skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hi Alex,
Great thanks for your feedback! We're about to implement app configuration API to use by other declarative RAD languages like yours. Please reach us in our Gitter chat or by any other convenient way (https://allcountjs.com/community) so we could discuss how can we be helpful.
Starters and Finishers
should this not be "Windows corrupting UDP Datagrams in some (possibly lower chance) cases"? The list of circumstances for the bug to occur (from the article):

1. UDP protocol. (Duh!)
2. Multicast sends. (Does not happen with unicast UDP.)
3. A process on the same machine must be joined to the same multicast group as being sent.
4. Window's IP MTU size set to smaller than the default 1500 (I tested 1300).

5. Sending datagrams large enough to require fragmentation by the reduced MTU, but still small enough not to require fragmentation with a 1500-byte MTU.
No, it means that a researcher doing fourth rate science has successfully trolled HN.
>The battle about the meaning of hacker (vs. cracker) was lost in the 80ies, yet some communities continue to use it in the old sense of the word to set themselves apart.

Part of the reason for that is the hacker community made up a word that no self respecting person would use to describe themselves. The modern 'computer hacking' culture came out of the phreaker community and IMO is the proper description for this activity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phreaking
Money is a mechanism that, in a way, insulates us from a variety of problems that, when reduced, allows us to focus on other things. For instance, when you're not worried about where your next pay check is coming from, you can invest that energy elsewhere. Reading, continued education, practicing your craft, etc. When one is no longer burdened by the hunt, he's available to venture into other activities.
littletimmy said the 1%, and this article says they're paying 1/3.
http://en.arguman.org/your-argument-is-invalid
Skipping rope: the silent killer
If you read the article, you would know that he wasn't protected under existing whistlyblower laws, and in fact makes reference to three others who specifically were unduly reprised, punished and proscecuted...
I was thinking about this a while ago and have been meaning to write it up and post it somewhere, so I guess this is as good a time as any.

Hashcash (also known as the precursor to Bitcoin) was proposed to solve this problem in 1997:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashcash

The trouble with it is that it requires computation for each sent message, which is bad for senders with low resource devices or legitimate mailing lists. I want to propose a variant.

Instead of creating an expensive hash against the message, create an even more expensive hash against the (sender TLS certificate, receiver domain name) pair. This implies using TLS but it works just as well even if the certificate is self-signed. Then each mail server only has to generate a hash once per recipient domain, ever. Every message that mail server sends to that domain is tagged with that hash. A legitimate mail server will have already computed hashes for all the domains its users regularly correspond with and rarely if ever need to do any more expensive computations.

If spammers do the same thing then the receiving server can mark all messages sent with that hash as spam. So there is a highly disproportionate cost to spammers (even if they have more computing power) because to avoid that they have to continuously generate expensive new hashes. Which can be made arbitrarily expensive because legitimate servers only need to do it once. And a new hash is much less valuable to a spammer than a domain name or IP address is today because each hash can only be used against one recipient domain. The required amount of computation can be set by the receiving server so domains with more users can require more computation.

If a legitimate mail server is compromised by a spammer then it will have to generate all new hashes (because the spammer will presumably immediately ruin the reputation of the compromised ones), but the reputation of the legitimate sender's email domains is unharmed because the reputation is tied to the hash computation, not the sender's domain name(s).

And adding support to mail servers would require no configuration whatsoever. You install server version N+1 and it starts tagging outgoing messages with hashes that receiving servers can verify.

So here's the traditional form: http://craphound.com/spamsolutions.txt

How'd I do?
A good explanation can be found in the video mockery linked below.[1]

Short summary:
There's a theorem that says that (under certain conditions) if you have some model that evolves over time, then you can reconstruct the geometric properties of this model by only looking at how a single 'observable' (e.g. the number of salmon) evolves over time. Of course if you have multiple observables then you get multiple reconstructions and with enough data you can figure out how to go from one to the other.

Now how this leads to prediction is that you can use any one of the observables you can figure out the current state of the model, which tells you both the value of the observables you didn't know and how it's going to evolve. Of course the accuracy depends on the accuracy of the reconstruction.

[1]:https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10405320
> However, many people who read your articles might not be so well informed. Many people have an incorrect and confused understanding of them and to them the word "drone" carries that jumbled mess of an associations.

Do you actually know anyone who has made this mistake? I've heard scores of people online claim this, but I've never met anyone who has actually met someone with this confusion. Who reads this article and thinks that the US government is preparing to announce that large privately-owned unmanned airplanes armed with missiles are going to require registration? I find it incredibly hard to believe that anyone who isn't mentally ill would make this mistake.

