skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yet days after this Trojan was disclosed together with a code signature, Apple is still relying on third parties to tell them which apps are affected. Meanwhile, we know that Amazon has been scanning their store for (at least) AWS keys for years, and Google has been running Bouncer on their store for longer.

It is well-known that due to Apple's restrictions on third-parties scanning software in their store, malware incidences in the App Store are significantly underreported.
I take issue with the characterizations of industries as "Big X". Big Pharma, Big Tech... It's clearly an attempt at demonizing larger players in the tech industry.

My opinion is that antitrust laws and such are not applicable here because even though the companies in question have an effective monopoly on traffic, it does not make it impossible for other players to create a profitable business.

Google is not a domineering empire like Standard Oil or Ma Bell once were. They do not have total control over everything. Even if they have a certain product (for example, Google Drawings), it doesn't stop other smaller players from making quality products that people buy (Sketch, Illustrator, Inkscape, etc.)

I don't really think this is a problem. (And where it is, existing antitrust laws are performing as they should.)
It's interesting he points to acquisition of patent portfolios of the big 3 (Apple, Amazon, Google) but no real mention of their defensive necessity given the current patent climate (vs using them offensively to sue competitors)
It doesn't do that on mine, benefits of blocking all their scripts I guess.

Try throwing in privacy badger, ghostery and no script, then see if it still does it.
We've a couple that could theoretically operate fixed-wing aircraft, but no aircraft to go on them, and we can't afford them anyway, so...
I suppose I could get by the point of the clock being reused, even if this does not make the reaction from the authorities any more excusable.

But damn, is that article a vociferous diatribe. It starts off in the first few paragraphs by poisoning the well quite unabashedly and finally "hints" (read: concludes) that "maybe, just maybe, this whole thing really was a hoax bomb after all" or as an Islamist provocation which does not follow from the premises supplied at all.

The author desperately needs to take their own advice of not "emoting online" or jumping to conclusions. I suppose what is meant is don't jump to the ideologically incorrect conclusions.
There are a few podcasts I enjoy which are supported by companies like Mailchimp or even shows on NPR which are supported by non-profits and foundations. Even high quality shows on PBS have sponsors supporting them.

How does your view consider high quality content which is supported by advertising?
Well, Mathematica, the commercial software environment/language has the same kind of thing.

And iPython has been made language agnostic, to work with Haskell, and IIRC, JS.
nitpick: Apple is not blocking ads, nor did they build an ad blocker into the browser. They gave users the ability to add them (which brings iOS Safari closer to feature parity with desktop browsers, incidentally).

I have no idea what this "non stop barrage of ads in the App Store" is you referred to.
I had wondered this myself -- it seems reasonable to see limiting the precision of activation as a form of regularization, as the author alludes to.

For me, the place we'll eventually end up is obviously custom deep learning / evaluation chips that perform analogue operations using transistors in their linear regime (like how op-amps work). These chips would be programmed merely to express the tensor operation graph, essentially analogue tensor FPGAs.

This should bring multiple order-of-magnitude reductions in power consumption and increases in evaluation speed. And when you don't have a clock there might also be interesting ways of dealing with time in which you don't discretize and unroll, like one currently does with GRUs or LSTMs.
In my city, we banned outdoors advertising that used animation, flashing lights, lights in any kind, and anything with a bounding box larger than 25 m²
Don't know how it actually goes, but if "Don't chase surge" is a saying in some communities, it's probably because chasing surge is such an accepted thing in the driver base as a whole.
Relatedly: HSL and HSV's concept of brightness does not match that of the human eye. HSL blue at 0.5 lightness is darker than HSL red at 0.5
It depends if it creates a new line (and therefore a new line box).
I see two problems with this proposal.

