skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Maybe you should study these things and come back later when you know what are you talking about?

You were extremely condescending and rude in your argument. That's why you were called a troll.
Yeah, I think you get zero information from someone who only upvotes or only downvotes, whereas you get some signal from people in the center.
It's almost like there are multiple people and groups in EU administration, with different goals and priorities.
The EU has many types of legal acts and the European Commission is responsible for planning and proposing law. Also EU regulations are legal acts that apply automatically to all EU countries without needing to be transposed into national law.

For scanning encrypted messages, they can be scanned on device before encryption, like Apple’s approach to CSAM.
> It's essentially an iPhone 7 without a SIM. Just buy one of those.

You literally can't "just buy one" that's new to give to a kid.
Distributed Computing Projects
How can it be a "crazy idea" to leave what you describe in your first 2 paragraphs? Crazy just economically?
So, I made a comment that it was in the top 10. Then you listed one that was dramatically higher. While I agree that NY doesn't compete for the top spot; your example in no way invalidates my point.
No, that's all redundant. Put all your mp4s in one folder. All of them. Your browser can search the page of directory listing that Apache generates. Subtitles are built into the codex, has nothing whatsoever to do with the server. Chromecast streaming? You're kidding me. Chromecast is and uses the same web technologies as a web server and a web browser. There is nothing novel there. And I already specified that Apache streams to as many clients as can be thrown at the server simultaneously without any extra hardware or software. Oh, you want to stream remotely from your home server? All you need is Apache and an IP Address. Please stop giving Google money. Apache is free software.
You're about to run their software on your computer-- what's the difference with that and running their install script?
Musk: Tesla close to self driving better than human and will get there this year
Match Group sues Google over app store
Please let’s not rehash that 2008 Heller and 2010 McDonald have settled that 2A has absolutely always been an individual right - even if you don’t like that outcome.

But apparently trying to hide a fact might make it change!
> You need co2 scrubbers for any oxygen producing solution, since co2 kills faster than o2 scarcity.

Given their uses are the space station, planes and submarines, cant you just vent some of the atmosphere out since you're in a pressurized tube of some kind to lower the CO2?
Hum, ok. You are interpreting "better results" in a strict monetary sense, without accounting for second-order problems from bad deals.

It looks more healthy for both groups. I do expect it to bring better both first-order and second-order results. (Those two are always correlated, and on investment relationships they are very strongly correlated.)
Why Do People Lose at Positive Expected Outcome Bets?
Please reread my comment, I don't use the terms "man" or "men" once. It seems you object to the idea that imprisoned female people should be allowed to have an opinion on being forced to share a jail cell with a male person.

Personally, I think female people are well within their rights to voice concerns about this. If you see it differently, I'd be grateful to hear your rationale on why the government should be able to move males into women's prisons in secret, as the ACLU asserts.
I spent a good chunk of time last week looking for a solid cross-platform GUI toolkit. I came to the conclusion that the terminal is the most portable GUI platform available. You can create an app that has windows, buttons, mouse support, etc, statically compile it for Windows, Linux, and Mac, and run it over SSH. The closest you can get to that with real graphics is using a toolkit built on OpenGL, and you'll be forced to dynamically link to X11 or Wayland on Linux.

The achilles heel of terminal UIs is that they can't display images.
iPod Wear
> Unless you're pre-informed on the issues, whoever presents it to you can just pick the side that gets you to the answer they want.

This summarizes a good 75% of modern political discourse.
> Protip: A 27" 4k monitors is a waste of a 4k monitor. Text is way too small for coding at that resolution.

Protip: Set them to 150 - 200% scaling and get way better font rendering and readability than with a lower-resolution screen, which makes it easier on the eyes. If things then get too big (because actually 4k at 24" would be more appropriate), reduce font-size by 1pt or so. 4k is not meant for use without scaling.
I'm a brit that voted exit because of the EU democratic deficit, not because of xenophobia. I expected it to damage the economy for a decade, and I stilll wanted out. I knew that would put me in the same group as the xenophobic racists, but I still voted out.

I also knew it would cause pain; the last people I wanted at the wheel during Brexit was Boris Johnson and the Tories. But I voted Brexit anyway, because I figured that it would be a very long time before we'd be allowed a referendum on EU membership again.

