skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That would be more plausible if he hadn't savaged the company for months, degrading its value, prior to being forced to consummate. It's below the threshold for plausibility now.

It's probably more or less the case that for the next several years, it will be difficult for Musk to do any big-ticket M&A, despite having some of the biggest pockets in the business, without agreeing to exceptionally seller-friendly terms. All because of how he handled an acquisition of a flailing media company that it is very unclear that he wanted in the first place.
good to know! I'll probably be buying a bunch and tearing then apart to use since the pi 4 is so hard to find.
Some people believe sex is a spectrum, or that it can be changed, but it’s super-fringe and mostly reflects ignorance of the difference between sex and gender rather than being a serious philosophical position.
Space X and Tesla are more inherently interesting regardless of the person in charge. Twitter is not. That modus operandi will not work for this.
> The ones with subjects like "query for account ACME-37" were from technical staff.

if you get an email from me, and when you want to follow up you're thinking "what was that phone number I should call?", don't worry, I have already put it in the subject line along with the person's name and the deadline
There is no right to zero consequences for speaking freely.

I say give users the moderation power and let aggregate voting dictate content that remains visible.

No one wants public control of democracy though. What these guys want is a business friendly soapbox.
The commenter you originally replied to was wrong. Pfizer (and other vaccine researchers) never did research on transmission.

But again, can you cite any sources saying that at one point they [Pfizer and other vaccine researchers] did claim that?

The answer of course is that no, you can't, because they didn't. They didn't lie and neither did governments and health organizations. But because we were asked to vaccinate to protect ourselves and others (which worked, and was quickly backed by independent scientific research after vaccines were offered to the public), it sounds like a big gotcha lie if Pfizer says they specifically didn't research that.

Note there are ways you protect others by vaccinating other than reducing transmission. By significantly lowering your chance of hospitalization, you ensure there are more free hospital beds for those that need it (due to COVID or not).
>I've been called a sissy on many an occasion.

That's just an insult.
I think that’s potentially charitable - arguably he pumped out some pro Russia tweets to try and get the deal flagged as against national interest to blow up his financing. He wanted pretty badly for this not to happen including trying a couple of 3D chess moves
Lacking evidence otherwise, I would say that we have to assume the internal experience of most life with central nervous systems are remarkably similar to ours, because we are remarkably similar.

The next step is to take this into account in ethics, but I fear this is a leap that humanity in totality will not make easily.
I think you are confusing things. Being critical of things is not hate. If that is your definition then sorry to tell you but we aren't working with the same definitions.

No point of debating when you think saying Hunter Biden committed crimes is the same as hate.

Violence has been happening much more from the left when it comes to topics you brought up.

There is significantly more violence on the pro abortion side. Look at all the prolife institutions that were damaged and destroyed. It is peanuts against the pro choice facilities. And to top it off some of them were attacks by leftists to frame the right.

Huge amount of racists crap written on walls and stuff have been hoaxes written by the group targeted. Look at Buba Wallace and Jussie Smollett. Look at the the rise in hate crimes against Asians. It isn't exactly happening from a common Trump demographic.

The left has been leading in violence and hate. Regardless the violence and hate is quite minimal. If all you see is hate and violence then you need to get off the internet and as the kids say touch grass.
> Elon has a reputation for fixing problems.

Based on Tesla, he not only isn't good at fixing problems, he actively pushes forward broken products and processes to save his stock price.
Uhh, if you've followed any of the Musk/Twitter drama over the last few months there was much whinging and crying
Offline-capable apps on phones are "a thing". There are plenty of times when I have poor (or nonexistent) cellular coverage and would love web-based apps to work.
I didn't even mention Twitter's algorithm so I have no idea what that has to do with anything.
Nine years ago the business media were all "robots are going to take everyone's jobs!!1!".

Time for the robots to show up to work and clock in. In the mean time, in developed countries the balance of power in wage negotiations has shifted in favor of workers, for the first time since the 1970s.
> It has to be downloaded and JIT compiled separately for every site that uses it

I don't really see the problem with that. Looking at the sql.js demo[1] the WASM binary is 610K (305K compressed/transferred), and it seems to run pretty fast even on my slow laptop.

> Maybe if half the sites on the web start using it

Most websites have no reason to use it; simple key/value localStorage is enough for many sites or apps that need some sort of storage. It's kind of a niche thing. Many regular desktop applications have no need SQLite, either.
> Didn’t an entertainer in the US recently get sued for millions of dollars over Defamation simply for repeating a popular internet conspiracy theory on his show-that some public figures were supposedly “crisis actors”?

No.

First, the Sandy Hook parents were not public figures.