In my experience, everyone in the US is quite capable of determining the meaning of "drone" from context. I've flown drones in parks and had dozens of people ask me about them. They may call them "drones," but there's no confusion. Not only that, but there's no fear or apprehension. People think they're cool, which they are.

Somewhat humorously, I think most of the FUD about public perception of consumer drones actually comes from the RC model aircraft community (of which I am a part, I suppose). I do not think it is based in reality.
If It’s Not an Offer Letter, It’s Not an Offer
Land of the free.
> suddenly Gmail was connecting to my mail server over an IPv6 interface

Nitpick: when sending email, the sending mail server establishes a connection to the receiving server, not vice versa. The sender is responsible for looking up the domain name's MX record, choosing a hostname from those listed, initiating a connection, establishing an SMTP conversation, and negotiating protocol enhancements like SSL.

That said, I could see a change in behavior like this resulting from action on the receiver's side. Though the sending server makes the choice of how to connect, that choice can be influenced by the presentation of the MX record. I haven't specifically run into this before, but I could see this happening if, for example, the MX record advertised a host with an A record first (IPv4), and then was changed to list a host with only an AAAA record first (IPv6).

There's quite a lot of arcana in the email space that's difficult to manage without careful, deliberate effort. Sending email is harder than it should be, and a lot of that difficulty results from anti-spam or general anti-abuse efforts. If it was easy to bring a server up and begin sending with a new domain name and IP address while successfully reaching the inbox, then spammers would do exactly that. So new identities are put through the wringer to prove they're legitimate. Well-known platforms have an easier time sending email because they can relay traffic from infrastructure that the ISPs already trust; and in turn they maintain that trust by keeping abuse off their platform.
Ask HN: How to deal pathetic Envato buyer?
A buyer is harassing me by messaging my employer and my friend. What should I do?
You want to see a "fairer America" fueled by a discriminatory taxation policy. I hope this irony does not escape you.

If your goal is truly to see fewer people living in harsh poverty conditions, an absolutely noble goal, let the free market be. Capitalism will (and has, see the extreme poverty figures) bring far more people out of poverty than any bureaucrat could ever hope to.
(Each line responds to a paragraph in order)

Appeal to fear.

No comment.

No being able to determine a right cause doesn't prove a wrong.

Loaded question.
From the article: "The top 1 percent on average already pay roughly a third of their incomes to the federal government, according to a Treasury Department analysis that takes into account the entire menu of taxes — including income tax, payroll taxes that fund Medicare and Social Security, estate and gift taxes, excise and custom duties as well as investors’ share of corporate taxes."
He returned to his wife and kids after 1-2 years.
Check Your MX Records
There is unfortunately a large political danger with giving cash. If you give cash, then it becomes possible for pundits to agitate for more assistance on the theory that "you can't live on $X". When poor people are explicitly given a room, 3 square meals/day, and government issue poor-people sweats, it's pretty hard to argue that they are somehow lacking anything necessary to live.

Based on this article, there is also no reason to believe that cash assistance rather than in-kind assistance is necessary. The proposed mechanism is "Parents are happier because they have more money, leading to less fighting within the family. This lowers stress on kids..." But in-kind assistance would also lower stress since parents wouldn't need money.

In-kind assistance has the added benefit that parents can't divert public assistance intended for children's welfare into other goods (e.g. alcohol, tobacco, drugs, junk food).
I honestly think the theory of the NIC messing up one of the offloaded tasks is a likely one, if I remember other strange errors that have happened in this context. To bad that he doesn't have access to the machine to do more thorough tests.
I agree that it's a waste of effort, and that the battle is lost even if you had a solid argument, but you don't. "Drone" has been used to refer to unmanned aircraft since at least as far back as World War 2.

This article is a good summary:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014241278873241104045786258...
wow

you must be rich.
“The majority of lonely deaths are people who are kind of messy,”

The need for instant gratification is a constant for those affected by major depression.
This may come across as "messy" when in reality severely depressed people would skip anything that does not directly improve their mood.

As despair takes over and one cannot find light at the end of the tunnel, the search for this light or simply giving up becomes the main thing whereas everything else becomes irrelevant.

I'm no psychologist but could not help noticing this kind of behaviour over the years in many cases of depression, suicides, etc.
I disagree that drone is wrong here. It's not clear to me that UAV or RPA is any clearer - certainly I expect a lot fewer people are familiar with RPA as a term, and I'm not convinced that UAV has any fewer connotations. I think the term 'civilian drone' might give the right impression.
There are more people with perfect scores than seats for them. The SAT iant a hard enough test to distinguish elite students -- it is a high school level math and English test.
Privacy is a reasonable thing to expect in basically all business transactions, regardless of whether it's listed specifically in a contract. Firms that want to maintain good relations with the startup community want to be seen as trustworthy.
Considering this revenue number, it really can't be valued at 10Billion dollars.
That's a very libertarian point of view. Has it been shown to work in practice over an extended time? I know that in the US growth was stronger with higher taxation.

