skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The opinion of three journalists working for the same retail tech conglomerate is hardly "research." WaPo has suffered a Pulitzer Prize revocation in 1981 for fabricating stories, has continuously circulated advertisements from China Watch (operated by the CCP), repeatedly settled on libelous claims made for profit, and on numerous occasions assisted in providing platforms for anti-Western and anti-Semitic groups supported by Iran. It's a joke to imagine they would do research in hopes of drawing any conclusion but the one that makes them the most money.
If you have to ask: not until you actually use it, no.
If I recall correctly it was a google algo change that punished the site a few years ago
Or following the mail example, adopt a spam control mechanism that doesn't require coding it yourself.
why not? why would the Corleone family go through so much trouble to live a criminal life, with all its dangers?
> If social media wishes to be immune from lawsuits regarding the content it publishes, section 203, then it should not have the ability to censor such content for an explicit commercial revenue model.

Why? This is seems like a total non-sequitur. It's pretty obvious that the individual posting illegal content is the person responsible for it and not the platform it's posted to, unless the platform is soliciting or refusing to remove said content. The anti-230 reasoning seems purely motivated by punitive thinking rather than what actually makes sense in reality.

> Those things are great, but are ultimately out of alignment with a commercial revenue model.

I would say it's out of alignment with the ad model specifically. Currently, there exists a financial incentive to curate content in a manner that pleases advertisers and the internet mobs that patronize their businesses. However, if social media companies were somehow forced into a subscription model, they would have a financial incentive to avoid banning users because it would hurt the bottom line, it would also eliminate the incentive to curate content to the prerogative of advertisers, and it would make the user experience much better due to lack of ads and the need to create better user experiences to maintain retention.
They have acknowledged the issue in the Feedburner Help Group

https://groups.google.com/g/feedburner/c/v33UeXJv6Go

Brian Walker
1:22 PM (1 hour ago)
to FeedBurner Help Group
Hello everyone, we are currently getting reports of a feed outage. This is an intermittent issue that we are currently addressing and the issue should be resolved within the next few hours. We apologize for the inconvenience and working to get the issue resolved ASAP.
When Section 230 goes every forum and smaller community becomes the legal wild west, open to being sued by any jackass claiming libel and to drag site owners into a years long legal battle.
So we should also give up on minimum wages? Heath codes? Safety rules? Just let the market sort it out? Last time we tried that it did not end well. Regulation is necessary for a practical (not-highschool-textbook) economy.
Not forcing, the universal crap care option is forcing through robbing his neighbor.
Stressful start causes chromosome errors in human embryos
Not really. OSMand has been around for ages if all you want is navigation with open street maps.

But that's really not what we want from a maps app, issit?

We want intelligent location data like searching for "groceries" and we want to know wherever the location is currently open etc.

While I hope that - eventually - open street map can fill that need, it can't today.
Agreed and wondering myself, DALL-E seemed to do a better job of great looking images with brief prompts, but Stable Diffusion seems to need more specific prompts. SD is free though so would love to use it more.
Quant-UX is worth a look for prototyping needs, it's OSS as well and can generate end HTML/CSS code: https://quant-ux.com/

Lunacy supports multi-player in the way Figma users are used to: https://icons8.com/lunacy

Frame / Plasmic generates code, the latter focusing on React: https://www.framer.com / https://www.plasmic.app/

But yes it does appear that Penpot for now is the most obvious de facto Figma alternative.

The silver lining of this whole debacle has been that it's brought to surface a lot of other alternatives that folks would not have otherwise considered or looked into, which are actually quite decent I'm finding out.
We have a middle-class levy in the form of tax medallions. So they have found a way to undermine that levy in a gray area of the rules society has set up.

They exploit the worker by underpaying them and treating them badly by the standards of the old levy, the taxi medallion. They exploit society by hollowing out the middle class.

We actually need a middle class for the benefit of the masses, and even the ultra-wealthy, though only a few of them seem aware of it, like Henry Ford paying his workers enough to buy his cars. H. Ford seemed to lack any goodness of heart--he just had the brains to recognize that no one could buy his cars if they didn't make enough money to buy them.

I think we should intervene in markets to sustain a middle class, which makes society better and richer on the whole. Unchecked free markets eventually seem to end up with a power-law winner-take-all type wealth distribution. Even the ultra-wealthy suffer compared to the ideal in societies with large wealth inequality. They don't live as long. They will have less things like the iphone, which the ultra-wealthy can't really even get a better core version of; they can, perhaps, buy one encased in gold. No middle class, no iphone and things like it.
I hope many companies get filthy rich transitioning the US to a carbon-free economy. I hope we mint a ton of greedy billionaires in the process.