I consider myself European, and I welcomed the UK joining the EU back then. But over the years, I've seen new entrants promptly ignoring the financial rules, the division-of-powers rules, and a bunch of other rules, and not get kicked out, or even sanctioned. I don't want to be in a union of governments with authoritarian racists.
What does “further right” mean? Positions the left would have never taken 10 years ago are now commonplace. The idea that a Supreme Court nominee is too afraid to even define what a woman is (due to her lack of biology credentials apparently) — that would have been laughable 10 years ago. The Democrat position on abortion, during the Clinton admin was “safe, legal, rare.” Now it’s “abortion for any reason at any stage of pregnancy, even up to the moment of birth.” That’s an extreme position. And on illegal immigration — Barbara Jordan’s position is identical to the position republicans have maintained for decades. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3qjdZUx7fUw
Just look up ACLU's response to the federal government's effort to describe environmental groups like the Sierra Club as "mainstream organizations with known or possible links to eco-terrorism" in the Bush-Cheney Era, c.2008. They definitely seem to have lost their minds and their historical agenda post-Trump. For example, it's worth reading their response to the 2001 attacks:

https://www.aclu.org/other/defense-freedom-time-crisis

My own view is that the leadership of both parties really would like to install Chinese-style mass surveillance practices, and the motivation primarily seems to be the desire to contain popular anger over declining standards of living across the USA. The creation of the Rust Belt via the implementation of neoliberal trade policies played a key role in the rise of Trump, and leaders of both parties pushed that through on the behalf of their corporate masters. Of course, Trump did nothing about it, so the populist anger is still smoldering.

If implementing draconian mass surveillance is the plan, then buying off the ACLU is a step in that direction.
>I've never met the people who want these clownish surveillance things but they keep coming up anyways.

They're you, your neighbors, your coworkers, your family. Authoritarians are everywhere.

They won't outright support the surveillance state but they'll say things like "well, government gonna government amirite" when these dragnets get used against people they don't like (usually various breeds of petty criminals and scofflaws who aren't really harming anyone at their scale). And of course they act all outraged when the .gov is using the same mechanisms to go after stuff they do like.

If cognitive dissonance was a physical object I would bludgeon people with it.
It should be incredibly obvious that this information would make it very easy to identify the individuals in question (especially with #1).
Switzerland does this today. They have a blended system of direct and representational democracy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_Switzerland
>But, let’s assume in a democracy, the majority of people decide to vote for free hookers and blow for everyone, why not :)

Majority of _what_ people. The majority of people within my square mile? This continent? The majority of people in my house? I merely reduce down 'democracy' to its logical smallest element, the individual. I vote what I will spend my earnings on, and as the only voter my vote wins. Of course, my vote has no effect on obligation of others, as they are not part of my own 'democracy.'

Very few people want a pure democracy. Pure democracy is 5 people in a house, and 4 vote to beat the shit out of the fifth. Pure democracy is when 60% whites vote to make blacks their slaves. Pure democracy is voting to intern the Japanese in camps.

Voting is fine, involuntary extraction of resources from others is not.
> This looks like a scare-story.

Let's hope you are right. The EU has a funny history of beating through brain-dead policies. The current EU commission chief, Ursula von der Leyen, is known as "Zensursula" (a portemanteau of "censorship" and her given name) in Germany because she attempted to install essentially the Chinese Firewall for Germany (complete with Stop signs) when she was still doing politics here.

> Firstly, the EU produces directives and regulations; it doesn't produce "laws".

A regulation is technically a law, as it is immediately binding in all EU countries. Directives are quasilaws, as local governments are forced to make them into local laws.

> Secondly, the phrase "child pornography" is in quotes, as if there's no such thing. There is such a thing.

Of course there is. But we have seen again and again that this phrase is being used by wannabe dictators to justify massive limitations of human rights for everyone.

> If that were the proposal, then surely that's what should be in the headline?

Just you wait, right now, very few people know what is in that draft. I'm willing to put money to the fact that it essentially outlaws E2E encryption (and, if we are unlucky, not "only" for messengers - which may be deliberate or by ignorance).
Why do we organize by shape, and not by function in our monoliths? We put all our controllers in a package, all our DB accessors in another package, all our "data objects" in another package. Even in OO languages like Java where we have package accessors that never get used because we layout our code such that package scope can never be used. We instead layout the code according to "shape".

When figuring out what to spin-off as a microservice, we do this by functionality. Why not just make it easier in the monolith and organize by functionality instead? Let's act like 4yr olds, not 3yr olds: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12090481/
Is protonmail robust against this?
Solarpunk doesn't really do stories compared to other "-punks". Optimism doesn't provide compelling conflicts. "Nausiccaä of the Valley of the Wind" is "Post apocalyptic" solarpunk manga (and an old one at that).

https://best-sci-fi-books.com/16-best-solarpunk-books/ seems reasonable.

Reading a book on permaculture seems the most solarpunk "Permaculture: A Designers' Manual"by Bill Mollison stands out there.
The security model is a big one for me. If they could extend the permissions system to work for individual dependencies, they could solve one of the biggest security issues facing developers right now. Especially if policies could also be applied to node packages.

Are there any plans to move in this direction? It seems like if you can do it for the full app, you should hypothetically have the capability to make it library-specific. Or perhaps there are non-obvious blockers that make it too hard?

