skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Absolutely.

People are going to do what they want to do. When you ban something that's the end of your regulation on it. So it goes underground and becomes less safe for everybody that's involved with it.

When you legalize it you can be more nuanced with the regulation, ultimately making it safer and having better outcomes for a huge majority of the people involved. You won't get 100% but it's certainly better than the 0% you're getting with a ban.

Of course the more you over-regulate and create effective bans the lower that % of people following your regulations is going to be and you're back to square one. Take a look at the history of abortions through being banned, coming into legality, and then back into over-regulation/effective ban in some places. Rate of abortions doesn't go down meaningfully when they're explicitly or implicitly illegal but rate of complications from abortions goes way up.

An anecdote for you: someone I know was instrumental in getting the "condoms in porn" law architected in LA county. The goal was to normalize condom use in the face of multiple STD epidemics including HIV. On the surface this is great. But porn with condoms is insanely less popular than porn without condoms - effectively making this new law a ban on producing porn in LA county. So what happened? Productions either went half an hour down the road to the next county or they just stopped actually filing permits and went unregulated meaning no more enforcement of the regimen of testing etc that porn actors were previously required to adhere to, leading to less safe outcomes for the folks involved and no meaningful increase in the amount of porn featuring condom use.
nft and iptables are both packet filters. What is your use case?
If a blind woman enters your office with her dog and it poops on the rug you may be rather peeved over the event - but seeing eye dogs are exceedingly rare and blindness itself is a rather uncommon condition. I think part of the issue with ESAs was that suddenly they were everywhere - it didn't come on as a slow adaptation - it exploded like a fad because, well, it was one to a big portion of the population abusing it. I really don't want to comment on ESAs personally since I've led a very happy life free from rape or other emotional distress - but the desirability of having an ESA led to it's adoption at a far higher rate than was likely warranted (along with a fair bit of poisoning the well IMO) and so public opinion turned against it.

Additionally the blind tend to have a harder time interacting with society and a great deal of patience and fortitude is required to hold down a job when vision disabled - this means that the people receiving the benefits of their assistive dogs flying for free generally needed that assistance - emotional damage covers a wider financial range that's less likely to garner any sympathy.
When I got married, we had no pre-marital property to speak of, and were still early in our careers. Spending money on lawyers to hash out a plan for how to split up unknowable things doesn't seem like it would have been a good investment.

The default rules seem reasonable enough that trying to do better for both parties without knowing specifics seems unreasonable. Comingling finances is a useful reduction of the total burden of financial management, and wouldn't be possible if you were trying to keep separate accounts.

In this instance, I was the breadwinner, and I would have no problem with an equal split of marital assets, plus or minus making adjustments to keep things easy: no sense giving each person half of three cars, can sell one and give one of the remaining to each spouse, the house might be challenging to split, but we're both reasonable and could figure something out that's more beneficial to both parties than a legal battle.
Maybe we could make this framework future-proof by using blockchains? Somehow? Maybe it can use blockchains, or it can be stored on a blockchain, or maybe both at the same time. Surely that will help society in some nonspecific, ambiguous manner.
> Although Google leaves open the technical possibility for Android consumers to acquire some apps without using the Play Store, this can only be accomplished through a competing app store installed on the device (either through preloading by an OEM or through the user sideloading the store), or through sideloading of individual apps. Google takes various steps to discourage OEMs from directly competing or sponsoring any app store competition. Google makes the sideloading process unnecessarily cumbersome and impractical by adding superfluous, misleading, and discouraging security warnings and by deterring users by requiring them to grant permission multiple times for a single app installation (discussed in more detail in Sections I.C. and I.D. below). The effect of Google’s conduct is to practically eliminate competition in Android app distribution.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210707/17411147129/googl...
Don’t be scared: Scientists figured out how fear works
I don’t really like the laptop compromise. Where you’re trading performance (and maybe reliability) for mobility. This laptop seems like a good attempt at making the compromise less bad, but, I’ve gone back to desktops instead.

I’ve found that the majority of my work is always at my desk so I switched my main machine to desktop. It’s much, much more upgradeable/repairable than a laptop can be. I still keep a laptop for when I can’t be there but mostly just use it to remote into the main machine so it doesn’t have to be from this decade.

