Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | chrononaut's commentslogin

Green users are recently created accounts.

A lot of these old services used the email address as the fixed user identifier making it much less likely (certainly for those bucket of services) that he'd have a user-facing option of changing it.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect

> Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.

> In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.

> That is the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. I'd point out it does not operate in other arenas of life. In ordinary life, if somebody consistently exaggerates or lies to you, you soon discount everything they say. In court, there is the legal doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, which means untruthful in one part, untruthful in all. But when it comes to the media, we believe against evidence that it is probably worth our time to read other parts of the paper. When, in fact, it almost certainly isn't. The only possible explanation for our behavior is amnesia.

Surprised this hasn't been posted within a comment yet :)


> No, [journalists] know what they are doing ... Carefully calibrated, highly-selective use of (often, quite awkward) linguistic constructs does not happen unconsciously, it is a deliberate, knowing choice.

The incredible vast majority of people in the world are acting in good faith. The way you are framing this is that nearly all journalists are acting in bad faith, which makes me believe the arguments of the parent ("The journalists don't think they're writing these stories to amplify the police narrative") more so than the argument you're making here.


> The incredible vast majority of people in the world are acting in good faith.

Maybe, maybe not. It is also true that the incredible vast majority of people in the world aren’t corporate journalists, also.

> The way you are framing this is that nearly all journalists are acting in bad faith

Nearly all American corporate media has a conscious, top-down policy starting with the owners and editorial board to favor certain institutions, which is enforced by hiring, firing, promotions, and assignments of staff. The specific beneficiaries of this vary somewhat between outlet and outlet and over time, but both American police broadly and State of Israel are common beneficiaries across most outlets.

Journalists either comply are they aren’t journalists in the corporate media covering the issues to which these biases are relevant for long. Corporate media journalists aren’t independent actors.


Chomksy to Marr:

"...I'm sure you believe everything you're saying, but ... if you believed something different, you wouldn't be sitting where you're sitting."

https://youtu.be/GjENnyQupow?t=597&feature=shared


>The incredible vast majority of people in the world are acting in good faith.

this a very westerner perspective on society. Ask an Eastern European (like myself) how the vast majority of people are really acting.


Can you elaborate?


How well has that worked for East Europe?


Really well, thanks for asking


> The incredible vast majority of people in the world are acting in good faith.

We have fundamentally different priors.


Which areas or circumstances are you observing otherwise?


I see routine bad faith in:

- politicians of both parties (eg, speaking disingenously on issues of relevance to their corporate sponsors)

- corporations

- judges, including in the Supreme Court, who abandon espoused judicial philosophies the moment they conflict with political expediency

- government administrators, much more so with Trump's appointments

- media organizations (The self-censorship of coverage around Gaza has been eye-opening.)


The problem is that it is essentially impossible for a journalist to exist in the western world and not have heard of the criticism about how cops' actions get reported.

The term 'past exonerative tense' is dated to 1991.'"Mistakes were made" was popularized by Nixon.

To continue pulling this nonsense is wilful ignorance on the journalists' part, and effectively equivalent to bad faith.


The N900. The best mobile device I've ever owned.


Just a note for readers that the Jolla C2 cellular modem only supports European bands, so if you're in the US you're out of luck on that front until they release a new model.


Jolla is trying to release a new model in 2026: https://forum.sailfishos.org/t/next-gen-jolla-phone/23882

If there's enough interest in US, then they may release it there, too.


Oh... I somehow missed this reading for 15 minutes through the site. Thank you!


Couldn't you make that argument for any law in any society?


Sure, which is why the value of such a law should be judged based on how well it's enforced, and not merely how often it's espoused.


As someone who doesn't speak Swedish, what makes this particular passage interesting, and what is it about the Norrköping dialect makes it interesting?

(I have attempted to study Swedish briefly, but I feel like I need to do more sustain discovery of content to consume in order to keep me engaged long term)


I'm going to make a guess.

I suspect the question is, will the translation to English convey the regional dialectal nuances of the original Swedish?

Decades ago I read one of Douglas Hofstadter's writings about Gorbachev's accent. (As least, I think it was Hofstader. He wrote a lot about issues of what it means to translate.)

Gorbachev had a distinct southern Russian accent, which affected how Russians viewed him.

"Gorbachev’s southern speech is held against him." - https://time.com/archive/6732598/mikhail-gorbachev-3/

More strongly, one Redditor writes "Gorbachev couldn't fucking pronounce Azerbaijan for a living, he sounded like a self-important moralistic buffoon." - https://www.reddit.com/r/AskARussian/comments/tw3zlm/what_do...

However, Americans mostly heard Gorbachev through translation.

Should the translator use General American English? Or use a US Southern accent? Perhaps a Foghorn Leghorn accent?

When you watch a Russian movie in English, do you expect English with a Russian accent (often fake), like in The Hunt For Red October? Or do you expect to hear people talking with strong regional US accents, so characters from Saint Petersburg might have, I dunno, a Chicago accent?

We see this in Peter Jackson's movie interpretation of "The Lord of the Rings", where the actors used regional English accents to portray the social and economic standing of characters who spoke Westron.

Based on what I read about this AI-assisted translation, they are using the original actors but speaking English, which means the dialectal nuances will not be interpretable by non-Swedish viewers.


Models need a large set of training data to work properly and dialects are usually underrepresented in the training data.


The National Library and public service television has done some work in this area.

You can find models here:

https://huggingface.co/KBLab

More information in swedish about the process here:

https://www.kb.se/samverkan-och-utveckling/nytt-fran-kb/nyhe...


Given that the tiles along parts of the perimeter are intact, I imagine the tiles might've shattered in many small pieces when the roof collapsed during the eruption, and they didn't want to just leave them there during the excavation


Define "burner phone" in this context?


Phones that come with low cost prepaid no contract plans, and are boxed to sell from a display rack in a department store, but can also be purchased online. “Burner” because you can set them up with no personal details- popular for criminals, teenagers, etc.

I honestly don’t understand why anyone would not use prepaid plans- I use visible for example, and it has full unlimited data on the Verizon network for $25/mo with an iphone that cost me under $200. It doesn’t seem in any way inferior to a high priced contract plan to me.


I think your definition is a little different from what others are thinking. I think of a burner as an alternate phone you can toss (burn) at a moment’s notice. For that, even the iphone se you described would be pretty expensive.

This isn’t to say you are wrong. Just that some of us are thinking something different when we see “burner phone”.


I always thought that (as well as the things you said) the word burner means it is cheap enough to discard (burn) after a single use.


But you can still play DRM content on them?


Yes, they're regular iphones, not different in any way.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: