skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The "American History Tellers" podcast did a great series on the Great Chicago Fire.

https://wondery.com/shows/american-history-tellers/episode/5...
But it wasn't just the act of creating some clay tablets - those particular clay tablets happen to have run the probability gauntlet successfully and came out the other side - just making a clay tablet and putting it in your closet is unlikely to produce the same results. The place you put the tablet is more important than the fact that it's a clay tablet in itself.
You don't know what fascist means:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusto_Pinochet#Accusations_o...

Pinochet was a violent dictator but not a fascist
Formulated in 1945, right after millions of people had been murdered ...

But I'm sure that Popper was actually thinking about defending 55 genders when he/she/ze/they formulated it. The timing was just a coincidence!
From the license (https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html):

Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, if you modify the Program, your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network (if your version supports such interaction) an opportunity to receive the Corresponding Source of your version by providing access to the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge, through some standard or customary means of facilitating copying of software. This Corresponding Source shall include the Corresponding Source for any work covered by version 3 of the GNU General Public License that is incorporated pursuant to the following paragraph

Sounds to me like the 'all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network' part doesn't distinguish between an internal service and an external service. If it has users, you must comply with the license.

I'm not a lawyer, this isn't legal advice.
> License owner can't give notice of 'permanent termination', only until the user ceases the violation

This may require litigation to resolve.

The rights are explicitly irrevocable with respect to the unmodified Program [1]. It is ambiguous, however, with respect to modifications. The "unless and until the copyright holder explicitly and finally terminates your license" confusingly implies a right to termination, though this comes into conflict with the § 2 irrevocability guarantee.

Is there case law around this?

[1] All rights granted under this License are granted for the term of copyright on the Program, and are irrevocable provided the stated conditions are met. This License explicitly affirms your unlimited permission to run the unmodified Program.
I have always lived my life frugally (at the cost of QoL) in all of my adventures both domestically and internationally, with that said, in VN to have a more "western" level of comfort, the costs equal or surpass the costs in a western country.

Quality of goods, services, and properties are measurably lower and you need to spend more to keep the life style you want. There are things that we get in the USA insanely cheaply, but over there its really expensive. Items like Motrin, cars, electronics, and good mattresses are difficult to find or measurably more expensive.

Just to throw a few examples, there are no Apple stores in Vietnam and the Apple products sold in official apple stores in Thailand or Singapore are measurably more expensive due to import taxes and higher prices.

The home construction was low quality and always had pests and mold. Even the new apartments were rushed together and often never completed.

I loved my time there and look forward to returning, but you have to compromise in both career development and life style.
Hollerith Punch Cards.
Can you give some examples? What was not possible and what's possible now?
How would my quote apply to people who do that kind of work?

The whole article is about people that <<don't>> do that.
Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar. Obviously this entire topic is fraught (in more ways than one), but your comments have been noticeable steps hellward, and we're trying to go the other way here. Being right, or feeling you are, does not make it ok to break the rules!

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I used one of their planed, unfinished edge-glued boards when I built my kid's bassinet. I was impressed by the uniform quality; it was almost as if it was a single board. Thanks Menards! (Full disclosure, my employer is technically a competitor, but we don't sell lumber.)
Who would want a lifetime searchable, contextually indexed, history of all the sites you've ever been to and perhaps a couple of sub-pages automatically scraped, all stored locally to be shared at your discretion, I'm sure Google would love to add that asap.
> China is not going to attack Taiwan which has US support.

China will have a Navy that (by tonnage) rivals the US's Navy in a few short years. US still will have more capital ships but there's big, unanswered questions about what the proper tactics will be in the next great naval battles.

Would we rather have the US's "Supercarrier" strategy? Big ships with lots of money put into each one? Or would China's "little ships" strategy be superior?

Really: one question. Will China's hypersonic missiles truly be a capital-ship killer? If their weapon can truly kill a US Supercarrier, (or more specifically: if China __believes__ it can kill the US Supercarriers) then China will probably attack Taiwan.

China is building a navy for _some_ reason. Taiwan seems like the obvious target.

------

China's increasingly large Navy is a big enough deal that the USA has given away its nuclear submarine secrets to Australia to counter-act the threat. That doesn't really change the picture too much (US always had nuclear-submarines available), but its clearly a degree of saber-rattling going on right now between US and China.
Considering that it's a list of what _can_ be included, this just seems like a rhetorical blowfish.
> But it may make sense to compel someone to share factual information ("the PIN is 1234") or to provide access to information.

