oenton

Whenever I read an extraordinary claim, no matter how implausible, I try to make an effort to at least Google it and steelman it as best I can. I do this as a sanity check and also to catch myself from falling victim to my own echo chambers. Here's what I found:

1. White House officials from the CDC, FBI, and CISA urged platforms to remove or suppress content deemed "misinformation" including "lab-leak theory. [1]

2. Missouri and others sued the Biden admin and requested an injunction for "federal interference" against social media companies.[2] That injunction was granted.[3]

3. The injunction was appealed to the 5th circuit[4]. Notably, while the the 5th circuit upheld the injunction, they didn't agree that the Biden admin was "coercive", which is why their ruling significantly narrowed the scope of the injunction. From that ruling:

  "Generally, the State Department officials did not flag content, suggest policy changes, or reciprocally receive data during those meetings."

  "...although CISA flagged content for social-media platforms as part of its switchboarding operations, based on this record, its conduct falls on the “attempts to convince,” not “attempts to coerce,” side of the line."
  
  "There is not sufficient evidence that CISA made threats of adverse consequences— explicit or implicit—to the platforms for refusing to act on the content it flagged."

  "Nor is there any indication CISA had power over the platforms in any capacity, or that their requests were threatening in tone or manner. Similarly, on this record, their requests— although certainly amounting to a non-trivial level of involvement—do not equate to meaningful control."

-------

You wrote the Biden admin was "forcing" Twitter to censor people but even the 5th Circuit, which was sympathetic to this complaint, disagrees.

Sadly my original assumption was true: this is another false comparison. Trump using or even threatening to use the FCC's licensing authority to revoke licenses of private companies that don't fire a comedian for speech the president found upsetting is not the same.

Now, if the Biden admin used (or threatened) the DOJ's authority to seize Twitter or Facebook's domain name if they don't take down legal, 1st amendment protected content the Biden admin disagrees with i.e. "lab leak", then I might agree with you.

My question to you is - do you agree these things are not the same or do you simply not see a meaningful distinction? Why or why not?

[1] https://reason.com/2023/09/11/the-5th-circuit-agrees-that-fe...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murthy_v._Missouri

[3] https://www.theverge.com/2023/7/4/23783822/free-speech-rulin...

[4] https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/23/23-30445-CV0.pd...

Lying liar says what now?

> I don't know what more he could have done (on the day of).

In the first year of his second term Trump has repeatedly nationalized other states' national guards, against the judgement of those states' governors. He also threatened to deploy one state's national guard into "blue states" the President has personal grievances with. Let's not get into the why because the why is clearly not relevant to your comment, "I don't know what more he could have done."

Once again, you're either not responding here in good faith or you need to take a long honest reflection at how you came to that absurd conclusion.

My apologies. I thought $10/day daycare was universal in Canada. I guess my broader point was the difference in disposable income between U.S. workers vs. other countries becomes a lot more nuanced when things like healthcare, childcare, retirement, and taxes are taken into account.

> I'm sure the $80,000 extra dollars is enough to pay for the healthcare premiums and daycare.

You're probably right. That said, SWE compensation in the U.S. has been quite an anomaly compared to the vast majority of American labor, especially in the last 5-10 years. I don't think those who are comfortable right now are thinking far enough ahead about what they'll do if that changes, or perhaps when that changes. If this AI hype has taught me anything it's that those with capital cannot wait to start trimming their pesky engineers with those high salaries. And maybe that's always been the case, but seeing them go full mask off hits different.

Unrelated, I like your website. It's simple and the color scheme is aesthetically pleasing.

How much of your U.S. paycheck goes towards healthcare premiums?

How about much is daycare in the U.S. for 3 children? Conservative estimates put that at $4-$5,000 per month, and that's after tax.

Is there a reason your comment omits these key differences when comparing a SWE's quality of life living in the United States vs. Canada?

