skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The internet accelerated and amplifies many other things as well, including the free exchange of ideas and information.

I would argue this may dominate over the effect you assume and drive the same simply because if one wants to become outraged over an act, they need to know it occurred in the first place.

I'm not sure I'd agree that the overall effect of the internet is to drive cultural consensus.
1) Whenever people call it the "Don't Say Gay" bill, I ask them if they've read the text of the bill. So far it's like 0-8.

2) I think you're conflating two different groups of people to make your argument sound better. I don't like cancel culture and I don't like the Florida bill either. People aren't just "ignoring" it.

3) > denying the existence of people who aren't like them

This is such a weird, vague statement and I have no idea what it means - which is great because it perfectly captures the mob mentality of the far-left cancel culture. The reason everyone is so afraid of it is because you never know exactly what you can say, and it changes by person by day.

In my professional experience, even "acknowledging the existence" of trans people is a minefield. The term to describe someone who is transitioning has changed like four times in the past five years and using the outdated term is considered wildly offensive. Certain people think changes of pronouns should be handled differently and if you disagree with them you eventually get a meeting invite from your supervisor called "Discussion".

Speaking of hostile work environments...
> The left’s current position is that puberty blockers should be available to all kids until they can decide what gender they want to be.

That couldn't be further from the truth as possible.

It is the right constantly saying they should be 100% banned, with the other side wants more nuance in the discussion.

You'll sure find some wackos with this position to use as a strawman, but that's definitely not "the left". I'm left, and I don't know anyone saying it.

TL;DR: You're projecting.
No, I still think you're wrong, and the thing you're saying isn't happening (people relocating from major cities to remoter areas) is clearly happening in pretty much all Ontario and BC. At least right now because housing prices have skyrocketed everywhere, not just in the GTA or lower mainland. The pandemic actually drove people out of urban areas and drove up prices all over the province. Especially places like Squamish or Collingwood that already had cachet for upper middle class people (but were previously affordable because of the difficulty of commuting from them).

While this is most obviously the case for southern Ontario, I think you'll find actually Timmins or Sault Ste Marie, etc. have gone up at precipitous rates as well. And elsewhere in the country:. Lots of people relocated to Nova Scotia during the pandemic, because housing was cheaper there, they handled COVID better, and they figured they could work remote forever. Housing prices have skyrocketed there, too.

The only place where this didn't happen is in Alberta, where low oil prices and other factors. caused a bit of a net emigration and lower housing prices for a bit and things were quite affordable there. That's now changing as the price of oil goes up.

In the end, there's boatloads of places for people to live in Canada, those places are growing, in some ways regaining a bit of the demand they had prior flattening out in the 1990s & 2000s. The problem is in general that industry and good paying jobs aren't necessarily coming with the people and they're creating an affordability problem for the existing "locals".

In the past people concentrated in the GTA and the lower mainland BC because of jobs jobs jobs. Remote is changing that a bit. For now.
We had two cats, a tortoise-shell and a tabby. The tortoise-shell would come running when it was time for dinner, and the tabby would take his time. Once, I noticed that the tortoise-shell kept switching back and forth between dishes until the tabby got there, and I wondered why. It was probably so she could eat as much from both plates before having to finally commit to one. Kinda clever for a cat, in my opinion :)
Afaik this has been the behavior of StrictMode since it was introduced in React 16.

One thing that’s called out in the linked docs is that duplicate console.logs were _deliberately_ silenced in React 17. I have no idea what they were thinking when they made this decision, but it sounds like it has been walked back in 18.
No one is forced to analyze his tweets, it's unbelievably easy to just ignore him if you don't like Elon.
they only burned a few witches, back when. It wasn't that big a deal...
I don't know what has happened with keyboards on Android, but I routinely have to re-enter a word 4-5 times because it keeps guessing wrong. Swiping as well as typing is just as bad. Maybe it's my gargantuan hands making me somehow break the mold and confusing the algorithms.

It can take me 10 minutes to type a message the length of this comment because I have to go back and correct every other words several times.

I don't feel it used to be this bad, and my hands haven't gotten bigger. Really weird.
I like Paul and am very sympathetic to this essay. But I want to make some points that may subvert his thesis, in the hope that we can nuance things a bit, hopefully in an interesting way.

1. Some things may be true (or at least potentially true) but not appropriate to point out in a given social situation. Example: "Avi did a good job on this project in part because of his Ashkenazi Jewish heritage, which conferred a genetic intelligence advantage." This could be true, it has some scientific support, but it seems to be not a good idea to say. It would probably still not be a good idea to say even if we definitely knew it to be true. A person who habitually says things like this might reasonably risk reputational and professional consequences.

