skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> propose whatever alternative you have to the normie in middle america and watch their blank stares.

We also overestimate how important the web in general is to many 'normies'. It was only a little over 10 yrs ago that I had to convince my wife (20-something at the time) that she had a reason to get a smartphone. We're so far apart on the adoption curve that it's very difficult to understand each other. As generations shift, I expect attitudes about lock-in, privacy, dependency etc will as well.
The chance for the 90 day extension under the law goes away before Trump takes office. He can’t legally give them a 90 day extension.
You seem to think percentage of ownership works the same way in China as in the West. That’s an understandable mistake
Twitter can’t be a news platform when tweets with links are suppressed
If I want to run what someone else has determined as "malware" on my computer, as far as I'm concerned, I should have the absolute right to do it. Same for spyware. Why? Because I don't want the government to make the determination for what is right or wrong for me on my own property. If the US government wants to block apps on their property, then they can go ahead and do that. But the moment it extends to my own property, it's quite ridiculous to think people are going to bend over backwards and comply with what's good for you. Especially in the context of some vague national security threat, why am I supposed to be subversive to the CIA?

How can you complain about the CCP banning foreign social media and censoring when you have your own government willing to do the same thing -- in the name of Protecting the Democracy?

It's not about privacy or data or whatever the facade is. The crime that we are committing is none other than allowing ourselves to be fed information that could threaten the United States. So, therefore, even according to the SCOTUS, if Congress plasters the magical words "national security" in their laws, then the Constitution takes a backseat and we too can be like China/Russia/Iran. Will we start banning VPNs next--which circumvent our new found love for censorship? I'd not be surprised.
There's torrents of it. I remember one AI company saying somewhere they just grabbed the big 7z torrent of it for their training.
So, usually in a representative democracy (republic or not), the judiciary power is supposed to check and limit the other two (to avoid a tyranny of the majority). You can have that done in two way: with "case law", the only way in some countries (like the UK): basically if a law is enforced against a minority, it will be enforced against the majority. Other countries added a consitution. Its use is to limit the executive and legislative power of the government: the legislative power is supposed to prevent the law/executive order from existing or being executed, and base that decision on the constitution.

TL:DR: no, it doesn't even apply to US citizen, only to US government.

PS: "tyranny of the majority" for some is a definition fascism, i disagree, to me it isn't even proto-fascism, it lack a weird mythos about internal enemies and a few other mythos. It's closer bonapartism, or cesarism at worst. To be clear i think it is a precondition to have fascism (I.E as long as your case law/consitution is enforced for everybody the same way, you aren't a fascist state).
The fact that Apple even considered "closing" a general purpose standard like NFC is a testament to how much they are willing to drag their feet on any innovative customer-facing features.

You'd think that it was common sense to avoid that, but we are talking about the company that invented DRM for the USB protocol...
If stooping down to their level is the move we make, then we should immediately stop acting as if we are more “free” or democratic than China. You can’t have it both ways.
My concern is that technical quirks tend to sometimes bleed out of their domains and start to change our perception of the society/world itself.

In the meatspace, I'm sure I don't have any single global handle. Here I have an online handle, my wife has a nickname for me, my friends use various names and nicknames too, one country's government had issued me a passport for one legal name, another country's government - for a different one, and so on. So I wonder if thinking of choosing a global namespace is actually a design mistake, as it doesn't match how the world works.

