skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The safest business decision would be to remain neutral, respond to law enforcement requests if presented with one, and otherwise do the job you're paid to do.

Have you considered that it might not be about money? What if the decision-makers and operators of Hurricane Electric just have certain people they just want to censor, and use their position to do it at the expense of money. Money is just a means to the end, and if they're getting to that end by foregoing money in business rather than spending it, that seems logical enough to me.

And if the government is ideologically aligned with the operators of the company, you won't find any protection from them. And in many cases it's just the government and large companies working hand-in-glove to get to their ends. Some political outsiders threatening your political monopoly? Pull some strings and have their social media accounts removed and banking taken away; but there's no recourse since "muh private company" even though they're getting direct orders from government officials.

So a good reason to be on the side of "free political speech" is that we don't want the people with the most money controlling what we can and can't say, and we don't want the government to have free reign to shut down criticism or challenges.
In math you have subsets of researchers who read each other's papers and work over a few decades to explore something, returning various nuggets and conclusions to the general body of mathematicians along the way until the whole thing is worked out. Eventually, in the most successful cases, the work is condensed into a book or something and a lot of people read it. It is a lot, perhaps thousands of times, harder to come up with theorems than it is to teach them, and atop that even harder to come up with broadly applicable yet effective conceptual systems (which can be introduced in a couple pages once you know which axioms are going to produce all the right facts later on), which is the basis for the whole enterprise.
You're ignoring my question. That's your personal definition of a Nazi, which I'd agree with; however, many people have much looser definitions.
Maybe Germans didn’t want it, but hey I guess coal is always an option. Canada and Mexico have always been happy to buy it and the domestic market is booming. It’s been especially useful for converting coal plants to gas and we’ve cut net emissions as a result. And well… Neue Ostpolitik and that smug German sense of superiority am I right?
When I paid attention to CNN's in the 90s I used mostly email mailing lists. I have other interests now, but still use email lists. But I'm not sure what to tell you about finding good email lists about LLMs. I'm more on the academic side so meet people at conferences (who tell me about email lists.) That may not be your reality...
Please elaborate on how you think the United States is escalating Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Presumably you mean they are truly escalating it, and not simply helping Ukraine defend themselves. Certainly this has helped prevent a swift Russian victory but I think we can agree self-defense is not escalation.
Entirely agree. DRYing is compression. It serves similar purpose. Like a mathematical equation, it's terse, light, elegant, easy to carry in one's pocket, yet loaded with meaning. It's not, however, zero cost. At maintenance time, it needs unpacking. DRYing is also not an exact science, nor a hard rule. It's the factorization of a specific idea (at least that's what it should be). When applied, it requires usability and cognitive considerations. That's the delicate trade-off. "Will people coming after me have an easy time figuring this out?" The newbie who comes to an existing code base and proceeds to indiscriminately DRY things up often doesn't realize that the reason they were able to do so in the first place is because, although repetitive, they could understand the original source, often without much effort. That's why repetition is cheaper than the wrong abstraction.
If you look at papers in arXiv you see there is

"zero shot" = ask an LLM to do it with a prompt

"few shot" = show a model (maybe an LLM) a few examples; LLMs perform well with "in context learning" which means giving a prompt AND showing some examples

"many shot" = train a model with many (typically 1000s) of examples.

The more training examples you have, the better results you get. A lot of people are seduced by ChatGPT because it promises fast results without a lot of hard work, rigorous thinking, and such, but you get back what you put in.

My RSS reader and agent YOShInOn uses

https://sbert.net/

to transform documents into vectors and then I apply classical ML techniques such as the support vector machine, logistic regression, k-means clustering and such. I used to do the same things with bag-of-words model, BERT-like models give a significant boost to the accuracy, are simple to implement, and run quickly. I can write a script that tests 1000s of alternative models a day.

The main classification YOShInOn does is "will I like this content?" which is a rather fuzzy problem that won't retest perfectly. I tried applying a fine-tuned model to this problem and after a few days of trying different things I developed a procedure that took 30 minutes to make a model about as good as my classical ML model take took more like 30 seconds to train. If my problem wasn't so fuzzy I'd benefit more from the fine tuning and someday I might apply YOShInOn to make a training set for a better defined problem but I am delighted with the system I have now because it does things that I've dreamed of for 20 years.

The whole "prompting" model is dangerously seductive for various reasons but the low-down is that language is treacherous. This classic book

https://www.amazon.com/G%C3%B6del-Escher-Bach-Eternal-Golden...

is not such an easy read but it contains some parables that explain why making a chatbot do what people would like a chatbot will be like endlessly pushing a bubble under the rug and these problems are not about the technology behind the chatbot but about the problem that they are trying to solve.
It's not that you're stupid, it's just that your standard of evidence you will accept around this crisis is embarrassingly low.
> You claimed people "might" be using the forums to commit crimes, now you're saying "it's pretty clear".

