skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I disagree that we're close to the end of the slope, but I guess if you're right we'll find out soon enough.

I'm not a libertarian by any means but I do have some amount of faith that if what you're describing comes to pass, the free market will provide alternatives, if demand exists. VPNs are one such alternative.

I truly believe that it's harmful to society to guarantee free reach to everyone. It's kind of like the paradox of tolerance, if you've heard of that -- if private entities are barred from moderating content on their systems, the discourse will devolve more than it already has into conspiracy, hate, and other forms of unwanted content.
You included MS Answers, but left out discussions.apple.com, which I find to be an even greater disappointment. This pair of $2T+ enterprises have failed so badly at something that should be table stakes.

How hard would it be to pay a small team to go through this tangled mess and clean it up and keep it that way? How little do they care about the attitudes of their users??
I would just use Shopify for a fraction of the headache and be done with it. Selling Go as your USP to small business owners is insanity.
I’ve not noticed a political slant to moderation here. The primary aim seems to just be keeping things civil.
Which laws, regulations, rules are not written by politicians?
Someone explain to me how this is a "hostile" take over?
I think comments here that this all about Chinese government wanting to silence political opponents via arbitrary application of the law miss the point. Preventing use of algorithms takes power from big internet companies to feed addictive content. In turn this is in line a general policy of CCP to curb the influence of big companies or prevent those to appear in the first place even if those companies follow all government guidelines.

I think CCP realized that any too-big-to-fall or too influential entity threatened CCP as a big organization even under tight control still provides an alternative that may very quickly become problematic for the government. With smaller entities the option just to shut down them is very effective way to deal with them.
Web applications are awesome. I don't have to buy hundred dollar licenses / pirate left and right to try and use things.

So much more information, media, entertainment is now available.

I have a lot of nostalgia about the past, but I'm not interested in going back.
Everybody is free to publish their research without going throught peer review even today.

It can still be science, but won't be trusted much before someone of authority comments on it.

Pre-publication peer review is a vehicle for winning "academia points", important for career promotions, grants and similar.

Science then and now has depended on reviews from expert peers, it's just that the number of scientists (this is good, remember) has given a rise to scientific journals and formal pre-publication peer review to filter out some of the crap.

Either side can be wrong in a peer review (or both), but the approach has to work in majority of the cases to be meaningful.

Gamification is a problem with anything in life, so we just have to live with that and change when the method stops giving useful results.
Ask HN: Why isn't there a standard network audio protocol?
Having been frustrated again in using bluetooth from a computer to a smart speaker -- ugh! I swear connections only work half the time, and it isn't due to RF interference -- I'm wondering why there isn't a standard protocol for transmitting audio over the network. I think it would be so much easier to use.

[I'm talking about having my devices at home talk to each other. They are already on the same network.]

Edit/Addendum: Are there any streaming audio protocols that work from Mac/Windows/iOS to Amazon Echo Dots? I'm looking for a drop-in replacement for bluetooth audio streaming, where I can play sounds on my computer (ex. a youtube video) and hear it on a louder speaker.
Just go 100% Linux with the LibreOffice suite and if the business takes off, kick down a sizable donation.
Twitter should be nationalized. No man should control such a large medium
Gogogogo Elon! free us from the cancel culture
It’s not just the government. Companies like Twitter are so ubiquitous that they are a form of government entity now, especially when they enforce government talking points. When Twitter decides that talking about the lab leak theory gets you kicked off the platform, they are becoming nothing more than a government tool. This was the breaking point for Musk and for me as well.

Not giving a “platform” to alternative views, no matter how “damaging” you or the government feels it is is crucial for a democracy.
On env Shebangs
> In the US, it's the _standard_ definition that was widely accepted

citation needed

> There are even web hosts that have an explicit policy of letting you host _any_ content you want as long as it's not against the law in their jurisdiction

perhaps, but how much pressure do you think they could take, if pressured to take down your content by other private individuals & corporations?

> the right to "get heard" is not a right guaranteed to anyone, at least not in the US. If you are spewing garbage, no one should be forced to hear it.

i don't think anyone is claiming that there is or should be a right to be heard. this is an issue of control over who can be heard, and the distinction is important.

for example, in a "free" twitter, i could post some racist tirade, and expect it to gain no traction/retweets from my followers & some random others. people might see it, but it is principally no different to making the same speech in the city center: i'm going to be heard, but no one is going to listen.

we're all talking in extremes here too, which really isn't helping. yes, moderated platforms can remove racism, abusive content, etc., but they can (and do) also remove regular speech: more realistically, above, i would have been more likely tweeting about the lab-leak hypothesis of covid, back in the time where any proposed cause other than the wet-market exposure hypothesis was being labeled as racist. do you think people that have been deplatformed/decried/cancelled for opinions like that were retroactively recognized as being legitimate? if so, where's the profit motivation in that?
> Oh but who decides what opinions are idiotic?

