skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The mother's choice to have sex creates the organism in the first place. That adds complexity to the topic not addressed in your argument.
$200k sounds like such a small number, but it was the dropping of the offending chip that was the gotcha.
Ya after graduating from college, I spent 3 years moving furniture from 2001-2003 and consider that the epitome of hell work. In that time, on the paltry wage I received, I could have designed and built a machine to do the work for me. So I spent 3 years being gaslit that I should be grateful for that job and that it was my patriotic duty to be there since someone had to do it. The whole time coming up with an invention a day that would have made the job safer/easier/lucrative. That broke down my psyche to such a degree that I didn't fully recover until going through ego death and healing during the pandemic 20 years later. Now when I hear people say "nobody wants to work anymore", I think of successful people who didn't do what I did, and think to myself "damn straight they don't".

The yakk shaving of today's programming has become hell work. We need a better way, yesterday. But we're all too busy spinning our wheels doing hard work to make rent as the world burns.

Edit: I want to add that I miss the days of my youth and would trade if I could, even taking the good with the bad. Just because something is stupid doesn't mean that we have to let it fill our reality. Turn the guilt/shame into empathy and let go.
The two times that a president has lost the popular vote and won the election in recent history were Bush Jr's first term in 2000 and Trump's term in 2016.

Only 3 justices were appointed during those terms, all by Trump in 2017 - 2020.

Bush Jr did appoint two justices but they were during his second term, when he won the popular vote.

The remaining four justices were appointed by Bush Sr, Clinton, and Obama (2).

So I have no idea where you are getting your figure of 7/9 from.
I wish I could pull it up, it had much more coarse grained categories than what you linked and long time periods. It might have been a meta study.

For example in one of the links they discriminate food away from home etc.

It's not the one I'm remembering but it looked a bit like this one: https://flowingdata.com/2018/02/08/how-different-income-grou...

It looks rather proportional. But I have to admit, here housing is fatter at the low and. Personal insurance/pension gets fatter the more you move up. Education is interesting as it is fat at the very low end, gets thinner for a bit, but after the lower middle gets fatter again continuously. It also cuts off after 200k yearly income, so there's that.
> The fact is that at some point between inception and time of delivery

I don’t think this is that complicated of an issue. The moment when the parent decides they want to keep the baby, is the moment when the fetus becomes a person. That precise time is when the fetus has someone that loves and cares for it, holds attachment towards it, etc.

However if the parent carrying the child is not allowed to make that decision form them self, then this becomes unnecessarily complicated.
It turns out that the justices spoke very carefully and nothing they said precluded them from making a decision like this. Dishonest, yes. Perjury, no.
There have been explicit cases of republicans holding public office saying that abortion bans should explicitly not make exceptions for ectopic pregnancies or even cases where the mother’s life depends on it in general
The War on Drugs is uniquely stupid, though there is an argument that the state has a compelling interest in making sure its citizens aren't all addicted to drugs.

The legal theory on which the right to privacy mostly stands is called "substantive due process", which more or less says the state can't abridge your liberties without trying pretty hard not to. So liberties here can be contraception use, or drug use. Indeed United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative had the coop arguing that the Controlled Substances Act "violates the substantive due process rights of patients, and offends the fundamental liberties of the people under the Fifth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments". This has generally (and maybe oddly) been at odds with the Commerce Clause, pretty well typified by Wickard v. Filburn where the Court held that even though Filburn was only growing wheat on his own land for his own use, the US could impose a quota on him because it was regulating the price of wheat federally. This extends interpretation of the Commerce Clause from mere interstate commerce to production and consumption. Here's a good quote:

"Hence, marketing quotas not only embrace all that may be sold without penalty, but also what may be consumed on the premises."

I'm not an expert, but I believe this is the constitutional leg on which the CSA stands: the gov't can regulate what you consume. I'm personally sympathetic to the substantive due process challenge argument, but probably still too young to be on the Supreme Court. Call your senator! :)
> Where you see delegating to the states, I see a minority (less than 30% of Americans agree with this)

Provide the source and the question that was asked on it. The majority of Americans think it should be up to the states, whether the state is for or against
FYI, the definition of cruel from the Oxford dictionary is "cruelty (to somebody/something) behaviour that causes physical or mental pain to others and makes them suffer, especially deliberately"

And why is the alternative eating an animal alive? Have you ever tried to eat a cow alive? Was it enjoyable and tasty?

Why is the alternative not eating the animal at all?

Let's use some logic here.

Here are some facts:

Fact 1

So it's been already established that you don't need meat to survive. Your own articles you shared state that you can have a healthy life on plant-based foods alone. You just need to ensure to get the necessary nutrients, either by supplementing or eating a bigger variety of plant based foods.

