skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have a different take on why it is different (seen from my point of view, of course it is possible that God actually exists and walked on water). People are brought up with religion as a really core of their identity, and it is really hard to separate that from themselves. It is sort of like being in a cult, incredibly hard to understand that. There is the saying the difference between a cult and a religion is the number of believers.

Edit: Also, the flat earth thing has not been believed by mainstream since the ancient Greeks for more than 2000 years.
Clearly it will contain a straightforward bias against our pet interest, confirming a grand conspiracy and validating our paranoia.
>perhaps there should be some regulatory branch that reports to Congress

I think only if you offer twitter users the level of first amendment protection they'd expect with a government body. Otherwise reporting to congress would be an a bold faced circumvention the first amendment. Twitter is a privately held company with no need to report to congress.
Which is fine for single item repairs or upgrades where the person doing the work is tech savvy and all parties are will to accept the loss of a functional device in case something goes awry. (Which, admittedly, is rare, but you have to take the liability on yourself every time).

Something like that is entirely non-feasible for mass manufacturing of parts with any guarantee of quality though.
I'm skeptical of this. People used to say that Windows viruses were much more common than Mac viruses because there were so many more PC users, the market share just made Windows a more attractive target. If this[1] is to be believed, in spite of its outsized footprint in recent supply chain hacks, Nodejs is still really only backing 1/20th the number of sites as PHP, and 1/7th as many as ASP.

https://www.similartech.com/compare/nodejs-vs-php
Well the entire supply chain for commercial CO2 is "reclaimed" so anything they have to say on the matter is entirely for the purpose of spin.

They needed something solid that can sublimate and be relatively safe. Media blasting with CO2 is really a super common thing everywhere in industry. I could drive over to Grainger and buy a CO2 blasting machine today.
Yeah, it was a bit snarky, but still an honest question. In some domains, like astronomy or geology or climate change, I guess it seems reasonable to make predictions 100 or 1,000 years in the future based on available data rather than experience. In other domains, like politics or economics or finance, it seems like there would be much more value in having worked through a bunch of election and business cycles over the years. I'm not sure where computing and AI sits on that spectrum. I can imagine a young AI researcher failing to realize that some approach was tried and found to be a dead-end 30 years ago.

On the definition of experience, I agree that education and life experience counts. I said "around 15" years for myself because the definition is fuzzy. I got some very specific career preparation and training in college, so that sort of counts, and I probably spend more personal time than many of my peers learning about relevant history and current events.
> Well, we changed people’s consumption by letting them have their S.U.V.s. We can change people the other way. We could say, To save the planet people should drive smaller cars. If you drive a smaller car, you get a rebate. If you drive an S.U.V., you pay a surcharge. There are many ways to go around bringing rational goals. You don’t have to invent new things to solve these problems. This promise of inventions — 3-D printing! Houses will be printed! Cars will be printed! Have you seen any printed houses and cars? We live in this world of exaggerated promises and delusional pop science.

The solution has always been to make gas $20 per gallon or $30 per gallon or whatever it needs to be to force people to use dense housing and public transit or cycling/walking.

Problem is not all the countries are going to do it, especially the ones who have not been living the high life for the past 60 years, so it is politically dead in the water. And hence you end up with exaggerated promises and delusional pop science, stuff that is politically palatable.
>It just seems strange that there isn't some rule saying that the board has to treat shareholders more or less equally.

AIUI, there is such a rule, and, FWIW, that’s why I found the OP’s explanation[1] somewhat dubious. Deliberately sabotaging the corporation for the benefit of another one that the 51%er owns … seems like the kind of thing that the courts would strike down.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31160874
I got my parents on Linux Mint after their desktop died, which I fixed, but they didn’t want to buy a new Windows license. They are absolutely not tech savvy, but only use the internet and some super basic document editing & viewing.

They got used to the system quickly and used it for 4 years, until the OS went out of LTS and I told them not to use it anymore… but still, they have no idea what a terminal is, no tech savvy, but still used it for their basic use-case for 4 straight years without issue! I didn’t even have to help them after the initial install. Couldn’t have been easier.
Apple being marketed as a privacy company makes me laugh... about once a month.
Exactly. Unfortunately, so much of the misunderstanding about Twitter's enforcement actions boils down to disagreements at the adjudication stage. Where Twitter may think X activity was inciting violence, other people may disagree. Making all the data more transparent won't change the fact that Twitter may interpret a given fact pattern in a different way than a critic.
Absolutely agree with what you say, but I wanted to pick a nit here:

> Being pedantic about whether or not this happens in an SQL query, or across multiple codebases, or by region, doesn't escape the question.

