skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think the main problem with aircraft is lack of redundancy. They still count on the ability of letting the pilots control the aircraft (e.g. .1% of the time as you mentioned), I think they should just try to go all the way as much as possible. For example, if they had 4 redundant pilot tubes on different places and other redundant methods to measure altitude and airspeed the AP would never have disengaged. For a large plane those sensors are basically free, and it's very easy to tell whether they're working correctly by cross-verification/calibration (i.e. maintenance/reliability is easy) -- they just don't go all the way because they're still on the paradigm that "well if a couple pilot tubes and/or other systems fail we can just hand it to the pilot".
I'd love to live in an America where they did that instead of their current 'whatever the hell we feel like' policy.
True. Attempted manslaughter / reckless endangerment would fit better.
This is interesting. From a hiring perspective, I feel like I'd be a bit wary of this. It'd be great to have a team that works well together, but I'd be really afraid it would overwhelm existing company culture/process/etc and cause a clash.

I think this is why a lot of acquihires fail (like, acquihired employees leaving quickly). They way the acquired team works together doesn't mesh with the way the new company works.
If a good team did this in the Bay Area with sufficiently strong internal agreements to ensure they all got hired together they could probably get ~$100K signing bonuses each, comparable to an acquihire.
You are assuming that the 'running someone over' was deliberate. We don't have enough information for such determinations. It may have been accidental, or more likely criminally negligent, but we shouldn't assume deliberate attack without all the facts.
Silly suggestion: have the copilot pilot spend the flight playing crash-recovery scenarios that reset every `random.randint(30,90)` minutes. When there is an actual emergency, plug him in to the actual avionics. It would be kinda like [work of fiction you probably should have read by now].
It is actually scanning them with the camera.

The MobileEye system in the Tesla (and other manufacturers) has some of the most sophisticated CV software on the road - not just scanning for road signs, but identifying road markings, lane markings, curbs, obstructions, traffic signals, etc.
Sounds interesting, is the physics in the book mathematically sound/consistent? (and interesting, hopefully)
It's Complicated. All else equal, yes, you should use ECDH over a good curve, implemented carefully in a curve library you yourself did not write, which library has been carefully reviewed for flaws.

But if you don't have access to that code on every platform you might need to deploy on, it might be better to do DH-2048 than to use crappy curve code.

Basically, your best choice right now is Curve25519. If you can't get a trustworthy Curve25519, though, it might be tricky to pick between DH-2048 and {other curve software}.
Well, if I'm remembering properly, MVP was originally designating the minimal thing that people were willing to pay money for. Add in kickstarter, and tada. You've essentially got people giving you money for the video (and a future promise)
Tesla's Autopilot System Is Awesome and Creepy and a Sign of a Beautiful Future
> I wonder what world you all live in in which this is a bad thing.

The world where we all depend on secure communications for autonomy of our own lives?
Breaking crypto is what the NSA was created to do, playing a cat and mouse game with it means you'll always loose.
If the NSA cannot break crypto it's useless, and given 2 outcomes them giving up or them just asking for more money and being more intrusive the latter is much more likely.

No one will get their privacy "back" by fighting the NSA through technology, considering their mission, budget and capabilities they'll always win, the only way to pacify the NSA is through legislation that will ensure that they only use their capabilities when it's warranted.
I agree. There is a huge amount of "inertia" in the engineering field. People find something they like and then use it forever.
SVG can represent vectors with units of "in", "mm", or "px". Inkscape only does "px", which means it's for drawing pretty pictures. There's no fundamental reason it couldn't support real units, but it doesn't.
System that checks air passengers against terror list experiencing disruptions
The last line from the article you quote is spot on.

Why are alleged "services" provided for "free"?

One group will tell you it's because advertisers are picking up the costs for "content". Another group will tell you that it's because no user (cf. advertiser) would pay if a "fee" were charged to use the www.

Of course, no "free" business model will dare test the theory of the later group, so I guess we'll never know how the user values these "services". Instead the investors and advertisers set the value. Grossly inflated.

In the early days of the internet as I remember it the real (non-hardware) costs for the internet were tolls on telephone calls (dial-up). Organizations picked up the tab for employees who used the internetwork. Tuition-paying students also got access.

Then came UUnet and "ISP's". And then people had their own personal computer, at home, with a network card.

As far as I'm concerned, the internet connection fee is still the only real cost.

I think the browser you allude to is possible. But I think some changes in thinking in how information is structured and presented on the www is needed. If we let the www be shaped solely by web developers with a lust for layers of abstraction and increased complexity and being given carte blanche to run code on others' computers, then it forces the "browser" to be something that is far too complex and too much trouble for any open source volunteer programmer to deal with.

