skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's kinda interesting how a world like "no tweeting from Texas" might jive with EU laws which want to restrict IO and data storage to just inside the region or country.

Are we about to get more decentralized just because the laws are accidentally forcing us to?

Imagine connecting to EU or Texas Twitter to see what's going on there.
I just realized that I was not logged in when I checked, that was silly of me, sorry.
Maybe they can finally secede and take Elon with them.
> if you dropped C++ a decade ago …

Fair. Still, the more recent C++ improvements tend to roll out slowly across the ecosystem and work environments.
It's not personal anecdote if it covers whole country
Europeans can't afford to run that!
> So, because any website can potentially reach millions of people, all websites must be considered public spaces and must be coerced to allow all legal speech?

Yes. When a few corporations dominate anything, they cannot be considered 'private' entities that can do whatever they want anymore. They are infrastructure, and they have to oblige by the democratic rules and regulations like how any large infrastructure company does.

Free speech is no different. After consolidating a majority of the social space and literally gaining the power to set the public discourse, no company can be let to do whatever they want with that power. That would invalidate any concept of free press. Not that current 'free' press is any different and that it does not need a major regulatory crackdown. But it has to start somewhere, and starting from the companies who literally ousted the traditional press from the helm of public discourse should be a good place to start.
Simple. Shut off Texas. You don’t have a right to use social media. I wouldn’t even appeal the decision. Let Texas lie in the bed they made.
Understanding is power, information is awareness, which when out of context is superfluous.
Well, then that's a totally different aspect of it. You're speaking about politics as a weapon or a way of surviving under extremely difficult circumstances, which neither of us here, reading and posting on HN, are suffering. What I'm talking about is politics as a smalltalk subject, in a family/friendly environment.
Hacker News avoids political discussion, would this mean a site like hacker news(assuming it’s big enough) couldn’t moderate heated political discussion as off topic?

Im curious how this would apply to Reddit, will there just be constant brigading of the political forums?

Ironically as others have pointed out this will probably have a severe chilling effect on speech.
Surprisingly, I find CDMX to be ver quiet the moment you get out of the main streets.

The buildings and vegetation seems to seal noises to their area.

Of course the quietness is never permanent as no street is off limits for the wandering merchants.
take a giant grain of salt when reading Doomberg:

Doomberg has a habit of wildly exaggerating and also were openly funding the Canadian "insurrectionist" trucker convoy (not taking a political position just pointing out he has a specific political tint to his tweets sort of like Zero Hedge).

Who is he? Well first of all he appears to be parroting a lot of talking points from a specific political spectrum, this much is true, given his open support for the Trucker Convoy movement in Canada which has been associated with the typical antithesis to what the other side of the political spectrum.

I'm deliberately refraining from using the term "left" or "right" here, just highlighting that Doomberg amongst other fintwitters (financial twitters) have begun to weaponize analytical financial "findings" by discounting/exaggerating/excluding contradictory data that would hurt their narrative.

In the case of Doomberg, his narrative and "analysis" tie together to ring well to a particular ex-president now being investigated for withholding top secret documents that supposedly impact national security. Again, refusing to use terms like "Trump" or "Biden" and being impartial to convey the ilk of which characters like Doomberg are weaponizing what superficially sounds rational with numbers to boot (which when you dive deeper is riddled with obvious omissions, discounts and exclusion) to echo back what his followers who lean in a particular political direction want to hear and buy his newsletter.

tldr: Doomberg has a long history of questionable accuracy and partiality to create an echo chamber which he is able to monetize by carefully disguising political narratives of a particular lens (and one which much of HN crowd who are employed at a large company would be alarmed at) in the form of "alpha generating macro economic analysis" (but never materializes).
There’s political discussion all over hacker news, in the comments.
> It aims to increase the albedo of Earth by creating more clouds over the oceans e.g. by spraying seawater.

Sort of; what we're usually doing, in general, is increase the aerosol burden which in turn increases the total number of nuclei available to form clouds. Given that the total liquid water content in a cloud system is fixed (i.e. controlled by factors that are harder for us to influence directly), this leads to a mixture of consequences:

1. The total number of cloud droplets increases
2. The average cloud droplet size decreases

Both (1) and (2) alone tend to increase the albedo of the cloud. They also produce secondary effects, e.g. they can suppress the formation of precipitation or modify microphysical properties that lead to clouds sticking around longer, thereby further increasing their radiative effect (more SW radiation reflected back to space and possibly more LW radiation at lower radiating heights).
Thank you for the affirmation in that.

