skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Alabama is an interesting look, because of metro Atlanta, metro Birmingham, Huntsville in the North - and then the blue belt that is the Piedmont.
> FOURTH: We need to abolish the two party system via ballot reform and move to Ranked-Choice or approval voting. This will weaken the two parties, allow citizens to vote /for/ someone rather than against, and will be a more accurate gauge of popular sentiment.

Yes please. The current system is completely dysfunctional.
Been using Memex since the old UI, (don't remember the version) and I would highly recommend this.
I agree with your sentiment, but immature name calling weakens the effectiveness of your position
Yea, that's the problem. Our government is dysfunctional and unable to pass laws even if they have widespread support.
Why do we need geographic representation? People that eat everyone’s tax dollars and contribute very little to the economy should not have an order of magnitude in voting advantages just because they decide to move to places no one else would. Those might have been worthy incentives during the frontier days but are completely unnecessary now.
I'm not sure what you mean - make what a law?
That’s not a systemic bias against Democrats, that’s an intention design so that small states and large states have more balance of power.
> My personal opinion is that polarization has pushed both sides to be completely antagonistic towards each other.

This opinion is about as uninformed as it can be. Currently the US is run by "moderate" Democrats, and extremist Republicans; the Right cries wolf every time the moderates do anything, and the moderates capitulate. If we look at American politics through your lens it makes zero sense.

We no longer live in a democracy and haven't really since 1978 with Buckley v. Valeo; increased by the recent supreme court decision in favor of Senator Cruz. There's a strong disconnect between what voters want and what happens in the halls of power, and it is increasing. The reality is that if you can donate to a senator enough you get "democracy".

Not to be too hyperbolic, but for the average person we really do live in a plutocracy.
That's easy to say for a 1-person shop, but when other people are depending on the job, too, it's a lot harder.
In case anyone is curious, the South Park Archives fandom page on Randy Marsh has a section entitled "Alcoholism": https://southpark.fandom.com/wiki/Randy_Marsh#Alcoholism
> That says nothing about their humanity.

To you. But that's your interpretation.

> even if it were, that says how God created Adam, not how God created their children.

When one turns to The Bible for an answer about when conception becomes life, this is the clearest answer given. Arguing that it's not a clear enough answer supports my point.

> Jeremiah 1:5

> > Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart

You can still interpret that as development happening in the womb (not life yet) prior to the event that defines life (birth). I personally find that a clearer reading. Otherwise there is no reason to talk about birth as a second event.

> > As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.

Now The Bible has contradicted itself. Until now, life began at breath, but now we have a fetus leaping for joy.

We still have an unanswered question: when does the soul enter the body? At first breath? When the fetus is developed enough to move? When the heart develops enough to beat? When the blastocyst sticks to the uterine wall? When the zygote starts multiplying? When the DNA from the sperm is copied next to the DNA from the egg?

Was it just this instance that the fetus became a living person (with a soul) early?

None of these questions is answered clearly enough that I would be willing to base the law on it.

> floor dust and burnt grain will not cause a woman to miscarry.

I didn't say it would, the book did.

> Lying about the truth in front of the Truth Himself is grounds for punishment, but from God alone.

Is that a threat? How petty. But wasn't it The Bible itself lying here and not me? So you are using the book to threaten... the book?

Have fun with that. Just don't expect me to play along.
Ok, there's more than I knew about. "We found 12 eligible studies in 443 identified records, involving 6736 patients, mean age 71.4 ± 2. We found a small benefit in cognitive outcomes in patients treated with Aβ-mAbs."

So there's a small benefit to using antibody treatment. To me suggests that Abeta is a good target, but antibodies are not a sufficient Rx.

Have you seen a brain at BRAAK stage 4-6?
Not to be harsh, but who cares what they think? Other major religions differ, and flat out contradict these viewpoints. It's a question of someone's religious doctrine, not federal law. We don't favor a particular religious viewpoints in the US - that is explicitly in the Constitution.
miranda rights

I have some bad news for you. SCOTUS blew that one up yesterday. <sad trombone>
Roe v Wade didn't argue that. You can argue that independently if you wish - but it was not a justification for it.

