skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah, looks like that's the diff OP intended to link.

At face value, it seems even worse than presented.

Removed:

>"Participants will be tolerant of opposing views."

Modified:

>Before - "Behaviour which can be reasonably considered harassment will not be tolerated."

>After - "Behaviour which can be considered harassment against protected classes will not be tolerated."

The "reasonably" removal aside - for an attempt to be much more precise and inclusive with language, why would they narrow the previous "harassment" to "harassment against protected classes"? I'm sure this wasn't the intention, but rather than adding or intensifying any protections, the change, if read literally in the context of the diff, makes it seem like harassment is now tolerated if you aren't a protected classes whereas it previously wasn't tolerated at all.

I think a better route would've been to keep that line as-is and add a new line saying something like "any remarks that could be considered disparaging, mocking, or exclusive towards any protected classes will not be tolerated". This makes it clear that any kind of singling-out of protected classes is disallowed, regardless of the fact that some people may consider the definition of "harassment" to require something more severe than that.
No, many other rules would still apply including “Behavior which can be reasonably considered harassment will not be tolerated.”
It probably is a joke. Jokes often have a butt. What else do you think they're up to, exactly...
Even more than US-centric, the commenters in the GH discussion explicitly refer to California laws. The internet is not California, regardless of what the technologists who live there would like to believe.

(to be clear, I'm completely in favor of protecting people from harassment and abuse, though I strongly disagree with reserving that only to legally protected classes).
Missionaries have been around for a long time.
Pretty good. With well in excess of a million km driven, a valid driving license (something which no software product so far has been able to achieve), zero alcohol, zero drugs and no smartphone to distract me while driving. I see driving as a 'full time occupation'. My vehicle(s) (and that includes by bikes) are kept in tip-top condition, no expense spared, I'm fully aware that it isn't just my life that's on the line. I also have a standing order to my eldest that he is to shred my driving license when I turn 70 no matter how much I protest, and that's only 14 years away.

I'm all for self driving cars and I believe they are the future. I also believe they will be a decade or more in the coming and that we need at least one more level-up before AI sofware/hardware combos are solid enough that your typical self-driving solution will outperform an experienced driver.
It's mentioned (quoted) in the github thread. It was a "joke" about women and age.

Date.today

Date.today +1 # no error, but wrong result!

# Maybe this has been written for women, having calculated their age ;)
Why Mezli (YC W21) is building robot restaurants
I feel like this post is a subtle troll
The new version

> "Participants should speak and act with good intentions, but understand that intent and impact are not equivalent."

Huh. That's interesting phrasing. I don't think i like it. Literally nobody thinks impact & intent are equivalent, the sticky point in human interaction and morality is to what extent do we take results instead of intentions into account when evaluating the morality of an action. The statement as is isn't saying anything about how we should interpret intent vs result just that we should acknowledge that its different.

I personally believe that codes of conduct (both this current trend, but also in the traditional meaning of the word) should be specific about what behaviour is wanted, otherwise its a meaningless platitude. This says nothing about how we should interpret someone doing something hurtful while not intending to (or claiming not to). Is that ok? Is it only ok if a "reasonable" person would make the same mistake? Is it ok if they haven't made the same mistake before? Something else?
When a thing has been created to solve a problem, it helps to first learn what the problem is before trying to understand the solution - and one of the best ways to understand the problem is to run into it and spend some time trying to work around it, with examples that are simple enough to understand but realistic enough that the student can see the issue matters.

If there are no examples that are simple enough for this, the student has not yet advanced to the point where they will understand the issue.
I don’t see how you could read the whole document and conclude harassment of anyone is ok.
This is a very small, non-controlled, non-randomized study.

Earlier studies of this nature, on young adults, were later debunked by larger studies:

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/03/few-pro-...

We don't have enough evidence at this point to be claiming long-COVID exists as a significant problem, and such a situation would contradict the very mild effects that COVID manifests in most cases. The evidence in support of it is not rigorous. If this was the breadth and rigor of the evidence being used support the idea that ivermectin is an effective COVID prophylaxis, no one would give the idea a second look.
Twitter for Professionals
"Offline" != "Off"
I think this is a good direction for technology. Many solutions I see for things start with a microprocessor where they might have an analog solution instead. This is also why I love some old tech, it's often a mix of mechanical/electrical/optical design with some micro-electronics mixed in.

Aside from that, this is really cool! I hope someone makes a commercial product based on this.
Big difference between science and popular emotion-fueled mischaracterizations of science.
Hey folks, Alex here (the author of the blog post) – happy to answer any questions.