If there are plans to do this, isn't it better to do it sooner rather than later? Better to get library authors in the habit of specifying permissions/policies now while the ecosystem is still small. If you wait too long, it will be a ton of work to retrofit all the existing libs.
Thin also supports other JS frameworks. Svelte docs can be found here https://thin.dev/docs/svelte We're focussing the communication on react mostly to keep things simple. The core of thin is independent of react.
I'm really interested in GPU-based compression / decompression.

Anyone know what the current SOTA GPU-based algorithms are, and why they haven't taken off?

Brotli has gotten browser support, so it seems to my naive self that a GPU-based algorithm is just waiting take over.
When your system is critical enough, those kind of prices are cheap for what you get.

I can't tell you about Okta, but there used to be a (now apparently gone) article by Nelson Elhague about their test parallelization infrastructure. Many thousands of pretty slow test ran for every Jenkins build, massively parallelized across machines to get an acceptable response time. At the time he wrote this, there was no modularization to speak of, so every test really had to run for every build. Very expensive, but there's a lot of value on getting the equivalent of integration-level tests for almost every critical system automatically.

As a monorepo grows, the technologies used have to change to make its disadvantages spiral out of control: Serious modularization of codebases, something like Bazel to make sure code isn't overbuilt, and a testing strategy that finds the right balance of finding problems and keeping expenses in control. Every company with a monorepo ends up walking that road, but the good part is that by the time you have a problem, you definitely have proof that your organization is in a situation where the problem is worth solving.

This is very different from, say, what I saw at a company that had Fred George as CTO, and was going all in on microservices with one customer and about a dozen engineers, all of which wrote in the same JVM language. At that point, all the work that avoids running too many tests is probably going to be a net loss, and even more so when one considers opportunity costs.
"Why the government would want to keep this secret is a good question"

That's an easy one - they always hide anything that could be controversial. This is definitely a hot topic in recent years.

"did people donating to the ACLU realize their money is being used to fight private citizen information requests & defend government secrecy?"

Due to the scope of the ACLU's actions and the variability of its members personal beliefs, it's almost guaranteed that they engage in things that some member disagree with.

Edit: why disagree?
>I don't think your sex is "private healthcare information."

Your sex is private information under GDPR. Why would the GDPR be stricter than than HIPAA in this case?

>Regarding the right to privacy, what's your take on the privacy rights of the (female) women who are being physically forced to house & sleep in a cell with males?

"But what about the children?" is never a good argument for taking the away the rights of others.
And the weird thing is when you try to say something without saying it, it makes it look like you’re ashamed of it. There’s nothing here to be ashamed of, so why not just say it clearly and succinctly?
I have come to accept that the only long-term solution to digital privacy must be in the form of technology. No amount of vigilance and democracy will be able to keep the wolves away forever.
The only thing I can figure out to do on these hybrids is to constrain system junk to the e-cores using a systemd directive, and put all my user session processes on the p-cores in the same fashion. Also necessary to boot with interrupts on the p-cores only, unless you want your nvme and ethernet device performance to be terrible. I'm not sure the complexity is worth it.
In theory (and in practice today), I’m strongly against this. However, I see a future where you will have to choose between mass surveillance or something close to extinction.

I might be wrong, but as technology progress, it seems almost inevitable that a single individual can do more and more damage. An amount of damage it took half an army to achieve a couple of hundred years ago, one individual can do today with the help of a bomb, a plane or a machine gun.

What happens the day that a few number of individuals can build a super virus (already possible for a few, but it will become more common), nuclear bomb or, heck, create a black hole in their basement? If that day comes, it doesn’t matter how strongly I hold the principle that everybody should have the right to privacy; I will gladly welcome our new AI surveillance overlords just to stay alive.
Those are good suggestions, thanks.
I think the argument in the Atlantic piece is roughly that these “one-off” exceptional blog posts justifying their decision is largely just-so stories with little principled reasoning. For example, this is their defense for why they opposed the justice nomination:

“Board members were clear that if the same concerns were raised about a Democratic Supreme Court nominee — inadequately investigated credible allegations of sexual assault supported by credible testimony and met by nominee testimony showing angry partisanship — we would similarly oppose that nominee.”

That’s a lot of qualifiers! Would they do the same for any potential crime? What about other crimes whose severity, from a social perspective, has changed in the other direction in the years since they were committed? For example, smoking weed was probably considered, contemporaneously, as less forgivable than making unwanted sexual advances. Should we try to dig into whether a nominee passed a blunt in college, since surely that’s a sign of poor past judgment?

