skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It is one of many passwords used to reset a password for someone who forgot their password.

Popular password resets:

password
passme
abcdefg
pass1234
reset
changeme
late4work

I am sure there are others, once the password is changed to one of these easy passwords, someone who owns the account is support to change it to a harder password.

I used to work as a federal contractor and in IT departments and handled password resets.

One time as a federal contractor someone phoned in from Florida to pretend to be me or someone in my group to get our account password changed to one of the above. They used social engineering and might have been someone who worked there but retired.

When you have a weak password, people can easily break in.
I'm reminded of this DIY cat door that used pattern recognition to prevent the owner's cats from bringing dead animals into the house.

http://www.quantumpicture.com/Flo_Control/flo_control.htm (2010)
I'd call them lucky.
It defeats the grocery store tracking mentioned in the parent post - Apple Pay uses a different temporary credit card number for each transaction, so the store can't track you with it.

I'm not sure what the server side component is - but I don't believe they would have itemized data. So Apple/Amex know that you go to Whole Foods, but don't know what you're buying. Obviously, credit card companies have always had that data anyways.
For those of you more familiar with NLP, are there some "dumb but effective" techniques to approach https://wit.ai/ like functionality? (Libraries would be great, but i doubt there are any, for Golang)

I know NLP is difficult, and frankly i hate doing it, but i want an expressive language to "speak" to an internal process i use (a bot), and NLP seems like the only solution. I imagine a rule based approach is best (for my simple needs), but i have yet to see any examples that come close to wit.ai.

Appreciate any replies :)
I actually thought about something slightly related -- With the AM drama, won't an individual have a reason to signup to all shady websites with their worst enemey's email address and then wait for one of those sites to get similarly hacked? Would some people have created AM profiles of others just as a joke, and now those people might be in trouble?

I once found a dating profile of mine that was created by an overzealous relative. Thankfully this was few years before I met my spouse.
> She had documentation proving that her license had been reinstated.

It doesn't even matter that her license had at one point been revoked, may have currently been revoked, or might be revoked in the future. There was no legal basis for pulling her over, end of story.
The Rise of the Freelance Economy
I have the same problem, having an jbloggs@gmail.com-format address.

It seems there's one lady who apparently lives in Utah and is unable to accurately tell anybody her email address. I've received several sets of flight bookings / e-tickets, personal photos, schedules for religious retreats, etc.
"Is doxxing always unethical?"

YES
> Ashley Madison does not validate all email addresses

There you go. Everybody gets a perfect excuse for their email showing up in that database.
More people are watching NJ than Newark. State elections have higher turnout than local elections as well.
See how annyang [1] does it. Forget the voice part (which it uses WebkitSpeech for). It's how they interpret commands that's probably useful in your case.

It's pretty good for a basic set and you can train more. Ultimately, you need something that is learning online and that will require an understanding of ML techniques such as CRFs.

[1] https://talater.com/annyang/
You are correct that a heat pump needs both a heat source and heat sink. However, radiation is quite effective at transmitting heat at high temperatures. Black-body radiators emit as the fourth power of the temperature, although real objects never emit quite as efficiently as ideal black-bodies. It works pretty well for stars, though, since radiation is how they lose the vast majority of their energy.

If the photosphere above the heat engine was opaque, then the heat engine would not work. So it makes sense to keep the heat engine near or above the top of the photosphere, without going high enough to overheat near the top of the chromosphere.

It's mainly just a fun idea. I have no plans of trying to build one in the near future. :)

* I am a physicist, but that is no protection against being wrong. ;)
You can't generalise like that. It's a mistake to tar everybody with the same brush in supporting the erosion of privacy. Some people, rightly, hold themselves and others to higher standards. Because they do so, does not necessarily mean they support outing cheaters.

> any and all human behaviour is totally normal

Categorically not. Lines are drawn and accepted socially. People even abide by the rules.
How can individual people be protected against fast moving drones that fly in from a distance? Perhaps small scale patriot missile like defence systems that scan for unauthorised hyper-local air traffic and shoot it down?
"Having morals also means speaking out about things when it is your concern. "

Nobody on AM was your concern. At all.
Read the context, friend. The original comment this guy replied to was pointing out that people may have different traits because of their exposed environment even though they had same origins. Are we all same people since we are all homo sapiens? Is a Japanese person whose great great grandfather was an American "same people" as pure breed Japanese? What is "Same people" anyway?
The state is not perfect either but typically a larger organization has more (professional) eyes on it, thus making it harder to mismanage or corrupt for a special interest. Same rational as why Michigan steps in to run Detroit as it was going bankrupt.
I think this is exactly backwards for the poster's inquiry.