I don't believe progressive taxation is discriminatory. The more you earn, the more the marginal utility of each additional dollar you earn is reduced. Progressive taxation recognizes this, and therefore eases survival burdens on lower income workers - who are necessary for any capitalist economy to function - while continuing to allow higher earners to become wealthy. It's a good system.
What does the end product show? Doctors kill plenty of patients.
And I found that fraction credible since it's been generally true after the 1986 tax reform (the following Clinton and Bush II tax changes didn't do all that much, especially compared to the Reagan changes).
I don't think it's robbery unless you don't participate in the state.

That's irrelevant. It's robbery because your agency, your ability to choose is being taken from you. As a thought experiment, ask yourself this:

What if you were on your way to a local orphanage to give your last $100 to the orphanage, and halfway there, a robber with a gun steps from an alleyway, puts a gun in your face, and demands your money... then, after he gives it to you, he proceeds to the same orphanage and hands the money to them.

Would you still say you were robbed? The same end was achieved, so you really weren't, right? But yet, almost everybody will intuitively find something wrong about this scenario. That "wrongness" is the issue.
Each situation I unique, but before modifying the prices read the patio11 "raise your prices" advice:
https://hn.algolia.com/?query=patio11%20raise%20your%20price...
Twitter's Dorsey: 'We should question' how we hire
So it's perfectly kosher to list big-time "investors" when your company gives them free equity? I was always under the impression that MLB, NFL, etc. voluntarily ponied up to invest in DraftKings.
What is registration supposed to do? Broadly, those who will register are responsible enough to not be a problem, those idiots you want to control won't register, and it all just ends up mostly harassing the wrong people. Have and enforce laws against bad behavior, yes, but stop this "guilty until proven innocent" nonsense.
Somehow I have a feeling commercial aircraft, military aircraft, and rocket launches are already registered with the US government. Just a feeling.
Are folks afraid of bitcoin?

You are part of the tiny percentage of the tiny percentage of the population that understands bitcoin.
Code: https://github.com/lihaoyi/ammonite

Docs: http://lihaoyi.github.io/Ammonite/
You're saying the salmon population isn't in a single eigenspace of it's number operator?!
Likely because welfare in general is unpopular and a subject of much antagonism. Particularly in the case of a Friedmanite negative income tax, it would create an unconditional basic income for people of lower income brackets, with all the moral and economic arguments there are against that.
Regulation applied to freedom of commerce is what's raised quality of life for people, not commerce as unregulated as possible ("let the free market be").

Life is better with worker safety regulations, child labor regulations, overtime regulations, regulations on being fired (which we in the US generally don't have), and so on.

The goal of "let the free market be" is what made life brutal for scores of workers throughout the first part of the industrial revolution--we moved away from that all with good cause.
Would you apply the same logic to cars? Because I think all of your points apply equally to cars, but nobody seems to object to the idea of both registering them and requiring a license to drive.
We all would've been robbed of the best RoR book of all time had your timing been right...
Kicktraq estimate of Solu computer kickstarter campaign
Why? I think progressive taxes are the price you pay for living in a civilized society.

I see paying a high taxes as a privilege since I still get to keep much more then less fortunate, less talented, or lazier people. I say this as someone who is living in Europe, where I'm paying almost 50% of my income to taxes.
...really? Because both aircraft and road vehicles today have identifiers painted or printed on them. What about driving around with a license plate or flying with a tail number? What's the difference?
This has to be one of the stupidest ideas I've ever heard in my life. Not because it doesn't possibly have some noble intent behind it, but - if for no other reason - because it's going to be bloody impossible to enforce. When any hobbyist can easily build a drone/UAV without much in the way of special skills or equipment, how in the hell do they ever expect they'll get everybody to register them?
Well if you're flying a real plane or copter, you have its registration number widely visible. No difference there.
Huh. I've been seeing a lot of startup friends transition into public policy & lobbying centered around tech. I wonder if legislation is the next phase of the industry?
Yes, I make UAVs as my day job and I run into this confusion regularly. People are very confused about the meaning of the term drone. For some people 'drone' definitively means military drone. For others, 'drone' definitively means a quad-rotor. In the news it's a catch-all term that could mean anything.

When I describe that I make 1,200 pound unmanned helicopters, the first question is always, "Is that like a drone?". In their minds it is neither a quad-rotor, nor carrying missiles, so they're not sure what to call it.
That's my mistake, I was assuming just federal income tax, thanks for the correction.
Heaven help us if Twitter becomes the standard ruler for sane valuations.
Only if you drive them on public roads.

