jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
The explanation of the Full cipher suite format has some tiny mistakes for the explained case.

> Use GCM for the cipher mode
> Use SHA256 for message authentication (making sure messages haven't been tampered with)

GCM is an AEAD-Mode, it builts upon CTR-Mode, but also provides message authentication. SHA256 is used as a PRF (Pseudo Random Function) to generate key material based on the master secrect. See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5246 Section 5 for more information.
This is just a Bootstrap theme. Even the column classes are the same.
>The solution is not to discourage rich people from investing in their children, but to do a lot more to help clever kids who failed to pick posh parents.

This is quite right. It is astounding to think about the amount of intellectual capital that is being squandered by the current structures in place.

It is in our collective best interest to develop this resource as much as possible.

Perhaps a market based solution would be to institute an entrepreneurship-focused boarding school (and after that, maybe a genetic engineering focused nursery, call it X-Y-Combinator, say).
Don't point mutations cause proteins to fold differently? And thus causing the proteins to become globally different rather than locally different?
Old old Windows Forms had its own text rendering (and still has), but most controls now have a second code path that uses the system's text renderer, which got updated with better shaping, more scripts, etc., while GDI+ basically never got any updates. You can see that when there's a call to SetCompatibleTextRendering(false) in the code somewhere; then it's using GDI instead of GDI+.
I think any analysis of the dangers of AI need to consider the principles of evolution. Human intelligence is a product of humans evolving in a natural world, where individuals were selected for their ability to compete for resources in that world. This has produced many characteristics, one of which is violence, which has sometimes been necessary to secure those resources.

AI robots will probably not be intentionally violent against humans. AIs are also evolving, but in an artificial world. In this world AIs are competing for humans favor. If they do well, if we're happy with them, we grant them computing power and replicate them. This selects for very specialized AIs with very deterministic behavior. Nobody wants an AI with unpredictable behavior.

AIs that survive are the ones that are the most adapted to serving humans. The danger is not that the AI itself harms humans, but that humans wants to harm or exploit other humans through AI. There could be a danger in AIs developed by the military, but I'm not too worried because they'll most likely be extremely special purpose with multiple fail-safes. Nobody wants to develop an AI that could kill the ones developing/using it. I'm most worried about AIs developed for economic exploitation. It's what we're motivated to work on, it's the area where there's most development being done, so it's probably where we'll first see advanced AIs causing problems. Arguably we already have (algorithms used on social media platforms promoting disinformation)

The thought that AIs will somehow gain some kind of general intelligence where it'll find that the logical thing to do is to eliminate humans is a fantasy. We don't select for AIs with general intelligence, if there even is such a thing. Most likely we are overestimating our own intelligence. It's probably not as "general" as we like to think. We don't generally kill because it's the logical thing to do, but because of emotional reactions which are a product of our evolution.

The example of the paperclip maximizer is really dumb. Such an AI would not be selected for general intelligence, and there's no reason to think general intelligence will occur accidentally. Even if it somehow gained this magical general intelligence, the decision of whether to murder humans to secure metal resources, or work with them, is probably absolutely undecidable. Even the most intelligent AI imaginable could not consider all the factors. The default would be no action. An AI would not have emotions produced through natural evolution that it could use as heuristic to decide what to do here. Not a problem for us humans. We have a built-in drive to consider killing someone outside our group, even if there's no rational argument to do it.
This news is a shakedown for entire web hosting industry. Most small to medium companies are running this software. They are effectively destroying it by increasing prices...
Your best bet is saving those pages as PDFs and backup those.
> It seems to me that the Amish approach starts with prejudice and outright rejection

This statement seems extraordinary and contrary to their practice. They simply see everything through the lens of their extremist faith. I think they are nuts but I respect their approach.

For example, they often do have telephones. Many villages have one phone in a phone booth in the middle of the town. So everyone can see you use it. You can't hang out and impersonally communicate -- instead you stop by and visit in person. But if they need an ambulance, or to do a business deal with someone outside their community, they can.

They also will use some power tools, though they don't want them to be electric. I don't quite understand the reasoning, but whatever. Apparently there was a lot of experimentation, and not everybody chose the same solution.

They also let their teen agers leave the community and get drunk crash cars etc. Amazingly to me a majority decide to go back into the fold. Every adult has made a conscious choice to be observant.

