skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This kind of thinking requires you to absolutely set aside the human ability to make "reasonable" judgments. That free speech is so unassailable that nobody is justified in declaring an expression or utterance to be dangerous. Our justice system is built on setting standards of proof like "reasonable doubt" with the implicit expectation that humans can, in fact, make reasonable judgments and those judgments can be of what is and isn't within their legally protected freedom.

As a reasonable person, I think that overt racism, opposition to public health measures, attacks on voting and democracy and unwillingness to accept responsibility for damage to the environment we all share are simply not reasonable points of view. I think the consensus for what is unreasonable is actually quite a bit narrower than that (no one has ever been deplatformed for climate denial). A lot of pro-Trump forums have devolved into exhortations to violence that lead to a deadly insurrection. No digital platform out there wants to be responsible for something like that and it's not just because of politics.
To the extent that Facebook does have such discourse (and it does), it's mostly failure in their implementation of their community standards policy, not a laissez-faire community standards policy.
> I think that's a misreading.

Right? But since that's a legal document, possible misreadings can end up exploited somehow.

Even something like an ambiguous comma can be at the crux of a dispute

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/09/us/oxford-comma-maine.htm...
You mean malicious intent by the author of the article to present the rather mundane situation as a nefarious crime and paint a picture of an evil wrongdoing by a group of obvious scumbags? The language certainly suggests that.
Well, I'd argue that the one imposing on others more loses.

Proselytizing religions have no moral leg to stand on from an imposition point of view.

Plus, let's be honest here, your example is just people being jerks with each other. The real debates are about physical harm, economic harm, etc., in which case it's far less fuzzy figuring out who's wrong.
The Blanc Media 8-Week Work Cycle with Sabbaticals
Freedom of speech should include the freedom to not speak on behalf of others. And then there’s freedom of association, which one might consider far more fundamental — it’s what you lose when you go to jail.
That's ringing a bell, I feel like I once had that site in regular rotation with slashdot.
Microfiche can last 500 years. So can engravings in nickel, which can be read with an optical microscope:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD-Rosetta
Shouldn't news.ycombinator.com redirect to hackernews.com instead?
GitHub Actions for Security and Compliance
Create a virulent sect whose main tenet is to keep the religious scripture (your personal writings) available to as many people as possible.

If you do it right the organisation will self-adjust, recruit new members, gather a tithe from them and keep propagating your writings for thousands of years or more.

There were these folks living in what we now call the middle-east ~3k years ago. Their memetic footprint is still reverberating strong to this day.
from the twitter thread:

>can somebody give me some context? I'm lost. is this referencing the bible? or an anime?

Not sure if masterful troll or not...
people outside the field are unqualified to parse the data.
please go back and get a degree in the field before commenting.
Indeed https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28889108
I would also add the social element - if you want your kids and grandkids to be able to read it, pass custody of the website well before you die (perhaps in a will?) and tell as many friends and family as you can. I know I would happily administer a deceased friend's website until i could no longer myself.
500 years from now, at a grand reconstruction ceremony:

"And there seems to be text scrolling and blinking upon the display surface... never.... gonna... give you up? What do you think it means, Tharl?"
I think this is specific to certain areas of the software market. I'm in embedded systems and the engineers I've worked with generally stay much longer than 3-4 years. There's a former co-worker on my LinkedIn who's my age and she's been with the same company for over 20 years.

I quit my last job after 5 years and over my 30 year career, that's the shortest stint I've had.
I don't want a warranty. I want my relationship with the company to end as soon as our transaction is complete. If something is worth repairing, I want to be able to pay whoever I want a reasonable price to repair it, regardless of what condition its in or how it got like that. I don't want a company dictating how I utilize and maintain my property potentially decades after I purchase it, and I don't want to pay an absurdly high amount for something I'm going to replace in a few years just because somebody may want to utilize it for far longer.
Ok I see the mix up. When I said “those people”, I wasnt referring to tech people in general, just the ones that would say things like the Linux desktop is doomed because of hardware support.
Without thinking ahead, I'm not considering the scale of technical debt I may introduce with my change.
I think a lot of it comes down to how you read it.

I usually read a book in a couple of sittings. This favors lighter fare, with copious excitement to keep one engaged.

I could never do this with Moby Dick. But with a 10-30 page reading per day, you hear about some interesting thing: perhaps mostly whaling and sailing, perhaps advancing the plot and characters. It's not enough to sustain an excited big read, but it's certainly enough to make you wonder about what you'll read next.