1) Migrating an entire city's population elsewhere is a MASSIVE undertaking. Not just in cost, either; we're talking about uprooting an entire population's lives and moving them elsewhere, which has all kinds of social problems. Look at New Orleans and Katrina for a great example of this. Under your strategy, pretty much the whole city should have just been abandoned and rebuilt elsewhere, but for the people who lived and worked there, this simply wasn't even on the table psychologically.

2) How do you propose to both earmark enough funds for realistic relocation/rebuilding efforts, and keep those funds safe from political interests over the span of 100+ years. It's been damn near impossible to keep Medicaid and Social Security funding in place, and those are being used by millions of people every day. "Rainy day" funds are an easy target for reallocation when budgets start getting tight.

Realistically, I think we're going to see individual cities deal with this in different ways, mostly on their own.
You can take a look at the diffs between this and what the list was in 2011 for Webkit:

http://gent.ilcore.com/2011/03/how-not-to-trigger-layout-in-...

They look basically the same to me - this part of a browser layout engine hasn't changed much, and probably isn't likely to unless Chrome goes all GPU-rendering. And it includes Webkit browsers as well, so it's also Safari, mobile Safari, Opera, and Android Browser.
And we need relevant ads.

If I’m watching a let's play on YouTube, I don't care about buying crayola crayons. If you’d present me an ad for the game the player plays, on the other hand, I’d probably buy it. Maybe even give the youtuber like a 2% cut of the sales.
Startups solve new problems. Large companies refine and scale the most popular of those solutions.
In what way does everyone "have to use Google's search engine"? There are no barriers to switching; you could switch to Bing forever in about five seconds.

Unlike switching from Facebook, you don't need to get all your friends to come along. Unlike switching from GMail, you don't need to move a bunch of data. Unlike switching your company away from Windows, you don't need to buy all new software, retrain all staff, or get your partners to change the format they use to interchange data with you.

If someone were to build a better search engine, we would all just switch. Like when everyone left Altavista in 1999.
This is an irrelevant tangent, but I liked the previous dialogue.
20 Cognitive biases that affect decisions
I agree. Interesting apps are the winner and the web is the only see. Native apps still get to have ads, and thus revenue streams, just not websites.

One solution is to push people from web sites to native apps that serve the same content but with ads.
I'm not a physicist, but from my understanding, light doesn't move at any speed from its own point of view. Its actually instant. From creation to absorption (or dissolution?), there's no delay from its point of view. Fast or slow has no meaning for light. We view things as having speed because mass slows things down from being instant. Am I correct?
> Knowledgeable web developers write code to standards, not browsers.

Really? I certainly don't try and work out how the spec says the document should render — I trust if browsers interoperably render the document the same, that's what the spec says. And I'm not someone scared of specs, having contributed to them for years and worked on browsers for years.
> It would be solution aversion if you denied that the rate of suicides has been growing because you perceive that the main use of citing an increasing suicide rate is to push homeopathic education.

It's not as I understood it. Solution aversion would be denying that the rate of suicides has increased just because I don't think anybody should be administered psychological well being tests. Maybe because I'm secretly afraid that the effectiveness of those tests would prove my ideologically-motivated position wrong. Other than that, I shouldn't be able to provide much logical support for my stance.

> If your aversion to certain proponents relates back to what it is they are proposing, it is not really an aversion to those proponents but to their proposals.

If it were just an aversion to their proposals, it wouldn't reflect itself onto the statement that is ultimately being denied. I could be completely averse to the teaching of homeopathy, but that wouldn't influence my attitude towards the stated problem. In order to be so, there might have to be the relation:

Proposed solution -> assessment of the proponent -> assessment of their original statement.

> because Obama (or black people, "liberals" etc.) had made that claim, independent of the qualities of proposed solutions.

The proposed solution in fact allows me to place the proponent into a classification bin: scientist vs homeopath, conservative vs liberal, alarmist vs denialist. Or just savy vs fool.

> shouldn't normally mean that "Obama says that P" is evidence of not-P.