Our Launch HN was previously discussed here – https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26468204
You're assuming good intentions on the part of the authors, but the impact is people will take away that harassment of those outside a protected class is OK. The intentions don't really matter here :-)
I thought this was a troll. I feel that the identifying of CEOs of big companies as a protected class may have been a tipping of the hat. There seems to be a common strategy by right wing accelerationists that involve masquerading as left wing and pushing things into absurdity.
The blog post seems to be getting some ML language history wrong: Caml was developed in INRIA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caml) and ML was originally from Edinburgh (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ML_(programming_language)).
If it's setting the bars at different levels then this seems to be a distinction without a difference (other than I guess indicating which direction the average bar height is moving?)
Yes to the being attentive, no they don't need to maneuver like F1 drivers because they are not in a race.

Drivers in the USA are - sorry - absolutely terrible, the driving license requirements are ridiculous.
Aside from obvious cases of intentional abuse:

The world is filled with people who have different ideas about what is funny, what is offensive, what is fun, what is boring, etc.

On the internet it is expected to have a clash of cultures since people from different backgrounds are collaborating. There will naturally be well intentioned misunderstandings. Rather than creating a system that allows for these to take place peacefully without incident, any example of a joke gone wrong or a word out of place will result in an inquisition.

Why do so many westerners want to live like this? Constantly thirsty for purifying others. It seems to come from some kind of emptiness that must exist in one's life to be so obsessed over minutiae.
>nothing to do

Buy her a dirtbike?
They're meant to further empower accusers and reduce burden of proof and remove the need for critical thinking, empathy, and nuance. Accusations equal guilt.
Let's be clear, I definitely don't think it's great. It's just that my immediate response prior to six months ago was to laugh at the mere suggestion it be put into production.

The only reason it actually was put into production is because we had a vendor requirement on it (and why they thought it was sufficient, I'm not sure).

There's a difference between "not suitable for anything because it's so buggy and there's been so many problems over the years" and "not suitable as a replacement for a real RDBMS for important data". For the former, I think my opinion was possible a little harsh for the current state of it. For the latter, yeah, I'm not going to blindly trust it for billing data and processing yet, that's for sure.
But it's a constant steering angle, right? Just hold the wheel in place.

(Of course in real life that wouldn't work so simply.)
> My college spent a lot of money getting an ABET accreditation for their CS/CE programs.

Why? Even here Stanford isn't even ABET and nobody seems to care.
I agree with plumbing.

But not residential. That's all pretty standardized.

Think industrial, or a nuclear power plant. Or a spacecraft. Something where everything had to be custom designed.
That was your immune system overreacting to a harmless foreign substance. Kind of like an allergy, but a desirable one in this case.
That's one of the rules they removed.
Why is it the mother's sibling's daughter but only the father's sister's daughter?
Why does Craigslist censor rental postings containing gender keywords
One my friend wanted to post a rental listing last week on craigslist. In it, there is a description like this: "One of the rooms is rented to a 4th-year male student, and we look for a respectful tenant to rent the other room."

however, the system doesn't allow the posting to be published, citing the reason that the keyword "male" is used. It's an automatic block. No human review or flagging.

It seems craigslist blocks rental posting with gender keyword regardless of the intention of the word's usage.

Why does Craigslist does that? Is it to comply with some law? or is it because of some potential legal liability as the host of classified advertisements? Is it a technical reason?
Equality once meant tolerance and acceptance of differences. Now it means if you disagree with me, you're a leftist or a trumper or a thisthatortheotherphobe.
Fixed title: Sparta was NOT an army of super warrior.

From what I understand, it was a fantasy model heralded by conservative Greeks as an example for all but is as much based in reality than the golden past of the people calling to "make America great again". It is projecting into the past an ideal that never was.
Good. Now ask about the risks to adults
Don't be surprised in the coming months to read 6 out of your 11 Onion headlines coming out as real scientific work.
Ironic reply is full of irony.
> 400+ pages of documentation/proof to change.

Like what?
> This seems like such a distant yet specific relationship type

I don't know much about it (never stepped foot outside EU/NA) but apparently some Asian countries have a pretty intricate system of kinship terms. For example Diagram IV in [1] shows different (Mandarin?) Chinese terms for what we would just call a "cousin" in English.
I also found the video by NativLang [2] on the topic pretty interesting.

