skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You can do that in linux by bind mounting a folder to itself with the more secure options. I have a couple systems where I do this to have directories noexec, nosuid, etc. Kinda hackish but useful.
VMware Workstation 12 Pro Crack and Serial Key Download
Clean, beautiful
I posted on another comment about quotes and may as well do so here: don't trust a journalistic quote to be a verbatim representation.

Charitably, he might be saying that he long claimed markets were overvalued. Only an idiot would claim that markets were constantly overvalued by 50% while fluctuating all the time.

Unless you have a verbatim transcript, it's best not to assume that a stupid-sounding quote was said literally as quoted.
These two happen to be accomplished experts known by most people in the security community. That's why it's news. Uber almost certainly has many, many more engineers working on security.
Now I'm wondering why it never showed up for me. The fact that I use an HTTPS connection for google? The long periods I've gone with javascript disabled when the option to disable on-the-fly updates as I typed my search queries didn't work? Different tech stacks than what Google is looking for?
It's not the same because the restrictions aren't in effect at the start of the program until the tame call is made.
This has been asked/answered before. check this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8919343
Hahaha - i also have been half-expecting something weird involving 2 naked ladies...
> I was under the impression that compiler optimisation often removed any NULL checks anyway

Goodness.

No, you are misunderstanding the example. The optimizer did not introduce a bug by removing a NULL check. The code had a bug because it dereferenced the pointer before checking for NULL.
My dad is getting old, and whenever we have to take the stairs with him, I definitely fear for his life.

I'm sure more people die taking stairs than do die taking elevators. The elevator is always the safer option. Unless there is a fire...and even then it's a toss up if you are elderly or have mobility problems.
> In some cases, bounds checking doesn't make sense, e.g. in video games running on consoles.

As if it couldn't be used to exploit and pirate the games, get extra lifes, buy in-game items without paying, automate bots...

"Many years later we asked our customers whether they wished us to provide an option to switch off these checks in the interests of efficiency on production runs. Unanimously, they urged us not to--they already knew how frequently subscript errors occur on production runs where failure to detect them could be disastrous. I note with fear and horror that even in 1980, language designers and users have not learned this lesson. In any respectable branch of engineering, failure to observe such elementary precautions would have long been against the law."

- C.A.R Hoare Turing Award speech, 1980
I am new on HN, I will take care of this. Thanks gus_massa for alert.
Bitcoin: Thoughts from Russia on the block size situation and Blockstream
..invokes the state secrets privilege to refuse to hand over the evidence, not the more kafkaesque problem of being unable to demonstrate standing because you lack standing

Your claim that the either approach is less "kafkaesque" or less Orwellian seems without merit and deplorable.
> NPM and RubyGems are casualties of people seeking
> open source fame and I hope we can avoid that in Elixir.

No, they're casualties of people actually using the platform, the platform's low publishing barrier, and the ecosystem's preference for focused libraries over monolithic bouncy castles.

Rallying around one library sounds cool until you see that the top three competing solutions in another ecosystem each have more contributors and activity. Then you realize you're not in the elite ecosystem, just the smaller one that has one library like my tiny Texas hometown.
On mobile so I can't open it at the moment. Does it show names too? If not, what's the problem with knowing which addresses took cabs?
> bootstrapping/operating systems.

Oberon, Modula-3, Singularity designers don't share the same opinion
This so hard, I mentioned this in a post just last week. There's a 9/11 every month on US roads, yet we leave the number 1 safety improvement (computerized traffic) we could make to probably eradicate 90% to private business: pushing driverless cars. Now of course at the end of the day this change has to be driven by businesses, but government can and should help: R&D and prototyping (like a ton of big inventions, e.g. the internet) could and should be funded to a very large extent by the government. Commercialization should be entirely left to businesses, but even here governments can use regulation to introduce new safety standards to inform drivers of the safest options for driving at the very least. And you could even go so far as to employ a model akin to that of many governments which increase taxes on fuel inefficient cars (e.g. SUVs) and decrease them on fuel efficient cars as an environmental measure, but then apply the same on the basis of safety (driverless cars, if they score well on safety which they should over time, being cheaper). You can argue that such a move is big government, you can also argue that's simply the government forcing the market to price in externalities (purely from a financial perspective, road death and injury increasing costs of healthcare on society, decreasing productivity, but also things like congestion and fuel efficiency can be priced in, which driverless cars should do better in) that currently are ignored. It'd still be entirely market driven, but the market reflects reality better. Once it picks up individual states could choose to make certain sections of roads (e.g. one lane) or sections of their city, entirely driverless car only at certain hours of the day, to accelerate the process. And once you go driverless you'll essentially open up what 'public transportation' really means. In a sharing economy of vehicles which need no driver, anyone's car essentially becomes a tiny bus-service. I'd expect the cost of transportation to drop quite significantly.
If your concern is your child being run over the important question is whether there's a higher risk of your child being hit by an autonomous car or a human-driven car.
No, the overwhelming majority of money is purely digital. For example in 2009 the Bank of England issued £200 billion of quantitative easing, not a single penny of which was physical.