I'll gladly clear this one up for you. It is: whoever decided the T&Cs of the platform you're using - the ones you agreed to when you signed up.

If you're banned from Twitter for posting white supremacist hate speech, paedophilia, for organizing targetted harrassment or anything else Twitter deems contrary to their T&Cs remember that (depending on where you live) while you may have the right to express yourself, I have the right as the operator of a platform not to listen to you or have you on my platform.

What most of the people whining about being booted from Twitter are upset about is that they aren't able to annoy the people they want to anymore. I'm fine with this.
I see Excel as the weak point in Office, at least from the viewpoint of getting the right answers.

There was that time I went and gave a talk in NYC and then came back to give the same talk in Ithaca and had an eagle-eyed web developer note an error in a chart I made with Excel because of the broken defaults.

There are numerous ways people get wrong answers with Excel, plus Excel does some really strange stuff to hide the fact that

0.1 + 0.2 != 0.3

in floating point numbers (hint: none of those numbers actually exist in the floating point number system, when you ask for 0.1 you get a different number that happens to print out as '0.1')

There is something brilliant in the spreadsheet model, namely, it frees programming from the need to sequence operations in some particular order. The CS community has seen relaxing this as a way to find parallelism for the CPU & friends but not so much as a way to take a burden off the programmer who might not need to think about it.

However there is quite a bit structurally inadequate about Excel from the grid model which doesn't necessarily fit the problem and no support for software eng practices to make complex sheets that really work.
Homes & buildings tend to be built in a way that allows any reasonably skilled professional to quickly determine a reasonable way to handle new work without any input from the original builder.
So what I'm hearing is, there may be some job openings at Twitter soon.
It's a bit annoying that this kind of idiocy is upvoted to the front page very often.

The web is the way it is becuase the forces which are seeking profit and power get their way in any new system that emerges.

There is a new system which is truly designed from the ground up to serve the masses and is immune to the tactics used to control Web 2.0. The decentralized web is the internet run for the people by the people... and even if you rely on service providers to host your data or do your computation, they can't see what you want them to see or take your content down. It is called Web 3.0 (there are two Web 3.0s, unfortunately... one is the Google's version where web is organized auch that you don't have to leave Google to browse it... think amp but for everything else... and then there is the blockchain version, which is what I am referring to).

Here's Gavin Wood's TED talk on the topic:
https://youtu.be/UIBR99gOLOQ
> In any event, don't worry about it! There are other sites on the internet.

Any suggestions? Sometimes I peek back at Slashdot. Otherwise Hacker News is my goto aggregator.
A tip - in India, if you have a low credit score, you can still get a credit card if you ask for a "Fixed Deposit" linked credit card. With this option, you have to deposit some amount with the bank in an FD account (FD accounts are fixed term accounts, where you cannot withdraw money till the term is over, and also earn some minimal interest on the money deposited) , and that amount becomes your collateral for the card, and also acts as the credit limit of your card. If you are diligent and a financially prudent individual, the credit company often increases the credit limit later. Ask around if German banks have a similar thing.
Really? That question is presuming the outcome and has no place in a good faith discussion.
I doubt they'll ever monetize Wordle directly, but the links it displays when you solve a puzzle and in the menu definitely drive traffic to their puzzles that they do monetize. I tried them, and seriously considered subscribing so I could keep playing Spelling Bee (I ultimately decided against it).
I feel I read a study about how flushing out your nose with water early and repeatedly when a covid infection starts can knock it back long enough for you to build the immunity to fight it off. Googling irrigation and covid gives you a lot of good hits; I have yet to see a negative one. If I assume competence for no good reason, maybe the government was afraid people would injure themselves?

Here were a couple studies that recruited people:

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04347538

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04559035
Could you elaborate? I guess the person you're replying to is talking about the Coral stuff such as the "USB Accelerator" et al, dubbed "Edge TPUs";

I too am after one of those for my home-security camera system but I've never really looked at what they _are_.
Talking about your feelings is fine. The line comes when you start making demands of the other person.

People also see these things as magic phrases that will solve the problem. They're not. Interpersonal conflicts are complex even at their simplest. So while it is good to know about all of these things, as a tool of active communication, they're often lacking.