Make the www easier to parse and then the www "browser" becomes easier to replicate. This is only my opinion. Others would certainly disagree.
Also my biggest feature request.

I tweeted it at Slack and they seemed surprised actually. (I didn't get the vibe like they're shipping it anytime soon.)
Sounds good. If you're doing space stuff in houston, I likely have drank with someone you're working around. Be interested to know what you're working on.
Microsoft Changes Windows 10 'Free Upgrade' Rules
Again that's not the issue, the NSA's mission is to be capable of breaking crypto that's their job.

Having the ability doesn't mean that they need to use it all the time which is what you should be fighting against.

As long as the fight is centered around trying to disarm the NSA you'll lose because that's not the right tactic an the US as a nation cannot accept it.
This is a little bit off topic (from standard iOS) but here's how I force zoom stuff with a little tweak I made http://imgur.com/1WXHoPv (jailbroken devices only). The thing itself is not for zooming, but it is a happy little additional bonus feature.
Most companies need a marketing department to convince people they're making good cars, while they're making good money making cars. Tesla simply makes good cars. No need for a marketing department if your stated goal is your terminal goal, and not just an instrumental one.
I thought the pilots got confused because of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_control_modes#Alternate... not, particularly, because of de-skilling. I'm going to use a stupid metaphor, that's perhaps ton totally apt. In that case it's kind of like reversing the gas and break pedals. 99.9% of the time, practically all your time behind the wheel the car behaves one way, but in this one special circumstance, the 'normal' emergency reaction becomes exactly the wrong thing to do. Hit the brake not the gas, but the pedals are backwards.

Yeah, maybe drivers will deskill. cars will fully automate much faster than planes. google's little fleet has racked up a million miles. The 80% solutions will turn into 95% solutions in a few iterations, then 99.99% solutions in a few more, then a long tail of fixing edge cases as they are discovered.
HTML is fine, it's the CSS/JavaScript that's the problem. If we were just displaying HTML we wouldn't be having this discussion.
I just looked at uBlock. I have used Privacy Badger for a long while, mostly because it is from the EFF and I trust them. What are uBlock advantages?
Don't be a target the NSA is interested in.
According to [1] it has been available for free online since 2013. I bought the hardcover 3+1/2 volume box set at borders almost a decade ago.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Feynman_Lectures_on_Phys...
Quest for Love
Just trying to make a connection. William Salisbuy, a divorced Veteran raising two girls realised that he would need to tap into a bigger pool of people to find someone who could fit into his unique puzzle. Please share his quest! https://youtu.be/7lISnl_-UbY
"Since weak use of Diffie-Hellman is widespread in standards and implementations, it will be many years before the problems go away, even given existing security recommendations and our new findings. In the meantime, other large governments potentially can implement similar attacks, if they haven’t already.
"

can someone explain to me why this cant be fixed over night. im no crypto expert, but

" If a client and server are speaking Diffie-Hellman, they first need to agree on a large prime number with a particular form. "

why can't you just switch the large prime number and then continue on sending encrypted data?
https://www.onlineexambuilder.com/loves-true-test/exam-38293
The Apollo program is hardly as convincing an example as TFA seems to think. That was early days for computing power. Humans have landed scores of other craft on various other bodies in the solar system, and that landing has been fully automated in every other case. If a manned moon mission were planned today it would probably be completely automated.
That's a terrible idea, trading an extremely unlikely weakness (a problematic 2048 bit standard prime) for an extremely likely weakness (a mistake in the code you probably won't even think to write to check your constantly changing parameters).

Do what Colin says upthread.
What an interesting concept. For developers, it's easy to see the value in hiring an established team. I'm glad the companies you spoke too also saw that. I wonder if this could be applied to even smaller groups, say 2 or 3 developers who have worked together well in the past.
This depends on your view of the nature of technology vs. the nature of political institutions.

I tend to believe that, with time as the X-axis, that the nature of technology is on a positive curve with regard to liberty while the nature of political institutions is on a negative one.
I think the key is that computer controlled vehicles could synchronize their stopping and starting. You wouldn't have to wait for the few feet moved by the car in front to bubble down the line as drivers notice the extra space. Instead, all stopped cars could coordinate to advance simultaneously.
http://blog.samaltman.com/

I'd say three of his last four posts are more negative than he has been historically. I've also observed an increasing number of articles about properly calculating financials, unit economics, and hiring "killer sales teams." I don't know that it means anything, but there does seem to more of that kind of chatter - and not from the buzzfeed "Bubble!!!!!!" kind of sources that its been pouring from for years.
You can, but there's a cubic fuckload of software deployed using the old parameters, and a whole lot of it doesn't know how to update itself.
They also didn't have much in the way of worthy competition. That really helped them out a lot. It's different now. So much saturation in many areas things have moved from the era of bold ideas to the era of carving out niches.
That's not how physics works. If the hammer is too heavy to lift, putting a flywheel in it isn't going to change that.
agreed. i imagine it could get a bit cliquey. i think it almost certainly depends on the structure of the host engineering team and also its size.
Because there is not magic switch to deploy software on millions of servers?