Fact 2

The large scale animal agriculture industry is a big contributing factor to the destruction of our biosphere. This has been backed up by numerous credible organizations, like the UN, IPCC, Oxford University and many others.

Fact 3

Animals feel pain. Animals are not plants. And killing an animal will mean it suffers, which is an act of cruelty. Simple test... has an animal ever freely given up its life, so you can eat its flesh? When you start slicing an animal with a knife, what do you think it will do. Will it think "yes please kill me and ingest my flesh" or will it run away?

Fact 4

Killing animals all day every day is a horrible job and it's PTSD inducing. So continuing to buy meat products means
you're sponsoring the continuation of slaughter houses, where many people have to work because they have no other options.

So given the above... why would you choose to eat meat when you could avoid the following by not eating meat and following a more plant-based diet:

A) Lower environmental footprint, which is required to avert a climate catastrophe

B) No sentient being has to suffer because you want some meat or cheese

C) People don't have to work in PTSD inducing slaughterhouses

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this.

I'm asking the same question over and over again - but you seem to skirt around it.
B3ta.com is over 15 years old and still going strong
A shoutout to Rob Manuel who has been diligently producing the newsletter for more than 15 years now. He does stuff with @fesshole, a live show too amongst other things.

A excellent and underrated little corner of the web. Popular links board, image challenge, QoTW (discontinued, but get enough new users and...?) and a TON of archive material.
>I'm not sure if we gained anything from OOP,

Yea, sure, we didn't gain anything.

Except milions of programmers being able to model complex real world into their software that powers almost everything now.

Even if it is "shitty" "hard to maintain"

then it at least works
Compromised Namecheap employee changed a few DNS records
> You are making personal attacks saying Ive has made many mistakes

That's not a personal attack.

> you have already made up your mind that whatever he does is a mistake

Uh, no.

As I said, good luck with that.
The law is (was) not perfect.

The distribution of Americans who support the right to abortion is also not even.

In States where the distribution of "anti" outweighs "pro" all citizens will lose the right. So human rights are lessened in the United States.

It is a tragic day.
Someone needs to write a WASM VM for it.
Show HN: PyCircTools update -A Python library to create circuits
I released a new version containing Multiplexers. Next on the list is adding adders and modules to perform basic operations.
There's a number of people who can take what they do in their day job and then write about it (this example clearly is not that, but he spend 30 minutes speeding up his site, and probably an hour documenting it; that's less time than many of us will waste on HN today).
This feels like a false dichotomy to me.

If I click an app in the Dock, I want it to come forward, always.

If an app launches for some other reason, I don't want it to steal the focus, ever. But that's in general, independent of Secure Keyboard Entry.
Birth control is next on the chopping block. Justice Thomas already stated that Griswold v. Connecticut should be reconsidered.
Hiring the wrong medical “expert” derailed US pandemic response
Well, really, any state that has a similar law on the books. But yesterday's ruling was specifically about a NY law. CA and many other states will also be impacted.
I bet you would get better results directly spinning the compressor via a flywheel rather than trying to generate the electricity to run the refrigerator.
actually no, can you elaborate?
The thing is, crypto coins tend to be terrible ways to transmit value. They usually have massive overhead compared to pretty much every other system and are often quite slow.

Anybody who has tried to pay for something directly with Bitcoin will see the problem instantly. The mining fee is a significant percentage of your transfer unless you're sending literally thousands of dollars worth of Bitcoin and it typically takes 4-24 hours for the transaction to clear unless you're willing to increase the transaction fee significantly.

Crypto currencies are so bad at this that PayPal is a better way to transfer money. Let that sink in.
> rights over their own body

When does the offspring gain rights over its body?
He was obviously asking about viable pregnancies.
Class inheritance in OOP seems to be largely derived from such contrived examples as "Duck extends Animal." It's basically a worthless concept and OOP would be better without it. Composition over inheritance leads to much better code.
Well, mail has to go through customs and cash is very easy to size. You can memorize the key to a crypto wallet and no one will know that you have it. If you try to mail USD as remittances to a lot of countries, it simply will not arrive. It's also not always possible to convert between currencies legally. A number of authoritarian governments prevent their citizens from doing so.
Which is why there is often an extra focus on situations of rape and incest when little to no active choice has been made to create life.
I said it was a misrepresentation. "The decision was right, but the reasoning was wrong ."(according to Ginsberg)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockbuster_(Bend,_Oregon)
nah they peaked in high school
Sweet oblivion looks just like me
I think secession is more likely, but we aren't there yet.
You left out the “without due process” part. The due process is the state enacting laws to restrict access.

