proprietary Unixes and basically required proprietary compilers. Connection hubs and DSPs doing signal translation from various industrial devices and military and space communications networks to IP networks have gone from almost exclusively ASICs manufactured by one of two companies to FPGAs, fully reprogrammable blank slates you can do pretty much anything with. Phones and tablets are certainly less general purpose than desktop and laptop PCs, but much more general purpose than earlier incarnations of phones and tablet-like devices such as Palm Pilots, digital address books, graphing calculators, flip phones, land lines, things that could only do one thing and couldn't have any type of extension application installed at all from anyone, whether it was part of a walled garden or not. If the average American teenager today has nothing but an iPad and iPhone, that isn't completely general purpose, but it's a huge improvement on when I was a teenager 25 years ago and the closest thing my family had to a computer at all was a word processor, not a software suite like Word or Lotus but a specialized typewriter with some proprietary embedded firmware and no writable memory at all.
> How would my being mildly politically active on HN contradict my belief that it is rational for me to encourage the distribution of legal speech, without regard for agreement with the content? [...] I just don’t see what that has to do with the thrust of my objection.

Yeah I'm not really making my point clear here, sorry.

My point is that a "values-neutral" platform doesn't exist, and every attempt to build such a thing is usually only "values-neutral" from the perspective of it's creator. For example, I'd argue there's a contradiction even in the way you phrased it here: "Legal speech" implies you are indeed giving "regard for agreement with the content", since this would imply suppressing content that is not in agreement with some legal framework you have in mind.

> I think it’s only censorship because of how HN fades the comment towards illegibility.

It's not just that. Upvotes promotes one position over the other, so when one considers statistical properties of how far people scroll down, or how likely people are to expand low-voted comments or go to another page (for platforms like Reddit, HN, etc), the effect can be the same.

It's interesting to see that as online platforms gradually replace "traditional" journalism for how people get information, we're rehashing a some of the same old arguments about what is "objective" journalism. Publishing ANYTHING, whether physical documents (eg newspapers) or HTML documents (eg HN, Facebook), will always promote some worldview and censor another based on what is included in the publication, and the ordering of the topics.

Sometimes this censorship is explicit (eg nixing a story, Google taking down a search result), other times it's done statistically (eg putting stuff "below the fold", a search result being on page 10), but our informational world is perpetually being shaped like this. Pretending that's it's even logically possible have unbiased platforms "without regard for agreement with the content" --- as an example, not you, but elsewhere here it was claimed 2010-2016 was mostly censorship-free --- is starting off on a wrong premise. If we start on a wrong premise, any further discussion is meaningless at best, and actively manipulative at worse (Fox News' "Fair and Balanced" slogan comes to mind)

> (FWIW, I did not downvote you, and I do so rarely.)

Thanks, I avoid this also!
The risk of loss itself likely outweighs the efficiency benefits.

Unfortunately, disk storage has a pronounced tendency to fail with no warning whatsoever. The only real assurance is multiple independent archived copies. Keeping tabs on health reports is itself a rather error-prone procedure.
Oh, so it's like Rust's `macro_rules!` identifier rule?

Rust's `macro_rules!` macros operate on ASTs, so the `x` inside a macro definition is different to the `x` in the scope where the macro is used, even though the textual representation of the identifier the macro inserts into the place it's used might be identical. This means that:

macro_rules! add_two {
($i: ident) => {
let x = 2;
$i += x;
}
}

fn main() {
let mut x = 5;
add_two!(x);
println!("{}", x);
}

appears to become:

fn main() {
let mut x = 5;
let x = 2;
x += x;
println!("{}", x);
}

but it still prints 7, not 4, because they're two different `x`s. (Of course, Red has first-class metaprogramming, so it's a lot better.)
In comparison to most other mammals (including the neanderthals), we are pretty awesome at adaption. Probably even better than bacteria, all things considered.

That is because we possess multiple different ways of adapting to our enviroment:

genetic

during childhood

acclimatization

culture and technology

This link provides a nice summary:
https://www2.palomar.edu/anthro/adapt/adapt_1.htm
I think it's more like the petty criminals follow the tourists and the travelers (who they can victimize with a cleaner conscience than their neighbors).
This is a somewhat contrarian statement--I'd like some explanation and examples of what you mean.

I find a x10 amplifier with high Zin, low Zout, low noise, low error, and constant delay to be interesting enough.

Every circuit is non-linear when used outside its design limits, but this hardly needs asserting.

