skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You didn't actually answer my question. It sounds like you might be confused on what eminent domain is. Eminent domain provides the Federal government with the power to take private property and convert it into public use. There is no single piece of land here. This is not only not land it's literally water that flows across the land. Further it's not private property. The Colorado River basin covers 250,000 square is almost 1,400 miles long. Not only do seven states depend on it but Mexico also has rights to it under The Mexican Water Treaty of 1944. To compare it to appropriating land for a mall is absurd.
To be fair, we’ll never know all the things Jesus said since it’s not like he wrote an autobiography or anything. All records of him were selected and written by other people, who may or may not have been comprehensive.
Build a PinePhone App with Zig and Zgt
Unless it's young life that's already living and happens to be impregnated via rape? Then fuck her, right? Force her to give birth?

And exactly how does banning an abortion when the pregnancy is not viable for any number of reasons (molar pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, anencephaly) help anyone? Why are we forcing women to carry dead fetus's around in their bodies?

Because that's what a total ban on abortion does. It also makes IVF illegal if "life begins at conception".

The notion that the only abortions happening are happy couples who find out they're pregnant, tell their friends and family, plan parties, and then in some sinister plot months later wake up and casually decide "you know what, let's just kill it" is absurd.

Not all life is equal, and not all human life is equal. If you were driving down the street and two buildings were on fire, a IVF clinic with viable implanted eggs, and a preschool full of living children, you would 100% of the time try and rescue the preschoolers if you only had time for one. The idea that all human life down to a recently implanted egg has the same value as an 11 year old girl who's been raped and wants an abortion is an untenable position.
That's incorrect, on several counts.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2690604/

> Quickening, the point at which a woman feels life, was used to determine fetal viability.

That's 16-20 weeks, a far more liberal standard than the bans going into practice now.

> By the end of 1868, 30 to the then 37 states had passed laws restricting abortion.

That's not all states.
No, it was just a cheap shot. "You know that discussion about AI sentience? That's stupid, talk instead about AI bias". They got nothing to say about AI sentience.
Also J Crew. They have great t-shirts made from actual cotton instead of plastic blends.
That post describes a certain random process of wealth redistribution.

It is not descriptive of social reality; and it is also not the desirable social reality. So, I don't quite see how it is useful.
My understanding is that abortion is a major social justice issue for Christians. So you would want to engage with them on their social justice priorities and strategies, finding overlap, and so forth. At least that’s how I approach these dialogues regarding policies of lower levels of government.
Roe vs Wade was the very first case we studied in first-year jurisprudence at law school 20-odd years ago, _half a world away_, in Australia.

Devastating to see this outcome. Reinforces the sense that we’ve somehow ended up in a deeply weird timeline.
Abortion not being murder is clearly an opinion a great deal of people disagree on. Kind of the crux of the issue.
> The Court is a counterbalance against the tyranny of the majority.

This is like an 8th grade textbook understanding of US government. It doesn't actually work that way.
I mean… let’s not act like the 2nd amendment is interpreted in any serious way.

The Supreme Court invented a personal right to bear arms from a 250 year old amendment during my lifetime and is now not only ignoring words that are in there but adding words that aren’t

Anyone trying to apply logic to this is just facilitating nonsense because these decision are based in ideology not logic. Don’t launder it for them.
We've started Digger 1.5 years ago, and launched it last summer. It was well received but didn't exactly take off as we hoped. Clearly needed more work. We have also realised that as a startup of 2 at the time we were trying to do way too many problems at once, it is simply impossible to build a full-featured platform with a tiny team.

We then launched a number of more focused products, all powered by the same Digger engine. 2 did better than the other 5 or so. Lemon was an alternative UI for AWS; Alicorn was a multi-cloud offering for containers. Those launches helped us realise that some of the core architectural assumptions we had were wrong. We also needed to rework the UX because people were getting confused by the split between Services and Environments, as well as separation of Infrastructure and Software deployments.

So we got back to the drawing board. We have radically simplified the UX, removed the confusing parts, introduced keyless AWS connection with narrowed down permission scope and many other things. The question remained - which is the use case people care about most? To answer it we started launching smaller products again, all powered by Digger engine with tweaked configurations.

Many people liked AWS Bootstrap. It allows you to quickly configure your AWS account to run frontend, backend and a database of your choice. Quite literally bootstrap.

Another thing that was well received was Terragen. We made it all about auto-generation of terraform. As soon as the user connects their AWS account they can export generated Terraform into their GitHub.

