Readit Newskick commented on Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees vice.com/en/article/3anw9... · Posted by u/fireball_blaze
I'm genuinely not sure if this is sarcasm or not. Teen Vogue is certainly surprisingly serious, but my standard for "solid journalism" involves some attempt at neutrality and objectivity as opposed to hyper-partisan ideology marketed to children. To be quite clear, the overall modern media landscape is highly partisan and sensationalist; Teen Vogue mostly only stands out in that they're marketing their divisive ideology directly to children.
EDIT: This is unsurprisingly attracting downvotes. I'm curious if people are objecting to the characterization of Teen Vogue as partisan and ideological or the implication that marketing divisive ideology to children is a social ill? Or perhaps that journalism should aspire toward the truth and not partisan advocacy?
Journalism was rarely feigning objectiveness: during the 1920s through the 1970s, some of the strongest voices in favor of labor were journalists. "Neutrality" is largely a construct, or meme, that has been pushed by Rupert Murdoch since he founded his "news" network. Naturally, his own properties are nowhere near objective, despite some people claiming WSJ magically escapes bias.
Everything is naturally biased, the only distinction is whether an entity is open about their bias. This goes for anything: whether it was the New York Times and FOX hawking for nearly every war during the 2000s, or it was Newsweek favoring MLK Jr. and Life describing his speeches with phrases like "demagogic slander" during the 1960s, everyone's naturally got an opinion. This doesn't stop applying when writing about a subject.
kick commented on An Interview with Sci-Hub’s Alexandra Elbakyan on the Delhi HC Case science.thewire.in/the-sc... · Posted by u/amrrs
No, they say that hackers "not only broke into their database; they changed the names and passwords of profiles" but they admittedly do not attribute that to the group.
>What's the harm in this? There's none! They're literally just requesting PDFs
Via stolen, cracked, or phished credentials, though. I'm not arguing against this, I wholeheartedly believe in the Guerrilla open access manifesto and its beliefs, and it is admittedly not proven to be Sci-hub, just a random attack.
No, they say that hackers "not only broke into their database; they changed the names and passwords of profiles" but they admittedly do not attribute that to the group.
You can't negate "They don't accuse Sci-Hub of actually doing anything!" with "They accused hackers of Doing Evil, but admittedly they don't attribute this to Sci-Hub."
Via stolen, cracked, or phished credentials, though. I'm not arguing against this, I wholeheartedly believe in the Guerrilla open access manifesto and its beliefs, and it is admittedly not proven to be Sci-hub, just a random attack.
So if there's no proof, and you'd agree with it even if there was, then why bother posting this awful article?
kick commented on An Interview with Sci-Hub’s Alexandra Elbakyan on the Delhi HC Case science.thewire.in/the-sc... · Posted by u/amrrs
I'm on the fence about Sci-hub. Every time I read about it, I remember this article about how they operate.
>Let me be clear: Sci-Hub is not just stealing PDFs. They’re phishing, they’re spamming, they’re hacking, they’re password-cracking, and basically doing anything to find personal credentials to get into academic institutions. While illegal access to published content is the most obvious target, this is just the tip of an iceberg concealing underlying efforts to steal multiple streams of personal and research data from the world’s academic institutions.
This might just be a hit piece by the same companies who are losing money, but it has some merit with proof of attacks changing passwords, etc. Real, tangible damage. I'm not sure this is what Aaron Swartz envisioned. I'm all for vigilante justice or whatever pirates use to justify it (seriously, I petitioned my local college to stop subscribing to them) but this is hardly the same thing.
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2018/09/18/guest-post-th...
That link is transparently pushing something, and what it's pushing definitely isn't "the truth."
The only thing, and I repeat: the only thing that absolutely ridiculous, fearmongering, slanderous article even says outright that they do, rather than just blatant speculation, is PDF downloading.
Then, over a weekend (when spikes in usage are less likely to come to the attention of publishers or library technical departments) they accessed 350 publisher websites and made 45,092 PDF requests.
What's the harm in this? There's none! They're literally just requesting PDFs. The article insinuates murder but doesn't even try to substantiate their claims of "Oh maybe they're doing something, just maybe, maybe maybe maybe they're doing something evil, yes indeed, maybe they are!"
