skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Company that backed technology A over technology B because they believed that technology B had fundamental issues stays consistent on their stance, people very angry for some reason, news at 11.

Also this is just wrong, Toyota has right now on the market competitive battery electric cars. But Toyota is a mass-market budget car marker and so faces way different challenges than luxury automakers selling to the already affluent who own their homes, and live and work in areas dotted with superchargers. Toyota, Honda, and GMC are stuck with solving the problems for the 90% of car users.

Personally, I expect that if you banned the sale of new ICE cars today or in the near future it will completely destroy the new car market and screw the used car market even more than it already is right now. I feel like people forget how little control the typical American has over their living situation. If you live in a cheap rental with street parking and need your car to commute to work you're just stuck waiting.
TMobile has been blocking 2FA texts/calls so everytime I sign in to Twilio is a supreme hassle. But only a problem with Twilio - so maybe the issue is on their side
>You're taking investor money, and inflate the bubble.

What counts as "inflating the bubble"? Are you just referring to share prices going up? Taking investor money and spending it on advertising arguably counts as "inflating the bubble" as well. Should that be banned as well?

>And you prevent the bubble from popping by using the investor money to subsidize rides. Part of the deception is that the true price of a ride is higher in reality.

It seems plausible that consumers were deceived about "the truce price of a ride", but it seems hard to believe that uber investors didn't know.
Anecdotally for what its worth my personal preference to avoid gaming the system is to run iperf3 on a random VM that has a solid tier-1 network and many peering agreements. I start it on a non standard port non standard for iperf3 and test bi-directionally with TCP and UDP. On each end I use the "watch" command to call a simple bash function that sorts the output of "netstat -s" to get tcp retransmits. I also watch the output of "tc -s -p qdisc" on each end to see how many packets had to be reordered or dropped. This can be useful for tuning or picking traffic shaping methods.

In reference to gaming the system one can also run iperf3 on ports used by https, voip, common bittorrent and other service ports to see if the ISP is blindly traffic shaping on ports by means of different behavior per port.
> It's like asking why a bomb defuser feels pressured.

The stakes and environment aren't even close for this to be a meaningful comparison. A job interview will always carry some degree of pressure, no matter the circumstances. What I fail to understand is why would someone feel more threatened by this scenario as opposed to, say, answering a barrage of technical question or solving algorithmic problems.
This is using a Google API the way it's meant to be used, and the API offers up to 100 free requests a day after which you need to pay.

The odds of Google deciding to ban you for using their public API are presumably similar to the odds of them deciding to ban you for using their other public services. So maybe high enough that you would t want to build a business plan around it, but I'm not sure why you're specifically worried that a user would get banned from the whole of Google for using a Google API.
I'll just put it out here. If the UK alone meets it's plans for phasing out ICE engines for EV, it would consume 9 months supply of Lithium and 2 years worth of cobalt/nickel.

Add on the plans for the rest of the EU countries, US states, Singapore, and Canada and frankly Toyota has a point.

Significant chunks of that nickel comes from Russia hence the price rising 500% since the war began.

There is a complete mismatch in the scaling of electrified 'smart' products and raw materials going forward.

There needs to be multiple horses in play, along with a fundamental realization that the pipedream of a house in a suburb with 2 EV cars for every individual isn't a sustainable plan.
The Russian Jet That Fights for Both Sides
“It has become easier” and “it has become easier in proportion to the massive many-orders-of-magnitude technological improvements every other IT function benefits from” are very different statements.

Re: crime, I am in agreement that the purpose of much regulation is to prevent crime. But it’s 2022 and I still buy things on the Internet by typing in a 16-digit static credit card number, or send wires/ACH by giving people my static bank account and routing number (from which, here in the US they can withdraw arbitrary funds!) We have the technology to vastly improve the security of these mechanisms, but instead of doing that we operate with 1980s-era technology undergoing constant fraud, and rely on layers of regulation to keep them viable. That’s not inevitable, it’s a very artificial choice. Cryptocurrency is the inevitable result of making that choice, just as Napster and Apple Music were the result of record labels' decision to pursue a (profitable) CD-based music sales model in the era of the Internet.
It is crazy to think about, I agree. Additionally, before 200 years ago, nobody even owned anything written, except for a tiny amount of people. We spent the vast majority of our existence knowing nothing, at least how we think of knowledge now. But we still had these awesome brains - instead we had it filled with local knowledge - people, places, and things from the environment we lived in, which was pretty small. Can you imagine the detail we understood back then? And yet nobody knew the answers to what we consider important these days. It's really mind warping to contemplate this.

Even now compared to 30 years ago or so is weird. Prior to the internet, largely speaking if your immediate group didn't know the answer to something, you just largely didn't know it ... ever. I mean you could find out if you really wanted to, probably. But there were things we just didn't have the answer to.

