IAmEveryone

This would be my bet, as well. The company being registered in Florida also supports it, even if it’s not definitive.

People get thrown off by it being the Pentagon and come up with all these James-Bond-level theories. But DoD just happens to be the owner for historic reason.

It's terribly hard to actually falsify the vote counts across thousands of polling places. In theory, someone observing the process, as should be legal everywhere, will notice the irregularities.

It's not impossible, obviously–especially if you have full control of at least anyone important. But plausible deniability suffers rather fast, and that's a valuable assets at the Putin-level of dic(tator|k)ishness.

The question is if the ability of the hateful to find communities of like-unminded people allows them to persist, organize, and affect the lives of the objects of their hatred in ways that were less likely than before.

I’m not sure what the answer is, tbh. I certainly doubt something like the Trump presidency would have been -possible, or as likely, before the internet. Organizations from ISIS to “proud boys” certainly profit from the ability to proselytize on YouTube. But, at the same time, the general trend of the arc of history bending towards justice appears to be still alive, to some degree.

The decision was reversed due to public pressure, so how unaccountable are they, really?

And even before that, the decision was made because they were afraid of public opinion. Otherwise, it doesn’t make sense to refuse to do business that generates revenue. The credit card companies’ puritanical values are a reflection of what they think public opinion, among the public that matters to them, is.

They were wrong, or at least outdated, or maybe online sex workers just somehow happen to be better at PR than evangelical christians. But (trying to) follow public opinion isn’t unaccountability, it’s the opposite.

You should really measure that.

Because, as it is, it just sounds like “advertisement doesn’t work on me, because I’m better than normal people”.

It’s quite something that the Scottish play comes out on top, however. It would work with a hypothesis that, for example, Shakespeare was using this pattern subconsciously, whenever the situation called for an eerie mood.

I’d also be interested in seeing if the 2:1 difference isn’t larger than for other authors?

This comment on the original post deserves some love: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28336357

The wealth of a society isn’t in houses and TVs. It’s institutions and structures, such as companies, clubs, families, universities etc.

That’s how you can almost literally wipe a city off the face of the earth and see it rebuilt within a decade, think Germany after WW2or London/SF/Chicago after fire and earthquakes.

Kevin Roose at the NYT deserves praise both for being the reason they went through this exercise in removing all doubt, as well as getting close to writing the complete story before it ever happened: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/14/technology/facebook-data....

I get the impression this trend has peaked. For a while, young people stopped going topless on the beach, for example, for fear of photos appearing online. In the last years, it's been making a comeback. I believe it's both a sense that there's so much out there, chances are rather low someone you know will come across any photo. And that it just doesn't matter. I am absolutely certain you wouldn't be able to hurt someone with sending their work colleagues a topless photo you found, but rather risk your own job if you're found.

That's because it's a lot scarier to meet someone in your apartment when you don't expect them than having you photos leaked.

(With the latter, strictly speaking, being a subset of the former anyway)

It doesn't always prompt for a password or, more accurately, fingerprint scan on newish devices. In fact, standard applications that live in /Applications don't need it.

Nor do free apps downloaded via the App Store, as I just tried. Although this may be a setting somewhere.

But does it matter? You know what doesn't need a password? Accessing your photos. There's really very little you can do after authentication that you can't do otherwise. Maybe, after exfiltrating all the user data, you can also update macOS.

Sandboxing is really far more important than protecting sudo privileges, and I believe Apple is doing a fairly good job in that regard.

I'm sure not being run by a narcissistic recluse holed up in an embassy and/or jail is part of the story.

Let's not overlook that about 98% of US states have also been trying to replicate the success of California, with decidedly mixed results. And the successes are all connected to giant economies like New York or research clusters as in MA.

No. I don't like cats. They're more like old-school fascists than alt-right.

“Delivering it to a cabal of multinational corporations” is the bad-faith interpretation that only works if you ignore almost everything written on the topic. And “cabal” happens to be an anti-semitic dogwhistle, although I’m sure its use here is just a coincidincle.

Here’s an example from Wikipedia: “ The final outcome of the Summit, the Tunis Agenda (2005), enshrined a particular type of multistakeholder model for Internet governance, in which, at the urging of the United States, the key function of administration and management of naming and addressing was delegated to the private sector (the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, ICANN)”

And while ICANN gets criticism as any other organization, few argue the internet would be better served by direct control by any government.

The article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multistakeholder_governance, also explains the reasoning behind the idea. Basically, the world has become complicated, and governments are often not familiar with some situation, so they want to involve more of the people close to the issue on decision-making.

Just to be clear, the article starts by bring intrigued by a story they themselves summarize as:

“ The set of conspiracy theories around the Great Reset are nebulous and hard to pin down, but piecing them together gives us something like this: the Great Reset is the global elite’s plan to instate a communist world order by abolishing private property while using COVID-19 to solve overpopulation and enslaving what remains of humanity with vaccines.”

…and while it continues with a completely unrelated and mildly less batshit-crazy idea of its own, it doesn’t get any more believable. It’s old method of taking quotes out of context, adding innuendo, and going for the bad-faith interpretation. What’s strangest about this is the unshakable belief that some evil conspiracy would publish reports on their meetings where they couldn’t avoid giving away the game plan in only mildly obfuscated language.

This tool https://wdumps.toolforge.org/ allows you to create bespoke dumps that are pre-filtered for your needs.

They aren’t “guilty”. This is civil law, not criminal.

I was talking about coaches now :)

...and my perspective may be both local and outdated. Intercity coaches were actually illegal here in Germany until 5 years ago or so, intended to protect the train services (and, I guess, roads and the environment).

