skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If your intent is to prevent harm to a group then why not implement it in such a way that it prevents harm to all groups equally? If you oppose harmful content you shouldn't temper your opposition just because the harm is being done to a group that you perceive as being less vulnerable. That's veering into territory where you are making judgements about who is deserving of being harmed, that's a very different position than harm prevention and is not morally defensible with such broad categories.

I think the author is correct in identifying its political bias as a key feature that should inform how we look at this problem.
You don't have children, I can tell. He was threatening to take away their children if they spoke to him. Would it be OK if he threatened to murder them where they stand if they said another word? If you had kids, you wouldn't think the two threats are so far apart. If someone was writing a movie about a totalitarian state and wanted you to hate a character, this is exactly a line they'd use. This is an authoritarian power-tripping asshole. He should absolutely, immediately, and irrevocably lose his job over this threat, just as he should if he threatened to murder them. I would even say jail time would be appropriate; you'd face jail time if you went into someone's home and threatened to kidnap their children. How can you possibly defend this?
Lions are mentioned in the Odyssey, implying that Greek listeners would have been familiar with them. I'd always assumed these were some sort of mountain cat, but that map suggests no, actual lions!
I couldn't agree more, but I feel so defeated with the already egregious violations of privacy that pervade bleeding edge and big tech companies. What's there to be done?
No more that as you get more AIs, all AIs get shittier together.
> It's pretty clear that what's really is when ducklings get saved by anyone, some fraction of the time a local journalist with column inches to fill writes a fun story according to an established template.

Which is not mutually exclusive with these things being puff pieces. For example, the same journalist could probably find something consequential to report happening down at city hall, or the last council meeting. They could dig a little into the local homelessness or drug problem or something else. If all you need is a few column inches to fill, you don't need to do in-depth investigative reporting of those things either.

But they don't do these things because as you pointed out earlier:

> maybe an attempt to keep the news from being a selective display of only bad things, creating the misleading impression that the world is a grimdark shitshow where nothing good ever happens.

That's what it is. Modulating the dopamine drip. Get you worked up, bring you back down, rinse, lather and repeat. If your local newspaper was all depressing or boring stories all the time, no matter how truthful, you'd eventually get tired of it and move on. So you sprinkle a little bit of feel-good writing throughout to keep the ride going.

This is why I never specifically referred to this as a conspiracy, because I don't think it is on the scale that the linked article is trying to imply. That would imply coordinated collusion between thousands of actors, which I find a bit hard to believe. I think it's more that the system is set up this way and we're seeing the natural results of actors behaving within the rules of the system. Take my example above of the newspaper that only prints bad news. Eventually people stop reading it, and the newspaper goes out of business. Newspapers that didn't only print bad news survive and take over the readership of the now-defunct one.

(Incidentally this also offers a pretty simple explanation for why there might be more puff pieces about the police published after the police do something horrible. If you think of a media outlet as trying to maintain a homeostasis between outrage and feel-good, then you need more feel-good stories to offset the newly generated outrage until things are back in balance.)
Just imagine how useful search engines would be if you had to email someone every time you wanted to click a link. Just keeping up with the literature is typically a dozen or more papers a week, plus skimming dozens to hundreds more if you're actively doing research. That's a lot of email and it's a lot of unnecessary burden for the very nice people who reply.

Piracy and open access are the only scalable alternatives to institutional access.
Funny title. The fact that I have to beat something is already stressing me out.
> it’s obvious vast percentage of citizens within democracies wish they lived in an authoritarian country, yet choose to live in a democracy

Most people don't get to choose where they live. It's really a relatively tiny percentage of the population who would have the financial ability and/or skills to emigrate, and those are really the people you're talking about. They have no loyalty to where they live because they don't need any; they can leave whenever they want, and threaten to whenever they get upset about anything.
Libertarians of that stripe are essentially pro plutocracy, which would end up being massively anti liberty in practice.

But just as the winners write the history books, the richest libertarians like Thiel and Koch seem able to define what the ideology looks like in the popular imagination, because they can afford to shape the debate via think tanks, media ownership, campus outreach, lobbying, etc.
>formally

or formerly?
Apple’s hardware VP on the HomePod’s return
They have a roadmap on their site. At the historical rate of development, the game will continue to be developed by Toady until his death, upon which (barring suspicious circumstances) the game's source code will be released.
A similar situation happened to me this last year at a small startup. In the end I determined, after exhausting what felt like all my options, that the only thing I could change was myself and I left the company. It's wasn't an easy choice, and it's still hard to figure out where to put the anger and the betrayal when it pops up.