Actually, epistemic ~"muddying of the waters" is a well proven technique to control perceptions and public discourse. If it works on HN folks, I expect it would work much more easily on amateurs.
I've been voting Libertarian since the Republican Party decided to decamp into MAGA-land.

Which is also not much of a home, since it generally is inhabited by non-serious people- but at this point at least I can morally live with a platform of you stay out of my way and I'll stay out of yours. The other options have too many compromises right now.
As a rails developer I really believe if Ruby had at least one more 'Killer App' it would lead to a much healthier overall community.
I think it's an apt analogy. You seem to be implying that all landlords are huge corporations that are gobbling up all the properties out there.

Individual landlords like myself are small time. I'm pretty much a mom and pop restaurant and you're criticizing me like I'm the McDonalds corporation.

I personally know 80% of my tenants and they've been renting from me for years.
> Yes or no? This is a very simple binary question

It’s triggering to a lot of people to use the term ‘binary’ in that manner. You need to check your Hetero-privilege. It’s hateful and hurtful to non-binary posters.
Got a link to some actual peer reviews of his research? I've seen him trotted out before, but at most the only data people seem to be able to produce related to his work are interviews like the one you linked, and his website (which is just request for donation after request for donation).
Yeah, I disagree with "ruthlessly productive" as a blanket statement because of this. I tend to find that a huge chunk of the time I save at write-time in Ruby (Rails)/Python/etc., I end up repaying at either runtime (nil exceptions) or read/explain-to-other-dev/refactor times, sometimes in multiplicative form (chasing down why something became nil, or a string, or an elephant, but only if the ORM did X, Y, and Z to the DB response, etc. gets ridiculous quickly)
The New Scientist article is behind a paywall, but this BBC article from 14 April discusses the connection between Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) and multiple sclerosis. (Note: the article does not mention the study in the New Scientist.)

> Studies published this year have convincingly pointed the finger at the Epstein-Barr virus.

> "It is very, very strong evidence that this virus is likely to be the cause of multiple sclerosis," Prof Gavin Giovannoni, from Queen Mary University of London...

> The crucial piece of evidence has come from the US military, which takes blood samples from soldiers every two years. These are kept in the freezers of the Department of Defense Serum Repository and have proven to be a goldmine for research.

> A team at Harvard University went looking through samples from 10 million people to establish the connection between Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) and multiple sclerosis.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-61042598
Fine. Ignore that part. But feel free to address the actual argument:

Temporarily freezing the banking privileges of people involved in the perpetuation of 1. A crime 2. while acting against an injunction 3. after being authorized to use that power by a majority of elected representatives is a pretty acceptable use of government. Regardless of who in power does it.

You said you don’t like people in power arbitrarily freezing accounts of people they don’t like, and cited what appears to be a completely made up story from a fringe candidate.

I’m pointing out that this was not arbitrary, and it was used in a very specific and limited manner, as authorized by law, to accomplish a very specific goal. The goal was accomplished with, as far as has been actually proven, an absolute minimum of harm caused, even to the perpetrators themselves.

The protest is still allowed, there are still people protesting in my town. Just saw ‘em this weekend. What they aren’t allowed to do is use money from unknown international sources to shut down cities and infrastructure
So you're saying google doesn't have infrastructure to allow a human specified list of keywords or domain names to "Twiddle" the results returned in varrious services such as news, search, and youtube for the purpose of artificial promotion or de-boosting?
it’s almost like this thread is nothing but people being pedantic and saying, there isn’t just one algorithm, it’s multiple algorithms. yes do you really think elon doesn’t know that? it’s almost like he’s just trying to get the point across in the most simple and basic way possible. pointing out that the recommendation algorithm isn’t just one algorithm isn’t profound at all. this entire conversation is mostly just people who want to argue and point out that they know something about how large tech companies work. congrats, why don’t you tell elon since you’re obviously so much smarter
I also can't get past the paywall, but the virus in question is seemingly causally related to developing MS. If the data holds up (who knows) it seems like it would imply the latent infection is not only triggering but sustaining MS.
Is this ATA188? The clinical trial is open for that med which targets epv infected cells.
This is alarming.

Who's building the next Twitter? All it needs is a good name.

I'd do it myself but already vowed never to solo-found a company again. There is undeniably an opportunity here.
Sounds like he knew he was about to be part of this person's all-in-good-fun humiliation. Entertainment like that cannot be passed up!
>Yuo cna reda tihs raedliy btu teh copmtuer cna't.

It would be interesting to see what GPT3 would do with this statement.

