skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Just out of curiosity, and feel free to ignore this question if you’d rather not say, but why something specifically without YouTube, but presumably other streaming apps?
That's quite good
Acid free paper is a big improvement, but it's not gonna last 500 years. It's expected to last 200 years.

Archival acid-free paper -- paper with cotton added to it -- can last up to 1000 years, but be prepared to pay $2.50 for 1 page[1], so a 400 page book will cost you $1000 for one copy, just for the paper in the book. This type of archival paper might be useful for important contracts or deeds, or legal documents.

But then you have to worry about ink. Normal ink will break down as well in 1-200 years, so you need archival ink. This boils down the difference between pigment and dye based inks. Dye based inks are more expensive but more resistant to UV light.

In the end, light, heat, water, will destroy everything.

The way to make something last is social in nature -- building long lasting institutions and cultures that value your website and archive it. These must be able to preserve themselves, which means traditions that forcefully apply to successive generations.

It is not a technological problem, but a social problem. However liberalism is completely unequipped to solve this problem, because in order to create something that outlives you, you must bind future generations to some course of action they haven't agreed upon yet. So a liberal society cannot have long lasting institutions or traditions, it always eats itself -- there is another trending hackernews topic about Jefferson being cancelled. Well, of course Jefferson will be cancelled. So will Martin Luther King. So will everyone else. Absolutely nothing can last in a liberal society that believes moral progress is possible -- e.g. that children can be more moral than their grandparents. If you look at durable societies of the past, they all believed that the grandparents were wiser and more moral than they. That allowed them to preserve traditions and texts. The contingent that believes the opposite does not preserve texts, they burn them/cancel them/or otherwise try to erase them.

So once you stop thinking in terms of "what is the best way to do X" to "what is the best way to make sure my mechanisms of doing X will last", then you end up with completely different solutions for the same problem, because the social technologies of preservation are often the exact opposite of the social technologies of progress and improvement.

So no, your website is not going to last 500 years.

[1] https://www.archivalmethods.com/product/archival-paper
> Gab has an absolute right under the first amendment to be able to speak.

Gab has an absolute right under the first amendment to be able to speak most of the time without government intervention.

ftfy. Speech is not unlimited. Freedom of speech only applies regarding government censorship.
Series of stone tablets + a visual grammar, language that can be deciphered from scrach with new eyes.
Was going to post a link to this post saying that it talked about what the OP's article did in a more succinct manner. Good to see I'm not alone.
It's hidden but it shows up if you press Alt.
> Once caught in the act, Trump's Group scrambled and took the site down.

Did they take the site down because of licensing issue or because it was badly configured, so exposed it to bad actors? I think all evidence points to the latter.
Programmers are some of the most contrarian people out there, after all.
You're right. Deleting...

Oops, can't do that, it appears.
Yes. Or make it available for download some other way. The license text is quite clear.
discussion is already going on reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/qdlela/breakin...

The compromised package: https://www.npmjs.com/package/ua-parser-js

7,680,657 downloads a week

Version 0.7.28 is still good, anything above that is compromised

> 0.7.29 includes scripts that download and execute binaries. From the command-line arguments, one of them looks like a cryptominer, but that might be just for camouflage.

Probably one of the biggest reasons it's downloaded so much is that it's a direct dependency of Facebook's "fbjs" package which is downloaded 5.7mil/week: https://www.npmjs.com/package/fbjs

https://github.com/facebook/fbjs/blob/main/packages/fbjs/pac...

Someone has already filed an issue: https://github.com/facebook/fbjs/issues/464
What you are describing is corruption. It’s actually a crime. But government will never hold government prosecutors or judges to account for corruption that favors government interests.
Perhaps theory of prices has a totally different meaning from "leftist" contexts? They operate under imperatives and assume there is some sort of ideal formulae that ignores that it makes the Knapsack Problem look log(n).

"What the market will bear." is a nonanswer to them even though it is accurate because reality is messy with human psychology more so.

Of course from mainstream economics perspective their concepts of value and exploitation are between fallacious (universal global value because labor is assumed as the basis) to pants-on-head levels of crazy (the idea that a fair trasaction becomes unfair when the buyer is able to reap later profit).
Big pharm adopts the subscription model of profitability
This is great as such but it really should be the law.
If it's decided that AGPL isn't a valid license, that will mean that Trump's org and most of the rest of us have no license to use Mastadon and thousands of other software projects.
nice! also interesting that they have chosen a lisp syntax for the book. note however that the book is written to be language agnostic

> It is a Lisp-like language which, by virtue of its syntactic simplicity, also makes for efficient and
easy meta-programming, an approach many implementors will take. That said, the real substance of this book is language agnostic and the main points should be understood in this light.
It had been officially released to users for a short period of time before it was taken down, as the article states. Since it was public, that public use of the code needs to be published as it was when it was public.
Oh, silly me. I totally forgot that the GitLab team reimplemented also a set of ESLint rules in Semgrep[0], just like I mentioned they did with Bandit. We published an in-depth comparison with ESLint[1] that might clear things up even more.

