skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I've come to think of this as just a culture problem. We think of share-everything and recent social changes as innovation and "the future" but not everything that is modified at t+1 vs at time t is necessarily a pareto improvement. I've come to believe something similar to you, that we need to come to our senses (each individually) and converge to more reasonable social norms.
I love when people who have no familiarity with the long and failed history of water batteries assume it's easy
Jack Dorsey's First Tweet NFT Listed for $48M, Highest Bid at $280
An overly cynical take.

Like any country, China has a balance of power in internal politics.

If we’re talking about those at the top (e.g. Xi), there’s really no need for this law to interpret 2+2=5; he’s the dictator and already can take whatever he wants.

For lower officials, maybe they want 2+2=5, but those above them want to keep them in check to make themselves look good, except in so far as the lower officials have something to offer in return. But even if that lower official is paying the upper official to look the other way, if the lower official pisses off too many people higher up the chain then there’s no way to avoid the consequences.

This is the game and balance of power as it exists today, and that doesn’t change with some social media law.

The main change here is giving CCP more tools to shape public discourse.

you’re correct that “wellness” can mean anything. If some app has too many posts criticizing Shanghai lockdown, tell the app it’s not promoting wellness, fix it with algorithms or go to jail.

In other words, a softer version of great firewall censorship: you are “allowed” to post on a topic, but maybe nobody will see your post because it’s not promoting wellness
But its perfectly acceptable to delete the president's account (Trump) on platforms that are perceived to open (Twitter)!
There's also the other possibility that Twitter, as a product, is limited to a more niche audience than something like Facebook.

More revenue, growth, or stock price is not a given regardless of who's working there.
At worst it's amusing to see all of the hysteria it generates from the people use see 'free speech' as a slur. Although these Twitter people seem to get off on FUD and hysteria.
The market disagrees with you.
Both the first and third example you gave would strike me as crossing the line.

Without permission to test the security of a system, you shouldn't be trying credentials you've stumbled upon or defaults.

If you randomly try my front door and find that it's unlocked, don't expect me to be thanking you.
Maybe you weren't aware, but those sites are drying out thanks to climate change, and have some other important responsibilities like drinking water

Hydro is failing worldwide. Look it up before responding please, thanks.
I worked in this space for a while. It’s a hard problem because none of the mowers take topology into account. Mostly they try to navigate a planned path along a 2d plane and just compensate to stay on their path. So the mower will attack elevation changes wrong.
Given it's Australia how long until ABC claim to have been "the victim of a sophisticated hack" and get the author arrested
Bring back Doug Engelbart's web vision!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mother_of_All_Demos
along this point, if you beleive in free speech if you have to defend speech that you don't like/disgree with/...
Sure, there's systems for that, such as Gemini. If you don't want to use the modern web alongside the rest of society, it's fairly easy to just... not.

https://gemini.circumlunar.space/
Oligarchs controlling every form of my mass communication can only make things worse, though.
That comment could also have been written as:

A member of a far-right nationalist party was condemned to a 800£ fine for teaching his pet to do the Nazi salute when he hears "Sieg Heil" and also react to the phrase "gas the Jews", and post it on YouTube.

The trial seems to have been over less than a month after it was opened, but "hellish" is subjective enough that it might still apply.
Well, that's where the whole business of Internet anonymity comes into play. What if people had to post their state-supplied identifying information at all times, so there was no doubt about who they were? This is more or less how traditional journalism works: the reporter doesn't generally get to hide behind a screen of anonymity. Editorial board op-eds are often unsigned, however.

I think anonymity is OK personally, it falls into the tradition of anti-government pamphleteering in pre-Revolution colonial North America under British Royal rule, and samizdat literature in the USSR.
> Scaling a tree structured view is difficult has hell.

Really? Why is that? It doesn't seem like that should be the case here. HN threads are only a few hundred comments, and the web page structure is very linear and formulaic (the threads do not form a tree in the DOM). I.e. it's a depth-first traversal visiting children by ranking, each comment producing a row in a table. For just a few hundred comments I would expect that to be very fast (but I don't know what data structure it's all stored in).
> As such, we don't want 7 different companies for each, laying 7 different sewer systems and 7 different electric grids.

I think decentralization is better way than building one big ISP controlled by the government. I live in a place (Utah), that has a non profit owned fiber infrastructure and leases it out to different ISPs, where you can even buy the dark fiber yourself for like $2500. I can choose from 10-15 ISPs with highly competitive prices and service. The ISPs can have whatever policies they want but the free market will take care of them pretty fast.
That's been utterly ruined by the blue check mark verification system.

