skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I thought the exact opposite. This is insanely clean and organized for a physical lab. Though I assume that's because they cleaned up in preparation for the press visit.
Agreed, and it doesn't help that it takes about 10 taps to enable keyboards in settings. I think all 3rd party keyboards are actually getting less buggy, especially in my experience since updating to iOS 9.
Actually, you are mixing a medical diagnosis with defamatory language and you are not Walter Kirn's doctor. By any definition, this makes you a shithead with an opinion.
Devil's advocate: everywhere gets so many of these that they use automated filtering to sort out resumes. Consequently, there is no point in spending ANY effort until you get a positive feedback from an employer.

So, you have a purely random process on both sides that nobody is willing to put in any energy to fix.
Intended.

Planes are too fast and too maneuverable. Especially military planes — SAMs weren’t actually designed to down civilians. That’s why missiles have proximity-based detonators, so called “proximity fuze”, to explode at the right moment.

BTW, here’s 8 minutes video about the history of that technology: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq_Uy5hGazc
like it did for Adobe Primetime CDM
I can say why it should be turned off by default -- because as a user, I don't want Dropbox knowing anything about computers on my network and relating IP addresses on the LAN to specific users. I'll take the long download times.
Uh, a gathering that sends proposed amendments to state legislatures is a Constitutional convention. (And the first Constitutional convention was gathered to do just that for the Articles of Confederation, it just ended up sending back a recommendation to trash the whole thing and start over. The concern that one called to do draft amendments for the Constitution might do likewise has always been one of the reasons people fear calling one, and have generally preferred running specific amendments through the Congress even when its difficult to calling a convention with direction to address a particular concern.)
Until websites are served and executed as binaries, none of these puny measures are gonna be really effective.

But that'll never happen, due to a myriad of reasons.
The first person to write "should of" and "could of" instead of "should've" and "could've" was certainly incorrect, because they misheard someone's speech and wrote it out phonetically in a way that no one had ever done before. At what point does the incorrect usage become so popular that we ignorant fools start teaching "should of" and "could of" as correct English to our kids?
Silicon Valley (2006)
Excellent excerpt:

They have this statement that the cost of solar photovoltaic is the same as hydrocarbon’s. And that’s one of those misleadingly meaningless statements.

What they mean is that at noon in Arizona, the cost of that kilowatt-hour is the same as a hydrocarbon kilowatt-hour. But it doesn’t come at night, it doesn’t come after the sun hasn’t shone, so the fact that in that one moment you reach parity, so what?

The reading public, when they see things like that, they underestimate how hard this thing is. So false solutions like divestment or “Oh, it’s easy to do” hurt our ability to fix the problems. Distinguishing a real solution from a false solution is actually very complicated.

I really wish there was more nuance in the discussion about energy at this level. Folks rarely consider the entire system when evaluating energy sources, costs, consumption-side infrastructure, etc. The only way to move forward is to consider all these problems at once.

Unfortunately, this is hard, and difficult to put in a headline. Witness: this great interview is called "We Need an Energy Miracle".

Might I propose another: "Energy Infrastructure is Hard."
I just finished up the first version of a side project I have been working on and I'm looking for any feedback, please let me know if you have any positive or critical thoughts :)
Apple did release peripherals today, so that's likely.
By its text, the 4th amendment applies to "searches" and "seizures." Requiring a back door is not itself a search or seizure, any more than requiring airbags is one.

I oppose requiring backdoors. I might even oppose requiring airbags. But neither is likely unconstitutional.
I know that's the argument, but I disagree with the premise -- you're essentially saying that it's valid for the government to enforce healthy decisions when it wants to limit the chances of a future payout. This would mean that the government can use its status as the "insurer" (in the sense that it operates the safety net) and the "enforcer" (in the sense that it alone can use force to compel you against your will) in complementary ways. Why not make a law that I can't have junk food? Or that I must exercise? Obesity has a cost on society as well, no?
The Myth of the “Autistic Shooter”
no it's got some serious red flags in it, for one, I can't even imagine a real practical workspace being that immaculately clean and organized. Pure white on everything. no scuffs. Something really smells.
The article seem to ignore a large part of the 20th century were in the post-war period many European countries took the "just build more and higher" approach extending cities with high-density suburbs. At the time forward looking and idealistic planned communities, today neglected and infamous for their social problems.

I'm a "city kid", I've always have lived and prefer to live in urban areas. I think these suburbs often have a undeserved reputation, but that doesn't mean that a simplistic argument of "thing we didn't like before turned out good, so maybe doing thing people don't like now will be fine" has any bearing. Like anything else you still have to look at the facts, weigh the arguments and if you try your best hopefully come up with a winning compromise.
Doesn't work on WSJ and similar sites that require a Google UTF to read. I also have a bit more authority and control over things than the limited options of Readability.

