skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Critics and pundits on the right like to portray the anger, resentment, and dissatisfaction on the left from the outcome of the vote as claiming trump "stole" the election.

There indeed were occasional headlines screaming trump "stole" the election (IIRC) and there were screams of "not my president", and even a few weirdos here in maine that were convinced Mitch McConnell and Susan Collins had cheated in their respective elections, but by the time of the Muller report, the allegations were much gentler. None of the investigations or impeachments were about "stealing the election", but rather violations, sometimes flagrant and absurd, of campaign finance laws and other points of how you are allowed to campaign for the presidency.

It turned out that a lot of the way the US has worked for 250 years is literally the honor code, and it's not illegal to be elected by being a huge ass or immoral person. Many people in Trump's campaign staff did end up in jail for campaign related crimes. There is also significant circumstantial evidence that Trump and some republicans are more friendly with putin than the average american hopes for, but turns out that is also not a crime.

Meanwhile party republicans, sometimes including trump, have claimed significant, direct manipulation of voting equipment, tallies, and voter rolls. These claims have gone to court and nearly every one was thrown out as baseless, and occasionally downright absurdist. The claims include millions of immigrants being bussed into places to vote, thousands (or more) of "dead" people voting, accusing vote counting volunteers of "fixing" the count against trump, and countless other things.

Compare: "The democrats managed to invent millions of fake votes" with no evidence to "Trump worked directly with the Russian government or individuals in the Russian government to manipulate the voter base, hack the democratic party's mail server, lie heavily to voters, and possibly hack into actual voting machines in a few states". For the latter, we have evidence that russia did in fact hack the DMC's emails, after Trump openly "asked" them to in a campaign speech, russia probably hacked some servers somewhat related to voting operations in some states (but not voting machines directly, probably), russian disinfo campaigns against american voters (though you can't blame trump for that I don't think), trump campaign advertisements that said shitty things to discourage black people from voting (which isn't a crime, hilary made stupid comments), and enough bad actions and connections in his friends and compatriots to get at least 10 people in prison.
> You make it sound like she was sentenced to sign paperwork for her entire life, when the reality is she consciously chose to do so every day

They are not popular concepts these days, but the ideas you're grasping for are duty and service. She did her duty and she served her people.

Also, the Royal Family is not in receipt of taxpayer money. The Sovereign Grant is funded from income generated by the Crown Estate.
Seems like a miss that this is using google fonts instead of the font made by the govt https://public-sans.digital.gov/
Agree with what you say. But your job, however hard it might be, is more palatable when you have people at your call and when you’re insanely rich. Contrast this with the lady at CVS near my home - she is at least in her 70s, looks frail and tired all the time. It is sad that she has to work at her age.

Money doesn’t solve all problems. It sure makes them less horrible though.

All that said, the queen was an impressive human. 70 years is a long time. I’d be bored in 3 years and quit
And for each of those blog posts, several others refuting them.
I find this super interesting, and I have a hunch it has to do with how much the Queen/monarchy has been revealed as human to us through media, movies, entire Netflix shows, etc.

I mean, the Queen could just as well have been a made up figure to you or me, given the vanishing possibility she would affect any of our lives directly. Yet after watching those stories about her life, the monarchy, it manipulates your neurons to actually have a person to mourn. Funny, isn't it? And the length of her life certainly gave enough material to feel some story.

I imagine that before QE2, much state/people mourning of the sovereign was just symbolic, and though perhaps somewhat heartfelt (I daresay, but more for loss of the symbol), not deep. For all their quirks and personality problems revealed to us on TV, it actually caused them to mean more to us.
The Royal Family in the UK is unusual in that it generates more money in tourism for the UK than they take in. Probably due to so many people being interested in the British royal family.

https://www.bbc.com/news/explainers-57559653
Yeah, it's tricky. Some places will just mix frogs into their burgers, so you've just gotta stop eating at the Chum Bucket and pay attention to what's in your mental diet.
Gephi: Looking back at 12 years of involvement
> This is not so consistent, you sound a lot like me when I was trying to cope with [...] getting a new job in an industry

I really appreciate the advice! This doesn't match my situation but I have known others in the position you mention and maybe they will stumble across it one day.

A valid point on the inconstancy :) I hoped I had quite a bit more time to save money while working at my current role. I am concerned with my resume because I need to fall back on it if self-employment doesn't pan out.
If Estonia had the GDP, political influence, or military of the USA it might not hold up to the same level of attacks.

It also helps that their population and schooling system prioritizes coding and technical literacy.
I'd consider her equal in relevance to Kim Kardashian.

For some quality entertainment, read through the comments pretending they're talking about Kim Kardashian.

