skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If people on the US were really liberal (in the original "capitalism of the free" sense), racism wouldn't even be an issue. People wouldn't care so much about race, and your genetics would be more as a "fun fact" rather than some central piece of your identity.

Also, they wouldn't care about atheists so much. Liberals may not be atheists themselves but they would be very detached from religion and "who whorships who". People wouldn't take religion so seriously.

The US is more like a bunch of conservatives trying to be liberal until their own beliefs trump liberal theory.
> adding that .0 implies a precision which is not correct. They weren't looking to see if you knew the arithmetic with that question, they wanted you to show you understood what they meant by "whole number" and understand you can't just leave arbitrary precision after rounding.

If you round 3.05 down to 3, 3.00 is not arbitrary precision, its explicit precision that's reflective of the rounding operation you did. I wasn't claiming that `type(3.0) == type(3)`. I was claiming that:

>>> round(3.0) == 3
True

And that such a representation was valid within the context of the question. This was long before I was wise enough to understand that sir, this is a public school, just do what the book says and don't make me talk with the students more than I need do.
Per the description provided above, the ban is on "classroom instruction... on sexual orientation or gender identity." It's doubtful that stating "Jim is married to Barbara" could be counted as "classroom instruction on sexual orientation" any more than stating "Jim works at the pentagon" could be counted as "classroom instruction on geometry." Nor would the statement "Jim is married to John" be considered "classroom instruction on sexual orientation". The point of the law is to encourage teachers, when fielding a question like "Why is Jim married to a boy?", to reply "Ask your mom". Parents are wary of these discussions for good reason[0].

It's truly hard to imagine allies more "dangerous" (per the parent) than those who obstruct the vital "freedom of expression" that is... teachers talking to children about sexuality.

[0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/719685/american-adults-w...
Comedy requires deep thinking, powers of observation, and self-reflection.
+, the WH-1000XM5s are the best pair of headphones I've ever had.
Are vertical tabs now in the main release of Firefox? I've been on Nightly for the vertical tabs and I love it. Fully agree - container tabs are awesome too.
Agreed Chrome is good on mobile. But I can't stand browsing without uBlockOrigin or dark reader. Plus URL bar on the bottom in Firefox is brilliant.
Proof of location for online polls
Dang that's impressive then. I've been a programmer of different languages for a while and I tried to learn/use rust ehh... but that's cool to hear.
Pale and male is stale. Asians are white and Jews are white post October 7.

The foundation is here —"Apple's Black Diversity Chief Steps Down After Saying White Men Are Diverse, Will Be Replaced By A White Woman" I believe via BET
My comment falls for the same reductionist trap it aims to expose.
Man, if you don't want to deal with the challenges of children, why have kids? I don't lie to myself, I know I couldn't do it and I didn't.

Maybe you just don't get to go out for dinner or ride on planes until they don't need to be hypnotized with a screen? You know it's bad for them but you're putting your comforts and freedoms above theirs and everybody else's.

I can't help but feel like the next generation has been completely fucked.
I genuinely don't think the tech medium is the problem. There's good and educational software available on tablets just as there is on anything else.

While I've always been anti-tablet myself, and anti-phone for similar reasons (though why a kid would need a phone is beyond me at this stage), there's programs for literacy and learning available on the tablets that work just fine, as well as art, creativity and painting. The "secret" is just no access to the toxic: we have one tablet, my 5/6 year old loves reading-eggs and Minecraft but we have no social media and no YouTube and no purchases, plus the entire house is behind an ad blocking firewall. My kid is allowed to watch videos and access apps like ABC iView/kids, but from the open web they have to be ripped and placed on our local media share drive before they're viewable. No YouTube or YouTube kids obviously because it's a toxic cesspool.

My experience is that without the trash\addictive nonsense, while the kids are drawn to the iPad, they'll also self regulate a bit and move between other activities of they're available and get bored of spending all their time on the pad.

In his room I've just built him a Linux computer, and that's restricted both in time (can only log on to his account at certain hours), has no native web browser, and requires me to install programs and updates. He can access the games we approve but like everything else in the house it's basically a social media and almost ad free zone.

I've introduced him to modded Minecraft because it's basically Lego... And though it's frustrating that Microsoft took it over, we basically just ignore the Microsoft side of things and just operate on the free community modded side of things. I showed him how we could change his sword and I've got a whole modded world where we can set ourselves up and play on LAN together. The other game he loves at the moment is beyond all reason, a community made RTS game I've been involved with, and he just won his first match against the simple AI (though I did have to talk to the other Devs to allow us an account from the same IP so we could play together). The goal of all this is to give the message that technology is all about being a creative tool you choose to use to make what you want, not a medium about being a passive recipient for advertising or marketing or endless video consumption, feeds, recommendations or outrage cycles. No one needs any subscriptions or recommendations or likes or feeds. But there's nothing inherently toxic about a screen or a tablet, those are choices we make (or more accurately are pushed upon and chosen for us if we're not careful).