M0 is the closest economic measure of what you and I consider physical money though it does include some non-physical assets that can be quickly converted to cash. In the USA today, M0 is about 15% of the total money system.
I once saw that when using a pay-per-ride metrocard and swiped at a different turnstile. I ended up having two rides deducted instead of just one, so I lost a swipe.
Java is also native compiled. Language != Implementation.

OpenJDK is only the reference implementation. There are plenty of commercial implementations with AOT compilers.

Edit: did not write != properly
As someone operating a start-up, about five hours of serious production work per day, seven days a week. About three hours per day of problem solving, research, dealing with various issues, and a dozen other things that go into trying to build a business out. Productivity stays high so long as the production side of the work stays under 50 hours per week. Occasionally I'll blow off a day on the weekend and use it for whatever I feel like, I find that relieves any feeling of creeping burn-out; and I allow myself to do that any time I want to, it acts as a pressure valve.

Total time invested is typically 50-70 hours per week depending on what I need to get done. I don't have a family, so that makes it a lot easier for me personally. I take breaks throughout the day whenever I feel like it. I try to heavily restrict demands on my time, I find that's hugely beneficial both to my work and non-work life.
>Once you admit the possibility that men and women might not be blank slates, many of the patterns that appear to be "sexist" suddenly make sense.

I don't know of many people who assert that people are blank slates, they just take equality as the null-hypothesis until they see evidence to the contrary.

And I'm not sure what you mean by "suddenly make sense". Differences caused by discrimination also "make sense", the question is which is the better assumption. I think it's unhelpful to assume innate differences, because that assumption encourages discriminatory differences, and so confounds observation.

>Let's say I want O and you want O + O'.

People don't necessarily want the Civil Rights Act, they just think it's necessary to kick us out of the local maxima of self-reinforcing bias. Ideally, all the protected classes get their chance, and over time people come to realise they're actually equally good at most things, and then the act is no longer necessary.

>Has the Civil Rights Act of 1964 brought racial and gender harmony? It seems to me that in many ways things are worse than ever.

Cultural change is a slow process, but everything I've seen suggests that things are definitely far better now than they were in 1964. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?

>Believers in O' would rather wreck college athletics with Title IX,

Personally I don't think women's leagues are an ideal solution, and I'd prefer a tiered unisex system that encourages competition at every skill level.

>or wreck the black community with welfare, than admit that O' doesn't achieve its stated goals.

Poverty traps are caused by economic policy, not anti-discrimination policy.

>Efforts to fight it will (a) cause massive collateral damage while (b) not working.

Do you have any other examples of this "massive collateral damage", because I'm not finding your examples particularly compelling.
You're drivng down a crowded highway and you see an obstacle. You're likely to get rear ended if you hit your brakes and you can't change lanes. However you recognize it's just an empty card oard box. You drive through it with no issues.

Can you train a computer to do that?
Most people don't want to root their phones.
> but it still doesn't mean your rights are being trampled.

Where did jsf666 say their rights are being trampled, you've just invented that unless they've edited their post. This is like strawman the post. On topic it's hilarious that he/she's complaining about downvotes for airing opinions against the hivemind then gets downvoted for that opinion. Way to prove them wrong. (jsf666 comment is currently greyed out)
Because Unix uses the file system for everything Windows uses the object manager. Windows maps parts of the object manager to pre-existing concepts, like drive letters, for backwards compatibility. And, well, Windows has a registry, for better or for worse.
I think you are misunderstanding how natural selection works. You seem to be implying that there is some guiding hand behind the evolution of each species. In fact, if longer life were an advantage for an individual member of any species, the gene pool would gradually shift towards longer life. Some species do indeed have extremely long lives-- some trees live for thousands of years, and some whales and turtles can live and even reproduce for more than a hundred years.

Instead, life length is a tradeoff that is made at the individual level. A longer life means more opportunities to reproduce (or help your offspring), but it also means that you have to set a higher limit for the number of divisions each cell can make, which can decrease cancer resistance. A slower metabolism will produce fewer harmful byproducts, but give you less energy than a fast-burning metabolism. And so on.

Longer life makes more sense for more intelligent organisms, since they can be more effective when they're older due to what they have learned. Often, they need teach the young, which can have relatively long gestation times. But an organism's lifespan is always going to be oriented around its reproductive cycle.