Yes, the company's offer has implied a valuation (and the company even says it's based on actual investor-dollars-in). But the poster already knows that, and isn't completely confident the offer reflects the real valuation offered investors. So there's no more calculation to be done from the offer alone. They instead want to know if they could/should require more formal documentation of the company's claims.
Congratulations?
I hear you. And, to be fair, clearly, the federal republic / representative democracy that we have isn't certain to solve these problems either. That's just as much an issue of the people demanding things that they shouldn't (and our legislators capitulating) as we would have in a direct democracy -- I just prefer for there to be a filter between a knee-jerk majority and the enactment of their laws, even if it isn't as effective as I'd like it to be.

If we were all starting with the assumption that everyone's rights were equal, then waiting a bit would be a more appropriate course of action than where we are. Martin Luther King Jr. once said "A right delayed is a right denied," and that resonates deeply with me. A single day in which a homosexual couple cannot be married is too much. A single day in which a transexual is not allowed agency is too much. According to the courts, a constitutionally enumerated right that is infringed is irreparable harm. I agree with that.

But, that aside, the problem in either system is that we have a system in which oppressing the rights of the few is the default, and not the exception. So long as that is the case, I will prefer that the legislative process be slow, and offer as much opportunity for objection as it can possibly have, on the grounds that it is more likely to imperil further infringements than it is to slow amelioration, which is all too often only resolved by the courts.
Looks like I'm in the minority in agreeing with the author's sentiments. It's a counter-intuitive argument but I'll try to make it...

I'm of the motherfuckingwebsite.com school of thought--an evangelist for simple design--but I think simple and unique often go hand-in-hand.

Take my industry: newspapers. Ninety-nine percent take a flat-pack, everyfuckingwebsite.com approach. I think that conformity compromises design. Readability should be at the heart of most sites--let alone news sites--yet I find most hard to read for colours, distractions and so on.

The news websites I enjoy are simple and unique--like the Drudge Report and Hacker News, which are pretty much just a list of links with minimal layers. I think that gets to the core of my purpose as a reader: no bullshit clicking around for ages to find what I want/need to read--just here's the news in our view.

For me, that's a big reason for the Daily Mail's success too. Content aside, I think their presentation of news is second to none. You could argue it's like a lot of sites but I disagree: few run tall pictures, nine-deck headlines and so on. MailOnline's production is similar to the way editors put a page together for print. They've transitioned much of the craft online. I think that's how the website retains something of a newspaper 'feel' which most have lost.

Anyway, I should stop writing, I'm going off on tangents and probably talking gibberish, just wanted to chuck in my 2p.
Interview on Containers with Bryan Cantrill, CTO of Joyent and Creator of DTrace
In life, you get to choose your actions, but you do not get to choose the consequences.

Yes, some 'went through a rough patch' and 'already moved past this', and are now dealing with a world of pain. But ask yourself, what makes you the authority on how much pain they should have endured for their mistake? As fate would have it, whatever 'moving past' they did will now be really put to the test. This will give some couples a second chance, to really ask themselves if all is forgiven.

Yes, some 'innocents' are hurting now. Some spouses, some children maybe too. Is this the fault of the hackers? I'd argue not. Ask yourself, if it weren't for the actions of the people cheating, could this have ever happened? Ashley Madison wouldn't even exist, and this hack would never have transpired, if it weren't for the liars, and cheaters, who made such a site possible. So should we be upset at the hackers, who exposed liars, and cheaters? Or should we be upset at the liars and cheaters, who thought they would get away with it? It's the liars, and the cheaters who hurt their family, not the hackers.
My gmail address, which I got when gmail just started, is my last name @gmail.com. There's no first initial, no numbers after it.

Now, my last name isn't that common, but there are probably several thousand people with it. And I get all sorts of email for all the others with my same last name who think that last name @ gmail.com will work.
The TAL episodes don't touch at all on the impact to the schools and other students. Except for a few clips of non-PC parent comments.
> We can not legislate away capabilities that are fundamentally the same as what's existed previously, but have a greater effect because of the digital age, and expect those to hold[1].

If you think about genetic predispositions to certain illnesses, and technologically enabled screening for that after conception as a precursor abortion, then you can see how people will disagree with your statement here.

The same principal applies to digital technology, just because people are able to do certain things, does not mean that the law will ultimately allow it.
I think teaching parents how to effectively participate in their younger children's education would be a fantastic initiative. I know there is a subset of parents who just aren't interested in participating, but I suspect there's a larger subset who are interested but don't really know what to do. Would be interested if anybody know of any initiatives like that!
Does this have implications in that Getmany can collect data on US citizens, and by sharing with the NSA, the NSA can circumvent restrictions on collecting data on US citizens?
Calling this "AI" is bit of a stretch. Any software that responds in natural language is not automatically AI.
> Because I can guarantee you that the "valuation" of $65B+ is a totally meaningless number. This includes every single company that had a huge, unsustainable up round which will almost certainly be devalued based on future financings or exits.