The chapters average 3-4 pages long. I think this is a hint that it's intended to be consumed in morsels.
Every single source I have found eventually gets traced back to Taubman.
but killing killers is legal under law.
You are not entitled to use F-Droid's distribution network, anymore than they are entitled to be installed on your phone.
I am in medical school. Just checked my notes for hepatic cyst. One thought could be an Echinococcus parasite infection - https://www.cdc.gov/parasites/echinococcosis/

Imaging - https://imgur.com/a/b0gJ3MZ

Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echinococcosis#Regions

Most likely this is not it. However, I would feel bad if I didn't at least mention it. Sincerely hoping for the best for you and your family!
I’m not saying it’s the problem now. I’m saying it’s been a problem in the last.

But the current problem is absolutely not due to truckers being non union.
>Stealing is wrong. But what if you're stealing bread because that's the only way you can get food, and you're stealing it from Jeff Bezos who was just going to let it rot. Is that still wrong? Even if it has no value to Jeff B? Even if it means your death if you don't?

Which is a misunderstanding of what you really mean by "stealing is wrong."

In that example, Bezos doesn't care about the sandwish, so perhaps you mean "stealing is wrong if it deprives someone of something they cherish." Or maybe you hold your life above your morals, but then you have to recognize what you're doing is amoral.
Why the move? What is it that BSD gives that Linux can't?
this is definitely not true
The community does not, and should not have the right to shut someone up. They have a right not to listen.
Yes, as usual with people most are honest. It's only the ratio of dishonest ones that is way higher than most places.

Once you interact enough, you get a history of problems. But for each interaction, the odds are that you will find a perfectly honest driver.
You could declare that the only way to show basic humanity is to precisely agree with the political zeitgeist in the correct left-wing circles and that the only reason to disagree with any of their political prescriptions is becaues you see certain groups as subhuman. I've seen plenty of activists do so; in a lot of circles it seems to be mandatory in order to actually be seen as human. Of course, there's the small problem that often the members of those groups don't actually support the political prescription, that it destroys the ability to actually challenge the people pushing those political views - who, by definition, have substantial power compared to the minorities they're claiming to help - and that it's lead to horrendous bigotry like TERFism. But that's not worth contemplating, because to qustion the righteousness of all this is to ignore the humanity of the people we conveniently don't have to listen to if it gets in our way.
Time is the ultimate limited resource
1. create a trust with a very reputable law firm, that lays out the terms of the service level agreement for the website.

2. Fund the trust in perpetuity with a large enough amount so that the interest is safely more than the cost to run it, including the trust admin fees.

My out-of-the-ass ballpark, you could probably do it for less than $100k.
Hurricanes and droughts are regional. Might make growing more expensive and limited in some places, while others are able to grow more.
> Section 13 begins with "Notwithstanding any other provision of this license..." which opens it up to a whole bunch of mitigating circumstances.

I welcome you to find a countervailing provision within the AGPL that permits TRUTH to host a service based on their Mastodon fork without distributing their changes. That would be, in legal terms, a "doozy."

> The AGPL can score some points and the company changes its practices and everyone moves on.

This is, as far as I can tell, precisely the intended outcome: the SFC intends to compel TRUTH to comply with the terms of the software they're using. Once they do (i.e., "change their practices"), they are perfectly free to continue using it (i.e., "move on").

As for the rest of your response: it's the same handwringing. The terms of the license are clear; Trump's status as a pariah doesn't entitle him to special relief from the terms of a software license.
that was exactly what i was asking for, i know how it works, but i would like to know how it is used by pros, (if used at all)
> I definitely winced a few times on re-reading it a few years ago.

You expected the insane AI bent on torturing the last five humans forever, to be more respectful of present-day sensibilities?
This is very Scary stuff. Who's going to be left running the elections the people making the threats?
I don't see how this creates standing for end-users. AGPL expands the licensees' obligations, but only the copyright holder has standing to sue over violations of the license.

This is analogous to a party that distributes GPL licensed software in binary form while refuses to fulfill their obligations under the license by providing code.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhoHasThePower
You may not like all the decisions the Supreme Court makes, but those three justices are not Trump's puppets.

And even if they were, then the decision should still be 6-3 against Trump. So I think your scenario is pretty much dead.
Freedom of speech is an ethical value. The first amendment is a legal element.

Homosexuality used to be banned in the name of "decency" too.
One of my pet peeves about the internet and modern rhetoric in general is how people are forced to write defensively, for fear of any omissions being construed as something you explicitly said, or a not fully finished thought as a binding contract. There's very little wiggle room to be wrong, and I don't mind being wrong, but you don't really get the chance to be constructively wrong in that format.