Of course, congress could pass a law enshrining the rights to an abortion tomorrow. This would grant and preserve this right for all Americans, regardless of state, due to the supremacy clause. Hopefully, this does happen.
If you're caught committing crimes (like for instance, using the computers to arrange transactions of human trafficking) and you invoke a standoff and shootout with the police, then yes, they probably will. That's true with or without blockchains.

And because I can see where this is going: The takes along the lines of "it's not illegal, I was just flipping some electrons into ones and zeros" is a really bad take, you can do better than that.
LaMDA’s Sentience Is Nonsense – Here’s Why
But this is the very heart of the problem. When the fatal dose is within the single package size, it's hard to argue it isn't a "risk". Why else is fentanyl so much more dangerous than other opioids? The dose makes the poison.

Stupidity is also a risk factor. Risks multiply. Product safety is often about managing tails, not the mode. You only need to die once.

Back to the original comment - the thing about weed is that it basically impossible to kill (or even directly injure) yourself with o/d. By that measure, even "super-weed" is much safer than whiskey.
My friend was a member of the transplant team for this. Their explanation was this. His physical condition overall was pretty bad by the time this transplant occurred. He was on the edge of multiple organ failure for weeks afterwards. While his heart was pretty strong, his organs in general were compromised, and in poor condition to support each other.

I'm not a medical professional. But I have been present and watched multiple people of systemic failures.
That tweet seems to contradict itself. If it being an old issue makes it more important, than isn't it also important to call out that it's an old issue? Sure, a date (in the far past) on the post might make people question if the issue still exists, but also points out how long the issue has been around.
Note that many services do not permit Google Voice numbers!

Instagram and Facebook will quickly disable your account and demand a real phone number. I recently had a delivery app inform me at signup that it's not even a real phone number (it happily slurped up the submitted Voice number and later sent me ads about pizza anyway)
Web3: Let’s Not Miss the Forest for the Trees
The lab-leak hypothesis is meta-scientific. When it was first tossed around, the lab leak hypothesis generated two predictions:

1. We would find evidence that someone was doing experiments on furin cleavage sites in coronaviruses.

2. We would find that the furin cleavage site matched a known sequence.

We did not find 2, which should have been easy to find. Eventually, we found 1, since a rejected DARPA grant proposal affiliated with the lab in Wuhan emerged.

Then, we found 2!! with a plausible explanation of why no one had found it earlier -- you had to turn on "patented sequence search" on NCBI blast, which is turned off by default. An easy mistake to make. As a professional biochemist for a decade I had no idea that blast had a patent sequence search, much less that it was turned off by default (which, btw is a sensible setting).

The scientific method says given a model it should make independent predictions (ideally unlikely) which are later verified. The evidence for a lab leak should be considered relatively strong.
This is a contrived example, but a pretty obvious answer given PC's stance. You can enter into the contact and would need be prepared for civil liability upon breach, or criminal if you entered into the contract under false pretenses. Intent would be a major part of deciding the criminal action. If you could be shown to have the intent of someone's death, then that would be murder, otherwise no.
10th amendment
Jon Stewart's classic lab-leak rant on Colbert's show:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSfejgwbDQ8&t=178s
I stand corrected. I was aware Francis had solidified the move to “never” from “almost never” that had been palpably occurring for some time, but somehow missed that he had articulated it as a categorical violation of morals rather as a progression of prudential judgement in changing circumstances as other recent Popes had.
I don't think this constitutes a formal proof on any way at all.
Except access to contraception is based on the same reading of the constitution that Roe v Wade depended on and has now been gutted. There are now legitimate pushes to outlaw contraception for unmarried people.
These processors were designed for assembly programming, hence their very CISC-y ISA. Some 8-bitters designed for compiled languages would be the AVR family.
That will work some smallish number of times; the worrying (from a btc / freedom perspective) is that Coinbase and other exchanges start to have opinions abt what you do even after you move your btc off the exchange, e.g., with mixing. That, I think, is what's going to force this showdown and lead to the end game, whatever it turns out to be.
Texas can separate into 5 states according to its state constitution.
What room are you getting laughed out of that is composed of normal people in normal clothes and also rich people in expensive suits, but who would laugh someone out of the room in a luxury brand?

This whole comment is bizarre to me, I'm not sure what to make of it. Who cares what is ridiculous to "actually rich people"? You realize they're also just people right, with their own biases and flaws?
People can argue whatever they want in an editorial, but I will take the word of the pope and the catechism when it comes to the question of, "what is the official doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church on X?"
Many of the abortion bans going into effect soon/now have no exception for rape
That's doesn't sound like a big deal. I don't really care for that type of gum and that isn't even close to my blood type.
> That changes the debate and invalidates all of your examples

Why? In what way?
The only 'legal' purpose is speculation around 'decentralized innovation'. It is legal to speculate that Bitcoin or NFTs may be more useful someday, therefore more in demand. Obviously that makes it no different than beanie babies, but buying beanie babies is legal and a lot of people did it.
Yeah, I've often wondered that. Is it the worry that if the baby dies in the womb, it will no longer go to heaven? Because if the unborn baby is considered to be one of the "most innocent" humans, then wouldn't the baby automatically go to heaven? And isn't the assumption that heaven is better than life on earth?