And of course real devices are not perfect. Resistors have inductance and capacitance and a thermal coefficient, capacitors likewise have flaws, wires have resistance and self-inductance, and circuit layout gives you stray capacitance, crosstalk, and instability. Op amps themselves produce noise, have input currents and offset voltages and limited slew rate and bandwidth. And so on, and on.

But again, none of that needs asserting.

While you certainly can design lot of deliberately non-linear circuits with op amps and non-linear devices in their feedback paths, it's difficult to design linear circuits without them, or instead with circuits, the core of which end up looking like simplified op-amps.

So, what did you have in mind when you said "the various non-linear behaviours"?
I think it's the healthy skepticism that's more important than being able to detect some minute detail in an edit. For a while photos were considered strong proof, not so much today.

There has been research on detecting photo manipulation and there's plenty of things people can watch out for if they're trying to "prove" an image was altered, but a lot of edits I see are so bad/obvious that the people making them aren't really trying to "fool" anyone with them. They just think it makes the photo look better. They'll do things like jack up color saturation to impossible/unnatural levels, or remove every pore from their skin, etc.
He'd been working on it for decades in exile trying to convince the US to back rebellions in Iraq then trying to get the US to depose Saddam itself. Of course there's rarely a single reason anything involving a whole government decides to do something but I think it'd be ridiculous to not say Chalabi was one of the big factors leading to the US invasion of Iraq. Another potential is the fact that the Bush family might have felt like they had unfinished work there from the first invasion where the US stopped short of deposing Saddam over Kuwait.
> Airbnb is a minuscule fraction compared to the torrent of homes that are purchased as investments vs for living in.

The two are related. Airbnb makes owning investment properties more lucrative. You can generally make more money and you don't have to worry about tenant protection laws that make eviction and raising rent harder for traditional long-term rentals.
Nancy Pelosi Making Millions in Stock Trades in Companies She Actively Regulates
Bitch deserves fucking prison.
"If your geoglyph lasts more than 500 years..."
Real estate is often used to launder illegally gained money[0], so likely drug money as well.

> Real estate has long been a preferred vehicle for money laundering. All too often, the proceeds of crime and corruption is used to purchase homes. Once the real estate is re-sold, the capital involved becomes legally acquired. The trick is to mask where the money comes from: Criminal networks do this by setting up anonymous companies to hide their connection to the purchase of the property. This briefing reveals the scope and seriousness of this problem and makes recommendations for what must be done to fix it.

---

[0]: https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/corruption-and-mo...
Yes that's a totally different employment relationship - you could be sued for plagiarism though.
I agree with you regarding FH's achievement.

You are not reading the message I am attempting to convey.
How do you choose the bijection?
This is what I think people often miss in those discussions. There is an assumption that everything shared/'hosted' online is someone's opinion and thus should be allowed to be shared.
This was never a case on the internet, don't trust what you read online. What should be regulated is what can be advertised, because most what you read is indistinguishable from an ad. Smoothies cure cancer - an ad or someone believe some antivax type bullshit? What if it's an ad to vote for a particular party because the other will do unbelievable bad things? Fanatic or serious opinion? Should you allow those kind of post on your platform?

In my opinion you should just because it is the only way to make sure that your platform is not taken seriously and will prompt people to read something a bit more serious. It will stir controversies on twitter but who in IRL seriously considers an opinion of a twitter person?

Edit: I went for a smoke I thought about it a bit more, take a look at voat vs reddit. Voat was created as a response to censorship on reddit and look at the cesspool of a place it is. Companies do not censor content because they have a moral stand or a political agenda, they moderate the content because otherwise it will turn into a shit you wouldn't believe (HN does it to). There is much more trolls on the internet responding to everything they can than legitimate people trying to have a discussion.

New Eternal September started with social media and those not hardened by the internet before have a hard time to just dismiss what they read as 'a troll'
It was the same with me. I couldn't afford a continuous glucose monitor. I was checking my blood sugar 10+ times a day, because I was having hypoglycemia anxiety.

Even after I got a job and starting earning money, I hesitated getting a continuous glucose monitor because it costed so much. I was using the cheapest glucose meter that tested with blood, because the strips were cheap. It turned out that machine was inaccurate and my diabetes nurse gifted me a better glucometre.

I recently was able to switch to a continuous glucose monitor (the tamagochi type thing) and things got much better.
> Signs of carbon-based life - who is to say all forms of life are carbon-based?

There's a limited number of elements, and their abundance in the universe decreases rapidly beyond the first few. Carbon is by far the most advantageous for life due to its vast ability to form complex molecules. Silicon might be a distant second. If there is other life in the universe, and if there's nothing special about us, it might not all be carbon-based, but it's extremely likely that a large amount of it will be.