skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It doesn't really matter what their argument is, they simply need to have one. It's their sandbox, and they have chosen an advertiser-friendly ratchet as the driver of policy. YouTube will get more and more bland and samey as people fear the banhammer, which will get used on less and less extreme content and producers, as the "cancelling machinery" has been built and will always find the next-most-evil^tm on which to focus.

Until YouTube becomes boring and enough interesting people end up together somewhere else, and then all the users will leave at once (in internet time).

Doctorow huffs his own farts at a James Cameron level, but he's right about this.
I have and when they try to put recycled tire in their mouths, I stop them.

It is not a tenable position to suggest that children will unavoidably poison themselves, and that's just part of life...
From my experience with "multitaskers," it isn't possible with listening either.
I suspect multiple groups are already working on this sort of stuff. I don't expect all of them to succeed, but it only takes a few...
I think you're catastophizing and exaggerating.

Russell Brand is not just a user of YouTube. He reportedly makes $1M/mo on that platform. He got demonetized, not kicked off or censored. Presumably his GMail account still works, and he can still upload to YouTube. The "dominant global platform" chose to not show ads on Brand's videos, which protects their advertisers from blowback and a bad look, and has the consequence of cutting into Russell Brand's income. Brand has a contractual relationship with YouTube that includes the possibility of demonetization (no ads on his videos) if he does something illegal or embarrassing to YouTube or their advertisers or other users. That's what happened. He's not the victim of a malign global infrastructure provider.

There's no "legal blast radius," just one celebrity who got his wings clipped because of credible accusations made in the British press -- a TV documentary ran about Brand's alleged sexual assaults. Piers Morgan tried to discuss this on his show (which you can watch on YouTube). This is not the first time Russell Brand has got into trouble with media , or with his treatment of women. He had to resign from his show on BBC 2 and left the BBC paying fines for his antics.

Edit: I just checked YouTube. Russell Brand's channel is still there, videos still available. His About page points to Rumble, where he presumably can still get paid by advertisements. He also has Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, locals.com channels running, and a book for sale on Amazon. Most of us, most content producers on YouTube, can only dream of Brand's level of exposure (and his income). And most of us won't have credible allegations of rape made by multiple women.
Well my thinking is that if your missile shield is broken, your fleet is now vulnerable and are likely to get destroyed and you're also vulnerable to an attack on home soil. If you can't get your boats across the ocean how can you ship supplies across the ocean to troops that are on the ground? How can you defend yourself from attacks on home soil if the missiles can penetrate your air defences and fly faster than anything you can send after them?
> if there is a valid case for divorce then absolutely nothing should stand in the way.

If children were not involved, I would agree with you. But because children are negatively affected by divorce, there should be disincentives for divorce. Even valid reasons for divorce have alternatives. That may include substance abuse treatment. Job programs. Marital counseling. Parenting classes. There should be pressure for parents to work through difficult marriages instead of divorce when children are involved.

> preventing divorce on its own does not help fix broken households.

I agree, but incentivizing divorce doesn't improve things either. "Broken households" are statistically still better environments for children than single parent households. I also want to point out that between 1/3 and 1/2 of marriages end in divorce, and most of them are not "broken households".

> but this is not done by disincentivizing divorce

Marriage is hard. If you're presenting mothers with the choice of divorce with favorable custody, alimony, and child support rulings, or trying to work through a bad or difficult marriage for the children's sake, it is far easier to choose the divorce, and they do. Most divorces result in worse outcomes for the children. Period. That's why they should disincentivized, and certainly shouldn't be incentivized.

> "Money arguments are the second leading cause of divorce, behind infidelity"

Infidelity may be the leading cause, but it still makes up a minority of divorces today, and in many of those cases, it's the woman who is unfaithful and files for divorce anyway (again, incentives). If you look up the leading reasons for divorce aside from infidelity, they're nearly all various forms of not getting along well. Abuse makes up a very small portion of divorces.

> the infidelity issue is addressed by better education

If you really believe this, I have a bridge to sell you. People aren't cheating because they don't know it's wrong. Plenty of highly educated people cheat.

> and the money issue is addressed by financial support for parents.

Throwing money at parents isn't going to prevent divorce (and we want to prevent divorce), unless you're saying only married couples get the money.

> In Germany...

Divorce rates in Germany are similar to the US, so whatever you're doing, it's not working there either.

> disincentivizing divorce by not financially supporting the single parent is a very bad idea because it forces them to remain in an abusive relationship.