"Remember that episode of Three's Company that had that one guy in it? What was his name?"

Guess what - we never found out that answer! The lyric of that song? Never found out before the Internet. Even today I still find myself remembering things I wanted to know growing up but the knowledge was inaccessible back then, but now I can find out in seconds.

Such a weird time we live in if you think about it. We have this weird mono culture, in a way, but within that mono culture we're getting all these tiny nano-cultures embedded in it. My son (13) loves some of the most obscure things and is able to find people also excited about it (Not just SCP, but SCP maps and mods done in Garry's Mod, for instance - there's like 100 people in the world that like that combination).

Now I'm just rambling, but yes, the vast majority of our existence we were isolated (globally speaking) and ignorant in profound ways. And now we are just the opposite.
That is a far cry from "useful pressure".
Honestly the only 100% secure way to store something is to write it down on physical paper and then guard that.
Everything looks like a nail
Anecdotes are not data. Even in plural form. We can witness isolated instances of what seems to be a phenomenon without it actually being part of a phenomenon. Other posters have already established that some experts can overestimate their expertise as well. The study mentioned by the original post and in my comment seems to suggest that the overestimation bias is prevalent across a wide range of cohorts of expertise. Senior students are just as likely to overestimate their talents as freshmen for instance. This effect likely extrapolates to experts as well it's just hard to get good data.

No DK doesn't say no bluster, no proclamations or no artificial assertions of expertise. It doesn't even say that the overestimates are just as prevalent among experts as laypeople. All it says is as near as we can tell the effect size of the overestimation is the statistical autocorrelation and our best efforts to produce the same effect without relying on the autocorrelation have failed.

I think there are a lot of ways to accept the anecdotes you mentioned occur that need much weaker assertions than DK as a psychological phenomenon and would hesitate to jump to DK based on that information.
Completely anecdotal and tangential but: the feature of the google pixel 6 where it screens my calls for me and offers up its own robo-voice interactive answering service is absolutely amazing. The phone visually shows a transcript of what is being said, what their response is (if any), and allows me to click options to respond. The main advantage is of the majority spam calls I get in a day I've already been able to "rescue" a few legitimate calls that I needed to respond to.
tmobile has pretty good spam filtering maybe one text and three calls have gotten through in the last 2 years
> Doesn't sounds like a crime?

Defamation is not a crime, but it is a "tort" (a civil wrong, rather than a criminal wrong).

-- https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/defamation-law-made-....

Libel is criminal in 24 states.

-- https://www.aclu.org/issues/free-speech/map-states-criminal-...
> people not distinguishing between objective and subjective matters like you will cause the US to collapse

Caution: Admitting ignorance on the topic and then levying an accusation that failure to discern is responsible for nation-state collapse seems like a large leap that one might want to avoid.

As to the rest: Most of the bans I've seen have been based around what I'll call controversial opinions, which I won't bother expounding on but some examples include references to Caitlyn Jenner's Olympic achievements, or whether they are biologically male or female.

Beyond that, I've seen a large number of bannings from those who questioned official government narratives:

* COVID vaccines have affect menstrual cycles

* COVID likely originated in Wuhan

etc.

These all seem to fall under the concept of 'opinion' and at least to the bulleted items, both of those opinions seem to have consensus support now, despite that they might have gotten you deplatformed just a year ago.

There has to be room for civil discourse to question official narratives (for the citizenry and elected representatives alike) and for elected representatives, it seems that "I think the narrative is incorrect and so I should resign to give voice to it" then leaves the politician ineffective at countering what may well be a disaster, and leaves open the possibility of a heckler's veto of sorts wherein the executive could merely inject insincere poison pills into the official narrative and then wait for their ideological opponents to resign in objection.
I have kept my old area code for just this reason.
>require overcoming tremendous challenges, including refueling infrastructure, battery availability, consumer acceptance, and affordability

This is a laughable quote. Tesla built their own charging infrastructure [1], designed and secured their battery supply [2], doesn't advertise, [3] and is selling to millions [4]. Toyota missed their e-chance and have no right to "warn us" about electrification.

[1] https://www.finder.com/tesla-superchargers-map

[2] https://electrek.co/2021/11/01/tesla-secures-lithium-supply-...

[3] https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-marketing-strategy-is-no-adv...

[4] https://cleantechnica.com/2021/01/02/tesla-499550-vehicles-d...

https://www.engadget.com/tesla-q4-2021-year-end-deliveries-s...
"the chicken can't exist before the egg"

Come on, all of these are things that grow WITH the EV industry as the EV industry develops.