That sounds like a great deal for everyone!
In order for your framework to, well, work, you have to make a lot of assumptions. Things like:

* Jobs are not sticky (eg, there are 0 switching costs once you are 'stuck' at an employer)

* Employers cannot change their character or terms (eg, it was a good place to work yesterday, now it has become a bad place to work)

* Employers cannot drag an entire industry or employment segment down (eg, race to the bottom)

* Employers cannot do anti-competitive/restrictive things (eg, you must drive this kind of car, you must work these hours, you cannot work for a competitor, you cannot negotiate on the terms of your pay structure)

I'm generally (and historically; eg, younger me) very sympathetic to the idea of freedom to contract for any terms.

However, it is not a zero-sum game. A previously-unemployed person does not become employed and then be magically better for life. That would assume they would have been unemployed forever had this business not come along, and it would also assume that this business cannot become worse to work for over time or limit one's prospects.

I used to be very opposed to the concept of wage floors, however what's changed my mind has been the impact of unemployment to drag down wages. As long as there is >0 unemployment, there can and will be a race to the bottom in terms of the wages and conditions of marginal employment. This wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing if the employment market was a fixed pie (again, zero sum game), but that's not the way the real world works.
If filtering is not publishing then what is it? Do we need a new term for this arrangement?
In both instances workers are being taken advantage of by an employer because of asymmetric power in the system.
If someone put legible graffiti on your house, and you weren't allowed to remove it, and it thus appeared that you endorse whatever the graffiti is saying (not to mention having to encounter it yourself all day), then that would indeed be compelled speech.

But we're not really talking about that. A site not removing a post is not an endorsement of the post, especially if they are legally required to not remove the post.

I'm not saying that prohibiting removal of posts is necessarily a good idea. It can certainly be argued that the company providing the forum ought to be allowed to do whatever they want.

But, for better or worse, "people/companies should be able to do whatever they want" is not a principle of US law. As far as I know, US states can make it illegal for anyone to cook hot dogs after 3pm on Wednesdays. If challenged in court, I think they don't even have to provide any rationale for this - it's enough that it is a law properly passed by the legislature. And of course US states have numerous less nonsensical laws regulating businesses, including things like prohibiting businesses from engaging in racial discrimination, or listening in on telephone conversations.
I use OsmAnd~ on mobile. Works perfectly. Obviously doesn't do traffic.
You misunderstood. Don’t require users to build their bubbles, but have providers offer bubbles for a user to choose from. You could even have external bubble providers that offer different technologies and qualities of filters.

Just don’t have one centralised overlord.
I agree, but so is food. Good luck convincing the govt to draw that line.
- $2.4B Ponzi scheme on 4,500 people worldwide

- Arcaro gave up $24M in personal earnings

- Arcaro gave up $57M in coin

- Arcaro got 38 months in federal prison

- Founder of Ponzi scheme missing (along with lots of money?)

Who's to say Arcaro doesn't have another $300M somewhere?

Federal agents are so eager to turn cooperative witnesses that they make it clear there will be no real consequences when you are caught. They gain from convictions, but are not penalized for being too soft. As a result, it's open season for digital and financial fraud on retail investors and consumers, who can't otherwise incentivize federal agents.

So: how exactly would one design the correct incentives for federal agents to protect retail investors (and consumers), and for people to avoid defrauding others, when computing and the internets permits actions at this scale for such low costs, and when investigations are so costly (particularly given opaque corporate structures and jurisdictional boundaries)?
Google strikes me as a perfect example of an org which became so big that it started to feel hostile to users. As a result users started to cut Google out of their lives. Google's growth and success will be directly responsible for their downfall. Companies always chase hyper growth, but I honestly believe that the best consumer-company relationships are created by mid-sized companies who focus on a core service, deliver very well on that and don't try to follow their user into all other areas of their lives at which point it becomes creepy and greedy again.
And the Nordic countries and probably many more European countries.
People actually do not have free will, we are all part of a deterministic system
No the point is that adobe has shitty business practices and their software is also bloated and crappy and has done fuck all to make my life as a designer easier in the past decade.

The fact that overwhelming amount of designers switched over to figma in the past few years, proves that how people feel about adobe is very real.

Personally I am never thrilled to switch software and endure initial period of relearning how to do my job in a new tool unless there are measurable advantages.

I ve used adobe products since the age of 12 and not having to install their crappy software on any computer since 2019 has been liberating af
Uber Security Update
I was merely adding that even in a country where being an open Nazi is legal, it is still legal to exclude Nazis from your place of business, not arguing against you.
I highly doubt it. It Struggles on GPUs with 6GB or less.
> many pockets of inefficiency with respect to engineering headcount,

This is assumed. The hard part is finding them.
designated initializers are a trap. you can't require certain fields are set... this has been a big pain point for my team. guess we should have used builder pattern or something
> Individuals have rights to be part of and participate in a group but legal entities that represent one or multiple people (you can have a corporation with one person) have not been recognized as a person until citizens united ruling and don't have rights.