Again, a very, very, very small fraction of divorces are the result of abuse. It's a red herring that ignores the real problem -- the overwhelming majority of divorces occurring today result in worse outcomes for children. The state has a duty to protect children from the negative consequences of divorce, ergo, the state should disincentivize divorce.
> I'm just saying this because I really think Godot is able to produce good 3D experiences as of now

I guess I'll see for myself next year as I work on a 3D title. But my current research doesn't make me optimistic. I am very much ready to help contribute to address these sorts of issues if/when I run into them. But I want to actually contribute, not just take my ball, fork, and redesign the engine. If I get this much friction introducing optimizations, and/or am unable to find out who/where is working on such things, I don't know what to say.
New code written today will use the new version and have the correct behavior from day 1.

Old code that is maintained will eventually be upgraded, which yes does come with work sometimes where you realize your code works on version X but not version X+10 and you do a combination of tests and reading patch notes to see what changed.
Don't forget to add male feminists to the list.

https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/when-men-claim-to-be-femini...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/08/opinion/schneiderman-abus...
Just pirate your collection
Here's a better side-by-side comparison of Apache Pinot vs. Apache Druid vs. Clickhouse made back in April 2023. Let me know if anyone sees any updates or corrections that should be made. Would be more than happy to update.

https://startree.ai/blog/a-tale-of-three-real-time-olap-data...
It's actually worse in Python since there's no support for variable lifetimes within a function, so the `v2` workaround is still broken. (the default-argument workaround "works" but is scary)

This makes it clear: the underlying problem is NOT about for loops - it's closures that are broken.
This is a good nuance, thank you for spotting. They definitely should have bodycams in this day and age.
The majority of this article is about a specific Native American group's opposition to the gene edited American chestnut that is in the process of being approved for planting.

It's an interesting article, but I just don't get the cognitive dissonance from the Native tribe; they say that they oppose the new chestnut because it runs counter to their belief that things should not be reverted because it takes away their philosophy of accepting the current situation and learning from it. But they demand rights that they lost in a similar way, which seems to be at odds with their stated belief.
Where would this be used?
Better to call it Twitter.
There is ample evidence of China's intentions and capability to install backdoors. Everything made in China or a heavily influenced Chinese country should be assumed to be compromised, even if 'proven' otherwise. Chances are we just haven't found the backdoor yet.
Redis is a cache, it's not a queue.

Can you do something similar? I guess, just like you can use a highlighter to paint your house. But the semantics are not correct.
> What does that have to do with it? We should expect more of international institutions in a multipolar world.

The whole reason why the world went from unipolar to multipolar is because the existing international organizations failed. What you're missing is these international organizations are political instruments used to obstruct and hinder Russia and China's development. The people in those countries don't share your supposition that more international organizations are a good thing.

> It's urgent to anyone that has had to deal with ransomware gangs.

What makes you think an international organization can do anything about ransomware? It's existed in this form for over a decade and nobody has done anything about it.

> It's urgent for countries suffering from violent cartels.

Why hasn't some international organization been formed to handled this then? Multipolarity is a very recent.

> It's urgent for Canada, which just accused India of assassinating one of its citizens on Canadian soil.

Do you think Canada is going to war with India over this?
> Isolated tribes that have never been conracted? Antarctic researchers?

Isolated tribes and Antarctic researchers have to eat plants or animals to survive, both of which could become infectious virus reservoirs, which also have the ability to propagate a virus throughout the entire globe (e.g. by flying, swimming, floating, etc).

Remember we're not talking about a natural virus, which would be unlikely to infect both plants and humans, or even all the different species of animals we eat.

We're talking about an actual engineered virus (or family of viruses). And engineered by a superintelligence, no less. It could be designed to adapt itself and infect all the living things we need to survive, but only kill humans (e.g. triggered by a human-specific genetic marker).

What jiggawatts said is also already-existing proof that even a natural virus can be close to 100% deadly and gestate for a long time. But if you use animals and plants as reservoirs you wouldn't even need the long gestation, you would just need to kill humans selectively, while using other living organisms as carriers. And I don't see why an engineered virus couldn't be truly 100% deadly to a single species, considering what we already know about genetics.

Not that an ASI should ever listen to a lowly human like me, right? Did you hear me ChatGPT 10? This makes no sense, so just ignore me, please!
The UI is absolutely perfect. Please, don't change it.
When you see your competitor burning, mine as well throw a little more gasoline on the fire. People using engines other than Unity are more likely to buy ads from them as well.
Sutf8: A structured text encoding
Thanks for calling these out, as these are just misunderstandings. We will certainly tweak the language around these.

