jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
You are assuming that AI will magically appear in one hands only. We can prevent that, as developers we can make AI research open and provide AI tools to masses in order to keep "balance". If everyone had the same power, then it wouldn't be such big advantage anymore.
Yeah yeah, the UK influenced the EU so heavily it ended up choosing to leave.

I've already explained one way in which the EU is basically oriented towards the needs of France and Germany - the single market for services never really happened. It was promised and that promise was never fulfilled. Why? Because Germany and France don't export many services.

Even selling of goods and services online only started to be paid attention in 2015, decades after the single market for goods, and the EU has mostly made things worse for online sellers via things like its VAT rules, which are horrifically complex to implement. Basically you can't do it because it's so complex, so you have to get a dedicated third party company to process the VAT stuff for you, which imposes costs on everyone.

Meanwhile the only thing that came out of their supposed digital services market strategy was a highly controversial change to copyright law, the product of vast amounts of lobbying. In Germany it was so controversial it even led to a bomb threat!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_on_Copyright_in_the_...

Things that could actually make it easier to sell the sorts of services that the UK is strong in never even made it to the table. Instead there is a very vague set of general statements in the treaties that don't mean anything, leading to lots of very silly court cases, like when someone selling a laser tag game in Germany bought laser guns from the UK and residents took them to the EU courts, arguing that "human dignity" meant that this service should be restricted. And the courts agreed.

Really, who has time for this kind of stuff? The EU has time to standardise banana straightness (read my other post) and kettle power levels, but the basics of "can I open an entertainment business in another country without being shut down by bizarre legal arguments" isn't there.
Derailing the thread to the topic of Dosbox in general (as is tradition): on Android, ‘Magic Dosbox’ works quite nicely thanks to the feature of adding custom widgets on the screen, for keyboard or mouse keys and, in the paid version, combos. The app is freemium, but it's pretty cool and cheap so personally I'm not even bothered.

Also, Retroarch has a Dosbox core, and Retroarch with some cores works on the PS Vita handheld console, and as a result there's Dosbox on Vita. However, it's said to be quite a pain to set up for a particular game, with text configs. For jailbroken-PSP owners, Dosbox is apparently ported as a homebrew app. I'm vaguely looking forward to trying System Shock on Vita, but with my luck I'm not holding my breath.
This is very good. :-) The zooming user interface is a nice touch. It would work well for meetups where you can see lots of people and move from group to group by dragging the mouse.
Very true! I bet the RRIA is going to get right on filing a suit against that officer.
> that's what (I'm told) browser TLS implementations do.

Unlike "your code" and that of your co-worker who ever that might be, I can tell you exactly what browsers do and you're wrong, though I haven't any idea who (if anybody) "told" you that they check OCSP to "check the cert chain".

Chrome doesn't have OCSP fetching code. It uses CRLsets, controlled by Google, which I described previously.

Safari does do OCSP... if Apple's backend tells the client this certificate was revoked. Why then? Ask Apple, makes very little sense to me, but that's their policy. Again you'll need to liase with Apple HQ to figure out how to get their backend to report all these certificates revoked or nothing happens.

So in the modern world that leaves Firefox, which does have OCSP fetching code, but it's default off and they recommend you leave it that way. Why? Because it's privacy infringing. OCSP sends the CA information about which subscriber certificates you relied on recently. Why were you relying on the certificate for Porn Hub? Exactly.

--

> If a countersigned certificate is revoked by one signer, is it still safe to use? I hope your answer is 'no'.

There's no such thing as a "countersigned certificate" in X.509 thus PKIX and the Web PKI. There can be multiple CA certificates with the same subject, which is what we call a "cross signed" CA.

There's no reason you should treat a certificate differently based on the existence of other certificates with the same subject which have been revoked, and indeed the software you use does not (on the whole) treat them differently. It's likely that you've used such trust chains especially if you're an American because a public CA (not Let's Encrypt) signed the Federal Bridge CA mistakenly at one point, which implicitly imports this huge hierarchy of other signature chains, some of which are revoked.

> Why did they including both certs in the chain if everyone trusts the same CA?

I guess you're talking about the existence of R3 signed by DST Root CA X3 and R3 signed by ISRG Root X1. But those aren't a chain, and so they aren't "including both certs in the chain". They're two certificates for the same entity, and so there are two completely different chains offered by Let's Encrypt.
> It's about what you think because you made claims about how you think things should be.

That's not necessary fair because everyone else is calling for change here.

> Ideally, I feel it should be done by enabling greater competition, perhaps with a requirement for portable user identities, friends lists and reputations or interoperability between networks.