[0]: https://semgrep.dev/p/gitlab-eslint

[1]: https://r2c.dev/blog/2021/javascript-static-analysis-compari...
These two seem mutually exclusive?

! X.org allows applications to exclusively grab keyboard and mouse input. If such applications misbehave you are left with a system you cannot manage, you cannot even switch to text terminals.

!! Wayland doesn't allow applications to exclusively grab mouse/keyboard which is required for games and applications like VMs.
This language is wrong. Rights can be terminated only if the user does not cease violating the rights. If Trump's group will publish source codes 6 months after this 30 day period, they'll instantly undo this permanent termination.
> Why would cold places adapt so hard that they did better than warm places?

It's plausible that many of the adaptations are trade offs. You do better in the cold by not doing as well when it's hot. Then if it gets warmer in the place it's usually cold, your adaptations to the cold are impediments and make things worse.

And the same thing the other way around. In the place where people have adapted to the heat, if it gets even a little bit cold, they're in trouble.

This implies that climate change could still be making everything worse for everyone. You make it warmer for people adapted to the cold and that's bad. You make it warmer for people adapted to the heat and that's still bad, because they're still where they are. Now it's 145 F there instead of 135 F and their adaptations are insufficient.
>People have their limits. Most people aren’t absolutists, taking their philosophy to the extreme and utterly unable to make exceptions to their rules when egregious examples show up.

If your morals don't hold up when pushed to their limits, it's that you have a poor understanding of what your morals are. A lot of people like free software because it's hip, but when faced with the very reason free software exists they turn back on it very fast.
Why Network Engineers Should Learn Go
If you're running with no modification you'd still need to link back to the source code. Likely the mastadon repo in this example.
Saw Ian and Tim argue about this on Timcast IRL last night. Hope these license issues can be resolved
If you're interested in probabilistic programming and want something a little more hands-on, I recommend The Design and Implementation of Probabilistic Programming Languages http://dippl.org/ . It's an online course/textbook that gets you programming right away and makes the power of probabilistic programming immediately clear.
> core/neck

I saw the picture above, looks very good!

> tone grass

I honestly believe that the key to building a good guitar is stiffness ... This will create a very high pitched instrument, as it does not lose the high frequencies in the wood. But that can be sorted out later vis EQing
My bad, dunno what I was thinking.
> the license violation and that can easily be avoided

And easily cured. What secret sauce could there possibly be in their modifications that early on?
So is there more or less bureaucracy in US and non-US healthcare? And how free markte is US health care really?
Yeah, and that might be as much a marketing problem as a technology problem. We may need to be considering another major category of desktop / laptop OS experience besides Windows, MacOSX, Chromebook, and "Linux (pick your distro)": "Linux (vendor)." Like Linux (pick your distro) but more likely to be working out-of-the-box and more likely to break under exotic manipulations than Linux (pick your distro).

I have a great ThinkPad X1 that I just tried to switch the window manager it shipped with for xmonad. Everything broke. It's not particularly intuitive that the list of things depending on the window manager config involves wifi, audio control, Bluetooth control, power management (machine no longer sleeps when the screen is shut), screen auto-configuration when a monitor is plugged in or unplugged, and what happens when you plug a USB drive in... But they do.

From an adoption standpoint, there might be meat on the bones of the messaging "Linux on the desktop is great if you buy from a vendor; just don't assume that any old hack you do to the default install is going to just work." Then widen the set of "blessed" hacks that do work from that base template of well-verified default configuration.
You might be surprised. Half the time I say that, I get a comment like yours. The other half of respondents go on about how it’s nonsense and that C is perfectly [modern/simple/usable/reasonable].
For most of the pre-modern era, 'governing body' simply means a group with enough stockpiled resources, especially food, to project power. Anyone who could get in on this action tried to. Spoilage is an issue, but humans came up with many neat tricks to work around this, many of which are still used today (fermentation, for example). Anyone who didn't want to live or die soley by the whims of the local warlord during a harsh winter had to maintain their own food stockpile.

The great lie of Civ is to present this as centrally organized when for most of human history this power was very finely decentralized due to the expense of communication and logistics. But as socities become more centralized food stockpiles haven't disappeared. Many governments still maintain food stockpiles, especially poorer countries.
No, it's right.