In a small way many of use use the same process (though hopefully from a different starting point and with different parameters). I love my MBP but the app I run most is Emacs. I know what an IDE is but don't see the point. I laugh when I see reviews of iOS apps that are described as "visually stunning" -- typically they have a low information density and slow interface, which makes them unpleasant to me. This doesn't make me a luddite nor does it make IDE (for instance) fans nitwits -- we simply find different local optima in the possibility space.
I’d say it probably has something to do with the collapse in union membership, deregulation and growth of the finance sector, and capture of the political system by those who can afford billions of dollars worth of advertising, but it’s a complicated story. Are you suggesting that wages haven’t kept up with productivity because inflation has been consistently high since the US abolished the gold standard?
My book "Data is Beautiful" [1] is a practical book where each section takes you through creating a data visualisation in Python

[1] https://datacrayon.com/shop/product/data-is-beautiful/
Why they don't want to hear this ? Isn't it something the Dutch people should be very proud of ?
That seems like a false choice.
If Britain attempts this, the deal struck on goods with the EU will be unilaterally pulled. Any hope for agreement on financial services will always vaporise
Regarding SQLite's performance, some things I've found very useful:

Use WAL mode (writers don't block readers):

PRAGMA journal_mode = 'WAL'

Use memory as temporary storage:

PRAGMA temp_store = 2

Faster synchronization that still keeps the data safe:

PRAGMA synchronous = 1

Increase cache size (in this case to 64MB), the default is 2MB

PRAGMA cache_size = -64000

Lastly, use a modern version of SQLite. Many default installations come with versions from a few years ago. In Python for example, you can use pysqlite3[0] to get the latest SQLite without worrying about compiling it (and it also comes with excellent compilation defaults).

[0] https://github.com/coleifer/pysqlite3
I read lots of code on GitHub, so I got really excited when I saw github1s (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26083919), but was disappointed when I saw that search doesn’t work (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26085540). So I hacked together `git peek` on Tuesday night. It works with any git repository, but uses GitHub’s API to be faster when it can.
I don't want to enable further selfishness and vanity.
What should I take away from this?
Interesting idea.

The slideshow on the front page changes too quickly once you get to the results pages. It is hard to see what is returned since it is only up there a few seconds.

How about providing a text box to allow the engine to be tested from the web. I know it is a mobile app, but before installing it I'd like to see if it produces useful results to something I might ask.
In the case of this Ross, did he really need to cultivate relationships that required personal details leaking? From his story it doesn't seem much of the case. After some initial startup time, people were just winning to trust SR (the stupid ....). The hustle to sell some initial product looks to be the only exception, and yeah, with no risk you might have a hard time starting a business.

The ideas I've outlined would work for more than one person, though I'd be very hesitant to trust others, and you would need to find such candidates in the first place.

Hiring agents should have been taken as a given. You're paying someone a few thousand bucks, and you don't think they're going to sell out if someone comes along that has far more? SR should have been robust to malicious actors. DPR can keep the root level stuff to himself, while allowing his admins to have limited tools. Periodically review stuff.

I fail to see how organized crime would be an option for someone like Ross, wanting to start SR. So while that may be an option for some (a Mafia style threat profile is not something I'd likely be happy with) it's not really that viable for a random startup. I mean, here's another way to be immune from a lot of regulations: be really rich!

Also, when I say persona, I'm referring to the currently active one that you're using at the moment. Silk Road claimed to have been run by a line of these guys. Yet there was no real evidence of that, eh? If multiple personas would have been properly used, we'd see changes on the site, the staff would know, you be wouldn't have old documents, etc. That's what I mean by fully going into a persona. You might use one disposable persona to buy an order or two of bitcoins. Another to run a server. Etc. Anywhere you need to draw a line between one act d another.
When you start to reach to point where metalevel, evaluation, transformation, compilation all fit into your mind you feel even weirder.
Doesnt the ETF also open the door to institutional funds that are normally restricted to specific assets? Seems to me that is the biggest advantage of a bitcoin ETF as it will open the gates to more capital for bitcoin investments.
It definitely takes longer for calls to connect and I think it may drop calls more frequently when using it on a cell (although it has improved greatly in that regard from about a year ago). I recently started using it through gmail and have been told the calls sound much better. Not sure what it all means.
Pff, why should common sense get in the way of some good bitching about tax dollars?

I'm sick of my tax dollars paying for their computers, they should have to type stuff up themselves in triplicate.
Alternately, they may be concerned about having pictures of naked children stored on the hard drive.

Or both!
Because there are no terrorists who can afford their own planes, clearly.
If you're developing gems for distribution, it quickly becomes one.
The main advantage is that HHVM is available now, PHPNG won't be stable until later this year at best. For my code base HHVM isn't compatible so we're eagerly awaiting the stable release of NG but damned if we didn't try to upgrade to HHVM.
The article title probably promised too much but if Meerkat's downfall did take any “tech journalism” with it, it would be good riddance. I wonder what the consequences of investors not doing their due diligence will be...
Here are a few reasons:

1) its hard to do well and still be profitable.

