Hacker News Reader

volakon Wildlife is reclaiming Yosemite National Park

A month without humans, bears are moving through survey zones more frequently. The problem highlighted here is our methods for setting up survey zones is terrible and is severely UNDERCOUNTING the population.

Even more troubling is systems of surveillance like these provide the inputs for the climate change models we've depended on and which have predicted we'll all be extinct in 50 years.

I swear by the end of Covid19 we're all going to look back at the models and determine what climate skeptics have been saying for decades: Models are easily manipulated by bad inputs - and generally trash

volakon TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

Presumably because a lot of attractive young people do

That's explicitly the point.

Yes its evil and manipulative - but everyone should understand CPC is not above such tactics. And neither are pop magazines, holywood.. other people

Its an ugly world out there

volakon Signs you're following a fake Twitter account

I think its interesting that Twitter has the capability to automatically and instantly tag tweets or accounts as being written by third party apps

Yet they choose not to

volakon Robinhood maxed out credit line last month amid market tumult

“We determined it was prudent to draw on our credit line during the week of Feb. 24 in light of market volatility. That capital was returned in full last week.”

Headline should read "Robinhood used credit that was available to them and paid it back"

But that wouldn't generate the desired panic or clicks now would it

volakon U.S. considers cutting Huawei off from global chip suppliers

Its bipartisan. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/watch-pelosi-warns-nat...

volakon An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

People downvote but I assure you many dads agree.

IMO dads don't achieve the same level of bonding as women do to their babies and therefore we are able to tolerate less of the crap babies get into during the day.

Its not sexism, its just biology.

If I had a project I worked on for 9 months I would have more desire to continue working on it into the future. My investor is an interested party, but ultimately its entirely my drive which moves the project forward

volakon Show HN: AI Dungeon 2 – AI-generated text adventure built with 1.5B param GPT-2

This is cool good job!

Had a bug:

  > create loyal subjects

  You made many loyal followers. You taught them the ways of necrom the dark arts.
  You trained them in the art of war and magic. You even created a new race of
  undead soldiers called the Shadow Guard. You even found a way to turn humans
  into vampires
  > unleash my power unto the world

  You unleashed your powers onto the world. The skies turned black and the earth
  split apart. The oceans boiled and the air burned. You released a wave of energy
  so strong winds that tore through the forest. You created a new type of creatures
  known as..
  > 
  the... the... the... the... the... the... the... the... the... the... the...
  the... the... the... the... the... the... the... the... the... the... the...
  the... the... the... the... the... the... the... the..
  Woops that action caused the model to start looping. Try a different action to
  prevent that.

Alas my evil plans were thwarted

volakon U.S. Farmers Stung by Tariffs Now Face a $3.5B Corn Loss

Real headline: Corn price futures fell heavily on unexpected planting area and yield pegging

Edit: Actually the new report causing the 20% drop in price is controversial. And given all the news has reported weather issues disrupting planting season... I'd say buy corn futures... Any futures investors care to weigh in?

volakon Energy Storage Investments Boom as Battery Costs Halve in the Next Decade

No companies listed in article - anyone have a list of companies developing new battery technology?

Been something I've tried researching in the past with little luck

volakon Sovereign Citizens Helped Swindle $1B from the Government They Disavow

Citizens apply to SSN and a corporation is created for them - they are not forced to apply for one. Even to this day you can have a baby and not apply to SSN (increasing a good idea given the state of the program)

volakon Sovereign Citizens Helped Swindle $1B from the Government They Disavow

The summary is slightly inadequate. There wasn't a corporation that usurped the government - the government made corporations of everyone

Basically it goes like this -

* SSN Act (created after the market crash) was created not only to provide faux "retirement" accounts but also "incorporate" every citizen of the country as a company upon birth.

* New baby John Smith instantiates company JOHN SMITH with account 123-45-6789

* ALL banking and financials go through your company account JOHN SMITH (check your checks, statements, loans). This included Liens, child support, taxes, alimony, etc.