Also, people who oppose Abortion believe that this is the government _taking away_ a life. Which would also be at odds with the constitution.
Voice calls have the same issue. Most leased lines and VoIP providers let you set your own P-Asserted-Identity header which can be used to spoof caller ID to anything you want.
Ideally I would write my code in a declarative way and the compiler would figure it out. Second to that, the language can allow interior mutability so I can optimize.
Pretty cool!

That's offensively fast by 2022 standards.
I'm seeing more services using email for 2FA nowadays.

SMS is actually easier, with email I have to go into the outlook app.
> But abortion couldn't be one of those rights because abortion was banned in some states.

Abortion was not, in fact, banned when that amendment was written. The first full ban was in New York in 1829. [1]

Besides, the legal issue is not whether abortion is one of those rights per se, but rather whether privacy is an implicit right (almost certainly), and whether family planning (abortion, yes, but also contraception & choice of sex partner) is a sufficiently private decision that the government is restrained from regulating it.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States#....
I think there is huge question of right of mother as well. Lets take hypothetical situation where someone forcibly mates two humans together in such a way that removing other would kill that other. Per anti-abortion people they would have to live together forever. Which seems bit sick...
No, the Senate represents each state equally. Everyone seems to confuse the Senate and the House of Representatives and what each represents.
To deprive someone of life is a crime, hence, someone who believes life begins at conception is advocating against unlawful killing, and crimes are certainly the purview of the state and society.
That's a straw man. Only 6% of Americans think birth control should be illegal, https://today.yougov.com/topics/health/articles-reports/2022....
> Everyone knows the rules going in.

Does knowing that a system is undemocratic make it more democratic in some way?
I don't want to be tinfoil about this, but I suspect there is maybe some more corporate politic stuff happening here than Zach lets on (and rightfully so). Zachtronics is wholly owned by Alliance Media Holdings. Alliance is run primarily by two people Jay Gelman (CEO) and Nathan Gelman (Director of Publishing + Stuido Operations). Last year, Nathan Gelman expressed some real crazy zionist opinions on Twitter during the most recent wave of the Israel-Palestine conflict. I didn't screenshot it, but you can sort of see some of the wake of it by searching his account name on twitter and seeing the replies to the now deleted tweet:

https://twitter.com/search?q=nathangelman&src=typed_query

Nathan also pretty consistently likes orthodox jewish content on Twitter, which, to be clear, isn't bad on its own, but with that plus the deleted tweet during the latest I-P conflict, thing I think it's maybe safe to say that Nathan, likely Zach's direct report as he is the "Director of Publishing and Studio Operations", has got some STRONG political beliefs. What I SUSPECT is that Zach probably just got tired of dealing with that and, given the ownership structure, has to "end" Zachtronics to step away from them.

It's tenuous evidence and maybe doesn't mean anything, but the only other point that makes me think Alliance is a not-great-company to be under, is that on the episode of Eggplant show where they interview Bravery Network Online creators (other studio/game Alliance published), The BNO people said that "the legal issues that came up on the game were some of the worst things our lawyer said they ever encountered". (Don't have the exact timestamp but here's the episode)

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/bravely-replacing-rand...

Again, maybe nothing, but maybe something. idk.
Hands on Review of the Hisense A9 4G E Ink Android 11 Smartphone
I still wish Rust had a way to express decltype tho. `impl Trait` doesn't always work, and when it doesn't it's quite frustrating.
You're conveniently leaving out one major concern of the pro-choice side: the bodily autonomy of lives that are uncontroversially people.

I also think you're dismissing privacy too quickly. How much privacy would you give up in the name of saving lives?
So how it operates becomes subjected to the whims of the people that are running Washington? Has the author seen DC in the past 20+ years?