No, it does not, because "compel" means that if they do not comply you punish them until they do.

How are you to know whether or not they actually remember the information you are asking ("The PIN was, err .. 1235?"). This leads to effectively punishing them for not giving the "correct" answer, which is no different from punishing them for not confessing.

Once you go down the path of punishing people for not divulging the contents of their mind, you may well just punish them for the crime itself and not bother with a trial.

If you allow compelled speech, there is no reason to have a trial.
> I think you need to explain your scenario a bit better.

If I'm developing a mastodon fork that I intend to run on a small private network for my company, and I accidentally expose it to the internet for a few minutes in error, and a person hits the site, under the letter of the license I am forced to disclose my source code to that person. My IP is no longer in my control and has been disclosed to a third party. This is not complicated. That scenario may be far fetched, but it becomes less far fetched if we actually get to a court case where a site was up for a little while and then was taken down and the legal system needs to rule on if this can be enforced from such scenarios. The political nature of this being disclosed publicly also seems like a huge error if they expect to be able to force source disclosure in court.
NPM package ‘ua-parser-JS’ with more than 7M weekly download is compromised
I wonder what the maximum bitrate of an audio cassette is, using modern encoding techniques like OFDM with error correction? I searched once, and saw estimates in the 25 kbps range, but no usable implementation.
You can try, sure. But AFAIK you can't just serve someone papers and compel them to turn over documents; a judge's discretion is involved in the process. If you say "I wrote some open-source self-driving car code and I think Waymo is using it", there's no way they're just going to hand over their self-driving car code.
That's more or less what Shakespeare did 500 years ago. ;)
If that was the problem then white wouldn't be available either
Ah good old bastardised Voltaire
We still make things in the US. Manufacturing revenue has been consistently increasing. However manufacturing as a share of GDP has fallen as other sectors grew faster. And employment has fallen due to automation and process improvements.

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/manu...
> Likely, the cause is simple ignorance. Modern developers of certain age just use whatever code they can fork from GitHub, think about licenses later (if ever).

Sure, that's entirely possible. Nobody has attributed malicious intent to them. But the terms of the AGPL are clear.
It doesn't really matter too much how you store it, as what it is: make something people want to remember and they'll figure out how to preserve it. If it's not worth holding onto, eventually someone's going to determine that it's no longer worth keeping.
Right, another instance of where the mineral product is to be much preferred over the so-called natural one is with turpentine.

Mineral turpentine is to be much preferred over the natural one because the latter contains organic wood terpenes many if which are toxic and proven carcinogens - after all it stands to reason that they're dangerous, as trees have evolved to produce them to fend off or poison insects that attack them.

I find it somewhat distressing to see so many carpenters and woodworkers using terpenes-laced turpentine because they believe 'natural' is better.

It's time this dangerous myth was dispelled.
It was obsolete at launch, though. 3DOF is "poison the well" territory and not good marketing for VR at all.
The situation would require a book, but here's the simplest I can do, yet it will miss many of the more detailed legal points and citations.

My wife an I both witnessed him say he was amending the charge because he made a mistake. He then went into the court and told the magistrate he was amending the charge to "cut us a break". The magistrate then issued a continuance (instead of dismissing if he knew the true reason). The incorrect charge carried pretrial restriction only found under that charge and the trooper knew that the charge was incorrect for about 6 weeks. State law only allows amendments if the rights of the defendant were not violated (there were 2 other rights violated later, and multiple procedural mistakes too). Subjecting someone to pretrial restrictions under a charge that is known to be wrong is unusual punishment and also a violation of the state constitution. So it would require dismissing the case. We found proof supporting this in the trooper's later testimony where he stated that he knew it was incorrect for those 6 weeks, yet held it against us anyways. The IAD investigation found that he did tell us the correct thing and then told the court something wrong 10 minutes later. The report said it was a "misunderstanding", without any details or explanation.

Later he claimed that a picture he introduced in court was in the investigative file "since the beginning", yet it was not furnished to us when we subpoenaed the file. Another IAD investigation found that the picture wasn't placed in the file until a later time. The magistrate did not throw out the picture because he thought we had access the whole time and we didn't have access to that IAD finding until after the trial (not sure if I trust this or they were covering). Furthermore, the picture was exculpatory evidence under the incorrect charge and should have been furnished to us regardless of the subpoena. So much for Brady...