Not strictly, but remember that, in general terms, non-P is not equally probable to P. P is a specific statement about reality; non-P is any possible other configuration of reality that negates P. That's why the burden of the proof is generally on who makes assertions, not on who denies them.
Купить дом в Кривом Роге
I've been on a low carb - keto diet for over a year. I didn't do it to lose weight, since I'm already underweight if you care about BMI. I did it for general health reasons. It's been pretty great. I feel that I can eat as much as I want and not lose or gain weight. I don't think I am actually eating any more calories - I just feel fuller faster. Within the first month or so I got a lot more muscle definition despite not going to the gym (I did start frequenting the gym later, though). A lot of it had to do with not having much fat in the first place, but it was still a nice benefit.

I think the biggest thing I noticed is my knees stopped hurting. I have bad knees and it got to the point where I couldn't walk down stairs or bend down to tie my shoes without knee pain. In winter I'd wake up at night with my knees throbbing until I "cracked" them. After a couple of weeks in keto I could bend down and do anything else without pain. After I started going to the gym I was careful with squats for this reason, but soon realized that I can squat heavy and not worry (I'm still cautious, though). The times I've fallen off the wagon the knee pain came back. Now, this is likely just some placebo effect and I know of no science backing this up, but if it works I'm happy .
Can we PLEASE stop posting stuff that is US-only? Solving an issue only in the US does NOT help the world.
I think there's something to say about having a monopoly, because the product is better than the alternatives. That's better for consumers than having a monopoly, because there are no alternatives.
And still rely on UA hackery in Opera, which given in principle it relies on the same version of the Chromium Content API as the current Chrome release, it's fairly obvious it's a business decision and not a technical one.
Exactly, and I think mentally controlled UIs will have a greater appeal in some (distant) future for the same reasons.

One interesting aspect of voice vs. tactile that remains overlooked is the amount of energy required for performing something with your phone. It is not at all obvious that voice is less energy consuming for us and thus more convenient. Never heard of any research that would prove it.
> if people don't want to pay for it, the content isn't worth anything to begin with

That isn't entirely true as the content is technically worth whatever the sponsors are willing to pay to make it happen. The university in my town puts on a summer series of movies in the park and Lynda.com has sponsored a number of the seasons. There is even a short ad played on the screen before the movie.

I wouldn't pay to go to the event, but am 100% happy letting Lynda.com pay for me.
I was wondering about this today, and tried to investigate only to find this very link. I'd always wondered why HSTS wasn't enabled yet, and it seems twitter wanted to have Referrer Policy Support above 90% of their userbase.

The only holdout seems to be Internet Explorer, of which only Edge 12 seems to have Partial Support.[0]

[0]: http://caniuse.com/#feat=referrer-policy
It might give the right answers.
But no way to set them as the default browser so links that open up from apps were still opening in Safari with the ads.
As a tourist? Go to the north west: Møre og Romsdal and further up north, Lofoten. If you want to visit the national parks, go east from Møre (the mid parts of Norway). I'm Norwegian, and if you want to see postcard nature, you have to go to the norhern coastal parts. Don't go just to Oslo or Stavanger and think that's all there is (although both are beautiful in their own ways). Go in late July or August. Best wishes!
Just because the trivial functions are obviously wrong that doesn't mean good non-trivial functions don't exist. I also don't see why you're stressing on linearity, there's nothing in general utility theory that demands linearity (in particular even in VNM utility).

So here's one utility function (for a company, for example): "Utility = Capital ^ (2/3)". It's one valid utility function (even in accordance to VNM theorem), which is why I don't understand the saying "there is no utility function".

If you read what I wrote in response to gress below, I of course have no hope that utility theory would unveil a good utility function in itself; indeed you cannot do it within mathematics exclusively. I just think it's a useful tool that exposes whatever fundamental motivations you have with clarity. Which again is why I don't see why criticizing utilitarianism is a thing at all.
Unfortunately they are big enough to fuel a lot of the irrational valuation exuberance in the startup world as exiting to e.g. Facebook is a valid exit strategy instead of building a standalone (and profitable) business.

