skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The first amendment is about GOVERNMENT interference. I didn't mention it. Some people believe in free speech, period.
Why would the majority of gems have anything at all to
do with Rails or need it to work as advertised?

If you put Rails-specific functionality in your gem, now you have a dependency on Rails, and given the seamless and transparent ways in which Rails (specifically, ActiveRecord and ActiveSupport) extend Ruby, it's easy to unintentionally wind up making the non- Rails specific bits of your gem depend on Rails somehow.

Additionally one could say that AS/AR serve as sort of a defacto standard library of sorts at this point. You copy some code from Stack Overflow, it's got a dependency on one or the other, etc.

I'm not endorsing that state of affairs.

I actually don't know how I even feel about that state of affairs. The mostly-transparent extensibility of Ruby is the best and the worst thing about it. It's great if you're writing a framework or gem; but it makes it really tough for beginners to know what is doing what.
Spotify already paid him $100M to make his podcast inaccessible to people. Where was the concern then? If Spotify limiting Joe Rogan from post the podcast to other services was not a concern then, why is Spotify limiting what it hosts now a concern? I see no possible philosophical distinction, but if you have potential justifications, please feel free to share.
Not Lincoln. https://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/12/11/cannot-fool/
They make money by convincing customers to give them money. They need to at least act like they are concerned.
Don't confuse a dozen of loudmouths on twitter with the society. We have people all over the media, the government, the Supreme Court, the academia - everywhere - lying to our faces every day. But somehow Rogan - who just lets people of any point of view to come and speak, without censoring - is the biggest problem the society has. What a load of BS.
Censorship is censorship regardless if you agree with the censors.
You already are used to it. Lots of the web is rendered on server.
you have two options -- empirical metrics or holistic or subjective evaluation. the weakness of the former is that it is subject to gaming, the latter is subject to bias and nepotism.
the only Joe Rogan clips my friends and I watch, even as MMA fans, are the ones we watch for the "lulz" where he makes fun of and questions the anti-vaxxers. Oh those were days.. just two years ago.. when he was semi respectable. Now the Youtube algorithm doesn't even throw him out to me anymore.
Spotify made the mistake of acknowledging the legitimacy of the whims of cancel culture. In doing so, it always emboldens them and has the effect of drawing in new recruits to the cause.
Those people are choosing to disassociate with a platform because they believe it is choosing to host harmful misinformation. Agree or disagree with that opinion, you suggesting it is wrong to do that in the name of free speech seems hypocritical.
> When you pressure other entities to associate/dissociate with someone according to your preferences, that's a free speech issue.

That's not a 'free speech issue,' that's free speech in action. Until the government is punishing someone for their speech, everyone has and is using free speech.

If you want to see actual free speech issues, look at the anti-BDS laws[1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-BDS_laws
> Forgive me but what are you protesting exactly?

Corporate censorship. [1]

> At some point you have to look in the mirror.

I don't appreciate your personal attack. You are not arguing in good faith, and I'm done responding to you.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_censorship
The banks in the US can point-and-click freeze your assets and ability to transact even in the absence of any burden of proof of reasonable suspicion of a crime. They frequently do this upon request from the government well prior to a conviction or even charges.

They did this to Wikileaks, for example, long before any charges against Assange were made public.

It's, to borrow a phrase, "turnkey tyranny", ready for abuse at all times. Those it is wielded against can't then afford representation to get it fixed, as they can't send or receive any payments.
Every single Nintendo console I've owned has basically been a very expensive Zelda machine. In a hypothetical world where Sony/Microsoft/someone else acquired the rights to Zelda, I'd expect Switch sales to be at least 50% lower. The incredible strength of their first-party titles is why Nintendo can get away with underpowered hardware, shoddy controllers, crappy software and a big whopping Nintendo tax.
Neither do I. Spotify set themselves up for this and there is no good way out.

I think the only way this wouldn’t have happened is if Rogan had made himself less controversial over time before a flare up like this occurred.

But I don’t think Spotify wanted a vanilla personality, if so why pay $100m for Rogan?
One of the ironic things here is that it’s pitted Spotify’s brand as a music company against their brand as a podcast company. For people originally drawn to Spotify as a music service the departure of even a few icons all of a sudden makes Apple Music very attractive.
Since the end of WW2, Germany has made spreading Nazi propaganda and denying the holocaust illegal.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/germanys-laws-ant...
Rust type system is also Turing complete: https://sdleffler.github.io/RustTypeSystemTuringComplete/

It has allowed us to emulate (numeric) const generics in crates like typenum (https://docs.rs/typenum) long before they were implemented as a proper language feature. Even today, typenum is more powerful in some regards than the stable version of const generics.
Isn’t the goal - blocking access to certain content - the same?