I've found a conversational trick in saying "But I haven't finished thinking about this yet.". It can sometimes be a bit of a thought terminating cliche, but I find it stops people jumping to contest obvious details in order to get started proving me wrong. People seem to acknowledge that I know I could be wrong, so they're more helpful in the conversation rather than antagonistic or dismissive.
I wonder if the victims of hate speech would agree with that.
We have spent the last 50 years trying to automate our job away. Many projects that 20 years ago took an entire team a year or more are now weekend projects for a single person, because of how much better our programming languages, libraries, APIs, IDEs, linters, etc have become. But demand turns out to be incredibly elastic. A 50% increase in productivity just means that there's 400% more work, because so many new things have now become cost effective to try.

Of course there is bound to be an end to this, a peak-software if you so will, where productivity increases will stop being offset by demand increases. I might live to see that day, but this AI wave is unlikely to be it. Yes, it brings some new tools that make programming easier, but it stimulates more than enough demand to offset that.
Allowing these groups to use your software and platform literally supports their operation. And again, it's perfectly fine to call this intolerance.
This goes against the idea that software is "art" in the sense that most works of art are created to physically endure over time.
The sandbox protects the OS. Apps from different stores could remain sandboxed. In addition, parental controls could easily allow restricting the phone to the App Store.
But you don't need to publish the link unless it is requested.
Best to be intolerant to, say, the Taliban, than to the Girls Scout.
>If Trump's group will publish source codes 6 months after this 30 day period, they'll instantly undo this permanent termination.

The license reads more like that only happens on your first infraction AND if you rectify your violation within 30 days.
The sound quality of an audio cassette is at least as good, and almost certainly better, than the quality of an analogue telephone line. So I bet you could set a lower bound of at least 33.6kbit/s, since that was as fast as telephone modems went.

56k modems relied on your phone line being digital after the switchboard, but I would imagine that 56k should be doable as well.
Not quite what you’re looking for, but a number of top US institutions offer a virtual second opinion program:

https://stanfordhealthcare.org/second-opinion/overview.html

https://www.massgeneral.org/second-opinions

https://www.dana-farber.org/appointments-and-second-opinions...

https://www.nyp.org/digital-health/second-opinion

https://www.mountsinai.org/care/international/second-opinion...

https://www.mskcc.org/experience/become-patient/internationa...

https://www.ucsfhealth.org/second-opinion

https://my.clevelandclinic.org/online-services/virtual-secon...
I'm not familiar with Linux that much so I'm curious, do you have a couple examples of errors in the piece?
Agree. Whether a business (or solution to a problem) is interesting, ingenious and innovative is a completely different matter from its being a good business. iirc warren buffet once said, "if it takes a calculator to figure out if it's a good business, it's not". In a similar vein (but with a different moral to it) my boss used to say that (in a corporate context) all back-of-the-envelope analysis was by definition correct - because it would only ever be checked via back-of-the-envelope calculations.
That would be difficult to answer. It appears that the tolerant people have flagged the comment.
> It will never be the year of the linux desktop if they can't put their feet in the shoes of a non-linux hacker.

My honest impression is that the developers of the software are often quite in tune with the needs and pains of the users, and the sort of "your problem is not a problem" responses lacking empathy you see are largely from other users. This isn't universally true, but I would say broadly. And even in cases where it isn't that one uncaring dev is often not representative of the project as a whole.

What I mean is - I think it's valid to call this a frequent failing of the broader Linux community, with users included. It bothers me as well. But the ones who do the most to make the software are often the ones who do care the most. And for them it's also quite a bad experience when generalizations go the other way.
It's a fun metaphor but there are so many ways in which it does not apply to the topic at hand. This isn't about an individuals autonomy on their own property, it's more about a societal contract and expectations over civil liberties / human rights. Comparing it to kicking people out of your house is not even on the same level.
The danger is that the policeman in question may not be all that interested in the truth of the situation, only in catching a "bad guy". So even if you are innocent they may assume you are guilty and look for anything at all that would get a conviction.

You might think that the courts would sort this out, since the cop obviously won't have any solid evidence, but it turns out that they don't have solid evidence in a great many cases and still manage to get convictions. The truth matters less than the system, and the system is designed to put people in jail.
I think we will clean that stuff up. You have to be pretty sure that humanity is going to suffer societal collapse for hundreds of years in order to put something in an orbit that people will want clear.
Not as I understand it. In this case, you have two parties, the open source project (Mastodon) and the site itself.

If the site is using the project, it should do so under the license. You, as a user of the site, have rights under that license.

However, the fact that the license terms are violated does not give _you_ a cause of action.
The site didn't enter into any contract with you. For there to be a standing, you need the authors of the project to say something.