I think there's a non-zero chance that I'll be setting up a local server for the neighbourhood kids over the next year or two so they can all play together without worrying about the wider internet and I'll probably have to work to admin that in some way.
This is historically true, but likely to change under project 2025
I absolutely love that this can be hosted on Github Pages. Am I correct in understanding that these notebooks will run independently, and will not need to proxy through marimo.app (in case the app goes down), or is that what the CORS thing is about in note 4, and it will still need to go through this domain?
> It’s a non-stop, swash-buckling battle to get them to put down their phones and do literally anything IRL.

What a bizarre statement. You are their parent. They are 11 and 14.

You can physically take their phones away. If they accept it - give the devices back. If they keep throwing tantrums - don't.

Obviously that is a last resort, but it seems like you've already tried other things and failed.
> Why do you think America can't compete with China, for example, over the long term?

Not saying I necessarily disagree with you, but just to give an example, the US has considerably better labor practices and labor laws than China. It's not perfect but there are protections about making sure people are paid what they're owed, how much you are allowed to work someone, safety protocols, etc. All of those things could, in theory, cost more money and make labor more expensive.

Compare this to nations that don't have the same work protections, where they can pay people peanuts and have them work much longer shifts with effectively no protection (e.g. Foxconn in China [1]).

This might translate to decreased cost, and Americans have made it excruciatingly clear that we're apparently fine with slave labor as long as it doesn't happen within the US.

[1] https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/chinese-workers-foxc...
I guess it’s not the same as Watch Later. I think I remember “add to queue” button right on videos, that was it probably.

I’m still using Watch Later, but for long videos I have no time for.
They'll be scouring the internet for signs of thoughtcrime and jamming the sources they find. Also, automating those sectors that tend to produce whistleblowers.

Because if they don't do the bad thing first, some bogeyman might become better at it than they are. Same logic that gave us the Manhattan project.
> He doesn’t even attempt to touch on the actual origins in the essay however

Because he's not talking about the terms original meaning. Plenty of people are reading the title thinking he's digging into the etymological origins of the term. He's talking about the origins of the ideas that contemporary people call "woke".

It's not an omission. Paul explicitly clarifies what he's talking about near the top of the piece. You and other readers simply wanted him to write about a different topic entirely.
I used this generator to build myself my own keyboard and the tool was extremely helpful. I went through a bunch of prototypes and I don't think it's possible to create a customized keyboard for yourself in one attempt.

I made a fairly extensive build log from start to finish including how I got the integrated trackball to work together with QMK here:

https://www.jonashietala.se/blog/2024/11/26/building_my_ulti...
For context, my wife and I did the digital nomad thing flying one way trips across the US for 10 months between 10/2022-10/2023 staying in hotels and I was traveling for work and she had conferences so we were staying in two hotels at a time sometimes.

Last year, we had around 70 days and this year we are looking at between 60-70 days.

At that point, hotel loyalty has benefits - loyalty points for free hotel stays , seat upgrades for flights and hotel room upgrades, lounge access when you fly a preferred airline etc.

Right now, if at all possible and the rates aren’t too much different, I’m going to stay in Hilton or Hyatt brand hotels. While I don’t care about 5 star hotels, I’m not staying at a Days Inn.
If I cared I would probably start selling material on how to sell material on alternative income... I think that would still be mostly reasonable point of meta. Good thing for world is that I do not care enough.
Linux is definitely a target, it runs the majority of, well, everything. The DoD uses Linux, defence contractors use Linux, infrastructure, most of the internet, etc... The idea that it isn't targeted because its "obscure" is silly, it's just more secure.

Also, remember when Microsoft themselves were hacked multiple times by Russia? Or when a Russian spy was hired by Microsoft?

Windows has historically been insecure, it could just be that Microsoft is bad at security...
My roommate works front desk at a hotel, a common problem is that a third party site books things incorrectly or promises things that don't exist, then the customer is in the hotel lobby mad at the hotel over something they had nothing to do with
> Failed startups don’t always shut down cleanly like that.

Agreed, and with the number of services and the "ease" of oauth it's likely impossible to even track. You could make a list of the major ones, but there could be hundreds per user, ultimately thousands of unique services used depending on the breadth of the startup's activities.
OK. Cards on the table.

This is not arrogance. This is not even about China and Taiwan fighting a war. (Heck, that's probably never gonna happen anyway.)