This said, KERI looks interesting - I like the idea that there's no single global ledger, as it matches my own thoughts on the matter. Thank you for the link, I'll save it to my reading list.
Emphasis on US citizens
It doesn't matter. That is for example painted poster

https://www.ozon.ru/product/poster-100-na-65-sm-plakat-voenn...

or another https://stihi.ru/pics/2024/06/14/4714.jpg (and if it reminds you something with 4-limbed symbol from 80+ years ago - it isn't an accident, it is the nature of the current regime in Russia)

While it sounds like a pun, there is no "trigger discipline" in Russia (I myself an ROTC officer). In USSR/Russia the "never point your barrel at anybody or anything" discipline has been taught instead.
This is an incredible point. Instead of using this crisis to pressure Beijing to crack open the China market to US companies or even just get some concessions, Trump just folded to look like a champ.
However, Apple is not obligated to lock users out of their own phones, and prevent them from installing apps outside the app store. They've placed themselves in the role of jailer, and this is not the first time a government has forced them to use that role against their users [1,2], yet they continue to recklessly deny their users' autonomy.

[1] Apple drops Hong Kong police-tracking app used by protesters - https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49995688

[2] Banned Apps in China are Apps at Risk in Hong Kong - https://applecensorship.com/news/banned-apps-in-china-are-ap...
Came here to post almost the same. Always have this impression from modern media that Roman civilization was thatch roofs and aqueducts with maybe a hole in the wall that poured water out or a well you went to the local square.

May have been that way for the poor, or the less status enabled, like many commenters have noticed. Yet it's still a dissonance that such high quality piping, boiler rooms, insulated engineered waterworks, and other similar ideas were available. Even if in limited quantities.
I tried so hard to like Mastodon, but discovery was actual work for me. On BlueSky, discovery is natural and easy.

I think part of the issue is that you can’t do full text search across instances. You can only search on hashtags, and people don’t always use hashtags.
I don't think obscenity has any sort of consensus, it's based on arbitrary morality.
Lenovo has been enshittifying ThinkPads and then walking back their bad decisions when people won't stop bitching, ever since they bought the brand from IBM. They've tried:

> Removing the trackpoint buttons altogether (walked that back)

> Switching from 16:10 to 16:9 (walked that back)

> For some reason, moving the fan exhaust to the right side instead of the left (made people's hands hot when using a mouse so they walked that back)

I'm surprised the bigger news regarding this laptop isn't just how ugly the thing is. It looks like one of those huge $200 Toshiba laptops you'd see at Wal-Mart in 2010. I can't even begin to imagine how much money Lenovo has wasted on changing their tooling to spite customers and then changing it back when they realize they need customers, almost every generation.

> How many times do we need to teach you this lesson, old man?!?
Just a quick reminder: Tik Tok (a service by a Chinese company) is still blocked in China.
That does not excuse signing a bill into law. If the president opposes a bill, he should veto it even if Congress will override the veto. To do otherwise is to be complicit. So to the extent that you think this bill is bad and shouldn't have been passed, Biden is to blame regardless of how strong the congressional majority was.
No-one would possibly think of using GIMP instead...

https://www.reddit.com/r/graphic_design/comments/ah9s8n/trie...
I genuinely hope you’re right.
Despite both ending up with TikTok staying up in the US, having the ban be unconstitutional or not exist at all is different from having the ban in place and a deal to avoid it. What the ACLU was fighting for would have removed leverage from the government/president.
Looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals that abacus makes lot more sense. It was not base 10 system, but bi-quinary (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bi-quinary_coded_decimal). For larger numbers very messy number, but one must think of how V is 5, L 50 and D 500.

So they did not really have place value system. Or at least logical leap from abacus to place value. Instead they had 1, 5, 10, 50, 100, 500, 1000 and summed or deducted these. Sometimes in stylistic ways.
I was dumbfounded too, but NBC explains in this same article:

> "The law banning TikTok [...] allows the president to grant a 90-day extension before the ban is enforced, provided certain criteria are met."
TikTok is still blocked in China.
Which is why he is never going to voluntarily step down, and has made it clear he is never going to voluntarily step down.
> then we should immediately stop acting as if we are more “free” or democratic than China.

This is a histrionic response. America can still be more free and democratic than China while also enforcing a ban on their businesses.
If I were an US citizen this would be the most worrying aspect to me.

Are the congressmen so incompetent that they didn't see this coming? This backfired horribly for them in multiple ways... unless this was somehow part of a master plan my simple mind can't comprehend?