He made 2-3 other factually incorrect statements that I did not have hard evidence of (just our word against his). These included things like changing his story in a contradictory way. We did have a recording of his testimony and a phone call with him (both consistent with law).

The complaint process also treated us adversarially, which is a violation of feral policy (hence complaint to DoJ). The state police claim they can knowingly hold incorrect charges against people.
Oh man this game was so cool and interesting, I played this with my girlfriend 4 years ago and we both got super into it. Definitely had to Google some of the solutions to the puzzles but wow it’s a cool concept. After we finished it we listened to the audiobook together which was also fantastic.
I’m based in NZ too, how do you go with time zones?

I’ve noticed many US companies hiring remote still specify employees to live within a range of time zones. And I haven’t seen those include NZ (+13, yes the edge of tomorrow)

In practice, I’ve found collaborating with US colleagues fine. There’s a 3-4 hour overlap (our morning, their end of day).
I was going to point out another HN'er that said this, but then I looked at the username and it turned out to be me in 2014. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7509095

Well, at least my ideas are consistent.

As for the root source, I suppose I could just ask him now. But the idea came from a slashdot post. Carmack personally responded to some criticisms of Q3 code quality, and said that he was proud of it, and that it had generated a lot of revenue for the company.

Billions may have been off by a couple orders of magnitude though. I'm no longer sure.

Maybe not too far off, though. The revenue of Q3 Arena alone was $11M. Far more valuable is Id Tech 3, the engine that was licensed by many studios over many years. Unfortunately, I can't seem to find revenue numbers on that. I wonder if it's public.
The downvotes prove the rampant Google fanboyism on HN. The YouTube app for AppleTV is exhibit #1 in Google's anticompetitive behavior.
I agree that demonizing and “othering” people on the Other Side is a bad idea for the reasons you state. I also agree with your overall point.

I disagree that deplatforming gab is demonizing anybody. It’s tackling an absolute cesspool of a community. It’s among the worst of the worst that’s available out there. I’m sure they’ll survive without it.
In my opinion, unless we develop AGI, not at all... And if we did develop AGI, then data scientists would find themselves out of a job too.

I think you'd be very hard pressed to automate systems programming, and most forms of programming for that matter. So, as long as we develop new hardware, new products, new platforms, new programming languages, then there will be lots of programming work to be done.

The jobs that machine learning is replacing right now (if any?) are fairly repetitive jobs that don't really require any reasoning. Maybe machine learning is also helping automate phishing schemes, but, is there any programming job out there that's really repetitive and thoughtless, where the work is predictable and akin to factory work? Do you think a transformer model is going to be able to handle debugging?
I think many people are perfectly content with being called intolerant, if that's what it takes for others to understand nuance. There is nothing wrong with not supporting hateful jerks and bigots.
Ya, I think too often we have a tendency to take a bet on propositions where there simply is no logical conclusion to be had quite yet given the current information.

I wish more author instead of saying, this is where my bet would be, they would just say, ya there's no good information and this whole thing is up in the air, we just don't know and here are the next steps if we wanted to get closer to knowing.

Because otherwise it leads to a weird bias. For some reason, we have the tendency to believe that someone who's done the research would be more likely to be correct in their bet, but inconclusive research doesn't actually make this true. If the research is inconclusive, having done it doesn't help the prediction.
Why would any sane person be tolerant to intolerant people? If you wish I were gone, why would I enable you in any way?
I think that's a misreading. That clause only limits additional fees charged to existing users for access to the source code.

You can make the changes and charge whatever you want for the software. When the user requests the source code, as is their right, for that you can only charge the physical costs.

The intent is to prevent expensive source code fees from being used as an end-around the source disclosure requirements. It also makes sure the distributor can cover the cosrs, but no more than that.
I do, I just disagree with the wiki article. It even contradicts itself within a few paragraphs there.

For instance it lists in your quoted section that

> argues that such regimes may be considered populist ultra-nationalism but lack the rhetoric of national rebirth, or palingenesis, necessary to make them conform to the model of palingenetic ultranationalism.

And if you scroll up to the section header it says

> Pinochet himself expressed his project in government as a national rebirth inspired by Diego Portales, a figure of the early republic:[127]

> [Democracy] will be born again purified from the vices and bad habits that ended up destroying our institutions.... [W]e are inspired in the Portalian spirit which has fused together the nation...
— Augusto Pinochet, 11 October 1973.
What else did those politicians vote on? If your claim is that the union funded politicians because of their support for the invasion of Iraq, that is an extraordinary claim that demands extraordinary proof. Let's see your proof.