Promoting a specific type of user over another is antithetical to the original ideals of Internet forums - whereby the most interesting / useful / "good" content filtered to the top regardless of authorship.
Paradox of tolerance, fellow human. If you allow Nazis, who are anti-tolerant, violently so ( and as you said, they'd remove all Jews), to do whatever they want out of tolerance, they won't respond in kind, they'll abuse that tolerance until they're in power and usher in their intolerance. You cannot be tolerant of the intolerant. Even Goebbels himself said it, they were going in the parliament as a wolf in sheep's clothing to destroy democracy from within with democracy's tools.

Furthermore, it's a bullshit false equivalency that a Nazi, who wants to at the very least discriminate people, is somehow equal to a random person who would get discriminated against. Or a racist and any random person. Those are not the same, and don't deserve the same protections.
Being a luddite isn't about going backwards, it's about refusing to support technologies that work against your interests.
it makes sure that any typos are caught at compile time, for one
Oh, they still let you use just a Mojang account? In any case, though, there's never an extra account required to use built-in server authentication that isn't also required to launch the game, unless you pirated it.
That has nothing to do with free speech though.

That has to do with changing the TOS for users of a private (after buyout) company.
The Blockchain Detectives Who Track Crypto’s Hackers and Scammers
It's unpopular from my standpoint because it "necessitates/assumes the trustworthyness of an external provider of compute service". It being considered a default implies you waive 4th Amendment protections.

Whereas securing your own network keeps them intact within your infrastructure.

Cloud is not always the answer. Learning to network and compute, is.
Magic for Humans with Justin Willman on Netflix (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_for_Humans) has some fun demos + explanations of this if anyone's interested.

What feels like a "random choice" when someone makes it is probably just the first thing they think of. So if you can make sure they're primed to think of what you want right away you can "predict" their choice. The real skill comes in being able to prime them without making it obvious that that's what you're doing.
Please give me specific examples of exactly what you mean by "free speech."
The only way it works is if people have some skin in the game.

To go the "free speech" route everyone should have to use their real identity. I realise this excludes people under repressive governments where free speech has really been lost, and you can be thrown in jail or worse for a seemingly mundane opinion.

But for those living in a democracy make them use their real identity. Otherwise everyone is just trolling with zero consequences.
Free speech + Karma + community self-moderation + community self meta-moderation can work, as slashdot (and HN) showed.
Thank you for the detailed feedback!

I created an account this morning but got no suggestions on my end... I don't know if I have to wait a few days or if what is done is done (ie: nothing).

We'll see.
Under the hood: ECS and AWS Fargate increase task launch rates
Most people don't see the full underlying logical endgame, because you have to be really immersed in the conversation to have a sense for it. Here's how I understand the logic: Sex doesn't exist, at all, we are each a kind of random assortment of things associated with "sex" in the past, and The Experts are just starting to realize this after centuries of transphobic/intersex-phobic blindness. Gender identity is something most people have, and most aren't aware of. It is a soul-level attribute that just happens to stay the same for most people since birth, but for some, it changes on its own or maybe in response to outside events. If you say you are trans/identify as trans, you are. Trans has nothing to do with "transitioning" inherently (and "transitioning" means something different for each person, whether operations are involved or not.) Same with pronouns: they can stay the same as they've always been or change every single day, and that's just part of being trans, because that's your true self. “Woman” “man” and “non-binary” mean something unique for each and every person who identifies with those labels. Ideas like "born in the wrong body" or that trans means switching sex or gender were just public-facing stepping stones so that cis people can eventually understand all trans people, not just the ones that are binary. Cis people are those who don't identify as trans. They inherently benefit from gender roles -- even the poorest, most abused women have advantage over any trans woman, because they are is cis (and there is currently a genocide against assigned-male-at-birth trans people, as The Experts say.) Of subtle importance is the fact that assigned-female-at-birth trans people sit at the top of the trans community privilege food chain, because they are transmisogyny-exempt, or tme.

To say the large majority have "mental illness" feels reductive and dismissive to me, I wouldn't say that personally but I am glad to hear about anyone talking about this. You are right about gender roles.

I'll add: The problem is that “trans” doesn’t mean anything, but it also doesn’t just mean gender-nonconforming. This can hold in general progressive spheres, because other identities like Jewish or Black also don't mean anything specific, so what’s the issue? Add to this that the definition of oppression (resource extraction by one group from another) doesn’t matter anymore – the understandings of Whites exploiting Blacks for slavery, rich exploiting poor for wealth, and men exploiting women for their bodies have been eschewed for the simplistic disease models of “racism” “classism” and “sexism.” So we end up with the result that women don’t really need the word “women” anymore. Oppression isn’t class-based, it’s an individual deficiency, usually in education, resolved through affordable training and mindfulness.
>Sometimes even coming to such views as "free speech is dangerous" and that "we should limit free speech" (by blocking the views I don't like).