> "I tried to trick an LLM and I did" is not exactly a noteworthy achievement at this stage in AI technology.

I agree it’s not surprising and I would also agree it’s not noteworthy, if the CEO of OpenAI wasn’t still making public statements like this:

People talk about how much energy it takes to train an AI model … But it also takes a lot of energy to train a human. It takes like 20 years of life and all of the food you eat during that time before you *get smart*.

Precisely. In fact I remember a story similar to this, so I Googled "did Sprint get sued for using 'unlimited' in their marketing?" Lo and behold, yes, they did. And for good reason.

It would be an understatement to say I am ashamed to work in the same industry as many of the commenters here do--commenters who are completely ignorant of antitrust law and why it exists, or for whatever reason, are completely unconcerned with the absurd market power these mega conglomerates (ab)use.

That's clearly not a good faith interpretation of the commenter you're referring to. Do better.

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> The one where he specifically told people to protest peacefully?

I know the rules say to assume good faith but I don't see how anyone can do that given what you wrote. I'm really struggling to understand how that is your main takeaway from all the events that transpired that day.

But rather than rehash that maybe it's better to focus on current events. What are your thoughts on Trump, the first day assuming office in his second term, issuing a blanket pardon for all of the crimes his supporters committed that day in his name? Why would Trump who just wanted people to "protest peacefully," pardon those convicted of... beating officers with a flag pole, stomping on officers' heads, and crushing an officer in a metal door frame using a riot shield?

I do agree with you on one thing though:

> it's like they're living in another world

It truly saddens me to see so many people living in completely different realities. But I honestly don't think it's me or the person you're replying to that decided to relocate.

> But you don’t understand. There won’t be any science if he is taxed because then he will leave and take all the money with him.

It's sad how many people truly believe this. Intelligent people, including tech workers, many of which have mistakenly convinced themselves they're not part of the working class.

The DOW is at 50,000! 50,000! If you get this reference (and even if you don’t), there are many alternative actions he could have taken, including not acknowledging this at all.

I think it looks cool. I like the mouseover effects. I still echo others concerns e.g. npmjs.com is the ultimate authority of what NPM packages exist.

Did you create this? If not how did you come across it?

> No one seems to want to answer these questions.

Have you considered why? It's telling that you haven't answered my question: How exactly did the victim confront law enforcement?

I can't speak for everyone here but frankly, I find these "Would you do X?" questions irrelevant and I struggle to see a good faith reason for asking them. I can think of many bad faith reasons, for example shifting blame to the victim to remove focus from the border patrol agents' actions. Or a more charitable interpretation is you view this as a simple matter of cause and effect: if he didn't bring a gun he'd still be alive; or perhaps, if he stayed home altogether he'd still be alive. Is that your motivation for asking these questions?

Setting aside the fact that no, we don't know those things to be true, I don't think that interpretation of your intent is much better. But you also haven't been forthcoming with why you're placing so much importance on these questions.

> Private citizens on the street confronting law enforcement

What actions are you alleging qualifies as confronting? Be specific. Unless I have a wildly different definition of confronting, everything I've read and every video I've seen from different angles shows the opposite.

(This is setting aside the fact that having a concealed carry permit and carrying a legal firearm is not a death sentence in this country.)

TLDR - malicious VS Code extension named "ChatGPT" sends the full contents of any file you open to servers based in China by using a hidden iframe in a webview. There's a second mechanism that runs a command that bulk sends 50 files at a time from your workspace to the same servers. Third also uses a hidden iframe (zero pixels) in a webview to load 4 SDKs that track activity in the editor.

I have to admit I laughed when I saw the marketplace screenshot of "ChatGPT" from some unknown author (not OpenAI or Microsoft) with a non-English description. If anything screams "sus" to me that would be it.