No thanks.
Not an American so curious. Isnt this exactly the kind of thing that the president can change with an Executive Order?
Wow it sounds like we shouldn't be forbidding people from voting at all, why the hell would we make specific carve outs. Its absolutely absurd, almost like the people who wrote the legislation wanted it that way
In the United States, a political moderate typically acts according to principles that the extremes of the large political parties don’t prioritize. They are only in the middle because we use a one-dimensional political spectrum in our discourse.
Not everyone is that smart.
>> Even Ruth Bader Ginsberg was on record saying that the decision was flawed!

> She was very much of the opinion that legislatively it should have been codified as a right.

These positions are not in conflict, and seem to be supported with quotes:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2022/05/06/ruth-bader...
I’ve passed wrong type of arguments to Python functions and assumed type of the return value wrong countless of times. That has never happened in Haskell. I don’t know how to reconcile my experience with the statement that there’s no evidence that strong typing reduces bugs.
I view these games similarly. I don't think anything has helped me in my day-to-day decision making at work more than the time I've spent planning and designing my factory(s) in Satisfactory.
@danluu: How do you find time to write a detailed post like this outside your day job?
I lived for a year in a university apartment for faculty with my father, who was a prof. At the top of the residence building was an observatory with a 10" telescope, now upgraded to 16".

As a kid living there I was often hanging around the building and if the telescope was being operated, sometimes they would let you look, or pick out fun targets to look at. I'll never forget the first times seeing Saturn and Jupiter.

https://www.brandonu.ca/observatory/gallery/
It's a lot more complex than that actually. With Signalwire for example you can rent Canadian (and US) numbers at 0.2/m that work well with surprisingly many services, but not all. In a similar fashion you always find the right company to use/abuse any service that asks for a number. You won't get around the internet with a single cheap VOIP number tho. Plus there are providers with more or less perfect Sims but they are expensive.

There are also services that are specialized on providing the right number for a one time fee. This usually works well, but more often than not destroys future account security (they all will give numbers out again, not relevant what they claim)

I could literally write a book about my life without a 'real' phone number.
the search function seems to work at the first of these links ( https://seop.illc.uva.nl/ )
Bill Mensch and Chuck Peddle - familiar names indeed.
Although it was never promised, I enjoyed Eliza and was hopeful of another visual novel through Zachtronics + Burns. Hopefully something in a similar spirit comes out in the future.
If your representatives in Congress would get off their butts and actually legislate, the court's "view" on the topic would be moot.

The fact is, lazy hand wringing house and senate members have been dodging these issues (more than just abortion) and passing them off to the court system for fifty years, or more.

They get good pay, they get good benefits, they should do their stinking jobs!

This all ultimately falls to the ineffectual legislative branch.
> I'd argue that where welfare of two beings is affected, you need to consider the rights of both.

About 5,000 people die in the US annually while waitlisted for a kidney transplant; they are deemed medically eligible and a donation would give them more quality adjusted life years, but there is not a willing donor available.

Consider, pairwise, the rights of two particular people: a person on the waitlist who will die unless they receive a kidney but who is below the cutoff line; and a healthy adult who lives next door to the sick person, who has two kidneys, and who could relatively safely donate one of them.

The law currently forbids the sick person from paying the healthy person money in exchange for their kidney. This prevents coercion[1] which could endanger the health of the healthy person.

In other words, the law prioritizes the healthy person infinitely and does not prioritize the welfare of the sick person.

Do you think this setup is correct? Or should we make legal changes that would balance the rights of sick people against those of healthy people? Under your proposed framework, should we sometimes allow sick people who have money to pay healthy people for their organs, buying a chance to live?

[1] Some discussion here: https://www.npr.org/transcripts/698563807
What the fuck am I supposed to do, then? Carry an AR-15 every time I take my wife to the gynecologist?
>I think hardly anyone would say that

On the contrary, I think it would be very popular to say that someone who directly caused the crash out of negligence should be required to give blood to save the victim.

