skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Reading over pages 4 and 5 of the injunction[0], it seems government employees are now barred in any way from discussing any social media content or company policy that isn't explicitly illegal with social media

Whether or not any involved content is “explicitly illegal”, they are explicitly permitted to discuss that content so long as it is related to threats to public safety and security of the US, content that may be misleading voters on voting processes, or about content that isn’t Constitutionally protected, among other exceptions; see the explicit exceptions on pp. 5-6. As framed, the exceptions are cumulative and trump the restrictions, so, e.g., a BOLO for content whose context was efforts to protect the public safety and security of the US would permissible under the injunction even if the content was itself Constitutionally protected free speech.
> If you're a government employee, speaking in the course of your duties, then it's not your speech, it's government speech.

This would make quite a few Congressional hearings unconstitutional. For example: https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/4-tech-industry-titan...

It'd probably also apply to the President saying "lock her up" about a private citizen. Is that unconstitutional pressure from an elected official?

> What does that even mean, for the US Government to have a right to speak without fear of action being taken against it by the US Government?

It means stuff like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_or_Debate_Clause
Not as shocking as you trying to speak for the whole human race, which evolved past no formatting while still living in the caves
Right now: they don't have such right.
After the law: they do have the right and it requires a judge's approval renewed every 15 days.
I'm not talking about what the capacity of intelligence services to do it, I'm talking about what the police (officier de police judiciaire) can lawfully do.

Source: https://www.francetvinfo.fr/societe/justice/telephones-mouch...
Not sure why people are throwing a fit. Space is marked out with lines. Fire hydrant in clear view. I mean it’s painted a non standard color, but it’s clearly a fire hydrant.

$33K per year in 2013 is just a tax on idiots.
How to Break the Bro Code
This is a bad take. Sega actually had incredible advertising campaigns in the 90s. That iconic "SEGA!" yell was addictive and memeable. Advertising/marketing was never a problem for Sega.

Sega also had tons of mindshare. They fumbled the ball and Sony ran with it for a touchdown. End of story.
Show HN: BoxyHQ re-launches SAML Jackson SSO with super powers
Our FREE open source SAML Jackson SSO solution comes with bolt-ons you won't believe!
thanks for the feedback! Aya does seems like a very interesting project. Somehow I forgot to link to Snitchrs' repo: https://github.com/FedericoPonzi/snitchrs
To be pedantic, it's the tags that are optional, not the elements. The html, header and body elements are still there even if you don't write the tags.

Quoting from the document you linked:

"Omitting an element's start tag in the situations described below does not mean the element is not present; it is implied, but it is still there. For example, an HTML document always has a root html element, even if the string <html> doesn't appear anywhere in the markup."
I love how there's a car there in the 2013 shot that likely received a fine.
> You might have multiple datacenters, but until everyone isn’t in the same office, you still have the same problem (office can burn down, or fall down and bury everyone).

Fastmail has multiple offices.

> Also, it’s email. It was literally designed to work in such a way that you can be down for days and still get your email.

Delivery is designed that way, not storage. Once Fastmail tells the sender that a message was delivered to an inbox, Fastmail cannot ask the sender to redeliver it if its inbox storage is lost.
Used to be pretty deep into the TI calculator hacking scene, I know that there were definitely programs/firmware images out there that allowed you to fake clearing the calculator's RAM and archive, as ridiculous as it sounds. But in my high school by the point teachers were manually clearing calculators most students were resorting to cheating other ways rather than advancing the graphing calc cheating arms race.
Me neither. I was so ready to disagree with the article, but this kinda won me over.
hundreds or thousands of hours of ad watch time, plus content which made others watch ads, ...
The author of the paper suggests it's because the author of the code cares more, and is more passionate. Do you think it's just random chance there is a correlation, or do you have a better explanation for the results?
You asked “how in the world do people in India or Arizona survive their summer?” Historical trends are irrelevant when the answer is that some don’t.
Mthis is the idea with Pollen, a static site generator implemented in Racket.

The markup experience was super nice.
> Fortunately Unreal Engine is a poor choice for many types of games

Do you have some examples? Seeing these 2d games made me question some assumptions I heard [1].

[1] https://youtu.be/wreOjWVGkys?t=43
I wrote a stupid message first that the person above you replied to accurately, I changed my stupid message to be less stupid while still reflecting my opinion on the matter.
"Nearly all contact" != "social media content or company policy that isn't explicitly illegal with social media companies"

The types of contact that are still allowed are still the vast majority.

The types of contact that are prohibited are those that are potentially viewed as part of efforts to suppress free speech.