[1] https://ac-journal.org/journal/vol3/Iss3/spec1/huang_jia.htm...
[2] https://youtu.be/YOi2c2d3_Lk
The difference, which will be missed by many, is that previously you could be reasonably certain your device is actually not spying on you if you power it off. That option is gone now. You should just assume it's on and sending your data directly to whoever wants it.
It's quite bad at the moment. I can't message anyone at work!
I feel like your comparison is unfair to HOAs.
Without empirical evidence, who knows what they are?
https://github.com/ruby/www.ruby-lang.org/pull/2690#issuecom...
My first guess is that there exist human languages in which there's a distinctive word for that relation. (French, for example, has "cousin/cousine" for a male cousin or female cousin, which is about halfway there.) I would guess this is used when translating into those languages.
Things that seem like they ought to be common sense sometimes need to be said explicitly, especially in large organizations that communicate mainly over the internet. I know at least one person who feared for her personal safety for awhile because she became a focal point of a large internet argument about how members of large open-source project ought to treat each other. I think most high-visibility projects have people with similar stories.
I’m literally shaking.
In the United States, if you've been victimized, you basically have two paths of recourse:

1) Have enough money, time, and connections to take legal action and hope that maybe you come to parity someday.

2) Draw enough publicity that the money, time, and connections come to you, in hopes that you can bring social change to prevent someone else from being victimized.

When you turn away from stories like this, you are complicit in why these are the only two options we have in our system.
Last time I participated in a discussion about adding a CoC to a project it boiled down to people just not liking that it's called a Code of Conduct. They agreed that we needed a basic set of rules etc for moderation purposes but opposed having a CoC, but they were fine as long long as it wasn't called a CoC. I neglected to point that out to them.
It's possible to do all that without Scrum. I feel like Scrum works best with a lower level of team maturity, where someone can't report blockers without a daily meeting, or someone would just jump in on a task without thinking how long it takes.
Ah, then a fair question to ask might be how confident Kyle is that there won’t be an at-fault crash in the first million km driven.

(Or even better, what he predicts will be the distance driven per serious at-fault crash.)
> There seems to be a common strategy by right wing accelerationists that involve masquerading as left wing and pushing things into absurdity.

Or does there? The truly disturbing aspect of so many things like this is that (as per Poe's Law) it's impossible to distinguish cynical mockery from earnestly-held extremism.
I think the cottagecore aesthetic grew out of representation in anime and Tumblr reposts, along with other less-practical/mundane aesthetics like goblincore. Rather than an actual back-to-the-land movement. With the pandemic it became sort of mainstream and synonymous for a desired or actual lifestyle and not just fashion and aesthetic sensibility, which is why the core suffix seems out of place.
I disagree that this is a representative parable. Putting eight blind men in a room to touch an elephant is a very controlled, very well-defined, problem; the insinuation is that if the blind people could merely collect the correct data, they'd arrive at the correct solution. Very few things in life exhibit these niceties, and the parable absolutely fails to generalize.

What about for the actual day-to-day of our lives? If I do not already value perspective, then why should I?
A lot of companies have policies for access termination, what they often forget is to terminate third party or SaS accounts. If you run a company building an appropriate checklist for termination, setting up audit reports for validating access is terminated and employing auditors to validate access is terminated timely is part of the job.
Can't educate myself if you don't give me a pointer.

That said, "please help me understand" is sometimes a bad faith tactic to claim ignorance of basic empathy.
Having a position of always assuming good intentions can be gamed by people with bad intentions.
How many articles about police brutality with no punishment by their superiors do you need to start questioning that there might be systemic abuse?

The reason why people say defund the police is because "we'll make it better!" is the same repeated statements that have gone literally nowhere, police abuse continues unchecked to the point where we have to write and publicly humiliate public officials to do their damn jobs.
> But the public transit lines would already be running, you are just hopping on a bus that is already going to be spewing some climate change gasses.

At least in Prague, they put more buses on the line, use larger buses, use streetcars with two cars, and they even build new underground lines (very expensive) in directions where the capacity of buses is not enough. So no, by hopping on a bus "that is already going", you are contributing to this.
Opening a PR for something like this is extremely dramatic.

I have, thankfully, never had much involvement with codes of conduct but if I did I would want it to pass by a committee or a community vote, with ample time beforehand for discussion, platform, and voting with majority or super majority requirement.

A PR, on the other hand, needs just a handful of political allies — your reviewer — to land, and that’s it. I of course assume the best intentions on the part of the requester, but one could be forgiven for seeing it as a power play, subverting the democratic process.

Not everything is code.
In general these seem like mostly bad ideas to me, but I'm not part of that community, and I'm in favor of them making their own rules and accepting the consequences.

However, I am wondering if there is some historical context that I'm missing: have their been increasingly hostile or abusive discussions in the Ruby community which these changes are meant to address?
How it started: come on let's just oust the baddies...who can disagree with this?

How it ended: I am from a different culture, I have no idea what any of this means.

Classic.
So can I get a blue checkmark if I sync my LinkedIn or something?
As an alternative, have you tried to not act like a jerk?
It's a bit buried in the GH discussion, but someone else posted it here:

"Maybe this has been written for women, having calculated their age ;)"

If I were in charge of a community or mailing list, I would kick the person who wrote that off. But I simply don't see how (a) the existing rules didn't do enough to cover this, or (b) the changes will resolve those issues without causing other problems.
Democracy never made socialism competitive with free markets. Democracy in Seattle led to the government purchase of port-a-potties at $250,000 each and $12,000,000 per mile bike lane striping. All involved were comfortably re-elected.