I've had to come to the same conclusion recently and am better off for it, as you say.
A worker is worth what a business can pay for the value they bring. Arguably a low paid apprenticeship is more beneficial than mounds of college debt. Somehow taking debt is seen as better than simply breaking even. I know many jobs that would benefit from someone "sweeping the shop" while they learn the business.
By some readings of section 230, they may not be able to unless they want to be treated as a publisher of speech. However, almost nobody is going to actually argue that this is the case.

Also, IIRC moderation rules are allowed, and if your rule is "no politics on the forum" and someone talks politics, they can be banned. Same with "no racism" or "no antisemitic comments."
> Should the New York Times owner be forced to publish opinions they don't like?

Yes, if they or their majority shareholders dominate a noticeable part of the press. Otherwise you end up how things are - a minority of the rich consolidating the press, setting the public agenda as they want to.
> only an idiot would look at an ad and think, oh this brand is knowingly sponsoring this content.

Yes, but also, we live in a very incendiary society where some people are willing to take on whatever story and blow it out of proportion. Your face or trademark in a banner on the wrong website is enough for someone to link you to whatever cause that site is promoting and that could be the end of your business/career, literally.
And? Those are additional features. The core is still light, easy and discoverable. All words that can't be said about Illustrator, Photoshop or InDesign.
The Constitution is lower in the ontology than the origin of the natural rights of human beings, so it’s really irrelevant whether it is documented in this downstream position or not. The break with the tyranny of the monarchy happened in the Declaration Independence and even that was documenting where the rights originate.
Why not just go to a different website that runst he way you want? Or revive NNTP and host community servers or something.
Craigslist is the only thing I have ever needed to rent out our condo for more than a decade. Long may it live! I'll also plug ezLandlordForms for everything else, inc. applications and background checks and contracts and yada yada.
"the constitutional law which says 'government cannot restrict free speech' is interpreted to mean also government cannot permit corporations to restrict free speech."

This is just a restatement of what I asked. Why is it interpreted to mean this? That's a total departure from the meaning of 1A.
I've done a lot of side projects and worked with a lot of businesses, so I'm starting to get a little jaded about how difficult it is to create or figure out what people want. I'm now realizing I could very easily spend another 8+ months and still not end up with a decent product.
Sutter might be a bigger name, but I think this has about the same chances as Damian Conway's SPECS[1].

[1]:https://users.monash.edu/~damian/papers/HTML/ModestProposal....
I don't know... When I'm reading something that really excites me I usually want to tell others about it and talk about it, why it excited me, what I find interesting, thus encouraging conversation.
Have you bought an amd gpu in the last decade? They don’t beat nvidias top cards but they perform well. Xbox/PS4 use amd hardware and so does the steam deck. I have no idea why this comment was even made?? Have you compared their open source driver to nvidias? Night and day difference.
Trussonomics
Section 230 is a federal law, it cannot make a state law that would otherwise violate the First Amendment as incorporated into the Fourteenth Amendment somehow okay. That’s not how the relationship between state, federal, and constitutional law works.
You can see the tweets and posts because a private company allows you to make an account, and even then you don't see all.

That's like walking into a Starbucks and reading the chalkboard. Everybody who can enter can read it.

Factual it's faster and easier to enter a Starbucks than creating an FB account.

And like we all know if FB decides to ban your account you can nothing do about it.

Doesn't sound like a public place to me
This is really the critical factor.

Anti-speech pro-corporate-authority advocates always try to put these monopolistic, unescapable megacorporations in the same category as some local mom-and-pop operation. It's a massive intentional category error; megacorps are not little companies you can just walk awawy from. There is a point where a corporation's influence becomes so unescapable and so capable of greatly degrading your life that it must be treated in some ways like a government, for the same reasons we treat government differently from just another company or citizen.

The same reason that the phone company or a company that owns all the local roads or water mains can't decide to "stop serving" you because they don't like your religion.
I think feigned confusion for the purpose of disagreement is rude.
I'm not sure the axiomatic basis given here holds up.

> Democracy, capitalism, believes of what is right or wrong are inevitable to occur in this way eventually after this starting point transpires

Poorly worded, but also not true. There was a Dutch Republic for a few hundred years, but they reverted to a monarchy.

They also don't explain long term survival of grossly undemocratic systems, like segregation in the US, or apartheid in South Africa.
If someone paints your house pink without your authorization, you do indeed have cause for legal complaint. But one would not usually say that your free speech rights have been violated (unless in painting it, they covered up some speech of yours).
The forest in France are growing faster than we are cutting them. Therefore, using them for energy would make for:

- a cheap, local energy source;

- one that is renewable;

- one that captures as much carbon as its consumption emmitted when its renewed (minus transportation and transformation, which is true for any energy source we use).

So it seems it's not that of a bad idea if you manage to keep the forest sizeable and healthy. It's hard to do for the UK because it's a small densely populated islande, so maybe the tweet is valid for them, but extending it for all Europe is far fetched. Espacially since the UK brexited.