I really don't understand the objection unless you support the efforts to suppress this free speech.
How do you propose they do college admissions then?
In my experience in college where some diplomat's kid would illegally park his car almost every day, they will tow the car but the embassy will go pick it up and pay the fine so it didn't really matter to them.
Lego nailed it in 1980 with the 8860 Auto Chassis, IMO. It does all of those things in a nice balance with piece count of 662 (for a 57 cm long car) and IMO still ends up looking better than today's 3000 piece models.

http://www.technicopedia.com/8860.html
Exactly. Made several similar ones and had a 'lock' screen that was blank until you input the right key combination, or exited otherwise.

Programming it meant I knew the content well enough to never need it.
I must be missing something, I don't see anything in those graphs that resembles the whole country getting cut off from the rest of the Internet.

(If anything, it appears that the traffic is actually higher compared to the previous 7 days?)
So, no he doesn’t work at Meta. We could have stopped this thread an hour ago.

We need a social network that removes the noise from the conversation
> As a long time inhabitant of the Fediverse, I do not like the idea of Meta slurping up my public posts hosted on my own server.

The whole point of the Fediverse is that any random person or company can come along and start slurping up your public posts (which, of course, is just another reason that it's a terrible idea).
Not since the 1960s, at any rate.

(The legacy of colonialism in many larger European countries is ... pretty dark. France, Belgium, UK, Germany, Spain, Portugal, ...)
The Bill of Rights is not ranked by importance.

Did you read the article?

>The ruling was criticized by Jameel Jaffer, an adjunct professor of law and journalism who is executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University. "It can't be that the government violates the First Amendment simply by engaging with the platforms about their content-moderation decisions and policies," Jaffer told The New York Times, calling it "a pretty radical proposition that isn't supported by the case law."

> While the government must be careful to avoid coercion in its efforts to combat false information, Jaffer said that "unfortunately, Judge Doughty's order doesn't reflect a serious effort to reconcile the competing principles."

> Stanford Law School Assistant Professor Evelyn Douek told The Washington Post that the "injunction is strikingly broad and clearly intended to chill any kind of contact between government actors and social media platforms."
Do you know if this is a JS framework or completely custom and unique to this site?

It's so cool :)
Sure and I'd understand if the GP said something like "nobody is using Mastodon" but that's not what they said, they just drew a comparison between Threads and other social media.

The defensiveness is off-putting. Almost like a cult slogan. I'm glad folks are enjoying Mastodon, and there's obviously users on it! Threads claims plans to federate with Mastodon after all.
Finally, a difference between the two.
I have shipped two small projects using Godot 3. It's a cool engine but to me it can improve on the following points to be considered a mature engine for a new indie project:
* GDscript is cool but lacks features such as better typing and lambdas over generic nodes.
* I have encountered many bugs in the Engine more than when I was using GameMaker.
* It lacks native mobile monetization.

Other than that I'm much more enjoying working with Godot than Unity.
Great. Now I can make pizza any way I damn well want. And chili.
A distinct property of a machine is determinism. Machines are made of electrons that obey the wave equation: it states that all electrons evolve as one. However we skillfully limit this waveness and squash electrons into super deterministic 01 transistors. We need it because our computing paradigm revolves around determinism. A more general theory that works with probabilities and electrons as they are hasn't been developed yet. And here lies the danger: if a super deterministic AI becomes the ruler of our society, it will prevent further growth. The same phenomenon on individual level is called arrested development: when the individual over-develops a minor skill, becomes obsessed with it and it blinds him from exploring anything else.

A still possible future is when science makes a breakthru in quantum computing and finds a way for humans to steer AI with their minds: it would be the neuralink in reverse. This would force science to research the true nature of that connection which will help to avert the AI doom.
Well its not called censorship when we allocate radio spectrum. But I think the point is above a particular level, there is so much noise everyone gets drowned out and some will act out of frustration causing harm to others or themselves. Really a question of being able to detect where that level is.
https://michaelscepaniak.com

I've been blogging since 2008 (but very inconsistently) about sustainability, software development, diet & exercise, entrepreneurship, travel, finance, and other stuff.
The obvious question is whether the source code for this tool has profanity in it…
I haven't seen people mentioning using Godot with Kotlin, so I'll leave the link here. At some point it could be nice for Kotlin devs.

https://godot-kotl.in/en/stable/
Start a side-project SaaS, incorporate as an LLC, hire some contractors in India. It doesn't have to make money. After a year put it on your resume as managerial experience.
How coercive? If you're right, the government can still make a court case that takes a good part of a decade and costs you ten million dollars to win.

That's just the straightforward stuff. That's without the IRS deciding your corporate profit statements deserve extra scrutiny, and the FCC deciding to question whether you really qualify for section 230, and and and...

You can be right. They can still make your life very difficult if they decide to. And it will be very hard to prove that that's what they're doing. And even if you can, you probably aren't going to get the money back that the court cases cost, and you definitely aren't getting back the time and management attention it cost.

