skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It’s a common talking point in the US that the second amendment was written in a time when the most powerful guns were rifles that shot balls which took tens of seconds, at best, to reload. That the authors of the right to bear arms weren’t thinking about automatic handguns and that the amendment can’t apply to today because of modern weaponry.

Maybe that’s the same for the first amendment too: it was written for a different time, with the technology of the time in mind, and so it can’t apply now.
I agree that people are sometimes accidentally unclear; that's why I asked a clarifying question.
Case 30-2020: Sudden cardiac arrest caused by excessive licorice consumption
Mostly UT99 with the GLIDE renderer on my 3DFX Voodoo 3, but I consider it inspiration ;-)
pinterest completely destroyed google images and is now starting to infect duckduckgo
That was before global social networking. Now if you're not on the big platforms your opinion may as well not exist.

"Oligopoly".

With the added problem that the big platforms are all subject to US "moral" censorship. Which a takeover by Musk won't fix.
> and are 99% if the way there

I don't understand - if you're not 100% of the way there then you can't rely on address comparison. 1% of your string comparisons would fail!
Erlang has symbols because its strings are ridiculously expensive (and kinda shit), so while it does have immutable strings identifying objects based on that would be ridiculously costly.
This is a thread on a comment where I explain how the article is not accurate, it’s not just that we disagree, it’s that you’re not acting in concert with reality.

I do not intend to leave anything “at that”, simply because you don’t like how the conversation is going. Someone else is free to reply.
He's blatently planning on running for president
Completely agree. People who think unmoderated online platforms are equivalent to a flourishing state of nature have not really thought one or two steps ahead.

No thought whatsoever about the fact that increasing automation makes astroturfing, propaganda, "coordinated inauthentic activity" possible in a way that was not easily practical before.

Additionally, no one thinks about what filter bubbles really are in practice, or models what they imagine to be the healthy exchange of ideas, or whether our present choices to be selective about information have broader array of functional purposes than are captured by an oversimplifying term like "filter bubble."

I feel like this is a conversation about free speech on the internet that is due to mature, and that as it matures there will be a new inventory of 101-level fallacies broadly understood by everybody. One fallacy would be the idea that bots, trolls, harassment campaigns, mob mentality and coordinated state-based campaigns are the same as a "free market of ideas" that leads to the optimal state of exchange of ideas. Another fallacy would be the notion that any act of preferentially selecting sources is comprehensively analyzed and understood by labeling it a "filter bubble."
Yes, the exact timing is up to the circumstances. But selling a significant amount within the next month would almost certainly be considered an obvious manipulation attempt
It’s an all cash offer. Do folks here who manage such things educate us how could Musk muster such cash? Genuinely curious.
Same! Their “agony” sorting (basically sorted flights by a combination of # of stops, total hours, and price) was a breakthrough at the time. It seems to be factored into most flight searches today, even though it’s not labeled as such.
As a free speech absolutist, I might actually start using Twitter if it were run by Elon. Unfortunately I’m not terribly optimistic about it happening.
There's a difference between opinions and misinformation, at least how I see it.

"Covid isn't dangerous" is an opinion. "Covid doesn't exist" is misinformation.
Maybe less relevant if it were private.
Electric utilities were granted monopoly status in order the treat them as utilities, prior to the 1930s they were just private companies that were wildly successful, and didn’t want to expand into unprofitable rural markets.

That’s not the dynamic occurring today, social media is available in even the most rural setting, albeit in a reduced form to support low bandwidth.

Do we really want to allow Facebook and Twitter monopoly status and then treat them as defacto government entities? Will that result in better services? I do not think so.

As we’ve seen with TikTok’s rise, competition within the space leads to better outcomes, not treating social media companies as “utilities”. Social media companies are not in any way comparable to a sewer system, an electric grid, or a phone line network.
Doom is such a great learning tool. If you have any interest in DOS games and programming, grab a copy of the Doom specs and start plugging away at the WAD file

https://www.gamers.org/docs/FAQ/DOOM.FAQ.Specs.html

You can use any language you want to work with the data, but C is probably the most straightforward. The first time you decode some sprite data, or a level map, you will have the strangest sense of joy as it appears on screen.