Yeah right, saying me not listening to a screaming preacher on the street is the same as the state locking them away is why I don't listen to free speech absolutists. Me having a blocklist or using an app to construct one is not an impediment to your freedom anymore than me changing the channel on my TV is an impediment to the freedom of a random news anchor editorializing.

If you really want to support free speech then support the right to not listen. They go hand in hand. Stop trying to force people to be captive audiences then we might have a starting point.
> Trump used Twitter to organize the overthrow of the US government and almost succeeded at it.

The Capitol riots? It was most definitely agent provocateurs who infiltrate every protest to justify actions against the protestors. Twitter just used it as an excuses to get rid of Trump to please their friends.
So this is all about, as another commenter said, complaining that you can't get the largest audience for your mole people rant. Facebook and Twitter are both very large social hubs, but they still get to pick what they publish. They are giving you the ability to publish anything you want until enough people (or the right people) complain about it.

It is democratized moderation. If your following is small enough to skirt the mods, then you can post what ever you want. If your following is huge and you post a bunch of lies about sewer mutants, or that the covid vaccine gives you rabies, or that Hillary Clinton is actually a space alien in cahoots with Planned Parenthood to subsist off the flesh of aborted 6 year olds, then YES, they will remove your posts, and potentially ban you for a period of time.

This literally happens to my aunt every few weeks. She gets a weeks long ban for basically reposting only Russian spam, gets her account back and does it again. It has never even been permanent.
While governments technically have the power, they are easily manipulated by interests with large amounts of money.
Twitter and freedom of speech are unrelated topics. You don't understand freedom of speech. I can literally censor you in public and that has nothing to do with freedom of speech. Also, tell Rwandans spreading propaganda is better than not being able to say what you want (genocide and all).
> I'll worry the moment the state makes expression of ideas illegal.

Uh, we already do that. Fraud, defamation, uttering threats, false advertising, perjury, filing a false report, etc.

At this point the distinction that matters is what we choose to protect from such ideas.

"Keira Knightly is anorexic" is an idea that is illegal -- https://www.theguardian.com/media/2007/may/24/dailymail.pres...

"Climate change is fake" is, apparently, not one.
The ability to do this depends on the will of private hosting providers and ISPs. It’s the same problem. It’s infeasible to maintain a site that permits all legal speech. It’s a constant legal battle and you’d better know a great lawyer who believes in the cause enough to work pro bono.
Next up on the agenda at the straw man convention…
Fun, I enjoyed that.

Bug report: Bottom is cut off when browser width > height, on wider monitors.

Defining height of elements in terms of vw units is the cause. Also body as a flex with align-items: center without a defined height on body won't have any effect.
Private takeovers usually assume a premium share price. The more credible a buyout offer is, the closer the stock price will rise to the offered price. It's exactly what got Musk in trouble for tweeting about taking Tesla private in 2018.
All the people I know who've read the novel agree with me that it was supposed to mean static. I wonder if anyone asked Gibson about this, since the advent of the blue screens.
The musk fan base (and detractors) are going wild trying to discuss his actions about twtr and probably overloaded hn.
That argument really has nothing to do with the fundamental soundness of crypto. Rather, you sound like a pump and dump scammer "get in now and become rich" basically all but confirming the viewpoint you seek to counter.
I imagine some of the use-case scenarios have dwindled because recent Chromebooks have come with the innate ability to run Android or Linux apps.

So the die-hard users that want to turn their Chromebook into a GNU+Linux laptop still look at Gallium. But the ones that just wanted to run a few Android/Linux-specific tools without needing to blow the entire OS away have found easier options.
I would think running stuff other than just a web browser is the use case. The device goes from portable web browser to Linux laptop with every tool a professional developer uses at your finger tips (and a web browser)
The complete merger of the 'private economy' and the 'state government' is a defining feature of both fascism and communism across the 20th century. Such relationships already exist to a large extent across the USA and Europe, notably defense contractors and their government partners, but also increasingly you see corporate media intertwined with state power as well.
where does this argument end, exactly?

it seems that the majority of people grossly underestimate corporation's level of involvement in our every day lives: if i were to become a persona non grata to google, apple, HN, social media, etc., how would i talk to anyone? how could i do anything? isolation will cause more harm than incarceration, yet i am not recognized a right to trial. not that it would matter anyway, the decision would likely be made algorithmically, without any one human knowing why it's happened.

what i'm saying is: corporations have come to own the infrastructure of our modern society. the protections that freedom of speech gave were (and still are) valuable in the context in which they were made. they don't address the reality that communication is fundamentally different to how it was in the 19th century.
Why are my large amounts of money not helping at all, then?
> I know plenty of people who don’t have Twitter accounts and live extremely normal lives.

