skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I see that a lot of people are praising the openness of this admission but cynical old me who's lived in Japan a while - a culture that (generally) values appearances over truth - notes that the article mentions that USB was found. I have to wonder if we'd have heard about it if they hadn't.
> [citation needed]

Dr. Martin Luther King
>> I'm tired of having the minority religious and bigoted views dominate politics and starve us of progress.

Is it minority views? Surely, when it comes down to states legislating this, people can make their opinion heard at the ballet box. And if a majority of people in a state vote conservative and abortion is restricted then we are legislating based on the wants of the majority. It will be interesting to see if this is an important enough issue for some conservative voters to swing them (and states) to the democrats.
People exist who satisfy any imaginable criteria - one guy cut out his own appendix with a kitchen knife and lived. What does that prove, we should be our own surgeons?

The key questions is, how many of such peope exist.
> "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

> I know this can be interpreted differently but to me it reads that nobody should be restricted from arming themselves.

Sure was interpreted differently when black people started carrying in public! [0].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act
Just remember that divvying up money doesn't have the effect of ensuring a decent standard of living. If you go to some person living in a slum of some under-developed city in an under-developed country, and you gave them 11K USD, they would be able to buy some consumption goods, rennovate their apartment etc. - but they would not be able to buy decent education for their children (let alone themselves); nor decent health care services (they would be able to afford a few visits to an overpriced doctor); etc.
Tip for savvy EU-based employers: you can save yourselves a lot of work when hiring US nationals that don't quite meet the European Work Visa requirements, by requesting a humanitarian visa for candidates that live in Florida and such instead. Abortion restrictions and associated death penalty pretty much make that a no-brainer.
Starve a child, deny them education, deny them healthcare, freeze them in the winter, allow other children to purchase AK47s and shoot them, deny them housing and all the sudden it becomes a fiscal matter and not one of religion or fundamental rights.

The law may protect kids from being directly killed consequence free. However, indirectly, these good Christians support everything right up to that (spare the rod, spoil the child).

Edit: To respond to your edit, since you don't want to take the time to actually respond.

Reagan was good with the short quips, yet hardly someone you should look to for a "pro-life" attitude. He actively impeded AIDs research because "ewe, gay people". He has blood on his hands and invoking him in an argument about the sanctity of life is ridiculous.

Further, saying "Oh, let the churches feed the hungry". What would you do for the child of an atheist parent? What would you do if the church (like many of them do!) imposes strict morality clauses before aid is given. What if there is no church giving such aid in a community?

Why do you think there is child starvation in the united states? Because not enough kids know about their local churches and community centers?

It's also laughable that the same people who cheer on dumping 800 billion dollars into the most powerful military in the world are somehow afraid of the consequences of what happens when that money goes into a program to feed children. So what, the government is only scary when the money DOESN'T go towards guns? What kind of backwards thinking is that?
A 2020 study showed that nearly 70% of Americans have less than $1,000 stashed away in their bank accounts. 40% have less than $300. How are these people supposed to afford to take time off work, drive to another state, have an invasive medical procedure performed, and then drive back home and potentially miss another day of work for recovery? If they have difficulty doing that, imagine how much more difficult it'd be to literally move to another state, lose all your friends and family connections, displace your kids from their school and friends, lose your support network, and have to find new employment? All for the sake of something that should be a protected right. Your perspective is really lacking compassion.
>Regarding abortion, what aspect of the constitution would cover it?

None. Roe was based on pure vapor, constitutionally speaking.

>You should be able to trust a court to make a decision based on the law, not their personal preferences.

That is in fact what the Supreme Court has just done, by overturning Roe.
Again. People who ACTUALLY build apps in Safari are the ones that run into these issues. The only people that attempt to defend it are the ones who don't even build apps for it.
The last amendment was passed 30 years ago, and the one before was 50 years ago. Maybe most of the politicians in charge only pay lip service to an issue, and don't have the will to die on a hill for anything, or leave anything for those who come after them.
This is a very correct assessment, well stated.
Unlikely. amagasaki2002 is more likely :P
Reddit is toxic and the mods are power tripping. That is why they moderate. People who otherwise would have no social status in life where others will listen so they end up on reddit where others have to listen. Of course it is not every singe one of them but a lot of mods are just pathetic. Don’t agree with the narrative - banned. And this will be the downfall of reddit. Inconsistency across the site and unjust bans for merely disagreeing with a mods narrative. I would love to see reddit fail.
To what extent are you willing to let other states restrict rights of US citizens because their cultural majority is different from yours? Is there a line? Perhaps 330 million people is too many to have in a single culture.

