skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
INAL but think the license is version controlled along with the code
From Sweden, Stockholm, can say a solid NO. my coworker lost his backpack (wallet, iPad and Mac) in the university computer room (card key required to get in) by just leaving it for 5min under summer HPC course. When we managed to track the mac down (through cloud & GPS) it was 40km away, moving in a car.

You can usually ask someone to keep an eye out while you go to the restroom/refill coffee and most people are happy to help, but you need your due diligence
Communication by Thermal Noise: Networks with Low Power Consumption
> To the people == legislative branch.

This is the first time I've seen that assertion.
> hasn't been recorded on the blockchain yet

That's not a very useful distinction. The latest channel update, being just a standard Bitcoin transaction, can be published on-chain any time a participant desires.

Would you similarly claim that 0-conf transactions in the mempool are not Bitcoin, as they are not recorded yet?
Genesis 2:7 - Life begins at first breath.

Exodus 21:22-23 - Abortion isn't murder. It's property damage.

Numbers 5:11–31 - The biblical version of the "abortion pill", used to test a wife's fidelity.
Any political system that allows for the murder of half a million five year old children is very obviously not legitimate. If ever there were a justification for outright civil war, this would be it. It doesn't matter one bit whether it's a democracy, or the will of the majority.

Any argument otherwise could equally justify any genocide.
Pence just asked for federal legislation banning all abortions. So I think you are wrong to say the Republicans are trying to return it to the states, thy are trying to ban it.

Note that a man is not required to donate blood to save an adult human, even if there is no risk to him. The equal protection clause extends that right to your own body to women, and that is fairly sound constitutional reasoning.

The constitution doesn’t mention a million specific things, but it protects our freedoms anyways.

A democracy is a place to gradually expand equal protection of the laws to all people. Each change seems radical to the people accustomed to undemocractic flaws, but the outcome has been very successful these last few hundred years.
Re: guns, if the militia is well regulated then the militia needs to explain guns getting into the hands of people that kill kids as well as insanely high per capita murder rates (primarily in red states, it should be mentioned). Maybe time to disband a militia that can't regulate itself?

This is aside from the founders not being presented with a firearm that can put 6" holes into a kindergartner's body at the rate of 45 rounds per minute.

We're never going to fix the gun issue in this country but the reading of 2a has always been absolutely absurd.

RE: SCOTUS the powerful will always protect the powerful. Sotomayor just went on the record the other day to call Clarence Thomas 'a man who cares deeply about the court as an institution.' Clarence Thomas, whose wife was supporting and funding the January 6th insurrection and effort to overturn a legal election.

Every now and then I ctrl-f the constitution to find the words "supreme court" and somehow come up blank every time.
> Then what about miscarriage?

This argument has always struck me as odd. A miscarriage is, for lack of a better word, a random natural event. People die from random natural events all the time.
This argument is obtuse. The contradiction is that it is considered a matter of personal responsibility as soon as a newly born infant suffers from abuse, malnourishment, poverty, and/or neglect, but before birth it is a matter of moral principle that the child, however unwanted, is born.
The Fragility of Unenumerated Rights
Conservative governance in general uses Biblical teachings purely for show. In an effort to set modern society back to the 1800s, they are using what they believe to be an unassailable source for their actions.

As recently as the late 1970s, evangelicals and Southern Baptists were at worst ambivalent about abortion rights. The anti-abortion stance of that particular set of people is tied pretty heavily to opposition to desegregation.
Wait, I thought development of Minecraft started in 2007? Wouldn't that put it before Infiniminer?
I actually think this idea that Japan is highly efficient and advanced is harmful and unhelpful stereotype.

Japanese people, like many other are proud. Rightly so, it’s an amazing culture. But it’s not efficient one. At least not now.

If the whole world just keeps mindlessly repeating this trope, they’re never going to try improve and get with the times.

It’s a highly inefficient and backwards society of late and really could do with modernising.
Not sure why you are downvoted but you are totally correct on that.

If Bitcoin was being used for facilitating illegal transactions, why haven't many exchanges delisted it already, or banned Bitcoin entirely? Is that why $3.6B in Bitcoin was traced up and seized by the authorities and not Monero? [0]

That explains why the scammers, criminals, etc are moving to use Monero instead of Bitcoin. Once that Bitcoin gets sent to an exchange, it is game over.