It's easy to sacrifice one's happiness in an effort to validate one's effort. I saw myself becoming a cancer and also recognized that I had done all I could to to course correct and the organization has moved on, so it was time for me to move on too.

Don't be somewhere that doesn't want you. Breaking up is hard, but if the relationship isn't working it's best for all parties.

Bonne chance, mon gar.
The solution for Google is to filter generated content, period. That will lead to an arms race of sorts, similar to the SEO keyword arms race. The SEO arms race resulted in keyword relevant, but unoriginal minimally useful content.

The problem for Google is that their advertisers love generated content.
I would suggest that those are better targets for hatred than tech companies. I am not saying that it is only possible to hate one thing at a time, nor am I saying that hatred is a healthy emotion, I am simply making some suggestions.

Of course, whether any particular group or individual is a better target of hatred than another is subjective, but I tried forwarding some groups which seem quite universally reviled.
I'm going to suggest giving Accelerando a read and consider the late state of the singularity.

http://www.accelerando.org

(heh - checking that link Charlie Stross just posted (Jan 31) a blog post: "An AI app walks into a writers room")

Anyways the link I was actually after ... give https://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/fiction/acceler... a read and consider the "what happens in the later parts of the book."
The electoral college wasn't created to restrict the power of large states like Virginia.

The electoral college was created because it was expected that state governments would elect the president, not citizens. In the presence of direct election of the president, it's an anachronism at best. It was never about "tyranny of the majority", and in a two-party system, trying to prevent the tyranny of the majority is just a tyranny of the minority.

If you want, weight the votes so votes in small states count more, or votes in rural areas count more. It'll still be a much more fair and equitable system than the electoral college, which effectively means that anyone outside a swing state has no representation.

Of course, doing it that way would make it much more obvious that there's no credible reason we should give 1,000 suburbanites Wyoming more voting power than 1,000 farmers in rural California, or 1,000 voters in Columbus more power than 1,000 voters in Brooklyn.
That's been available for 10 years since all the popular streams were just full of bots spamming twitch emoji or parroting one another's one-liner
If you have even the slightest actionable proof I am confident advertisers would pay large sums to know the actual reach of their ads. Until then your firm beliefs come across as conspiratorial.
*lately

It pops up on /r/golang sometimes. I don’t think it gets taken super seriously but there’s usually at least someone bringing it up.
> In your position, the expectation is that you are mostly a working through others and acting as a force multiplier of their work.

OP said that his role is senior developer. Developer. Not a manager. Not a team lead. But someone who wants to write code, preferably together with other experienced developers, and by doing so, enjoy the process of learning and understanding technology at a deeper level. Why, then, would one expect his responsibility to be motivating juniors, giving them work, or raising them to be leaders?

Also, if someone wants to write code, teamed up with other senior developers, where should one go?
I think the overwhelming majority believes it's okay for 17yo children to roam free but not 17mo toddlers. Even if the gray area in between can't be made zero-width, I'd like it to be smaller.
Yes, that is what I intended to say (in the first sentence), thanks for explaining it better than I did.
I feel you may not be reading or following this conversation.

My point is: Taiwan cannot make "decent chips" without the cooperation of the US and EU. China may possibly be able to without the US and EU, but roughly no other country could even try to build "decent chips" (i.e. EUV) without the help of the US and EU.
I agree. The devs couldn't continue working on CS 1 forever, and eventually a sequel would HAVE to be made somehow. It was never going to please everybody, no matter what they did. Im glad that, despite the controversy, CS: Source still ended up being good.

I remember I got it for GMod, and played it out of boredom one day and I ended up loving it!
I fully agree with the AMA request.

I'd specially like to know why it was "generating something ~random" instead of "generating something random" when given an empty question.

If it's random, how does it come up with the topic, and if it is "~random", how is it not other (random) user's data? The former case being the interesting one, since the second one would appear to be more of a caching or session management bug.
For sure I understand, I was not trying to say you were wrong. My point was in some ways our system is worse than what we consider dystopian authoritarian systems.
Surprised that such a poorly written article as this gets so much attention on HN. Trite thoughts, misspelled words, poorly defined concepts and pessimism that can't back itself up.
PopUpBackpacker is 10 Years Old
First because it's not an either-or situation. Marketing works by finding different channels and approaches. You could say "in a world with video, why would people pay for an ad on a bus stop" with the same logic.

Secondly because advertisement is about trust. For a while, the ads on TV where all the rage because, if it's on TV then it's a proper brand. If in the short term future, like I postulate, the web becomes unreadable SEO filled trash, and people access it via Chat-GPT like technologies, then there will be an element of trust between the bot and the user. And that trust can be exploited, more or less subtly.