Did it somehow not backfire and I'm just being led to believe so?
Bingo. I never understood why "foreign influence" was supposed to be a bad thing. Free speech is grounded in the idea that people are capable of reasoning and forming their own opinions. If we truly trust in that, the source of the influence - foreign or domestic - shouldn’t matter. People who advocate for censoring foreign sources of influence are implicitly admitting that they don't trust their population to think critically.
Deciseconds?? There's your problem. Always work in seconds when forcing a function for your users.
Right out of the KGB and FSB playbook: feed them so much lies from all directions they stop trusting anything at all.
Code is speech. By saying you can't distribute a particular app in the United States you're restricting speech.
Looks like you’re getting downvoted, but this exactly matches my kids’ HS friends who said “now I finally get MAGA - let’s make America like it was before the Tik Tok ban!”

There isn’t too much teens really feel on a day-to-day basis with politics and this is one of them. I’m not a Trump fan at all but his ability to spin things like this and the stimulus checks will need to be studied.
yes, the Trump faction also flirted with anti-tech politics in the 2016-2020 cycle - but there have been shifts since then. i don't disagree with you that a significant part of this alignment is due to strategic reasons - but it doesn't fully explain outsized donations to Trump prior to his election and shifts in donation patterns by regular tech workers. I do think that there has been a real political shift rightwards in SF/SV, especially among the tech elites but percolating downwards.
Mitch McConnell is 83.
Thank you for the issue-awareness-building and the tool! Hopefully not too much hn-drama went your way, I always enjoy your content :)
It's not a highly restricted platform at all, there were literally videos of translated Hitler speeches trending with hundreds of thousands of likes, even though the CCP absolutely hates western nationalism.
> aren't we really saying voters are not individual agents but rather a mob subject to manipulation by propaganda?

Yes, it is. Always has been.

> threats to "democracy" that simultaneously take such a cynical view of the democratic process

> then the whole "democracy" thing is just a cover for elite power

You'd have to have fallen hook, line, and sinker with America's propaganda to actually believe that democracy is NOT a cover for retaining control over a population.

The US has been playing this game in other countries for a while now, to keep a check on who comes to power and who does not (always using support for democracy as an excuse). Gautemala, the arab spring, bangladesh - these are just some of the examples. And it's become very blatant of late.
19 days into the year seems a bit premature to call the biggest mistake.
> It was an iconic, recognizable differentiator, and is the sort of thing that makes people tell the story of your brand. Other brands would kill to have a legacy, especially in a space where the product is otherwise largely interchangable ...

> If I was working at Dell, I would be flabbergasted at my competitor just throwing away one of their little advantages.

That was my thinking. Why would you give away what distinguishes you and gives you an identity - one with an American, Western connection - and become just another laptop company? Why buy Lenovo now?

I read a story about Apple when they fired Steve Jobs. The new management did what everyone had been pushing for years: License the OS to other manufacturers, and start shifting to PC-compatible hardware. Pretty soon, Macs went from a single physical unit with a handle on top for carrying, to a CPU box and separate CRT monitor, available from multiple brands.

But then why buy a Mac, with it's broadly incompatible OS and higher price? The marketing genius of the crowds was, of course, incompetent. When Steve Jobs came back he killed the licensing of the OS and immediately put out a fun, high-design, single-unit cheap desktop computer.

Edit: On the other hand, maybe Lenovo is smart. There can be a big controversy, lots of people talking about Lenovo, and then they can go back and forth a bit and finally put back the trackpoint.
Isn’t that the premise of the Enlightenment? That’s everyone will be well educated, or, if they’re not, at least they were the ones in control of their destiny?

i.e. “You crazy, translating the bible to the plebs? What happens if stupid people get to choose for themselves?”
`map` aint so bad...

map :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b]

I suppose an absolute beginner would need someone to explain that Haskell type signatures can be read by slicing at any of the top level arrows, so that becomes either:

> Given a function from `a` to `b`, return a function from a `list of as` to a `list of bs`.

or:

> Given a function from `a` to `b` and a `list of as`, return a `list of bs`.