That’s not playing the victim. It’s the plain truth.
I think that the fact that's he's been contracted for exclusivity really changes the nature of the free speech argument. Rogan is functionally being hired to Spotify to produce content. I don't expect the ability to freely express myself when representing my employer.

I think it's a very different situation, simply sharing your content on a platform, where I think free speech is much more relevant, vs. being contracted to produce content for a platform, where I think it stands to reason that you're expected to produce what the platform want.
My friend's linkedin photo:

https://media-exp1.licdn.com/dms/image/C5103AQHf_hGI8go5Tg/p...
Here is what i suggest you do.

Go on discord and buy famrmed gmails with a 30 day proxy. They are 5-10$ A piece resellers use them a lot. Use that account for 30 days then dump it and get another. If you still see wierd shit it’s because you are searching wierd terms or because you are visiting wierd sites or perhaps you are suffering from a untreated mental health condition. The metal health stuff can cause heightened awareness of things like this that other folks gloss over.
I really doubt that. Many of the episodes that were removed were fellow comedians like Theo Von and Tom Segura who are in Joe Rogan's peer group.
Honestly I felt that $100m was pretty low for Joe Rogan to sell out to Spotify. Wonder how the "cancellation" scenario is covered in his contract.
Totally agree how painless it is switching services - Tidal paying tunemymusic for music library imports was a good idea.

I wonder if that is part of why Spotify started pushing podcasts so hard - they can get exclusive content easier that way vs going with "commodity" music artists which will be available at all their competitors.
Please don't fulminate on HN. That's in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

You may not owe steel procreators better, but you owe this community better if you're participating in it. We're trying for curious conversation here.
This describes my experience exactly.
Facebook's tanking, Google's on it's way down, Amazon's getting broken up. Seems like the long-predicted next economic recession is around the corner
So the title should really be:

"Spotify deletes AN ADDITIONAL 71 Joe Rogan episodes"

Seems 42 episodes have been gone since around the article you posted (March-April 2021). Now 113 episodes are gone in total.

So are Spotify likely to remove more episodes soon when they waited almost a year since the last time? Hard to tell. The pressure on Spotify is probably higher this time.

Joe Rogan fans also seem to have endured the last batch of removals well. Perhaps this batch will anger them more since the "stakes" are higher due to the unusually heated controversy at the moment.

Or perhaps it will all be business as usual in a few months time.
When I heard of JRE many years ago, I said to myself, "do I care to hear the endless opinions of the former host of Fear Factor? Nope." And that was that, never even decided to give it a try with so much other potential content available.
No, it's not representative of how free speech would look like. "The coven of the witches" problem arises in part because of all the witch-hunting going on.
What about payments? And web hosting? And so many other things?

It’s never been easier to start a site, yes, but it’s also never been more obvious that the providers that make it that easy aren’t interested in neutrality.
I have found that for technical results, and niche programming, and anything really to do with IT, google gives top results. For just about everything else, use any other search engine.
Perhaps you do speak for the majority. I am a fairly heavy Podcast consumer (I run a lot and like to listen to them), and JRE is consistently among my top two (always a battle with the ever great Rich Roll) because of the sheer diversity of guests he has on. I don’t care for MMA or most of the comedians so I skip those but that’s fine because Rogan is so prolific that there will be something interesting in the next few days, max.

I find the controversy about JRE to be massively overhyped like the controversy over Howard Stern back in the day.
Thanks, I hadn't heard of zed. More reliable solution than catching a fault with a login script. I was pretty happy when I found msmtp and imagine I can make them work together.
I'm curious if he said the n-word in any of the episodes.

The Rock just announced on Twitter some news about finding out just how much Joe Rogan used that slur.

News spreads fast in Hollywood circles. Maybe Spotify is trying to get ahead of the curve before any more controversies break out.
Past related:

Accidentally Turing-Complete - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22964441 - April 2020 (58 comments)

A collection of things that are Turing-complete by accident (2013) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16383072 - Feb 2018 (63 comments)

Accidentally Turing Complete (2013) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9195519 - March 2015 (1 comment)

Accidentally Turing-Complete - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6577671 - Oct 2013 (48 comments)
Free speech is not limited to First Amendment protection of censorship by the state. It can also be inhibited by chilling effects, self-censorship, market power, taboos, etc.

But I think the motivation for "free speech maximalism", from the perspective of a tech platform, is more strategy than principle: if you're in a position to make a decision as to who or what to silence, you are going to be subject to constant pressure from all directions, rightly or wrongly. Sticking to your guns and enforcing a limited and specific scope (illegality, ToS violations) is a "bright line" policy. Holding to it consistently means not having to constantly justify and take heat for tough gray-area decisions, which is a losing game anyway, since you won't be able to appease everyone no matter what you do.
I think we have different ideas about which party is being petty.
>But of the about 150 interviews I've conducted for Amazon, 90% of almost all candidates always ask me: "So is it really as bad as they say working here?

