skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The discussion on photography and its relationship to capital-R Reality dates back to the medium’s inception. There is no lens-sensor system that can capture what we see with our eyes, but is what we see even “reality?” Is the reality of a visually divergent person a lesser Reality than that of typically sighted people? Susan Sontag’s “On Photography” and Roland Barthe’s “Camera Obscura” are nice meditations on such questions.
no, just that people didn't consider florida as a state beside palm beach, and now every inch of the land has been made worthy
I think Postel is misrepresented. It was addressed to programmers who anally rejected everything that was not (in their opinion) in spec.

Working code and rough consensus is how we progress.
The value proposition was clear to me from the landing page. Maybe it wasn't to you. I could read enough of it to say "hey, this sounds interesting, I wouldn't mind hearing more from this person."

Also, SQL databases are one of my favorite tech topics. Postgres, especially, has tons of cool features (example: lateral joins.)
> The above comment is not right. How do the registrar come into this?

People often use their name servers (and possibly delegate a zone further) instead of adding their keys directly. Or at least people use their registrar's interface for managing those keys.

> The oversight there are beyond what you have in any CA. That much is a fact.

Absolutely not. There's no system for monitoring key (mis)usage at all. There isn't a way to mistrust anyone if they do violate any agreements.

Maybe you mean oversight internally by some ccTLDs, but that does not build trust externally.

> If you have specific criticism, feel free to ask any of the people concerned at for example the next IETF. In my experience criticism is welcomed and listened to. That is, indeed, what builds trust.

These issues have been described in detail, but you've skipped over them a few times now. Plus they are not for the IETF to solve really, as they mostly relate to the human concept of trust (or lack of it), not the raw technical cryptographical aspects.

What indeed would build trust would be adopting public audits, transparency and revocation methods from WebPKI.

Let's start by logging all zone files signed. The fact that this doesn't exist already shows how much worse DNSSEC is and don't skip this point this time.
The stock price agrees with you. I’m not convinced because the environmentalists may care more about environmental performance than his antics. Those indifferent to personal impact on climate change, which is economically rational, can rationally buy the Tesla truck based on operating cost economics… it just can’t be seen as a “libtruck for libs”.

Weird theory, but it points to Elon not being quite as foolish as the left would believe.
Low-end indeed, I used the AF-P DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR.

Better lenses are more expensive than my phone though.
Repeating a previous comment:

If you want TikTok banned in the US because they don't have proper data hygiene and you believe that data could be used by the CCP in the future that is fair.

If you want TikTok banned in the US because you believe that they promote dumb content as part of some strategic Chinese plot and you conveniently ignore Meta and Google, I'm going to assume that your reasoning comes from irrational fear of the Chinese. It doesn't make sense to distrust the Chinese when they are doing the same thing as Americans (unless you don't like them just because they are Chinese).

>imputes a motive onto your peers

If my peers don't realize they are are repeating sinophobic talking points, they should be made aware of them. My concern is chiefly that sinophobia is simply a vector that allows American social media giants to get rid of competition without being forced to clean up their own backyards. If your concern is "algorithmic dumb content", then just banning tiktok is the wrong solution. Secondly, the reason why China has different content on TikTok is through government regulation, and we could do the same thing here! It's not a Chinese conspiracy that keeps Americans from regulating corporations.
Wow. What does being "in" even mean in this context?
Is it just me, or has copy/paste from terminal to terminal, webbrowser to terminal, anything to terminal gone awry? I seem to recall being able to just copy/paste from dang near anything to my terminal in Linux. Now, it surely seems like its heads or tails, hit or miss, "works 50% of the time, all of the time" kind of deal.

Is it just me? I swear I see this on three different distros. Highlight in terminal/program X, paste to <pick any terminal>, and half the time it just does not work/gibberish/crash and burn.
This is true but also...
In my experience[1] a large majority of facebook-level romance scammers use the same copypasta messages when possible, because they actually are from (e.g.)Nigeria and really do have poor English.

This is especially relevant to your point because facebook could EASILY be flagging people based on known pasta messages, for review or shadowbanning etc. They presumably don't do this because "not my problem".

1.Actually the experience of someone I know who's turned screwing with scammers into a personal hobby, who frequently shares notes on this with me.
CIA Podcast: The Greatest Museum You'll Never See
Customs office in Seattle just pointed a camera at me and said “Ok you’re good.” Didn’t even ask for my passport.

Not sure if this is the same program, but that experience was quite jarring.
Yeah, I've seen those.