Second, Jones and Infowars did significantly more than just make claims about people being crisis actors (though, that in itself absolutely can be defamatory in that it was a false statement of fact). There were also claims that some parent's fabricated their daughter's identify and then faked her death in order to steal money from hard-working Americans.

Third, this was not a matter of Jones simply making an assertion once. He repeated these claims for years, which led to a significant and ongoing harassment of the family.

The original complaint is here, though I'll note that it's from 2018 and much more evidence was discovered since the complaint was filed: https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInqu....

Fourth, Jones refused to participate in the lawsuit itself, deliberately and repeatedly not complying with repeated discovery orders. This led to a default judgement against him.

Fifth, an entire trial was held on how much damage Jones' defamatory statements and unfair trade practices caused. A jury of his peers determined that Jones' defamatory actions caused $965 Million dollars in damages.

So, I think your characterization of it as "an entertainer simply repeating a popular internet conspiracy theory on his show" is an absolutely incomplete summary of what happened, and why he was found to be liable for his actions.

Which jurisdiction(s) do you think would have afforded more protections to Jones' defamatory conduct?

The entire docket can be found here: https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail/PublicCaseDetail....
I probably should have been clearer that I believe strongly that it's a tax worth paying. My point was just that I think it's statistically extremely unlikely for a consistently honest person to become obscenely wealthy because the cost/benefit proposition gets worse and worse the richer you are. It's relatively easy to walk away from a dishonest deal that nets you a hundred bucks. But it takes a lot more character to walk away from a dishonest deal that nets you a hundred million.

I tend to assume (possibly without sufficiently compelling evidence, but I'm allowed to believe what I want) that anyone who's reached stratospheric wealth has done so by not walking away from some of those shady deals.

You may be right that "tax" is not a good metaphor.

> to observe that having to constantly verify at great expense what in an honest society you could you could otherwise trusted at nearly zero expense, is the more costly and pernicious "tax" on total human productivity.

I agree 1000%. The value of a society made of honest people is radically improved efficiency.
Just my opinion. But why would you lie about what will become a fairly big piece of news right before you are about to go through and be cutting a bunch of jobs. It would be almost certain to leak.
I'm not sure if China even needs to actively do anything in order to create a chilling effect on Musk. Maybe he will just censor things on the platform proactively to appease the relevant authorities/interests. That's of course speculation, but there's precedent for it happening already (see Disney[0])

Honestly though I'm just entertaining the idea. I'm not too worried about Musk's acquisition of Twitter

[0]: https://hir.harvard.edu/rated-c-for-censored-walt-disney-in-...
> These types of contracts are not new or innovative.

Agreed.

> On top of other companies having these contracts in place as well

Yes, but scale is important. My analysis at the time was that Tesla was locking in significantly more material behind contracts than Toyota or other companies.

> mining companies will pay to break these contracts if a high enough bidder comes along or flat out pays them to break it.

This assumes the contract is written in such a way that Tesla does not have to consent to the contract being broken. My understanding was that Tesla was trying to get into as many contracts as they could without such clauses.
“You people” never got anyone worked up, right?
And, from your own wikipedia article: " A study published in Scientific Reports wrote: "While [Media Bias/Fact Check's] credibility is sometimes questioned, it has been regarded as accurate enough to be used as ground-truth." Thanks for the source! I love being given more material that backs my claims!

What does it mean to rigorously and objectively classify a news site as on the left or on the right? More importantly, what's your alternative classification system that is more objective and rigorous? It's so easy to criticize, and yet so hard to come up with something better. Again, you bring absolutely nothing to the conversation. How do you intend to convince anyone of anything?
https://pytorch.org/docs/stable/notes/mps.html

In my very limited experience it's not a ton faster than using a CPU backend though.
I've seen some pci-e m.2 5x sata boards. That would get you to 7 ports. You can boot from emmc (i assume) if you don't want to boot from your array.
> Then, there are things like the Taliban, Russia, China, etc which have at times actively cheered on social media about the death of Americans or an American defeat

Soleimani. He helped the U.S. fight the Taliban. The U.S. later killed him in "self-defense" (no, really, that's what the U.S. Ambassador to the UN said). Scholars and the UN said the assassination was illegal. Do people who cheered his death deserve a ban?

That's not a trick question or whataboutism. At an international scale, principles have to be rigorously and fairly applied.
> But, do those terms they use, e.g. neuron, synapse mean the same thing they do for biologists

They are not meant to. This is not "brain simulation" or similar - which exists, but is a different matter. This context is instead about neuromorphic computing, as hardware implementation of components for Artificial Neural Networks. And results seem to be remarkable:

> They calculated that the synapses are capable of spike rates exceeding 10 million hertz while consuming roughly 33 attojoules of power per synaptic event (an attojoule is 10-18 of a joule)

The comparison with biological neuro-transmission is just indicative - for trivia, for curiosity.