Sorry, I can't edit the original comment anymore. But thanks for pointing that out!

> However, I am not aware of any actual evidence or examples that substantiate the claims made in it.

Fortunately US Code doesn't require violence for cyberbullying to be a crime.
Animal torture videos
there are really no comments here yet. Was this automated?
Is this situation like, say I own some commercial property like a mall, someone rents from me, I realize the person who is renting from me is allowing one of the storefronts to advertise the ritualistic sacrifice of kittens. Shouldn’t I be allowed to 1) tell the guy renting from me to boot out the kitten killers; 2) boot out the guy renting from me for letting one of the storefronts of my commercial space be kitten killing?

Am I not understanding something here
For me, it was python available on the base Linux install at work. Along with Bottle.py it meant my team could build internal web apps and host them without asking IT for additional software installs like apache.

If ruby had been there with a ruby micro framework available we might have used that.
Great article. It goes into the radio and the audio frequencies, and talks about equipment that can transmit the signal, from handheld radios to SDRs, and even covers how to build your own (with circuit diagrams).

Much better than the article linked IMO.
> however the Rust memory management via the type system feels natural once you wrap your head around it

It disallows many valid patterns. That is why I recommend to take a look at Hylo programming language (before called Val lang) to see what I think it is a very good example of how to make a language safe without making the learning curve so steep and without a need for a GC.
Surprised by the huge outpouring of support here, yet when X puts forward the exact same values of "freedom of speech but not freedom of speech," it's met entirely with criticism.
Python is much older than Ruby in terms of wide adoption.

Python became popular because: if you want to write a program that runs from the shell, uses file I/O, terminal I/O and possibly network I/O, that's quick and easy to work with, and where the runtime is either already on your computer or can be installed painlessly, there weren't many alternatives.

Shell script is too crappy a programming environment for anything non-trivial.
Perl is a mess. Ruby isn't on the machine and is (still!) a nightmare to install. Compiled languages are not quick and easy to work with. JS doesn't exist yet (in a form usable from the shell). Tcl is too niche.

Python is the least worse choice.

All the stuff about ML and stats and Jupyter and what not is not relevant -- that came later as a consequence of Python already being popular.

It's actually amazing that Python is still popular because it nearly shot its own feet off with the 3.0 nonsense. Most folks here probably don't even remember that...
We have a phone call recording of Victoria Nuland picking the president of Ukraine.
I generally downvote complaints about the title of articles. (I don't downvote requests to change the title on HN though.)
>Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this is how smalltalk/squeak works?

In Smalltalk those would be classes' methods rather than freestanding functions, but yes: all objects within the image directly send messages to each other, i.e. invoke each other's methods. Lisp machine operating systems are somewhat closer, since initially they had no object system and used freestanding functions calling each other, though later they became generic functions specialized to their arguments' classes.
That doesn’t make sense: everyone else got hit by Intel’s failure to deliver, too. Even if you assume Apple had some 4-D chess plan where making their own products worse was needed to justify a huge gamble, it’s not like Dell or HP were in on it. Slapping a monster heat sink and fan on can help with performance but then you’re paying with weight, battery life, and purchase price.

I think a more parsimonious explanation is the accepted one: Intel was floundering for ages, Apple’s phone CPUs were booming, and a company which had suffered a lot due to supplier issues in the PowerPC era decided that they couldn’t afford to let another company have that much control over their product line. It wasn’t just things like the CPUs failing further behind but also the various chipset restrictions and inability to customize things. Apple puts a ton of hardware in to support things like security or various popular tasks (image & video processing, ML, etc.) and now that’s an internal conversation, and the net result is cheaper, cooler, and a unique selling point for them.
I mean that's basically this history of the US in Latin America, but everyone complains anyway.
Looks like some of the flagged ones have already disappeared - the first comments were all Putin apologia.
100-240V 50-60Hz switching supplies are common "worldwide" or "universal" adapters, definitely not an indication of service voltage standard here.
Ruby was popular by accident. Rails was popular because it was valuable.

Rails was ahead of it's time. The alternatives in that era were ... well, they aren't around any more. Rails was to the alternatives what an iPhone is to a flip phone.

Python is useful with a low barrier to entry. It's valuable and available. It isn't competing with anything. It's useful in the way that spreadsheets are useful.