With all that being said, humans are very clever and I wouldn't be surprised if ways were found around human mortality eventually. I can't help thinking of all the "humans were never meant to fly" arguments that people used to pooh-pooh heavier than air flight in the old days. There's no fundamental reason why life extension couldn't be done except time and effort. But I am not as optimistic as Kurzweil about the timeframe (who is?)
>Why are human women different?

Some mutation in early histroy maybe? Evolution never cared to fix it, because it happens later in life and most woman are done with reproducing at this point in life.

>"nature just wants you to reproduce and then die"

No. Nature just wants you to reproduce. Wheter you die afterward doesnt matter.
Interesting question, I'm curious about this too.
It's not a technological argument, it's one of human perception. The article talks about how ordinary people like you and me simply didn't view an elevator as something that's safe or convenient without a manual operator, quite like cars today. And that this perception didn't change automatically, it took time and new ideas which didn't have much to do with technology really.

As for safety perceptions back then, it's hard to say exactly what they were like. The article alludes they were pretty bad, when elevator operators went on strike the city was badly affected apparently. I can tell you in the US like 20-30 people die each year in elevators, it's pretty minor given the billions of trips but I think we can easily imagine elevators were not quite as reliable 100 years ago when the automatic elevator existed, and that the accident rate was quite a lot higher.
Replying to myself.

Sorry about this, guys. I messed up.

I've read Megan McArdle off-and-on for years. I am familiar with her writing. So when I read the part that said "angry e-mails ... my corporatist paymaster", I thought "well, of course you will get those". And that was the end of it. My brain was thinking of the messed up situation in Venezuela, and probably just set aside the "paymaster" remarks.

And then Ted remarked on exactly those words. My brain wasn't thinking of Megan's lament, it was thinking about Venezuela. That's why Ted's comment seemed out of the blue for me.

In retrospect I should have re-read the article to see if I missed anything before I replied to Ted.

Once again, sorry.
I would presume this absolutely sucks though?
This formula does not take into consideration game theory. How fast you grow also depends on how fast your competitors are growing. Being #1 in an industry, ends up being a massive difference from being #2.
Pretty much everyone in the video games industry is going to disagree with this. Performance is the primary concern there, period. Languages that reject such ideas in favor of others simply will not be used, given a choice. Consoles also only run signed code, enforce NX, and mprotect doesn't exist, so there is very little in what can be exploited.

> automate bots...

This has nothing to do with memory safety.
Android-x86 Project – Run Android on Your PC
I'm sorry, but that conclusion is not supported by the article (or by other data). No human being has a "great shot at 130" no matter how modern the medical care is. The longest documented human lifespan is 122 years. Living past 110 years puts you in a VERY exclusive list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_living_people Why this is true is one of the great medical mysteries of our times, which we haven't solved yet.
>> It's cool because people say it is.

I know a guy that moved to Michigan from LA. He said the same. People have a vision of California that dates from the 50's before the traffic, cost of living, and pollution got bad. The only thing nice about it now is the climate in his opinion. From what I've read and seen (a week in SF) he's about right.
consumers have been taught that routing, NAT, etc isn't done by a PC or server, but MUST be relegated to an appliance.

Because that's far more reliable. People don't want their whole home's Internet to go down every time they reboot their computer (and buying an extra computer to do routing is a big waste of money/complexity). Not to mention households that only have laptops.
The Cannabis Chemist [video]
No no no. You can't predict where that library is going to be used. Check the return value of malloc, communicate the failures to the caller and let them handle it in an application-appropriate way. They may want to crash, and they may not.
That is kind do neat, you could do a self help thing with that format as well!
Genode – Operating System Framework
We sure do. Feel free to apply here at https://www.uber.com/jobs/28017 :)
The MTA has planned to upgrade to a tap-to-pay system in its 2015-2019 capital program, but that budget has a huge shortfall. Regardless, last I heard the metro cards are getting too costly to maintain so the rollout may still happen.
Some time ago, I went and grabbed all the quarantined executable attachments from our mail system. I was shocked there were so many, given how long it's been that blocking zip files containing .exe files has been a standard.

I uploaded 30 to virustotal to see what would happen, and I can't recall exact numbers, but I believe we'd be looking at about 25 that has detection rates of 0/51.

Since then, I'd been a staunch advocate of the argument AV just wasn't worth the effort.

Meanwhile, I walk into organisations and every single person has 15 different toolbars clouding up half there screen real estate, and popups hitting them constantly. And you scan with an antivirus and the majority of players end up claiming this sort of thing is legitimate software.
Interesting that the article claims Monday's drop didn't take them by surprise. My understanding of the fund's premise is that they make a small bet everyday that today will be an abnormally large drop - most days they lose, but every now and then they have a big win that more than covers all that bleeding. In other words, they were probably just as surprised about Monday and wouldn't have minded if it was Friday or Tuesday.
I've been driving for a few weeks with Waze running most of the time and the human generated alerts are incredibly useful.