--

Edit:

on the contrary, these devices aim to be in a way simpler than ANN's neurons (far from aiming to be as complex as cerebral neurons):

> By only rarely firing spikes, these devices shuffle around much less data than typical artificial neural networks and, in principle, require much less power and communication bandwidth

That is because the underlying aim is to achieve using a single photon for communication, with an immediate potential practical use in ANNs.
Even if none of those things were true, satire and pisstaking shouldn't ever be banned.
And then came:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

(WARNING, RACIAL SLURS QUOTED FROM COURT DOCUMENTS:)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/395/444

>> The line between what is permissible and not subject to control and what may be made impermissible and subject to regulation is the line between ideas and overt acts.

>> The example usually given by those who would punish speech is the case of one who falsely shouts fire in a crowded theatre.

>> This is, however, a classic case where speech is brigaded with action. See Speiser v. Randall, 357 U.S. 513, 536—537, 78 S.Ct. 1332, 1346, 2 L.Ed.2d 1460 (Douglas, J., concurring.) They are indeed inseparable and a prosecution can be launched for the overt acts actually caused. Apart from rare instances of that kind, speech is, I think, immune from prosecution. Certainly there is no constitutional line between advocacy of abstract ideas as in Yates and advocacy of political action as in Scales. The quality of advocacy turns on the depth of the conviction; and government has no power to invade that sanctuary of belief and conscience.
Or maybe they wouldn't because it's just twitter and why would anyone pay to "like" something? seems more like the crypto fantasy for a world where everything is a financial transaction. I don't think its a realistic assessment of how people actually value money and speech.
GR is not relevant on those scales
Does simply saying "men can't get pregnant" count as some kind of structural violence towards men that have been pregnant? More or less so than telling a disabled person that their disability is made-up? More or less so than calling someone a racial slur?

Can we make this start an insightful conversation about the limits of free speech? Imagine being in the position where your platform is being used to harass a particular group of people... Wouldn't you want to help those being harassed?
The reason Musk bought Twitter is the same reason other billionaires own newspapers even though they're money-losing flame dumpsters: they're a tool to control the narrative.

When you're the richest man in the world, money does not matter any more. Power and influence do. And Twitter is a big league weapon in that game.

I don't think he cares at all about making Twitter profitable or catering to advertizers. He just bought himself the largest megaphone in the world, one with which he'll be able to sculpt the perception of the public at large any way he sees fit.
Why not post the original URL?? https://www.cs.usfca.edu/~galles/visualization/

What is this dichchankinh.com domain?
> no one seemed to bat an eye.

Predating eye bats is Marie of Brittany's late 14th century marriage.[1] In 1937, Eunice Winstead (aged 9) married Charlie Johns, but it was noticed. Life Magazine did a story on it, "The Case of the Child Bride."[2] In 1971, at least one of two Florida judges would grant a marriage license for a pregnant 11yo bride and rape victim (which goes without saying).[3]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_of_Brittany,_Lady_of_La_...

[2] https://yesterdaysprint.tumblr.com/post/143251401189/life-ma...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherry_Johnson
> Where are people gonna go if not on Twitter?

I think you may be over-estimating how much most people "need" something like Twitter. For the vast majority of users, a news feed and private messaging (WhatsApp, iMessage, etc.) are good enough.
I feel like "unwanted" and "hateful" content are potentially two very different circles in a Venn diagram.
Depends on how they value their stock options, no? SpaceX grows rapidly and if you believe in the mission you might believe the sky is (not) the limit.
I appreciate your perspective. I used Twitter to follow industry news. But the people I cared about left and so did I. It’s so boring and pointless now. Absolutely no value to me anymore.
Where did I claim there was? You can philosophically believe that free speech (and also know that the 1st Amendment does not apply to private companies, but that the "right" to it is a general philosophy outside of government) should exist while holding the position that you can be held accountable for some things.

The question is how much a public forum should allow or not, especially one that has advertisers but is also an important forum for our democracy. That's very important and just saying everything under the sun is hate speech is not a good debate starter, especially when it's unevenly applied, and the rules are written by one viewpoint.