[0] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/02/3-6-b...
It's addressed toward the bottom of TFA:

> “My original plan was to wrap things up at Zachtronics and then find a new job teaching high school computer science, but the timing was off,” he says. “I just finished my first year of teaching and Last Call BBS hasn’t even been released yet! I was hoping that I’d really like teaching and stay with that for a few years, but I learned that’s definitely not the case and I’m having a hard time imagining anything other than games in my future, in some shape or form.”
Tax carried interest!
I believe the resulting models would be the same. I don't know all the internals on how something like Dalle generates its images, but let's assume that if you then gave both models the same text prompt and random seed, they would generate the same images in the same order. Although I would argue that if this system was sentient, all we've done is clone/recreate the sentient system. The ability to clone/recreate an intelligence does not contradict that there was a sentience, I believe.

The human equivalent would be if you could create two molecularly identical brains, and have them experience the exact same lives for some time, controlling all stochastic processes, would they be the same person? Obviously it's not possible to control these things in the physical world, but even if you did get the same person, that doesn't make either any less sentient.
It is also not possible to migrate a community to another platform.
Is it?

Try and move more than $10K in cash and see how far you get.

It's not yet pervasive, but there are many retail places that don't even accept cash. Once CBDCs are in place there will be a massive incentive for the US to further restrict cash. CBDCs are the ultimate control over a state currency. They'll provide all kinds of legit rationale, but totalitarian control is along for the ride.
To clarify: I'm referring to the ability to convert CPU cycles directly into money.
US Constitution.
What site can you recommend so as not to waste your money?
What site can you recommend so as not to waste your money?
I am not sure which pillar of functional programming is lost with labelled arguments? Partial applications still work, higher-order function too. One might need to use anonymous functions when labels does not match but I don't see any pillar being lost.

In the same way, it is perfectly possible to switch to the imperative style only in the specific code path where performance really matters and use abstraction to isolate this performance-sensitive part from the rest of your application. Ideally, you can then keep both the elegance of functional programming and the performance of imperative programming.
Passport fraud is slightly more illegal than turning off your browser cookies.
What you are describing is science. The scientists can determine when life begins, but when life begins is ultimately irrelevant. The state already has no issue killing violent criminals, so even if scientists agree and say "a fetus is equivalent to a fully-developed human at 12 weeks", the question will still be "is it ethical to allow the mother to terminate that human beings life?". At which point you start comparing the value of an unborn human life to the cost that raising a child imposes on society. Again, pro-lifers wont engage with any of this discourse. The blame lies with them.
Using a blockchain is literally trusting a third party. Blockchains require third party miners/validators to run the chain. The idea that blockchains will change anything about this is a pipe dream. The design of them simply makes it impossible for everyone to "be their own trusted third party", whatever that is supposed to look like.

Ironically, the most feasible way to really go "off the grid" is still probably to hide large amounts of valuable commodities (i.e. gold, platinum, etc) inside your home. In the words of that grug brain developer from yesterday, you go back to collecting shiny rocks. But I really doubt cryptocurrency is going to encourage people to do that, it's bad for many obvious reasons.
Crypto Policy Symposium
How is the presidency and senate undemocratic? If they are, it would be through the lens of direct democracy and I'm not sure direct democracy would result in significantly different politics.
Sorry but the USA is mental.

Why have a unelected supreme court making political decisions?
Stop using SMS for 2FA.

Not familiar with SMS Sender ID Verification, but after quick Google, I was unable to find any signs that it counters SMS spoofing.

SMS as a 2FA channel is broken. There are so many vulnerabilities that it just makes no sense to use; for example: corrupt telco employees, SS7, sim card cloning, sim swap, spoofing, governments, etc.

Beyond that, if you’re located or traveling internationally, it’s a nightmare to deal with.

NIST has not recommended SMS based 2FA since 2016:

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/08/nist_is_no_lo...
In 2000s "Neumorphism" would have been a name of one WinAmp skin. In 2020 I guess a single style warranted a whole trend.
It’s definitively not at all transparent place.
I mean, their core argument is what you said, but the reverse. It is, of course, bullshit.

And, of course, the rights that they always take issue with are when the federal government is permissive with them. Apparently, in some strange backwards logic, the federal government granting you a right is tyrrany, but the state taking it away from you is not.
That will not help you of course but before I began I hated all exercise with all my heart. It will pass if you keep at it though. :)

That "hate" is just hormonal dis-balance. And yeah I know that explanation doesn't help because you can swear on everything that's sacred that this is exactly who you are and it can't be false... But yeah, it still is false and no that's not you. Hormones are a b1tch, a chemical programming agent that's specifically designed to lie to our brains. It's how we're wired.

Not trying to convince you of anything. I know how I felt 6 months ago and I know nobody and nothing could have changed my mind back then; I would have likely physically lashed out at somebody if they tried to press the matter even.

I am only here to tell you that it can get better even if you are 100% sure that it can't. That feeling is false and it's our brain trying to avoid a change and that's why it fills us with doom scenarios and unreasonable hate to the source of the change. It's still just a facade for "but I don't wanna, I am comfy now!" and that facade can fall relatively easily.