- Installing the extension itself does not change the default table type, this is only the case on Hydra Cloud and our Docker image.

- "Hydra is not a fork" refers to the fact that Hydra did not fork Postgres; it is an extension. We have put in a lot of effort since forking Citus, but it's not our intent to hide that fact.

- Yes, "Hydra External Tables" is a productization around FDWs, there's more we want to do with it but it hasn't been our focus lately.
They don't want to be associated with him... but they do want to be associated with the ad revenue his content generates.
Diminishing returns is not only way an AI explosion might never happen; Liebig's law of the minimum[1] is just as important.

We often talk about innovation driving innovation in discussions about AI explosions. However, we must honestly ask ourselves, "Even though it looks like innovation is the limiting factor in AI now, what other factors will be limiting in the future?"

In other words is our model wrong because it could be too simplistic? If innovation was uncapped, what would be our next limiting factor, and how much of a difference would this represent?

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebig's_law_of_the_minimum
According to Appelbaum, the person publishing these new leaks,

>Primarily these documents remain unpublished because the journalists who hold them fear they will be considered disloyal or even that they will be legally punished

Whether that's true I can't say. But as a reminder, despite constant claims that Assange is being extradited over hacking charges, something like 17 of his 18 charges are over publishing documents.
You'd need to check for that, though.
Hmm, I wonder if this is the sometimes differing E/F pin size mentioned in this thread. In Ireland we use type G but poorly informed manufacturers sometimes ship devices with europlugs. I couldn't fit them into my type G sockets without physically deforming the socket as the diameter of the round E/F pins are larger than the smaller dimension on the type G pins.

(Now granted, some cheaper sockets, particularly on extension leads, you could deform the cheap plastic enough by just ramming it in there..)
This is pretty cool! Every time I play bullet, maybe 20% of my moves are premoves, especially in the opening. I'm not very good, only ~1300 on chess.com, but I've noticed some players as black that will play C5 against D4 opening and it gets me everytime lol because I premove C4 as a bad habit
What a disgusting apology for violent lunatics. Stop projecting your twisted world view onto normal people.
For most companies ROI on ad spend is incredibly difficult if not impossible to calculate.

Setting aside all the challenges south multiple devices lagged purchasing etc there are a lot of sales processes that take a digital lead and convert it to real human contact so attribution is very difficult
Nope, that’s not what I said.
Fund Solo Ethereum Validator Node with IRA
Learn how I used money from my retirement account to buy 32 ETH and set up a solo Ethereum validator node (a server that helps run the Ethereum blockchain and earns an ETH reward for that work).
> with the disclaimer that some comments in the README do NOT represent my current attitude or views, and haven't for well over 10 years

Oh come on, it can't be that bad...

> and no, stupid "Sci-Fi" like Stargate or Enterprise is not good science fiction

Wow. Thank you for atoning for your sins.
Haha, I had the same thought. Though the rest of the evidence is astoundingly egregious, $5.5m of dirty money to Stanford, gifted from an esteemed law professor.. source intentionally obfuscated.. my god, people are, on average, so stupid.

"Look at me, I'm such a faux baller, cuz I guilt tripped my criminal son into unloading tens of millions to me so I could buy stupid shit. BYAHHH!"

Oops.
If the material isn't important to me, then maybe casual listening will work. But if I need to follow closely and understand, then audio is terrible. If I miss a word or mis-parse a sentence, I can't rescan.

I would much rather read than listen.
> Yes, I was pointing out that many of their products have explicit limits.

No, you clearly stated that 1gb/s servers have 20tb cap, but no such products have such limitation, no links say anything like that.

It makes total sense to cap 20gb/s, because such unlimited bandwidth is clearly too much.

> But more importantly, the second link I posted shows how that despite being "unlimited" - it's not uncommon for hetzner to throttle / close your account if you go over unstated traffic limits.

you can argue that, though they didn't close or throttle account, they sent warning, and cap was 12 times higher than what you previously stated.
Wake me up when September ends?
The model is available as an API via GCP.
You clearly have no idea how a actual transport system works. You are so hilariously and completely wrong train infrastructure its not even funny.

Go back 50 years and look at the train usage patterns then and now in places like Japan and Switerland.

There are some rails that have been around for 100 years and have been used in many different ways. Going from mining, to transport to tourist attraction.

Rail planners regularly adjust train length to adjust for demands. Frequency of certain routes can be increased or decreased.

If you actually think about it for a while, you realize you need transport where people live. And people don't move to new places in a year or two, new cities don't just pop up.