I am starting to come around to that view myself. The mythology of America has been dying for some time, and accelerating dramatically in the last few decades. Without that mythology to bind us together, it may be that we are more different than we thought. Arguably the majority of people in the southeast, for example, do not share the same values as people in the northwest. Maybe they should not try.
We don't use this standard of reasoning for anything else. If abortion is murder then it ought to be banned regardless of how effective the ban may be.

Your job is to argue that abortion is not murder. Any argument that sidesteps the morality of abortion is not going to convince anyone.
Well, first I need to make sure that other civilizations also exist.
I generally agree, and I'm hoping that Gleam fits the bill for "Rust with garbage collector" (also, when I say this, people leap to OCaml, but OCaml introduces a bunch of problems which aren't present in Rust: cryptic syntax, lower quality build tooling, unbounded type inference, competing "standard" libraries, a fairly toxic community, etc).
Supreme Court has shoot itself in the foot. It they can overturn their own decisions based on political schemes, then we can overturn EVERYTHING they do, including this decision itself.
The original Roe v Wade ruling, regardless of opinion on the outcome, was widely viewed as being based on a weak and poorly reasoned judicial argument. The risk of leaving defective judicial reasoning as precedent is that it enables a whole class of undesirable legal outcomes in the future unrelated to abortion. For this reason, it was expected that the Supreme Court would eventually fix this mistake. This ruling doesn't outlaw abortion, it merely moves it outside that court's jurisdiction and leaves it to other parts of government to decide.

I support this ruling for this reason even though I am against outlawing abortion.
Indeed, but it would definitely be a minority position to say that any sentience at all makes you deserving of human-level protections. Most people think there's more to being a person than the minimal ability to feel.
It's not the civilized world, but here in the south you'll wake up with a racoon in your pocket making off with your Dentyne Ice and a flock of mosquitos airlifting a liter of O-positive.
I have to interject here for the sake of those unfamiliar with OCaml and who may take the parent comment at face value.

Saying "it has quirks like using ;; to end statements" is misleading to the point of just being bogus. The double semi-colon is only ever used in the REPL. In fact, I've been programming OCaml for fun and professionally for over 15 years, and I've never used a double semi-colon in my code, nor have I ever encountered one in the "wild".
Their shirts are good, yes. I have several pairs of their chino shorts though and those do not hold up long term, to the point where I’m looking for alternatives that’ll last a bit longer.
I wrote a three-part series of articles on "50 Years of Running" [1], and the issue of motivation is specifically addressed, since how else would you keep up something for 50 years?

It's not at all about eating, and I'm honestly not sure it'll help you, but the tag in the first article is:

If you can't find time to exercise, you'll have to find time to be sick.

[1] https://albertcory50.substack.com
In my country you better let the window-tinted Audi Q7 merge, or else you might get a gun waved in your face.
the existence of groups like the log cabin Republicans make this seem unlikely...
That isn't what was found by DC v Heller.
> Apple releases some hot trash with great marketing and bam, BB is toast.

Was it really "just marketing?"

Apple had multi-touch and the App Store.
Probably just not even saying anything at all, given they found the USB shortly after it was lost.
That's the basis of many of these laws and unfortunately it's obviously illogical. Even if we accept that as an unreasonable search that makes the search unconstitutional. Not the law.
Do you have the right to light your body on fire in a crowded room? It’s your body after all.
A person suffering from amnesia is still experiencing the world around them. Sentience is not about memory but rather the subjective self-experience of, well, experiencing things.
> it asserts a right to privacy that apparently only applies in the specific case of abortion

False.
If you're American your taxes are supporting this, wherever you go. For it to be different, you need to renounce citizenship.
ok so someone who puts money in a savings account is not living paycheck-to-paycheck, but someone who puts that money into the stock market is? it makes no sense.
> The Republicans only care about getting the votes they need to maintain their stranglehold over red states, cut taxes and environmental protections for the benefit of their patrons.

As has been pointed out elsewhere in this discussion, we don't vote for Supreme Court justices. There's no leverage to impose electoral or party pressure on a justice who has already been appointed, unless it is by impeachment. Your assessment of their motivations doesn't hold up.
It likely won't affect things much, or they wouldn't have let it go through. They will now be focusing on protecting this new status quo; "don't let liberals re-instate abortion and kill children!!!" etc
What street dangers are there?
SML definitely has a more tastefully designed syntax also, and not only because it's a smaller grammar. OCaml syntax is the "scuffed" version of SML syntax, as the kids say!

Unfortunately to be a real-world SML user these days is a very isolating proposition, because although there are some really nice implementations (MLton, PolyML), to a first approximation there are zero libraries.
Obama Statement on the Draft Supreme Court Decision to Overturn Roe vs. Wade
in cases of rape too?
good point, thanks! we had to shorten the top menu on mobile devices to fit all the important stuff so you only see "X filters" rather than the full filter as on the desktop
Regarding guns, the dissent argues that “well-regulated” and “militia” are key components of the text. The applicants for concealed carry were not part of a militia, and the current court doesn’t seem to acknowledge the “well-regulated” piece exists at all.

