erklik

I think Google has it's place. However, I also think that an additional search engine like the one I described would be a very nice and useful tool. At least for me.

I wish I had that. I spent like 2 weeks installing a million different things, and configuring like 200 different files and even then, my build ran but not everything worked.

Weirdly the same is the case for reddit.

What I really want I guess is, a search engine, where i can provide you sites to index, and when I am searching, I only search through those sites. That's it.

Is it just /r/programmer? or many other programming related subreddits?

In general though, this is great. I would similarly love a solution where we could submit sites to be indexed. A way to have a search engine for all the websites I want specifically would be awesome. You could probably add some sort of popular filter on top of it so that only sites popular enough get indexed. I don't know. Just an idea.

I love the fact that it's accessible from the terminal. That's fantastic. Although, would be nice to have a very simple HTML front-end. Think very early Google or go very brutalistic.

Anyway, excited to hear about it.

Edit:

Doing the following gives me an Internal Server Error for some reason.

curl -G -H 'Accept: text/plain' --url https://dontbeevil.rip/search --data-urlencode 'q=Notes' {"message": "Internal server error"}

If it's a valid, public source, well, even if you don't know the source, if someone is willing to put their name to the news, maybe it's more valid.

Some of this is pretty on-point. 'child of alumni' is somewhat dumb standard. I guess part of it is looking at standards and ensuring they're based in rational, and logical ideas.

However, if the issue with the standard being good GPA is that it's not fair to someone who went to bad school. The issue isn't the standard, it's the school. A better attempt to increased enrollment is to focus on ensuring better schools are provided to those students.

> And what they look like is important because certain people experience life very differently depending on what they look like.

That's correct. However, it's not clear to me how lowering standards is good? It's simply lowering the quality of students overall. Again, the solution falls to actually improving the level of quality of education for the under-represented groups instead of lowering standards.

In general, this discrimination is the definition of racism. Replace Blacks with White, and replace Asians with Blacks and you can be pretty clear how similar it is to racism of the past.

Quoting a paragraph from the article with slight changes:

> Among other things, standardized testing requirements were eliminated, and subjective admission criteria were added in an effort to deny slots to African-Americans and boost enrollment among white Americans.

If I saw that in a newspaper, I would conclude that's some racist stuff right there. If I remember correctly, most of the world, including America, in general decided a while ago that this Racism thing is not good.

The US provides lots and lots of weapons to Saudi Arabia, who are artificially creating a famine in Yemen [3] and have used the US's provided weapons to deliberately attack MSF Hospitals [2].

There is no mass outrage. No trending tweets. No real pressure at all on the US administration for either of those things. Afghanistan was a thing for a few days, but eventually everyone started blaming the poor civilians instead.

Seems clear to me that you have to be a certain demographic to get sympathy from the Internet in the West.

1. https://www.news.com.au/world/middle-east/afghanistan-us-mil...

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine_in_Yemen_(2016%E2%80%93...

3. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2016/09/yemen-evidenc...

Facts are:

1. Patreon is a private company.

2. I don't think their policy around the whole funding military stuff has changed recently. If they changed the policy when this happened or to specifically target this. That would be quite terrible.

3. The page was against the rules of the company. It's perfectly reasonable for a company to remove a page against its rules. It's technically on the organizers, why did they create a page on a website that explicitly does not allow military funding.

I am guessing we wouldn't be this supportive of a private company funding the Iraqi Army fighting against the illegal occupation of their nation by the US.

I am not too aware of this account. How much money was moving through Patreon to the Ukrainians? Is it the majority of the weapons funding they needed?

Not for those of us who don't live in the US unfortunately.

Why can't it be? Does everything require a money motive? Is it impossible that people want to do something good?

The Crown

Bojack Horseman

Lupin

Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt

Russian Doll

Glow

Narcos

Sex Education

House Of Cards (although, this is less fun to watch now considering Kevin Spacey's real life actions but the show itself was and is quite good)

Dark

The Witcher

Daredevil

The Haunting of Hill House (similarly Midnight Mass and Haunting of Bly Manor)

All of these are award winning as well as just being incredibly good shows. I think Netflix just pumps out so much content. There's plenty of bad stuff, but there's also plenty of very very good stuff.

Does this exist? At least a methodology that doesn't mean I need to study the subject area deeply?

My point is that the difference between the approach from Google and Apple is that in one case (Google), we have a tech level blockage, it's not currently possible for Google to even do that.

On the other hand (Apple), the "blockage" is policy or "promise". That's far less reliable than the tech just not existing.

The massive difference being that they would scan photos on my device. Not on the cloud. On my local device. How is that people consider that better?

The important bit is that Google does not currently have any capability to scan stuff on my phone. This is good. It's my stuff. They have no right to look at my stuff.

Apple proposed to implement tech that could scan stuff on my device, with a promise that they'll only do it when I am uploading stuff. Wait a few years, and some pressure from Authorotarian Government/Corporate Overlords and now the promise is just a promise that they can be easily removed and we can scan all stuff to make sure you're not stealing "content"/spreading "propoganda".

the tech for this is essentially sci-fi though. We have no way of uploading the brain, nor "plugging it in" without ensuring bodily functions. Is Facebook gonna go into the aged care business, hiring nurses and doctors to take care of their customer's lives while they have a headset on for the rest of their life?

I then re-read it once more. I am now convinced that this doesn't mean anything. It's a vomit of words. Someone please help explain this to me.

Yet.

A few years later, [Insert gov agency here] will force Apple to scan all photos and compare hashes to material banned by the government.

This ability to scan photos on the device simply should not exist. If they only want to scan photos being uploaded, just scan them on the server itself. It really isn't that hard.

Apple has turned a steel barrier that's capability focused, into a policy barrier that can be changed by influencing people. That's simply much more insecure and much less privacy focused.

Why is that? I am not aware of Facebook's corporate structure so I am curious.

- Yes, this is a LMGTFY question, but I find that people can often provide a better answer, that's easier to understand especially when the question is more of a curiosity rather something I wish to find the answer of rapidly.

This is a nice summary.

It's less being studious, and more that being studious tends to be correlated with spending time indoors more. It's the spending time indoors that causes it apparently.

Firefox as a browser, especially dev tools, seems better in every day use than Chrome does. I am really not sure why they keep losing users. I do remember being massive performance issues in the past, but that's really not the case today (at least in my experience)

> To solve this problem I am building https://linklonk.com that cultivates trust as you rate content. When you upvote a link you connect stronger to the feed that posted it (which could be a blog's feed) and to other users that upvoted this link before you. When you downvote - your connections to those who upvoted become weaker.

> The strength of your connections to other feeds and users represents how useful their content recommendations have been to you in the past and they could be used as a measure of how likely their future recommendations will be worth your time (ie, trust that they won't waste your time).

> The content is ranked according to the connection weights - so you get information from the sources that have shown to be content curators for you.

> I did a Show HN recently for this project that has more details: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28405643

> [1] - like my comment here tries to draw your attention to my hobby project.

I find this so interesting. OP complains about people constantly trying to sell him something which is why he was turned off of blogs. And what happens? Someone tries to sell him something for his problem of too much selling.

Ah. What a world. Solution to too much selling is more selling.

> I guess I'm just in shock. Usually creating a new cool thing on the internets takes me days and stress.

Good on you OP. You made something and put it out there. That's already different from the vast majority of us who mostly just consume. Well done, you did pretty good. GraderJS looks interesting too. :)