I used to play around with that stuff in the 90's with a copy of Turbo C and started to write a Mac level editor (very simple one at least) a few years back but haven't really worked on it since I had kids.

https://github.com/robilic/MDE
And it's usually cheaper, if you have no morals, to invent something they're doing that is terrible, to win their vote than actually govern.
Many (mostly) women enjoy caretaking more than working for the machine. Definitely higher quality of life satisfaction is possible if the division of labor is agreed upon.

Complementary relationships can be far less stressful if each are sacrificing for the well being of the other.
Thats supposed to be how it works, but in reality the decisions skew much more towards 'that person disagrees with what I personally believe, so ban'
I understand what you’re saying. A problem is we have enemies weaponizing free speech as propaganda through social media. We have fascist wannabe dictators with a speaker in every citizens wallet. We have role models peddeling antiscientific junk to our kids.

This isn’t the free speech of the 1900’s. Social media is a game changer and a possible weapon of mass destruction - imo.

Free speech to me doesn’t mean you get to say everything everywere. Try standing up in a restaurant and shout political propaganda - you’re gonna get thrown out.
> These bad conditions have often revolved around a lack of freedom of expression, especially in the modern era, where this has been extensively documented.

Yeah, I just don't think this is true. I think a lot of progress has been agnostic in this sense--i.e., "free speech" in the sense that modern advocates of the term use it had nothing to do with, e.g., the invention of automobiles. Was it the yellow journalism of the late 19th/early 20th century that gave us any of the progress of those eras? It was instead property rights and basic rule-of-law things.

> For example, there has historically been intense stigma for expressing skepticism of the local religion, and scientists have famously suffered for it.

Again, a problem that wasn't solved via allowing every grandmother to be exposed to and propagate conspiracy theories; if anything, one might argue, those biases might have been continually reinforced if everyone had their say. Query whether the kinds of people who have brought about the positive changes to which you allude were analogous to Fauci or whether they were analogous to Breitbart.
> Musk will either make a lot of money, or own Twitter.

I mean maybe he still acquires Twitter but that could be in 20 years after it's been run into the ground.
Service looks similar to GPT-3 and Cohere.ai but distinguishes itself with the multilingual and multimodal. I'd wanted to link their announcement tweet [1] but found the video extremely unclear. Their docs are quite good though.

I found their (probably cherry-picked) "Image Reaction" [2] example surprisingly good.

[1] https://twitter.com/Aleph__Alpha/status/1514576711492542477
[2] https://app.aleph-alpha.com/jumpstart/image-reaction
There's a lot of great, thoughtful decisionmaking that went into this tool—staying away from NPM ecosystem's tooling; keeping reliance on dependencies low; facing reality and compromising to use CryptoJS, anyway, but vendoring it in your own source tree. Some thoughts:

Before I even finished the post I was wondering how you'd choose to distribute tp-link-config-editor and whether you realized that, since this runs in the browser, you could use a bookmarklet to augment the TP-Link admin interface and integrate it directly with your tool. A bookmarklet might be overkill for something as seldomly used as a router configuration editor, however. I was happy to see, though, the remark that in the end tp-link-config-editor is just "a simple web page with two <button> elements and a <textarea>". On the other hand, I recommend distributing it as a single file. Hosted stuff is (or should be) suspect for things as security-sensitive as router configuration, even if it's a hosted utility. Better if you give people a copy, the way that you can give someone a copy of foo.exe for them run from disk. It makes sense to target the browser, because it's the most accessible platform, but being a utility written for the browser doesn't necessarily mean it has to be an editor for the Web. The ability of browsers to act as a runtime for offline apps is underappreciated. On that note, directories of files work, but they're a bit more fragile than a single file that you can move around (and email, etc...) on a whim. For comparison: <https://crussell.ichi.city/lines.app.htm>

> It avoids using the web's ArrayBuffer and NodeJS's Buffer

There's actually nothing "web" about ArrayBuffer (unlike TextDecoder, for comparison). ArrayBuffer is part of JS-the-language (as defined by the ECMAScript standard), and not a Web platform API.