I don't know how they qualify those results; they don't publish anything resembling scientific work. Like, how do they counter-balance that Android users need to replace their phones less often? Apple users usually buy the new phone every gen, instead of every 3rd or 4th gen (Apple screens and batteries tend to die quickly); so, it seems active Apple users should be 1/3rd or 1/4th of active devices, not half.

Sales in of themselves don't mean much if you're comparing Apples to oranges (ahem) with a disposable phone vs one that isn't.
Analysis and Response Toolkit for Trust, helping drive thuth topics online
That's not really a very persuasive argument.

China has rules that apply to all social media apps operating there, including rules on data storage, data sharing, and moderation. Those applications are not willing to follow those rules, and so aren't allowed in China. TikTok is willing to follow those rules, so is allowed.
this tweet makes no sense
Given that Ukraine is nowhere near the US, even for satellites, that's hardly likely, given that their v1 satellites don't have inter-satellite links.
At the beginning of the century, the Microsoft IM platform "MSN Messenger" had an elevated notification system called "wizz" that would literally make the interlocutor's window shake to attract their attention.

Video (in French but pretty clear visually): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMaiUS6jkn0

I agree this could be useful in some cases.
Indeed, it's what got us "quirks mode" and that took years and years to dig the internet out from under.
> it's publishing information that would be trivial to use to hurt specific individuals

But so do a lot of organizations. It's legal for kiwifarms' users and it's legal for the phone company, the federal election commission and for my city government too.

> What value could KF provide that's worth that pain? I don't think there's any.

What pain, exactly though? People claim that there have been suicides, but the claims seem dubious at best. If you call someone out for misappropriating funds and they commit suicide, is that on you?

What value? Many reporters (and regular humans) use kiwifarms to get a sense of the history, backstories and relationships of online figures and groups.
If it wasn't just a PR move, it would be whitelist based instead of banning a single app.

There are likely thousands of apps on every major app store with apps whose sole purpose is to fish out data from users and sold to different criminal or governmental entities.
I used to buy into the idea, but it increasingly grates my intuition as time goes on. I'm at a point that I believe much of the misspelling, poor grammar, etc are not intentional. If the same scammers were better at what they did, they'd snare more marks. I think these scammers are only capable of exploiting the bottom of the barrel when it comes to discerning audiences, though.
Seriously?

In Maryland and Virginia, school districts tend to go by county or by county-equivalent city. Fairfax County, Virginia, and Howard and Montgomery Counties in Maryland have many excellent schools. If you drive a couple of hours north to Pennsylvania, the school districts tend to be much smaller, sometimes just an elementary school or two, a middle school, and a high school. I don't think that most of those high schools are competitive with (for example) TJ in Fairfax or Blair, Wootton or Richard Montgomery in Maryland.

There is no reason you can't have a top-notch small school district, but I'll bet that it is in a very prosperous end of the state. (New Jersey has the same mania for multiplication of local government, including school districts; some of those districts must be outstanding.)
The FCC is handing out billions of dollars to improve RURAL broadband so for those purposes it doesn't make sense to measure average speeds that include congested URBAN cells.
Bad data to you is data that contradicts your intuition. That ain't how it works.

I'll say again: New York had fewer murders in 2020 than it did in 2010.
I'm interested, do you happen to know what it is?
Whats "technically correct"? You think making a money sending feature using a currency that has random 1000% swings from fraudsters is "technically correct"? It's fucking useless garbage is what it is. Good thing their users didn't buy into the fraud seeing how this scam has no volume (ironically enabling this scam).
Your text +
Add a punchline which surprises the audience with john speaking a coherent line before once again barking:

John: Peter, I think we should take a different route. This staircase is too narrow and slippery, and I don't think it's safe for us to continue.

(The audience is surprised by John's ability to speak coherently)

Peter: John, I agree with you. Let's find a different way.

Jesus: Very well, let us take a different route and continue on our journey together.

(The three of them continue on their journey, with John leading the way)

As they reach the bottom of the stairs, John suddenly starts barking again.

Peter: John, what are you barking about now?

John (barking): Woof, woof, woof!

(The audience is surprised by John's sudden return to barking)

Jesus: John, what is it? Is something wrong?

John (barking): Woof, woof, woof!

(The audience waits with anticipation, unsure of what John is trying to say)
The Twitter Files
Unfortunately it doesn't have a browser, so your puter can't even load up puter.
holy hell; do they really need it to be that concentrated?
>> It's hard to imagine how that's even possible!

And that is exactly what will make it possible.