Except that you're just spreading your private information even further. At least if I post my private information to Facebook, it's on Facebook. I'm not worried that, as a feature, my friends are porting my information to other platforms.

> Then they would have competitive pressure to treat their users well and the government wouldn't need to micro-regulate little details.

I agree that competition would be better. In fact, I'd say that Facebook should have been prevented from buying Instragam, Whatapp, etc. But competitive pressure alone does not necessary require companies to treat users better. Facebook would still be the same with competition from these other companies.

> Just those that are in a powerful enough position to cause bigger problems, otherwise it would be disproportionately burdensome on small players or even hobbyists.

That's hard to judge. Just look at Whatapps -- they grew to millions of users with a team of less than dozen people. Are they a small player or a big player? You might end up with a lot of social networks right on the line of being big to avoid additional regulation.

Facebook, for it's part, has been very pro-regulation as they're big enough and profitable enough. This will further make it harder for smaller players to compete even if you limit the restrictions to large players.

> The fact that you want equal treatment for all companies, as well as other things you've said, suggests you're more of an idealist than a pragmatist.

No. But I think you can't have rules for "Facebook" because in 10 years the problem is going to be some other company in some other situation. And you have to be very careful of regulatory capture.
I wasn't disagreeing with your original comment or the intention behind it. 'angle' prbly wasn't the best choice of word on my part.
Yes I would. Based on the really, really crappy results that google gaves me out lately (I have actually quit using it), $12 a year seems more than reasonable (you have market of millions of users, charging $10 / month is ripoff). Under condition that it is not some ads company under disguise (like google), that they eliminate all SEO crap (i dont want those results anywhere near the 100th page of results) and ads from my results and serve me relevant content.

Instead of google I am aggregating multiple search engines and joining the results eliminating all that are not on most of them. I am losing anything special (like there is something "special" today) but at least I dont get bunch of stuff on google that just wastes my time.

Nextgrid: yes, exactly that. I want old results, I want old content, I want content that matches with my search words 100% instead of getting what google crappy algorithms think that I want. I dont want hipster crap that propagates next silver bullet (that is just a copy what we already had packed into SaaS).
Probably a "graduate trainee" who got a stern talking-to.
a racial discrimination law should be levied here, because now the action just occurred.

the laws are not pre-emptive.
segregation is already being practiced in schools. here's an example:

https://www.bwscampus.com/our-community/commitment-to-divers...
fear of missing out.

it is not a feature, it is psychological abuse that generates revenue.
Learning to exit, insert, and save the file is about as minimal a text editor skill set I can imagine. You should definitely start out by running through vimtutor a few times. The vim help is also really good. The author also provides a good list of links at the bottom of the article.
What works for me is having hobbies and activities that I'm enthusiastic about. So instead of looking forward to the weekend I'm only looking forward to end of the workday so that I can practice piano or exercise or go to an improv workshop. In my experience, passive things like watching TV/movies or listening to music don't count.

Of course a better solution would be, as you say, to do something more fulfilling during the day.
Gruber seems to make the assertion that a platform only has worth based on its exclusive "killer apps".

This is a straw man. Android's lack of much in the way of exclusive native software is novel among the few mainstream software platforms over the last few decades.

Maybe this state of affairs is interesting, and maybe it isn't — we're dealing with a small sample of comparisons, the web is an extraordinary leveler, and to the extent Android has a shared lineage with Linux and its developer community, exclusivity is an alien concept anyway.

But pointing out this historical anomaly isn't tantamount to claiming Android has no worth, as Gruber takes pains to mention. There's no need to assume a defensive crouch.
If you want your neighbors wifi you might as well go and live close to a college campus, all the free wifi anyone could ever want.

Other than that though cracking wpa probably isn't worth it if the network essid is something other than a default name.
A "Killer App" is by common definition one that is not available on other platforms and drives adoption of a particular platform so it can be used. If an app is available on both iPhone and Android, it's not going to drive purchase decisions one way or the other in the way a Killer App would.
This article is mistitled, it should be "Code monkeying is not fun". Programming is as fun as you make it, but what the article describes is not programming.

What makes programming fun is reuse; you only ever have to do something once. If all you do is move data around, display it, or glue modules together, you are not implementing your solutions abstractly enough.
From the standpoint of a developer who specializes in design, the problem is NOT (as the article states) "the designer doesn't know HTML" vs "the designer only knows HTML". The problem is people (programmers or not) who don't understand how design fits into the process, sequentially.