I’m looking forward to the moment I can plug a keyboard into my phone and connect into an EC3 instance or something like that and not worry about hardware at all.
GrapheneOS is my daily driver and immensely happy with it. Never been more satisfied with a mobile experience. On a Pixel 4a
Cheshire Crossing.
Companies can be very self-deluded about what they are.
Nerva and Orion were both cancelled, it's not like they just delivered everything. If Joe Biden said tomorrow "I'm going to wave a magic wand and we will have non-intel x nm fabs tomorrow" then loads of people would be moaning about big gov. or the cost etc.
So this way Google automatically confirms the validity of the email to spammers by visiting all their links? Doesn't sound great, and people still know when you click on links or view the email. They just have to guess a bit better.
What would be the motivation for people to get involved? Can they compete for riches? Can they become famous (with respect to the niche of prediction-brainstorming) by topping some leaderboard? Do they receive fractional IP rights and royalty payments from generated ideas? Does it serve as a hiring pipeline for bureaucracies wanting analysts? Is it inherently fun?
You make just visiting the URL not everything that needs to be done. So for example, the URL you visit then also runs a small bit of javascript behind the scenes that does the actual unsub action - or the javascript just does a redirect.

Or even simpler, you make it so the user has to click a button to POST the request. You've had to do this for years, now.

I would assume though, that Gmail is smart enough to go, "oh hey, looks like a verification link, maybe I shouldn't touch it"
Good video. Good engine. Haven't done too much with it yet, except some testing, but the code looks clean. As martin-t says, it seems to have quite advanced 3d support compared to other Rust engines.
Check out VRland.io/lobby, have had it for months already!
We have done high-level client review and approval meetings in a Horizon-style interface (Venues), with a surprising level of success. We were hesitant at first because of our client-base and the significant dollars at stake in these reviews. Comments:

1. A surprising amount of emotional communication is possible with these avatars. The combination of arm/hand/finger articulation and movement + head nod/move/position + hearing someone's voice... that is synthesized at a much higher level than you might anticipate. I was truly surprised at the level of nuance we were all able to glean from fairly minor, almost involuntary movements people make, how that is represented through avatars, and then translates effectively to accurate social communication.

2. The physical representation of space and the avatars around that space carry the same "tribal" rules that exist in RealSpace. Certain groups tend to gravitate to each other. Side conversations can occur in a way that can actually be helpful to the overall gestalt. Leaders position as leaders, subordinates as subordinates. (Avatar group interaction is a fascinating, evolving sociology.)

3. Most importantly - all participants across multiple meetings and multiple clients agree it was far more effective then Zoom/Meet/Teams/etc. Latency is rarely perceived as an issue, the brain adapts and adjusts amazingly quickly to the new representation of space and human interaction, and decisions are made quickly because of the interactions, not in spite of them.

Of course it is in its infancy. But once you have done real business and interaction in these environments, it's disappointing (and counter-productive) to return to the endless talking squares on a monitor.

YMMV, but I doubt it. ;)
What if I can generate an attack that will mark your own picture of your own toddler nude in a bathtub as CSAM? Do you still feel confident in "some peon at Apple" to mark it as not CSAM?
It's equally as possible that some people have become so overly sensitive to the idea of dog whistles that they see them everywhere, even when that wasn't the intent.
I have not read the papers showing that using a different font to sign something is a sign of fraud. DO share the citations! Seriously, no idea what the story is with this study, but the guy has an injury related serious disability with his hands, so he uses transcription software to type, and others in the office may copy edit his transcribed writing. I have used different devices or software to write documents too, and it makes the fonts different. Does that make me a fraud? Seriously, if you are that eager to prove someone is guilty that you come up with random "evidence" with no basis, it calls into question the rest of your arguments.
You have to nip these habits in the bud. Might require changing company if it's a well established thing there though.

I know when my meetings start in the morning. If someone books a Monday morning meeting with me after I go home for the day Friday they will learn really quickly that I won't see their meeting invite until its too late. Same for any other days.
> They are still relatively unknown, and their reputation hasn't been tarnished.

Are you sure about that? This company seems pretty well known in the creator space, but not for hosting anything other than porn. At least in all communities I follow, having an OnlyFans account is synonymous with selling porn.

> Pornography is not how you become a billion-dollar unicorn

Pornhub would like to have a word with you. I'd say that, in fact, porn is one of the easiest ways to get there (as shown, for example, by OFs enormous growth).
What are Intel doing then?
Sourcegraph CTO here, thanks for posting this feedback.

Yes, we do collect information from self-hosted instances of Sourcegraph. (Note to other readers: the blog post is talking about sourcegraph.com whereas what we are discussing here is running a standalone instance of Sourcegraph.) Here is what that info is:

(1) High-level "ping" data (https://docs.sourcegraph.com/admin/pings#critical-telemetry) that includes the email address you put in during installation, the version of Sourcegraph that's running, an aggregate count of users, total codebase size.

(2) Additional telemetry (https://docs.sourcegraph.com/admin/pings#other-telemetry) that includes aggregate usage, latencies, and product actions (e.g., which features are in use, progress through onboarding). This can be disabled in config: https://docs.sourcegraph.com/admin/config/site_config#disabl...