"I've never considered myself a ['celebrity worshipper'] but... I just burst into tears unexpectedly [upon hearing of Kim's death]."
Countries growing 70% of world's food face 'extreme' heat risk by 2045
Hmm… all the useful endpoints are returning a 402 status.
TCP needs a connection to be tracked or it counts as invalid session since the tuple wouldn't existing in the connection table. So there has to be something going on or something in front of Caddy doing ip based hashing to a backend caddy instance. Most anycast setups I have seen have been geographic which means unless you move you won't get routed to the wrong endpoint.

*http3/quic gets around this be setting a connection id in the UDP packets so mobile phones jumping towers can still be tracked if they get a new IP.
Chemistry and LSD newbie question: what would make it unsafe?
There is also nginx_proxy, based on nginx.

https://github.com/nginx-proxy/nginx-proxy

Note on both projects, if you care about security, you should split the generator/controller container out of the main webserver container, so the docker socket is not used in container that is directly exposed.
I havn't seen this before but the .pagination.next url value is a great convenience. On the other hand, the OpenAPI documentation doesn't explicitly mention offset and limit for paginated services even though it lists format for each service.

jq '.pagination.next ' member.json
"https://api.data.gov/congress/v3/member?offset=20&limit=20&format=json"
Balmoral isn't part of the Crown Estate. It is the Queen's (now the King's) private property.
We've banned this account for using HN primarily for political/ideological battle and breaking the site guidelines repeatedly.

If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
shouting matches prevent an engaged discussion. on the current topic we can either discuss what the death of the queen means to us, or we can yell at each other for having the wrong opinions. but we can't do both. it won't work, and it doesn't provide any useful data because the shouting matches bury the other discussions which would actually be interesting. it's not possible to ignore them if there is no way to signal that those comments are not welcome. that's what downvotes are for.

people who do nothing but shout their arguments without engaging in good natured discussion are therefore equally not welcome. as a community we need the ability to stop those people from derailing our discussions.

the problem with flaimbait is that it is that it motivates people who like to shout. in a perfect community where noone engages in shouting matches, flaimbait would be unable to start any fights. it would therefore be harmless and ignored. but rarely is a community perfect, and so it is helpful to remind people to not do that.

to know why this particular comment was flaimbait it may be necessary to learn more about the topic and what kind of responses it draws out. understanding this is the job of the moderators. and while the moderators aren't perfect either, they are doing a god job so far, and instead of rejecting particular moderation actions it would be better to find different, less controversial ways to approach the topic in question, which in this case surely did happen. the topic brought up by the banned account has been discussed on this site multiple times in a more civilized form.

right here we have an example of an engaged civilized discussion. this is as it should be, however it is off topic, so people would still be in their right to downvote all of the comments in this subthread, including mine. we can and should have this discussion, but not here where the topic is the death of the british queen and not freedom of speech.
> $5 esp32-wroom dev kits

That's an awesome price!
Yup, that's why I wrote "interview" in the singular. Still wondering how they got even one if they were doing so badly.
Stevens' books are well-regarded:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCP/IP_Illustrated

I'm enjoying his Unix book now. (Although these are little more technical and not as oriented to lay-people.)
> one of the 4,225 secure messaging ecosystems.

And that’s just Google’s collection of messaging systems!
Three Caffeine Alternatives and the Science Behind Them
>"You can check twitter and see."

I have, and now more than ever I am convinced Twitter brings out the worst in people. That platform is a carcinogen of the mind.
No like if you're accusing me of either being the tallest man in basketball and the shortest loser on the street, both your accusations disprove the other.
Your arguments would be a lot stronger if you focused on the SMS limitations that have not already been alleviated by MMS.
I worked for years in a business providing support services for maintaining the distribution network to rural areas. The distribution network was run at a loss by the government. Please look at the numbers and stop reactively responding.
Anyone familiar with Zynamite, EnXtra, and TeaCrine?

Interesting wrt the different approaches to blocking (or not) adenosine receptors, but I haven't heard of them (although maybe they are marketed under different names).
I think he means literally on the bank notes and coins.
> Logically, it’s not a defensible inference in the slightest.

We have different views of "defensible". I imagine clicking something on that page and waiting for a response. I learned to make that association based on experience.
Cool product, could use some work. My first search revealed:

https://imgur.com/d0a8Qcc.jpg

The picture shows it does have armrests though. It would be great if you could have some button there to report incorrect information for each product.
Sigstore Verification of CPython Releases
I can turn that on its head: I am no fan of the Windsors, or "Saxe-Coburg and Gotha" as it used to be.