Every time an AMZ recruiter tries to poach me from my current job, I consider replying back with links to the NYT article, the URA article, and various anecdotes from friends that worked there. Ending with a question of 'Why in god's name would I work for your company?!'
> That ends in a cesspool that nobody is willing to spend money on or do business with.

That's not quite right. Voat was populated by the fringe that was evicted from other more mainstream platforms, Reddit in particular. So the primary demographic of their userbase is "people whose content isn't allowed on Reddit". Which given that Reddit is fairly permissive compared with many places results in an incredibly skewed userbase. Without a compelling reason for users that are more mainstream to switch I think this result is unsurprising.

The "free speech" side of fedi suffers from this dynamic as well. There's a growing contingent that's there simply because they were removed from Twitter.

This is all a great example of why deplatforming doesn't work at all. In seeking to silence various groups they instead get concentrated in specific locations which results in a greater degree of polarization.
I’m struggling to have sympathy with anyone involved in this. Podcasting has always felt like a resurgence of the “original web” spirit to me: anyone can upload, anywhere. All you need is an RSS feed and anyone can subscribe.

Then Spotify came busting in and decided that the open podcasting platform is obsolete and paid Joe Rogan $100 million for exclusive distribution of his content. So they’ve dug their own grave here.

Rogan has too. He didn’t have to take the deal that removed his podcast from open distribution and put it under corporate control. But he did. And he paved the way for many others to go down the same path and erode the open podcasting ecosystem. If he hadn’t done it he’d have none of these problems. So he’s dug his own grave too.

I wish both parties nothing but the best in digging their way out of the mess they created for themselves.
Every major cloud hosting platform is censoring now (remember Parler?). Same with every major payment service. So it's not as easy as it seems.
The anti-censorship comments here of course resonate with me, but I'm curious about the legality of this. Spotify advertised Rogan and sold paid subscriptions. Now they've unilaterally removed the ability to listen from millions of paying customers, at least some of whom subscribed exclusively for the purpose of listening to JRE. Do these customers have no recourse?
As I was reading this thread, scrolling down a bit, my whole browser screen turned into a loginwall ad for a Twitter account.

It's amazing to me that people are still donating content to these platforms.
The Louis Theroux one really throws me off.
The web page you linked seems like it was written by someone who lives in a basement and has never logged off of Twitter.

“ We defined “prominent far-right figures/prominent far right talking points” posts as those that contain prominent far-right figures such as Ben Shapiro, Alex Jones…”

“ We defined “racist/white supremacist” posts as those which… support white supremacy by using white supremacist talking points such as “white pride” or “white lives matter.””

So do white lives not matter? Seems like whoever wrote this hates themselves and is racist.
I really can't tell if the comment you are responding to is satire. "I don't know why Coinbase would ban me all I did was use their platform to launder money"
Commando Libya – C64 (1986)
Ask HN: Would a cold laptop warm up faster on table or under blankets?
Would a cooled (32 F), off laptop reach room temperature (70 F) faster under the blankets of a bed or on a table?

The coefficient of heat of the blankets is higher than air but it would also insulate the cold of the laptop?

Thanks!
Yes, but on /best, which is pretty stable over a few days, it is now #4
Let’s stick to the crux of the matter - people don’t want to pay for stuff. If an alternative App Store set a minimum price and sn upgrade path, not many people would buy the apps.

The only successful model so far has been subscriptions for productivity apps. For arcade quality games, the streaming services have a chance and Apple is subsidizing non slimy games via Apple Arcade.
I'm not going to address all your remarks because I don't have time, and also because I think you're last point is the most salient:

> Either way, people are sick of the lockdowns and government overreach, none of which has been particularly effective...

How could you possibly know this? We don't have an alternate universe we can examine to see how things would have gone globally without public health measures.

> while simultaneously being detrimental, especially to those at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder. Not everyone has the privilege of working from home.

Yah, I do fully agree that the public health measures pursued have had a negative financial impact on those more economically vulnerable who work in low paying jobs. But at the same time, these are the people who most need protection, as they don't have much job mobility and have to work on the front lines. You know what's worse than getting paid less? Dying from covid, or being unable to work because of COVID, or suffering the long-term effects we don't fully understand yet. I've heard so many horror stories from people working in grocery stores, etc, where there are mask requirements (In some cases, implemented not because of government legislation, but rather because the private businesses decide it's appropriate) that are routinely ignored by customers. These customers, when confronted, often become verbally or physically abusive (AFAIK there was a story about a security guard being murdered somewhere in the states).

Just FYI, I work in a customer facing job (onsite IT), and have been working in an office with a large number of people for almost the whole pandemic. I have to a wear a mask 8-9 hours a day. I say this because I don't want you to assume I'm arguing in favour of something that I won't be subject to.
I switched from Spotify to Apple Music fairly recently and I am still shocked on the daily how poorly built Apple Music is. In the several years I subscribed to Spotify I never had issues of content not loading or choppiness in the playback, but with Apple Music it is nearly every day.