Given how much Toyota has helped the hydrogen industry develop hydrogen infrastructure over the last decade as they put all their eggs into the hydrogen bucket, they very much know all this.
I think the key is to allow the learner to develop an innate understanding of the grammar trough natural usage, instead of memorizing a list of formal grammar rules to apply. That would mean learning a second language like we learn our first. Every child has a very good innate understanding of the grammar of their mother tongue long before they are introduced to concepts of formal grammar, E.G. a 6yo can use verbs without knowing they are called "verbs", and can assign the proper tense long before they are introduced to the formal rules of conjugation. So, as a child learning a mother tongue, the study of formal grammar rules should be introduced eventually to a 2nd language learner, but not before the person has an innate basic understanding of the language.
> Your phone might be listening in the background (e.g. Hey Siri needs this to work). Even with the option off (as you said), it might still be processing words on-device for better suggestions.

That's _barely_ any better. That's essentially the behavior that's being complained about but implemented a different way.
You think getting certificates is improving your mind?

My experience in corporate work is exactly as the comment you replied to. Endless drone work doing much the same things day after day. I did it for 3 years, learned basically nothing beyond what I came in the job with, then went out on my own. In the time since I have learned so much more than what I did in that corporate job, there is just no comparison. Also, I strongly suspect they literally try to keep you stuck in one spot and too dumb to move out of it on purpose; you are less likely to leave or ask for a raise. They want predictable drones in corporate work, and yes, getting certificates is one way you make drones feel like they are doing something.
This is a REALLY SOLID response to the question, and I'd hope it would get some strong 'hire' points.

I agree -- but unfortunately the interview question doesn't filter for this level of thinking.

If anything, it filters for the exact opposite: your ability and willingness to shove a random new feature into the codebase in 3 hours (or GTFO) -- stability and other consequences be damned.
14 or 15, often. 18 year old adults is a recent liberal human rights innovation.

There's not a whole lot of difference between humans now and humans 100,000 years ago. We have better tools and culture and knowledge, but we're physically identical - swap a baby in either direction and nobody would know the difference.
As of version 1.1.8, Aseprite is source-available proprietary software, not open source:

https://dev.aseprite.org/2016/09/01/new-source-code-license/
painfully ironic to cover the article with a prompt to sign up for a shitty email list
There are far, far too many "coincidences" from many people with this same or similar story.
You can use a catchall, no need to set an alias for each address. Fastmail is very often recommended around here
Does the fact that this have no comments mean that it's just accepted as fact?
I just took a video as a parameter - a recent engineering animation - and got the following:

format 18 - 640x360 AVC1, V+A : ~50kB/s
format 22 - 1280x720 AVC1, V+A : ~60kB/s
format 137 - 1920x1080 AVC1, V : ~128kB/s
format 400 - 2560x1440 av01, V : ~450kB/s
format 401 - 3840x2160 av01, V : ~850kB/s

Are you sure you are not reporting mega/bits/? When you mention the «player reported data rate», are you sure that is not the "connection speed"? 10MB/s means downloading 36GB/h (one CD per minute, dozens gigabytes per hour)...
Legion did a great little PSA about conspiracies and it fits here as well: https://youtu.be/zKYUxOQj5OA
You're telling me that a connection-oriented system with a volume a billionth of the internet can't keep logs of who initiates a connection for 5 minutes? Oh, yeah.
Npb. It's also listed on the upcomming release page apparently

https://about.gitlab.com/upcoming-releases/
Does the Y Smith name match perhaps by letters from the number pad?
This is a pretty poor characterization of the context of the comment.

Accusations are flying around here including calling them liars and intentionally hiding information. This is a far cry from "merely asking". Particularly since the other party isn't present in the forum, providing the avenue available to us to actually do the asking seemed reasonable to me.

Unless the point is to complain uselessly into the void because of the need for two minutes of hate against political enemies. Then I'll bow out...
Delivery vans?
Germany, seem to be electric at my place, and cargo bikes are used in the city as well.
A recent advancement: https://ebike-news.de/75-tonner-bald-geschichte-db-schenker-...

I don't think there are any issues of removing diesel here.

I can't think of why ambulances couldnt be electrified as well. Low center of gravity thanks to the battrry could help here.
Here in Germany commercial cold calling is illegal and carries a pretty heavy fine. (in the tens of thousands). In 20 years I've had one spam call. Literally just ban it and require explicit consent from customers, problem solved.
There is also a nice quote from when, after a period of chaos in the late 19th century, Spaniards democratically chose to bring in a foreign King to govern them (sorry if I got this wrong -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadeo_I_of_Spain ).
In a short two years, Amadeo ended up fleeing the country claiming Spain to be simply ungovernable; and that the most dangerous enemies of Spain where the Spaniards themselves.
Figuring out a new UI is kind of a puzzle, but not a very good one. Figuring out a bill or form that has been sent to you -- not sure about 40+ (they should really do their own bills, that is weird for a 40-something year old), but when I think of my grandmother who is more like 80, this seems like a pretty reasonable thing to ask your kids about, given the absurd number of scams that target older folks.