Getting rid of old software is hard, people don't know, then there isn't enough incentive to upgrade, then you need to support legacy clients so you still keep old crypto support (which now means that you can attack clients which support stronger crypto through various downgrade/fallback attacks) etc..
You wouldn't even have to explicitly sync them; it'll take just few milliseconds for a self-driving car to notice another car is beginning to accelerate. Machines can keep precise control to the level simply unavailable to and unperceivable by humans.
Closest that comes to mind is Ender's Game. Ender doing simulations that abruptly increase in difficulty.
> I’m fascinated how simple the __NSDictionaryI turned out to be.

There may be other cases where one gets something entirely different than the __NSDictionaryI class, depending on how the dictionary was created or how much / what kind of data it contains. There is some evidence[1] that Apple switches implementations of its collection classes based on various conditions, even something very simple, such as when an array contains more than X elements (where "X" is some threshold where the optimization characteristics change). Being able to dynamically change implementations is the main benefit of class clusters after all.

[1] http://ridiculousfish.com/blog/posts/array.html
Breaking the law /= recklessness. You are probably thinking of negligence per se, something less than recklessness.

And I wonder why you assume that a bunch of motorcycles driving through the mountains would be breaking any laws. I know a group of lesbian harley riders who never go faster than 50 who would take issue with any assumption that riding a bike suggests illegality. For them it is about being seen and showing pride. I did a ride for burn victims a few years back. The kid riding on my bike was all smiles even though I doubt we broke 30 the entire way. He just liked the wind, a bit like my dog when she hangs her head out the window. Riding for fun does not mean riding for speed.
That would take longer than 10 minutes but definitely under an hour.
You raise a good point. It's not a matter of caution and being double careful. The point of the essay is the drive towards self sufficiency, and being realistic about how investor expectations change in successive rounds.

Perhaps: don't think there's a rope backing you up if it isn't there.
Did you consider contracting? You can bill as a team, you control the interview process, you can split and reunite at will, and the people who are booked can support the people who are benched are working on open source portfolio stuff to attract more clients.
Show HN: Zertcore5 – C++11 Server framework
Fun factoid: Growing up, I always thought The Ruttles were from Framley. Imagine my embarrassment...
Your beliefs are opposite the reality. Invasion of privacy has never been so high
i understand not every piece of software can be updated, but when something like heart bleed was release - correct me if i am wrong here - but millions of machines were updated.

if i read this article correctly, if we could update millions of computers in a short period of time with a new prime number that would be enough to solve this problem in the short term - long term all we need to do is change the prime number every X number of months, were X would require billions (as opposed to hundreds of millions) of dollars to solve
They will have devices that communicate directly with the car's systems.
> R is much more regular

Compare scikit learn to other a large number of R libraries with incompatible interfaces. In this respect Python is more regular.
He is comparing situations where human decision makers are highly trained professionals such as astronauts and passenger plane pilot to daily driving situations where the average human decision maker is more likely to be an idiot(people switch off while driving) distracted by his smartphone.
Why is there not more hedging of bets by implementing both? That way if one is broken or improperly implemented, there's a bit of safety. Apart from being ugly is there a reason this doesn't work?
> Wait I thought he was on the ground bleeding out from his multiple 2-3" lacerations?

There were at least three people present, the one behind them was there all along, the two in the ATV came later. The person with the lacerations and injured palms was behind the car when, according to Tesla, they accelerated into him. The two people in the ATV were in front of the car. It becomes more difficult to claim the injuries inflicted were accidental when they manage two separate 'accidents' in a small amount of time, but we'll have to see the accident reconstruction to see whose claims hold up.

> Again I don't want to apologize for the illegal and dangerous actions of the RGJ employees here but (1) this isn't the whole story and (2) I think it's absolutely ridiculous that Tesla has their secur-- err "safety" staff heading people off at the pass in ATV's and risking their lives over some illegal photos. It's also possible that my skepticism is misplaced and Tesla is not exaggerating here and RGJ employees engaged in exactly the behavior described.

Wanting to read both accounts is reasonable and fair. RGJ has their own account which you can read here:

http://www.rgj.com/story/news/2015/10/09/rgj-photographer-ar...

While you're right that security should be trained not to do dangerous things like this over simple trespass for this exact reason, the big problem here is that both accounts of the story say that the RGJ journalists hit Tesla employees with a car.

That's lethal force.