Accident ahead.
Object on road ahead.
Car stopped on shoulder ahead.

There will be a way for self driving cars to broadcast these types of alerts for human drivers. I would expect that the self driving car would attempt to preserve itself (and prevent harm to its occupants) before trying to protect a human driver from harm.
Not center of course. Just one edge is probably more accurate.

But I don't think you realize just how hard it is for a normal person to randomly hop on an IRC channel and be bathed and be able to keep up with it and make friends. If HN feels redundant then consider that serious validation of your competence and the league you are in. I tip my hat.
On Ello, comments lead to respectful discussions without a real name policy. On HN, I don't often see many issues without a real name policy either. I suppose it depends on the community, policies and maybe actual content, but the point is, that imposing a system in support of real name policies will also sideline those concerned with privacy while also contributing to the bubble effect.
That's what I thought when I first moved here, but there is actually a difference. It is very subtle.
That depends on your needs. If you think a desktop Access app is appropriate for your needs, but you want it online, then it would be a good enough solution. It's basically the same thing as in OP.
Yes, but they were making the point that thinking you are checking for a null pointer may not always hold especially once inlining happens.

Are there any modern platforms where dereferncing a NULL pointer will not cause a crash?

Edit. Answering my own question it looks like ARM is one [1].

1. https://www.securecoding.cert.org/confluence/display/c/EXP34...
What I mean by that is the philosophy that verification should be based on explicit types in the original program source. This intricately ties the process of authoring software with that of verifying it. The result is needlessly constraining both the developer and the verifier. It only lets you (easily) write code within what it can prove, and only lets you prove properties that can be expressed by the types that you use.

Other approaches say, we'll let people write code however they feel most comfortable doing (more or less), using types whose expressivity is defined not by the limits of the verifier but only by various concerns over language complexity, mental overhead, performance and teamwork, while we let the verifier prove whatever types it can. If it proves that the variable x is of type "an integer which is always equal to the current time in seconds modulo seven, except on Saturdays when it's always zero", then that's great!
I thought they weren't public? Where would you look at them?
...and it turns out the "empty" cardboard box is half filled with metal pipes, which your human eye had no way of knowing in the split-second before your car collides into it in 65 mph. Your car screeches, loses control, and swerves into the neighboring lane.

But luckily a following self-driving car already detected the presence of an obstacle using radar. It detects your car maintaining speed. Within several milliseconds it evaluates chance of collision as VERY HIGH, starts evasive maneuver, scratching your car at a speed which is still uncomfortably high but not likely to cause a fatal accident.

Several weeks later a team of automobile experts review everything recorded in the accident, improve the algorithm to reduce the chance of accident even further in Edge Case 783645: the preceding human-driving car plowing into a small road obstacle at 65 mph. Firmwares are automatically upgraded during the following months.
> you are willfully ignorant

No personal attacks, please.
It's not "wishful thinking". It's a tool/lie by the ruling class to control the mass. "Marriage" has always been a tool to ensure hierarchical stability: nobles married nobles because that helped to maintain their family wealth, which is not necessarily how the society works today, and so-called "romantic love" was a new notion invented only after renaissance(it's also not the truth on how humans think/behave anyways). Of course technical advances also play a big part in it. In ancient times there were practical troubles for sleeping around because of STD and impregnation. Female liberation and sexual freedom largely came with advances in contraception devices. Nowadays with everybody gaining more independence and power such archaical social institutions are bound to be obsolete. It's just that social changes mostly come slower than technical/economical basis for them.
See here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Clojure/comments/3ir1bl/a_new_pulsa...
I was just thinking of the ability to have javascript responding to and interacting with the form. Calling out to external services as well would be huge as well. But if you can do the first, basically a properly functioning "MS Access for the web", you would make an absolute killing.

I think current developers (and managers) either are too young to know of Access/Delphi/PowerBuilder and how easy it was to build extremely useful applications in them, or perhaps more likely their livelihood depends on them not remembering it. Sure there are shortcomings, but for most in-house apps built today, nothing that would be a show stopper. If you could bring that rapid development to web apps....wow.
Everybody, please look at this Readme file. It starts with a section called "What is this thing?"

That is a fantastic example of something everyone should have in their OSS projects. A simple section at the top of the main doc that states what the thing is. Seems obvious, but I only mention it because it's so rarely done.
Russia's Wikipedia Ban Buckles Under HTTPS Encryption
Thanks for posting that - adds some context and color to what is essentially a PR story.