For what it's worth, I absolutely agree with the comments saying the warning doesn't clearly communicate the risks. I too had no idea opening a directory in VS Code (that contains a tasks.json file) could cause some code to execute. I understood the risk of extensions but I think that's different, right? i.e. opening a trusted project doesn't automatically install extensions when there's an extensions.json (don't quote me on that, unless that's correct)

To give some perspective: VS Code isn't my primary IDE, it's more like my browsing IDE. I use it to skim a repo or make minor edits, without waiting for IntelliJ to index the world and initialize an obscene number of plugins I apparently have installed by default. Think—fixing a broken build. If I'm only tweaking or reinstalling dependencies because the package-lock file got corrupted and that's totally not something that happened this week, I don't need all the bells and whistles. Actually I want less because restarting the TypeScript service multiple times is painful, even on a high end Mac.

Anyway enough about IntelliJ. This post has some good discussions and I sincerely hope that you (well, and Microsoft) take this feedback seriously and do something about it. I imagine that's hard, as opposed to say <improving some metric collected by telemetry and fed into a dashboard somewhere>, but this is what matters. Remember what Steve Ballmer said about UAC? I don't know if he said anything, but if it didn't work then it's not going to work now.

I guess I'll be the one to say it:

Having an organization that collectively bargains for the employees would be very useful right about now. I know, I know... unions can be corrupted and next thing you know, it's a legalized mob.

Well, if my choice is that or "upskill myself" and "negotiate", while ignoring the inherent and overwhelming power asymmetry that exists between an employee and the employer, I'll go with the mob; at least they have my back.

Yes I'm being glib, but there's also some truth to that. Almost all of the reasons or arguments I've seen from those who oppose unions are based on some myth or combination of myths, such as: - We don't need unions because we're 'well paid' (relatively speaking) - Unions only value seniority - Make it nye impossible to get rid of poor performers - Dark money comes in and corrupts the nomination process, now the CEO's buddy runs the union and you don't even know this is controlled opposition

Okay I'm being facetious on that last one, but seriously. We are long, long overdue for a power shift that values the workers. Emphasis on values because that word value has been cooped to be synonymous with money, and it is anything but.

> isn’t a good look for Nobel, and shows that we’ve now moved so far from the original intention of the prize that the peace component really should be scrapped.

I don't follow. Are you saying the committee should have known that Trump would literally wage a military war if he isn't awarded the peace prize? Are you saying if they changed their mind now and allowed Venezuelan politician Machado to gift her prize to Trump, that Trump would no longer have a desire to own Greenland? I'm honestly trying to understand but maybe I missed an important story.

Yes and despite how demoralizing it can feel, I encourage everyone to do the same: https://www.congress.gov/members/find-your-member

In the past we have hit critical mass, where so many people were calling in to Congress to complain (when Trump initially started with his arbitrary tariffs) that the Congressional phone system began to fail under load, and that made headlines that managed to break through the 24/7 firehose of bullshit.

Yes, yes, and yes. I live in a "blue state" and their response is the same every time. To quote Bill Burr: "Nobody can help but everybody understands."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89JN5GdMqb8

It never ceases to amaze me the lengths some people will go to in order to sane wash the batshit crazy things that the President says and does. And just like all the other rationalizations before this, this one is no different: "negotiating tactic" (aka 4D Chess)

> I don't know what the angle is (haven't thought that much about it)

You don't? It seems pretty clear to me. He states it in the first sentence of his letter:

"Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace..."

That's it. That's the reason. It's not very complicated and it doesn't require any thought. Childish? Sure. Unbecoming of an elected official in any capacity? Absolutely. But this is who he is and this is how he operates. I can't think of any President before Trump that required special whisperers to translate everything he says and tell us what he really means.

> Everything was for sure simpler, but also the requirements and expectations were much, much lower.

This. In the early 2000s, almost every day after school (3PM ET) Facebook.com was basically unusable. The request would either hang for minutes before responding at 1/10th of the broadband speed at that time, or it would just timeout. And that was completely normal. Also...