I couldn't quite figure out to do anything... "Group by" does nothing, and the docs say it takes effect when you use some aggregate function, of which I couldn't find any?

Would there be any advantage to using ruby or python in an interactive shell or jupyter-style environment?

There are also some spreadsheet-like tools I've found useful, most of all https://openrefine.org.

I have no clue. But, based on the theory that I really just don't want to get sued, even if I happen to be right, it seems important that neither does the author:

> permits you to use TypeIt in any [...] personal project

That's trying to establish some requirement to be non-commercial, which the GPL doesn't do. In fact the author here should know this better than most people, considering they are trying to sell something that's also GPL-licensed.

So if you get a good lawyer to give an all clear to use this in your Uber-for-Platypus-Stylists venture, they will get just as mad as if you don't.

In Europe, trains are far more comfortable, usually faster, and with better networks in most places. They are more expensive, but if you are in your early 20s (up to 25 or 27) the Interrail ticket is an all-summer (or several weeks, as you chose) pass to travel as much as you want, over most of Europe.

The parasites ivermectin treats don’t cause itching as far as I can tell. And the most common infection with the symptom, pinworm infection[0] isn’t treated with it. I’d also be careful with scaling medication just by weight. Just because that’s how it’s often done in humans, it doesn’t work across species, because it usually depends on some enzyme’s activity levels, and they can vastly differ. That’s why almonds kill dogs, for example.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinworm_infection

The liner notes included an attribution to John Cage, making the case somewhat more complicated.

I've been part of this community, and slashdot before it, for more than 20 years. The shifts in attitude are huge.

To start with a tech-focused example: there used to be at least a sizeable minority in favour of GPL licensing, vs. MIT, and people on both sides of the issue had at least some familiarity with it. Today, I see comments where people seem unable to even grasp the idea that anyone would consider the GPL.

Since it's difficult to believe someone would actually forget so much on an issue of importance to them, I believe it's changing audiences rather than the initial audience getting older. Or, alternatively, the tech sector simply expanding by several orders of magnitude, and any people who have been in it being drowned out.

This is somewhat noticeable on issues of social justice: all the major tech companies still have policies to promote participation by groups that were traditionally marginalised. But you wouldn't expect that from the comments here, Gamergate would still be filed in the ethics-in-journalism-dept', if that joke had survived.

It's tame in that people will opine that women are too stupid for IT, but they will do so very politely.

HN moderators are very proud of being accused at roughly equal rates from both of the US political tribes. That's the sort of triangulation leading to false balance even local journalists have managed to pick up over the last decade, where they still exist.

I'd really prefer if they flipped a coin and grew a spine. Is George Soros eating babies or not? Answering that question with a shrug isn't neutrality. For anyone in a position of even minor power over the discourse, it's dereliction of duty.

Practically, it means that any even barely political question on HN is discussed on a level where I could write both sides of the discourse in my sleep. If it's SF housing it's going to be "you don't want homeless people around where you life if you have children" vs. "you do know not all homeless people are violent, right?".

In the process, everyone retreats to their corners. The "virus lab leak" idea, in its first incarnation, was not something I'd be willing to explore, because allowing any possibility of it would immediately be weaponised by people pushing the idea that it was an intentional release of a biological weapon, an idea with completely different ramifications that was, nonetheless, superficially similar and closely linked.

Any tread on COVID is 90% fighting over "it's just the flu" (very beginning), then hydroxywhatever, and lately ivermectinopleasedont. In that regard, I truly doubt the comments are representative of even the readership of HN, let alone the US public, and even less the world's public.

Opinion on "mainstream media" is probably the most out-of-wack compared to opinions generally voiced in polite company. It's enough for a story to be published by the NYT to get a dozen comments often not even arguing that, but assuming everyone agrees with, the idea that everything they write is a lie. This may be an outcrop of the single uniting characteristic of commenters: they love to be contrarian. So much so, on this issue they all agree. "Actually", they tell each other with the mannerisms of a big truth being revealed, "I am much too smart to believe what everyone is believing". And if that means water isn't wet, so be it.

This gets two things wrong, namely that the US has some sort interest to regulate cryptocurrencies to protect its7the USD‘s power, and that it lacks the means to do so if it wanted.

As such, it’s par for the course for the cryptocurrency discourse which, from the early days of Bitcoin, liked to think of itself as valiant underdogs fighting the USD. Lurking behind that thinking are various conspiracy myths of who, exactly, is using that currency‘s power for what. If in doubt, just let them talk for five minutes, and see if they mention the FEE being “a private bank”.

One would have thought people notice when reality doesn’t conform to their expectations. The world’s governments never tried to stop Bitcoin, but instead, for the longest time, either ignored it or reacted with mild bemusement. Only when people started to expose themselves to fraud risks en masse did they reluctantly try to curb the worst excesses.

You know, like governments not beholden to shadowy cabals would do.

But their „product“ link in the footer goes to https://cerebras.net/?page_id=632, which is 404. So I‘ll wait before judging the relative skills of each site‘s technical abilities.

I worked at a Max Planck genetics lab and never saw an NDA, or even any reference to the notion of keeping anything secret.

The are also dozens of online databases for all sorts of data from biology.

Reading between the lines, you seem to attach certain ideas to the term „genetics“?

This is the sort of valid point that one will tend to avoid discussing because it is likely to be misused by the ideological critics of vaccination.

As an alternative I haven’t heard much of, updating the vaccines would seem to be a good option, as well? The first round was developed fast enough to almost outrun variants, so it should work quite well second time around.

It’s important to avoid the naturalistic fallacy: infection is not necessarily better protection. That is why, for example, tetanus and rabies vaccines work even when given after infection.