We, in our individual experience see only the stuff moving around us. Moving earth for a few days for a new house or driveway or shopping center. But we have no realization that it was years ago that humans surpassed all other natural processes as movers of earth [0], or that over half the world's land is use for agriculture [1], or that we've already increased the CO2 levels to 150% of the value from 1750 [2] or reduced insect biomass by 76% in a few decades [3], or polluted every raindrop with beyond-unsafe levels of PFAS chemicals [4], etc., etc., etc., and that's just the stuff off the top of my head.

The naive view is 'How could puny humans have an effect so big?'. Yet we do, and it is because we can magnify physical forces and scale operations.

No more than a failure to imagine that you could drive off a cliff and die does not mean that you cannot, there is zero to say that we will not make an error with this scaling and effectively kill our planet and ourselves.

In both cases, the failure to imagine how it would even be possible will massively magnify the risk.

[0] https://www.bgs.ac.uk/news/humans-overtake-nature-as-the-big...

[1] https://ourworldindata.org/global-land-for-agriculture

[2] https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_in_insect_populations

[4] https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/pfas-in-rainwater-...
I think there are better anti-scalper methods. It probably won’t be 100% effective, but making it hard to transfer permits can help prevent a secondary marketplace from forming.
I think you are generalizing my claim. My claim is specifically that the claim that the Chinese is using TikTok as some American programming vector is sinophobic. The CCP could be tracking the location of government officials through tiktok; that is a legitimate concern. If you want TikTok banned in the US because you believe that they promote dumb content as part of some strategic Chinese plot and you conveniently ignore Meta and Google, I'm going to assume that your reasoning comes from irrational fear of the Chinese. It doesn't make sense to distrust the Chinese when they are doing the same thing as Americans (unless you don't like them just because they are Chinese).

If you want to ban TikTok for another reason (such as their incredibly poor data hygiene, such as tracking every action you do within their app browser), then that is fair and you can reasonably argue that point from the grounds of privacy and national defense.

My reasoning in calling it sinophobia is because if you actually care about "dumb content" the proper solution is REGULATION for ALL the social media companies. Singling out TikTok makes no sense at all.
I've also muted keywords and had tweets containing those words show up in my timeline under a "follow this topic" banner.
I am curious too. Why is SBF not being treated like a Bernie Madoff? Paper trail non existent or too complicated? It's odd how softball the NYT etc are treating him. There's a meme where they count the number of times "crime" "fraud" etc are mentioned in articles about him. Almost nil.
A combination of factors. History, ownership, culture & region, other personal experiences with contributors.

Those of us who were raised with this publication held over our heads grew up, checked it out, and do not hold it lightly in our considerations...in the right context it may be fine at face value but this is not one of those.

(Look up the name too. It has "old school industry/productivity concept" in its blood, even just as a general point of interest)
Lots of folks noticing here:

https://twitter.com/Rackspace/status/1598800773047099403

https://twitter.com/Rackspace/status/1598761923008266240

https://twitter.com/Rackspace/status/1598701161426538496
My spouse used TikTok for a while on the app. I can’t remember if they logged in or not (I never used it), but the videos it recommended where kinda shocking. It would recommend reviews of a fridge we had bought, but hadn’t explicitly searched for on TikTok, or anywhere else that I recall. There were also some other coincidental videos that would pop up that just seemed eerie. I assume there’s some data broker TikTok uses (AAID or IDFA tokens perhaps for fingerprinting). Needless to say, we stopped using it and I don’t open shared links anymore.
Palm Beach was not founded until 1909, and Florida has some of the oldest cities in America, including “the oldest,” so I’m very curious to understand where your head is at on this one
I actually want a broadly fair reservation system for the various parks, even if the government has to spend a bit to get there.

Maybe the article is wrong and Booz is doing great, but from the various comments here talking about people abusing the reservation system, it doesn't sound like it.
Think of it this way:

Savvy users who will become wise to the grift somewhere along the way are the ones they want to weed out. Early in the process ideally.

Having totally convincing emails fails to weed out these savvy users - you get to discover who they are a bit further down the line, after you've invested some time.

Since their time they can spend is finite, they want to only spend time on sure bets. This is why it is important to take a few moments to lead on scammers - you're damaging their ROI the more of their time you can take up.
This 'Ministry of Truth' project will train you how to think correctly when you engage in conversations online
Right, but TFA is talking about the compact camera market. I agree with the comment that cameras haven't kept up with the ease of use and convenience of phones in any way.
3 Hour JavaScript Course for Programmer
Created this course to teach programmmers JavaScript quickly. Hope you enjoy it.
> If that were true it would create a loophole so big that the first amendment would practically not exist. The President could require the New York Times to carry a daily editorial on the front page from the desk of the president, with just with an additional caveat "This editorial does not reflect the opinions of the NYT". The President could require TV stations to broadcast speeches from the president speaking in the Rose Garden.