Just as databases didn't "lose" because spreadsheets are more widely used, neither Ruby nor Python has won or lost. Python is more useful in high-value areas, particularly data science. And ruby is still more fun.
Reading the comment section of the NYT leaves me wondering why so many Americans idolize Putin and hate their own country? Even here on HN there there are those who in a clever way show their support for Putin and Russia. When did it become okay to start a war and invade other countries with the goal of destroying them and erasing their identity and existence? Shameful.....
> Yeah, sheesh. KF is a website that gleefully reposts terrorist murder videos treated with the same legal penalties as CSAM in other countries, and during the reign of ISIS and the Taliban I don't recall people sitting around defending the need for that particular free speech.

Do you genuinely not see a problem with the New Zealand police ordering websites to remove content they dislike and hand over user information about anyone who so much as discussed it? Christchurch was a horrific act of terrorism; that doesn't make attempting punish people for hosting or discussing content related to it justified.
I would like to hear it, please post it...
> Your reasoning seems to be based on vague assumptions based on a very vaguely described situation

indeed, with no detail provided, we're forced to make assumptions, or ask for detail

I chose the latter, that is why I included this in my post:

> I guess I need more convincing, 1st that there is indeed full context exonerating the "obvious" quote from meaning what the words mean, and 2nd that it wouldn't work to just provide that context to resolve the matter (e.g. if it truly is exonerating context, why wouldn't providing the context exonerate?)

when I asked for that detail, I just got a snide, uninformed remark about the answer being obvious, from someone who clearly could not come up with an answer

I would like a response to that part of the post if you feel up to providing it, please
Or if the IRS investigates the President's political opponents.
Mathematica is nothing less than a work of art. I dedicated a fair amount of time to become proficient, but it never solved the use case I had (find derivatives for complicated functions- this was before autodiff was common).

Unfortunately, Wolfram himself has made a number of decisions that greatly limited its applicability and so it will always be niche.
It's mostly just a misnomer. A 110 V device with a 5% tolerance, for example, would not work on nominal US circuits.
By all means, produce the recording!
Dividing it by two gives you 3/8 rather than 9.5mm. Dividing it by 4 gives you 3/16 rather than 4.75mm. Both 3/8 and 3/16 are common sizes. You can drill holes cut grooves this size. You can use your 3/8 chisel to quickly find the centerline.

It's not like you can't do any of this with the metric system, but you'll either need to measure things more, or round things. Often rounding is fine, but to me it feels like a compromise that is born out of the measuring system; a compromise that isn't needed when using the imperial system.
I have noticed that when babies are trying to figure out how you speak, they will often shove some or their hand in your mouth to try and feel where your tongue is and what it is doing. Perhaps it is that pathway opening in reverse?
Might be time to upgrade the kettle. I really want one with temperature setting and insulation.
>Anti doxing laws should've shut that place down long ago.

Reposting publically available information should never be illegal.
I love websites getting uglier and uglier due to forced "accesibility" colors, how about you give me a color palette? I want my color palettes to be like a 90s RPG, fully radioactive colors, I can see better if colors are brighter, I don't want dull/boring colors, I literally turn off darcula and switch to high contrast/terminal colors with bright green on my IDE for a reason.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I just think the founding fathers could not anticipate the world we have today.

The problem of course being that intelligence tests were used in the 60's to deny voting rights. But the founding fathers were okay with slavery, so would they have been okay with that for that purpose?

Originalism has a purpose I think, but, we've changed so much since then...
I think the question is not quite so easy as many here (and even the EFF) are making it seem.

It's easy to talk about free-speech that needs to be protected at any cost when it comes to political speech, but if we look at e.g. spam nobody argues that spam and spammers should be blocked. Now is spam less speech, because it is not political?

On a similar note, if I own a large piece of land should I allow a demonstration that I disagree with cross the land because of free-speech? If no, why does a company who carries data, need to provide their "pipes" to the same people?

I understand the argument that restricting speech is a slippery slope, on the other hand I agree with Popper, not restricting all speech and enabling the "intolerant" is also a slippery slope (I say that as a German, we have quite a bit of experience with this).

I'm not sure how to draw easy boundaries, but making this into an argument of "easy it's free-speech that needs to be defended at all costs" seems much too simplistic.
> I agree, we've got far too many entities that should just be 'dumb pipes' trying to play moral police at the moment

This is one of the positives of capitalism. The only color that matters is green. More competition please.
Yeah, hilarious, but in reality they just won't go.

Just like e.g. most Indians never fly to the U.S. even if they have relatives living there. Or more fittingly, how most Hungarians used to be able to afford to go on a holiday near Lake Balaton until they were priced out by wealthier Germans, or middle-class families in Canberra used to be able to afford daycare but now only the top 3% by income do.