You're referring to a version of the violinist argument: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Defense_of_Abortion#The_viol...

Your version is actually pretty similar to a normal pregnancy (the woman brought about the pregnancy through her actions and now has to decide whether its morally okay to stop the babies' use of her body).

I think it's very hard to justify abortion along these lines and might be easier just to try to show that the fetus is non-human and doesn't have rights.
this may come across as emotional, and I suspect it is, so feel free to downvote me. but that person, dead or alive, is completely non-grata to me. she is a big part to blame for allowing the court to become so heavily conservative. if she had stood down in Obama's early years, when she was asked to, it would be a 5-4 split, and a good chance that they wouldn't have had the balls to follow through with this
I love how they handled sorting in Python: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timsort. Good for vast majority of use-cases + formal verification.
I do like sporting t-shirts and hoodies with the 'Kirkland' logo because I like a good deal.
UPDATE: The decision is 231 pages. https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/24/read-supreme-court-...
> I would buy clothes with no distinctive marks if I could find them.

Where do you shop and how do you dress? Most "corporate wear" mall brands (think Banana Republic, j-crew, brooks bros) sell clothes without logos. If you're into boring casual, Target sells racks of plain colored t-shirts and pants.

Seconding uniqlo, especially if you're on the thinner side. Indochino is great too, but can lean a little flashy.
> What I witnessed was no less than a 45 minute diatribe on the dangers of abortion, casting various aspersions (ad hominem) on any political leader not on board with new political agenda of the Catholic Church.

A typical Catholic Mass lasts less than one hour. Most of the Mass follows a fixed, prescribed set of prayers and readings, that have nothing to do with politics. In the middle there's a sermon, that usually lasts about 15 minutes, that might include references to news or to politics.

Either you ended up at a very atypical mass, and by very atypical I'd say borderline heretic, or you don't remember well.

> with new political agenda of the Catholic Church.

New? Like it or not, the position of the Catholic Church on abortion has been extraordinarily consistent through the centuries.
No, you're not missing anything. The author of the article just suffers from a naive and simplistic misunderstanding of the SMPP protocol and the mobile grid.
And we have representatives who are literally pro-death. Some have said no exception for ectopic pregnancies and some have clearly stated that there is no exception for the life of the mother.
That's not a systematic bias. The senate was DESIGNED from the beginning to be immune to population differences: each state gets two senators, regardless of population. It was one of the compromises that convinced the small states to join the union in the first place.
On the server, less ecosystem than OCaml. Long compile times. A big part of its "market share" is taken by Rust instead.
I find TIS-100 and shenzhen io frustrating because of how limiting they are. There is a max line count per chip and the circuit board is very cramped. I actually finished Exapunks because I felt the language was expressive enough to not be as frustrating and the line limit is a lot higher than needed.
While somewhat true at the national level, the issue is actually pushed back to the states. Their legislatures are democratically elected.
TIS-100 and Shenzen had that fun little bit of hacking using the docs. Or just fiddling with it and finding that one instruction that had enough of a side effect where it could let you shave off two other instructions. Where you could get that really fun rush of removing 1 cycle from something. It is a skill I do not get to use much anymore as most things are fairly cookie cutter.
By no means am I arguing that those at the extremes are always right. I'm saying that if you have no other principles than 'compromise' then you will simply let yourself be pulled around by the most powerful force in a go-along-to-get-along fashion.

Moderates are simply conflict averse and don't consider that there is anything worth fighting for, ever. Unscrupulous extremists rely on them as a strategic buffer, because they are easy to manipulate. Neville Chamberlain was a moderate.
Thanks for the responses. I hope it was useful to go through. Yeah, I think the salient points are that the sid is not all 0 but mostly 0 in one case and Fermat's Little Theorem basically make the math work out. I suspect the authors thought of this clever attack because they were already thinking about fault attacks on RSA where perhaps similar concepts come up.