No information about individual user identities, behavior, repositories, or code is sent outside the Sourcegraph instance, unless you explicitly enable a feature (like code monitoring alerts) that does so.

We follow the open-core model and our enterprise-licensed code is also public. You can use Sourcegraph to explore the source code of Sourcegraph and see how telemetry is implemented: https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/sourcegraph/sourcegraph/-....

We collect this data in order to sell our software to companies that use it. We have no plans to charge for Sourcegraph for open-source development, nor will we sell individual user data (which we don't collect).

We've made the decision to make (1) mandatory, because we haven't figured out a better way to ensure we have reasonable awareness of which companies are running Sourcegraph. We do try to keep this data as high-level/aggregate/non-invasive as possible, but I also understand that some might not want to send any data. For folks that fall into that camp, there are a number of other code search engines that are great: Livegrep, Zoekt, Hound, and OpenGrok are ones I'd recommend. If you think the feature set of Sourcegraph is cool and want to use it strictly for personal or open-source development while disabling all telemetry, feel free to reach out (beyang@sourcegraph.com) and I'd be happy to do what I can to make this happen.

Of course, if you don't want to run your own instance of Sourcegraph and are okay with using a cloud service, you can also add your repositories directly to sourcegraph.com, where they can be discovered and used by anyone from a single search box :)

If folks have any questions or feedback on the above, I'd love to hear it!
"Diversity" and "inclusivity" are weasel words, they mean absolutely nothing when it comes to corporate speech, it's something you throw in a PR statement to appeal to young people who vote left and political pundits, nothing more.
I disagree. I think the image and resource preloading done by Google is perfectly fine, but clicking actual links will mess up tons of systems (like, for example, links that are only supposed to be valid once, like in password reset emails).

There are good use cases for links with single-use tokens in them. Companies sad and desperate enough to suck as much data from you as humanly possible (i.e. every single news letter with tracking links) ruin these use cases for everyone, assuming they are indeed the reason Google is implementing this feature.

Given that many links (like, again, from password reset emails) give the person who clicks the link instant access to your account, I'd say this behaviour goes further than just filtering out trackers. Google has no business opening my Slack account or entering the change password page for the services I use. The stalking prevention they apply to external images and such is fine in my opinion, but links to external web pages should be left alone. You never know when Google accidentally clicks a link that says "confirm order" or "unsubscribe" because its magical AI misinterpreted the contents of an email.
This sounds like they have built a unsafe system and are running into something which is checking for malware. This has been a problem for decades, which is why things like unsubscribe systems usually give you a form which requires you to submit it since a passive robot won’t POST it.

I have little sympathy for the first poster: those kind of phishing tests are good if your goal is to train your users to think of the security group as an adversary but not much else. If clicking on one link compromises your security, you need to put the IT house in order first (hint: where’s the WebAuthn which completely?) and especially deal with the vendors who are training everyone to think that clicking on obfuscated links is routine.
A GET of a webpage shouldn’t have side effects - if it does, your app is broken.

This might be new for Google, but some virus scanners have been prefetching links for decades.
What would be a better (i.e. more accurate and neutral) title?
The only problem with the SV real estate market is the segregationist-era zoning policies preventing the market from sorting out the self-inflicted shortage.
Have Self-Driving Cars Arrived Yet?
> Google will also pre-load all the images in your email too

PLEASE disable automatic loading in Gmail settings. Don't let the idiots use unethical, stalkerish e-mail read receipts.
I have a single app that can 1) host hundreds of different coins, and 2) convert them on a built in exchange. So this has been a complete non-issue for me.

If there's a single app that lets me use Venmo and Paypal and Cashapp all at the same time, I'd love to know about it.
True. Phish testing campaigns in companies that send fake phishing emails to employees, are probably full of inaccurate data due to this.

"Why did you click that link? But, I didn't."
The Core Web Platform Loop
Shared micromobility company Bird launches a consumer electric bike for $2,299
HTTP GET requests should not be interpreted by the server as a request to change something. That's what POST, PUT, DELETE and PATCH are for.
But to be fair, 1-click unsubscribe is a very user friendly thing to do. As a user, if I have to jump through a bunch of hoops to unsubscribe, I'm just going to mark your message as spam and move on with my life.
Thank you! It runs on my servers (rented at Hetzner) would you like a version that orchestrates your own AWS account?
Doesn't automatic loading render those read receipts meaningless?
Oh man, come on. Be a grown up and read what I write, not what you want to read. I don't care what you do, the articles I linked you show "a preponderance of evidence" that many vegetarians and vegans (entire populations in India) suffer from B12 deficiency. You don't want to know anything about that? You follow your doctor's advice so you don't care what everyone else does? Well, that's the willful ignorance.