So, not legally coercive. But still kind of coercive, even though legally it has no force.
Facebook is made up of many parts. Some parts find advertising to be directly opposite of their goals. The react team may not like ads being force in their docs for example. If own shares through a pension I may not like advertising.

The CEO decides who manages which roles and divides authority. Opinions comes from these power structures. They could be divided on issues or unified. They speak for the company.

Google is so big you often have conflicting goals from different power structures.
Looks like you've still failed to articulate the credible implied threat Facebook felt from the Biden administration's requests,

or how that ties in with the GOP-controlled senate bringing the CEOs before them:

did they do that because the Biden administration ordered them to, as a result of Facebook ignoring one of the requests?

It's a laughably bipartisan conspiracy theory, and thus nobody would actually feel threatened by it.
Nexus devices did have such “feature”. IIRC it was activated by a carrier SIM upon first boot and some people were quite sad after inserting say AT&T SIM into their supposedly “unlocked” phone.
Actually, afaik most raylib users use it for 2d games/tools; it has a batching system to minimize draw calls that works very good with sprites (but also used with 3d shapes).
About shaders, raylib provides a Mesh structure with some predefined vertex attribute arrays but you can use them for custom data if required.
Also, you can use the lower-level library rlgl for a more fine grain control over the buffers.
For instance, if you're the FAA, you should express opinions about airline operations, air safety, etc. That is your role. If you are the FDA, you should express opinions about food and drug safety. And in both those cases note that you are a regulator, and within your domain, it is your role to regulate the players.

If you are the White House, you are not a regulator of anything. It is fine to express your opinion. In fact the White House has a daily press briefing for specifically that purpose. It is fine to call out people with whom you disagree. Perfectly OK to call them dangerous charlatans and liars. It is not OK to censor their speech. It is not OK use the implicit coercive force of the executive branch to encourage third parties to censor them.

It's not hard to understand.
Django is the opposite. It holds your hand and tells you how to structure your "app", templates, database, and media assets. And django-admin is godsend. It's awesome when you are on the beaten path cause everything just works. But if you step of the beaten path you will have to tweak various obscure settings and create weird hooks to override Django's defaults. Flask is the opposite. Just a very well-written web server and it's up to you to decide things like project structure, template engine, orm, asset manager, etc. Personally I prefer Django since most of my web applications are quite mundane and don't require the flexibility Flask can provide.
> This would make quite a few Congressional hearings unconstitutional

Well, maybe, if you ignore the Constitutional carte blanche for Congressional proceedings of the Article I Speech and Debate Clause.
> I played Sewer Shark on the Sega CD

six - six - niner - six ugh, that game kinda sucked. Never hit that million pounds of tube steak high score.

What a weird time for gaming. FMV games were something that looked like the future to a little kid but once you played them they were awful. The video padded out boring interactive game play like shooting the rats in Sewer Shark or the shooting galleries of Ground Zero: Texas. I remember Night Trap being highly controversial at the time for sexual an violence themes and I only knew one kid who had it and his mother threw the game out so I never got to play it.
If you export it, you get XML, with embedded HTML in <CDATA TAGS, among other things. But the point is the same - it's not hard to parse. It also has base64 encoded images and pdf's. Don't know what else.
" I don’t give a rat’s ass about the free speech rights of the government...the purpose of free speech is to protect the right of the weak to speak even when the strong disagree with them."

That doesn't sound right to me. You basically just argued "The purpose of a right to free speech is to protect the right of free speech." It's circular reasoning. Why should free speech be a right?

Out of curiosity I pulled up an article in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

One principle put out by John Stewart Mill is that free speech is valuable because it leads to the truth. If this is correct you should arguably be concerned if the government can't engage in it because we will all be lead away from the truth.

The article says "... arguments show that one of the main reasons for justifying free speech (political speech) is important, not for it's own sake but because it lets us exercise another important value (democracy)."

So if we accept this then if censoring the strong undermines democracy it could be bad, especially if they became strong because the weak elected them into office to represent them.

The article quotes someone who says "Speech, in short, is never a value in and of itself but is always produced with the precincts of some assumed conception of good."

In other words, don't argue free speech is good because free speech is good.
If you look at last 28 days the drops are visible and annotated: https://radar.cloudflare.com/dz?dateRange=28d. And the drops link to the related blog post: https://blog.cloudflare.com/exam-internet-shutdowns-iraq-alg...
> Unity and Unreal Engine have formed such a depressing monoculture.

That's because those got finished and shipped. There are a huge number of hobbyist small game engines that made it to about 80% of useful before the creator got bored. This is the "0.x" curse of open source. In the Rust gamedev world, it's said that there are five games and fifty engines.