I would not hold my breath about the state subsidizing cross-Atlantic trips for families.
Due to procedure changes, and very tough doors into flight deck which are generally locked, and voluntary handgun carry by pilots, US hijacking is not feasible. Yet we pay a ticket surcharge to get TSA groped and our privacy violated.

Americans won't see the enemy which is staring at us. Domestically it will have to get a lot worse over the next decade.
As a degree mathematician who has done a little contract work for both historians and lawyers and may have occasionally regarded law as the study of first order logic and theatrics (fun sledge, amusement rather than disrespect intended) I have to ask whether the history crowd had a valid point wrt to strength of reference in supporting an argument.

If five decades onwards one were to write a History of Our Times (the Central North American Edition) it would be correct to, say, point out that claims were made in the media and courts regarding a stolen election and to then cite court filings, articles in prominent newspapers, and perhaps videos from both network and youtube archives.

It's fair to say that such claims formed the zeitgeist of our recent times for a substantial portion of the population affected and that any citation failed to logically support what it purported to support.

This is the "History is what happened" argument not the "History makes sense" position.

I freely acknowledge I've slid past the arguments made in this thread source, that current history isn't being rigourous with open access to sources and annoted commentary of primary material - but I note that the crafting of alternative histories can be coincident with primary events.
I don't think we materially disagree about the civic importance of free expression.

> I personally don't think the government should step in and force companies to carry speech they disagree with. I think they should make certain that no company has the power to oppress people leaving them without reasonably equivalent options.

This maxim has not been violated in this case! HE is one of many ISPs; no evidence has been presented that it colludes with other ISPs[1] to stifle public expression.

And note: the logic of "reasonably equivalent options" doesn't entitle anybody to Internet access, for the same reason that the freedom of movement doesn't entitle me to a driver's license (or a horse). The government may not prohibit my expression; it is also under no particular obligation to supply me any particular venue for expression.

[1]: HE is somewhat famous for having long-standing conflicts with other, larger, ISPs with regards to peering: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mpetach/4031195041
Have you checked if it was the same people? I usually read about "Here last week someone said this, but now someone said that" as HN or communities in general are one single organism, what your post wants to say? Have the people in this thread forgotten to go through education camps?

Do you hope that Musk is going to throw some peanuts at you for defending him like a good boy?
>Some of the people Kiwifarms harassed were driven to suicide.

This is repeated often but there's no proof for these claims. There's more evidence that Reddit has a greater kill count than KF.
I'd suggest reading the linked readme, it does a great job explaining the differences. In other operating systems apps do dynamic linking & syscalls. Those don't exist in Fomos.
> […] and would bleed like it just had its throat slit.

Thank you for your beautiful turn of phrase which has made my evening brighter.
Power does not corrupt, it's just that these people were always bad people and power gives them the tools to do some bad things.
In your wsgi.py file, you specify which settings module to use when loading your WSGI application with, e.g., gunicorn. In your settings.py file, you can specify what your root url config is, e.g. a urls.py file which recursively defines all routes in you application. But nothing is stopping you from having n different settings files, e.g. settings/service1.py with n different urls.py files and loading them in n different wsgi.py files and serving them with n different gunicorn deployments.

You can also do things like adjust the settings defined in your settings.py file to use a different url conf programatically based on environment variables. It is just python, after all.
>Since when did the Nazis become synonymous with being anti-free speech?

When they uhh... eliminated free speech in Germany?
Neat. It's mentioned on Facebook's page, but here Google's version of point tracking: https://deepmind-tapir.github.io which is Apache-2.0 licensed.
What do you mean by "picking"?
Because of criminalizing "deadnaming" or in spite of it?

For those that don't know, so-called "deadnaming" "is the act of referring to a transgender or non-binary person by a name they used prior to transitioning, such as their birth name."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadnaming
OpenDoas has opt-in persistence via the --with-timestamp build flag. And on NixOS, for example, it's built with this flag by default.
I love getting MFA prompts constantly and getting locked out unexpectedly so much that I can't wait to use it for my personal life too!
So it turned out to be ...

the hijack to end all hijacks?
Performing a DDoS attack is already illegal. Content neutral for legal content shouldn't be a high bar.
This is a very interesting product! Congrats on the launch!

I was wondering if this would also be supported for no-SQL databases like Mongo?

Also a little sandbox to play with it would be nice. For example, you could have a small table of weather data from a random city, and people could then query something like "How many days in 2022 was the daily high for Los Angeles above 100 degrees?" Of course, this might be a lot of work as you would have to have it run on the backend and then return the results to the frontend.
Merriam webster seems to agree with me.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Nazi

I think maybe where you went wrong was asking what a Nazi is and expecting someone to actually answer it.