But I think an hereditary head of state is a Good Idea. Democracy is very important. One of the greatest dangers to democracy is majoritarianism. If every stage of the state is chosen by "50% + 1" then it will become a tyranny. (I am not a history scholar, but I believe the USA has plenty of examples of the pitfalls of voting "50% + 1" for every part of the state)

The role of a monarch in a statutory monarchy (one where the law applies to the monarch) is to protect the interests of the minorities.

It is sad that this has partly devolved in England to protecting the rights of aristocratic land holders. That is the risk. But the tyranny of the majority is a terrifying thing.

Ask a black person, a Jew, a queer person...

For all the many faults of her family, and however much I disliked and dislike her and hers, she was Queen for all her subjects, not slicing and dicing to get an electoral advantage, but everybody.
A feature suggestion: a way to list specific possible outcomes, and have pros/cons/questions/votes relate to them.

In the "We will open a new office in Amsterdam" example, it's expressed as just a yes/no situation, but peter@acme.corp is seen asking a question which is really an alternate potential outcome. It seems like a whole separate "decision" would need to be made for that, with its own pros/cons/questions, which would be very clunky compared to having that alternative discussed in the same place.

A different instance of something similar came up for me recently. I lead a small team and a member of the team is temporarily in a far flung timezone. We normally have a team meeting at a specific time which is very inconvenient in this far timezone, but moving to any convenient time would inconvenience the rest of the team. I considered a few options and ran a small poll, proposed a new meeting time for some of the meetings, and everyone on the team hated the idea, so we fell back to having it at its normal time.

I think a tool like this could have been very helpful for listing out 3-4 possible options and allowing people to express specific pros/cons for each of those. We might have ended up at a more optimal situation, but instead we ended up with the one that was simplest to express, discuss, and agree on.

All that said: even with that feature, I am not sure I would pay for this tool. I feel like the friction of introducing "a tool" for things like this, with accounts and signups and seats and process and payments -- it just isn't worth it for the pain it would solve for me. I feel the pain, but I'm not convinced I should pay someone to fix it, or that doing so would really make things better. I also feel (as a shitty developer customer would) that I could build this or something that gets me 60% of the way there for free, or accomplish it via existing mechanisms in slack/the team wiki, where my team already lives.

(but, don't listen to me -- prove me wrong!)
My post (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32769925) was not for or against monarchy, or about monarchy at all. It was about tedious, low-quality internet comments. I'm against them.

(Edit: that first sentence is really a template instantiation. When I post like this, it's never for or against <T>. It's always just about internet comments. People who are against <T> (or for it) often react like we're for <T> (or against it), but this is an illusion. It could quickly be cured by grokking the template, since at that level all these posts are entirely the same.)

It may not make so much sense now, but this thread was filling with the worst sort of dumb flamebait when it got started. That it isn't so now is because I've spent the last 3 hours refreshing the page and meticulously moderating it. If some of my comments are a little dyspeptic, that's because dealing with tedious comments is tedious, and I sort of pep myself up by letting loose a bit. Not the finest of practices but esprit de corps is also a need.
Does RCS work for devices that do not have a phone number? My reading suggests it does not, that there is still a carrier dependency.

iMessage has no carrier dependency, no phone number dependency at all. Kids all over the world use iMessage over Wi-Fi without working phone service at all.
When was the last time this caused a bug for you? My experience of moving from JavaScript to typescript is that it takes significantly longer to write many generic things because the types can’t really express the intended use as well. I will certainly admit that types help a lot at the boundaries between systems , or for catching errors introduced when changing code, but it’s not always a clear win for types, given how much more verbose, and less expressive the language becomes as a result.
This is San Francisco we're talking about... you just have to sit at Dolores Park and wait for the sellers to walk by....

Also, the chocolate brownies are pretty good and even sometimes have drug-free versions too!
If a "wikiocracy" is where shadowy, unaccountable hierarchies manipulate policy to their will while pretending to be democratic about it, then yeah we live in one but I'm not sure it's better than a representative system.
> Oakland police is so dysfunctional

https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/guqz5t/comment/fsk...
Ah yes let's adopt RCS, a standard that requires a phone number, isn't encrypted (yes I recognize that Google has a proprietary extension to the standard but that isn't part of the standard and is not standardised), and is controlled by carriers (A group known for supporting development of features that make them less relevant).

The blue vs. green is a very easy to understand demarcation for secure vs. insecure. Blue = secure, green = insecure.
Yeah, and the internet is just sending 1500 bytes of binary data. There are no phones that actually cut you off at 160 characters, it's an implementation detail at this point. And MMS is fine, not great but fine.

But regardless, let's push the goalposts back, the whole point of interoperability is to allow people on different messaging networks to communicate. The users of RCS is a subset of SMS.
In what meaningful and useful sense will a republic be different from what the UK is now?
Similar sentiments from me.