With regard to abortion, the constitution guarantees us a right to privacy, which is closely linked to bodily autonomy. The argument being that there is constitutionally no legal way for the government to involve itself in your personal health decisions. There is an interesting ideological reversal here with regard to the recent vaccine debate with liberals arguing the government should be able to compel vaccination, and the conservatives against.
If the constitution is so vague that different judges will interpret it completely differently (and it "encompasses everything that it means to be American"), you need to fix the constitution. Having judges interpret vague things the way the people of the day want is a recipe for...exactly what's happening now.
This is exactly the point for me. Roe V Wade embraced a court that decided that judges could/should legislate (that is, make new laws) rather then enforce the text of existing laws. This is not new from the court - separate but equal, Bush v. Gore, Citizens United, Dredd Scott - all basically where examples of the court taking matters into their own hands.

This simply says "Abortion is a legislative matter - the constitution does not say that abortion must be legal until the moment of delivery".
I thought law is written by the legislature not the courts. This is a decision in a case no?
You see a woman as an incubator of a "child" that has a right to life. This is biologically wrong and the fact that so many people share this view is an indictment of America's failed education system.
There are zero places where abortion is banned but post-birth infanticide is legal, and nobody wants to make that the case anywhere.
It's not just abortion, there's tons of case law around the implied right to privacy in the constitution.
Or Pine64, then we could use it as part of the build farm when it wasn’t printing.
Yup

If you want me to wear cloths with your logo on them, YOU must pay ME. I'm not going to pay you to wear your advertising.

This perhaps that comes from my days in top-level but obscure amateur/pro sports, but if I'm wearing a logo, it's from one of my sponsors, certainly not some competing brand, and I see no reason this shouldn't also apply to regular life.

I'll buy your stuff it it is good, but for me to advertise it by wearing a blatant logo you must pay me (the amount is up for discussion, but not the principle).

They were doing the same with car wraps, and again, if I support the produce and the pay is enough I'll wrap my car, but I'm sure AF not paying you to do it. Same with clothes.
Exactly. I looked at eco-tanks, and aside from the fact that the tanks would dry out given how little I need to print, it was avoiding the evil printing companies selling those printers. That left Brother: Linux-friendly, inexpensive open printers. Kinda took them at their name.
"The dry conditions come after years of falling oats acreage as U.S. grain growers swapped it out for more profitable crops such as corn."

40% of US corn goes to Ethanol production. If we're serious about reducing food prices, we need to abandon Ethanol mandate and subsidies.
The judges forced their morality on everyone by saying the constitution gave a right to an abortion. The constitution does no such thing, meaning the judges were acting as activists, legislating from the bench, rather than doing their jobs correctly. If you are honest, you should be able to say both that you are pro-abortion and that Roe v. wade was possibly the worst supreme court decision of the 20th century.

The secular argument against abortion is so incredibly simple: the unborn child has the right to life just as the mother does. Government is about managing the rights of everyone and balancing them when they come in conflict.

And, finally, abortion is forced on our society in the sense that our tax dollars fund it, our tax dollars fund public schools that promote it, and, if the left have their way, insurance companies will be forced to cover it, possibly free of charge: https://noqreport.com/2021/02/09/california-bill-would-force...
Only if they’re sewn on, instead of printed. In that situation I’d be hesitant to call it a logo at all.
All those red states that courted tech employees the last two years are about to get a challenging political period from that new donor base.

Alabama has Huntsville, Texas has Austin, TN has chatt and Nashville, NC has Charlotte and Raleigh-Durham, Florida has Miami/Tampa, AZ has Phoenix, CO has Denver (CO isn’t super red but it’s somewhere). This will get more interested and remote workers go deeper into small towns.
thanks for sharing! there's this saying in marketing that you should ignore anyone who's not much bigger than you so that's how we think about it. we focus on the tools with a large audience and ignore the rest as few people in our target audience would have heard about them. people tell us all the time how they didn't even know alternatives to GA existed before they found us and that tells a lot about the state of the market for millions of sites that use GA
>cultural consensus about how to balance the rights of women with the rights of fetuses

Nothing like a consensus between human rights and a disgusting invention of a certain institution known for raping children, right?
They overturned "may issue" laws where you could meet all the training and qualifications to legally carry but a state official could make an arbitrary judgement call based on if you had a "good reason" to carry.

All states with "shall issue" are still in effect because its a straight here are the requirements, if you meet them and are not a prohibited person, you get your permit.