[Edit: At the end of the day, union leaders are elected by union members, and if the members do not like how their contract is negotiated they can elect different leaders or otherwise make their voices heard. Call it "bullying" if you want, but I fail to see how non-unionized workers are not being bullied by the companies they work for, given how one-sided negotiations between individual workers and companies are.]
What is "the community's right to shut somebody up"? If a country elects a dictator, it is fine if that dictator then shuts people up?

Mastodon (afaik) already has the feature that communities can decide what outside content can enter their servers. What is the point on making it impossible for others to use the software at all? It doesn't server the purpose of protecting that community from nasty speech, because that is already accomplished by not communicating with the evil servers.
Lex Is the Queer Dating App of the Future (and the Past): On Text over Images
Didn't we know this was going to happen as soon as we shut everything down last year to combat Covid? This shouldn't be a surprise to anybody... we collectively agreed that this was the price we were willing to pay to save lives.
Wow, the music is also very striking. Does anybody know if there's a modern recording of it?
But what if nobody asked for the source code? Did anybody ask for it?
The questions is, who decides who is intolerant?

In this scenario Democrats will claim Republicans are being intolerant and vice versa.
From the Preamble:

> The GNU Affero General Public License is designed specifically to ensure that, in such cases, the modified source code becomes available to the community. It requires the operator of a network server to provide the source code of the modified version running there to the users of that server. Therefore, public use of a modified version, on a publicly accessible server, gives the public access to the source code of the modified version. [emphasis added]

From Section 13:

> Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, if you modify the Program, your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network (if your version supports such interaction) an opportunity to receive the Corresponding Source of your version by providing access to the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge, through some standard or customary means of facilitating copying of software. This Corresponding Source shall include the Corresponding Source for any work covered by version 3 of the GNU General Public License that is incorporated pursuant to the following paragraph. [emphasis added]

This brings standing to the users as the license requires that the users be granted access to the "Corresponding Source", defined in Section 1 as:

> The "Corresponding Source" for a work in object code form means all the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to control those activities. However, it does not include the work's System Libraries, or general-purpose tools or generally available free programs which are used unmodified in performing those activities but which are not part of the work. For example, Corresponding Source includes interface definition files associated with source files for the work, and the source code for shared libraries and dynamically linked subprograms that the work is specifically designed to require, such as by intimate data communication or control flow between those subprograms and other parts of the work.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html
You couldn’t trust one firm. Many firms in many countries?

Or even better, diversify, and use multiple different plans, not just lawyers.
Right. The result of the protest is an unsafe environment for the professor. My point is just that any protest I can think of, whether it’s outside a government building, a business, or on a college campus, involves being present, so it doesn’t seem out of the ordinary. That’s not to say I condone an unsafe work environment, to be clear.
"It's a lot easier to ask whether contemporary humans can understand 1000 year old language, than to ask whether humans 1000 years ago can understand contemporary language."

This is clear. And since we can only look backwards, we can only assume it works the other way around.
I personally agree with you.

But I can conceive a hypothetical Chinese Admiral who disagrees with the both of us. And that's all that it will take.
Isn't it actually the case that diamond isn't the strongest material? Just scratch-resistant if memory serves. Not that it's weak either, of course, but I'm curious if it's the best choice.
Stock market predictions are the philosopher's stone of today
Harlan Ellison wrote Star Trek’s greatest episode. He hated it. (2018)
Why does it matter why they funded them? Why are they funding them all all? What is going on the unions are funding one particular political viewpoint?
> Ellen seems to have gotten the most growth from the original short story. And I was very happy to see that, because the original had a couple of cringe-worthy passages about her. Maybe they weren't as eyebrow-raising in 1967, but I definitely winced a few times on re-reading it a few years ago.

Like what? I don't really remember anything cringe-worthy in the story.
I think for the cold extreme it's less likely confusing too-cold with too-hot, and just the same as your African desert example. People without experience in the heat won't be able to tell when it goes from uncomfortable to dangerous due to inexperience. We're more than capable of bearing deadly heat emotionally, and so if you don't know what that feels like you'll just keep going until you get heatstroke, which will also be a new experience for an Icelander I assume. For those new to extreme heat, the sheer amount of water required to stay safe is usually underestimated.
"Most people," huh? You sure are an expert on what "most people" think. Maybe just replace that phrase with "I" if you want to stop being intellectually dishonest.