> It's frustrating because all the exercise advice I find seems targeted at people that are practically a whole different species from me...

Nope, you just don't belong to the statistically significant group, that's all there is to it. If you keep looking you'll find your exact alien homies. ;)
> But, the Supreme Court should not be responsible for managing dysfunction in other branches of govt.

And it's not. The underlying problem is most of voting public doesn't understand how the system works, and why.

Repeated the language has been "The SC is making abortion illegal." That simply is not true. But with that falsely dumbed down "fact" ppl judge, form opinions, make noise, etc.
63% of Americans support Roe v Wade and 80% support abortions in some cases.

People agree on that. Adding it to the constitution hasn’t happened because politics.
Those cases created rights out of thin air and said rights are supported by huge majorities of the country. It would be trivial to pass a law actually codifying them. Not so with universal abortion, because it's not popular at all: https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/152150922486134374...
I think that's an idealized interpretation of a young country that spent it's first 100 years believing humanity is attached to skin color, fought a brutal civil war over that before spending its next 100 years preventing most of them from entering commerce, and its last ~50 years incarcerating as many of them as possible. And things like shadow wars in Cambodia do not look good on a country proclaiming "rule of law". So perhaps that's how you perceive it's shared methodology, but certainly not "how it has always been".
> really wanted to make a difference

most people don't care, they won't move for that. But Covid/Remote work/housing is pushing them, hence Rep. went all-in.
You jest, but that used to be an argument against making seatbelts mandatory in cars. I suppose people would drive even more safely if there was a sharp metal spike sticking out of the center of the steering wheel.
I see, you made the beginner mistake with OCaml. You should never read the OCaml error message except if all other options failed. Try to not read those messages, but just look at the line where the error occured. You can use -annot or -bin-annot when compiling and the Tuareg function caml-types-show-type in Emacs will be your best friend.
Please make sure to read the Thomas opinion in full and not just any excerpts without context that may be flying around social media.
not a few months. a year or so, like I've explicitly said. the prices were past their mid-plague peak, but otherwise fine. and the dominating narrative up until the terra/luna/whatever crash a few months ago was climate change, not volatility.

and besides, the OP blog post has nothing to do with the prices either.
The Church rejects the death penalty. It's literally a part of their catechism.
> We live in a post-scarcity society now.

This.

I repeat this over and over again, so sincere apologies to those who are tired of it, I'm a Bucky Fuller fan boy. He was an engineer who had a kind of epiphany one day, and he realized that he could maximize the benefit for humanity of his personal skills and talents if he did his best to work on behalf of all humanity. He went on to invent things like the geodesic dome, and was one of the most famous Americans world wide in his time. He traveled around the world something like eighty times (not eighty days, eighty times.)

Anyway, he calculated (remember he was an engineer) that if we applied our technology and resources efficiently to solving our basic human needs (the lower tiers of Maslow's pyramid, eh?) then by sometime in the 1970's it should be possible that people could have careers of only two years duration and then retire, having accrued enough wealth to live "happily ever after" for the rest of their lives.

> ...there’s more to it than technology and innovation. Because those have already given us what we need, in many cases. But we have so far failed to leverage them fully.

Yes. The technology arrived right on schedule, but the (relatively simple) logistical arrangements have not yet materialized.

This seems to me to be a straightforward social/political movement. But it seemed that way back in the 60's with Bucky's "Design Science Revolution" as he called it, yet here we are.

So, yeah, we have all the technology we need, we just have to organize and apply it efficiently and everybody on Earth could have food, shelter, clothes, energy, etc. Not only that, but we could do it in ecologically harmonious ways so that we're increasing the healthy and vitality of the world rather than grinding it down (as most of our systems do today.)

It would be fun and easy.

I have no idea why it's not more popular.
It's sometimes the case in the US as well. When I got my RealID driver's license I had to show some sort of utility bill as a proof of address--which, as you say, could be pretty easily faked.
most people do think that abortion should be law in some form, but since the US doesn't have a democratic basis in 5/6 of the federal government - "leaving jit to the legislature" is just as bad as letting SCOTUS decide the law. that doesn't even touch upon how constitutional amendments aren't even on the table with how hard they are to pass

and no matter what, you're dealing with laws regarding the bodily autonomy of 50% of the populace. if that can't be considered a fundamental right, what really can?
Nothing. There is no equivalency, there is nothing to learn from it. Rural block voters can go about not getting same-sex marriages and not getting abortions and it won't impact anyone else, just like other people having same sex marriages and getting abortions doesn't impact them, aside from their desire to control how other people live their lives.

edit: My point - since it seems I was not clear - is "rural" people that object to the activities that Roe, Lawrence, Olbergefell, and Griswold allowed can individually decide to not do those things. They should not be able to compel other people to make the same decisions. Abortion was correctly determined to be a federal right. So are same-sex marriage, contraceptives access, and the choice to have oral or anal sex (that's literally what Thomas explicitly talks about wanting to overturn, the right to engage in "sodomy" as determined in Lawrence vs Texas). People that don't like these things should NOT DO THEM and leave the rest of us the hell alone.
> why did something that was in place for 50 years needs to be revisited?