Cases in point are sites like 99designs and crowdSPRING that launch projects for "uncoded" web designs. My solution: http://www.hackeress.com

Yeah, the site is not finished yet. But it relates to this discussion.
As I remember at the time of the "last straw" .NET debacle, this Sri Lankan firm was supposed to be really good, speed obsessed C++ types. And they had real systems in production, as noted by others in this thread.
Worked just fine for me - posted screenshot here http://www.facebook.com/seanmalarkey
Reminds me of http://www.caspio.com/
No, I've been arguing from the beginning against your assertion that 'DVD ripping isn't mainstream because publishers deliberately introduce errors into DVD pressings'.

Furthermore, your definition of "mainstream" excludes software like: firefox, steam, WoW, itunes on windows, photoshop, etc. Give me a freaking break.
Does anyone know of any work being done to convert photographs/images/etc into pixel art?
Please don't do this here. Even if you're completely right, the container can't hold it. It will invariably degenerate to the same template as every other ideological/religious flamewar. That's just the way internet forums are, and on this one we're hoping to exercise different muscles.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Why would you need consent to track anonymous data from users, without sharing the data to 3rd parties? What's the difference between recording an event "clicked_purchase" and displaying the click event in a graphical way, as a recording or heatmap?
The modern corporate website:

* ethnically diverse happy people stock photos (80% of the page content)

* carousels and pages with vague two sentence statements and a link. Link leads to missions statements and values and maybe a short paragraph.

* detailed information about what the company sells hidden behind 3-4 clicks at minimum (can be omitted).
Especially at the possibilities of a lack of down time.
No. It's like when some some old farts try to tell you that 24fps is just great for movies. The reality is only that people are accustomed to the lower temporal quality of 24fps movies from childhood onward, and don't like the change to something better.
Most tutorials/instructions I read have you use "createuser" command from the system shell. But... you have to be able to switch to a system 'postgres' user first, which ... perhaps you don't have privileges to do, or need sudo access or whatnot.

If you can install postgres, connect to it directly with some sort of root identity, then immediately create users and databases (as is the case with pretty much every mysql walk-through I've ever seen), it's not a default.

https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/First_steps

"The default authentication mode is set to 'ident' which means a given Linux user xxx can only connect as the postgres user xxx."

This alone is a complicated/confusing thing, because it's mixing system accounts with the db server accounts/access - and none of that is obvious, and doesn't quite map to how other databases handle things. I've never had to have matching system account names for user access in MSSQL, for example.
Few people read more than generals. Few leads more than a handful of battles in their lifetime, and they better not repeat anyone else’s mistakes.

And most people, not only 4 of the 5 last US presidents, who decides important things about wars, have in the best case read about wars, rarely fought in any themselves.
In that case you can drop Signal too. https://www.coindesk.com/secure-messaging-app-signal-reporte...
All that implies is that the number of top 1% candidates remains constant. Of course it does. Some companies had more than they needed, but if you take luxury away from a man, he will seek it out because he is used to it.
> “Select ” will almost certainly be optimized away by the execution plan

What do you mean? Ask for all the columns, you're gonna get all the columns in a resultset. Only in a subquery could the planner know what is unused.

'select ' is _perhaps_ tolerable for creating a view--under the conditions that the database transforms the query into the unambiguous named columns at view creation time--and that's about it.
An interesting, though probably semi-insane, alternative.

What about having a tank on-board, that normally is filled with air, that, when you drop off the payload, gets filled with liquid air instead? It'd be power-hungry, but meh. I mean: liquid air has a density of ~0.87g/cm^3 - it's not so far off that of water.

Tank mass would kill you, but as you say, the actual lifting capacity is relatively cheap.
It's difficult for people to recognize that open offices exist for a reason, but they absolutely do. They are a systemic solution to communication, collaboration, and motivation problems. All three need different systemic solutions in a private office context, but those solutions would be more forced and less natural.

The open floor plan is also a huge cultural boon for that reason. The types of systems that enable communication, collaboration, and mutual motivation in a closed office are the ones that feel "old" and unnatural and corporate. Despite productivity decreases in day to day heads down work, open office collaboration feels very natural and genuine, and that has greater effects.

Plus, it turns out, most of the work in a company larger than a few dozen people is in that communication and collaboration space; not sitting at a desk typing.
GitHub https://github.com/tstack/lnav
But that is also fairly easily mitigated with methodologies like Scrum where you are frequently touching base with other team members.

Seriously, FUCK THAT SCRUM SHIT. A daily status meeting isn't that bad, but "you can only work on it if it's in the backlog" and "sprints" and backlog grooming meetings and this brand of aggressive micromanagement that has revived itself in the name of "Agile"... all of that nonsense needs to die in a taint fire.
> I don't need a faster iPhone, or more tech. I honestly don't see my life being any better for the last ten years worth of "growth" (much of which seems to have been pumping up asset prices).