Also, the right to bear arms is explicitly enumerated in the constitution, so taking that right away isn't up to the states. The right to an abortion is not. So it goes to each state to decide.
Hey now! Patagonia ish is comfy af. (Just sayin. I upvoted you for your candor)
> Most haven't been outright bans on it, but there have been plenty of rules about who can get them and how all the way back to Hammurabi.

This sounds like it needs a source.

As far as I understand, anti-abortion laws started getting traction in the 1800s. Before that, these were scattered and mostly religious inspired. Also, Hammurabi doesn't make any references to voluntary abortions.
Lightning is using Bitcoin, but it is not Bitcoin.

Giving someone a casacius coin is not the same as sending someone a digital Bitcoin, as the properties are different. And in the same way sending someone Lightning Bitcoin is different as it hasn't been recorded on the blockchain yet.
For no-logo t-shirts nothing come close to "forty five" in terms of quality and comfort
Wrong, wrong, absolutely brimming over with wrongability.
― Arnold J. Rimmer Red Dwarf
(A hologram)
Fixed ~2h ago. The homepage is pointing to OpsFlow UI again.
If I object to you murdering a homeless person, should I be obligated to help him get a good life?

That is essentially the same argument, just applied to somebody who is very much human.

I don't support this ruling, but I don't believe that argument is any good.
Do you willfully misunderstand my point? I’m demonstrating the lie.
Roe v. Wade wasn't the will of the people. If the will of the people is to make abortion legal, they would vote for politicians that make abortion legal. In Mississippi, they clearly voted for the opposite.
Ah. I was not aware you were Canadian; I was speaking about how it works in the US. My apologies.
Except this is not the way the consitution is actually written:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

To the people == legislative branch. to the states means the states legislative branch.
The wealthy/connected are probably better at getting away with murder/theft/rape/etc too, it doesn't mean we should legalise it in the name of equality. Also, nothing prevents further restrictions on abortion in the future, for those that still can get them.
> For what is the moral difference (from a consequentialist, utilitarian standpoint) between taking previously conscious humans with minimal brain function off of life support and an abortion of a non-sentient and non-conscious fetus? There is non, except for the fact that in the latter, a human being is forced to act as life support.

There is one obvious difference: in one case, the person's consciousness has been irreversibly destroyed. In the other case, the person's consciousness is imminent.

From a utilitarian standpoint, the fetus has a considerable upside while the brain dead patient does not.

Utilitarianism is largely unconvincing anyway, IMO. A much more convincing pro-abortion argument is how the unwanted fetus infringes on the rights of the mother.
so basically corner meth dealers will now deliver abortion pills? IDK if thats gonna last, because you know we can always police the drugs out of the system.
The person I was responding to was trying to say that progun people will support gun control if blacks get guns. I was just trying to say they won't and use it as an attack against gun control advocates.

I don't think it is relevant if, when or on what issues parties flipped. The Democratic Party used to support gun control take prevent blacks from having guns. The current Democratic Party supports gun control. Their reasons may or may not have changed, but it is still used as an attack.
There's a lot talk about what blockchains could be but most of the time this is just people lying to themselves or others about getting rich. It's the FOMO from Bitcoin. It's somehow picking the next Bitcoin from the 30,000 shitcoins.

Algorithmic stablecoins have shown their obvious weaknesses in recent times and is another application that doesn't deliver.

But here's the nail in the coffin for me when it comes to blockchains: the government could shut down any blockchain, including Bitcoin, tomorrow if it chose to.

The US could make mining Bitcoin illegal and make it illegal for any financial institution who wants access to the US financial system to transact with cryptocurrencies. Will that shut down the network? Not technically, no. But it will make any such network basically useless.

The US government exercises this power all the time. It's why most cannabis dispensaries and growers are forced to deal with cash because they're excluded from the banking system.

China shut down crypto mining and it basically disappeared the next day (mostly moving to Kazakhstan it seems). With rising energy costs in the developed world (including the disruption to natural gas supply in Europe thanks to Russia's invasion of Ukraine), at some point hte fact tha Bitcoin uses more power than Sweden is going to be an political issue.

The US dollar is maintained by the long dick of the US government. A currency is a projection of government power. And no crypto network is a match for the projection of power of nation states.
Uniqlo selvedge denim is really good, I wear it a lot. Most US brand 'jeans' (Levis etc) are just cotton pants in a jeans cut. If you tear them on a nail or cut them the hole will spread and fray - real denim does not do this and the uniqlo pants are cut well for my body type, last for ages and when damaged the hole stays small.

You have to pay hundreds for genuine denim Levis which puts them in the fashion pretentious class imo.
Ouch. That last statement hits close to home.
My guess is they'll try to outlaw home pregnancy test and start requiring doctors to report any positives. Wouldn't be surprised if someone already tried to pass such a bill somewhere.
Where are you getting that religious Americans held their noses to vote Republican? That is not the mental model I have of people religious enough to ban abortion.