You are off by around 200 years. See [1] for a good summary.

Note: they might have some cases mixed up. They cite "Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts v. Town of Pawlet (1823)", but the only case with that name I see is Society for Propagation of Gospel v. Town of Pawlet, 29 U.S. 480 (1830). There is an 1823 case with that plaintiff, Society for Propagation of the Gospel v. Town of New Haven, 21 U.S. 464 (1823). I'm not sure if they meant to cite the first and got the year wrong, or mean to cite the latter and got the defendant wrong.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood#In_the_Un...
> people have pointed out that 100% of the profits go to ending poverty

As far as I know, there is no evidence of that beyond the creator's claims. What happened to skepticism? The creator has enormous economic incentives to lie.

If he is truly putting all of his channel's revenue "back into the communities that I shoot in" (whatever that means), why wouldn't he be proudly transparent about what that means.

How much money?
Where has it gone?
Can anyone verify it?

I would love to be wrong about this, but as far as I know the answers are:

Nobody knows.
Nobody knows.
No.
While various bodies have purported to force common carrier status on various companies, the actual jurisprudence is much more nuanced than what you have suggested. The legislative imposition is that the FCC is empowered to declare certain entities common carriers if in the public interest. Thus the status is administrative rather than legislative.

Furthermore, last-mile ISPs are "information services" not common carriers (Mozilla vs. FCC). It is complete nonsense if YouTube is a "common carrier" and Comcast is an "information service"!

Finally, whether a firm presents itself as indiscriminate or not is the main way that it comes to fall under common carriage regulation. See Nat. Ass'n of Regulatory Utility Com'rs v. FCC.

"Moreover, the characteristic of holding oneself out to serve indiscriminately appears to be an essential element, if one is to draw a coherent line between common and private carriers. The cases make clear both that common carriers need not serve the whole public, and that private carriers may serve a significant clientele, apart from the carrier himself. Since given private and common carriers may therefore be indistinguishable in terms of the clientele actually served, it is difficult to envision a sensible line between them which does not turn on the manner and terms by which they approach and deal with their customers. The common law requirement of holding oneself out to serve the public indiscriminately draws such a logical and sensible line between the two types of carriers."
The very fact that you made this comment implies that you expect the public to understand what it means. Therefore, so would a jury of your peers.
In other words, if you get that this behavior is just a twist on botting, it's safe to assume the courts will too.
> Its comments like this that have caused me to really lose faith in the quality of conversation on Hacker News.

I get what you're saying but isn't it a little rash to discard all discussion on hacker news because of a splattering of naive shallow comments? I rather agree with your response, but I also understand how many people who have yet to consider the matter deeply, or maybe have never been poor, think of reality as "a group of rational equal individual actors".

I very much agree that the argument responded too here share a lot of similarity to arguments for slavery, although the veneer is certainly much more palatable, but we have to remember that even slavery was pretty popular, and hacker news will never be a progressive socialist platform.

Personally, I think accepting these types of discussions is a small price to pay for the informed and nuanced discussions i get to have and watch on hacker news.
Do you believe him, just because he says so?
Uhaul is such a dumpster of a Dino company it Wouldn’t surprise me if they secured everything with “password”. I hate them with a passion
There was more to it than just sails. Keel and rudder tech had to evolve too. Tacking a ship upwind is a special thing that involves every aspect of sail and hull to accomplish. And the equipment to do it comes with drawbacks.
do you extend this line of reasoning to all criminals whose forebears did not arrive on the Mayflower?
> Sadly, all Penpot/Figma alternative posts are getting penalized presumably because Adobe employees/Figma people with incentive to see Figma continue are flagging them, but anywho.

Please don't, this is against HN comment guidelines.

> Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, bots, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.
I'm not claiming that the objections are of equal merit, but a moral/legal system is clearly not going to work on a societal level if it's just going to be "it's fine to disregard the legal system if you think there's a good reason for it".
Publish all content to blockchain and let the users create their own interfaces as they choose. But first make all content equally and indisputably available?

I’d be cool with this.
> No way, that's not even remotely true

Oh. Who’s being naïve, Kay?

Keep reading, because the article says,

"The idea that American anti-Italian bigotry is the root cause of the mafia is obviously stupid."

And,

"Of course, the Don tells himself that his choice of crime is justified. Of course, Michael tells Kay whatever she needs to hear to give him what he wants. These are, let’s remember, bad people consistently doing bad things. Understood in this light, Michael’s manipulation of Kay is a flaw not in the film, but in Michael."
> programming is hard, let's go (language) shopping instead
But there are thousands of other jobs to choose from.