"Meaningless" is hyperbolic. How much would you pay for a share of Airbnb? More than nothing, I assume. I think one can conclude something from consummated, informed responses to this question.
There was a talk about Santstorm at Debconf. (258M)

http://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2015/...
How to Run in Style
Pocket: The App That Irked Me Over Privacy Today
True! However, for things that are not economic necessities I view it as less of a problem.
That's the deal with GCHQ, why would the BND be any different?
I have my [lastname]@gmail.com -- I have learned that there are many distant cousins in Brazil.
The article discusses this. Look again at the first table. Compare the power values (measured in Watts) which climb slowly, vs. the "Energy Impact" values which climb incredibly quickly.

If "Energy Impact" was a good measure it would correlate closely with real power consumption. It doesn't.
So this is how women can get interested in IT.
Realistically, we have to assume this, given the fact that this is the approach used by the "five eyes".
Yes she did fight the 4 tickets in traffic/mayor's court, but she lost. That did not take 6 years.

After losing she filed a civil lawsuit against the city and the officer, that is what took 6 years (including appeals) and that is where her monetary judgment came from. That was my point, it is confusing to non-lawyers, but generally they should be aware that defendant's do not win monetary judgments in traffic/criminal cases.
"people want to know when their spouse is cheating on them"

That's completely different than people outside the family wanting to know.
It seems you're replying to the wrong post. That was just a subjective word used by another HN user. It's not the keyword in anything.

It's just stating the reaction that will happen to proposed changes. And what's wrong with proactively warning the other side? It's the smart thing to do.

The actually important point is that both sides are completely free to do as they like. The company isn't forcefully demanding money or causing harm so there's no ransom or extortion going on here.
I'm not even sure what "separate schools" means. Yes, schools are separate. But at some point, a school's constituents need to take some responsibility for improving conditions. You can't just send the kids across town, driving the wealthy kids out of the public system. That is not the solution.

I guess I'm just a little bit tired of the suggestions that the solutions lie with everyone else except for the people involved.
With Underground App, a New Android Push from Amazon
> Touchscreen gestures are trivial to implement

You have never worked at the raw level of getting a touch screen controller (especially the older ones, todays once are much nicer) working.

The work Apple did to get first generation capacitive touch screens working is impressive, I say this with no more experience than having had to get later generation cap touch solutions working.

The amount of clean up you have to do on the signal, the sheer garbage you get through, and then to figure out what gestures actually work reliably?

I won't comment of if it is patentable or not, but it sure as hell is not trivial. Getting cap touch working involves close collaboration between the EE, ME, Firmware, Software, and UX teams.

The nice little world of touch points software developers get access to at the highest layer is supported by a massive effort beneath.
This is what you needed, especially in this case. Ashley Madison did not verify e-mail addresses, anyone could put any address in there.
Amazon Underground – Their shopping app plus free games and other apps
>To support another country's foreign intelligence service (which is targeted with espionage on Germany) is nothing short of treason on an organized scale.

Maybe, but the logical slippery slope if you do allow this happen is that in the end every country cooperates and their budget for counter-espionage looks like... the budget, say, California has to defend itself from Texas and Massachusetts, or for securing its borders from Arizona, Nevada, and Oregon by planting spies in those countries I mean states, or the FBI budget for counter-intel versus the CIA. All of which is exactly, precisely $0.

In what conceivable world is it better for California to be spending that money on such hypothetical programs, or for taxpayers to fund the CIA in its attacks against the FBI, and to fund the FBI in its countermeasures against the CIA -- an idea that is total, complete madness - instead of putting it into education, roads, water, or whatever else you want that actually has any benefit to society whatsoever?

The world is incredibly well-connected, and states don't need to be hacking other states. Whether you agree with surveillance or not, it is not difficult to argue that cooperation is a net benefit for all.
Looks like you've listed 8
Exactly - a friend of mine had that at Chevron. In addition to the obvious benefits, she also felt more productive the Fridays she was there since the other half of the office was out.
Many of our arbitrary morals, even religiously influenced ones, are based on tribal culture and human biology. For example, chastising monogamous cheaters is one way to reduce jealousy and oxytocin-induced stress in a community. Following your example, anti-abortionists may see themselves as championing undefended members of society.