I find the first to be the more intuitive one: it turns a normal function into a function that acts on lists.

Anecdotally, I've actually found `map` to be one of the most intuitive concepts in all of programming. It was only weird until I'd played around with it for about 10m, and since then I've yet to be surprised by it's behavior in any circumstance. (Although I suppose I haven't tried using it over tricky stuff like `Set`.)

`fmap` is admittedly a bit worse...

fmap :: Functor f => (a -> b) -> f a -> f b

But having learned about `map` above, the two look awfully similar. Sure enough the same two definitions above still work fine if you replace `list` with this new weird `Functor` thing. Then you look up `Functor` you learn that it's just "a thing that you can map over" and the magic is mostly gone. Then you go to actually use the thing and find that in Haskell pretty much everything is a `Functor` that you can `fmap` over and it starts feeling magical again.
Plasma/ion nitriding for enhancing component properties
Restrictions become more effective when they are less obvious.

When as has been demonstrated their algorithm ignores the number of upvotes in favor of massively promoting viewpoints it cares about, that’s also vast suppression of opposing viewpoints but in a way o get creators to quietly comply rather than try and push the boundaries.
Do you get the impression that the incoming administration cares about the law?

As long as there is a fig leaf/smokescreen, and TikTok makes the right noises and contributions, they’ll be fine.

If anything, Keeping them technically in violation of the law is the leverage the administration will want to keep so they can squeeze TikTok whenever they want.
i do not agree that this is the key question nor do i find Nazis so compelling that i have to avert my eyes from their speech for risk of becoming convinced myself
It's because platforms can deal with feature complexity and UX standardisation in a way that protocols can't.

Multi-protocol clients tend to end up a mess compared to the integrated experience of a platform which can provide a single source of truth for identity, authentication, and so on.

Netscape Communicator ticked many of the boxes of Facebook years earlier, but by kludging together NNTP, HTTP, SMTP, POP3, FTP etc., and that's before you consider the difficulty of moderating an open syndication like Usenet or IRC, or the pain in the ass that email spam had become by the early 00s.

Protocol/standards people like to think they care about UX, but for platform companies, user growth and retention literally pays their bills. It's just a different set of incentives.

And to be clear, I prefer the more open internet, but UX wise, it never stood a chance against normie-optimised, integrated platforms.
My cofounder Zak and I were on a show called "Planet of the Apps" by Apple, many years ago. I met Jessica Alba, Gwenyth Paltrow, Will-I-Am, and Gary Vaynerchuk.

I can tell you that a lot of these shows are staged. They tell you to "react like X" and then film you again and say "react like Y" and they slice and dice footage to show whatever they want. In the case of that show, they completely edited us out of the final show.

So it's not really easy for contestants to "sneak something past the censors" :)
The security concerns about TikTok has merit but I'm surprised given the reputation of HN, nobody is connecting the dots to lobbying from Israel as a legitimate reason. In fact in all the past few threads about TikTok ban there is almost no mention of it. There have been numerous strides to push China as the sole reason but there is almost no real risk other than China knowing what you are into to show you more of the same content exactly how social medias are designed to work in America.

Tiktok views with #freepalestine tags eclipsed #istandwithisrael by nearly 200 to 1 (videos with pro-Israel views got low single digit millions while videos with pro-Palestine views got nearly 200 times that) and THIS is a better explanation for the panic and why essentially lobbying for the ban of TikTok using China isn't a conspiracy theory (especially since it was discussed by a few US media outlets) and that this really in an attempt to keep young people exposed to an uncensored and unfiltered platform which inevitably causes them to grow more sympathetic with Palestine.