With OpsFlow we took the learnings from AWS Bootstrap and Terragen and made the UI even simpler. It no longer bothers the user with optional stuff, it is all moved to the new Settings page. And it's centered around 2 simple types of building blocks - Apps and Resources.

OpsFlow is the closest we got so far to making something people want. Still a long way to go though :)
Many people believe we should be giving animals much more protections exactly because of their sentience.
they make mounts now where this is exactly what you do which is nice when the device can do longer exposure than you can hold still. they are adjustable so you can use it for a plethora of different devices.

They're great for use at star parties. You can keep switching out eyepieces (a common thing) to get the view you want for whatever is being viewed. Then each person can get a pic on their device. It makes them much more engaged especially since the CMOS sensors can start to pick out colors that the human eye can't see.
For self hosting do you hand-manage accounts in Mattermost or use some form of SSO?
I have a link for you!

> A group of 13 research assistants (11 men and 2 women) were recruited for a trip around the world. They traveled to 355 major cities across 40 countries. In each city, they visited banks, theaters, hotels, police stations, and other public spaces and turned in a “lost wallet,” which they claimed to have found on the street, to a nearby employee.

https://gizmodo.com/researchers-lost-17-000-wallets-in-hundr...
Equal protection is not substantive due process. Gay marriage & interracial marriage are on far firmer ground because of the right to "equal protection of the laws". Not that the conservative wing won't try but they're going to have to torture logic to do it.

Substantive due process is far shakier. It's Justices deciding what rights they think people should have and then working backwards as best they can to justify them. The back to back gun rights & abortion rulings lays it bare. There's just no intellectually honest way of finding a right to an abortion but not a right to bear arms.

IMHO, the substantive due process was the wrong way about this. It was a shaky foundation and as more rights were found the logic got shakier. They should have used the right to peacefully assemble and based most of these substantive due process cases on them.
There are people who would dispute whether there's a helpless minority whose rights are being protected by this Court's decision. You can disagree on the resolution, but don't handwave away the almost unique conflict of rights abortion presents between the bodily autonomy of the mother and the right to life of the child. You'll convince nobody by proceeding so dishonestly.

I'm not about to dignify such an obvious bad-faith argument as is represented by your parody of originalism.
Countries need to be able to do this, you know, to disconnect all printers and screens in Russia during war.
Have you read (or "read"; I don't want to be responsible for your death lol) the Texas GOP platform[1] for this year? The first sentence in the "Homosexuality and Gender Issues" section is "Homosexuality is an abnormal lifestyle choice". And they follow it up with "we oppose any criminal or civil penalties against those who oppose homosexuality".

They are rearing for another battle in the gay rights culture war.

----------

[1] https://texasgop.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/6-Permanent-...
Or ‘mom and pop’, which is even more derogatory (at least here in Silicon Valley).
"The question of whether machines can think is about as relevant as the question of whether submarines can swim."

The debate is about our labels and definitions not about how the world works. Basically it's useless.
I wonder how many voted republican in spite of abortion because of Roe vs. Wade. Given what happened today this could hurt republican support because it makes abortion a more direct election issue. I wouldn't necessarily just assume all republicans are pro-life.
> Jesus was Jewish and fetuses aren't considered persons under Jewish law.

A counterargument would be that the Jewish law does not address whether they are persons, but rather focuses on the fine being the solution to the matter. The law also only addresses if the incident should occur by accident (the miscarriage being a side effect), whereas deliberately inducing a miscarriage was not included.

EDIT: Adding more information (also due to reply timers):

@DangItBobby The verse in question:

"When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined, according as the woman’s husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life."

A few notes.

1. The law only addresses unintentional injury, and does not address intentional injuries.

2. The law does not specify "injury." It could mean an injury that occurs to the pregnant woman, the unborn child, or both. One way to interpret the passage is that if the woman is caused to have an early delivery, then the penalty is a fine, but any further injury to the child is covered under the lex talionis law of “an eye for an eye.”

3. The law actually calls the fetus a "child," and takes foregranted that the woman "is with child" which pretty clearly shows that the personhood was taken foregranted.
The Total Perspective Vortex, it extrapolates the entirety of the universe and shows you your relationship to it, powered by a small piece of fairy cake.

But, in reality, he's just this guy, you know.
I'm not sure if this is subtle satire, or not.

The picture presented is very convenient living, but is it life?
> Like, are you serious?

> Acceptance of gay marriage is being forced on everyone

Wow. I'm sorry that my marriage to my loving wife is such a problem for you.