Now, I'm pretty sure if we start abusing it, we will discoverd it kills some important ecosystem to regularly turn over trees like that, or suck all minerals from the the soil. So I'm not going to assume it's without problems, but we don't have an energy source for 8 billions humans that don't have any.
That's GNU/President Stallman
> Do you want the government deciding what is acceptable?

Yes. Entire world except the US does. People elect parliaments, who make laws according to their voters' agendas. Then the laws are enforced. What's acceptable and what's not acceptable are decided in the same manner. Like how going out naked in any city in the civilized world constitutes an offense unless you have a mental disorder.

You already obey with a zillion of things in which 'the government' decides to be acceptable or not acceptable.
I seriously wonder why no one did that before (put a context-free language in front of C++). Presumably, because of the need for modules to get anything beyond trivial code (without modules, one would have to use the preprocessor which would intermix old and new syntax).

Now, please do it. Context-free syntax is so obviously better that it's really an embarrassment, people are still defending hacks from decades ago.

And please, for the love of Knuth, someone do it with LaTeX, too.
This sounds like an interesting writing prompt. I'd love to see this turned into a short story!
Rappi. Massive app in Latin America.

The level of usefulness and convenience is astounding. I ordered some items I forgot to get at the supermarket the other day, arrived in 4 minutes. In my home first world country, next day delivery is touted as a massive success by execs on linkedin.

For how powerful Rappi has become, not only did they beat Uber Eats completely out of Colombia (their service just isn't at the same standard anywhere), but they also beat McDonalds who tried to go exclusive with their own app for a year before coming back to the platform.
I think you're talking about "discussing politics to shoot the shit" but I think it's really important you realize that you and I do that because we're lucky, and "eschewing discussion of political topics" is only something you get the privilege to do when you're not getting targeted.
Morality is the conservation of the potential of being, not the elimination of “suffering”.

Consider Objective Morality as thus:

Good is the conservation of the potential of being.

Bad is the waste of the potential of being.

Evil is the corruption and perversion of the potential of being.
> They're public squares that are closely related to a mall rather than a private Starbucks location.

Just reading a book on malls, in America, they are mostly privately owned and are absolutely famous for rigid policing.
Trends in Passenger Seat Belt Use Among High School Students–United States
I'm confused why anyone would use a M.2 card in an IoT application.

Is this a development board?
Welcome to Your Airbnb, the Cleaning Fees Are $143 and You’ll Still Have
What does the C++20 change in a day-to-day work? I know they added "stuff" (as always) but is there anything that really benefits >80% of all cpp programmers?
> sensationalist

unfortunately this is how you get 5~6 digit followers on fintwit. its no longer about nuanced analysis but how can I disguise my political narrative in the form of "DD" or "analytical take" but leave room for contingency in case somebody digs deeper and throws stone at my bridge made out of twigs?
Curious what kind of issues you've seen with fly.io? (Most reports about them I've seen seem to be based on people trying it out relatively briefly, where they might miss things that crop up over a longer time)
Rewriting the Story of Compensation
This will not happen, and the reason is that Obamacare made a great effort to decouple health care insurance and benefits from the employer. Since insurance is now available for purchase on the open marketplace, there are whole classes of employers who don't need to worry about including it in their benefits packages which they offer. It would be a step backwards to require or force companies to include it, especially to gig workers or contract employees; they should simply compensate them enough that they can afford to purchase an appropriate plan on the marketplace.

If you do not like this structure then you should have worked to block Obamacare from becoming law, because that was a primary objective of the legislation: to decouple health care plans from large companies and employers, and make that insurance more accessible, on the free market, to more workers than ever before.
No tweeting from Texas sounds like a great idea! We can expand it to no tweeting from anywhere after we see the effects on Texans. Then I bknow the popular nexts step would be to get rid of FB and Instagram, but I'm in favor of dissolving Pinterest first. It is like charlie and the football everytime I follow a link from an image search looking for something only to notice it was Pinterest right afterwards but before it loads, realizing I am about to be hounded to load an app, then log in, and then be shown that image is no longer part of Pinterest.
Well it has input fields, like a contact form and comments.
What is your well-researched scientific concern regarding the accumulation of those particles?
They want the US to be like Saudi Arabia.
Old post so IDK if they still do it, but Riot Games does some automated testing for League of Legends: https://technology.riotgames.com/news/automated-testing-leag...
Yes but new posts are often closed as overly heated/off topic.
I finished HIPA and HL7/FHIR Integration. I am getting users through a population health model. This is phase 2 of my moon shot. This was phase one. I am writing a larger blog post about it now.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/award-winning-progr...
Actually, they will likely ask for en banc first. This is just a three judge panel
Go all in on GDPR, handling data sovereignty, etc.

