skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If someone has the power to have a judge order you to pay 20+% of your income, and that income is imputed meaning a lower income may leave you in an impossible position, it is smart to always keep it in mind. I also keep cancer screening in mind.
First Amendment rights do not extend to corporations under foreign (adversarial) government control. Simple as.

This amendment to the constitution was rewritten a few times, each time more clearly stating that it applies to “the people”.

From: https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt1-7-1/ALD...
You’re a fire management expert? What did LA do wrong?
Meanwhile, it's perfectly fine for foreign adversaries to use American social media to interfere with American events. Anything for that GDP.
> But its perfectly fine for a US company to do it?

China blocks facebook/twitter/instagram/pinterest/gmail/wikipedia/twitch and even US newspapers.

So clearly they don't think it's okay for a US-company to do it (and are at least an order magnitude stricter about it)...
Misanthropic is not a claim I'm making based upon data. It's not possible to validate independently, but a judgment by myself. Your claim sounds misanthropic to me - it sounds like, if we are high earners, we should distrust our spouses because they are just out for our money and will demand we work miserable jobs to make sure they have enough, and if we don't they'll divorce it and demand the money of us. That's bleak and distrustful of people.

I'm not expecting a Cambridge study, but I was hoping you had some sort of news article or something rising above an anecdote in a forum about how some guy's wife forced him back into his job. You seems to feel you should warn people about in this forum, so you believe that it happens at a rate such that it could happen to any of us. So in that case, "common" seems less "strawman", and more "correct usage". You don't have it, that's fine, but if that's the case, why do you believe it?
It is a bit of a silly term. It was made mostly to contrast against the somewhat more adhoc methods that preceded it. The new technique was parameterized more around physical properties where the older ones were more about visual descriptions.

This paper from Disney is what kicked off the movement https://disneyanimation.com/publications/physically-based-sh...
I'm also a CTO frequently making product decisions, and I refer to it as "Boomer pricing." You want to get on a call with me to assess the size of my company and whether or not I have some bureaucratic, unconcerned entity with an indiscriminate pocketbook. Clear pricing up front, and ideally a pricing calculator, or I don't even consider it.

If I make a product, I don't want you to use it because you found me first and I happened to harangue you on a sales call. I want you to find my product, compare it will full transparency to the other products, and go with mine if it best suits you. Anybody who behaves differently I immediately assume to be behaving in bad faith and is not actually confident in their product on its own merits.
This is being positioned as a national security issue that a foreign government has so much influence over the US public (and data on people if they want, like geolocation, interests, your contacts, etc).

Note: I'm not saying I either agree or disagree ... just pointing out the dynamics in the case being made.
They have been wondering about that for many years quite explicitly.
The U.S. Found the Beijing Firm Behind Major 'Salt Typhoon' Telecom Hacks
According to wikipedia:

> Analysis of mineral salts in the wine revealed a high concentration of potassium salts, indicative of the cremains in the wine

I kinda wanted to try it too before I read this.
The opinion is mostly not about control over recommendation algorithms; it goes out of its way to say that the data collection is dispositive. Check out Gorsuch's concurrence for some flavor of how much more complicated this would be with respect to the recommender.
NASA put people on the first flight of the shuttle to space, which turned out after the fact to have 1 in 12 chance of killing the crew. Can't do that in 2025.

https://x.com/eager_space/status/1879291376418120184
What exactly is your issue with this, as a textualist?

>[The Congress shall have Power . . . ] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes; . . .

This is foreign commerce. It falls under the explicit jurisdiction of Congress.
In recent years China does not do much blatant invading and prefer much more subtle means daring people to respond to them like in the South China Sea.
Dolby Digital
Jurisprudentially? Yes.
For a 1MM kids, not for 169MM others. They will go where there is the least friction which is likely a Meta or Alphabet product.
It's opinion regardless of the specific legal philosophy. Each philosophy makes decisions about what kinds of information, sources, context, etc are considered to form the "correct" interpretation. Those decisions are opinions.
In preventing a country from being invaded, yes, we are.
The interesting bits from the text[1], relative to the now flagged sibling

-----

(3) FOREIGN ADVERSARY CONTROLLED APPLICATION.—The term “foreign adversary controlled application” means a website, desktop application, mobile application, or augmented or immersive technology application that is operated, directly or indirectly (including through a parent company, subsidiary, or affiliate), by—

(A) any of—

(i) ByteDance, Ltd.;

(ii) TikTok;

(iii) a subsidiary of or a successor to an entity identified in clause (i) or (ii) that is controlled by a foreign adversary; or

(iv) an entity owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by an entity identified in clause (i), (ii), or (iii); or

(B) a covered company that—

(i) is controlled by a foreign adversary; and

(ii) that is determined by the President to present a significant threat to the national security of the United States following the issuance of—

(I) a public notice proposing such determination; and

(II) a public report to Congress, submitted not less than 30 days before such determination, describing the specific national security concern involved and containing a classified annex and a description of what assets would need to be divested to execute a qualified divestiture.