And I'm with you on "mass industrialisation". Factory farming is an atrocity that should be eliminated. But what does that have to do with eating enough meat to stay healthy? Most people in the world don't get their meat from factory farms.

Now, did you really not know that, or did you know it and willfully ignore it, too?
> With all due respect, the fact that anyone is forced into porn to get housing be safe from abusive partners is the indictment of a society.

I absolutely agree. A society where people have to resort to prostitution in order to keep a roof on their heads FAILED, politically, morally and culturally. In fact, that's exactly how things go in third world countries...
No, we just need another anonymous distributed networking/storage/socialmedia/coffeemaker protocol to save us
What we know from this well written and helpful article; The false positive rate Apple told us their algorithm had seems to be accurate. If a machine learning model is extracted from the OS it exists on, it will be much easier to generate adversarial attacks.

For example, a neural net's cost function is just a multivariate function with weights as its input. To figure out how to move those weights (positively or negatively), the gradient of the function is calculated and the weights are nudged in the opposite direction (gradient is the direction of the largest growth of a function, we are trying to minimize the cost). Now, assume we are given a cost function and the weights are constant, now, the input can be the image. So, we take the gradient of the cost function with respect to the image pixels and can now see how we should nudge those to maximize the cost. Apple will absolutely need to protect against adversarial attacks for this to be viable. I'm hopeful.
I was required to disclose the source of my down payment funds when purchasing my house. They asked where the funds came from since my bank statement just showed a deposit in that amount in one block. It took a while to convince them that it was not a gift or another loan to pay off.
Personally I'm far more concerned with the those robbing the the country of taxes to build F-35s for $2 trillion dollars or occupy mountainous countries on the other side of the world for $5 trillion.
Still could be. Turn around and contact the relevant employers... "pay me $10k and I'll unmask your employee who installed fake malware with intent to extort you." Just... make sure the malware is perfectly harmless.
I frequently use depsez[1] for explain analysis and, initially when I'd create a new plan I was sending the delete link alongside in a DM to my coworkers so they could clear the entry when they'd finished with it... until I realized that slack was pre-fetching the link and deleting explains before my coworkers could take a look. This is an interesting case since having the request be a pure `GET` submission is pretty convenient - but yea... there's a good reason to follow the proscribed behaviors for when to use `POST`.

1. https://explain.depesz.com/ great site - I highly recommend it for getting into postgres performance analysis.
How is staring at the phone for 2 minutes different than staring at a menu for 2 minutes? At least in my circle the phones go away afterwards.
Digression: I'm always annoyed at seeing science fiction and fantasy genres lumped together. I know there is some cross-over with some books, but for those of us with strong preferences for one over the other it's always a pain to filter.
None, both the decisions I made from the book and song turned out to be the best.
The problem isn't that you need an alternative to PayPal, you need an alternative to Visa and MasterCard.

That's a lot harder because they have more of a network effect. People have a Visa or MasterCard because it's widely accepted and it's widely accepted because a lot of people have one.

The solution to this is to make it easier for people to get or accept the alternative payment network. Only now you're into regulatory barriers.

The critical feature of PornCard is that you don't have to give your name, right? Except that they're specifically prohibited from offering that.

The regulatory cost of establishing a new card is effectively the same whether you have a hundred users or a billion, so high regulatory costs put a disproportionate disadvantage on small and upstart networks, which would then have to charge higher fees, which would then cause no one to accept them.

The regulations destroy competition and without competition you don't have a free market.
Spacemacs runs in terminal mode.
I'm not a market strategist, but I think you don't start to capitalize on the network effect by cutting away 95% of your network.
> Another example is a 5th-grade lesson, where a problem with Ms. Hernandez knitting a scarf for her grandson is labeled noninclusive and then modified to one where Mr. Hernandez is knitting a scarf because “guys can knit too.” Unless the authors intend to imply that women should never knit, it is a crime against fundamental logic.

What the hell is up with that weird example?
The link sends me to a YouTube video completely devoid of context and in very poor quality. I don't know who made that video and in what way (if in any way) it is related to this proposed curriculum. If it is, the article should make this connection clear.

Moreover, as much as it may be pointless to replace "Mrs. Hernandez" with "Mr. Hernandez" in that question, it's certainly not "defying logic", it's just arbitrarily redefining the (irrelevant) context for a maths problem. I find people who complain about such a change at least as annoying as the ones arguing incessantly for these kinds of changes.

As the article is otherwise very light on details about what's wrong with the curriculum (the example with the fence is the only concrete thing that is being referred to that is not ridiculous, and even that is arguable), this just looks to me like some opinion piece that tries to fan the flames of some culture war.

It's quite possible that there are problems with this proposed curriculum (I don't live in California, I know nothing about it), but this article is not making a very clear case.