Because the goal of a relationship should be to find a person you mesh well together with, not to find someone you can mold into a perfect partner. That's also a serious problem.
Elon Musk is into politics, isn't that looking strange somehow? I mean he wants to go to Mars, his project was "Flyin' mother nature's silver seed to a new home in the sun", and now he goes right in the opposite direction. Did he have any major setbacks with his Starship?
> That's a very strange way to describe them

It tends to be how they're most commonly described, so - independent of whether you think that's accurate - it is certainly not "strange"
You are absolutely correct. Do you remember when your parents would have some weird rule you didn't agree with, and their justification was "my house, my rules." This is basically the same thing. You don't have to follow the rules, but if you get caught breaking them, there could be some grounding and privileges taken away.

I do not get why people are under the impression that Twitter has to indulge their every tweet. They do not, will not, should not, and have not since the founding of the platform.

If you walk into a McDonalds and start selling your own hamburgers out of the bathroom unbeknownst to them, is it censorship when they finally discover the atrocity and have you removed? Is it stifling competition or free speech? Probably, but their house, their rules.
I just want to point out that compressing gas takes a non-zero amount of work. Compressing gas to increase temperature to use temperature to make energy would be better spent using the compressing work directly to make electricity.
If you copy before you write, you're not mutating, you're making a new thing.

e.g. This pseudo code must stand for mutation to be present.

a = ...
b = a
mutate(a)
/* b now mirrors a */
Moderation, either top-down curation or bottom-up mute/block, is not a solution. Either way, you're going to haphazardly create echo chambers, which aren't great at maintaining free speech.
It makes sense, but how can you possibly reconcile that with reality.

Reality is much more complex. The effects that have been sought through the manipulation of "free speech" on platforms like Twitter are so dangerous because they are insidious. They are insidious because they are matrix, they are not linear (like "go kill that guy"). The bad actors seek to leverage it to gradually sway opinion into such a state that everyone is shouting exactly what they want them to shout.

This isn't arcane knowledge anymore, it's been the subject of exposé after exposé over the past decade.

Those kinds of effects weren't possible at scale over other forms of communication. It's the immediacy and the context-less nature of the communications that enables them.

Applying Mill's argument here is like trying to apply Earth's physical constraints to actions on the moon.

The rules governing those platforms aren't perfect, but they're like a gardener spotting new weed growth and clipping it off.

If you want freedom, it was never in Jack Dorsey's (or now Elon's) garden, man. (or, What freedom was there ever in the courts of kings?)
Sorry, sarcasm was the wrong word, I meant pedantic nit-pickers
Nice, congrats on the open source release!
I believe that labelling people as absolutist confuses the issue. JSM advocated liberty up to the point of harming others. Almost everyone in the Western world agrees with this as stated. The differences lie in the vagueness of defining "harm". I don't think JSM defined it explicitly. For some people, harm means physical bodily harm. For others, social triggers legitimately count as harm.
I know you're being snarky, but success as a hyper-capitalist is less and less a good thing to many people, and not really a sign of great intelligence (more psychopathy, if anything). His behavior is very often so incredibly childlike that it's hard to excuse on his business success. Even this! A share price based on $4.20; Really?! Again with that? He is clearly trolling and it's working because here everyone is talking about it.
Free speech is an ideal that doesn't really exist. Even in the USA I can't threaten to kill you or announce that a bomb is in the building.
I protested a war in front of the White House. Can’t do that in Russia right now. I am far more worried about the effects of misinformation than I am about people getting booted off Twitter.
If your drive folder has more than 50,000 files and you try to download an archive ZIP of them, your files will disappear at random. The only way to avoid this outcome is to install a desktop client and sync the folder.
<< taking a free speech absolutist stance is not the way.

I genuinely dislike this label. It is not an absolutist stance at all. If anything, it is simple a stance based on the foundational values of US as a country. And there is a reason for it. If you cannot express your real thoughts, the conversation gets confused with attempts to evade censor or completely incomprehensible since language gets too distorted to mean anything at all.

It is getting tiring. I am saying this as an immigrant from the old country, where censorship was a thing ( with author writing cringy articles in defense of it -- sounds familiar? ). It is sad for me to see US going that route.
Gallium OS is great, I even donated because it's provided so much value. Been running it for years on my old Acer Chromebook after Google EoL'd it.
Revenue puts a ceiling on profit. You can't sell at a loss and make it up in volume, but you also can't make more profits than revenue.

Right now there are 360,000 blue check marks on Twitter. If I spot you the first million blue checkmarks and the first 100,000 business profiles, that's only $144M of revenue per year. Even if that is 90% profit, $130M / year profit on a $50B investment is not particularly brag-worthy.
I think this topic is a little messier than how you put it.