Edit; just tried it. GPT-3 chatbot understood it instantly.
Left when they integrated NFTs into PFPs, serious doubts he would unwind that. Though if he does I would join back.
Every time Yishan's thread comes up, I feel I need to add while he says Elon is behind he is also behind: one half of the debaters left facts and reality behind. This means any fair moderation will be seen as left leaning.
It's so difficult as someone who works in technology to tolerate this idea that there is "an algorithm". Maybe this will get flagged on HN but the overwhelming feeling is to just scream "don't be such a fucking idiot, this is a $43Bn company it doesn't boil down to 50 lines of code" and hell, there are plenty of examples of 50 lines of code at my company I could spend a month really understanding and even then not understand the full ramifications. It's a stupid persons idea of how tech works.
> A Von Neumman machine (which separates memory and processing) would struggle to execute a logarithmic search within even it's fastest, pathetically small on-die cache in a few dozen clock cycles. It would take many millions of clock cycles to perform a single fast disk fetch. A brain can access most of it's [sic] entire memory every clock cycle.

The last sentence is just guffaw-inducing ignorance. A brain might have a lossy, highly compressed and probabilistic index, that doesn't mean it can access its whole memory in a clock cycle.

> ... more speculation...and then
> So you'd need a couple hundred terrabytes worth of memristor modules to make a human brain sized AGI, costing on the order of $200k or so.

Holy cow, what a leap. What if neurons don't work like memristors? What if neurons are more like tiny FFT circuits, working on firing rates, integrating over time, encoding information into frequencies? What if the molecular structure of the insides of neurons works more like a forest of tuning forks and can use molecular computers to do analog, approximate calculations that we're simulating with GANNs using weights?

This person is...ok, let me read a little more...

> For safety purposes, the human designers have created some small initial population of AGI brains and an elaborate Matrix simulation that they can watch from outside. Humans control many of the characters and ensure that the AGI minds don't know that they are in a Matrix until they are deemed ready.

...high as balls maybe?
> the definition of “the algorithm” is the training set

Or the trained model itself. There are people looking for intentional bias. But the insidiousness of the problem likely arises from unintentional bias. Letting researchers brute force the ranking models with hypotheticals could be a win win.
(b) sounds like the kind of thing The Guardian claims radicalised people and got Trump elected.
I don't think you listened to me, because you said this:

> Now compare that to fighting default styles and complected component styles

As I said, I am NOT fighting default styles. I want them.

I don't WANT to write my own components, just change colors with Sass (and maybe some affordances).

I'm an engineer, not a UX designer, and I don't have budget to hire a UX designer (nor do I pretend to be good at UX like most programmers). Bootstrap is ideal for my situation, and many others in my position.

Also, what are you talking about? Tailwind absolutely does NOT give you out of the box components. Only third-parties, like DaisyUI and OP's link are fully formed components (or the links off of the tailwind page), which are at best like bootstrap and at worse an inconsistent mess.
In my kitchen my Google home unit is a very advanced timer, unit conversion device, and picture frame.
it's probably just a ripoff of pagerank with a separate spam filtering and banning system along with an army of contractors manually fixing it up.

if twitter is a game, sinking $43bn into it is kinda like winning or losing the grand final boss level. (unclear which)

wish elon would get back to facilitating the building of useful things. we still don't have a great clean energy generation story.
If it's too complicated, there is a good chance Elon will ask to simplify it until it can be open sourced.
> Bill Gates, e.g., still sits at the top of the money-power pile, even though his own success peaked 25 years ago.

Bill Gates made 3X more money after his retirement by doing nothing than what he made through working at Microsoft 12-16 hours a day for 35 years. All hail capitalism!
I don't see how Twitter can be changed away from what it is and still be a place people are interested in going to.

I think the best reasonable outcome will be for it to be destroyed by this, and set the cause of elite outrage back a few years until something else evolves. I assume this is the master plan. Otherwise, what is the real pathway to a single site where opinions coexist, free speech is allowed, and people participate in good faith. It's a bit like democracy, it only really works if the overwhelming majority have the same goals, otherwise it sucks for everyone.

I see the potential here for a tower of Babel type destruction where all the silly tribes fighting each other just get scattered and take some time to regroup, and hopefully give society a chance to thrive for a bit. Let's see.
> Taking a salary implies you're forgoing a salary

You lost me there. How does taking a salary imply that you’re foregoing a salary? That sentence doesn’t make sense.

You seem to be conflating the expected value of equity with the general financial outcome of having a job, or you might not know precisely what expected value means. (That’s okay! I’m not judging.) You can’t say that equity is positive EV just because you didn’t lose money and ended up with some salary. To calculate EV, you must compare it to what happens when you don’t take equity. That is the definition of Expected Value: the probability of an event multiplied by the outcome gain/loss. Since accepting lower salary has a probability of 100%, and the probability of the value of shares being greater than $0 has a probability less than 100%, it is obvious and tautological that the EV of some equity can be negative.