-----

The way I read this is that Congress is bootstrapping the law with its own finding that ByteDance, Ltd/TikTok are Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications, but then, in (3)(B), the President is responsible for determining any other entities this law should cover given previously stated parameters (what they mean by "covered entity" here), using the procedure it then provides.

I believe that addresses the concern about this being a "Bill of Attainder".

Edit: Obviously IANAL, but it also doesn't appear that this issue of this being a Bill of Attainder was raised by TikTok, nor was it considered in this opinion. Perhaps they will do so in a separate action, or already have and it just hasn't made its way to the court(?), but if it were such a slam dunk defense, you think their expensive lawyers would have raised it.

[1]: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7521...
will do, thank you!
That's an interesting hypothetical, I have another one.

Imagine you're a country with natural resources. Private industries want those resources. Suddenly the US media is flooded with fabricated or exaggerated stories about the country written by NGOs and Think Tanks. Suddenly, out of nowhere a coup happens in the country with the stated intention of "liberalization" and "democratic reforms". The country goes through shock therapy and structural adjustments as it takes on mountains of IMF loans to enter the world markets-- it has to sell off control of all its national resources and industries to American companies. The life expectancy plummets.

Oh wait this isn't a hypothetical this is just actual US foreign policy.
Maybe they'll cite this ruling as part of a reconsideration?
Sadly they won't, that's just one more reason for e.g. the EU to censor more social media on the grounds that one of their """allies""" does it too.
For those not in the know, why is cryptic pregnancy tiktok bad?

I'd never heard of it, and from what I understand, it's a hashtag people use to share stories of how they found out they were pregnant late in the pregnancy because they didn't have pregnancy symptoms. But I don't understand why that would be bad for people to share/consume.
This whole thing is both silly and unsurprising.

Everybody knows the fearmongering about Chinese control and manipulation is a smokescreen. The real reason is that Tiktok doesn't fall in line with State Department propaganda [1].

It's noteworthy that SCOTUS sidestepped this issue entirely by not even considering the secret evidence the government brought.

That being said, it's unsurprising because you can make a strictly commerce-based argument that has nothing to do with speech and the First Amendment. Personally, I think reciprocity would've been a far more defensible position, in that US apps like Google, FB, Youtube and IG are restricted from the Chinese market so you could demand recipricol access on strictly commerce grounds.

The best analogy is the restriction on foreign ownership of media outlets, which used to be a big deal. Back in the 1980s and 1990s, US companies would defend themselves from foreign takeovers by buying TV stations, for example. That's basically the premise of the movie Working Girl, as one (fictional) example.

Politically, the big loser here is Biden and the Democratic Party because they will be (rightly) blamed for banning a highly popular app (even though the Congressional vote was hugely bipartisan) and Trump will likely get credit for saving Tiktok.

[1]: https://x.com/Roots_Action/status/1767941861866348615
Incorporating is good business advice in general and something you definitely should do but bankruptcy isn't always an option and those debts don't magically disappear. Unless you're planning on running an illegal or quasi-legal business from the start, avoid high risk strategies like this.
Taxes were also part of the reason newspapers got so large: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadsheet#History
> The U.S. Treasury Department is expected on Friday to say Sichuan Juxinhe Network Technology Co. was directly involved in the deep compromises of the telecommunications firms, which U.S. officials and lawmakers have said is a historically damaging espionage campaign carried out on behalf of the Chinese government. The firm is based in the Sichuan province of China and advertises itself as a technology services and cybersecurity company.
And this is why most countries should ban Facebook, Twitter and US social media.
It's still completely legal for Meta to sell that user data to Chinese owned companies. So no security is provided by this change. I see it as theatre.
They have?

They released a Marty Rimm-level report citing that pro-Palestinian was mentioned more than pro-Israeli content in ratios that differed from Meta products. This was the 'smoking gun' of manipulation when it's more of a sign Meta was the one doing the manipulation.
This is a common criticism in these kinds of discussions, but no, protecting oneself from foreign influence and threats does not require a moral high-ground, just as locking your front door doesn't.
Indeed - if the US is this afraid of a popular social network under foreign control then every country outside the US should be petrified.

And domestically in the US - citizens should be demanding the dismantling of the big powerful players - which ironically the US government is against because of it's usefulness abroad..... ( let's assume for one moment, despite evidence to the contrary, that the US government doesn't use these tools of persuasion on it's own population ).
Nah, it’s not just that. IME, most devs are completely unaware of how this stuff works. They don’t need to, because there are so many abstractions, and because the industry expectation has shifted such that it isn’t a requirement. I’ve also met some who are aware, but don’t care at all, because no one above them cares.