In the US you can sue them if you suspect they're using your software in an infringing way, then use the discovery process to unearth this evidence.
I think I understand the spirit of your complaint, but I'm not sure what concrete changes you would support. Are you arguing that the GPL3 license is a poor reflection of open source ideals? Or that the license should provide exemptions for politicians? Or that violating the license should be protected as free speech?
Not from what I understand. Your copyright (by default) gives you standing. If you hold no copyright, you have no standing to claim copyright infringement.
> What standing does the Software Freedom Conservancy have to do pursue this in court themselves? Are they authors of Mastodon?

They are users of software built on AGPL (Mastodon) and therefore have a right to have access to that source code.
Download available here:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3841844
Yeah. If people don't have a problem with gab being blocked on fdroid for essentially dressed-up political reasons, then they also shouldn't have a problem with the play store or apple's app store blocking stuff for political reasons.
Sono Group F-1 IPO
Anyone that signed up and used the service is legally entitled to the source code, even if they are internal users. From reading the article it looks like some external users successfully signed up.
> openly promote the idea that whites are superior and deserve to dominate society.

From what I could gather, the idea they're promoting is for whites to have a separate society, and not dominate anyone. But since they're so open about promoting, as you say, whites dominating others, you should have no trouble finding an example proving me wrong.
>let everybody say whatever they want.

So SPAM is ok?
It's about the density of information, quality of preservation (eg. checksumming) and simplicity to decode.

Sure, QR codes are unlikely to be useful in 500 years, but if they have the above properties, they are just as good as anything else. If civilization endures, I am sure they'll be decodable in 5 centuries (whether they are preserved is altogether another matter).
The Hidden Costs of Living Alone
One of the goals of the Affero GPL, in fact, was to close exactly that loophole with respect to hosted software. The rights granted by the license are expressly granted to the users of the software. So in theory SFC can sue for the source code themselves under the AGPLv3. I'm not aware that that has been tested, but it seems reasonable.
> If I (today) said I had a word document and needed "an old version of Microsoft Word", I'm sure most people would know what I mean, and that I'd find someone with a Windows XP machine and a copy of Office 97'. Meanwhile, there are tons of people who are just going to stare at you blankly if you tell them about EBCDIC, never mind help you find a decoder.

Funny, I suspect the precise reverse is true.

EBCDIC is a well-documented encoding. Worst case, find you a reference book and you can figure out how to deal with it, because that knowledge is open and available.

The same is true of ASCII. If you can understand binary encodings with 8-bit groupings--a fairly fundamental concept in digital computing--you can probably find your way to an ASCII table in a library somewhere.

But good luck finding a working Windows XP machine with Office '97 fifty or one hundred years from now, let alone a spec for the format.
My experience working in a deep learning outfit for a few years has been that the software stack is incredibly immature and fragile.

You're generally tied to proprietary nvidia drivers that are a pain to install, and when they change version, it breaks software such as PyTorch, you're forced to update. PyTorch itself often has breaking changes. Then, most of the code is written in Python, often by academics who know and care very little about good software engineering practices. That also leads to fragile and breakable code. You'll often find yourself trying to install code that's just DOA because of multiple broken dependencies.

The quality of the code can be terrible, because academics are in a constant rush to publish the next thing, and tend to view code as throwaway. Worse yet, it's often written by students, and these students are taught by professors who view software engineering as an inferior, unscientific discipline. I've seen many github repos with no open source license, and no README, just a random code dump with no comments.

I'm personally not super enthusiastic by the idea of replacing a lot of code by machine learning just yet, because not only is the software ecosystem fragile, but the models can be as well. You're likely to introduce weird, unpredictable modes of failure. I can see that there's clearly a lot of people who dream of being able to basically create software without coding, and not have to deal with pesky software developers, but IMO, we're not there yet.

This guy talks about cloud-based machine learning solutions. You won't have to deal with drivers and general "IT" concerns there. The problem is that, besides being very expensive, these cloud-based solution will introduce extra layers of vendor lock-in. If you're training on the google cloud and using TPUs that you can't even physically buy/own, you might have a hard time porting your code to run without a TPU. If Google revokes your access for some reason, because they claim you've violated their TOS, you are fucked.
As someone who doesn't jive with those politics, but I have to think though that they missed a real opportunity to just share the source. That'd be "the truth", that'd prove that social media companies aren't just hard coded to be echo chambers by some kind of evil political robot, but yet the dark patterns are hidden in code that isn't nearly so obvious. Plus it would show they weren't trying to do anything evil with the results? I don't imagine they will be making money with the tech anyway, it would probably end up being advertising?
Fascists can't be losers?
> Out of interest, what's to stop them publishing some 'version' of the modified code, but actually running a different version on their servers? Would that be easy to detect?

That depends on what you mean by "detect" -- there's an large body of Computer Science research dedicated to program attestation, i.e. enabling a user to verify that the program (or results of a program) derives directly from some source. But it's far from a solved problem in the general case.