Even in lieu of a privacy-free utopia where we fully analyze our motivations, I think we'll still have biological and tribal inclinations influencing our societal morals. (Unless this hypothetical utopia is so far in the future we've biologically evolved.)
the article doesn't mention that you have to confirm your email is valid by clicking a link before you get registered so incriminating strangers this way should be impossible. I presume he validated the email himself
Ranking News Items with Upvotes
I have to agree. The only way it will lead to change is if multiple powerful people are drastically inconvenienced, and honestly I don't think you get to be powerful in western society by being stupid enough to outsource your guilty pleasures to an online information broker.
This is really cool, but I think there might be issues with this:

1) The "random" selection of a winner seems to come from the modulo of the hash of a determinidtically selected block in the blockchain. How difficult would it be for someone to rig the lottery by simply waiting until the right moment and adding a block to the chain with a hash that would make them the winner?

2) Aside from the above, the "random" winning ticket index is not uniformly distributed unless the number of tickets is a power of 2, so there will be a significant bias in ticket selection.

Are these real shortcomings or am I misunderstanding something?
why doesn't that seem to interest anyone?
The Globe of Economic Complexity
Credit card numbers are often stolen and therefore are not a good singular piece of evidence.
Not sure if you're being sarcastic or... o_O
Carless in Montreal: Owning vs. Car-Sharing
I would assume so.

Your rights are your rights. In my mind a few 1000$ but i dont actually know. In practice the proceeding legal battle would probably not be worth it.
Ditto. I assumed this happened to everyone; it happens to my gmail address constantly. Occasionally I get a message that's cc:d to sameusername@notmyuniversity.edu so I can at least inform the person that they've been using the wrong address. I actually was shocked to hear the above woman's voice on the radio one time, when she was interviewed by NPR as a faculty member at that same university!

Mostly it's an annoyance, and pisses me off that more places don't use double-opt-in.

I've had the GMail account since 2004 and I got no mis-addressed mail until at least 2008 or 2010, then only stray ones until about 2013 when all of a sudden there was an uptick and it seems like there must be at least 20 people who at least occasionally use my email address by mistake, at least on occasion.

I've gotten Alitalia boarding passes, tax data, all kinds of things. I'm on a family mailing list. I got a reply to someone who sent an email (using my address) from behind the steering wheel of a top-down Miata. Imagine their shock when I sent back an identical picture from behind the wheel of my own identical car.

Another good one was the kid who kept signing up for college information using my address. Then one day I got email from a college administrator saying the snail-mailed info packet was sent back to them as unaddressable, and asked him (me) for clarification as to his postal address. I politely pointed out that he also, unfortunately, provided an incorrect email address. I was thinking to myself "not everyone is college material", but others assured me I had done the right thing.
Yeah, dropping in $100 million at once without seemingly much of a vision doesn't seem exceedingly prudent.
With a bit of investigation it's easy to find out the lat/long and signup ip address associated with an email account. Most of the time this should make it clear if the person in question really did it or not.
There was once a search engine called Excite. Then came Google. But the old village wise man asked, "And why would Karen start buying Google ads since she's getting exposure for free?"

But then the wise man, who had much to learn, discovered that ads pay per view and click, and just like nobody reeps in a barren land, just like nobody pees against the wind, nobody advertises where the users aren't.

The users, to much a surprise, were at the website which valued quality.

The old village wise man learnt that Internet is powerful only in consensus. That what worked at his tubewell, will never work with running water. What worked at his ice factory, will not work for refrigerator.
> This is where I lost a track of your arguments.

Then maybe you should maybe spend some time studying these topics instead of acting up on HN.

> Lisp did not fail. It's in pretty much all the mainstream languages now.

This is where I lost the last doubts about the reality and your lack of closeness with it.
Car hacking made easy or the Cuckoo's egg in every car
> won't an individual have a reason to signup to all shady websites with their worst enemey's email address

Well usually sites verify that the person signing up on a site is the owner of that address, in a large part for this very reason.
Microsoft Windows 10 on 75M Devices in First Month
"But it is downright chilling to watch the leadership team throw around buzz phrases from business best-sellers with minimal focus on the nuanced requirements of applying these principles to the education ecosystem generally"

Replace "education" with software and still applies. :)
Wow. Like finding a line in ancient source code that says:

// DO NOT MODIFY ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE!
Very interesting that the human trainers are being used to train the AI to eventually do their jobs.
Something similar here :/
The entropy comes from the mined hash. Could a cartel of miners all decide to not submit hashes where they don't win? Wouldn't that make this technically exploitable?
This type of comment may be keeping them away.
Ask HN: How can your SaaS startup accept (US) checks?
We have a customer who insists to pay per check instead of credit card or Paypal. We aren't US based so I'm wondering if there is any payment provider or service that would allow us to get the money. The dollar value (yearly subscription) is large enough to go the extra mile for that customer. It's even fine if the money ends up in escrow for a couple of months (check clearing takes a while, doesn't it?).