Tech interviews are wildly stupid: they’ll hammer you on being able to optimally code some algorithm under pressure on a time limit, but there’s zero mention of physical attributes like cache line access, let alone a realistic problem involving data structures. Just once, I’d love to see “code a simple B+tree, and then discuss how its use in RDBMS impacts query times depending on the selected key.”
In theory it all sounds nice, but in reality I have never seen any website or product adhere to what you (or GDPR) states.

If you answer yes in a popup by fat-fingering, stress, mixup whatever you are screwed. The popup typically comes up when you do not want it, i.e. when you are about to use the product's main function.

> Under the GDPR, retracting consent should be as easy as giving consent.

Well, the popup to give consent comes up all the time wether you want it or not, but there is no popup coming up to retract it. You have to search deep in the settings. It's quite unlikely people will do that on embedded hardware or cars.

And if first given consent by mistake, they have already fetched data in the meantime until you turn it off.

> Violates both the rules that consent should be given freely.

What do you even mean? Of course no one is pointing a gun to your head, but they put up the popup asking for consent and I might push the wrong button by mistake. I might also not notice I pushed the wrong button because there is never a confirmation step.

[EDIT]: And there are typically a huge bunch of switches and checkboxes asking for different kinds of approvals which makes in even easier to make mistakes.
This is true! And frankly, it's the most likely explanation.
Even then, I'd appreciate a "starting/maximum" price (which is what car dealerships and home listings do). "This is the price, unless you want to spend the time trying to negotiate it down..."

If the pricing is made up of a number of complicated usage components, it would be great to give both a ballpark for a given description of usage, and a brief explanation as to what goes into the price.

I think sellers either forget how much more information they have than the buyer, or know, and try to take advantage of it.

One of the best conference talks I ever saw was from a pool contractor explaining that it is indeed hard to answer the question, "How much does a pool cost?" because it can vary SO MUCH. But he found that explaining the components of pricing, along with examples and ballparks, was more than sufficient, and that his business took off as a result of publishing that information, rather than hiding it behind a sales call. (Looked it up - this is not the exact talk I saw, but it was this guy: https://blog.hubspot.com/opinion/uattr/marcus-sheridan-hubsp...)
> I think from an entrepreneur standpoint, if I see a space with vendors with non-transparent pricing, I often think "there's an opportunity there".

That makes a ton of sense. IMO, it means one of two things:

* prices are so high because of the cost of goods sold or margins that they'll scare off anyone researching and therefore there might be an 80% solution that can be priced transparently and eat the market

* the company is still exploring pricing and doesn't have a firm grasp on COGS; this means there is some kind of blue ocean opportunity
Wouldn't you profit from believing that the other party acts in good faith?
The short answer here is that directly addressing a threat from a foreign adversary formally designated by both the legislative and executive branches long before the particular controversy before the court affords the government a lot more latitude than they would have in other cases.
Not reinforced concrete built to code.

Contrary to common American percepctions, there are other places in the world with Earthquakes.
An implementation detail that might be interesting is that the discussed method of the ban is to use the same ISP block that is used for torrent sites (and other websites).

This may be a bit of relevance when talking about how banning a website get applied through the legal system.
My small sample size has always said accountant's work CRAZY hours for much less pay. Clearly you have a different sample. What are you hearing?
> This is a modern distinction.

Well, the actual scripts were distinguished semantically all along, and "alphabet" is also a word newer than the scripts in question. We should probably just use the words that make most sense to modern english speakers rather than... whomever you're referring to. Or just use "phonetic script" or something.
I'm no fan of textualism but I don't think it had much to do with this case.

SCOTUS didn't have much to work with aside from level of scrutiny. They defer to Congress regarding national security.
> That can’t be it. Facebook sells the same data to foreign adversaries including China and Russia.

I'm not sure they do that anymore, not in the current geopolitical climate and not with the DC ghouls having taken over the most sensitive parts of Meta the company (there were many posts on this web-forum about former CIA people and not only working at the highest levels inside of Meta).
A lot has to do with infrastructure.

In most of South Florida basically anything left standing is pretty well built to withstand hurricanes.

A category 1 storm hitting NYC or North Carolina is an unbelievable disaster. A category 1 storm hitting Broward County is usually disruptive to everyday life but that’s it.
I thought it was less about the data and more about the control China had on what Americans saw, and how that could influence Americans.

If China could effectively influence the American populations opinions, how would that not be bad?
Those people are not collecting the profits by moving their own money around.
Your using how much they charge, not how much it costs... You seem to not understand any kind of sales strategy or atleast basic game theory here.

>More expensive, but not by some huge margin.

Obviously no matter what it costs them, they are going to price themselves slightly under the going rate to fill their launch manifest. Also, they get to CHARGE THIS ~20 TIMES PER VEHICLE.