Imagine saying that again but replacing gay with Black or interracial.
There are many conservatives in power who are lying, but there more people who live next door to you who genuinely believe it.
Lightning is Bitcoin. It’s trading state changes of sats between channels.

Is a Casascius coin Bitcoin? A paper wallet? If I give you a casacius coin, have I given your Bitcoin? Lightning is analogous to being able to fractionally trade a Casacius coin.
"Just vote with the people that won't ban abortion" in insufficient in a system with an undemocratic Senate. The Senate controls who gets on the Supreme Court, and it requires 60 votes to advance legislation.
But suddenly upon birth these same children need no societal protection?

This is a straw man argument. No one is arguing children need no societal protection. Look at the push for Head Start under Bush, for example.

https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/infocus/earlychi...
Then we should invent a new type of sentience, no? Should we mix human sentience with AI sentience? Isn't the border should be well defined to avoid bigger and ethical problems in the future?
>books like the bible even instruct you on how to perform one

Not really, that depends on which translation of Numbers 5 you're looking at. It's not clear at all that the "Ordeal of Bitter Water" was supposed to induce a miscarriage.
This is a good point - it's how the Texas law was written.

And not just travel - self managed abortions are cheap, safe, and the most common of all abortions nowadays. They can just mail you the pills, and its literally safer than ibuprofen.

You're going to see a lot of cases about "Can [provider, citizen, org] in [Legal_State, Legal Country] provide [medical care, advice, money, other_help] to [person, organization] in [Illegal_State]"
A slightly different situation, but it reminds me of the classic election-day crossword, which was cleverly constructed to support either outcome:
http://www.alaricstephen.com/main-featured/2017/7/3/the-clin...
That’s the bad faith part. This has nothing to do with precedence and the current Supreme Court will do what it wants and invent new and incoherent forms of logic as needed to do so.
I mean isn't that the will of the people in that state? If you live in a state that will be affected, it could certainly be a problem for you. If you don't then you are wanting to subvert their democratic process, no?

Imagine if it was something else like marijuana legalization and whatnot.
I avoid takes on my mortgage too (here in the UK). Surely the point of the rule of law is that the law applies equally, right? Or is people being rich and having rights too much to bear.

Sure, well off people should pay more tax, that's fine. Advocate for tax reform, sure. But I find this kind of mean spirited jabbing at basic rights just such a miserable attitude. It's not as if this particular point really makes any meaningful difference anyway.

It's not even got anything to do with the rest of the article at all, which by the way is grossly factually incorrect. Home ownership in the USA isn't not a "small share of Americans", home ownership rates in the US are at 65%. Vast swathes of Americans do participate in the investment markets through their pensions. US pension funds now account for about 60% of assets in the P22 largest markets, and pension funds account for about 1/4 of all assets under management globally.
Why is this right to privacy exclusive to activities around reproduction? Where else do you enjoy this implied right of privacy? Why not quote the direct text that provides this right to privacy if it's so clear and obvious?
why does the entire thing need to be without a company?

User A posts on Twitter that they are crowdfunding an idea or project. Users X which may be one, two, or thousands are willing to support and pay for that. Same could have occurred on FB, WhatsApp, Discord or anything, none of those apps are facilitating the exchange.
After reading a bit about Austin this morning (but before this news) I was browsing zillow + google maps, trying to get a feel for the city. Basically I'm tired of winter. It's a total non-starter now though.
I'll have to dig up some stats, but it's been a consistent pattern in my reading on the subject over the past 20 years.

I'm not talking about 2019 to 2020/21 pandemic migration that your article covers. Those years will obviously be an outlier. I'm talking about long-term demographic trends over the past 100+ years.

Edit:
A very quick google before a series of calls today: https://www.brookings.edu/research/despite-the-pandemic-narr...

https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.25.3.173

It's more difficult to find stats going back 150 years quickly, but the visualized data I've seen on that is pretty striking.
Btw you can actually write loops and mutate things with the ref keyword. It’s usually much clearer than writing a loop recursively but not everyone uses it.

The impossibility to return early in a function does create really convoluted code though. I’m wondering if there’s a solution to that in FL
The old testament also banned eating shrimp and that people working on Saturday should be stoned, so I kind of see lots of cherry picking here. It's also highly ambiguous if the fetus should be considered a human being or property (see Exodus), but that's not the point.