(Readability was built into Safari 5 but is a standalone bookmarklet/add-on as well. Was actually a big inspiration for me fixing things how I want them.)
Heh, I must have seen it on Slashdot all those years ago, and picked up that mirror link. Thanks for posting it, and thanks for keeping your site going!
US government and military personnel are immune from criminal and civil action for interrogation techniques that "were officially authorized and determined to be lawful at the time they were conducted." [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detainee_Treatment_Act
No room for "Moments #FTW" unfortunately.
1% is surely far too generous.
The report we're commenting on right now demarcates the area, and it's not hotly contested.
I don't see how that would work — not all copyrightable acts can convey the author information in the body of the work, and more importantly, you wouldn't be able to recover damages if someone used your work for profit.

Sure, an image might be watermarked, but if someone plays a song without a license do you expect each recording to include a copyright statement before the music?

If you remove penalties for copying then what would stop a private gallery from showing your photography and charging admission? All you get is attribution note, not a cut. Likewise, anyone could use your music on any commercial, radio station, movie without royalties.
If I recall you can use a Map Legend to protect yourself, but I cannot recall the case. Some person made a legend to safe guard his password. He was force to hand over his legend but did not have to tell (FBI/CIA) how to decipher it. Anyone know what I'm talking about. Sorry if this is off subject, just thought it might be interesting to look up.
Um, folks, you're missing the obvious.

Optic fiber glass is SHARP AS HELL.

So, make the thing light up with pretty lights and colors and expose a sharp glass edge for cutting.

Works like a razor, cuts incredibly closely, and has ooh shiny for marketing.

I'm not seeing a problem with this.
Wait - wouldn't that cause more demand and thus more opportunity on the supply side?
Gify is completely broken. The search doesn't work (hitting the search button doesn't do anything) and when I reload the gif it crashes messages. Great idea though.

iPhone 6s Plus 9.0.2
Claiming that a flat tire is because you emailed about visiting a datacenter, and that there are invisible black helicopters guarding the datacenter, and spending an entire crazed weekend looking for exactly what you want to see and then deciding that everything you see fits exactly what you were looking for is basically the definition of crazy. He might not be crazy, but what he's describing himself as doing definitely is.
I still remember winning "Best of Show" when I was a Tiger Cub. Took me a couple decades to realize this was a booby-prize.
It's a hard problem to solve, but given that many of the folks being dismissed are engineers with elevated access to Twitter's data and services, it makes sense from a security and privacy perspective to disable access first. There's no good way to lay off 300 people at once. Hopefully Twitter actually follows through on the separation package and job search assistance. That's far more important.
Paranoid or not, we should develop a healthy skepticism about this in the society. A scary thing to me is that most people don't know about the true capability of information linking/correlating from multiple sources. It's not intuitive for us that you can get seemingly innocuous data and combine them to magically tell one's behavior. These kinds of threats should be systematically studied and made consciously known to the public.
I think the echoes of the new topographics remains loud and in people's consciousness. It pervades with thoughts of materiality and alienation. Robert adams's Colorado springs.
Right, but how did the cookie get associated with a Google search query and then get to the 3rd party who did the shady mapping? That's what wouldn't have happened.
You can 3d print a relatively decent actuated humanoid arm: http://www.thingiverse.com/search/page:1?q=inmoov&sa=
looks quite disruptive compared to your average web-mobile-whatever intangible.
What if he's using an Android phone? Most third party apps on the Google Play store have access to both your location and accounts.

I even remember seeing back in the day questions with valid answers on stackoverflow about how to get the email associated with a device without requesting the accounts permission, but some other close ones.

I also made the mistake of using a personal account with my first Android phone. I had zero spam on that account. 2 months later I was getting about 10 emails a day. (not targeted though since I didn't live in an very active area)
Checkr Is Raising $30M+ for Its Background Checking API, Y Combinator Investing
It is true. The text you cite is pointing out that rights are rights, enumerated or not. Just because some right happens to be enumerated somewhere does not change the fundamental property of rights that they are not something you must enumerate to have.
Copyright is important. A limited monopoly on the distribution of your work means you can recoup development costs and actually make money.

What needs changing isn't abolishing copyright, but making it less draconian and returning to the original principle: a monopoly for a limited time (not an infinite one), perhaps ten or twenty years, or varying by field.
Shouldn't it remain readily available to at least the citizens of the US? If nowhere else, via the Library of Congress? An initial search didn't turn up that report (as far as I can tell, at a glance, there's a couple of funding documents authored by Feinstein at least) -- but there's a rather depressing list of other documents:

https://www.loc.gov/search/?q="Committee+Study+of+the+Centra...

Like the older:

United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Hearing June 10, 2008

"Coercive Interrogation Techniques: Do They
Work, Are They Reliable, and What Did the
FBI Know About Them?"

https://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/Senate-Judiciary...