If the government is, in effect, simply hijacking a private communications medium to carry a message that's clearly from a different speaker, that's permissible. In TBS v. FCC, the Supreme Court held that cable companies can be forced to carry local channels: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/520/180/#tab-opi.... It found the burden on "cable providers editorial discretion in creating programming packages" to be insufficient to raise a first amendment problem.

Under the reasoning of TBS, Twitter has even less of a basis for claiming first amendment protection. Cable companies exercise "editorial discretion" in curating channels to fit into a limited number of available slots. Twitter doesn't need to do that and doesn't purport to do that.

> You're just pointing out that the free speech guarantees of the first amendment aren't absolute, which isn't in dispute as far as I know.

Not just that, but the guarantees are greater or less depending on the type of speech. The protection is very low for commercial speech that isn't purporting to carry any sort of message.
Maybe the link should be altered to the detailed posts incoming by Matt Taibbi:

https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598822959866683394
This comment isn't anything to be proud of either. Go piss in someone else's cheerios.

Sounds more like engineers managed to communicate why it was worth doing a refactor to the stakeholders, made a rough estimate, and then through a solid round of planning managed to find out how to reign it in a bit. Sounds like something to be proud of to me.
How does 130k in comp compare to a "tolerable" compensation? Do you anticipate someone earning above 130k USD is representative of the general public of Americans who would be punished for the railroad strikes?

As a matter of imperfect pragmatism I would support a bill that equally collects from the employees and employer as it would still be some way of extracting rent from land provided freely by public for a service they were cut off from.

>Your solution is that the government tax you for the privilege to continue to mine

No my solution isn't to tax for the privelege to mine, it's to tax for damages for loss of use of public lands that were only given up conditionally so they could be used productively by employees and employers of the railroad.
Gas/diesel/whatever have energy density of zero.
If somebody were to make petrol/oxygen stoichiometric soda, damn right I wouldn't want to be near it either.
Maybe, if only maybe, you should make political donations illegal. That would pretty much solve it for the legal part of business. But money is free speech whatever that may mean (I know what it means legally, you can still ban it).
British colonialism killed 100M Indians in 40 years
Yeah but not for the car maker. So the suppliers cut corners whenever they can, and the demands from the manufacturers tend to be insane as well.
The people writing the playbook I am sure are clever.

The scammers I've talked to are often dumb as rocks. And probably are not the primary beneficiaries of the grift.
One thing about SBF and the FTX debacle is the record keeping and overall story seems incredibly confused and incomplete.

That a crime occurred seems very certain, but which exact crime is a lot less clear, and until a lot of digging and cross referencing of records happens, that’s likely to continue to be the case. To arrest, they need to be able to identify a specific crime with identified specific elements in a specific jurisdiction.

It seems like they have had an equivalent of a dump truck load of legos dropped in their lap, and it won’t be hard to assemble a Lego airplane out of it (probably), but yikes.
never go full browser
The article states:

>"FTX lent to traders so they could make big bets on crypto with just a small initial outlay, known as trading on margin. If the traders made losses, FTX would automatically sell the cash or margin they had put up, thereby protecting the exchange."

Can someone say what is meant by "sell the cash" here? I'm guessing this is not literal. Cash is an asset, what wouldn't they just deposit the cash in their account?
No, but the broader idea of sensationalist journalism wouldn't have been a foreign concept.

At any rate, there is a process for amending the Constitution, so if you want the First Amendment to change such that the federal government has a clear mandate to do this sort of thing, feel free to campaign for that. But just repeated violation by the state is not that process.
Because the influential billionaires have hogged all the resources, so if anyone can, and should, do something about it, it is them.

They literally have more money than they can use in multiple lifetimes at any ordinary spending rate. The only useful thing to do is to return those resources to something productive.
Only if it shoots flaming tennis balls.
> isn't the system rife with cheaters?

No ? All of the high stakes entrance examinations CAT / JEE / NEET / Civil services are completely cheating free and the systems goes through great troubles to enforce it. I believe it is exactly the same for law schools, accountants and NDA (defense) exams. That about covers all of India's well regarded professions.

Cheating happens in courses once you're in College because of a general apathy towards what is being taught (sadly) and the knowledge that your grades don't matter for much.
You've just restated exactly what the article says, but yeah.
Scaling the Mastodon
Can you actually do anything useful here?