skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
But what about free speech absolutism! “Yeah of course the government can silence people” doesn’t sound like absolutism to me.
I hate that Rust has fallen for the "Linux can't OOM" fallacy too. Fortunately the mistake is only in its stdlib. Rust-the-language doesn't allocate, and kernel/embedded projects turn stdlib off. Panic doesn't have to unwind. It can be a trap instruction or `while(true);`, but in case of an unrecoverable bug it has to stop execution somehow.

Rust's initial goal was specifically Servo, a browser engine. It was based on a bunch 80s/90s programming languages, and Ocaml which is a bit Haskell-y, but JS/Go specifically and explicitly were a non-goal[1].

[1]: http://venge.net/graydon/talks/intro-talk-2.pdf

Direct C replacement for embedded programming was Rust's goal early on too. Async is for the JS/Go crowd, but it's a late addition to the language, and it's also designed to work without any runtime at all. It can be used in embedded and kernel code, and for non-network things too. At its core it's representing function's stack as a struct. Fancier things are just libraries built from it.

If you want compile-time safety and minimal runtime cost, it's unfortunately impossible to do without a more-complex-than-C type system. There really isn't much you can remove from Rust without either creating loopholes in the safety, or losing features that make its safety practical to use. For example, you can't have a safe set that stores void*. You need HashSet<T>, so that the compiler can track of what type it stores (because T could be a struct with a pointer to the stack, etc.). But then you need to hash and compare the arbitrary T type, and that needs some abstraction over types, which traits provide. "Small Safer C" has been tried at least in Checked-C, Zig, and Cyclone, and from these it's clear the problem has inherent "choose two" trade-off of {runtime type checks, complex type system, safety loopholes}.

Programming on a type level is definitely is a very different mindset from what C does, but dismissing it as merely unnecessarily complex is a shallow and inaccurate view IMHO. There is an inherent complexity in writing high-performance safe software. The complexity has to go somewhere. If the language doesn't have tools to with it, then you have to deal with it in the software yourself (like the level of vigilance and tooling that's required to have safe C). Rust is a bigger language, but its toolbox is for reduction of complexity in the software you write. The things you dismiss are not optional nice-to-haves, they are part of the solution, and the pay-off for not having to deal with the complexity in the software, because it's already dealt with in the language.
I have no idea what you are talking about. You sound a bit crazy, to be honest.
"Abuse" is mostly subjective.

There need to be equal repercussions for fraudulently claiming abuse, too. Search SLAPP to learn more about the current lack of repercussions against wealthy entities suing journalists.
The US is the only country with such weird views on free speech, there are many perfectly free (often with better freedom of speech/press scores actually) first world countries with different definition of free speech.
Point out where the good faith was :-D
How the hell is this a hostile takeover? No one’s even responded to the offer yet? Shitty ass clock bait headline.
> At least the stuff GW installed at the Whitehouse is actually helping towards a leaner, more efficient, smaller government, which people claim to be for unless it involves burning less fossil fuels.

Typo I think?
Musk is not an activist. At this point, I’d consider him a cult leader and an opportunist. He does not have people’s best interest at heart.
My opinion is that Ruby has symbols for strings that are static - part of the program - and normal strings for dynamic runtime data.

Separating the two is useful semantically because it lets you differentiate between the two - and because these two kinds of string are better off being implemented and optimised in different ways.

So it's both UX and practical mechanical sympathy.
Can any experienced sale people share any advice on career paths within tech sales?

I am considering a career reboot come June, and sales is one path I am exploring.

Are there certain types of software companies, products, or sales environments that you would recommend with regard to TC, lifestyle, and/or career satisfaction?

Alternatively, red flags to be aware of?
mmaunder also wrote:

> A really great check to do if you're buying used is to look under the driver's seat for rust. It indicates flooding. In the case of pickups, it means they either submerged it or used it as a mudder. Red flag. Walk away.

which is probably what the parent post was addressing with how do you check this?
And

>transaction lookaside buffer

not

>translation lookaside buffer

I think hishnash made this discovery and this chain of tweets is echoing it.
You likely already know this, but just a reminder/tip that bash and zsh will let you edit the current command you’re entering in your editor of choice if you press ctrl+x ctrl+e (without releasing ctrl between). (Note if you’re using zsh without ohmyzsh, you’ll have to enable this manually [1])

[1]: https://nuclearsquid.com/writings/edit-long-commands/
> Musk says there is tremendous financial potential in Twitter but then offers $54 a share, which is not even 2x the IPO price.

He means tremendous financial potential for him.
Nobody is arguing that the system is perfect. Yes we know bad things happen and there are bad people in the system who prey on others. That's true everywhere and it should go without saying.