This is about the US manufacturing important things on our own. And it's not just the US either by the way. The Europeans want to be able to manufacture their own chips. The Russians. The Chinese. The Japanese. The Koreans. And on and on and on.

Why? Because the current system is dumb for everyone who is not Taiwan. For a whole lot of reasons. (Most of them economic.) No one wants to say that out loud, but it's the truth. We can't have everyone dependent on chips but only one nation capable of making them. Again, we're not the only ones who have come to this conclusion. Are the Chinese also "arrogant"? Are the Japanese "arrogant"? The Europeans? The Russians? Are the Koreans "arrogant"?

So everyone else can make common sense moves, but it's "arrogant" if the US does the same common sense thing? So we should just keep paying out an increasing share of our GDP as chips become more and more important and expensive while everyone else makes moves to cut their costs right? Is that what we have to do to be considered not "arrogant"?

People need to be a bit more reasonable.
> What does gone mean though?

Anything but the original. That the original might have shimmered (or otherwise looked like) this Bitcoin icon, should have no bearing on what it chooses to put there
I don't think that it being a specific list makes any difference, because the lawless action theoretically incited by this speech is still not imminent; it's abstract in the sense that there's not a direct link between the actor and the speaker. The guy making these cards doesn't know that someone will see them and choose go kill the named CEO. It's possible, sure, but that's not the standard (and if it was, saying something like "Trump is a threat to democracy" would be incitement - it's naming a specific individual target, and it's entirely possible some deranged individual would take that statement as an instruction to carry out an assassination). The Brandenburg test requires that the speaker hold specific knowledge that their speech will result in lawless action; merely knowing that it is possible that the speech inspires lawless action isn't enough. If the guy were handing the cards out to a squad of hitmen, then that wouldn't be protected - such an act would be specific instruction to commit lawless action, not just inspiration as we see here.

And actually, regarding the Brandenburg case itself, this is what was said:

> We're not a revengent organization, but if our President, our Congress, our Supreme Court, continues to suppress the white, Caucasian race, it's possible that there might have to be some revengeance taken.

So, actually, the speech was specifically directed against a named group of individuals - "our President, our Congress, our Supreme Court" - but is still protected because of the lack of imminence. I'll note that there is a distinction between "the President should be killed" and "I will kill the President" - the latter is a true threat, the former is not.

As the ruling says: "the mere abstract teaching . . . of the moral propriety or even moral necessity for a resort to force and violence is not the same as preparing a group for violent action and steeling it to such action."
And has less cultural cachet.
> "How seriously we take a thing" and "how good a job are we are doing."

Conceptually, yes, these two things are separate. However, that does not mean these two things are independent of each other.

As you note, we take murder extremely seriously, but we do a poor job of reducing the number of murders. I think that is because we think, hey, we're taking murder really seriously, so we must be reducing the number of murders. In other words, people believe that "taking it seriously" will automatically reduce the frequency of a bad thing. But in fact it doesn't--it might well do the opposite. Maybe if we paid less attention to how "seriously" we are taking murder, and more attention to actually reducing the number of murders, even if many of the things we ended up doing to accomplish that had no obvious relationship to murder and didn't look at all like "taking murder seriously", we might do a better job.

In the case of sexual harassment, similarly, "taking it seriously" does not seem to have helped in reducing its frequency; it might even have done the opposite (at least one commenter elsewhere in this thread has said they believe things have gotten worse).

> it is a society-wide issue

There is a very general society-wide issue that the things we are discussing are special cases of: how should a society deal with the fact that there will always be some proportion of people who, for a variety of reasons, don't want to behave as good members of society?

Because this issue is very general, it requires very general solutions (or maybe "mitigations" would be a better term--you can't "solve" the issue in the sense of just making such people not exist any more). But "taking seriously" particular manifestations of this general issue, like murder or sexual harassment, does not help in finding a very general solution to the very general issue. It often hinders it, by inducing people to mistake symptoms for the root cause. The root cause is not "too many people like to murder" or "too many people like to sexually harass others". The root cause is the very general one I gave above: some people just don't want to be good members of society. Society's method of dealing with this should be similarly general. Specific applications might vary in the details, but the general principle is still the same.
>As to modernity, much of it was brought about by things that were called the analogous of "woke" by the centrists and conservatives of the time. As I wrote in another comment, claims of empty performance were contemporaneously levelled at the very same movements that Graham now characterises as substantive (radical chic). The way the arguments were presented were also similar: the feminists of the interwar period fought for something real but now it's all a show. You speak of the Enlightenment, but many things we take for granted were heavily debated in the West until the late 1960s at least, and those debates seem to be making a comeback.