2. Paul says there are more heresies than in decades past. Is that true, or are they just different?

3. Are there some things that should be heresies, like arguing vigorously for the legalization or destigmatization of adult-child sexual relationships? Don't those things provide some insight into why people might see themselves as legitimate in making X-ism a heresy?

Will add more as I continue reading.
1) Byte align the value of hash_ptr.parm.v.p

2) Decrement hash_ptr.parm.v.p

3) hash_ptr.parm.v.p points to the return value of fpop(sst)

commentary:

1) Hardware / variable type specific! aka can be 8, 16, 32, or 64
C can pack the bit representation in unaligned fasion.

2) Hardware dependent -- some do not permit operations on addresses!v

3) Looks like fpop(sst) returns an address containing value (vs. returns value) which impliess that lower, unused bits in address are being used for storage.

short answer: OS and/or hardware may not permit non-zero values in lower, unused address. At hardware level, executable & data bits may be required to be in different locations.
If it’s a dog whistle it’s the loudest one I’ve ever heard.

Beginning of the actual framing of the issue:

> There are an ever-increasing number of opinions you can be fired for.

> For example, when someone calls a statement "x-ist,"

Is there any genuine confusion what he’s talking about here? How many commonly used words fit the “x-ist” framing?

I mean he’s a white pontificating boomer billionaire active on Twitter worried he’ll eventually say something dumb and get cancelled.

Which, indeed, is a concept that’s having a cultural moment right now. The problem is he’s adding literally nothing to the discussion.

I think most sane people can realize that the fringe “woke” elements of the discourse can veer into ridiculousness. Maybe that matters a lot maybe it matters a little I dunno.

To the extent there’s an actual problem here it’s really focused on those who are potentially at actual risk.

Examples of actual problems that could be created by excessive wokeness include the increasing degree to which HR is able to divide and control the most vulnerable elements of the labor force, or the highly cynical ways in which jargon laden intersectional language is used to obscure a hegemony of corporate and wealthy donor interests over leftist or activist organizations.

Would be interesting if he had opinions on that.

But instead we’re again talking about how the most powerful economic forces in our culture are being trolled on Twitter. That isn’t an actual fucking problem. Like really it isn’t.

PG is clearly a very smart guy. I’ve read his books I want to like him. Sure is a terrible pity he’s not spending his twilight years being introspective about the horrifying legacy of inequality and misery that’s been inflicted on society by the tech sector, where he has an actual ability to have a positive influence.
I saw Amazon branded shipping containers on a freight train just the other week
No - there's very much active disagreement on which people are black (colorism in general in the black community is alive and well) and who thinks you are a jew might change a good bit if you ask the local white supremacist or a rabbi.

Just because "I know it when I see it" applies to your personal lens its an inarticulate way of viewing the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule
Our onboarding documention is decent, but it's usually a little bit out of date. I have the person who is being onboarded update the documentation.
> do you think you know some deeper truth about these other people than they know about themselves? why do you think you can reliably identify that case?

I think the debate is less about what someone's inner life is like, and more about whether gender words (like man, woman etc) refer to inner feelings or to someone's physical sex. Historically they have been used to refer to both, and many people. use their own gender label to refer to their physical sex rather than any inner feelings.
I have done this, but sometimes the issues are systematic. My manager wants junior coaching to be done only some ways and those ways are not conducible to healthy mentoring. And he does ask for these screenshots but he is satisfied as long as screenshots are there, but does not care for their quality. And the next time the junior needs to re-use the same screen flow but from step 3 instead of step 1, and well, it is not pleasant.

I would rather spend time 9 times, or 10 times, and make sure the person understands it. However, if the solution is screenshot from 1st attempt itself, I am sorry by the time we get to the 9th version, I am at my limit both with the junior and the manager.
The evidence doesn't support your view that SJWs are "just trolls". A lot of SJWs genuinely believe that cancelling people for espousing wrong view is a real force for good. And they have some superficially good reasons for that belief. Trolls will use any weapon they can, so it's less interesting to debate them (except, maybe, about the nature of sadism).
It’s not studied because nobody cares about w3m or Lynx. I’m just making these statements based on my own experience with fuzzing both a few years ago.
With a varying frequency but I do use them in interactive sessions:

$ grep -c '\$\?' ~/.history
137
$ grep -c '\$\$' ~/.history
30
$ grep -c '\$!' ~/.history
6
$ grep -c '\$#' ~/.history
13

Less so when it comes to affix removals… I use them liberally in scripts as well as in data transformation pipelines or more complex one-liners, though.

I also semi-frequently quit the shell with «kill -9 $$» when I do not want to pollute the shell history with garbage, which is not refelcted in the count above for obvious reasons. It is quick and efficient.

> Also things like $status and $argv are reminiscent of csh, which also goes back a long way!