It doesn't change the fact that the US is very different from NK and not really at all comparable if we are being intellectually honest.
But you need a Microsoft account to launch the game even if you're not connecting to a server that uses it for authentication. (Unless, as you mentioned, you're playing a pirate copy of the game.)
I was shocked at how many people took ivermectin when things started opening up this year. I still have a hard time believing these people got over their covid infection in 2 days with an ivermectin prescription, but at least 50 distinct people told me this. Meanwhile I was left to my own natural remedies after being turned away from the ER.

Also shocking is how many people who did not get the vaccine at all. Really makes me question reality

EDIT: this is purely my anecdotal research of a southern state (where i live) compared to a northern state (where my family lives)
What happens to employee unvested stock grants when you're taken private?
It might have reach... But does it make money? And can it be made to make money?
I mean, what else can you ask for if you're limited to 240 characters?
Learning Test-Driven Development
Nope, nothing subjective about the examples I gave there. Try harder.
#1 Card matching game

Browser based game where you try to pick two matches cards. When the pandemic started, I played this a lot with my kids (they were better every time). Got tired of shuffling cards and laying it out and I wanted to learn Javascript, so.

https://github.com/richsuca/memorygame

#2 Grade 2 Spelling Practise

My daughter had to learn spelling of a few words every week in Grade 2. To help her test it, I wrote a Windows desktop app that would say the word and she had to spell it.

https://github.com/richsuca/SpellWell

#3 Bulk Tag Remover from Pinboard

I had too many tags that it became useless so I had to retag all my links in Pinboard, the website doesn't let you do it in bulk so I made a Windows desktop app (also wanted to try out XAML).

https://github.com/richsuca/Retag
The OP links Gankra's first article, but don't miss the follow-up where she actually implemented some of these ideas as proof-of-concepts in the stdlib and compiler: https://gankra.github.io/blah/tower-of-weakenings/
I think we're not discussing the real point here which isn't whether "full completely unregulated free speech" should be the norm on twitter or not. Elon isn't proposing allowing CP or whatever the worst stuff you see on 8chan is. The battleground is simply in a much subtler grey area of idea space. Elon basically seems to think there's been push to disallow discussion about quite reasonable subjects (which indeed would have been allowed on HN too, e.g. covid vaccine pros and cons) and he'd like it to be allowed again.

Note also that twitter is quite different from traditional forums in the way it's structured. You follow people, you can block people. The analogy to traditional forums needing moderation isn't really one-to-one.
A critical part of any non-trivial business situation is understanding what question to ask for what reason.

When deciding “should we make the incremental effort to expose an already existing dataset as a new product?” you are quite reasonably going to look at different data than if you want to know “overall, how profitable were our data products in aggregate last year?”

That’s the main point of the article we’re discussing: how things get weird when marginal costs are very close to zero.
But the thing is, defamation would be legal under absolute free speech. Nobody could sue for it.
If you are a TWTR shareholder, then you should vote for this deal.

Just open a chart and see what a disaster TWTR stock is since transitioned into the Biden administration. The market (institution shareholders) is not stupid. The lower price is how the free market punish TWTR for their actions. They have lost a lot of their users due to many of their limited free speech and work with government actions.
Russia has been using sock puppet accounts to spread manipulative propaganda throughout western democracies for over two decades. They’ve been especially effective in the last ten years. Their goal of fomenting grievances among the factions within democracies, combined with a global refugee crisis they helped create in Syria has resulted in the rise of authoritarian leaders within over a dozen countries.

In other words, the Russian regimes free speech has given rise to authoritarians who would in all likelihood, limit free speech in other countries if or when they rise to power.

“Free speech for me, but not for thee.”
It's intellectually lazy to ignore the very different power of the internet and the very different social context in which the relevant technologies are developing. For example, the Gutenberg press didn't let literally any idiot immediately distribute their inane thoughts to everybody. There were still barriers of literacy, etc.
Most laws are subjectively applied. That's what happens in societies made of men with opinions and not made of robots, always has been, always will be, the case of free speech isn't an exception
Russia never had fundaments for democracy, its democracy was a facade and still is, all state controlled media were brain washing society from the 90s, there is no rule of law for you in Russia if you are against someone from the party or local government.
Concepts like "objective" and "politically neutral" are what Walter Bryce Gallie called "essentially contested concepts."

Even in a system where moderation was administered perfectly, there would be some percentage of people who fundamentally objected to the accuracy and even legitimacy of moderation based on its outcome. A "correctly" administered system would probably still be one in which disgruntled people dismissed "correct" choices as activism, biased motives, etc.