Of course what passes as modernity today would have been considered progressive back in the past, but you fail to mention also that many such of those debates back then also never panned out and fizzled out (aka non-substantive), while others were actively fought against and rolled back.

The French Revolution, Communism, Fascism, The Cultural Revolution, society at many points has historically pushed back against radical progressive visions that ultimately turned into horrific failures that the majority opposed. And the helm of many of those movements were power-hungry Authoritarians, aka the "Aggresively-Conventionally Minded" PG is referring to. The point is that radical progressive movements often provide the unfettered space for Authoritarians to act out their own worst impulses on society, the Reign of Terror and the Cultural Revolution being a prime example.

That's why also the point of "conscious bias against defining new forms of heresy" is just reiteration of the etablishment view of slow, iterative change vs highly disruptive change, of which the former can more effectively keep authoritarians in check. This is not a paticularly controversial view either.

The point is that for PG, and for the majority that voted Trump, Wokeism isn't working, it's not the direction that people wish society to move forwards in. I don't think it's analogous here to Civil Rights or Feminism either because it's a question of speed rather then change. Equality via Long-term Integration (& Homogenization) vs Equality via Aggresive Multiculturalism, and I think people prefer the former.
> Not what I'm talking about at all. Teens in the US use autistic in the exact same way the r word was used 20 - 30 years ago. It's an insult that is a stronger version of dumb.

Well that's... <searches mental Rolodex> the actions of a bunch of people with the intellect of a grape, the empathy of a stale French fry, and the collective odour of a sack of dead badgers.

(See how much more fun this whole insult business is with just a little more effort?)

> You're just not exposed to it then. Which is fine, but doesn't mean it isn't commonplace. I am guessing you don't live in the US based on your spelling of humour, which would be one explanation of why you aren't tuned into this.

Yep. I'm in the UK. Have teenage kids, if I caught them using autistic in that way, they could say goodbye to wifi access for a month.

> People being considerate is good. But banning specific words doesn't accomplish what most of the word police claims it will.

Eventually it does, or helps to at least, but over a much longer timeframe. Generations, realistically - many middle-aged people don't have the mental plasticity to absorb big shifts in how race, gender, sex, sexuality are addressed.

Changing minds takes a lot longer than changing manners, but the latter can make a positive difference in the meantime.
> The advice (in the post you're replying to) isn't bad.

I didn’t call it bad, I called it bland, generic, and worthless. Like telling people they should eat healthily and exercise. It’s not wrong or bad, but it’s also not something you haven’t heard hundreds of times before and doesn’t really help you much.
The article claims this is a malware that has been used since 2012 in general and from 2014 allegedly by China.. I wonder more if innovations or obfuscations were needed in the last ten years if this malware worked the whole time? Kind of the too little too late model of security.
No hotels that I’m aware of will give you loyalty points unless you book directly. You can also get more loyalty points by using a cobranded hotel card. But only by booking directly.
Surely there is a lot of software involved in the design / operation of these fabs, it's not just designing the chip directly. Another commenter mentioned EDA so maybe I'll look into that.
For the uninitiated in Advanced Glycation Ends (AGEs):

> AGEs can also be ingested from food, especially food cooked at high temperatures and with little moisture, like grilled meats, fried foods, and baked goods.[23] The Maillard reaction is the main nonenzymatic reaction known to form AGEs in cooking and is famously known for the distinct browning color and complex flavor and aroma of roasted coffee, French fries, seared meat, and other favorites.
Because it’s not taxes. If everyone were to charge you progressive rates for things you wouldn’t be rich, you’d just be the same as everyone else.
You don't have to. I believe RoR has good and bad sides, but the multi-threaded debugging stories of _why_ there were timeout problems when the interpreter got a global interpreter lock and how SQLite driver got fixed translates to lots of other programming languages.

Just saying that you run network I/O and blaming the kernel / network latency for all the delays in other SQL drivers is easy, but with SSDs getting so much lower latency than HDDs, one has to seriously consider throwing out network based databases for lots of programming tasks.
Because successive public health campaigns demonized fat, then salt. Both of which drive flavor. Only sugar is left, and sugar has very powerful lobbies
As an owner of a used EV6, I can tell you this issue has caused some concern and I do think it's a real but rare issue.

However, my calculation is this: It's a 1% impacted issue. Replacing with an AGM battery drastically reduces the issues. Recalls somewhat mitigate this issue further. Apparently reducing your L2 charging rate to < 7kW also reduces this. At the end if you are still unlucky, the ICCU is almost always covered by warranty but replacement is annoying and can take months.

To mitigate I plan to replace my stock 12V with AGM, and buy a portable battery starter.