ebcode

I for one am very concerned about the fate of Julian Assange, and would like to see evidence that he is still alive. If he is in fact not alive, that fact would trouble me greatly. I live in the USA, and while I am considering fleeing now, his death would be yet another reason.

It's called dog-whistle politics. It's subtle, so you have to listen hard, but here it is: "To the people who are used to influencing our choice of leaders, ..." and he goes on to describe "wealthy" and "successful" types of people. Basically he's talking "to" and "about" people like himself, namely, white men. The man is a bigot, and like all modern bigots, he hides (and shows) his bigotry in coded language like this.

edit: just to clarify, "people who are used to influencing our choice of leaders", I am interpreting in the context of voting rights in the United States, which of course were originally denied to everyone but white men. So those are the ones who are "used to it."

not blaming bezos. and the spelling mistake was unintentional. just trying to keep an open mind and an awareness of media bias.

bear in mind this paper is now owned by jeff bezos, and the actual results are still not in yet

edit: bozos -> bezos

I had the same reaction to this comment as you. He says to "beware the educated idiot", then goes on to describe someone who is the opposite of that. I think we were both expecting an example of an "educated idiot". Maybe he should have said, "Keep an eye out for the uneducated genius?"

I was in a discussion with someone here about Trump and "hate speech", and I'm curious if anyone can actually point to anything that Trump has said on record that would qualify as "hate speech" under US law.

Also, any nation's law regarding hate speech would qualify to give this idea more dimension. I know Germany has especially strict regulations around this, and wonder if anything Trump has said in this country would qualify as "hate speech" in that country.

Thoughts?

Dude. Look at the caption underneath those screenshots. They say, "A screenshot of the phishing email received by ..."

The fact that Google actually sends out emails that look like that is what makes the phishing attack so effective. The email looks like it is from Google, and therefore trustworthy.

As to why the phishers would inform him that they got his password? The reason is that at the time they sent the phishing email, they didn't actually have his password, and wanted him to click on a link that they controlled so he would give them his password.

I'm trying to get through to you. Please tell me it's working.

No, the screen w/ "Google stopped this sign in attempt" is not from Google. Presumably the "Change Password" link pointed to a server controlled by the phishers.

I want to know if our own star is also sending out these "peculiar periodic spectral modulations"??? If our own star is doing this as well, it could indicate that our solar system is a part of some type of "network", and these 234 stars would make excellent candidates in the search for intelligent life.

Thanks! I was imagining a star suddenly going dim and staying that way. This does not appear to be that.

Any chance you can point to the research on that?

Of course he doesn't say that. Or at least he hasn't yet (that we know of).

I can see that my definition of "hate speech" is much, much broader than yours, however. So it will only be a time-sink for us to try to come to any agreement in the immediate future.

That said, I appreciate your response and will give it some thought.

Anger is an emotion I try to avoid entirely. If I could only choose one word to describe my feelings toward Hitler, it would be "pity".

I'm not saying anger is never warranted, but holding onto those feelings and acting on them usually just brings more pain into the world. I'd like to think that The Allies won the second World War not for their hatred of Hitler, but rather for their love of humanity. But maybe I'm being naive.

“Anger is an acid that can do more harm to the vessel in which it is stored than to anything on which it is poured.” -- Mark Twain

Fair enough, but that only goes so far. The usefulness of language depends on there being commonly held definitions between the speakers. If I said, "your definition of 'broom' can differ from mine", things would start to fall apart pretty quickly.

Now that our (US) government is in the business of defining our words for us (eg, "terrorist", "hate speech"), I think it would be wise for us commoners to start working out amongst ourselves what we want these words to actually mean so that we can agree on their definitions.

My current definition of "hateful" would be anything that points to some "other" as "less than".

What's your definition?

>Trump is an ideological figure with very few actual political views. His popularity is due almost entirely to his cultivation of American hate.

I think this is spot on. If someone says something hateful, and I retweet it, am I not also saying something hateful? Say I don't retweet the actual comment, but instead respond w/ "Have some money." Is that not still an endorsement of the hateful speech?

Ultimately, I think we can view hatred as a kind of ignorance and fearfulness of the unknown, and therefore as a kind of stupidity.

It logically follows that endorsing a stupid candidate is itself a form of stupidity.

I just recently went through an RSI flare-up and had to do something urgently, so here's what I did. I immediately went and bought a replacement mouse, with a trackball. Because it was my right hand/wrist that was experiencing the worst of it, I switched my mouse from the right side of the keyboard to the left. This has changed up my usual right-hand grasping/squeezing/clicking motions, and now the flare-up has died down considerably. The other thing I did was to get a split keyboard similar to the one you bought.