Or is it about wanting the mother to also go to heaven, and believing that if she did this, she would not go?

I appreciate you pointing out there may be a deep existential fear and doubt of the existence of heaven that drives people to this and oh how I wish we people talked more about our doubts, especially as they relate to religion. One of my favorite TED talks was about how doubt is essential to faith: https://www.ted.com/talks/lesley_hazleton_the_doubt_essentia...
> Even if they were good ideas then, it’s not remotely the same world we’re living in now.

Which is why the government system they created allows us to update the constitution. Which we have done. Many times.

At least give specific reasons for why you think we should abandon the political philosophy that has underpinned our government for almost 250 years rather than vague references to technological changes.
>there are reasons to believe that the supreme court might come for birth control next

Reasons like Justice Thomas explicitly and clearly saying they should reconsider the ruling that prevents states from banning them.

From the NYT:

>Then, [Justice Thomas] took aim at three other landmark cases that relied on that same legal reasoning: Griswold v. Connecticut, a 1965 decision that declared married couples had a right to contraception; Lawrence v. Texas, a 2003 case invalidating sodomy laws and making same-sex sexual activity legal across the country; and Obergefell v. Hodges, the 2015 case establishing the right of gay couples to marry.

>Justice Thomas wrote that the court “should reconsider” all three decisions, saying it had a duty to “correct the error” established in those precedents. Then, he said, after “overruling these demonstrably erroneous decisions, the question would remain whether other constitutional provisions” protected the rights they established.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/24/us/clarence-thomas-roe-gr...
> The issue reverts to the states, many of which have taken steps to curtail or ban abortions.

Sounds like people need to get off their asses and vote now. Voting is more important now that it's ever been before. It's up to individual states how they want to treat abortion and related services.

This ruling isn't an end to anything, unless the populace doesn't care enough to grass-roots the effort to change their state's laws.

Now, go vote. Voting is the only say we have in this tumultuous country.
> The real reason has nothing at all to do with what the court’s role should be, and everything to do with the religion of the people currently serving on the court.

You’re inferring that the court made it’s decision on a religious reason, and you’re entitled to your inference.

So here’s my inference, as an atheist conservative. No the Supreme Court did not overturn the case for religious reasons. They overturned it exactly for the reasons they stated:

“The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. We now overrule those decisions and return that authority to the people and their elected representatives”
It was intentional and a big part of it was to protect slave-owners. Evil intent does not get a pass.
idk why you're getting downvoted. This was literally a compromise made by the founders to protect smaller states from larger states
I would buy and read that book, even though I know a lot of it will be out of date by the time it was ready for sale.
I fundamentally don't understand this kind of authoritarianism.

What possible good could ever come from involving the force of the state in something a trivial and banal as a todo list app?
There is definitely an autistically propertarian argument in favor of abortion, which I personally consider fairly compelling, but 99.9% of people are not nearly as propertarian as I am, and I'm not willing to give people a pass to use this kind of reasoning selectively. If you support abortion rights on these grounds and you're not also 100% on board with laws that let you e.g. shoot burglars, you're not being consistent. A lot of people using this argument were also pro-vaccine-mandate, which is similarly inconsistent. (Not calling out you personally, just using "you" to refer to the hypothetical flip-flop.)
Typically, Western culture recognizes individual rights to do what they want with their own body, such as drinking too much, going hiking when it's too hot, or getting ugly tattoos. These days, even the right to use drugs is returning. So although having an abortion one day before delivery is unwise, I hold that it should absolutely be legal.

It's hilarious to me that the same crowd that fights for gun rights under the banner of "individual liberty" is very quick to invite the government into the womb.
How to Configure a Postfix Server to Send Email Through Gmail
All of my downloads folders are huge unwieldy messes. I clean them out on the occasion that I want to feel conscientious. Otherwise I can't be bothered.

Now, in decades past, when I had but one or two hundred megabytes to mess with, I would assiduously comb through nearly every folder by hand to keep the drive clean and neat. Now, with thousands of gigabytes I'm supremely lazy.
Wait for Microsoft to fix their privilege escalation bug in help viewer?
Assuming the games are still for sale after they disband, who gets the money? Just the publisher?
The senate still has to approve SCOTUS nominations. Unless you are getting rid of the senate, too.
There is no correlation between those things. The problems of GCC are mainly due to underfunding.