Can't worry about it if it's the table stakes of doing business.
("quiet", though in your defense I proceeded to make the same typo myself just now)

I don't know if this is as big a change as you think it is. There is no huge world-changing technology that just got released. We already had phones and the internet.

I'm experiencing burnout too, but when I look around, I have trouble seeing what actually changed in my life. I do effectively the same job I did before, in much the same way; my coworkers now exist in a rectangle on my screen labeled "Zoom" but otherwise behave as before. I have trouble believing that's enough to cause a mass epidemic of burnout.

I have considered the possibility that I happened to burn out for unrelated reasons at the same time all the extroverts of the world burned out because Zoom is actually that much worse for them, but I have no idea how to test or measure that.
Oh, it’s not accidental.
It works for us its fine. After this stunt however I'll be pushing to migrate to jira like the rest of the company
> Current minimum wages ensure automation are going to win.

The only problem is that there's no evidence of this. Automation still costs more than people, and when machines get sick, you have to hire mechanics that charge by the hour to fix them. When automation is cheaper than people, it's a good thing that all of society profits from when things are automated as long as you don't allow the automators to permanently lock/monopoly away their innovations i.e. you allow competition to reduce prices.

All gigwork "tech" has succeeded in is manufacturing legal pretexts that allow companies not to pay for employee downtime. Bringing back piecework from the 19th century isn't automation, it's lobbying.
>So, because any website can potentially reach millions of people, all websites must be considered public spaces and must be coerced to allow all legal speech?

The difference is that your site has some small non-zero chance of reaching millions in the future, while Twitter, Facebook etc are reaching millions or billions right now. The law doesn't have to work on your potential to reach millions of views, just like how taxes don't work by assuming you might become a trillionaire overnight.

Could you wake up tomorrow to your social media platform having grown to millions of users, yes. Is it a realistic situation that should roadblock regulation? no.
I always got a slight feeling that he was a bit of a creep in disguise, but looking back after having watched, I don’t know, maybe half of the videos on the channel currently, I think that he intentionally brings interviewees in off the street exactly as they are. I believe the studio is near skid row in Los Angeles and that many of them are invited to film in whatever they were wearing that day. Whether or not that is appropriate or germane to the end goal of the channel is debatable, but I do feel like he is simply trying to show these people “as is”, with no production varnish
Maybe email could be integrated into the browser better.
Also labor competition in general, and self-employment, and small businesses...
"People" like banks, phone companies, ISPs, software vendors (suppose MS decides not to support your speech and prevents you from using any of their products), multinational taxi (Uber) and rental (AirB&B) companies, utilities (water, gas, electricity), or retail chains (Walmart)?

Calling such entities "people" is at best misleading.
It is often one sided. As soon as you say something that doesn't fall into line, like against the monarchy, then you get censored.
i don't disagree with you that writing concurrent and parallel programs in erlang/elixir is nicer than in nodejs or go or java. erlang picked a nice set of primitives and elixir extended that with some very good apis. i don't even disagree that language idioms influence software architecture and that elixir and erlang are particularly strong here -- particularly considering otp. however, i just don't think elixir/erlang's concurrency/parallelism story is as important now as it was when erlang was first getting attention for it

at that time the concurrency story in most languages was terrible. non blocking i/o was rare. truly parallel programming was esoteric. that's not the case today though. i am not a huge fan of go but it's undeniable that it has a strong concurrency story AND a strong parallelism story. java has nio and better libraries for concurrent and parallel than it did 10 years ago. even nodejs (which was always the equal of erlang when it came to non blocking i/o) has a very straightforward and fairly efficient worker api for doing parallel computation. languages like rust and swift and julia were born with compelling concurrency and parallelism features

elixir still beats out ruby and python (although python is getting close) but people using ruby and python today largely don't care about these things. they know the limitations and they accept them. if they didn't they have a wealth of languages to pick from

elixir/erlang no longer occupy a unique niche. the other languages have caught up and offer "good enough" libraries and apis. they also bring much to the table that erlang/elixir don't. elixir may lead in concurrent programming but users choose languages that lead in community, ecosystem, compatibility, commercial appeal, etc. for elixir to compete with go, node, java, python it needs (or needed) to offer more

(i say all this as someone who really wishes erlang had 'won'. it's by far my favorite language when you consider solely the syntax and semantics of the code itself. pattern matching should be ubiquitous in modern languages. data should be immutable, full stop. i'd rather write a foldl than a for loop. it didn't win though and the erlang vm is roughly identical today to the erlang vm i was using in 2012 (this isn't to say it hasn't seen improvement but the improvement has been incremental and modest). the ecosystem moves at a glacial pace compared to that of node or go or even a relatively unpopular language like rust or julia)