I think the "downvote" system which does eventually hide comments (until you request them) is a feature that already exists in beta. I think that's better than the "shadow banning" and suspensions in some instances. Obviously, you still can't tolerate some things, such as calls for violence, rioting, etc. Moderation is very difficult, but I err on the side of more openness than locking things down and stifling speech and debate.
Is there any evidence he was specifically influenced and motivated by online rhetoric?
I don't think the parent argued that it was compliant with the TOS, he's more likely saying that the TOS was inappropriate and is glad that's been corrected.
A desktop app that's cross-platform.
Open circuit, they merely generate a small voltage that blocks carrier drift, and thereby, useful current.
Please shoot me down in flames if needed, but maybe the CPU should be on a riser board and the GPU on the mainboard? Look, it seems to me that Nvidia needs to come up with its own x86 reference platform that revolves around supplying enough resources to the GPU rather than relying on adding layer upon layer of bandaid solutions. Listen, I'm not an engineer, and I don't claim to understand voltage, amps and watts, but it seems plainly obvious that if Nvidia wants to keep pushing discreet components that need a lot of juice (as opposed to Apples SoC strategy), then they need to come up with their own robust reference platform.

On another note, did EVGA see all this coming?
What does “pointed in the wrong direction” mean? Isn’t it a sphere? Genuine question; I am ignorant of such things.
It's easy to summarize the world in binary terms based on empirical evidence that comes from your own experiences. In my experience, conservatives are far more likely to back up their claims with evidence than those on the left. Is it always true? Of course not. But it certainly is a generalization I am convinced that is supported by reality.
That's already illegal, report it to the police
Toleration is a funny thing isn't it? If you have a problem with transgenderism how much do you need to support it to be tolerant? If you have a problem with people who have a problem with transgenderism how much do you have to support them to be tolerant?

There are great yard sticks to this question in theory "I tolerate everything except intolerance. Your right to swing your arms stops when they come into contact with someone's nose." In practice though it's always easy - on every side - to pick out the things we don't like and decide that they're violent or intolerant.

Everyone is tolerant of the things they like - and they ask everyone to join them in that if they like those things or not.
the everything-app thing would be significant if realized, the thing about that is it has to compete not just against all the tech giants, but also against all the smaller companies who are already mostly succeeding in those verticals. having to install another app isn't really an impediment to acquiring users.

it's an interesting vision to be sure, but i'm not sure how buying twitter actually helps it - twitter has already been struggling to expand outside their core product - none of the experiments like moments, spaces, fleets, etc have really taken off. it kind of seems like twitter users just want tweets and nothing else. so now he's taken on a whole bunch of debt to acquire a userbase who is hostile to the app expanding into any other markets? I don't really see a whole lot of evidence that twitter is a good launch platform for an everything-app.
There is no point arguing further i guess, may god help us make our computers secure, i'll fire some candles tonight, amen
I was kinda hoping to see ultimate frisbee disc prices
I guess the question is how you would describe something like listening to music for a human. It would be 'intrinsically rewarding' and 'hedonic'. Why? because of our brain structures? Hard to say.
But then it wouldn't have the retro (NeXT, Cobalt/Sun/Gateway, Apple...) cube aesthetic.
I prefer https://shucks.top/ which often indexes very good deals, if you're willing to crack open the casing to extract the juicy drive within.
I feel we have a generic tendency of looking at downward trends and assuming that shocking radical change can’t make it worse. As history tells, it sure can.

The old Twitter was a lost cow looking for pasture and moving very little in fear of getting more lost. For better and worse it had stability. We can assume that stability is now gone through the window.
I always wonder, how many people would actually buy the brooklyn bridge if someone tried to sell it to them...
What damage does CSS do to screen readers and accessiblity? I've used several accessible browsers it has never bothered any of them.
We're not just talking about basic political speech freedoms, there's plenty of gray area about.

For example, the US and UK both have laws on libel/slander (I think most countries do), but the US is much more permissive than the UK, in the sense that it's a lot harder to prove that someone committed libel/slander.

Is it a "human right" to maliciously and publicly lie about whether some other person, say, killed a child for fun? You could certainly argue "people should be able to say whatever they want whenever they want", but I think most people would agree that some restrictions on that kind of speech is reasonable, because it ends up harming others.
Those ones are marked as "used". It's an interesting idea because drives follow a bathtub curve for failures, so presumably gently used could be significantly better than new.
People still think that police were murdered by the protesters on Jan 6 two years after being told that every police officer who died on that day died from causes that had nothing to do with the protestors and everything to do with going up a flight of stairs under the influence of donuts.

It's not good enough to print a retraction which no one sees and pretend it's solved the problem of spreading lies.
Levine was very prominent among conservative media, not due to being trans, but due to being a prominent part of Biden's Covid response alongside Fauci. It wasn't a random targeting.
How dystopian. Why not just build the matrix and be done with humanity.