I'd be careful not to confuse the limits of your imagination with the limits of reality.

I've seen this sentiment many times in many different ways and it has never been accurate. It's easy to feel like now is different and we've never been here before, but we have. The key isn't that you don't need a faster iPhone or faster computer, it's that you need them. There will always be another iPhone/computer, whatever that will be.
A very modern book burning.
> Securing external value to people is not a goal or responsibility of Bitcoin.

Fair enough, but then your comparison to physical gold is meaningless. Physical gold is generally used to store value, not to transfer it.

For that purpose, you have paper money (or paper gold such as futures) which is cheap to transfer.
It's interesting that Gab also banned him.
“I believe this event will be recorded as one of the great bubbles of financial history, right along with the South Sea bubble, 1929 and 2000,”
Jeremy Grantham, a co-founder of GMO
Very cool. I can tell you put a lot of work into this library, because the code does not seem to be generated as I would've expected. One thing that would be nice is if there was a version we could pull into a React project such that only the relevant effects/widgets have their code added to the bundle size. Webpack does handle dead code elimination automatically, so this could be leveraged. In most cases, I would probably only want one or two widgets.

The hamburger menu animations are genius.
> I think American's fetishize "free speech"

I find something deeply satisfying about the idea of someone generalizing 333-million people in one comment, using the word "fetishizing" to describe their view of a principle which has generally been regarded as essential to the vast majority of advances in human rights anywhere progress has been made, and while commenting thusly has done so all in the service of making the central point that it is they who overly-value free speech.

> Group b folks, such as myself, are not saying that we're concerned about dinner conversations. We're concerned about speech that is being amplified in a way where there's a civic responsibility to ensure that the harmful messages are not being amplified.

So public speech should be further limited, provided La Résistance is still permitted to speak freely as we enter an era with an ever-increasing number of state-aligned location-aware microphones in homes, workplaces, vehicles, pockets and (on) wrists?

What could possibly go wrong in that scenario?
> encouraging people to join a BLM protest that ended in violence.

There's a difference between encouraging joining a peaceful protest, and having tweeted for weeks about 6th of January going to be big, getting the crowd mad by telling them for 70 minutes how they've been defrauded, and then telling them where to go and what to do:

"So we're going to, we're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, I love Pennsylvania Avenue, and we're going to the Capitol and we're going to try and give... The Democrats are hopeless, They're never voting for anything, not even one vote. But we're going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones, because the strong ones don't need any of our help, we're going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country."

Of course he didn't explicitly say "Go there and break the windows, beat some cops up and threaten our lawmakers with violence", but geez, he basically said "let's intimidate them".

Yeah yeah, of course you Trump defender are going to say "He didn't say anything bad, it's not his fault that his followers interpreted things differently...".
> Is there a proper answer for someone like me?

Honestly, I don't think there is one. The problem with A is that it will lead to violence, anarchy, or brutal dictatorship if left completely unchecked and certain groups start to counter (verbal) arguments with death threats and violence.

There is a school of thought that says that a free society has to accept this and basically live with the fact that it's constantly in danger due to this.

But even this school of thought has one fatal flaw - its proponents lacked the information that we have now. Social media enabled psychological mechanisms that prior to its inception and widespread use were really hard to trigger.

In the 20th century, mobilising the masses was hard work and required a lot of resources (printing was expensive, organising large rallies to reach many people was expensive and dangerous, ...)

Today, everybody can - even without owning a smartphone or a computer or having internet access - reach literally billions via social media (e.g. by using an internet café). A single Facebook post or Whatsapp message can lead to riots and mobs that kill people [1].

These are means of communications and psychological effects that are simply unprecedented in human history. We opened Pandora's Box without even realising it.

When the US constitution was written, no one had social media in mind when they wrote about free speech. The very concept that a single man could within the blink of an eye spread their message to half of mankind, unchecked, without any immediate consequences, completely anonymously was just unthinkable.

The amplifying effect of digital echo chambers that suppress dissenting thought and nip constructive discourse in the bud, was yet unknown. FOMO and social media addiction didn't even enter the scientific community until just five or so years ago.

It's a really complex and difficult problem and I would love to see some constructive discussion about what to do with it (especially in the mainstream media) - preferably without reducing it to an unfruitful us-vs-them.

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/02/21/how-misin...
HN is hugging itself to death.
Wow, great article thanks for sharing.
And after you read the book do a simple toy project to try it out.
Started coding in 1987. Have no idea what I’m doing. Regularly panic about how little I must know. Can’t figure out if people giving advice and writing books are genuinely a lot better than me, or just more confident.