(39 pages, some interesting points are made, among them some pretty clear arguments that torture is illegal, and harsh techniques that for some reason or other are deemed to not be torture may also be illegal...)
Some vitamins (A, D, E, K) are fat-soluble, so good luck not eating any fat and significantly increasing your risk of getting cancer. A lot of people have problems absorbing vitamin D from food on their own; helping them even more with low-fat food is wonderful /s. Also, milk from properly fed cows contains conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), aka Tonalin, which helps weight loss, despite being a kind of trans-fat, which we all know is dangerous /s.

I am always puzzled while in the States that I can't buy anything non-low fat and barely a single brand of unsweetened yogurt even in Whole Foods; it feels like I am forced to buy only inferior food over there, guys. I then imagine your food industry extracting most of beneficial fat from milk products and selling you supplements containing those ingredients for significantly higher price...
Meh, I had a PMP for a while. I let it expire because nobody cared. Besides, once you have the certification they milk you by making you earn continuing education credits (which for the most part cost money to obtain).
I don't fully understand this claim.

The job market has people coming in, but also, in parallel, people exiting out of it.

developed markets, especially in Europe and Japan, will see massive attrition due to people retiring or dying off. the baby boomer generation in the US is retiring as well. all those jobs need to be backfilled and all those old people will need services.

as the world population is stabilizing, it should not be that bad, no?
Don't forget Privacy Badger
I think this would come down to the purpose of the safe.

If the sole point of the safe can be demonstrated to be defeating law enforcement access then the judge won't look very kindly on you.

If you can make a reasonable argument that the safe was there to prevent thieves and crooks and safe crackers from getting their hands on the contents, you have a stronger case.

Judges don't take lightly to people trying to skirt the law in "clever" ways.
'Right to work' is a specific term used in the US to designate labor legislation used to cripple unions and shouldn't be confused with a general 'right' to employment.

The choice in terminology had me very confused on the first read.
Awesome. At which point did these techniques crossover from Stockhausen etc., or did they independently appear on the "pop" music circuit?
You really have no idea how bad it is man. The shit I've seen through all of my data analysis contracts at different startups have showed me how the process (sorta) works.

The tech companies just need to connect one little "key" and they've got the query. The cost of being wrong is low, so there is almost no Type II error. Every consumer website out there has some sort of bloatware / spyware tracking pixel or ad network or analytics pack. They record the headers, the fonts, etc. They make a statistical fingerprint that is very tight.

For the Google Maps example I can think of 10 different ways that the user profile leaked ranging from a single installed key logger (virus), to a toolbar, to his clicking on the website.

"But how could they know it is him or his email?"

There are tons of tricks they use. Just log onto a single social network, bam. There was also a time that you could put down a LinkedIn iFrame to have:

"Zach Aysan" has looked at your profile.

Sent to your inbox.

Sure the occasional hacker is smart enough to only install a select number of pluggins, and to watch downloaded programs very carefully, and to install HTTPS Everywhere, and to install an ad blocker, and Privacy Badger, and to reinstall the OS every couple months, etc. But there are tons of people running Windows XP which gets hacked so frequently you need to assume people on those systems have viruses.

My point is this: A discussion on whether Google is the one leaking information begs the question. It doesn't matter if it is Google or another party. The question is this:

"Is there a reasonable chance that a non-technical user will have his searches online leaked to a global network of advertisers and INT personal?"

The answer is a resounding yes. My parents were both programmers 30 years ago, and neither of them can trust the devices that they have to not phone home about them.
The Viet Cong learned from the one true master - these torture/coercion methods are copied from Mao's "struggle sessions" where any successful farmers/craftsmen and university graduates were publicly tortured in front of the proletariat until they admitted to any and all crimes (and in a few million cases they were killed anyway, pour encourager les autres).
I’m disappointed that they used the stone-age method of UDP-broadcasts-on-a-reserved-port to find other servers when there are modern standards like ZeroConf which work quite well.
There's a difference between pointing out the flaws of the new system and flatly denying any of its benefits.

Luddites would smash looms so that they could keep their old jobs; I'm merely suggesting that if companies don't want a million resumes for every open position there are things they could do -- which they are not currently doing -- to help with this.

The problem with email is that it's frictionless. It costs an immeasureably small amount of money to send an email so as long as there are some suckers out there who'll buy your penis pills, sending spam emails is profitable.

Similarly all the friction has been taken out of the "submitting a resume for a job" experience and companies are now getting deluged. That's probably not the optimal outcome for employers or job seekers, but the only people who have any power to change it are the employers. Job seekers don't have any real influence on the systems by which employers choose employees, at least not until they get hired and even then it's just about impossible.

