Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30216783

Points: 10

# Comments: 2

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.

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.

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?

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.

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).

https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/52405/the-apl-orchard/

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.

BQN https://mlochbaum.github.io/BQN/

ngn/k https://git.sr.ht/~ngn/k/tree/master/item/readme.txt (Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22009241)

aplette, which is a modernization of Ken Thompson's APL (with a LOT of projects in between them; Ken's APL interpreter -> ? -> OpenAPL -> aplette) https://github.com/gregfjohnson/aplette (Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21740536)

I'd also recommend checking out J, which isn't a recent development, but has the best syntax out of all array languages, has the best development environments, is the easiest to learn (it has a way to learn it built into the language itself!), and is the only one that treats making GUIs as a first-class feature (and, also, critically, is not proprietary, unlike Dyalog):

https://jsoftware.com (Has so many previous discussions I just recommend using HN search to find them.)

The chat is biased in favor of Dyalog APL, but a lot of the modern additions Dyalog has made to the language make it (in my opinion) worse as a notation, so ideally don't let it turn you off of the concept of array languages entirely if Dyalog doesn't "click" with you.

If you haven't already, you should also check out Notation as a Tool of Thought, a paper so good it won Iverson the Turing Award:

https://www.eecg.utoronto.ca/~jzhu/csc326/readings/iverson.p...

http://beyondloom.com/blog/index.html

http://beyondloom.com/things/index.html

http://beyondloom.com/games/index.html

http://beyondloom.com/comic/page0.html

('RodgerTheGreat on HN)

k is really fast. Half of the things on the Shakti mailing list are just Arthur getting really excited about how significantly he's beating x or y or z in performance and giving numbers for it. `grep`ping it now I see 40 in half a year that explicitly contain the word "benchmark," though not all of these are comparing to other things (some are just comparing to different k releases), and there are more comparisons without that word.

Arthur doesn't work at Kx anymore, by the way. He's at Shakti now. Shakti has a different (but still draconian/non-(A)GPL) license. It probably doesn't have the benchmark clause, but I don't care enough to check (I prefer J to k and don't have a proprietary k on my system).

The idea that privacy can be violated like this solely because random Facebook users are interested in it and on the off-chance that family he hadn't interacted with in years might find some abstract comfort despite not being close at all is just incredibly bizarre.

Answer: They don't.

Privacy should be respected, even in death. Especially in a case like this.