Reuse is cheaper... the fact that you can even begin to contemplate that makes no sense. They lose the upstage with only one engine and they even recover the fairing. The combined cost for RP-1 and LOX is approximately $300,000–$500,000.
Relative to total launch cost the fuel cost makes up a tiny fraction (~0.5–1%), which is about $67 million for a Falcon 9 commercial launch.

Also with your calculations you conveniently leave of the super heavy which has a ~$1,500KG per dolar with a ~$97 million price tag carrying ~63,800 kg. Which is a 1/10th of the cost of KG to LEO than their competitors.

The loss of the upper stage is around $10–15 million. This includes the engine, structure, and integration. So by saving that in starship and boosting the payload to 150k KG you get a KG/LEO of 10, where the next nearest competitor is the Proton-M by Khrunichev at 4300. Which puts them in a completely different league of the space shuttles Cost Per kg to LEO of $18,000 to $54,000.
Temporally Consistent Object-Centric Learning by Contrasting Slots
Why is "The Chinese Communist Part is more dangerous than Meta sharholders" such a hard thing to grasp?
Because for all of Mark Zuckerburg's flaws (or Elon, or whoever), America is unlikely to go to war with him?
The meme I'm seeing everywhere is that with so many Americans joining RedNote, Americans are discovering how much Chinese people are paying for healthcare, food or property, and Chinese people are discovering things like 40 hour work weeks and actually having a holiday from time to time - so now the question is whether US or China bans it first.
I'm not sure how many dimensions this chess game is being played in, but if I were a lawmaker I would be wary of unintended consequences.

Overall, I view this is as an admission to US populace and the world that the US is a weak-minded country that can easily be influenced by propaganda.
You are assuming a lot about supposed evidence nobody has said anything specific about. One shouldn't also assume people in Congress know how to evaluate any evidence. Nor justices, based on the questions they asked.
Treasury Sanctions Company Associated with Salt Typhoon
US used to be much smarter in general. Now that Trump is starting a 2nd term on Monday, the world over now realizes the US is comprised of a bunch of imbeciles. We've lost our prestige, and we'd been trading on it for a long, long time.
The opinion today has almost nothing to do with how content is controlled on the platform; the court is very clear that they'd have upheld the statute based purely on the data collection issue.
Looks like you have never used TikTok or RedNote.

Chinese users are starting to caption their videos in English.
American users are posting regularly.

It is the number 1 app in my country right now, because of the TikTok ban.

Look up the playstore and you will see. Download it for yourself and you will see.
Yes, unless it is 100 years old, the framing is either reinforced concrete or steel beans(less common)
> I have the automatic suggestions turned off. I use a keybind to activate it when I want it.

I didn't realise you could do that. Might give it another go.

> Copilot uses "all of github" via training, and your current project in the context.

The current project context is the bit I didn't think it had. Thanks!
You could deploy HTMX on top of any static site generator and get literally the exact same experience? Your portrayal of any of this as 'novel' just comes across as naive. The technology already exists, I agree its underutilized, but this could have been an advocacy post instead of reinventing wheels that are already quite well made.
CA wasn’t data being “sold”
> I guess GDPR is a good idea, but in practice it has limited value. I suppose all that is needed is that the user accepts (consents) by answering yes to a popup question. It can be asked over and over.

While this is a somewhat common approach, it's not compliant. The real problem with the GDPR is enforcement; it's largely enforced by national data protection bodies of, well, varying quality, resourcing, and aggressiveness.
It does seem like it's time to stop letting this "industry" profit off the misfortune of its customers. Making all of these a public service instead of private industry makes sense at this point.
Legal aliens absolutely have the same First Amendment rights as citizens.
But it's fine for Russia as long as it's through an American corporation.
Well gosh, that sentence makes it seems like Congress could do anything!

However, this case is about something else. The opinion states that there is a first amendment interest, but that interest is secondary to a compelling national security interest that, in the court’s view, is valid. That may or may not be correct - but it is a subjective interpretation.
I just want to do a drive by comment to compliment you and the rest of the Lit team on Lit. I love how using a TS compiler is optional, I'm impressed by how fast and pragmatic lit-html is, and how easy it is to understand how it can be fast (vs, say, React's virtual DOM). Lit has a Redis-like quality of simplicity to it, like good Italian food and very much unlike eg React or Vue. I could study the architecture for an hour and feel like I completely grokked how it worked and why.

I can't say I completely love the OO aspect of it (notably the amount of boilerplate it requires to define props), and personally I think Lit would've been more powerful if it were optional for LitElements to be Web Components (having a million nested shadow DOMs by default is, well.. let's say it makes some common pragmatisms like global CSS overrides needlessly hard. also a single global namespace for tag names gets messy fast, and so on). But given the goals you set yourself, Lit is absolutely amazing. Small, fast, easy. Hats off!