So why would they not take advantage of it?
The web will transition strongly to verified identities, like we have with SSL certs. Along with filtering out people who use AI to post under a verified identity and get caught, It’s the only way to help ensure you’re reading actual human content.
Another one would be to (somehow) filter out fake reviews. I'm not sure how to leverage ChatGPT to do this but this is obviously a major problem.

However, a person could read the 800 reviews and (given enough time) could likely summarize the more important aspects with some accuracy. They may even be able to filter out some of the obviously fake reviews. This information has value but the costs are (currently) too high to obtain. Perhaps LLMs/ChatGPT could improve the equation.
Right, nobody (AFAIK) has been banned from Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, etc. for espousing Laissez-faire economic policies.
i don't agree that i subscribe to that dichotomy

i think it is incorrect for precisely the reason you state
I'm not sure, but you can probably just capture all ip fragments and do a second pass with something later?

When I was running a webserver with worldwide audience and 40+ Gbps traffic (most of that was our apk though), I saw no more than a couple fragments per second; unless there was some UDP reflection DDoS going on and I was getting fragments from that.

Lots of high profile sites don't even accept ip fragmentation because it's too costly to deal with.
Did the social worker lose their job? It sounds like if they had multiple issues and there was a restraining order, then they should have. If so, they removed one abusive social worker. Without that, that social worker would continue to do similar things to others. I'm guessing the emergency order was granted without supporting evidence (ie illegally by the social worker made things up).

Also, there's a big difference in how you invoke those rights. If you get aggressive, that can be a problem. Probably the best thing to do is ask for their card, say that you want to help and that you'll have your attorney contact them. If there's a claim of immediate danger, a quick show of your kids being happy and unharmed should suffice.

The main point is, if everyone just rolls over, these abuses and terrible bureaucrats will not be uncovered. The system will never improve unless people hear about these abuses. That itself is highly valuable, even if the personal cost is high.
By the end of my CS 1.6 days I loved those Nipper maps, Hookmod, Warcraft mod etc.

It's mostly the console gaming experience has taken over with few outlets for modding. FPS kids these days don't know what it's like to precision aim with a mouse or have a piece of clear tape stuck to their CRT so they can 360 no-scope w/ AWP.
I’m running into this concern at work. If you have one main app or service constellation, then you can’t make any big changes like these because they have to scale from test benchtop to production with few steps in between and there’s just no accurate way to know what you’re going to see until you try. Traffic shaping only does so much.

I’ve been moving our tools and sidecars and lesser services to do more reuse, not for the code and effort duplication reasons, but so these technologies get more burnin time before they have to do it live. We have one service that is particularly good for this because it doesn’t see a lot of traffic on average, but it bursts up to production requests levels during a certain workflow that is less time sensitive than live traffic but still gets scrutiny because it blocks a run book until it’s done. Parts of that run book can be run as often as you like if you stop before the steps that alter production state, so you can run it a few times to take the median time and see if you’ve improved or regressed.

We turn things on there and if they haven’t caught on fire we feel a lot better about flipping it on for user facing traffic.
A good insurance agent should do most of 1-4, but your service should make their job easier. So I see this as more for them than for a consumer. And also because after a plan is selected, copays and deductibles are essentially fixed so consumer would have no need to price shop.
That's the biggest thing that frustrates me about NWO (as a concept) used as a rhetorical device in argument: it's not necessary.

You have world history littered with examples of mass surveillance platforms being used for oppression.

No explanation or justification of why that happens seems necessary! It's a stronger and supported argument to just say "Whatever the cause, when mass surveillance has been implemented historically, it is eventually used to errode civil liberties and increase population control."
Well, this means that content curators and good content producers will gain in value.

The hard part will be to stand out, and to create things that AI can't easily reproduce, such as linking content to a service.

I think it's a good news for actual high quality original creator: they will rise to the sun.
Then pay them more for the work they do and they won't have to rely on govt services.

Welfare is essentially a subsidy for crap wages. U either pay them a proper wage (surplus value) or u get taxed for govt services.
For more reading, Bret Devereaux wrote some good blog posts about war elephants:

https://acoup.blog/category/collections/war-elephants/
Dictionary Dispatch Pattern in Python
Ask HN: Do you care about your HN karma?
Has the fear of losing your HN karma ever stopped you from expressing yourself?
Oh, are all the paren/bracket types interchangeable in Perl? I've never used Perl.