Norway pumps 20% of its GDP out of the ground.
Oh, hey. The author! Allow me elaborate on my original comment.

First and foremost, my initial comment was made after spending 30 seconds reading the article. It was a quick judgement and (unfairly) condescending. My initial comment was based in the assumption you were a fly-by-night blogger trying to cram buzz words unto your post to get clicks.

I was wrong. And I apologize.

I have now read more of the post. It IS a document on implementing GPT-3, and it IS a good foundation for people who are not familiar with it. I applaud you for making ML stuff more accessible to HNers. I recently took a crash course in deploying ML models (like GPT-3), and one question I kept in my head was "How can we make this accessible to EVERYONE".

Please keep documenting and democratizing cool models.
Yes. There's an option to add "related contact". I'm not sure what triggers the full flow, but normally it shows three options, and eventually you can get a larger list of 15 or so expected options (mother, father, brother, spouse, etc). And an option for "all labels" that leads to the mess hinted at by this constant.

I'm not sure what the point is, since you also have an option for a custom label, which even if I wanted to add a link for the "younger cousin (mother's sibling's daughter or father's sister's daughter)", I'd probably type in whatever I call that relationship informally as a custom label before selecting that mess.
Too late to edit, but I was wrong, it seems that Waymo did not request a permit for cars without safety drivers.
Or there are left wing actors that are truly absurd. I'd believe that before tinfoil theories about bad actors.
Spartan martial prowess wasn't anymore effective, individually or as a group than any other group of their time. Eating beef and raping slaves is simply not good enough reason to persist this mythology.

Carthaginian sacred band had better equipment, fitness, tactics and discipline, combined with a religious zeal that made their morale unbreakable. They also ate meat, whatever that's worth. Apart from a single dubious and assuredly propagandized solo account from well known liar in history, Sparta simply has no consistent feats to backup any of the mythology that has been popularized by comic books and movies.
At least for my understanding of the post, it’s not saying the analogy itself is bad. It’s saying the analogy you find clarifying is useful to you because it’s familiar and helps you relate the new idea. But that as a teaching/explaining tool it’s not necessarily useful because your student/audience won’t necessarily have the same familiarity or way of thinking about it.

In other words, it’s not analogies that harm sharing abstract concepts, it’s being presumptuous about what the other person thinks or knows in the concrete.
> print out a haiku while numbering the lines.

Little need for monads to do this:

main = readFile "haiku.txt" >>= putStrLn . number
where
number = lines . zipWith addNumber [0..] . unlines
addNumber n l = show n ++ " " ++ l

(Untested, but should work.)
My finger may not be on the pulse here, but I think we all deep down believe that a classic suit and tie is still dressing well... even if we choose not do it.
see: Japan, Hiroshima.

just scale up a little.
> The rest of us normal, sane people need to stop letting "good intentions" let the trojan horse of endless CoC, morality games, witch hunts and ideological warfare from continuing in the name of 'being non-offensive'.

Amen. These days my instant response to this kind of posturing is to disengage as far as possible from all involved. It's an ideological cancer that turns previously productive communities into a morass of backbiting and one-up-person-ship.
The S5 had a removable battery and backplate with headphone jack exposed, and had a IP67 rating. It's easy enough to do just no one wants to put in the engineering work.
70 isn't too old to drive.
And here I was suddenly feeling older, slightly squinting at the page, wondering if the text was always that small.
> The study does have limitations, though. It does not have a control group, and the researchers were unable to contact everyone who was discharged from the hospital during the studied time period. This could create biases in the data based on those who were able or willing to participate in the follow-up. The study also only looked on early in the pandemic before the emergence of any variants, which could have different long-term effects.

Still, the findings are largely in line with other studies. The authors conclude that "taken together, our research suggests that the health consequences of COVID-19 extend far beyond acute infection."

Pardon the rant but...

So let's take a half-assed effectively invalid scientific study, and use it to justify legit studies? And/or use legit studies to prop up a wonky one?

As tempting and convenient as this might be, it's not Science. This type of bias has no place in the context of science. If this were a news outlet, it would be editorial. Editorial should not be confused with real journalism.
Tesla FSD can't operate without a driver and isn't doing commercial rideshare, so it's not relevant in this discussion of a permit to operate a driverless commercial fleet in SF.
I was wondering if some of the weirdness is machine translation from Japanese. Anyone know?
Elliott Wave Patterns in NFT Trades
I'm offended by your insinuation. Take that back and apologise right now!