jdoliner

39 ms·

361.
by jdoliner 9y ago
We do: http://docs.pachyderm.io/en/latest/deployment/on_premises.ht... Hopefully that should work for you. Deploying on prem can mean a lot of different things so some paths will work better than others. The
362.
by jdoliner 9y ago
Hey lobster_johnson, Pachyderm CEO here. Thanks for the shout out and we're glad you feel Pachyderm is promising for these use cases. I just wanted to clarify / respond to a few things. > no streaming yet, as far as I know Pach
363.
by jdoliner 9y ago
It's amazing how quickly this goes from tolerating someone who says disparaging things about gay people, to emboldening those people, to actual violence to the conclusion that Sam's essay is DANGEROUS. It's the thinnest of ar
364.
by jdoliner 9y ago
That wasn't who I had in mind, but thanks for sharing that example. I think the guy I'm thinking of is at Cornell and still alive. He also might actually be in CS instead of Math. I tried googling it but, unfortunately, "math
365.
by jdoliner 9y ago
Short answer: No, there's nothing new here that can inform better human learning. Longer answer: The concept of self-play isn't new in any sense. All chess players use this technique to some degree. None use only this technique. T
366.
by jdoliner 9y ago
I'm saying people will be less likely to care that repealing net neutrality will hurt them if they feel like they're already experiencing the ill effects while it's law.
367.
by jdoliner 9y ago
Hopefully you can see how "this will probably only make the problem worse" doesn't quite stir people's stumps the way "this will create a new problem that we've worked very hard to avoid up until this point.&qu
368.
by jdoliner 9y ago
> The app stores are monopolies. The FTC absolutely should be slapping them for half the stuff they're doing. > There is no need to regulate their content Is there or isn't there a need to regulate them?
369.
by jdoliner 9y ago
But all of the supposed goals of net neutrality, competition, everyone having a voice, etc. seem to be impinged at the hosting / domain layer. So if the justification for net neutrality is that we might lose those things... and people
370.
by jdoliner 9y ago
> And that isn't what network neutrality is anyway. Network neutrality doesn't regulate content. It says nothing about what anyone can print, it just says that everyone can buy ink on the same terms. What do you make of the cas
371.
by jdoliner 9y ago
> For example, the claim that there's "nothing illegal" about it, which is factually wrong as lots of the content on Daily Stormer would easily break a couple of German laws This isn't an argument that an American ISP
372.
by jdoliner 9y ago
You'd be amazed how many of the accused said things very similar to what you're saying, right up until the point when they themselves were accused. It's not simple at all, people who claim it is are missing a great deal of nu
373.
by jdoliner 9y ago
If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through th
374.
Twitter removes verified checkmarks from several white supremacists’ profiles(techcrunch.com)
5 points by jdoliner 9y ago|1 comments
375.
by jdoliner 9y ago
> Those of us that grew up poor or lower middle class will continue believing he grew up privileged as fuck. And what does that mean exactly? If someone accuses him of racism then they must be right because he's too privileged to ha
376.
by jdoliner 9y ago
Unfortunately, you may be in the wrong journalistic era for those.
377.
by jdoliner 9y ago
I did read that actually, there's nothing in there that really screams a non-average upbringing to me. Maybe above average in terms of wealth... but not ridiculously so.
378.
by jdoliner 9y ago
How do you know Elon Musk has never had to deal with racism and has no empathy for the experience of an average person? My understanding is that he grew up as a fairly average person in South Africa.
379.
by jdoliner 9y ago
The rags to riches dream was always a fairy tale, at least from a statistical perspective. It was always the exception to the rule.
380.
by jdoliner 9y ago
Because that's the globalist answer to everything. Find some organization that you feel is responsible for fixing some moral failing you perceive in the world. Lobby them, claiming that they are responsible for the moral failing and im
381.
by jdoliner 9y ago
The US certainly does spread propaganda to the rest of the world. Voice of America [0] has historical been the main vehicle for this. They also seem to have pioneered a lot of the internet based methods that are being used now with their co
382.
by jdoliner 9y ago
It's never been this effectively targeted at The US. US meddling has been much more effective than this, and the tactics much more extreme. It's also not exactly difficult to uncover, Facebook is telling us exactly what they did.
383.
by jdoliner 9y ago
Yeah, even if they completely corrupt our political systems we can sleep well at night knowing that we've always taken the high ground on things like this.
384.
by jdoliner 9y ago
It's almost hard not to make that joke, horizon.io just lends itself to that so readily.
385.
by jdoliner 9y ago
> The first amendment only extends to government laws. This isn't true. SCOTUS has decided [0] that denying someone access to social media can be considered an infringement of the 1st amendment. Salient quote from the decision: &quo
386.
by jdoliner 9y ago
Consequences? For a social network that may have hosted content that may have convinced people to vote for a candidate you don't like? What sorts of consequences do you have in mind here? And where exactly do you draw the line between
387.
by jdoliner 9y ago
> Why has free speech fallen out of favour with SV? Because Silicon Valley has made its foray into politics. I guess it started all the way back with the first Obama campaign when Google cozied up with him as a candidate. It seemed innoc
388.
by jdoliner 9y ago
Oh I'm sure they are indeed actually biased, that's how bias works. They're not thinking: "this will better allow us to get away with presenting our political angle as objective truth" they're thinking "th
389.
by jdoliner 9y ago
Judging by these guidelines I see no evidence that NYT actually wants their staff to be unbiased. Only to appear unbiased. This, I presume, is because it allows them to present biased opinions as objective truths. An art which the NYT has p
390.
by jdoliner 9y ago
Things you never saw at all could be made public too. How would you prove them wrong? And would it even matter if you did? It seems like a fools errand to worry about this, even if you do everything right you can still get just as screwed.

More ›