By wading into these waters, the ACLU should have airtight argumentation, ideally proactive not reactive. It hasn’t offered much of that, which is why its integrity is being credibly questioned.
The problem with this is that it's the mindset of a frog being boiled. Just one more degree won't hurt me.
All the left wing press is calling for this, by running articles about how the far right is using encrypted chats to organize violence:

> Why right-wing extremists’ favorite new platform is so dangerous. Telegram’s lax content moderation and encrypted chats make it a convenient tool for extremists.

https://www.vox.com/recode/22238755/telegram-messaging-socia...

> In collaboration with anti-fascist research group the White Rose Society, the Guardian has tracked McLean’s activity through the rabbit warren of largely unregulated Telegram groups and found that he describes a vastly different version of his intentions.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/mar/26/where...

> Far-right groups move online conversations from social media to chat apps — and out of view of law enforcement

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/oct/14/telegram-war...

> White supremacists openly organize racist violence on Telegram, report finds

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/26/tech/white-supremacists-t...

> Are Private Messaging Apps the Next Misinformation Hot Spot? Telegram and Signal, the encrypted services that keep conversations confidential, are increasingly popular. Our tech columnists discuss whether this could get ugly.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/03/technology/personaltech/t...

> A report this week found that the messaging app had emerged as a central hub for several conspiracy movements espousing antisemitic tropes and memes, including QAnon, as well as others on the extreme right promoting violence.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/15/parler-...
Duke Student plagiarized Harvard 2014 commencement address
Sure, but people have to fight for their rights. The world doesn't swing towards freedom automatically. The rise of authoritarianism around the world (China, Russia, etc.) makes that clear.
I ended up getting into software (I saw it as infinite parts) and the 'rich kids' ended up becoming doctors and lawyers. I'm really happy I didn't end up like them, though, of course we do need doctors (lawyers: not so much).

Electronics was - and is - an engineers game and I personally don't care about whether someone came from a wealthy background or a poor one, jealousy is only going to get you so far, grit, perseverance and smarts will count for at least as much as pedigree in a somewhat meritocratic environment.

For the start-up lottery it's a different thing, there your parents will pretty much determine the outcome because if you are already rich you can take much bigger risks. But having a scope or wanting a scope so badly that you'll build your own (I recall hand-drawing the scale for my first VOM, and converting a small BW TV to a low frequency scope) isn't going to make huge difference and building your own test gear (at least, the basic versions of them) will give you a huge degree of insight into how it all works.

Fixing laptops doesn't require electronics knowledge beyond replacing units, much like being a car mechanic.

BTW, when I eventually did get a 'proper' scope (a nice dual beam 60 MHz Tek from a surplus store) I found that the difference between 'no scope' and 'crap scope' was a lot larger than between 'crap scope' and 'good scope'. I still have the Tek :)
Regardless, that isn't the ACLU's normal fight.
What are some examples of this? (Aside from the posted article, which is debated in other comments.)
I really hope this serves as an inflection point for the Effective Altruism crowd to pivot away from some of the weirder things they embraced in the past.

I love the idea of Effective Altruism and what they're trying to accomplish, but in practice it frequently turns into funding for intellectuals to sit around and pontificate about AI risk and other things, as opposed to actually going out into the world and doing altruistic acts.

Some of their previous grants are downright laughable, like spending $30K to distribute copies of rationalist Harry Potter fanfiction (Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality) despite the fact that it's freely available online. (Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/CJJDwgyqT4gXktq6g/... Ctrl+F "Harry Potter")

The EA movement has become a bit of a joke in many circles after making too many moves like this, so hopefully this serves as a wake-up call for them to start getting more practical.
I hope the FAA and EVTOL companies can work this out and these new rules don't significantly disrupt or destroy such a nascent industry. Of course the aircraft need to be safe but I hope there will still be a clear path for them to become fully certified.
Of all the possible examples to choose, I would not have guessed a classic for/each would be at issue.

How is that for loop not expressing what it means? for is used to iterate over something. There are legitimate reasons to choose for even when forEach is available.

Does this not express what I mean?

if (amount > balance)
return “insufficient_funds”;

Chances are, I’ll put this in a method anyway, and that’s what a language enables me to do - to create meaning that is contextual to my program.

Abstraction can help simplify complex problems, and that’s what it is good at. But when literally everything is abstracted away, it becomes harder to reason about what the program is doing without also learning about what the particular abstraction does (e.g. implicitly handling negative numbers, etc).

A well implemented standard library can be a joy to use, and some people choose languages for this reason. Some languages very intentionally provide a very lightweight standard library, and that’s just fine. All of this shouldn’t absolve the developer from understanding some of the very basic constructs of the language they choose - a lack of which will lead to bugs and vulnerabilities.

If I choose JavaScript (or it’s chosen for me), it behooves me to understand the basics vs. farming this out to some node package that just made my app harder to reason about and vulnerable to supply chain attacks for essentially no value.