> The only odd thing is the setTimeout but it's needed as createObjectURL will hold onto the blob forever and cause a memory leak. So revokeObjectURL releases it. There's no API to hook into the download's progress so a generous timeout is the best we can do.

It's up to the browser maker, but from what I understand most browsers expire the URI when the original context disappears (e.g. you close the tab/window containing the app that created it), thus releasing the blob that it's associated with. Also, strictly speaking, the new tab/window created with `window.open` isn't necessary. The `a` element supports a `download` property, which additionally lets you suggest a name for the file. See <https://codeberg.org/triplescripts/trplkt/src/commit/380411d...>
Isn't that more about authoritarian governments? Hitler was elected and wrote down with he thought in a book.
Ask HN: How you make templates for partial rendering?Django,Rails,HTMx
How you make templates for you web apps with partial rendering,

Ex: You can make a beautiful HTML web pages using
tailwind or derivatives like daisyui.com, tailwinduikit.com,

But if you want fully minimize css/js, you have to use npm to build you web pages.

Now my original question is how you going to take this npm/node base project to your DJango/rails/Java Spring project.

By partial rendering mean not using React/Vue type SSR, but rendering page snippets with HTMx,Jquery or plain JS.
I think there are some problems in the article.

The main point of the referenced article by Aria Beingessner is Pointer Provenance. That this also helps out with enabling potential support for CHERI is a nice (and intended) side effect.

So yes more is needed for supporting CHERI but:

1. The non-address parts, if and how you can access them are fully CHERI specific. Any such code should (for now) not be Generic Rust but architecture specific extensions. (E.g. live in `std::arch::<somethingCHERI>`)

2. "Rust's integer type hierarchy" There is no type hierarchy in the sense there is in C/C++ as there is no sub-typing of integers (i.e. auto-conversions) in rust. Same is true for pointers so I don't think it makes sense to call `mut ()` the "root of the...". (Also if anything that would be `const ()`). Similar it's more a void-pointer (through not quite the same) then a `uintptr_t`. To quote Aria: "I don’t think Rust needs to define a moral equivalent to intptr_t [...]".

3. The 129th bit is a "secret" implementation detail. So not representing it is intended. if your code relies on somehow detecting if it's set or not to work correctly you are doing something wrong. (Through maybe for testing/asserts, still at most a CHERI specific method under std::arch.)

4. The proposed scratch design for hybrid mode fundamentally doesn't work because of pointer provenance. Pointers need to be build-in types. So in hybrid mode you now would have 4 instead of 2 pointer types. Also given that you would want to use all of them in normal code you also would have 4 instead of 2 reference types. As far as I can tell this is also a messy nightmare to use in C/C++ (Through I have to read into it first). Anyway hybrid mode is as far as I can tell irrelevant for "pure" rust applications and only becomes relevant when linking against non-capability-supporting FFI. EDIT: Provenance is often partially lost at FFI boundary anyway and you probably would want to special type the non-capability pointers and then at the boundary convert them to "normal(capability)" pointers. Only handling "normal" pointers in rust (which all have capabilities when compiled for CHERI).
The Beginner's Guide to VC (2016)
Yeah, any other person or company unlike Tesla wouldn't be able to fuel the levels he does... I really don't understand that, but thankfully I don't have enough money to bet against him...
If an electricity company sells electricity (to you), what does Twitter sell (to you)?
I remember reading about his discoveries on the Puma chipset and that was actually really useful information when I was debugging cable issues myself.

No idea what his most recent issue is but hey, thanks for your work bud, it was useful to many. Time to take a break!
>> Now if you're not on the big platforms your opinion may as well not exist.