The only thing Apple Music has going for it over Spotify (in my opinion) is that the recommendations are easily 10x better for discovering new content.
Maybe they are having trouble paying their S3 bill
I don't see the relevance of this comment. Free speech people don't think that agendas are anti-freefom-of-speech. Agendas are allowed. Lies are allowed.
You realise they have some pretty vile artists on their platform too right? I mean if we're objecting to content here they've literally platformed homophobic and xenophobic music for years. Are we honestly arguing that having conversations critical of big pharma and public health policy is now worse than homophobic hate? The only reason this is being discussed by the media is because this time it's impacting the wrong people.
If cancellation is done for the purpose of silencing, then it is censorship. That's the very definition of censorship: suppression of speech.

Contrary to popular misconception (usually just in the US) it has nothing to do with the government.
It is on other people though, because unvaccinated people have a higher chance of spreading COVID to others.

We've been over this shit since the beginning of the pandemic, it's surprising and disappointing to see people still framing it as a purely individual decision.
Honestly I think the games library is why gameboy outsold game gear, and why nintendo continues to dominate the mobile console market
I learned today it may also be an ancestor to Kvasir, who was a Norse god associated with mead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kvasir
"Podcaster" isn't one of the protected classes under US law.
"book burners" seems like a particularly poor analogy, given that the general motivation is to reduce the death toll of Covid-19, not eradicate a cultural heritage (which was, in the case of the Nazis - the quintessential book burners - accompanied by a deliberate mass genocide). A more apt comparison would be people who lobbied to restrict tobacco advertising (see the Surgeon General's Warning, etc.)
I am going to call this some kind of technical error. The episodes deleted are so mundane that it's impossible to imagine taking these down but keeping all kinds of horrible music that is explicitly violent, rapey and racist.
1 foot per ns.. that really confuses me.. Why not something simpler such as 300000 km/s? :)
Probably because people like me can't be bothered figuring out how to setup libvirt/Kvm/Qemu.
> The difference is when the US’ “brexit” moment happened the northern states decided the southern states didn’t have the right to leave and enforced their opinion at the cost of 1 million lives.

It was over a century and a half ago, but we still owe the union soldiers who died in the US Civil War a debt of gratitude for their sacrifice in ending the scourge of slavery in the United States. Their lives paid for the freedom of millions of men and women. Their sacrifice saved us all from the debasement of living in a society in which one person can be owned by another person. You do disservice to their memory when you characterize their primary motivation as being to "enforce the opinion" of the northern states with regards to the southern states' right to secede.

Not all of them were motivated primarily by the abolitionist cause, obviously—many fought because they were conscripted into the army—but those union soldiers knew that they were fighting to end slavery, and they knew what they were risking to fight for that cause.

As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jy6AOGRsR80

It's also worth pointing out that the Civil War started after the South Carolina Militia, cheered on by the civilian population of Charleston, bombarded Fort Sumter with artillery until the US Army forces that had peaceably occupied the fort surrendered.

Who was it that enforced their opinion on whom?
I know it's a lost battle because anyone whose not a nerd will never care, but I wish we could all just call content that moves to a centralised platform like Spotify an internet talkshow or whatever and leave the word podcast to the people distributing MP3s via RSS.
Radio stations used to deal with this all the time - remember Howard Stern? Rush Limbaugh? Way more divisive than Rogan.
Amazon Interested in Peloton
I think the idea is that if Spotify ignored this and waited for the news cycle and hype to move on, they would retain more of their users (through apathy or whatever.) By rewarding people who have been migrating their accounts anyway, while angering others by capitulating, they lose revenue from both “sides” and make themselves susceptible to repeat scenarios further winnowing users. Hard to say if true, but that is the theory.
Cliffy B could be the game designer.
@dang @mods

This user needs to be called out for consistently being needlessly inflammatory and adding little to nothing to the conversation.
The OP makes an excellent point about the prevalence of abbreviations in technical nomenclature.
India Arie already bailed on Spotify because she didn't want to be associated with Rogaine's race related bullshit. She's explicitly stated that she's indifferent to his COVID misinformation. That was all over one episode. Undoubtedly there's more, it's just a question of how much more.
A more apt analogy would be efforts to restrict cigarette advertising. Book burning was about eradicating a cultural heritage, and was accompanied by a literal genocide in the case of Nazi Germany.

Although in this case, the action to remove the proverbial cigarette ads was taken voluntarily by the private media (magazine/etc., in the case of the analogy), and not done as a result of government coersion.

The analogy is really disingenuous at best, and pretty stupid at worst.
You’re doing it wrong.
Nobody mentioned first amendment violations...
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30211916.