So maybe not a public road -> airspace below a certain height?
> When poor people are explicitly given a room, 3 square meals/day, and government issue poor-people sweats

What if someone inherited a place to live, but has no money? What if she grows her own food, but she can't afford the suit she needs to interview for jobs?

Premise 1: Each person's situation is distinct. In other words, there is no standard group of benefits that would solve everyone's problems.

Premise 2: Poor people will use cash to improve their lives in the long term, rather than just blowing the money on short-term pleasures.

That second premise is exactly what's being demonstrated in small studies, national programs outside the US, and surveys.
Well theres also reason to question the size of x. If substantial amounts of money are wasted in the effort of allocating x, might it be better to just use that money to increase x and go for a simpler allocation model. For example equal amounts to everyone.

After that you must consider the systematic effects. If you do manage to increase x and allocate it to the poor. What will it do to the economy? There is a chance that it will feedback into increased tax revenue, which again raises x. More money allocated to the poor means more money spent on things needed by the poor, which means increased demand for certain goods and so forth. It's also possible that the same poor, now equipped with secure funding, starts new business to fill that demand which creates jobs and more taxable incomes.
I'm guessing that they're not worried about the hobbyists, who are generally more responsible; but the random people getting assembled drones as Xmas gifts.
Just saw this film. High caliber stuff. Highly recommended.

Quick fun fact: It was directed by Cary Joji Fukunaga, director of S1 True Detective
> should this not be "Windows corrupting UDP Datagrams in some (possibly lower chance) cases"?

I mean, I guess, but I kinda assumed as much, since if Windows was corrupting UDP at any significant frequency certainly it would have been noticed by now.
The clear solution is to give each LP different revenue numbers. That will make it trivial to identify the leaker.
"Has it been shown to work in practice over an extended time?"

Depends on what you mean by "work"--this is what things looked like in the late 1800s, early 1900s, in the US. Conditions for workers were bad enough that it led to the union movement, federal workplace regulation, etc.

For most people, you'd have a hard time saying it "worked", but for the handful of people who got rich during that time, sure, it "worked".
You are really missing the point here and you have some key assumptions wrong.

>recipients of the email and the senders of the email have very different ideas

What does that mean? They sign up for our service and expect to get e-mails from us, which they don't receive. We have the same "idea", but the third-party is interfering with that "idea".

>if the recipients can't complain, that's a problem

I will repeat that by definition of the business model, the recipients don't complain to the third-party because they have no knowledge that the third-party even exists.

>but it's not like people don't have a choice of email providers

Even if recipients did know about the third party, do you know the switching costs of e-mail? And, you're suggesting that we should wait until all of our affected members get fed up and change providers (hoping that provider doesn't use the same service, etc.)? All of this, when the problem is obviously being caused by the third-party's error, yet they have no responsibility?

Sorry, but of course the third-party is absolutely compelled to provide some recourse for legitimate senders that are mis-classified. Too hard with all the spammers out there, you say? Sorry. Pick another business.
For what it's worth, the people actually using these, namely the US Air Force doesn't call them drones in any official capacity - but alternatively UAS, RPV, RPA and very rarely UAV. In fact when I was a briefer, just as they were becoming ubiquitous, there was quite a bit of debate about calling them RPAs vs UAVs, which was the most used term at the time.

The DoD nor USG has never officially associated "Drone" with any specific flying operations.
Don't know about OP, but I could use it to connect to fast storage on network and do some video finishing. Laptop has sufficient power, but no storage of that capacity.
I live in San Mateo but used to live in SF. It took me a while to realize I hated living in SF. I left when somebody pointed out that since I had no interest in nightlife or bars or going out to restaurants in crowded parts of the city, I didn't really need to live there.

Your "45 minute commute" is a bit optimistic, it's more like an hour from WC.
UNHCR has some experience with this http://www.unhcr.org/515a959e9.pdf
In what way is Blender's UI powerful?

Blender itself is powerful, yes. But that is in spite of its terrible UI. Most of the controls don't even have useful tooltips.

To be fair, they are improving it slowly but surely.
Yeah, there's a lot of nuance here. I know many people who may not be where they are without government assistance as a child, myself included.

But I also see my alcoholic sister who uses almost all of her child benefits for liquor. That said, without the direct payments, I would expect her to turn to prostitution. So there's that at least.
Interesting that the revenue share of winnings is projected to remain 10%. This suggests players don't value playing on a site that takes a smaller percentage of the game - or that the sites collude. Do any of the companies that occupy the 5% of the market not Fanduel/Draftkings try to differentiate based on cost?
You just have to signal the right way to show other people that you're the right type of person. Hard to explain but if you experiment you can find that this will get you a huge amount of the way.
What are the best resources to learn Node