It's censorship disguised as a national security threat for a totally unrelated motivator and once again, I'm disappointed more HN users especially those that have been on this website far longer than me were able to connect with all their wisdom they exude in other areas.

https://x.com/5149jamesli/status/1880888299080098163
Making smallest possible Linux distro (x64) [video]
That is a good point, the nance and kruz etfs aren't doing badly, but they aren't rockstars either.
> …aren't we really saying voters are not individual agents but rather a mob subject to manipulation by propaganda?

…yes? Is that even slightly controversial? If it wasn’t the case, why would propaganda even exist?
Unlike TikTok, X is an American social media platform. By default, It is protected under free speech rights. TikTok is Chinese and doesn't get to play that card. End of story.
They don't really hold hard-line positions anymore. The ACLU would no longer defend the speech of a neo-nazi, for example.
Per the article, those shares are not in TikTok:

> The ByteDance unit that sold golden shares to China's government holds the licenses of Toutiao and Douyin to operate under local law.

So those shares don't mean much as far as TikTok's operations are concerned.
"The US won because <wild uncited guess about the future>."
People one go where the technologically literate tell them go. If it wasn't for me, my family and friends wouldn't have gone on iOS, WhatsApp, Signal, you name it. If we give the thumbs up they know it's not bad if they migrate. Of course they can still decide against something if they don't see the value, but we can have significant impact on what platforms they use or not.
The US has already jumped head first into the shit can.

All those ideals of democracy I learned about growing up in the US - checks and balances, the rule of law, land of opportunity. It's all become a massive joke.
That's the entire reason for representative democracy over direct democracy
Let's be realistic, rust is great, especially compared to C.

But it shifts the need to memorize undefined behavior with the need to memorize the borrow checker rules.

If you are dealing with common system level needs like double linked lists, rust adds back in the need for that super human level memory of undefined behavior, because the borrow checker is limited to what static analysis can do.

IMHO, the best thing Rust could do right now is more clearly communicate those core limitations, and help build tools that help mitigate those problems.

Probably just my opinion, and I am not suggesting it is superior, but zig style length as part of the type is what would mitigate most of what is problematic with C/C++

Basically a char myArray[10];, really being *myArray is the main problem.

Obviously the borrow checker removes that problem, but not once you need deques treeps etc...

If I could use Rust as my only or primary language, memorizing the borrow checker rules wouldn't be that bad.

But it becomes problematic for people who need to be polyglots, in a way that even Haskell doesn't.

I really think there's ways for Rust to grow into a larger role.

But at this point it seems that even mentioning the limits is forbidden and people end up trying to invert interface contracts, and leak implementation details when they're existing systems are incompatible with the projects dogma.

It is great that they suggest limiting the size of unsafe code blocks etc....but the entire world cannot bend to decisions that ignores the real world nuances of real systems.

Rust needs to grow into a language that can adjust to very real needs without and many real needs will never fit into what static analysis can do.

Heck C would be safer if that was the real world.

I really do hope that the project grows into the role, but the amount of 'unsafe' blocks points to them not being there today, despite the spin.
> They can't search a global place and find all those people they want to find (why the Mastodon team don't have this as the #1 thing they are working on, who knows)

Amen and hallelujah! This is why I gave up on Mastodon. I read that not allowing full text search across instances was actually a design decision in order to discourage brigading. But, more crucially it undermines discovery.
Oh man have I got some bad news for you
Predicting the future has nothing to do with being right tomorrow, its all about convincing someone today.
On Pruning
I often use my thumb on the touchpad, but doing it now it does seem like I usually move my index finger a bit off home row. This is on a MacBook, where the top of the touchpad is basically right under the spacebar.
Origins of Common Unix Programs
RTO usually seems like an indirect way to do some layoffs to me. Surely management must be aware of the attrition it causes.
How remarkable that our major geopolitical enemies (with the exception of Iran) support our incoming president. He must truly be a great uniter that will usher in a new age of global peace.