They aren't even trying at this point.
kick commented on Rust: “Move fast and break things” as a moral imperative drewdevault.com/2021/02/0... · Posted by u/als0
Why would you need to bootstrap Rust on a T2 platform? You already have a rustc build for that platform, can't you just use it? It may be buggy yes, but if you have a built compiler you should already be a good deal of the way to having a working compiler since you can "just" run the tests and see which ones break. Descriptions of what actual problems you ran into would be greatly appreciated, especially since riscv64-musl isn't a target mentioned at all in https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/rustc/platform-support.htm... and I do want to know what makes it so hard to get a platform from T2 to T1.
I also resent the insults that I am blindly "towing the party line", I truly don't believe that with the market share POWER9 and RISCV have it is worth putting in the effort of supporting them unless you are a "true beliver" in them, in which case you can put the work in yourself if you want to. If this is unreasonably hard (which it does appear to be since you weren't able to make any progress in a week) it would be much better to hear what actually made it so hard instead of whining that the Rust devs won't support your esoteric platform for you.
Drew is an Alpine maintainer. Alpine, which you might know as probably the most-used server-side Linux distribution in the world right now, bootstraps everything in its repositories, just like every major Linux distribution on the planet.
Serious question, are people still using this language (APL) for anything serious? Or is it just a hobby language at this point. I notice that Dyalog sells commercial runtimes for about $2500 a year for Unix, so there must be someone.
Morten Kromberg (big guy at Dyalog; coincidentally, author of the post we're discussing) in "justifying" why Dyalog isn't libre, just a few days ago: There is little risk of the demise of Dyalog APL any time soon. Our customers run businesses that are based on Dyalog APL with a combined annual turnover in excess of a billion euros/dollars.
https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/52405?m=56860424#5...
There are a few other companies with proprietary APL implementations that are also getting by really well.
k, which is pretty similar, is even more of a money-maker than Dyalog APL, having been responsible for a company worth a billion or more (Kx) and an entirely different company that also seems to be doing pretty well.
J also is used somewhat commonly, though less, and its users seem to be doing more than well, too (my current employer and most of my previous employers have been J shops, and none of them have gone under yet. I think a couple of them had record-breaking years in 2020). J is also free, libre software, so instead of paying for a Dyalog or K license, you should really just use it (or ngn/k, if k is more your thing).
Dyalog clicks a lot more than J; "the best syntax"? "Easiest to learn"? Can you expand more on these positions?
And "a lot of the modern additions Dyalog has made to the language make it (in my opinion) worse as a notation" this one. I don't know when you mean modern but as a casual user, {} functions, trains, nest ⊆, rank adjustment ⍤ (like J), seem to make things more convenient?
"the best syntax"
Yes, absolutely. By a long shot. For starters, J can actually be parsed. (k can also be parsed, for what it's worth.)
"Easiest to learn"?
Spend ten minutes using J's built-in Labs feature. Or read J for C Programmers (also ships with the language), if you come from a non-array background. Iverson was able to teach this stuff to public school children in no time at all; modern array languages seem to deliberately make themselves obtuse to outside observers. APL was doomed to obscurity because the people making it decided to please existing customers rather than try and make it approachable.
I don't know when you mean modern
Pretty much every APL2 feature and everything that came after it that they didn't borrow from J.
While J has English control statements, they generally aren't used, but nearly every time I come across something written in Dyalog APL it's full of :If :EndIf and all sorts of atrocious English words which mock the ideal of a better notation than ALGOL.
Even the person Damore was inspired to write his manifesto because of (SlateStarCodex) admitted it was too far.
Biased reporting isn't new, it's always been universal, and it'll never go away. You just sound like you want more conservative outlets. Here's a tip: Turn on your local news. Local news in America is almost always owned by one of three conservative companies (Sinclair and Nextstar come to mind most immediately), and all of them have an extremely conservative bent.
That's not even getting into the bias of media on scientific issues. HIV/AIDS never got proper coverage, and the coverage it did get was usually outright wrong and hostile during the 1990s. Climate change? Completely debatable! A matter of emotion! They were still pushing that up until a few years ago. Encryption? Can be government-crackable and still secure! That's been a constant topic since the 1990s, too!
https://www.vox.com/2015/3/26/8296091/media-bias-race-crime
According to a report by the progressive research center Media Matters, New York City television stations give disproportionate coverage to crimes involving black suspects.
The Media Matters study found that between August 18 and December 13, 2014, the stations (WCBS, WNBC, WABC, and WNYW) used their late-night broadcasts to report on murder, theft, and assault cases in which African Americans were suspects at rates that far exceeded African-American arrest rates for those crimes.
There's always bias. Always will be bias. The above issue was even worse in the past.