2) It would require a massive internal shift, The security tools internally for doing things like IAMs are far to primitive. It would take years to re-tool, stopping momentum on products that make money

3) its not where Zuckerberg see facebook in the future. That future is AR/VR.

Google stumbled with AR, It's structure means that any AR will eat at the mobile buisness.

Apple might make a splash, but its unlikely that they will be first to market.

Which leaves a whole segment for facebook to dominate, if it makes a decent product, and tackles it's image.
There are grades of grey.
Bohmian mechanics [1] is a deterministic interpretation of QM that's empirically equivalent to traditional quantum theory. However, it requires non-locality (instantaneous action across vast distances).

From a recent paper [2]:

"Bohmian mechanics reproduces all statistical predictions of quantum mechanics, which ensures that entanglement cannot be used for superluminal signaling. However, individual Bohmian particles can experience superluminal inﬂuences."

This paper [3] referenced in the Ars Technica article shows that finite superluminal velocities (c < v < inf) can be exploited to achieve superluminal signalling.

Very interesting result. I assume BM is still consistent with this. The paper does mention BM:

"Bohmian mechanics and the collapse theory of Ghirardi, Rimini, and Weber [...] reproduce all tested quantum predictions, [however] they violate the principle of continuity mentioned above (otherwise they would not be compatible with no-signalling as our results imply)."

The principle of continuity described in the paper:

"In both cases, we expect the chain of events to satisfy a principle of continuity: that is, the idea that the physical carriers of causal influences propagate continuously through space."

"Clearly, one may ask whether infinite speed is a necessary ingredient to account for the correlations observed in Nature or whether a fi nite speed v, recovering a principle of continuity, is suffi cient."

Actions can happen instantaneously under BM ("infinite speed"), so BM is still consistent with QM and doesn't allow FTL communication.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Broglie%E2%80%93Bohm_theory

[2] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1207.2794.pdf

[3] http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphys...
where cam i download the leaked data?
In fairness, I think that while you mention security as a main source of this, you have it a bit out of order. Security pressures and expectations are substantially higher these days. Applications written thirty years ago faced far fewer attacks, and with generally less consequence for failure, than they do today. Probably by orders of magnitude though that would be hard to actually measure.

Increased patching to address this reality seems unavoidable, at least until we understand how to produce truly secure software on the first try far better than we currently do.
>Such a badly-written, mean-spirited article.

The same attributes applies to most of current "hollier than thou" cancel articles. The principle of charity is totally lost, anything that an idiot can misread as offensive is labeled as so, and offensiveness itself is potrtrayed as the biggest crime.

The NYT is worse a rag than the National Enquirer, because at least the second is not perceived as some objective and quality source (and doesn't influence politics, or help setup trillion dollar wars and mass carnage).
I believe you can only perform a citizens arrest in the case of felonies, not misdemeanors.
Well, for example, I got a twinge of nerves on reading the following "red flag":

> Only focuses on a single group (e.g. women) to the exclusion of other forms of diversity

That is, if you make the mistake of going in too much depth on one particular aspect, then this is a red flag. I could easily imagine myself doing this simply because I have a tendency to answer interview questions depth-first rather than breadth-first.

I was also a bit terrified of "when I ask this question of an underrepresented candidate…". Some forms of group identity are outwardly visible; some are not. The author notes how sensitive this subject is, and then also predicates a fifth of the "discussion" section on the assumption that they can reliably make this judgement.

And on this "red flag":

> Indicates distrust of workplace inclusivity measures like codes of conduct, anti-harassment training, etc.

There was a good while when I distrusted all corporate training, simply because the only forms of active corporate training I had been exposed to were these box-checking legal cover-your-arse arrangements. If you've only experienced that kind of training, then of course you have a generalised distrust of it.

If you give me a list of criteria on which you are judging me, I will certainly be able to find ways in which I violate those criteria, no matter what the criteria are. (It's exactly the same problem as odd-one-out questions: there's always a way to make something the odd one out, so there's no right answer.) Hence the landmines: you can't know in advance which of those violations are actually meaningful to the interviewer.
That’s true on the surface, but there was a ~300 year gap between 1472 and 1763. By 1600 contact was widespread which should have been plenty of time to spread disease. https://www.oregonhistoryproject.org/articles/historical-rec...

So, native populations should have had time to develop immunity to European diseases. At even 2.5% annual population growth rate a population recovers from a 90% population drop in under 100 years.

https://www.oregonhistoryproject.org/articles/historical-rec...