- MySpace literally let you inject HTML, CSS, and (unofficially) JavaScript into your profile's freeform text fields

- Between 8-11 PM ("prime time" TV) you could pretty much expect to get randomly disconnected when using dial up Internet. And then you'd need to repeat the arduous sign in dance, waiting for that signature screech that tells you you're connected.

- Every day after school the Internet was basically unusable from any school computer. I remember just trying to hit Google using a computer in the library turning into a 2-5 minute ordeal.

But also and perhaps most importantly, let's not forget: MySpace had personality. Was it tacky? Yes. Was it safe? Well, I don't think a modern web browser would even attempt to render it. But you can't replace the anticipation of clicking on someone's profile and not knowing whether you'll be immediately deafened with loud (blaring) background music and no visible way to stop it.

I honestly struggled to write a starter comment because... in the totality of the circus of things that transpired this past week, I don't have much more to add that hasn't already been said. But it's clear to me there aren't any adults in the room. Maybe there hasn't been for some time? Either way that's fucking scary.

Ironically, this "board" sounds like the poster child of what was feared in certain fringe circles around 2012. In that timeline, libertarians feared a big unaccountable federal government, and the only thing scarier than that is a big unaccountable global government where membership is mandatory.

I don't know how we ended up in this timeline, or more accurately, how this timeline started accelerating so rapidly, but now would be a great time for Congress to wake up and do their job. I called my senators and reps. I said, "Listen! If you don't make a public statement and wave your finger very strongly, I'm going to call you again tomorrow. Well, tomorrow's the weekend but first thing Monday!"

In the words of Bill Burr: Nobody can help but everybody understands.

> Entering private domiciles without a proper warrant? "Democracy, as the founding fathers intended"

Or my personal favorite, "a mandate."

Interestingly I don't recall any other US President in recent memory (last 30 years) referring to their policies, or more accurately the fact that they won an election, as "a mandate given by the American people."

But you only need to go back a few more decades to find similar phrases used by a certain country's infamous authoritarian regime. Are the frogs boiling yet? It's starting to get really uncomfortable really fast.

> bridging communication between product management, engineers, and users.

Thank you for putting this so eloquently into words. At my work (FAANG) tech writers are being let go and their responsibilities are being pushed on developers, who are now supposed to “use AI” to maintain customer facing documentation.

Is this the promise land? It sure doesn’t feel like it.

> and dare I say it "web scale"

Obligatory reference https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2F-DItXtZs

Curious, what do you mean by 'anti-immigrants'?

This is the second or third comment I’ve seen online that says this. I’m curious how do you conclude the fed has “never been non-political?” Is this just a matter of using the right terminology? The term “non-political” (also “independent”) isn’t concerned with each board member’s individual party affiliation, or how they vote in elections. It just means that management of the fed and importantly its monetary policy I.e. the federal rate, be guided by data; not influenced by short term goals of politicians and especially not influenced by the President or his administration.

(Edit) all that to say, maybe that’s what you meant by “never at an individual level”?

I was just talking to someone close to me about what to expect if (when?) Trump starts annexing Greenland. I truly believe a national strike is our best bet. But the reality is many (most?) people are living paycheck to paycheck and can’t risk that. But knowledge workers and especially software engineers can probably fare much better in the event of immediate job loss.

Now that’s not to downplay or minimize that risk, especially if you have a family, dependents, or some unique circumstance. But I’d hope for the majority of workers in our profession, it’s the difference between “I can’t buy food next week” vs “I have about 4-8 months before I’ve drained my liquid / emergency savings”

The sad thing is I don’t know what to do. Would this make headlines? Would they cover it? Would it get condensed into a single sound bite “big tech goes on strike”?

I’m conflicted but I feel like the choice should be obvious and simple. Just do it.

I don’t know if you truly mean that or you’re just being glib. But if you’re serious, I’d strongly urge you to get help or just talk to someone you know and trust; even if you disagree on a lot of things.