Besides, the giants diversifying into experimental R&D moonshot projects is a bad sign too. Shareholders should not support that and probably wont in the mid- to long-term.
Does anyone else hate reading stuff like this because it seems like it has something to say but it really doesn't at all? He keeps referencing Miller, maybe it would be better to just read Miller instead.
Actually even further--

"His mistake was to fail to defend a better, interactive workflow enabled by new technology that could have helped the company tremendously, and instead fell in line."

The lesson for me is, we have to think critically, recognize real opportunities for the company, and argue for them. To fail to do so is not doing your job.
Cyberlink Powerdirector 12 Ultimate Crack and Key Full Version
That's not why. HN's design is very old and table based so it's not easy to make it responsive / mobile friendly. It's also not easy to change the design because the HTML is integrated into the code rather than being separate templates.

They're working on improving it but it's an ongoing process.
Fine, make it run from cmd.exe or command.com. Just not a browser.
You can still ban ads in private spaces. Many cities did that. Sao Paolo is just one example
They cause immediate reflow only if the DOM is dirty. In both cases it'd be a maximum of 1.

This'd be 2:

element.textContent = 'omg';
var w = element.clientWidth;
elem.classList.add('ok');
var h = element.clientHeight;
Is because Diphyllobothriasis, cestode larvaes from freshwater fishes that can be very dangerous for humans; but the fish metazoan parasite that send more sushi lovers to the hospital is marine in fact.

Anisakiasis by roundworm larvae in raw fish or squid normally is not a big problem but is painful, and can lead to serious health issues sometimes. Any competent japanese chef will know how to deal with it. European law obliges to restaurants to frozen all fish destined to be served as sushi just for this.
Besides, the giants diversifying into experimental
R&D moonshot projects is a bad sign too.

Isn't that how society gets technological advances?
This works both ways. You may be more likely to believe something is a problem if you like the solution being offered.
Yes that threw me off at first as well. When I lived in Denmark I was used to the candy and recognized the picture immediately but I haven't heard it called that before.

Ah now I miss the proliferation of licorice in everything.
Ask HN: How would you sell open source software?
This is a hypothetical question, I don't actually have anything I wish to sell.

If you had a piece of software that you wished to be open source, but that you also wished to sell; how would you go about doing so?

Of course, if the source were to be hosted publically, then it would be easy for anyone to build it. But assume the software did not exclusively target developers, then it would still be possible to sell binaries and make money, I imagine. But what would be the best way to go about making money from your work, while still allowing others to browse the source, and make PRs if they wish?

Just wondering how easy it would be to keep things open, while still make money from your work.
I think this problem takes care of itself, but it takes time, more time perhaps than people are willing to allow.

1. As organizations metastasize, the negative tail of the competence distribution becomes more and more populated. In response, the organization clamps down with restrictive rules that retard its innovation in exchange for protecting itself from the invisible stupid within. See Microsoft, see IBM, and see increasingly Google and Facebook as they turn to acqui-hires over internal expertise.

2. It's nice to rant yet again about 20-year patent cycles, but when are we going to fix the copyright system? Or will we eternally be Mickey Mouse's beeyotch? At this point, I'd be happy with a Mickey Mouse Forever Amendment(tm) to the constitution if it would free up all the other copyrights.

3. Working around patents is what clever people do best. Make more or import more clever people and you'll eventually get the companies that knock Google and Facebook onto their increasingly lethargic keesters. And free bonus, if you make more technically literate young adults, they'll have a lot less to fear from looming technological unemployment.
What are you actually talking about, though?
What are examples of high quality content that is supported by advertising?

All of the examples I can think of, like radio, YouTube and other video sites, and television, happen to make their money from high quality advertisements: ones that were curated and have higher production values, not random ads from dubious ad networks (except for the YouTube text based ads).