Before global social networks your opinion didn’t matter either. And that was probably a good thing. People are entitled to their opinions but most peoples opinions are idiotic and shouldn’t be broadcast around the world to be picked up and amplified by other idiots.
> We already have free speech and consequences

No we don't have it on the Internet. On the internet(including YC), the norm is that your speech is removed and/or you are blocked from further speech (as a consequence) if you say the wrong thing where "wrong" is defined by the platform operators.

Musk may choose to make Twitter an absolute free speech platform but he might choose to make it something else. I hope for the former. He might end up to turn it into something horrible or just leave it as is but I don't know why would you spend $50B to do just that.
Why is the market cap of Twitter so low (not even 10% of fb)?
The downstream generational damage of no future children and so on
>Unlike Tesla and SpaceX, I'm sure Twitter can be managed by someone other than himself.

Isn't past behavior the best indicator of future behavior?
> what are the Democrats doing about it right now

Democrats have been trying to do a lot.

The original Build Back Better was a cornucopia of climate policies (mostly clean energy tax credits) that was neutered to please Manchin and then he refused to support it anyways.

Biden also used the EPA's authority on pollution to regulate CO2 emissions from power plants. However, the courts have stalled this and the stacked Supreme Court will likely nix it.

The third major plank is the regulations on vehicles (50% of vehicles EV by 2030 and much more). That's still being drawn up, but Biden's union base is stalling it internally.

IOW, Biden was trying and failed. Since the war on Ukraine he's given up, or at least has tabled it.
This is a false dichotomy.

There are other ways to implement moderation that isn't censorship.

I've proposed "blocklists" before, where users could create different blocklists (e.g. "no vegans"), other users could subscribe to them, and there would be some default blocklists (e.g. "no porn" and "no gore") that people could also unsubscribe...
> Governments don’t control these massively influential communications platforms (Maybe they should?)

Trusted News Initiative says otherwise. Which is why all big platforms either censor or warn public on information that is counter to the Western governments narratives.
If there are two parties and you think one party might abuse the Presidency to help/harm your business, and the other won't... which one are you going to spend time ingratiating yourself with?
Thanks! I saw this in a leaf comment of my original comment. Much better.
When that privately-run website becomes the public square (as Twitter wants or has done), it should forfeit some moderation rights.
If you slow the speed or scale isn't that just censorship?
How did this non-tech, not even particularly good, informative, or interesting article end up in hn frontpage?
There's been limits on free speech in the US and other first world countries forever. Where we put those limits will always be up for debate, but I don't think it's realistic to ever expect no limits.
A worm gear driven by a DC motor with an end stop to “home” at max height wouldn’t be overly complex (and likely cheaper/more reliable than a stepper motor and screw thread as the worm gear can’t be back-driven, so you can power it down and it will hold position to well beyond the tolerances needed for mowing).

If you just wanted to switch between a small number of pre-set heights (and changing those heights could be manual), a cam arrangement is probably better.
Just revisiting this after the news that he offered to buy for $41.39 billion. Looks like it was a good guess.
Plenty.

Of the ones I use every day:

* Parallel downloader (https://github.com/ThomasHabets/rslurp)

* Email client (https://github.com/ThomasHabets/cmdg)

* sudo replacement with phone auth: https://github.com/ThomasHabets/sim

* Custom frontend to youtube: https://github.com/ThomasHabets/yurate

* Scan-to-google-drive (https://github.com/ThomasHabets/autoscan)

* My own RSS reader (not published. It will never be end-user friendly enough to compete with other ones. But it's better for me)

And then plenty more than I use occasionally, and some I no longer use. E.g. for a while I used my own SSH replacement, in order to get TPM-backed keys (https://github.com/ThomasHabets/tlssh). Nowadays I use yubikey instead (https://blog.habets.se/2016/01/Yubikey-4-for-SSH-with-physic...).