The core point was that most of the message and teachings of Jesus were clearly, unambiguously about social justice and charity, and yet modern Christians care way more about Old Testament moral rules than the actual Christian message, what Jesus clearly cared about the most, the last, the meek, the poor.

The modern Christian votes for racist ultra-rich that only profess hate towards everyone that's different from them in order to get abortion and gay marriage banned. That's the worst corruption of the Christian message possible, in my opinion, and makes those people phony believers to my eyes. They use their as an indentitarian way to distinguish them from the others, which is absolutely at odds with the ecumenical message of Jesus Christ.

Care about the young not being able to start families first, about those who are in need and can't make their ends meet, and then take care of the rest.
That's what happenes when you are not tied with US political corectness BS and can say things as they are, one of the few things I liked about China as well, which is similar int his aspect, people have no problem to say harsh truth (unless it's politics), though on the other hand they often lie about irelevant things.
What I find fulfilling doesn't pay anywhere near as much as corporate SaaS. I am sure some are passionate about corporate digital security, but very few.
USA... Abortion illegal - Gov says you must have the kid. Guns legal - The biggest killer of kids in USA. From the country that self-proclaims as the greatest this is a low.
Thomas literally wrote in concurrence that this decision also implies that Lawrence, Obergefell, and Griswold are on the chopping block next.
But OOP was specifically created to model real world objects and their relationships. If this article is saying OOP doesn't do that very well and we should not think in those terms, what's it good for?
We are made out of matter but not matter “just like a computer”.

It’s pretty clear the matter that I am compromised of has very different properties.

The matter I am made of let’s me move to a new place, dance, and seek necessity. A computer is only aware of what we program it to do. I can see blue without having a word to describe it. Very unlike a computer stuff.

Go put a Thinkpad in a jungle hut on battery power. Come back after a month. It will be dead and not have even tried to survive.

Your conceptual model is way too vague.

We are from being just like a computer. Frankly I think you should probably shut yours off for a while.
Does it stand to reason that other humans are sentient? The opposite view is the root of solipsism. What if an AI in the future acts in a way that you would expect from someone sentient?
If AI are deemed "moral patients" they are entitled to protection, just like animals and little kids. If they are deemed "moral agents" then they also carry responsibility.
Who cares what you’re arguing? It’s about what you’re doing, and the only thing that conservatives get out of bed for is restricting abortion. Where’s the massive conservative push for easing the burdens of child care through social support?
Conservative populism is usually DOA. They are very bad at creating social programs.
The federal government cannot pass a law that restricts the state and local governments from passing anti-abortion legislation. The only remedy is a constitutional amendment, and there have never been the votes for that.
"There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home." - CEO of Digital Equipment Corporation, leading computer maker, in 1977. Microsoft was founded in 1975.

https://www.google.com/search?q=ken+olson+quote+personal+com...
For all of the "freedom" we have as Americans, there are many areas much of the rest of the western world does things better. Not getting political, but just factually... check out gun violence statistics next.
Move to Europe. If you work and/or live in the US your taxes are supporting this system.
> When liberal justices are in charge, they unconstitutionally force their will onto the people.

One person having a right to do something is not forcing it on anyone else.

> place the power back in the hands of the people.

A majority of "the people" do not agree with this decision. In fact, they were appointed by someone who did not have majority support, by a party that represents a minority of the actual population.

> The problem was activist judges making the Roe decision in the first place.

You just got a handful of judges making decisions based on their regligious beliefs. Please explain to me how you see that as different than an original decision?
I’m with octaron on this one. No disrespect, but a bit of hand waving and big claims.

I’m kindly invoking Hitchens razor, here
What are the implications for IVF?
AI Makes Strides in Virtual Worlds More Like Our Own
One could argue that every living human — all of us — are a product of generations of rape and unwanted children whose lives no one cared about, who survived to have their own. Civilized humans who enjoyed enforced women’s rights are a laughably short segment of all human history.
Everyone is acting like this banned abortion, which it didn't. It is up to the state you live in. If you don't like the state's laws, then move.

If you don't want to move, then when you get pregnant, go to a state where it is legal.

American's cannot be inconvenienced. These 1st world problems are terrible.
> what Jesus clearly cared about the most, the last, the meek, the poor.

You could say it is a matter of perspective, as to the Christian, the unborn child is the most last, the most meek, the most poor, and the most helpless compared to any person including the mother, and thus logically requires precedence.

Is the fetus a child or is it not? If it is not, then the mother should take precedence. If it is, in fact, a child, then it must be protected as such.

@timbit42 Not true. https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=31863293&goto=threads%...