Sure, but just because its law doesnt mean its just. If you are just talking about "the law" you are talking about something very different than everyone else. Even if its the law, its obviously a violation of the intent behind free speech to limit speech only to those who the government can intimidate. If the only way to have free speech is to be within arms reach of the government's threats you arent really a bastion of free speech, you just practice speech within the bounds of what the government will allow. And as we have recently seen, that can change dramatically depending on who is paying.
Incredible how short peoples' memories are. "The American security aparatus says its dangerous" has historically been a very poor indicator of a threat to the American people, and usually forecasts misguided geoplotical interests that will have long lasting echoes. Gulf of Tonkin, Red Scare, WMDs, etc. No idea why people believe now, over the dancing app, the secret briefing given to congress was factual. In fact many congress people have said is was extremely vague with 0 evidence aside from "we think this is happening, and it definitely could happen".
It becomes more and more clear that the people supporting this app don't use the app, making it easy to imagine the worst. The reality of this situation seems very obvious to me: Meta sees the future, and knows that they have lost the next generation to tiktok and social media platforms that are authentic. FB is doomed, Instagram is all ads and manicured posts, and the Metaverse is perpetually 10 years ahead of the tech. They wanted to do what they did last time they needed to stay relevant: buy a relevant company (Instagram). Tiktok wasnt interested. So since they cant compete they spend a fraftion of the money they would need to compete fairly to simply bribe the government to ban the app. Its a "security risk"! And look, they are saying all these bad things about Israel, your AIPAC bribers hate the app too! Its definitely not that Israel is a pariah state that the entire world except for the US (where bribery is legal and encouraged) despises because of their crimes against humanity, its the Chinese government controlling the app! And you have no way of forcing them to censor the news like you can on Meta and MSM! Sprinkle some red scare in the pot, talk ominously about China, and now all the representatives (avg age 63 btw) are scared about the chinese controlled brain control app that all their grandkids love.
Anytime something remotely political comes up on HN I'm reminded that the people that tend to be very matter of fact and well informed on the intricacies of tech are no more immune to tribalism and groupthink than anyone else. No ciritical thought when the government says something they agree with, no matter how nebulous and manufactured it is. And yes, I include myself in that group. Reminds me to take everything I read on here with a healthy grain of salt because this same tribalist-bias exists in seemingly objective tech discussion.
Do any engineers actually like DD? Execs/managers seem to love DD and get upsold all the time on it and ask engineers to implement some of their half-baked features. It seems like its good for alerts and dashboards for infrastructure teams. But as an engineer its a pain and using it for log analysis is much more annoying than just tracking down the actual relevant logs and grepping.
What is a well designed system, especially in nature? What values does nature maximize for? Nature is just a bunch of distributed systems that have chaotically learned to work "together" in vicious harmony. Nature's "design" is brutal, and is not compatible with the comforts we have grown to expect in our modern lives. If nature had its way we would mostly die around 50 years old of a cold.
Its sort of a given to learned people that regulations are good. The fact you don't live in a factory town bartering cigarettes for Amazon Coin you use to buy your meals with is a testament to this. Or that your company isn't forcing you to work at gunpoint. The US allowed corporations to run free during industrialization for just 60 years and they managed to exploit people to such an extent that even the hands-off US government stepped in and started pushing regulations. When able to relentlessly pursue profits, companies will stop at no length to increase profits, and we have seen this all across the world. I believe your partisanship is clouding your judgment.
The author is also clearly not a leftist based on the contents of the article, and his allusions to centrally planned societies (aka their understanding of communism) as a fool's errand.
Could you cite the portion of the Communist Manifesto this reminds you of?
I thought this was a well written comment until you used a political boogeyman to attempt to lend credence to your opinion. You can disparage the idea of simple and unambitious lifestyles more adroitly by focusing on the philosophies at hand rather than attributing them to a comic book interpretation of a political theory.
For the vast majority of robotics and controls traditional methods often have the best (implementation + research)/time value. Using any kind of machine learning usually means a lot of research and implementation time for widely varying results. Maybe if you had some ML specialists that could accelerate implementation and direct you on the right path, ML approaches could become more popular.
The simplest and most practical use of ML is in CV. I'd be surprised if they weren't doing some of that.
That's a nice straw man you got there. Be a shame if someone set it ablaze...
Pre 2015 people were worried about the government actively monitoring and controlling what could be said on the internet. It was a fight to protect free speech on the web.
The current issue about the actions of the FCC focuses on net neutrality. While also being essential for free speech on the web, this issue focuses on the prevention of monopolization and antitrust practices by internet service providers.
When they acted as a pass through for leaks and supported govt.transparency. Now its pretty clearly a partisan attack on dems with the min focus of profiting and keeping wikileaks generating cash (check out their store, which used to never be a thing, if you don't believe me).
The first set of large leaks wikileaks ever did were simply dumps. Now they spoonfeed their leaks, which they claim everyone has a right to know, at a peace that is most beneficial to them. Its clear their primary objective is no longer govt transparency, but their own profits.
I am thinking the same thing right now... maybe people will eventually get tired of the privacy invasions and start running an OS that doesn't spy on you
Just my opinion, but shouldn't an analytical company provide actual formal data. While using the data given you could approximate their st dev etc, it seems weird they would not do a real analysis, seeing as it's so simple :/