Those are just the main ones (as in not small, and used every day), and ones that fit what I assume your criteria: ones with no expectation of users other than me. I find myself fixing problems all the time by writing code.
> Just like the NYT is not required to post every opinion piece that is submitted to them.

That worked when there were more than two platforms to post your opinions on.
The thing is the site probably would have been more valuable if he kept it up. The domain itself probably isn't as valuable.
And the fact that a poster on a tech focused forum didn't even know who Moot is, is proof itself that he got nothing in the end.

And it's really weird. I assumed Moot was mega famous with tech folks.
Remember the time Elon Musk called someone a "pedo guy"?
This is a naive view. Twitter does not enable free speech for a single person on this planet. Every el single prison in the world who can access Twitter can also access any number of other ways to speak freely.
For him though, obviously. He is attempting to take the company private.
Making claims without scientific backing probably shouldn't be a bannable offence. The spirit of science is about discussion and counter arguments and being open to being wrong or even the idea that the consensus might be invalid, not about coercion.
Private companies are not the arbiters of free speech, and they should not be compelled by the government or anyone else to distribute views they don't like. This especially goes for businesses whose revenue models are based around advertising, where the financial incentives do not line up with the social benefit of their users.

I believe the proper solution here is social networks that are open, distributed, and federated. It is not for government or advertisers to decide what speech must, or must not, be discussed in the open.
Aside:

This website is very well made. Snappy, nice design, good discoverability and information architecture.

There aren't many web (-designs) I really like. Most of them feel off in some way or another. Another good one would be MDN.

Does anyone with design competency know what it is I like about the design? Are there some known principles at hand here that I can learn more about?
One major point of going public is to give the first investors liquidity. The banks and funds that supported this financing event (the buyers at IPO) are the ones being pitched: Vanguard, Morgan Stanley, BlackRock, Fidelity, etc. They might have bought the dip but only after buying into the IPO.

TWTR started trading 8.4 years ago at 45/share (after being priced at 26). SPY was priced at 180 and is today at 440. Gold was down near 1200 and is now at 1900. Twitter grew in value at 2.2%/yr before inflation while the S&P index grew 11%/yr. Factoring in the IPO pop (which screws the VCs), Twitter would have grown at 9.1% per year.

(The banks also have strategies that earn them more at IPO, so they probably are earning slightly more than 10% per year on their investment.)

In short, Twitter is not keeping up with the broader economy at Musk's price. You're telling the investment banks, mutual funds, and most-senior vested employees that their company has the same worth as a low-risk government bond or a bar of metal.
From observing various internet forums, including this one, I noticed that people from the "first world" countries think Elon Musk actually cares about freedom of speech and isn’t just a bored billionaire throwing his weight around.
Sorry India. 2nd largest.
I'd be careful about posting stuff like this as a young person in Australia. The modern situation is incredibly hostile towards this sort of disclosure. Especially regarding a government entity.

It's not that you've done anything in the slightest bit wrong. It's that others with power can easily make it
become wrong with little to no backlash in the current Australian climate.

I understand the desire for recognition, but certainly think twice and at the very least wait until after election season is over in June so tech-illiterate political opportunists don't pounce to martyr you for their own gain.

Would suggest looking into the fall of someone widely recognised like Dr Vanessa Teague, a professor who pointed out government failures in e-voting and claimed health anonymization measures to make up your own mind. One government department finally had enough and she was out, I'm sure it's a lot cheaper than actually fixing the problems raised.

Behind the laid back "beers and beaches" mirage, Australia is an authoritarian country with huge public support for iron fists, this is clear to many.
Not a natural citizen...
> Free speech absolutism is possible and is beneficial once you ensure that someone is not gaming the system

This is unbelievably naive. It’s like saying “a perfectly lassie-faire economy is possible, if no one is greedy”.

Someone will ALWAYS be trying to game the system.
If social media companies actually had the true power to remove topics from public discussion, there would not be public discussion on increasing regulation on these companies or breaking them up.
Just not US President since he was born in South Africa.