* The line you sign your name on your check is not actually a line but very tiny "Authorized Representative" IE: John Smith is acting on behalf of JOHN SMITH

Why?

Because Feds didn't have the power to enact laws on individual citizens at the time. So they created companies out of every citizen which they can then force to pay into Social Security (among other things). This has evolved over time granting the government the power much more power over individuals through their "shell companies"

Some sovereign citizens claim to be able to gain sole control over their shell corporation JOHN SMITH and with that all government encroachments on their rights via liens and taxes are invalid.

Disclaimer: I have no position on this conspiracy theory just providing a better summary

volakon Facebook’s algorithm change has spurred an angry, Fox News-dominated News Feed

There are left wing Breitbarts just like there's MSNBC for TV. The issue then becomes why these are far less popular.

Its not because of a FB algorithm - that's for certain.

I can ask everyone in my family if they've heard of Breitbart and 99% will say yes. If I ask if they've heard of Rachael Maddow.. maybe 40%? This is despite both of them engaging heavily in anger porn

volakon Facebook’s algorithm change has spurred an angry, Fox News-dominated News Feed

Fox News dominates ratings on TV so its not surprising they'd be #1 - there's also the fact this is "engagements" and not click-throughs. I'd wager good 15% of these are probably people clicking "Angry" not actually engaging.

If you look at "content with the most shares" not surprisingly Reuters and Patch tops the list.

OP's headline presumes any algorithm should achieve left/right balance - this is just impossible.

There was a good tweet the other day something along the lines of

If I Google a headline the results are:

* New York Times: Your number of free articles is 0

* Wall Street Journal: Subscription needed

* Bloomberg: See this article for $1

* Fox News: Completely free

* Breitbart: Completely free

Seeing this its no stretch to understand why media struggles

volakon US shutdown: Flight delays caused by staff shortages

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/426824-schumer-blocks-bi...

Bill to just pay the coast guard no strings - objection from Schumer

volakon US shutdown: Flight delays caused by staff shortages

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/425858-house-rejects-gop-...

volakon US shutdown: Flight delays caused by staff shortages

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/425858-house-rejects-gop-...

volakon Unintended Consequences: How the GDPR Can Undermine Privacy

Collecting data subsidizes the cost of the service.

Would facebook have 1 billion users if it cost $5.99 a month?

Data collection is not going anywhere, so long as people are willing (even unknowingly) to give up info for a perceived discount.

Now here - fill out my form with your address, email, phone, photo id, and passport number for a chance to win a brand new 2019 Honda!

volakon Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case

Yes a lot of companies do. Especially minimum wage jobs. Because there are vastly more people without a record willing to work. But now imagine you have a previous conviction but you are willing to work for less than minimum wage?

If I value a fry cook for $10 an hour and I get 1 person with a previous conviction who wants to work for $5 - I'll hire him in a heartbeat so long as I could fire him at any moment. And since I'm a good employer I'll make him a deal to pay him $10 an hour after 6 months provided he stays clean and works hard.

As it stands I'm not allowed to do any of that - so the convict remains unemployed and will probably commit more crime just to survive.

I'll let my man Friedman take it from here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca8Z__o52sk

volakon Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case

True - 100% true. If I had a checkered past with no references I would expect to get denied for every job I applied to.

To combat this prejudice I would fully expect to have to lower my expectations in the form of lower wage or other restriction. If I offer to work for half the normal pay not only will I definitely get hired but I'll get a good reference providing I prove myself capable and trustworthy.

volakon Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case

You are still arguing against human nature.

Give yourself a scenario - you have two equal candidates:

a) background check clean, no google results b) background check lists sealed conviction, no google results

you'll choose?

now another:

a) background check clean, no google results b) background check lists sealed conviction, google results says he stole some cookies

you'll choose?

Probably (a) both times. Unless in scenario B you can ask about his previous cookie conviction and pay him less and/or able to fire at any time.