4chan's /b/ is the same exact place that:

- posted racist, misogynist, misandrist, and shocking porn

- stood up to scientology

- acted as an obfuscator for anonymous

- led raids on other communities

A normal person can pick the things out of that list they don't want and say "be gone". The problem is, the other things on that list don't exist without it. This is generally the allegory and type of connection that keeps our idea of "government free speech" tied somewhat closely with (what I call) "personal free speech".

On the other hand, I moderate smaller communities than /b/ (and other large forums) and I agree, in these smaller settings there are left and right political grifters, there's content that will cause people to leave or backlash, and endless personal disputes that must be mediated.

The problems between my small communities (a couple thousand) and large forums (hundreds of thousands, sometimes millions) are very different, and they serve a very different purpose in the larger ecosystem of communication that I think is difficult to quantify.
Except that in the last 12 months, people have literally died because they believed non-experts creating and amplifying anti-vaccine conspiracy theories.

'I wish I'd been jabbed'...
Eternal September is a thing. Over the past 15 years, billions of people became online. I use that number casual, but it's nothing short of a shift on par with the impact Gutenberg had with his printing press. Humanity's barely out of the gates in terms of assessing how this will play out in the long term.

The bar to publishing your thoughts, having an online presence,... is stupidly low. That's what big platforms and centralization have achieved. The vast majority of people who make a living online don't care about the details. They simply want to express a thought, share what they see, etc. And the proverbial smartphone and Instagram account are all you need to do exactly that.

Wishing to go back to Web 1.0 is a non sequitur because it would mean raising that same bar again. It would also run counter to the billion dollar cottage industries that have sprung up in the wake of the emergence of these platforms.

That doesn't mean using the core technologies that make up the Web and leveraging platforms are mutually exclusive. They aren't. Nothing stops you from breaking away with like minded people and building your own community. The openness and standardization of the specifications that define the technology allow you to do exactly that.
The U.K. Has a New Plan to Attract Individuals. The U.S. Should Copy It
You claim to support private companies adopting whatever moderation policies you want and yet your examples of "hate/conspiracy bullshit" go against this. If you believe this absolutely then _what_ is being censored would be unimportant.

You are unwilling to confront the idea of Twitter censoring true things that you agree with but by your own principles you'd find this agreeable.
It's very hard for my explain, within my company, that "failure" isn't the opposite if "success."

... if you're not failing some of the time, you're not trying things ambitious enough ...
I completely agree - this is nearly verbatim a personal frustration I recorded in my work log from a few days ago:

Extremely frustrated with Google Shopping ads. I can’t understand how they make money. Spent an hour trying to figure out how to:

- Add custom UTM parameters (can’t unless with a manual feed, it looks like) because Google doesn’t doesn’t seem to track shopping ads unless you install extra JS events and modify google analytics

- Change search queries that products come up for (after deeper research, look like you can’t - again, handled by the data feed but your product title must be now SEO’d to all heck to hit the right keywords. Good luck if you have an original product name)

- Fix the product disapprovals (their bot was too dumb to understand how to navigate native shopify variants, it keeps seeing a mismatch between a variant and its price… and this is the data feed that Googles own app in Shopify generates!)

- Understand why the shopping ads dashboard in Google and the in-Shopify google shopping ads dashboard show different product disapprovals... just why? Genuinely confused here.

It’s ridiculous. It wasn’t this hard a few years ago. In the quest to add more ‘automation’ and ‘smartness’ they’ve made it so dumb and so bad it drives me up the wall.

It reminds me of the time when a friend tried to do Google’s recommendations for “smart” ads and it optimized his local North Carolina health store ads to ads for dieticians targetting neighboring states, because of a few logical algorithmic leaps of “well this is what other users see success with, with ads like yours.” He wasted a few hundred dollars and time fielding confused calls, until we reverted the campaign, turned all the recommendations off and made it a simple, dumb but effective campaign.

What a joke. A horribly infuriating joke played by a group of product managers and engineers. They are literally leaving so much money on the table because the platform is so unusable (speaking for experience: I regularly have people turn to me asking for help setting up their ads because they can’t make heads or tails of it).
To their credit, the automated system told me I was banned and couldn't talk to anyone until I got unbanned, so I never got anyone on the phone.
Generating one big page is not the scalable way of doing that, I think, It will eventually reach to a point that it's no longer a web-page but a downloadable document with couple of megabytes.

I'm interested to brain-storm about how to model and implement "Breaking-up" part of your comment.

For the backend part, I think Splay-tree kind of a data structure will help to serve it faster.
Organometallic Sieve could separate Deuterium at low cost
The man who broke the internet by deleting an 11-line NPM package [video]
This site self-selects. People who think the moderation is good stay, people who think it is bad leave. There are plenty of alternatives to this site, you can easily find one that suits your needs. It's not an effective monopoly like the big social media giants.