Even then, note that the issue is the use of copyrighted code, not the fact that the users didn't get the code.

If you complied with the license, and the copyright holder came to you and said, give me money, you could point to the license and say that you are in good standing.

But that doesn't work the other way around, but IANAL.
I think Fedilab doesn't block any but haven't confirmed yet.
>"But we need you to do it without name-calling and personal attacks."

I do not think I've made any personal attacks here. As for name calling - the post I responded to is way more fitting.

>"Also, as a bonus, it will make your comments more persuasive"

Maybe. I just said what I think about the statement. I do not really care if my opinion persuades anyone.
/s, I know, but: A platform is a mechanism to obtain power, not a prescription for how power is practiced.
It seems nobody in this group actually watched his special, and their reaction to this is just proving his entire point.

When you try to force every day people to participate in your self-image, don’t be shocked when you get some criticism.
Progress != destruction of jobs.

Farming, auto, journalism, and marketing fits your model. But medicine, finance, and tech would suggest otherwise. I've been getting advice about how there is no money in software and I should study hardware since 90s.

Yes, maybe this is a freefall and we haven't made impact yet.
But drawing parallel without further evidence seems to be too simple of a analysis.

What cause the jobs in Detroit to be outsourced? What skills was replaced? How easy was it to train those skills? What was the potential pool of workers? What was the demand of workers?

All I'm saying is that this question is a lot more nuanced. I'm a software engineer, so I'm biased. But I'm guessing that you might be biased in some ways too. The real answer, perhaps boring, is that we really don't know. Even if you're right - you could easily be off by 200 years.
I prefer CDs to vinyl because:

1. higher dynamic range needed for classical music

2. don't have to clean the disk every time I play it

3. doesn't skip

4. no snap crackle pop that happens even on the first play

5. vinyl takes up too much space

6. the needle doesn't turn into a furball after a few plays

7. the needle doesn't need to be replaced after 300 plays

8. the speakers don't cause feedback with the needle

9. you don't need to tread softly lest the needle picks that up

mp3s, however, trump CDs.
I like to say that the Eight Amendment prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment likewise only applies to the government.
“we are printing money in the basement, and we are fine.”
But my lawn is not a platform. And even then, FDroid is a small enough platform that they should be allowed to do whatever they want. But then it's OK to point out the perceived hypocrisy in having a free software platform that censors apps they disagree with.

Free software is not really about free speech, but usually both philosophies are held together since they are somewhat related.
So, should we meta discuss the site now?
Launch an (autonomous?) ROV to the moon. Draw your message into the sand using the tracks of the ROV. Make the message large enough to be seen from Earth with a high powered telescope. Consider using pictograms, so language won't be an issue.

Bonus points: Pay for the mission by agreeing to embed messages from advertisers as well.
I can't trust CDs or digital downloads to not be Loudness War mastered.
It is clear that we have completely different perspectives. What is a "minor detail" for you is a decisive factor for me. I happily enable the Popularity Contest in Debian because they ask and because I trust them. I deliberately block all possible telemetry on Windows because they don't ask and because I don't trust them.

You know what is a crucial difference? I can take my Linux box and inspect all packets coming in and out and understand what they are for (it will take a long time on a modern system, but it's doable). And if I don't like something, I can block it and be sure (compromised systems aside) it will block everything I ask it to. With Windows... not only I can't be sure what all these packets are for, but I can't even be sure the built-in firewall and the related API will successfully block all packets communicating with Microsoft servers (same with Apple tbf). This is something that doesn't bother 99% of desktop users. But it does bother a certain kind of people who don't like being treated like that. We're different, that's all.
I e purchased and learned how to use a tap strap. Unfortunately it doesn't really live up the the hype and after a few frustrating months of practice and work it now lives in a drawer collecting dust.
What do religions say about pronouns?
> The narrator takes great pains to point out that Ellen obligingly has sex with all of the crew (ehh....), but she really likes having sex with Benny.

I don't see anything cringe worthy about that - it's not unusual for women to, uh, prefer bigger organs.

> but a book written today might be a little more conscious about the optics of the black female character having sex with a Simian/human hybrid.

I don't understand this bit either - what does the character being black have to do with it? Once again, in SciFi it's not unusual for humans to have relations with aliens, mutants, etc. Are black people not allowed do so?
Go? Isn’t Rust all the rage these days?
If every time you fire your weapon you are brought before a review board that treats firearm discharge as a serious matter and may lose your job if you acted in a panic or without reasonable justification then it's going to make you think twice about blasting that perp that maybe twitched his arm when you told him to hand over his driver's license and registration.
Does your browser's incognito mode make you anonymous?