Because it was poorly reasoned judicial activism and always has been. The amount of time that a decision stands should have no bearing on how good of a decision it is.

One of the dissents in Casey v Planned Parenthood in 92 also wanted to overturn Roe, for the same reasons that the current court did.

Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg thought that Roe v Wade was poorly reasoned.
Seems like a side issue to me. If I forcibly put someone under my control, it should be my responsibility not to kill them. Airplane pilots have the same responsibility. Imagine if pilots forced us to fly with them, and then decided they didn’t want to carry our weight anymore! There’s good reason that is illegal.
But amending the constitution is also done by majority vote. There's nothing about legislating at the federal level that makes it more likely to produce the right laws than at the state level. For example, there's the federal marijuana ban, sending countless non-violent drug users to prison.
Except it isn’t valid, because while there was a Supreme Court precedent, such a law would be superfluous, and while there now isn’t, such a law would’ve be repealed the moment republicans regain control of the congress.

Do you really think that a Republican controlled Congress for the majority of the 2010s would have allowed such a law to remain on the books?
Time for every equality-minded US corporation to move as much capital as it can to Canada / Canadian assets / banks. Moving HQs, even better. Politicians will notice if hundreds of billions evaporate.
USA is a third world country in a gucci belt. Change my mind.
What's perplexing is why they don't apply this to the rest of the federal powers. Overturn Wickard v Filburn and cut it at the root. The federal government has no legitimacy to regulate intrastate trade, most gun laws, most of the civil rights act, the controlled substance act, etc. The fact that they picked abortion but not the root of anti-constitutional federal expansionism is truly baffling.
It's not murdered, the amass of dividing cells called a fetus isn't viable on it's own. When that fetus is unwanted, abortion is comparable to removing a tumor.
> Instagram doesn't pay people either.

Of course Instagram pays it's moderation team.
Love it. My favorite bookmark manager.
You may be trying to compare very different things. Abortion by definition ends (aborts) a life. Having a right to own a gun does not automatically do that ( although it most certainly could ).

We keep balancing stuff like that all the time. The seeming major difference here is that guns are explicitly mentioned in the constitution, while abortion is not ( and was invented from other amendments ).
I don't think they want to support fetuses (through prenatal care) either. I think it's just about protecting the "life". Pro-life people don't see a difference between killing a 3 month old baby and destroying a fetus at 3 months.

Anyway, I think that's mostly irrelevant. Say conservatives decided that abortion would be banned nationwide but there would be comprehensive social programs to care for pregnant women and children. The banning of abortion would still be a terrible idea.
yeah, thanks for the link and i recall (from years ago) reading about her thoughts on the subject. roe v wade was a sweeping judgement that (depending on how you looked at it) guaranteed women's rights at the expense of state autonomy WRT laws.

because of the states' rights issue, plus moral "conservatism", roe V wade was an easy target and i'm not surprised it was reversed.

fwiw, i'm a lefty and think that this is a terrible decision w/consequences that won't take long to be felt around the country
its fair when you get your way, its unfair when you don't? You think "Roe v Wade" is the appearance of neutrality but Dobbs isn't? What is your standard of fair vs unfair?
Note though that the majority opinion itself specifically calls out these cases several times as different from abortion because they do not result in the termination of a potential life. Here is one specific quote:

Unable to show concrete reliance on Roe and Casey them-
selves, the Solicitor General suggests that overruling those
decisions would “threaten the Court’s precedents holding
that the Due Process Clause protects other rights.” Brief
for United States 26 (citing Obergefell, 576 U. S. 644; Law-
rence, 539 U. S. 558; Griswold, 381 U. S. 479). That is not
correct for reasons we have already discussed. As even the
Casey plurality recognized, “[a]bortion is a unique act” be-
cause it terminates “life or potential life.” 505 U. S., at 852;
see also Roe, 410 U. S., at 159 (abortion is “inherently dif-
ferent from marital intimacy,” “marriage,” or “procrea-
tion”). And to ensure that our decision is not misunderstood
or mischaracterized, we emphasize that our decision con-
cerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right.
Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt
on precedents that do not concern abortion

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/supreme-court-abortio...
"well-regulated militia" meant well-stocked and prepared in the parlance of the era it was written.