Less formally, that's what the legal system is for: if the copyright holder suspects that the published source code is different from the source code that's being run by the service, then they're perfectly within their rights to take the service provider to court and attest, under the penalty of law, to their compliance.
I just tried this with my iphone 11, just out of curiosity...
Siri ratted me out and my face still unlocked it.
Pinochet is one of the clearest fascists of the past half century. It's very obvious.
command+l,n,enter
Freedom of speech has always included the right to choose not to give a platform to speech with which you disagree. Compelled speech by definition is not free speech.
I've heard that software engineers are the automobile workers of the 50s-70s: Extremely well-compensated professionals who were ultimately thrown to the wayside when technology came. I wonder if data scientists and AI will do a similar thing to software engineers.
You sure?

“In part, the unlocking is an attempt to guarantee that Go hardware will continue to be fully functional well into the future, allowing for "a randomly discovered shrink wrapped headset twenty years from now [to] be able to update to the final software version, long after over-the-air update servers have been shut down," Carmack wrote.”
>Out of interest, what's to stop them publishing some 'version' of the modified code, but actually running a different version on their servers?

The law

>Would that be easy to detect?

No
If the politician wants to silence the spread of free code I think it's about right that the free software movements fights back.
Correct. I'm not sure of your point. This would obviously be immediately rectified with a new version that addresses any judgement.
Would the Trump-supporting programmers you know be fine having "Trump Social Media Platform" as the latest job on their resume?

I'd guess fear of ostracism in mainstream tech would filter out more people than actual politics.
That was achieved by the instance level blocking. Clients breaking protocol to antagonize instances the developers don't like and F-Droid arbitrarily kicking apps despite them following the inclusion policy is where this breaks down.
> they remove any public-facing evidence

You screenshot the evidence before letting them know that it exists, and then you take that to the judge. "But we took down the site" isn't going to stop them from ordering discovery or stop your screenshots from being evidence... It can't be a total fishing expedition, but it doesn't need to be much more (as I understand it, not a lawyer).

There's also always the human element, someone on the inside let's you know (and indeed, you might compensate them for that, like the Software Alliance does).

There's also the fact that most software isn't exactly... subtle... about what it is in the backend. Error pages and such are often quite distinctive.
It's just funny because they're removing it from a source code repo, packaging it up into a zip, and adding it to another source code repo. If they didn't mind including the change history they could've just published the code as-is as a clone. If they did want to strip the change history they could've published it as a shallow clone or an artifact. But instead they chose to push a ZIP file into a repo with a single branch. I guess at least they'll have a history of their ZIP files.
Depends on the bean you cook. Most beans are fine, kidney beans, for example, are not.
Internal testing: no. Public testing; yes.

Launch and release has no legal meaning, gmail was in beta for years. What matters is who can access it?
>Turns out, most people don’t just dislike gab, they think it’s dangerous not to take action and don’t want to be on the eventual wall of people who Did Nothing when retrospection comes.

The vast majority of people who support this deplatforming have been whipped up into a hysteria by their peers and media and unironically believe that half the country belongs to the party of racism and white supremacy and anti-science, and that platforms like gab are merely hangouts for extremism and insurrection plotting.

Ironically, this sort of treatment is going to breed extremism, and if I may say, rightly so. You don't demonize and dehumanize half the country by associating them with "whiteness" and nazism, especially while claiming to be anti-racist.

At best, this path leads to construction of a parallel society, with it's own infrastructure. At worst, genocide, but which side will do the genociding is hard to predict, the way things are going.

There's no excuse for this blatand politicization of all of our institutions, and the way that they all implicitly and explicitly collude to effectively deny voices to half of the country while worshipping SCIENCE! as though it were some unreproachable religion.
Merit isn't the dominant criteria.
Thanks for posting this--a few weeks ago, I also read Robert Loerzel's article "The Great Chicago Fire, As Told By Those Who Lived Through It" in Chicago Magazine and found it riveting:

https://www.chicagomag.com/chicago-magazine/october-2021/ins...
I would do it just to stick it to Big Tech and their censorship.

Still, as a rule I don't work for governments and politicians because they are perpetrators of violence and they're mostly unpunished by society.
> My point of view is: let everybody say whatever they want. Doesn't get more unbiased than that.

That assumes the individual’s right to speak is greater than the community’s right to shut them up, and is therefore biased in favour of the individual.
Kind of off topic but seeing the current comments, keep in mind that excess deaths due to temperature is but a tiny fraction of the equation. Co2 levels and its impact on our cognitive capacity, ocean acidification, loss of crops, access to water, massive population migrations, warming of permafrost, &c. are all much more likely to cause problems