The government itself has a bunch of jobs that require similar skills.
Interesting who funded this study: Institute for New Economic Thinking was founded with an initial pledge of $50 million from businessman and philanthropist George Soros . I'm sure researchers try extra hard to not be influenced by the funders and pursue real science. Let's hope they did in this case.
Then maybe I dont understand the distinction you are making between someone thinking they are bound by precedent and agreeing with it in this context.

In the specific legal context, there is stare decisis, which itself is not absolute.
In the realm of public opinion and politics there is no equivalent I can think of.
No individual human has their opinions bound by precedent.
You are talking about library API design, not language design. A new C++ syntax will not change how functions in the standard library are named (e.g. operator<<).
I’ll believe it when I see it. Probably huge fines for small and medium business and nothing for the big offenders
That doesn't match my professional experience: Many code bases iteratively move forward through language versions. They do vary in how intensely they drive this, which can lead to vast differences across different areas of the code, but that is not necessarily bad, but would be an issue with hard breaks.
A must-watch in that context is the Oscar-nominated 1972 documentary on Thor Heyerdahl's Ra expeditions.

They attempted to cross the Atlantic on papyrus boats, based on drawings and models from ancient Egypt.

Here's a good picture of their second boat:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/09/19-08-28...

Here's the documentary:

Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJDYiTYoaLE
Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hb6Jsudv7lg
> any limitation on a free-for-all internet commenting as a kind of censorship. You're nailing all of the reasons why it's such an unworkable idea.

I think it misses all the solutions we'd implement if we decided that ISPs and social-media couldn't censor. We'd have strong personal content curation tools to avoid things that merely offend or bother us, and ISPs/social-media companies would only get protection if they cooperated in helping police find the posters of actual criminal speech.

> Should I be allowed to come into your store, harass your customers, scream my political views, and then tell you that you can't kick me out?

Scream, no. But if you sell me a coffee I should have a right to sit at the tables and talk to my friend, even if another customer dislikes our politics. You didn't sell me a coffee and a ticket to a specific-viewpoints-only dining room, so you can't kick me out for my viewpoint after the fact. If someone's harassment only involves knowing that someone else has a different viewpoint than them then it's not harassment.
> The bills can discourage rape reporting and compound victims' trauma.

Are there any studies on how this knowledge emboldens sexual assault and rapists?
I think this is pretty common.
There was a years-long conniption over the Python 2 to 3 migration. I also believe that it's ok for a language to break backwards compatibility once every 40 years, but I completely understand why so many language designers are afraid to.
I wonder if anyone at Deep Mind can share why they stopped working on this. Technical issues or a business led decision?
yes and no - each day it is game rules plus the ability to negotiate; elected officials come in all flavors
First 2000 calories, tax free! (Once everything is cashless they'll know exactly what you're eating anyway.)
Ah, but you don't know if the bag of tat contains vital information (event schedule, car park code...) until you've already left the registration desk.
I clocked 18 seconds for a 512*512 image, 25 steps, on a Mac Studio with M1 Max and 32GB.
That is an operator overload of a library and not built in language syntax.

Even so there is now std::format

https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/utility/format/format
I think the system needs to change. You have no idea if the ride in that zone will take you 30 minutes away so you actually need to drive back unpaid to get higher fares. I think with enough transparency it can be fair to the drivers - but to the detriment of the customer experience.
People often want free speech when it favors their side, and they will likewise rationalize against free speech when it doesn't. We should be able to talk and think about laws outside the very specific political context of the day, but Reuters cannot help but remind the reader that free speech online may enable 'violence' and that this ruling is a win for all sorts of people associated with Republicans and Donald Trump - as if to say you are somehow associated with such viewpoints because you have libertarian views on what thoughts people are allowed to be exposed to. It reads very biased.
Grab is doing okay I suppose but it feels like "just another app" in SEA, and is mostly used by people for hailing rides. The payments are there but very few vendors actually use it.
storage (and grid stability in general) is always the crucial achilles heel to renewables and it's always handwaved away with fantastical arguments positioned squarely against nuclear (here, springing up a whole global hydrogen economy out of nowhere). it's frustrating to see so much needless internecine fighting when nuclear plus renewables is the most viable answer we have right now to a fossil fuel free future. we need to be laser-focused on removing coal from our energy present, let alone our energy future.

coal is still nearly 30% of the electricity generation in the US (and 11% of total energy consumption). if we'd just kept building nuclear like we had between the 70s-90s, we'd be coal-free right now (other than that the bit used by industry, which is about 10% of the total coal use, and 1% of total energy consumption).