Getting rid of vaccine misinformation would lead to antivax cranks saying the pharmaceutical industry is using their financial power to influence moderating. Getting rid of 2020 election misinformation will lead to conservative narratives about "mainstream" media silencing their voices out of political bias. The liberal narrative on moderation decisions would say it excludes minority and disempowered voices. And all sides would invoke concepts like "objectivity."

The problem is that not that all sides do it, but the opposite, that there really is a real underlying truth out there, and it really will be the case that some people are going to be systematically wrong at every level at which they register objections to moderation, and the correct response is that their concerns are unfounded.

Of course that won't make people happy, but it shows that the limits of what is possible are limits relating to human nature that won't be uniformly satisfied by any system.
For those like me who went familiar with it: https://containrrr.dev/watchtower/
Did you have your server configured to allow pirated clients? Because that's the only case I can think of that would allow for such an easy bypass.
But this is nonsense -- what does "politically neutral" even mean in this context?

> not based on mobs of activists actively trying to get their opponents banned/silenced.

Moderation literally is silencing/banning someone.

----

My (slightly uncharitable) take is that when "non-political" or "objective" gets brought up in this context it usually means anything that the poster already agrees with, and "political" or "subjective" means value judgements that the poster disagrees with.

But any moderation policy you bring up in a private space -- from banning alt-coin scams to blocking pornography to deciding what does and doesn't constitute harassment -- all of that is a balance between protecting communities and allowing people more space to speak, and making political decisions about what content does and doesn't belong in those categories.

All of these categories are socially constructed and based in part on group consensus about the types of content and people we would like to see banned/silenced.

----

I'll also point out that using a word like "objective" can sometimes make free speech policies more strict. There have been multiple points in history where we believed something to be objective and settled truth that later turned out to be false.

So not only does this ignore the reality that moderation is inherently somewhat subjective and political and needs to be in order to protect communities, it also ignores the reality that moderation is inherently somewhat subjective and political and needs to be in order to avoid over-censorship.

What is and is not settled knowledge is often a contentious debate, and by treating it like it's not a contentious debate and like the decisions about what to ban are just fully impersonal and objective, we open the door both to people who want under-moderation and (surprisingly) also to people who want over-moderation or want to quell criticism of establishment ideas. By treating these moderation decisions like they're not decisions, we allow both over-aggressive and under-aggressive moderators to hide behind a veil of objectivity and to avoid responsibility for the choices they make about the content they allow.
Lol they fought tooth and nail against any change for a long time. Look at oxycontin in the US and how the FDA was complicit for like 20 years.
Is it the license fee or a "driving school" tuition?
Would you not eject someone from you property if they were harassing your other guests?

It's not an exact analogy, and there are features like mute and block that are less severe than removing someone from a platform, but people generally don't want to individually deal with every person who decides that being miserable to others is the best use for social media.
Just to clarify, when I say Image search, I meant, searching for like-images by uploading your own.
I don't know if it's my civic-minded love for humanity or my laziness, but whenever someone describes a common failure mode and then expects me to do work to catch it every time it inevitably happens, my brain screams "no!". The tooling, processes and community should make this problem impossible by design and/or easily caught in a semi-automated manner.
I too love using old hardware for “real work”. My current writing workflow is Office 97 on Windows 95 (Pentium II) -> SMB share on a Raspberry Pi -> upload .doc to google drive from my iMac. It’s pretty nice for distraction-free typing, and I still find Word 97 easier to use than any modern word processor. And the appeal of playing with my old computer makes me more likely to want to write. :-)

The Win 95 machine is on a private network for which the Pi is the router, so the SMB share is available without connecting win 95 to the internet.
I mean, the above comment leaves open that there are many reasons. Is it so crazy that he would use money to take down the account after offering money for the owner to take down the account?
I'am not the writer and thought it was a good way to look at things. Just because you don't care doesn't mean no one cares.
/me quickly googling “what is the difference between power and significance/p-value?” because I know I lack competence in statistics.
sure - https://github.com/golang/go/issues/44167. you'll see the new design the CPU util only increases in GC CPU utilizations when you're actually allocating heavily. which makes sense you're doing more work. this should completely resolve the problem discord had; since their system was in a steady state.
> It’s interesting (and terrifying) that someone could take Twitter private and exercise that level of power.