Even this I'd say is a stretch. If they're consuming any kind of news or contemporary entertainment, Twitter is absolutely impacting their lives. The degree to which it quickly propagates groupthink and shared narratives is difficult to overstate.
* > I've been trying to start a business lately, and as many people do, have chosen to rely on Google's suite of products.*

Just a reminder, most businesses fail - so doing what many people do is not necessarily the best thing to do.

Having said that, it's rather foolish to have your business depend on Google. They have repeatedly demonstrated they're not good business partners and the main thrust of their business isn't in providing products and services for businesses. They don't support their services, they'll drop them at a moment's notice without any regard to the impacts to your business, and there's no way to get ahold of a human being when things inevitably go sour. Why do you want to partner with someone like that?

I bash on the technical merits of Windows all day long but one thing Microsoft has done well over its nearly 50 year history is serving the needs of business. It's in their DNA. Office 365 is a very capable, and supported, platform. Nice thing is you can run it on a Mac too!
I'm similar but I keep a hard cap of 80 accounts I follow, if I'm at that it's one in and one out.

That way every new follow comes with a cost because I have to a) drop something I thought was following b) weigh up which is least valuable.

As a result all I follow on twitter is open source projects, companies I use products from (i.e. JetBrains) and people I actually like/have something interesting to say.

It makes twitter very useful to corral all that stuff into one place.
Here's one for $450, saw another for $375: https://www.bizbuysell.com/Business-Opportunity/self-serve-l... - and they don't even own the building.

Machines alone are $1-3k each depending on how old and repaired they are.
"The economy, stupid!"

Because they want to make as much money as possible off their acquisition. If someone else is housing a history of the game, and people can go play the game there instead of on NYT, that's a net bad for them. There's no NYT ads or 3rd party tracking pixels on the archive, so it's tapping into their market.

If I gave a fuck about guessing a 5 letter word each day, I personally would prefer to do it in a way that doesn't continue to support the Gray Lady, so I'm going to do it on the Archive instead of the NYT page.
For that, one would only need a Chromium OS build without Google API keys. But then, replacing Google account login with something else could take some work.
SolarCity was such a bad investment he had to hide the financials by stuffing it inside of Tesla
Yes now it is. It wasn't nearly as well known _before_ the election.
I don't know of any roguelikes that implement this but there are MUDs with some degree of baked-in accessibility. The one I used to play was in the LPmud family and had a significant contingent of vision-impaired players.

Those also depend pretty heavily on ascii maps and the solution they implemented was having a "written map" output option. So instead of like |--@-c your "map" would read "the end of your vision is three rooms west, a child is two rooms east" etc.

It gets very verbose when you have a lot of data in both dimensions but is fully legible to screen readers. In the mud-specific case too it can be sent out of bounds through GMCP or similar and handled in client-specific and user-configurable ways. I don't know what a similar UI would be like in a roguelike, but MUDs also move a lot faster than RLs so it may not be a problem that needs to be solved.
The best footnotes I've found provide nice bidirectional linking for easily jumping to / back from the footnote so that it disrupts the reading as little as possible.

The beautiful / fun part about having a blog is that it's your own little garden: you can adjust things just like how you see fit, and footnotes were just a case where I figured I'd do without until I could implement it in a way I was happy with.
You say “single handedly”, but you just named five different services by three different companies. Do you see the problem here?

Are all the radios broken? Do newspapers not exist? Has TV vanished? Fox News alone has millions of viewers every week. There are hundreds of other outlets from which people get their news.

You really think Twitter can unilaterally erase something from public consciousness?
I hate Google Workspace so much.

Not because of the product, which seems fine. But because 10 years ago I signed up for google apps. It was marketed as a way to have a vanity gmail domain. Free forever up to 10 users.

I thought it was cool, was a huge Google fan at the time, and created a custom domain for myself and another one for my grandparents. Now, 10 years later they are holding my online persona hostage in a shameless cash grab to try and make Workspaces more profitable.

All I ever wanted was my own Gmail domain. I have zero use for the business functionality. Fuck you google.

I'm a VP of Cloud Platform for a rather large enterprise and quite frankly this is why we won't even consider Google Cloud. Broken trust. Broken promises.
Not at all. They specifically mention tyranny, not just people you “disagree with”. They also assumed political parties would never be created because they designed the legislative bodies to be sufficiently elitist, that it was presumed there would be no significant factions within wealthy holders of large capital.
So in your model, some other random person can come along and force you to use unlimited amounts of your own resources to broadcast whatever they want to say?

We have freedom of speech in that the government cannot persecute us for what we say.

We do not have the right to commandeer other people’s resources without their permission to rebroadcast what we want to say.
The market is an unreliable narrator: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_beauty_contest
Show HN: A link shortener that doesn't send visitors away