By denying all potential information you sow distrust between a mutually consensual relationship. Do you think more or less convicts will be hired when you can't trust background checks to get all the relevant information.

In such a world gossip will replace google. "Did you hear about mark? Oh don't hire him I heard he murdered someone over a batch of cookies!"

volakon Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case

Because in many places employees can't be terminated without cause. You as a business want employees to be worth than what you pay them. If you hire someone for 50k who sits around and needs direction from a manager to do anything you are taking a huge loss. Also as an employee if you are harassing female employees (but never too much because you know how to toe the line) you create an environment no one wants to work with and from which you can't be fired.

An employee being fired is not that difficult. You can either not list the experience on your resume or take the hit and lower you expected salary. You'll never be un-hirable just because you were previously fired.

volakon Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case

This is a weird question - I think you are trying to point out that the employer/employee relationship is not equal.

This is true. The employer always takes a much greater risk to hire you than you take to work there.

volakon Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case

I don't like to break up arguments into tiny pieces and remark on each one - so I'll just wrap this up in 1 thought like a normal person.

You are essentially complaining about human nature. Here in reality people want to know if you've violated someone else's trust before trusting you. We are social beings and if you present two people - "This one betrayed a friend, this other one has not" - 99% of people will choose the later.

You will never ever convince a majority of people that someone who has demonstrated untrustability should be trusted the same as someone who has not. Regardless of how long he spent in a steel and concrete cage.

volakon Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case

Not true - if mark has a resume listing a successful employment post-cookie incident I would call them for a reference. A good reference isn't completely trustworthy but 2 or 3 of them with good companies and I'd be convinced.

volakon Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case

If I was HR and I had a choice between a Javascript developer for 50k with a clean record and a Javascript developer with a 5 year old conviction for 40k - I'd actually pick the later. But only if I could fire him immediately if he turns out to actually be a cookie monster.

volakon Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case

Think you missed the part where I said these restrictions were temporary until trust is rebuilt.

I have more of a reason to trust a stranger with a clean record than I do to trust a convicted criminal. Once the later demonstrates hes trustworthy these restrictions disappear.

volakon Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case

The problem is future employers don't know if mark made a one time mistake or is a serial cookie monster. Why would they hire mark over a similar employee with a clean record?

Mark needs to be given the opportunity to demonstrate to an employer hes no longer a cookie monster. He needs to rebuild that trust.

He would do this by taking a lower than average pay, agreeing to periodic cookie-tests, and giving the employer the option to terminate his employment at any time without cause.

If mark really isn't a cookie monster anymore he should be fine with this precautions to minimize the company's risk - after a year or so when there is more trust these disappear.

volakon Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case

Entering into a deeper relationship with someone (employer/employee, landlord/tenant, etc) you want to know everything about the other person. This is not because you are some nosy person - its because breaking that relationship means risking lawsuits or damage to your property or a whole eviction process which can take months to years...

Its a dangerous thing to "trust" someone when they'll have that level of control over your future so people use government records and google to know if they could possibly have an issue.

This isn't a privacy issue its a minimizing risk issue.

If you give people better options for minimizing risk then google results will matter less and less. For instance I'd be happy to hire a convict if I could a) pay him less than I normally would (initially) and b) fire him at any time for any reason.

Same for renting. If we draw up a contract with a no-drugs no-weapons clause and allowed me to inspect the place once a month for the first year or so I'd be happy to rent to him.

But these things sensible precautions are illegal. There may be good reasons because of them "evil corporations" blah blah. Sensible or not that's reality - so people understandably discriminate against people based on google results. Its a fairly understandable precaution given the amount of risk involved due to regulation.

Therefore the fix isn't to make google "forget" things - that only increases risk dramatically. The fix is to make these relationships less risky by allowing business owners and landlords more control over their own personal.

volakon Mark Zuckerberg Can Still Fix This Mess

True - 100%