Ergonomics are extremely important for our profession (obviously). Examine how your elbows are situated in relation to the keyboard. If you're sitting at a desk, be sure to have a keyboard tray underneath the desk so that when your elbows are at a 90-degree angle, the keyboard is underneath your fingers and your wrists are straight and not bent. If you know anyone who plays piano regularly, ask them to show you their positions and posture, and try to replicate that at your desk. HTH

Don't bet on it.

Wow. Even HN is trying to bury this.

>USA might be a democracy but there is no power in the hands of the people anymore.

Question: How can we (I live in the US) still be a democracy if there is no power in the hands of the people?

I think either the US has slowly become an oligarchy[1], or it has always been an oligarchy that was merely good at pretending to be a democratic republic. I would vote if I thought it would have an effect, but sadly our voting process is inscrutable. I, like many others, pray for a revolution here soon.

1. Edit: just found out Jimmy Carter apparently agrees with this: https://theintercept.com/2015/07/30/jimmy-carter-u-s-oligarc...

Right. Trump hasn't attacked Assange personally. If I had read a news article alleging that HRC had said, "Can't we just drone this guy?" about me, I would be pretty terrified to leave my flat as well. Even more so if it appeared that she was about to become the CEO of the US military.

If I could, I would encourage Julian Assange to stop fearing for his life, and start living it, whatever precious little (or lot) of it he might have left. Unfortunately, if he can't access the internet, he can't read this comment.

It's true that the whole world is watching this, and a lot of us in the US care not only for the fate of Assange, but also for the fate of our nation, how these two have become intertwined, and what it will mean if Assange does indeed come to harm as a result of his journalistic actions.

If I were Julian, I would use right now as the perfect opportunity to walk out, and face the charges in Sweden. At least then I could serve actual time (if necessary), and have an end to my imprisonment within sight.

Above all, this is certainly an excellent opportunity for Hillary to show that she can resolve a crisis diplomatically. If she could just tone things down a bit, she could assure Julian (and the world) that she does not actually mean him any harm. Of anyone, I would think that Hillary could be quite good at projecting soft power globally.

Besides, can you imagine what it would be like if they killed him now? The Hollywood trailer of his biopic would have to start with, "First, they cut your internet access ..." ;)

Trump hasn't made "jokes" about droning him. [1]

Secondly, and with a little more convoluted reasoning: it seems to be a truism that Republican/Conservative presidencies are harder economically for people living in poverty. Republicans are less socialist, in other words. I think it's pretty clear that Assange would like to see a revolution in the US, and revolutions tend to happen when the people don't have enough to eat. Hoping for Trump to win could be seen as hoping for a revolution in that light.

1. http://truepundit.com/under-intense-pressure-to-silence-wiki...

1. Howard Roarke (The Fountainhead) 1943 Novel

2. Stanley Kowalski (A Streetcar Named Desire) 1947 Play

Just two that spring to mind. I'm sure a diligent person could find plenty of other examples of rapist protagonists in 20th century literature.

Yeah, I get your point about the hivemind, but I think it's less damaging to see downvoting as being about the comment, not the person. iow, don't take it personally.

The "entrance fee" in this case would be: understanding promises. When you introduce a new feature into a language, my assumption is that a "less-experienced dev", by definition, would not have experience using promises in production. So if you're going to sprinkle in higher-level (or just new) concepts into your code, you're assuming a certain level of experience for the devs who will come after you. If, instead, you sort of "spell everything out", it will take more words to do that, but you aren't referencing an assumed set of shared knowledge.

If anything, I think it would help to identify what assumptions are inherent in our code, and at least point to references for a "less-experienced dev" in the comments. A comment that said: "Hey you! This code uses promises, so if you don't know about those, check out this ref: [URL]", would be extremely helpful in this case.

Having seen that the $99 price point was too high, is one of your goals still "supercomputing for everyone"? Or has that dream been dashed?

John Holland is always worth watching, and not very many people have seen this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_u_d-KLEsE#t=1183.549186

I think you misinterpreted the comparison. It's not /. to YC, but /. to HN

> People are exploring ideas like 'stop paying taxes' because there are no other options available to them except civil disobedience.

Stopping paying taxes is a form of civil disobedience. eg, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Night_Thoreau_Spent_in_Jai...

Have you found Scratch yet? https://scratch.mit.edu/

I don't disagree w/ your attidude towards the LOC metric, and I especially like your idea in the footnotes about each line of code being a tax on future programmers who have to read the code. I'm afraid that the code example itself is a bit hand-wavy though, since you introduce a "downloadAsync" function that needs to be implemented differently for each example. So I thing your argument could be strengthened with a more concrete code sample. Continuing the money/tax analogy, if each line of code represents a tax to be paid each time the code is read, then the cost of understanding the code with fewer lines represents an "entrance fee" that would be a barrier to less-experienced devs. I could see how even a technically-minded manager might appreciate the code with the lower barrier to entry -- and justifying their continued use of the LOC metric thereby.