In Rust land, if you want to do something that will get used, get behind WGPU, Bevy, and Rend3, and push. It won't be easy, because they've solved the easy problems and are now working on the hard ones. Progress is way too slow.
Towers use sector antennas that can cover typically 15 degrees down to 5 degrees, so the angle from the tower is somewhat known. There are some ways to get an idea how far a device is from the tower with sufficient access, but its usually a moot point because rarely does a device get into a place where it is only being seen on one tower.
What is the expected performance? If I have a very simple table with 100k records, what will be the expected read/write/update tps? I know it depends on many things, but still any guesses?
I strongly suspect that those companies’ net worth isn’t enough to pay for the cleanup.
>That said, we are already intervening in the climate with greenhouse gases. The safest intervention from here is to just stop/slow that. We know what the world is like with less GHG. We only get one shot at a habitable Earth, so while it is scary to try fixing it, it’s more scary to continue breaking it in my opinion. No one wants to act hastily though, we’re working on the science to make sure we know what we’re doing.

Agreed 100%. Gambling with the only planet we have is tremendously stupid, yet there are many (including in this very thread) who advocate doing just that. The mind boggles.

Thanks for your response. I'm a former mechanical engineer turned software engineer who's currently studying data science while between jobs. I want to do something good for humanity, and your field sounds like it could be a good fit, and interesting. Are there many remote positions in climate informatics?
> because it doesn’t have a physical brain developing individual thought.

You summed up my point with a single sentence I can agree with, can't argue there!

In your scenario what's the opinion Facebook has about advertising? I'm in favour of more bike lanes in my city but I don't consider that an opinion. Describing _why_ I'm in favour has an element of opinion but voting yes/no is not an opinion to me. Plus, any old why isn't good enough for an opinion. For instance, if Facebook says they're in favour of advertising because it helps them make money then I don't think I can consider that an opinion.

I suppose corporate slogans and mission statements are opinions (We believe the customer is always right) but it's hard for me to call that an opinion because are your values actually opinions? I would say that they can be formed using opinions but I would be reluctant to say they're opinions themselves because of the "strength" of them I guess?
In my tests, favicon gets loaded after the page, and 404ing it seems to go ignored by browsers.
> Net benefit - is your made up argument.

I already explained that this is how all policies are evaluated, not on arbitrary fraud thresholds. I cannot make you understand it any more than I can make you smart enough to have been accepted at your preferred university.
I was specifically responding to the OP's point that this demonstrates power flowing from government to Facebook. The fact that FB ignored the request and did not suffer consequences demonstrates that power does not in fact flow that way.

You're welcome to judge the appropriateness of the event as a whole however you want! I'm not over the moon about it either. I wasn't arguing that it's wonderful this interaction occurred.
> We're not in the wrong here. Judges produce absurd findings with regularity -- this case is newsworthy because the finding is surprising and controversial.

Well, i'm wrong enough in that i don't want something i say to be taken to court when i could have, easily, been more explicit. "Wrong" in the sense that it leaves myself open to needless outcomes.

I generally want to avoid judges at all cost, heh.
The goal of fines is meant to be to discourage specific problematic behaviours, like parking where it would cause problems for the fire department.

When the goal becomes to cause the behaviour more often so that your can collect more fines, the entire system is just fundamentally broken.

A large portion of the money collected should go to a department whose goal is to find further ways to discourage the problematic behaviour. Paint the curb bright red, for starters.
Ah, I understand.

I have entered into verbal contracts and haven't had any real issues with them. I strongly prefer written contracts, though, because the process of hashing out a contract clarifies assumptions and misunderstandings that may not be apparent to each party until they see things put down in black and white.

The value of a contract is that it makes the terms very clear to both parties instead of relying on the other party understanding what I "obviously" meant (and vice versa).

That said, I also noticed something over the decades: I can tell the level of trust I have with a party based on how thick the contract is. If we don't trust each other, the contract will get very thick as we each try to make sure that there is no loophole the other can take advantage of.

With a high degree of trust, the contract tends to be much more brief. With a very high degree of trust, the contract can literally be a talk over coffee and a handshake.

So it all depends.
The daily White House press briefing is an excellent venue.
In the end, because his choices were to agree to the purchase or wage a court battle that he wasn't likely to win. The former costs ~$44 billion; the latter probably still costs $44 billion, but also court costs and whatever embarrassing/damaging stuff that comes out in discovery.

As to why he made the offer in the first place, who knows? But whatever the reason, it's fairly obvious that he regretted it almost as soon as the ink was dry.
I wonder if swearing can help "free the mind" in some way, with the "rebellion" opening up more, perhaps non-standard/out of the box, "fucking good" ideas?