Thus either disease was vastly more devastating than just 90%, genocide by Europeans was very intentional across generarions, or some other effect was in play.
I think your pain points with Julia are real, but they don’t bother me too much. I mostly use Lisp languages, enjoy but am not so good with Haskell, so I am very flexible in syntax. I shared the dislike for 1 based indexing, but when I recently started evaluating Wolfram/One and Language, my limited experience with Julia and Octave made Wolfram’s use of 1 based indexing OK.

I love experimenting with programming languages but I don’t like recommending languages just as I don’t like recommending movies: I figure that everyone has their own tastes, and that is a good thing.
Exactly. See also: Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/65213-briefly-stated-the-ge...
Thanks a lot for the input
Not quite this, but I think the enforced discipline of parenthood has made me a better worker overall. My ability to procrastinate hasn’t been eliminated, but every moment available to work feels more precious so I’m much better about just jumping in and getting things done. I also have hard stops and self imposed deadlines like I didn’t before, so I’m more efficient in “just getting things done.”
So you presume that there is a fixed amount of development work to be done at companies and by using open source software for free they are hiring less people?
When working on an existing system, I find it's a good sign if your SLOC/day count goes negative for a while.
> People hoard for the same reason they overeat.

Personally, when I overeat it tends to be because the food just tastes too good and overwhelms my self control. It used to be the same with stuff ("that will be awesome, too!"). I've managed some success on both sides, but the idea that over-consumption is driven by scarcity only applies to a subset of the population.
It's explicitly labeled a parable: "a simple story used to illustrate a lesson." It's not meant to be literally true. The second programmer's inexperience is just another reason why his boss judges his work to obviously have been easy.
Any feedback or suggestions welcome
Like George Hotz, who at 17 removed the SIM lock on the iPhone and a few years later got sued by Sony for breaking security on the PlayStation 3.
The owner of Gumroad is already rich, so competition doesn't matter so much anymore.
The parent comment didn't say they couldn't, it said they shouldn't.
It's zero-rating, which is a loophole to go around most net neutrality laws. Governments would have to patch that loophole or enforce a stricter interpretation of net neutrality laws, but then everybody would hate them because they'd be banning free stuff.
If that's the case, where is all the money going? How can we reconcile increasing supply without budging inflation?
You can disapprove of something without kicking its front door in.
Sure you can, it's just not automagic (because your messages aren't stored on some external server, like with other apps). You just create a backup file, copy it to the new device, and restore -- I've moved my history to its third phone now without issues.
They are convinced that Trump is the river, but I fear he was the dam. I hope I'm wrong.
The end result is the same, but the mechanisms that create and persist that phenomenon are now a billion dollar industry driven by very smart people with shareholders that they answer to. The result is that the effectiveness and pertinacity of these creations far outstrip anything ever seen before in human history.
Court filings that have been released show that SolarCity was approaching bankruptcy, and that Musk faked the solar roof presentation to sell the deal to Tesla shareholders. The homes shown at the event were non functional.
> They care about features.

This I certainly don't agree. Telegram would have been the most popular app in India if this was true. It is only recently that WA has come close and slightly more in some cases.
> Notably, during the status quo, postal mail - the main alternative that avoided middle-men - faced very little censorship.

You might want to double-check your history there.

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_censorship#American_Civ...

https://www.archives.gov/research/holocaust/finding-aid/civi...
This article seems off to me. It seems like perhaps the author has reversed the fragmentation issue:

Quote:
"Peters wrote that the fragmentation will also lead to slower rollout across the devices than Netflix would have liked:

“Unfortunately, this is a much slower approach and leads to a fragmented experience on Android, in which some handsets will have access to Netflix and others won’t.""

Doesn't the above say that lack of generalized DRM (a feature that doesn't exist in Android at all) will lead to fragmentation, not fragmentation will lead to more fragmentation?

I understand that some devices will have netflix and some won't, but isn't this more because Google decided against providing a system for DRM and less about there being different types of devices on the market?
Plus, it's most likely to get users engaged as your app sits there in their apps list
christopher@kaggregate.com <- msn/email, thanks!
I saw a documentary where they used this same question. The filmmakers were interviewing children, and universally the children said it was bad to steal. The interviewers asked the same children the same question each year as they grew older and went through puberty. As they went through puberty the children began to see the morality at work in the question, should you steal or let someone die? With all the children, they began to question their beliefs on the right choice in the scenario. They all thought the stealing was a necessary evil and was justifiable compared to letting the wife die. It was fascinating to watch the kids go from a rote "stealing is bad" evolve to understand the nuance.

tl;dr kids see things in black/white, while teens start seeing things with shades of gray too.