Ah, I thought somebody would mention csh as the prior art! Frankly, the C shell syntax have never really clicked with me precisely because of the more verbose syntax, and, as soon as other shells have borrowed history, job control, aliases and a few other features from (t)csh, I was out of the house!
> For example, when someone calls a statement "x-ist," they're also implicitly saying that this is the end of the discussion. They do not, having said this, go on to consider whether the statement is true or not.

I’ve been asking, practically begging people, to comment on the accuracy or inaccuracy of my statements than the way it makes them feel.

Looks like Paul Graham wishes for this too.
The article isn’t flawed; it perfectly shows PGs evolving right leaning viewpoints. I used to understand where he came from when he originally started to argue about women in tech, but the new things he says, can’t stay with them anymore.

You’re trying to divide two types of heresies because you don’t want to acknowledge the truth, there’s no two types just a sliding scale of offensiveness. You want there to be repercussions for some heresies (overt racism and homophobia?) while others should be let to slide by. But there’s no inherent difference between the two types. PG is smart and acknowledges that, but decides there should be no repercussions as long as you state facts. I and I suppose many on the left would say there should be. As long as it’s not the government that’s doing the banning in public forums people need to shut up about their rights. What’s special about the government? As PGs friend Thiel eloquently put, government is a monopoly on violence, it stands to reason the only entity that shouldn’t have the authority to shut your opinions and voice is the entity with the monopoly on violence.

But I guess once you’ve stayed rich and influential for long enough you’re annoyed at this one remaining domain where you can’t just have everything you wanted yet so you want to change the rules to let you do the same. That’s what people like Thiel and now sadly PG are trying to do. They don’t care about any real issues, they just want to spend time blasting wokeness and actively sabotage all of humanity (in Thiels case) because I don’t know what their endgame is.
Difference being that you cannot see what someone’s religion is, nor are there only two variations.
> Pakistani society is probably the most Islamist in the world. The elite, both civilian and military are considerably less so.

Okay, so why is it such a stretch to say "if the military didn't dominate Pakistan, I wonder if there would be [an Islamist regime] right now"? Maybe that wouldn't be the case, maybe the elites who are also less Islamist would dominate, but it's not a crazy idea.

Having opinions about "Islam" or "governance" or "politics" is going to get you into a corner somewhere. But we have to have opinions about these things. What keeps us from paradox, as far as I'm concerned, is that some opinions are more right than others and actual events that occur out in the world confirm or refute certain opinions.
That one has a better title, too. I wandered in here thinking America had diabetes or something.
> Which, looking at the replies, is a mistake, because everyone projects the least charitable interpretation and/or assumes the article is dog-whistling.

I think this is actually the big problem in the debate, not "cancel culture" or "heresies". A lot of people seem gleefully enthusiastic about seeing the worst in other people. This is not isolated to just one ideological side: people on the right engage in it just as much as people on the left.

I've started to seriously dislike "dog-whistling". Often it's "yes, what they're saying is looks fine on the surface, but I know their actual secret motivations!" Yes, things like "14/88" and whatnot really are "dog-whistling" and it's fine to call it out as such, but 9 times out of 10 I see it used today it's weird assertion about someone's motivations. It's essentially a straw-man argument with extra steps (allude to a far more extreme position than what was stated, and then attack that).

Sometimes this goes so far I wonder if I somehow don't understand the English language correctly, or ... something. Many times I see people commit a "heresy" it's something fairly mild – or even completely benign – taken to far more extreme levels than what it seems to mean on the surface.

In this specific article it seems clear to me that Graham isn't defending tosspot Nazis or other overt "x-ists", yet here in the comments we have people who seemingly take this to mean that Graham is defending folks who say that "people with different skin colors are dumber" and similar things. You can read that in his essay, I suppose, but only if you come at it with a certain attitude.

Once you eliminate the "this person is x-ist, let's find arguments to support it"-attitude the whole "heresy" problem goes away, too. I haven't the foggiest how to actually do that though.
I'm not a fan of his by any means, but want to still give my N=1 counter example:

I have disagreed with PG on Twitter, and also pointed out errors in his logic and facts a bunch of times, and haven't been blocked.
G.K. Chesterton boiled this down pretty well:

“The Special mark of the modern world is not that it is skeptical, but that it is dogmatic without knowing it. It says, in mockery of old devotees, that they believed without knowing why they believed. But the moderns believe without knowing what they believe - and without even knowing that they do believe it. Their freedom consists in first freely assuming a creed, and then freely forgetting that they are assuming it”.

Noteworthy to add that for Chesterton “heresy” is defined as the obstinate rejection of a dogma.
It invaded me attacked South Vietnam to stop a national uprising there, that was 1961, after some time the war did expand to North Vietnam and the rest of Indochina.