Unless they can show something like being in reasonable fear for their lives (or grievous bodily injury), the driver is in big trouble. Nobody has alleged that the Tesla guards were trying to kill or maim the journalists. There's a mention that a rock was used on a window and a seat belt was cut, but neither side alleges any injury to the journalists or a threat thereof.

So it is sort of like when you have someone 'resisting arrest' and only one side is injured. But here, only the cops are injured. I would normally give the injured side the benefit of any doubt when only one side shows injury, but that's only when there's doubt and they can show evidence to overcome that burden. The Tesla guards were injured and they had lethal force used against them.

While we should wait to see what new facts come to light, the uncontested parts of the two stories paint spell serious legal trouble for the driver. Neither account disputes that the RGJ driver used lethal force against and caused injury to Tesla security guards in an altercation over claims of trespass. That's worrisome.
> Tesla is definitely pushing car engineering in some respects, but as far as I can tell the only thing new in this story is that the feature was added to the cars in a software update. Do you really think Audi would be #1 on Hacker News if they updated the 5 series over the air to stay in it's lane automatically while on the highway?

If they played it the way Tesla did, they probably would. Recall that nobody buying Model S knew about those capabilities up until the moment Tesla announced, "by the way, at some point we've started packing Model S with sensors; if you've bought recently then you have self-driving capabilities that we'll enable soon with a software update". This came as a surprise for everyone.
Technology can be positive or negative it's all in the application, but that's not the issue.

It's not that the NSA is inherently bad or good, as long as it exists it will be able to break crypto because that is it's mission, the US needs that ability for national security but it doesn't mean that the NSA has to apply their capabilities to cast a net on the entire planet.

That said it's very unlikely that an organization with virtually unlimited funding, and a recruitment monopoly on the best and the brightest in the field of cryptography and computer security will lose on the technology front. Trying to disarm the NSA is effectively trying to disarm the US that won't fly, the only option is to ensure that they use it only when its explicitly warranted and not as a business as usual tool.
While the confusion over normal mode and alternate mode did play a role in the crash, the BEA report investigating the crash found the following six proximate causes [1]:

- temporary inconsistency between the measured speeds, likely as a result of
the obstruction of the pitot tubes by ice crystals, causing autopilot
disconnection and reconfiguration to alternate law;
- the crew made inappropriate control inputs that destabilized the flight
path;
- the crew failed to follow appropriate procedure for loss of displayed
airspeed information;
- the crew were late in identifying and correcting the deviation from the
flight path;
- the crew lacked understanding of the approach to stall;
- the crew failed to recognize that the aircraft had stalled and
consequently did not make inputs that would have made it possible to
recover from the stall.

Of those six, three can be attributed to skills atrophy: failure to follow procedure for loss of displayed airspeed information, lateness in identifying deviation from the flight path, and failure to recognize stall. These are all skills that pilots are taught when they're certified to fly a given aircraft. The fact that they didn't have them means that they forgot, or, in other words, they didn't have enough ongoing training to keep their skills fresh for emergencies.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447#Final_re...
Well, this is mostly only true of the high margin, hoping-for-viral-growth so loved by the internet VCs.

There are a ton of highly profitable, relatively low margin businesses (at least compared to internet services), like consulting or something with high sales effort, like enterprise products. In those cases, you can easily imagine your growth limited by, and accelerated by, your ability to hire and grow the right talent.
do you really think that is possible ?
Several prior discussions:
https://hn.algolia.com/?query=feynman%20lectures&dateRange=a...
Most of the magnetic field lines are along the z-axis (up and down) so anyone could still simply slide the hammer towards the end of the metallic floor it's sitting on(like the sewer cover) and be able to pick it up then. That's how we unstick really strong magnetic targets in our sputtering system, we simply slide them off.
> Reading road signs is exceedingly tricky.

You (and parents) vastly overestimate difficulty. They are reflective, high contrast, using known font and very limited symbols (0-9). Car CV systems can distinguish pedestrians from background, they can read a freaking sign.
This is a newbie question, but how are the standard primes created? How is it ensured that they are not selected maliciously, etc?

(a link will suffice)
I would suggest that Google cars haven't logged any driverless miles, at least not on public roads. They have humans onboard with backup controls (parking brakes if nothing else). So they are not driverless just yet.
That was one specific piece of software, the overwhelming majority of deployments of which were on machines that could be updated easily. Weak DH parameters for TLS are deployed in tens of thousands of middleboxes that are not easily updated.
Wantrepreneurs, ignore the risks and focus on the rewards
Some advice from the authors on how to properly deploy Diffie-Hellman:

https://weakdh.org/sysadmin.html
The Facebook app on iOS isn't listed as having requested access to my contacts. Is this just an Android thing? Or does the app have some way of sneakily getting access?
What is Bitcoin and how to do Bitcoin Investing; a complete guide to Bitcoin