I think there is something to be said for, lack of a better word, the continuity of history. 70 years with the same monarch. A system of monarchy, for over a 1000 years.

It is a symbolic role, but symbols are powerful.
If it enables Google to sell more ads, they will port anything to any platform.
The alternative is listening to the people running the elections at the grassroots level. They should be a mix of people representing various interests. There should also be international observers. If there is widespread fraud, the word will get out before the results. And you will hear about the fraud from everywhere, not just from a handful of weirdos or from top-level people of one of the parties.

Every sane electoral system starts from the assumption that the authorities responsible for the elections cannot be trusted. Instead of trusting the authorities, you trust a large number of people watching each other. Then everyone knows that if there is widespread fraud, it will be obvious, and hence the electoral system can be trusted.
You think so? It might be a tad dramatic but teens interface with the world through their phones and this purposeless "otherization" can not be having a good effect on society.
It depends - do you feel that Proctor and Gamble are guilty of using psychologcal understanding of dopamine hits to design their Ranch flavored Doritos?

In similar vein, would there be a difference in algorithm that shows you what you want, or determines which videos create the most dopamine hits and juices you in a particular direction?

There may be fancier ways to describe this, but would an algorithm that merely enhances diffusion be the same as an algorithm designed to drive molecules to the most extreme directions?
I think this is the wrong take away. The market made a few specific decisions:

1) Users don't want to deal with installation.

2) New developers are attracted towards the least steep difficulty incline -- learn HTML first, then some CSS, then some JS. At each stage you can do something visible and useful, and the next step is within your grasp.

3) Most investment goes towards companies adding value to the web, and companies that do that will tend to use web technologies first.

I think crashes have very little do with it. In my experience web apps have just as many stability problems and broken features. Also important that #2 means that developers that can work on systems where web solutions can't work (things that really need C++ because of realtime requirements) are paid a substantial premium. So the market has also decided the people who can do native well are more valuable.
While most people harping on the "there are no known negative health effects." claim are talking about the drugs making people crazy I would point out that some psychedelics can also make people become sick. It passes, no long term harm, but it still seems like a miserable time and one I'd call a "negative health effect".

Sure, too much alcohol can cause people to get sick too, but then nobody ever said alcohol had "no known negative health effects" either.
> He got bullied and saw others bullied too

> I mean it’s not a bad company

These two statements cannot exist together when discussing the same organization.
> and for that there needs to be a shit-ton of weed-pulling

Grateful am I. But mate, you do sound like you need a holiday!
It would be nice if you had an option to never show Amazon links in the results. Due to their commingling, counterfeit problems, and their scummy business practices, many people who would use your site probably don’t want to give Amazon their business. (I’m betting a higher number of your users are power users than other sites.) One of the features I like about kagi.com is that I can exclude sites from search results.
That is the opposite of the truth. The common law position is usually: "If it's not forbidden it's permitted". You're confusing common law with civil law used in most of Europe
OAuth Modes
When they are shut down they are not working. I would like to see some statistics about how many phones make it to 10 years. (dendrites growing). I shall also chech my phones in the basement before they catch fire :)
Here's the thing about truth: the "who" doesn't matter. There shouldn't even be a question of "who determines if something is untrue?", nor should we be advocating for every individual to decide the truth for themselves. There is one objective reality that exists outside of our own minds, desires, and decisions, whether we like that reality or not.

What determines truth is empirical evidence. If something has no empirical evidence, it is untrue. If something has empirical evidence, it is true. If there is conflicting evidence, then some of that evidence is invalid and it must be re-analyzed using math, existing knowledge from provable things, and formal logic. After doing so, you will either determine which of those things is true, or arrive at the conclusion that there isn't enough evidence either way and stop after saying "I don't know" rather than deciding which version you prefer.

It's not about appeals to authority. Expertise is about people who have more practice at finding, testing, and analyzing the evidence in their field than random Joe Schmo on the street; and it's about nothing more than that.

We should not let people "make up their own minds" on conflicting evidence -- which is another way of saying "let people make up their own reality and expect to live in it" -- we should encourage everyone to stop at "I don't know" when they aren't sure where the evidence actually leads, and defer to people who can follow the evidence, if such a person exists. And if no such person exists, then we as a species should all stop at "I don't know (yet)".
The only ones that I know of are in https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.06684 (with Julia DifferentialEquations.jl and DiffTaichi), but those are more algorithmic. There, Julia does extremely well, but the conclusion that I would draw from it is more: use a programming language with robust and differentiable differential equation solvers rather than writing simple Euler loops by hand (as this article does).