Saying it was legal and not an invasion, because the client regime invited them, is like saying the Soviet Union never invaded Afghanistan, because they were also invited and it was ‘legal’.

They were crimes, the two biggest crimes since WW2
I've had cats all my life due to my parents being cat people. I have the smartest siberian cat that i got from a breeder ( because of my partners allergies).

She goes out and comes back when i call her and understands that she can wander outside only if she comes back when called. I put bells at the door that he uses to tell me when she wants to go out and rings the bells on the otherside when she is ready to come back in. Plays hide and seek, fetch ect with my nephew. And above all i feel like her emotional intelligence is on another level. She knows how to read minds. Best cat I've ever had!!!
I wouldn't mind using it but their license keeps me away.
Great essay as always, however the deliberate withholding of examples is irritating me. I'm not looking for witches to burn, but names or examples of "grumpy, censorious people in a group — the ones who are always first to complain when something violates the current rules of propriety." would be helpful to identify the described mentality.
Congratulations! However, would have loved to have a way of using this framework with an SQL database such as MySQL or Postgres.
Please note that the US military is highly competent in the existing-regime-ousting-and-chaos-generation part of the regime-change thing, the problem is always with the new-regime-building-establishing-order-and-peace part.
> If using a regular modern browser is a superset of the experience of w3m, why do I want to add the extra level of inconvenient indirection?

Because using a 'regular modern browser' is not a superset; it also lacks certain things, such as freedom from JavaScript, freedom from some forms of tracking and it is incompatible with the terminal or other text-based environments. Some folks find those things to be worthwhile.
All of those statements can be easily refuted factually, so no, they are not heresies.
define “joy” lol
I suggest to rediscover an infamous and undone USA secret ops: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Dropshot witch was essentially the natural prosecution of an UKs one, similarly undone: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable

The USA are the sole who hope, want to dream, a feasible nuclear war because they need war to save their economy, not from today but always, their economical model is not sustainable: produce much for a short period, than a deep crisis, than a war and back at the start of the cycle.

So no we humans can't survive a nuclear war and to survive we need to annihilate neoliberal school of thought, witch is essentially the British school of thought extended to the USA and Germany and then to China and SK before being globalized. Only erasing those think tanks from the root we can survive.

Unfortunately many born under their school fails to understand whose their own enemy and fight for them...
Paul posted this because this has escalated to getting people on the political right fired from their jobs (directly or indirectly).

See his words:
"Nowadays, in civilized countries, heretics only get fired in the metaphorical sense, by losing their jobs. But the structure of the situation is the same: the heresy outweighs everything else. You could have spent the last ten years saving children's lives, but if you express certain opinions, you're automatically fired."
An exe is a singleton, a file is a singleton. Most things in a computer are singletons. We have been battling this OOP problem for decades. Memory mapped structure is volitile busy work. There is no perfect design pattern
Apple Notes supports undo which reverts all changes you've made in the current editing session for a note. A note can also be undeleted for 30 days.
To fly from NYC to Philly will take at least an hour on the plane, plus about an hour to go from Manhattan to the airport, plus 30 mins or so to go from the Philadelphia Airport to Philadelphia...the train takes an hour and departs/drops you in the center of both cities. How is that technologically obsolete?
> Very few dinosaur remains have been found in the rocks that record even the final few thousand years before the impact. To have a specimen from the cataclysm itself would be extraordinary.

My understanding is, per an article in The Atlantic (and others I'm sure) a couple+ years ago, the modern theory is that excessive worldwide volcanic activity was already killing the dinosaurs for many years, the asteroid was simply the final death blow.

The fact that finding dinosaurs in the asteroid time frame seems to led support to the modern theory. That is, you can't find what wasn't there. The dino numbers were already significantly minimized.

Sidebar: The bonus I found in The Atlantic article is it got into the politics and (dare I say) close-mindedness of that "industry." For tbose fond of "trust the science" this article adds a darkside to that slogan.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/09/dinosau...

https://massextinction.princeton.edu/
1), 2), and 4) are not particularly inherently or exclusively left-wing positions. 1) and 2) have been popular with some Republicans (and republicans) in the 20th century, as well as many traditional and Third Way liberals.

4) is extremely contemporary, but it's definitely a common populist right-wing position these days also.
I think the problem is more in people automatically assuming the worst possible interpretation of any remark as soon as it is about race/religion/gender.
As you can probably guess, by "murder" this guy means "oust from the CEO position".
As a clang++ demonstration see https://godbolt.org/z/bTMT6qd4f.
The failing `static_assert` uses the variable `i` which comes from the line missing a semicolon. It only reaches this assert because the compiler internally fixed the first error.