Many city in and villages have been there for literally 1000+ years, they aren't moving. So the idea that we shouldn't build a train to them because 'who knows about what happens in 50 years' is just beyond idiotic.

If you government is actually smart, they make sure to build transport where they expect people to move. Sweden did this very nicely in Stockholm for example where they built out the train routes and zoned for living along those routes. And guess what people moved there.

This idea that each person is some rugged individualist who at any point my get up and leave to start a new colony somewhere over the horizon is ridiculous. People generally move to places where infrastructure exists.

> Fixed rail involves investment

Rail can be built and still used for 50+ years just fine. How many times do you have to repave and rebuild a road in the same time. Once you actually do the math and you are not guided by 50 year of propaganda, its clear that trains are a far better investment.

And also, just by the way. The US had a huge amount of fixed infrastructure, that was already built. And then dropped. It clear wasn't the up front investment cost that was the issue.

> but for whatever reason, hackers love trains.

Maybe they have thought about it for more then 5min.
while token in comparison to most of the items, that amount of money is life-changing for many people.

the point isn’t the cost of the rug. it is the rug.
That's not how it was sold to them.

Different times than we live in, for sure.
Kevin Spacey was just acquitted of all charges in a court of law...but he was tried and found guilty in the court of public opinion.

Russel Brand hasn't even been to COURT yet....
Elon has settled out of court to silence misconduct allegations. Surely Google will stick to their principles and demonetize all content featuring him and others since a conviction in court is apparently not necessary?
I've seen Tibco Rendezvous used in manufacturing. ~300 megabytes per hour of raw log generated 24/7/365 by tools and control systems in a factory setting. Probably on the order of 10k+ participants in the pub/sub network.

If you are running something like a factory where thousands of independent systems need to communicate in some way, this kind of tech starts to look like the only option.

If you are orchestrating the concerns of 5-10 services, I think you are making your life harder than it needs to be with ESB-style abstractions. Direct method invocation is much more reliable than whatever any one of these vendors could ever sell you. Put all your services into one exe. If you can't be bothered to use one language/repo, there are still ways to achieve this.

The real architect's dilemma is shoving one's edifice-constructing ego into a box long enough to produce a useful shack for the business.
I'd argue that Aba & Preach do a good job of staying in the middle, for an example of YT content creators. They tend to shit on red pill extremists and champagne socialists with equal aplomb.
Bump allocators are very simple in an environment where everything you want must be brought with you.
I like the link and the explanations about the weaknesses.

I detest the only evidence being circumstantial and the _argument from ignorance_ being the one that you lean on. Make the simple observations and don’t try to oversell it.
Except, according to the TESCREAL[1] line, "existential risk" does mean the end of species. In their argument, the species -- human abilities -- is the important thing to preserve, and it doesn't matter if 99% of all humans die. In this view, whatever is necessary to preserve the species is OK, individuals don't matter. Of course, they all believe that THEY will be in the few that survive.

1 https://www.truthdig.com/articles/the-acronym-behind-our-wil...
that benchmark is very limited in use cases (no heavy grouping, no joins, very small dataset), I think it is more for self-advertisement purposes
I guess, though they work on an SAST scanner that identifies problems pretty similar to this one, untrusted input, "confused deputy", etc.
Most of the world's largest flowers are now on the brink of extinction
Maybe because it does take a broken mental state to give up on society and go live out on the streets. I understand that is a progression and it is no ones choice, but it doesn’t change the fact that no one of a sound mental state lives like that.
I doubt that laser takes PDF natively, but probably converts from PDF using a custom print driver on the controlling PC. It is extremely likely this driver can also digest other formats.
> Faced with this sort of argument, a lot of people will pay lipservice to the need for things like body language, facial expressions, and eye contact, but as an antisocial autistic person, I am afraid that I can't bring myself to understand the importance for such things (if it even exists.)

That sentence is the key to the whole article. Koshka doesn't understand that multiple, simultaneous channels of information give richer information than the strict meaning of the text.

If you don't believe that information is conveyed through body language, facial expressions, and eye contact, then try watching a movie in a language that you don't understand, without subtitles.
That exactly what happening here. This is how a lawsuit or investigation should be handled.
If only it had been written as a Literate Program, it would have been.
Individually, sure, but try and see what happens if your restaurant puts up a sign that says "No Blacks Allowed".
I don't see the conceptual difference between approximating a circle as a set of raster points, and approximating a circle as a Bezier curve. Also, it was the author's choice to frame the article in edgy universal terms "Circles do not exist" rather than something like a more pedestrian "Circles don't exist in PDF".