If I take a half salary, and a bunch of equity to compensate for the low salary, and the company never goes public, then it’s a negative outcome, I lose 50% of the money compared to taking a full salary with no equity. (Even if I collected, say, $1M in salary in the mean time.) This is what actually happens all the time, equity ends up worth less than the value that it was traded for. Given that most startups fail and never go public, that means that the average EV of equity over all startups probably is negative.
I guess technically the math works out that way :)

In my opinion I'm seriously mediocre as an engineer. Slightly above average at best. I'm just good at managing my time, which is more of a business/personal skill than any engineering skill.
> Right...what is the revenue of Uniswap?
> Zero, because the point is not to make revenues but to bake in any form of perceived utility into the appreciation of a token. Again only use is speculation

Uniswap has an annual run rate of over $1 Billion. It's one of the fastest growing startups in history.

But why let facts get in the way of opinions?

I'm sure in your fantasy land where everyone does exactly as you want them to everything will be perfect and no resources will be wasted.
Leaving the option of gaining control via 51% hostile takeover would essentially be a ~50% discount for Elon. If your goal is to sell at the highest price you don't want to count on someones word or intentions.

Plus even if Elon really wants all 100% for reasons, the bank providing funding would certainly want him to consider any cheaper options since it's (nearly) the same gain for them but less risk to finance buying 51% vs 100%.
Running Twitter Is Going to Disappoint Elon Musk
Assuming we're talking about the timeline "latest" mode (rather than "top"), IIRC in the past the used to do the home timeline processing on the read paths, but have long since opted to optimize for read latency, thus the heavy lifting is performed during the insertion, so in broad strokes, when someone post a tweet, the three main things that happen are:

1. Insertion of tweet to tweets table.

2. Insertion of that tweet-id to the home timelines of all that user's followers.

3. Insertion of that tweet-id to the user-timeline of that user.

On the read-path, if I'm not mistaken, the only join that happen is between the requested timeline and the tweets table (which is replicated across cluster of machines but not partitioned, or at least I remember reading that was the case not many years ago)
There are plenty of other people besides Trump that have been banned by twitter. I'm more interested in the people that were silenced for "COVID misinformation" and/or other forms of "misinformation" that turned out not to be misinformation at all but rather just didn't run in line with the mainstream consensus.

With regard to Trump though, if half the country is listening to him anyway I want to know what idiotic things he's saying as opposed to just burying my head in the sand. Censorship has never historically worked, and it will continue to not work.
How do fights and conflicts work out? Surely under the stressful conditions of a sub, people have conflict. And keeping that conflict hot can't be good for everyone. Are the personality types less prone to conflict, or is there some general way it gets resolved?
To counter your anecdote, I’ve seen fake news on the platform dozens of times (at the “Obama was born in Iraq” level). Usually someone parroting it from a partisan media vehicle.
Twitter itself is probably the training set for twitter.
… any more.
points from all-hands

https://twitter.com/alexeheath/status/1518706644124721152
The article's “Honeywell, an early computer-maker that would later help power the Arpanet” is a journalistically muddled version of a more specific fact: the ‘Kitchen Computer’ was a Honeywell 316 in a pedestal case, and the 316 was also used for the ARPANET Interface Message Processor (i.e. router).
For my own sake I'm probably going to be completely anon, but you should check out the following site for a community of overemployed folks:

https://overemployed.com/
main points from all-hands

https://twitter.com/alexeheath/status/1518706644124721152
Probably not good, have you ever met the execs who work at Tesla? He rides their asses hard.

I know from firsthand experience they're pretty much undatable. In order to be successful there, total commitment is required, not a lot of room for anything else. It bears the pungent aroma of cult.

He's definitely a touchy customer (this is a generous way of putting it), best buckle up, we're in for a ride.
GoldWave Open Source Goal
The Epoch Times is not a credible source.

“The Epoch Times is a far-right[16] international multi-language newspaper and media company affiliated with the Falun Gong new religious movement”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Epoch_Times
i'm looking forward to see what's going to be on it.
Spam extends beyond bots! Besides, there's also still the "and other undesirable" accounts part.

There are a lot of reasons a person may choose to block another account, from harassment to simply curating a better experience for themselves.

> people should be able to see who and who isn't allowed to enter that town square to respond.

Do you use Twitter? This isn't how Twitter works at all. The fact that a person blocks you doesn't prevent you from entering the "Town Square" in any way.
To those that are probably triggered by this and likely even uninformed, the "left" view has been that the laptop story was fake, but it turns out it was real.
I can't pass the paywall but have the sense that this may actually be.. a trial in humans? Can somebody confirm?
WP is neither of the same magnitude, nor is it the similar in kind. WP is not nor was it ever a platform in the sense that Twitter is.