It's terrifying that a company has that power (and has already used it) regardless of who owns it.
The closest thing we had (have) to online free speech was (is) Usenet. But distributors of child porn along with Andrew Cuomo (when he was the New York state attorney general) making a deal with a number of major ISPs resulted in most ISPs discontinuing their Usenet service.
This happened to me exactly _once_ in the last three years of successful monthly update on our self-hosted GitLab instance. I got an error because the backup script expected a folder where no folder was. Updating GitLab is a breeze!
As a fan of Musk and his companies, I personally hope this fails. He's already busy enough running SpaceX and Tesla which matter significantly more to the future of humanity than a website that lets people type 280 characters.
Musk is not obligated to hold his shares indefinitely. Yes he can’t sell, say, tomorrow. But he can sell in the future.
I think many of the people described aren't taking free speech for granted, they're reevaluating the idea in a new social dynamic. Technology has changed the societal impact on free speech drastically: reach, frequency, noise, targetability. In parallel, populations have grown drastically so the scale for ideas to reach critical mass and spread have changed. The dynamics are simply different now.

I think many understand the consequences of highly restricted speech and how much benefit free speech has, including how censorship and tight control on speech has lead to undesirable government regimes historically. What people are really doing is reevaluating the costs side in the new environment where there's no longer a town square, information has the potential to spread to masses quickly, information is more difficult to separate from noise, and those with harmful intent can speak with more anonymity.

I'm a huge fan of free speech but the increasing potential damaging effects can't be completepy ignored. It's better if we can defend against such issues, in my opinion, and protect free speech, not ignore them and go on as is.
Identifying an unmet need, getting a market fit for a solution, understanding what people are willing to pay are all counter-intuitive for engineers, but essential to make money.

These are my recommendations to anyone who's here and not getting the traction they want, or are considering starting a business. The 1-Page Marketing Plan - Alan Dibb. The Right It - Alberto Savoia. Monetizing Innovation - Georg Tacke & Madhavan Ramanujam. Obviously Awesome - April Dunford
"billion dollar startups" they don't even exist and yet he price them in the billions

that's when you know journalists are corrupt
Agreed but I do think a lot of people project into the future about “what could be a problem” and solve for that. I would guess it’s very common. I’ve seen it done and done it myself. You say to yourself “well if this becomes popular, I won’t want people to know the next word”, which sounds reasonable but it stops things from getting done.
I'm in my notice period with nothing concrete lined up right now. (I'm job hunting - in the middle of several interview processes - but no offers yet.)

I am lucky enough to have savings and a very supportive partner, and even so it is stressful. Certainly without either or both of those things I would likely still be sticking it out at the current job (especially with the various things that were offered when I handed in my notice). I sympathise with those that feel trapped.
Professional developers enjoy simple and concise explanations just as much as people who are coding for the first time.
It will be fun when the Internet mobilizes a mass exodus to a new or competing platform to fuck him over. He lives his online life with a foot three inches from his mouth, cocked and loaded, and waiting to scatter his brains to the wind. The first time it goes off after the takeover, Twitter will burn to the ground.

Because at its core, woke culture isn't righteous; it's petty and it's fueled by have nots fucking with haves because they can.
Thanks for post
That's my conclusion too. Game are, at their core, something close to a real world activity but not the real thing. Even cats play games like that to learn. But current games, that is video games, are most of the time not a substitute where you can experiment with something close to the real thing. They are a form of entertainement. That means that what you accomplish in those games is nothing.

If you want something with stakes in, there are options in games (competitive players are like professional athletes this days for example), but the alternative that makes the most sense is just real life.
100% agree. Freedom of speech protects you _from_ government. The idea that government should compel commercial or private entities to give all voices a megaphone is misguided.
"Regards”. “best wishes”. “Warmly”. “Cheers”. “Take care”. The words at the end of a professional email may seem banal."

First, go easy on informality. ....Affectionate terms such as “toodles” or “lots of love” do not enhance proximity to the recipient unless the closeness is already there. “Smiles” is unspeakable."

"Use proper grammar and spelling."

"Avoid being prescriptive. “Have a nice day”, “Happy Monday” or “Take it easy” emphatically do not promote relaxation."

Reading over this, it doesn't seem to give any concrete examples of what, precisely, one should close an email with. A lot of advice about what not to say, it's like we should end emails with just "End of email, Goodbye."
I'm not explaining things, I quoted the explanation from a fan in the video you linked to!
Aleph Alpha announce multilingual and multimodal langauge model
From their status page:

> Starting at 11:58 UTC we started seeing an in increase errors and latency on our Standard Edge Network. The issue has been identified and a fix has been implemented.

Update:

> We’re still seeing the increase in errors and latency on our Standard Edge Network. The team continues to work on the issue.

https://www.netlifystatus.com
I mean the "ignoring that wife does not want to move to that foreign country, taking the job she is opposed to".
Yes this is why there are very few actual limits on free speech. Twitter isn't going to throw you in jail for saying something wrong on the platform. Your country didn't slide into a fascist state because a private company started limiting which kinds of posts are allowed on the platform it made and owns.