Yea, each set of them ([], (), {}, <>) has a very distinct meaning in Elixir.
> Building a more compassionate society means reminding ourselves of luck, and of the gratitude and obligations it entails, against inevitable resistance.

No, not at all. Moral obligations come from the idea of sharing your success with the rest of society instead of being strictly selfish, because you live in that society and it has the added benefits of indirectly helping you in the long run.

Luck doesn’t change the sharing story and people don’t view luck that way either. When someone wins at a casino they don’t feel any obligation to share because it was lucky.

You share out of moral obligation to support the common good, if there’s zero luck involved it doesn’t give you some moral ground to maximize your selfishness.
I feel this underestimates the seriousness of the difficulties we are facing in the area of social cohesion. The conflating of real/non-real and credible/non-credible is very much at the heart of the Trump/Brexit divide
The first lab-created 'quantum abacus'
Okay so you build a knowledge graph on top of the internet archive. Now you are struggling to prioritize the resources necessary to capture long-tail content that doesn't mesh easily into popular corpuses. I imagine this would lead to the library equivalent of an echo chamber.
I'll bite. I lived in an authoritarian country.

People occasionally did disappear (usually temporarily).

A lot of things were worse, but a lot were better. You're definitely not going to be arrested or harassed for letting your kids walk alone. Not sure how good their record is for actual child abuse (bad cases would make the news, so there was some enforcement).

While they could prevent you from leaving the country, they didn't have no fly lists, and I believe many more were impacted from the latter than prevented from leaving that country.

No one is disputing things can get really bad in those countries. It's more about probabilities. One thing that becomes very clear in the US if you poke around: It's ridiculously easy to end up with felony charges, and I know plenty who faced them (some convicted). The number of people I knew in the authoritarian country who had a criminal record? Miniscule. Raising my kid here, the chances of him getting a criminal record is significantly higher here than there and is a source of worry.

And typically no one has to worry whether they'll find an apartment due to some crime they committed a decade ago.

And sorry, but no. No local oligarch/overlord. That's orthogonal to authoritarian governments (and is often more about ineffective governments).

> someone who moved to US (why moving if it is such a great place to live?).

Classic false dichotomy.
if this was a discussion on generative AI, I'd agree that the cat is out of the bag and there's no stopping this now.

BUT.

what are people using deepfakes for, in good faith? can someone provide one example that isn't malicious?

the best I could imagine is maybe amateur filmmakers deepfaking their faces onto existing footage to cut costs - but it doesn't seem that this outweighs the drawbacks
There's an irony to me here - one of Anime's most distinctive artistic features (lower framerate, repeating frames/backgrounds) was specifically a way to increase content by reducing animator's workload.
Did you stop to think for two seconds before posting this? People can tell where a sound is coming from in a 3d space. That’s why you can tell the difference between a sound directly in front of you and directly behind you.
Before that it was DIVX, Digital Video Express (not the codec), who in the late 90s tried to create an alternative to video rentals: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIVX.
But the player has to have the record function. Did it allow for that or did someone mod the hardware?
The safety models of cities is just different from that of suburbs. If you live in a walkable urban area, there's safety in numbers. It's not uncommon to see children walking down the block to their corner store or going to school or whatever. If a random adult approaches a child, there are plenty of people around to see it, and if they call out for help it's very likely that someone will intervene. In the suburbs, it's a bit different. The safety model depends more on things being "normal" - people are suspicious of anything out of the ordinary. In a community where everyone drives their kids to wherever they need to go, seeing children walking down the street might be unusual enough to get someone to call the police. because they'd want other parents to do the same if their own children somehow escaped and started wandering the neighborhood. It all depends on the norms of the particular community.
I'd argue that Epstein, Covid, and internet censorship touching everyone and everything had a greater impact. Those things you listed impacted Republican's trust in news for sure, but at this point even Jimmy Dore has a good laugh at the likes of Sam Harris and Neil deGrasse Tyson. It's basically, "do you trust your corporate overlords?" which doesn't require that one have a particular view on economic policy.
But it is way, way more capable than a search engine.
It reminded me of DIVX[1] from 1999. Amazing how many times this horrible greedy idea was tried.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIVX
Indeed! Nice 'documentary' (what do you call this format?):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccneE_gkSAs
This is just how ungrounded devices sometimes act when you are able to come into contact with the neutral via some current path. I have LED light bulbs that are like this, you feel a vibration when touching the exposed metal heatsink of the bulb, and some bulb fixtures have started to be manufactured with a ground wire on the chassis just to eliminate that.
The other problematic area with that detection is people who have disabilities and use an AI assistant to help them type.