I am 100% willing to believe that continuing to learn new things is good for brain health. But it seems to me that these examples are more like outsourcing the handling of annoyances, rather than avoiding the kind of new learning that would otherwise keep their brain healthy.
Yep. At least once a week I wish the Chevy Volt had been made by Toyota. I'd adore a PHEV that combined Toyota reliability with enough electric range to get through my whole commute. The Prius Prime is just sad with its 25 mile max EV range that drops to 17 at highway speeds.
you can just add +myalias to most email services and get it delivered automatically. E.g. first.second+github@gmail.com delivers to firstsecond@gmail.com
> Your claim to authority here is helping out claimants on a tobacco case, a situation where the companies were unquestionably guilty.

I’m not claiming authority, in fact I did the exact opposite, I highlighted my lack of experience in billion dollar plus cases. However, my experience is enough within the industry to provide alternative insights to someone who thinks billion dollar cases settle like your average rank and file case, or even more unrelated like plea deals in criminal cases.

And no the tobacco companies were not “unquestionably guilty.” First “guilt” is a criminal term and immaterial as we are talking about civil cases and civil liabilities. Second some tobacco cases still go to trial, the companies actually win some despite being “unquestionably guilty.”

As it relates to liability with respect to the tobacco cases the studies tend to show tobacco products increase lung cancer risk anywhere from 15-30% and the glyphosate study I referenced concluded a 40% NHL cancer risk increase. So naturally I’m curious about the standard you apply when you say the tobacco companies were “unquestionably guilty” unlike glyphosate manufacturers, when the increased risk of a given cancer is higher as a total percentage for glyphosate than tobacco. If tobacco companies were “unquestionably guilty” and glyphosate is shown to increase cancer risk as a total percentage more than tobacco, please enlighten me about the science.

Everyone here who has responded to my comment is talking about “the science”, including you, whereas I’m the only one that bothered to reference a single statistic from a glyphosate study and no one else has bothered to address that study on the merits, except one response that accepts the 40% increase risk as true, but argues that’s a “small increase.” Finally, I’m not acting as though the jury trial settles the science, but when I’m the only one to reference a study and the replies don’t dispute the study or bother citing any studies of their own, then 90,000+ voluntary settlements by the product manufacturer are useful enough for this discussion on HN.
> But it is censorship. Moderation is not censorship. A moderator in a debate does not censor, he directs conversation....

> Censorship is simply preventing people from saying what they would like to say.

You're contradicting yourself. What if someone wants to disrupt the conversation? Depending on the audience and venue, disruption can take many forms.
That people can be so oblivious to the ways in which targeted advertising actually works while simultaneously so vulnerable to conspiracy theories about "hot mics" has me worried.
I guess the question then becomes "would that name have shown up if op hadn't said it?" And frankly it seems pretty naive to say that it's only an issue because op noticed it this time.
Ah, the Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon.
Twitter board after Elon offered to buy out company
You can definitely turn off the "enhance" on the Samsungs...
Two lessons you should draw from this:

1. The successful communication platforms are ones that are opt-in, meaning you can't message or talk to someone unless you give their consent; and

2. This is why federated messaging systems have not worked and likely won't work in the future. Why? Just like with POTS, there is always going to be an incentive for bad actors to "launder" messages or calls.

What I find particularly irksome about the spam situation is the exceptions carved out for charities and, worse yet, political fundraising to the "do not spam" laws. I mean these laws don't stop a huge amount of spam because it's illegal anyway and probably originates overseas.

But I honestly don't want to be a part of the current phone system and just ignore any unknown numbers.
This is what I do as well. I just mute and set the phone down. They usually give up after 30-45 seconds.
>There will _always_ be such restrictions. For an extreme, but derived from the same philosophical core, example: the act of murder is an individual freedom, but it imposes on other peoples' freedoms. So we have to make a choice between which freedom is more important: that of the person whose life is at risk, or that of the person who wants to take lives. The formal concepts are referred to as negative liberty (freedom from murder) and positive liberty (freedom to murder someone).

Your example seems messy because people seem very opposed to the notion of a freedom to cause harm as even being a freedom. So why not avoid that complication entirely?

I think there is an even simpler example that'll work. If one is truly a free person, can they sell themselves into slavery. If we say yes, then allowing slavery is part of the package of ultimate freedom. If we say no, then there is at least one restriction we must include in the package of ultimate freedom. Package of ultimate freedom just being a spur of the moment name I've given to the legal system under which we are most free. Lastly, an answer of the form 'no one should exist in a position of being able to stop you from doing such', such as provided by anarchists, it just an alternate way of answering yes to the question.
You swapped public vs private, but peoples diaries have caused them problems in the past. It’s an issue with the written word rather than the spoken one that’s adding repercussions years later.

“If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.”
I skipped most of the article and still got trapped