The only knob job seekers have to turn is how many resumes they send out and there's little/no downside to sending out more so it's entirely unsurprising that they choose to do so.

Companies on the other hand have a bunch of knobs they can turn regarding how they accept resumes. They're choosing to turn none of them and dealing with the problem on the back-end (keyword matching) rather than the front-end (increasing friction). This leaves them with a quality problem because people aren't keywords and someone with a year too little of experience X might have more than enough actual skill with the thing you need. It's kind-of foolish to assume people all learn at the same rate, isn't it? But because of the quantity problem that employers have, they can't solve the quality problem because that would cost far, far too much. They'd have to spend tens of thousands of dollars on engineering time to try and find the close-but-not-exact-but-definitely-good-enough needles in the not-close-at-all resume haystack.

This is why various companies have tried all kinds of different recruiting tactics like Google's early days where you had to solve problems from billboards or how a lot of companies want to see your open source work or for you to take a coding quiz. That's solving the problem on the front end.

But for some reason not everyone has picked up on this and out of all the programming jobs in the world maybe only 10% (no idea, it's just a guess) get filled by people who solve the problem on the front end. Everyone else does it on the back end, and their methods for dealing with it that way are not up to the task. This is a well documented phenomena, there are countless articles on the subject.

http://www.cio.com/article/2398753/careers-staffing/5-inside...

http://www.today.com/money/how-employers-make-it-hard-find-g...
You aren't paying attention to what you are saying, or the facts. Chrome was released in 2006. Firefox didn't have 20% then. In fact, it looks like it's 15%.
I don't know. If the convention had to get it past the states, then they couldn't do anything too crazy, even if they totally rewrote it.
From google:

> Crazy: 1) mentally deranged, especially as manifested in a wild or aggressive way. Extremely annoyed or angry. Foolish. 2)extremely enthusiastic 3) (of an angle) appearing absurdly out of place or in an unlikely position

I have to agree that he does not fit the definition of crazy at least by the text of his article.
I am just curious is it not be possible to use a crystal oscillator and hence not be dependent on the power line for timing? Are they not doing it just on principle i.e using only transistors, resistors, diodes and capacitors? I vaguely remember building an AM transmitter in high school using a crystal oscillator and transistors but no ICs.
>Would you say this information is a fairly complete summary, or have there been more (unconfirmed) shootings?

the list is a bit short, and if you look at page 182 of the report (or wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ukrainian_aircraft_los...) you'll see 2 su-25 shot down on July 16. One of them was shot down at 6-8 km altitude. This time Ukraine blamed a Russian plane (which was never sighted nor attacked anything else nor had any other traces left nor there were any other signs of Russian planes in other situations/places. To compare - we know that Russia helped rebels with tanks and soldiers as there is ample evidence of this. You can't hide planes in the age of smartphones/YouTube/twitter/etc - all the aspects of this war are very well documented there).
I couldn't disagree more. Stock your meeting with food that the attendees will eat. Get pizza, and make sure you have safe options, like "cheese".
Thinking Outside the Box by Moving Into One
Note that the term "exceptional access" was originally devised in the CRISIS report from NAS, back in 1996.

> Third-party access has many twists and turns. When it is necessary for clarity of exposition or meaning, this report uses the phrase "exceptional access" to stress that the situation is not one that was included within the intended bounds of the original transaction, but is an unusual subsequent event. Exceptional access refers to situations in which an authorized party needs and can obtain the plaintext of encrypted data (for storage or communications). The word "exceptional" is used in contrast to the word "routine" and connotes something unusual about the circumstances under which access is required.

The report didn't intend to suggest that "exceptional" implied "legally improper" (in fact a subsequent paragraph from the same chapter assumes that government normally has appropriate legal justification for seeking exceptional access).

I'm not sure how that affects your criticism, but I'd just like to point out that we didn't make up this phrase and that we may well be using it correctly in its original sense here. :-)

It was apparently also always true in American history that people could use secrecy technologies to try to obscure their communications from any unintended recipients.

http://vjolt.net/vol2/issue/vol2_art2.html

So one could also argue that surveillance proponents are trying to expand government power in unprecedented ways by questioning people's right to use technical means to protect the confidentiality of their communications. (Both things could be true at the same time!)
After the VW incident I do wonder how many laboratory style tests are actually useful. I can't help but think 'that's not how a human interacts with it!' when I see the robot arm doing its monotony thing for 5 million or so keypresses. Add in a reality distortion field and you can see how 'Hockey Puck' mice get to see the light of day.
I think OP meant opening up a safe with some explosives. But let us say it is a magic safe that incinerates the contents if it detects excessive tampering - I am assuming the purpose of which is to protect sensitive documents in case if the entire safe is stolen. Then the safe maker is not liable for obstructing justice any more then a paper shredding manufacturer.