I predict with some confidence this will be made into a CTF soon if it hasn't already so we may as well work on the code now ;-)
Now, which is more important life or liberty and property of owner of the host body in pregnancy. And if life is is more important should we force organ transplants? After all at least there is lot of spare kidneys around... Maybe half a lung is also workable.
The child is not a child nor a person. Not even the Catholic church considers a fetus a person, nor the government (as you can't get a tax deduction for your fetus). I used to be fairly religious and godfathered a couple of kids. Neither of them were baptized in the womb though. Or maybe I had the 'wrong' religion?

If you think the fetus is a person, then don't get an abortion. It's super easy. And if your fetus is killing you, then feel free to die for your beliefs.
Fedora 37 Looks to Ship with Stratis Storage 3.1 Support
My case is more biomechanical. Running will decrease hunger much more than cycling or the gym as it gives the stomach much less rest.
Explain this:

"The right to abortion is not explicitly defined in the Constitution, and therefore does not exist."

"The right to _purchase_ firearms is not explicitly defined in the Constitution, but somehow must also exist, because how could you bear arms without it?"

The sad reality is that this shit is all just twisted to convenience.

Why did Thomas exclude interracial marriage as a state decision, while calling out same-sex marriage as being a state decision?

Why do several Supreme Court Justices state that they are originalists, and the Constitution is sacrosanct, when the people who wrote it said that it wasn't, and was to be "reviewed and updated to the needs of the times as a living document"?
Marbury v Madison established judicial review, meaning that the courts can strike down unconstitutional law. It does not give the courts legislative ability.

Maybe you're using a fuzzier definition of "law", but there was never any federal legislation that guaranteed access to abortion. That is what we need.
People Make Games made a video about this Infiniminer/Minecraft story and they interviewed Zach Barth. When Microsoft was reviewing the 2.5B Minecraft deal, Zach was working for Microsoft and was on those meetings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__Nq2vNcpIo
quite a bit, the votes are likely there to overturn those things as well.

what thomas did is a little gauche, the court generally avoids opining on cases that aren't actually in front of them because the facts and specifics of the case matter, but, yeah, the votes are probably there, thomas just likes to say the quiet part out loud.

who do you think is going to vote against it? thomas, who has outright stated he's a yes? kavanaugh, who said roe was "settled law"? Barrett, the actual handmaiden cultist? Alito?
I have frequently participated in an extreme version of this discussion.

Think about a situation where your race was being genocided in a neighboring country. The fastest way to stop it would be to engage in war. Now if you lose, genocide goes on, you have no recourse and your country is vulnerable to exploitation.

Instead, you can use economic levers. Maybe wait for your armed forces to be strong enough to go to war. Wait for winter and destroy food reserves. Maybe strike a deal to have your race only be 'persecuted' instead of genocided. Maybe fund militia instead.

All of these are suboptimal moderate outcomes. All of these lead to some loss of life or huge losses of freedom.for the people you want to save. But it avoids the worst case outcome. Majority of your race stil lives.

Moderates aren't spineless. Rathe, they understand that their agency is limited and you pull levers that are within said agency. If you try to climb a mountain that's too tall, it will lead to your demise.

Idealists want to be olympic gymnasts at 30. Moderates make peace with being a Yoga teacher. That's not spinelessness, that's wisdom.
That is not my definition of mostly fine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks

Also even if there weren't tons of holes to poke in the philosophical argument of "what is a human life? / what makes human life valuable?", life isn't sacred. We kill prisoners, send soldiers overseas, or let people die as a result of preventable diseases (COVID).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life#United_States

The question for a utilitarian is when is it ethical to terminate a fetus? Weighing the costs of an unwanted child on society, the cost of life if the mother dies, the cost of preventing back-alley abortions, the cost of her future as a mother if she suffers reproductive damage and cant have kids in the future even if she wants to, etc.