Content paid for with advertising is paid for by advertisers (brands). Quality brands want quality content that will be watched by as many people in their target demographic as possible so they're willing to pay for it.
The public discourse on this sort of thing is controlled by media companies, most of whom make the majority of their money from ad revenue.

The other player in this game are technologists making ad-blockers. Up to this point, these technologists have been only moderately successful in permeating the market.

Ads are so terrible, and ad blockers so effective, that it's a risk for media companies to even talk about ads and ad blockers. It's bad PR for media companies, and an argument against ad-blockers is more likely to simply make more unaware people aware of ad-blockers than it is to persuade ad-blocker users to stop blocking ads. Ad blockers are a problem for media companies, but not a big enough problem to warrant taking the risk of talking about ads.

All that changed when Apple decided to include ad blocking in IOS9. Now ad-blocking will permeate a very large portion of the market, and since Apple is a trendsetter in the mobile market, it's likely that other mobile manufacturers will follow suit. Obviously Google is not going to support ad-blocking in Android, but they'll have a hard time preventing Samsung/Motorola/etc. from shipping with their own ad-blocking software.

Now it's worth the risk for media companies to talk about ads and ad blockers, because if they don't, their entire business model is going to die anyway. So they're trying to persuade consumers that ads are actually in their best interest so that there will be consumer pressure on Android phone manufacturers to allow ads.

I don't think it will work. Consumer pressure only happens when consumers feel pain, and there's no ad-supported media so great that losing it is more painful than ads. The only people who are actually feeling pain from this are people whose businesses are ad-supported, and frankly, I'm quite happy about that: people who tie their business to an immoral, unethical business model should be punished. It's rare that the bad guys actually get what's coming to them.

Anyone who is worried that this is going to hurt technologists: it's only going to hurt the ones who deserve it. I've been programming professionally for 10 years and I've never worked for a company whose business model involved advertising because it disgusts me. This doesn't affect me at all. If you decided to hitch your wagon to the advertising horse, that's your fault; you did a bad thing and I don't feel sorry for you.
That is all fine and it would cover many cases. However, someone other than you is still able to push code to your users without your acknowledgement (assuming you have trusted a third party key).

If you are already using a CDN, put your updated manifest (index.html) there as well.
So right now the moonshots are privatized and the liberals are unhappy about it. When the pendulum shifts, the moonshots will be publicly funded again and the conservatives will be unhappy. Takeaway: happiness is unattainable.
This stuff is 90% consistent cross-browser, but it's possible IE has a larger list, or smaller list. In retrospect, I coulda left off the "Chrome" specifier on it.
Government spying spooks French citizens
Everything depends on your definition of "significant" so I certainly can't just guess at a number. More significant than any other problem humanity is facing, perhaps?

If that is what you mean, my completely unscientific guess would be a decimal, then a whole lot of zeros, then a one. And I would not find it prudent to do anything to avoid that possibility that takes longer than five seconds. The steps usually recommended are much bigger than that.
Stan is best viewed in my mind as a successor to BUGS (Bayesian Inference Using Gibbs Sampling) which more people may have heard of. In fact, there are lots of players in the probabilistic programming space now, personally I like the model of "Infer.NET" [1] from Microsoft Research, as I find variational and approximate variational inference a good solution to my problems and I like coding models in nearly C# more than in Stan format.

If you want to get started as fast as possible with computational Bayesian inference and don't need the performance and advanced features Stan, I'd recommend emcee [2] which is a lightweight python MCMC sampler.

Final recommendation to the HN crowd: Bayesian Data Analysis 3rd Edition [3] should be on your desk if you are thinking about using any of this software.

[1] http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/cambridge/projects/in...]

[2] http://dan.iel.fm/emcee/current/

[3] https://www.crcpress.com/Bayesian-Data-Analysis-Third-Editio...