skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> If you had been allowed in and it was obviously something internal, would you really just assume that Google intended for you to have access?

So this is a great example. Suppose you type "ssh root@google.com" on a lark and it unexpectedly lets you in. Your reaction is, of course, WTF. Something is wrong and you start trying to figure out what it is. DNS record point to the real google.com? Some malware or network attacker doing a MITM on all your ssh connections? What does the remote side think its network configuration is?

This "wait, what?"-type reaction is completely innocuous. But the CFAA says you're already going to jail.

Now if you get root@google.com and start reading everybody's gmail and stealing credit cards from Google Play, you deserve to go to jail. But there are like fifteen separate other laws against that stuff.

> Literally all of your objections would apply identically to trespassing laws. Do you have to check the lock on every door before you know whether or not you're allowed on the other side?

Is it the front door to a store? Because yes. If the door is locked you expect that the store is closed, if not you expect it to be open for business.

And that is the context we have in computer networks. The expectation is that things you shouldn't have access to don't allow you to access them and most everything actually works that way most of the time.

> It's not exclusively based on the reasonable person standard, that's just what it falls back to when the situation isn't completely clear.

It is, it's just that in some cases the reasonable person standard is completely clear. The problem is the rest of the time it's as clear as mud and the outcome is a coin flip -- or 80% in your favor but the consequences are so severe you can't take the chance.

> More to the point, this case is about a guy who started a new company to compete with his previous employer, and then accessed the computers at the old company. Are you really suggesting that the question of whether he was authorized should depend on whether he was successful?

What I would suggest is that the CFAA ought to be entirely redundant for cases like this. Charge the man with misappropriating trade secrets and so on. What does it have anything to do with whether he used a computer or not?
The strain relief would be more effective if it was tapered instead of ending abruptly. A stiffer sleeve will reduce the bending moments on the conductor, and a higher gauge for the conductor will make it last longer.
> But according to the parent comment, guilty until proven innocent

Where did I state something even remotely close to this?
And in that case you'd be looking at hospitalization rather than jail. (Though the person would still not have freedom of movement it would be a whole lot better for them.)
Yeah, a lot of CAs do this.
I don't like it, I'd prefer a policy that forbids that. But as long as they don't force me to use that option I'm kinda okay with it.
Science is just as much abot politics as any other human endeavour; witness the time it took geologists to accept the idea of tectonic plates.
That would be the freedom FROM association.

Freedom of Association is the right to join or remove yourself from a group for the sake of collective right.
The state wouldn't admit their mistake because they have potential civil liability for imprisoning someone that clearly couldn't have been the perpetrator. The DA's refusal to drop the charges even after the obvious differences between perpetrator and the defendant were pointed out was outrageous and almost certainly constitutes willful misconduct. This guy can and should sue.

The larger issue is that prosecutors do this kind of thing routinely. Since most of them take jobs as prosecutors with an eye toward obtaining higher-paying jobs at prestigious law firms, perhaps the best way to combat this type of behavior would be a name-and-shame website. Every DA insisting on outlandish sentences for minor crimes, or that refuses to drop charges in the face of clear evidence that the someone is innocent, should be named and their record of inhumanity should haunt them at the top of Google search results for the remainder of their career.
Nobody was fired, as far as I know, but the editor certainly resigned (http://nypost.com/2015/07/30/rolling-stone-editor-quits-same...).
It sounds to me like there was only one mis-step in this story. The mis-identification was resolved quite quickly once the accused had a competent private lawyer. So it seems to me that this case is not an indictment of our legal system as a whole so much as it is an indictment of underfunded and/or incompetent public defenders.

What if we tried funding the public defender's office with the same average amount of money per case handled as the prosecutor's office as? What effect would that have on both justice and people's perception of justice? And is this a simple enough test to be run with either public or private funds in a few sample municipalities as an experiment?
To reiterate, because you missed my original point: The author thinks we're doing okay at security, and capabilities failed. We aren't doing okay at security, and capabilities are still a promising solution.

The solutions where capabilities are truly most promising have no embedded competitors. I'm looking at things like SELinux here. Few other solutions (except e.g. Macaroons) are actually capable of making correct authorization decisions in scenarios involving 3+ principals: the competition is broken, and vicariously, so are most authorization systems which try to solve 3+ principal authorization problem correctly.

You may as well be arguing that memory safe / garbage collected languages lost to C circa 1995. C is broken and programs written in C will always be full of holes as compared to equivalent programs in memory safe languages just in the same way as authorization systems not built to handle 3+ principals will make wrong decisions. This is why it's 2015 and we're still dealing with CSRF.

If you implement SELinux at your job like I do, and have some informed criticism about how Capsicum is unneeded because SELinux is great, I'd love to hear it! But I'm guessing that isn't the case... I am also guessing it's an area the OP is not particularly informed about.
There's absolutely nothing racist about that statement.

It's actually a very accurate description of how a group that historically is facing systematic injustices and racism get to have fewer illusions than the comfortable majority.

If anything, it's ANTI-racist.

Not being racist is not the same as believing that racial minorities have absolutely the same experiences and outlooks as the majority.

A group of who had the cops enforce Jim Crow and segregation on them, or arrest, harass and shot them far more often than another group, has a different outlook on this "justice" thing.
> Apple HAS implemented strain relief

Apple favors form over function and tries to make their cables in interfaces as small as possible. The result is that there's no room left in their designs for adequate strain relief. They end up using the smallest cables they can get away with and have a bushing around the cable as it enters it's housing to protect against lateral force and that's about it. There's rarely any internal strain relief mechanism.
Stronger Locks, Better Security
The problem is if you only do a software boycott they can just reinstall their crap

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150812/11395231925/lenov...
It might make sense if a unique private key was generated each time the application was downloaded.

For example, a user wishing to use the Azure web services either supplies their own cert/public key to Azure, OR requests Azure to generate a unique cert/key, and supplies the private key to you. Now, obviously, someone using Azure APIs doesn't install this key into your root store.

And that's the second "WTF?" - why install this as a Trusted Root cert, when your application could just hold it locally, and reference it?

(The first WTF being distributing a common private key - rendering the point of encryption useless.)
> If that shot of the person's face is from a video of the incident that person is not him.

Yes, but as far as we know, it's just a picture on the internet.
He wasn't saying that there is no incompetence or corruption; he said that it's not statistically probable for you to run across a case like this if considering all cases in the U.S.

The United States is a very large country, and I've seen a lot of people give it flak for incidents like this that happen here. Each and every state has different laws about incarceration, and the cultures of each of the states varies very widely. Pushing a stereotype on someone from the United States is like doing the same for someone from Europe-- not only are there many different subdivisions of Europe with completely different laws and cultures, but the United States is also a larger landmass than Europe, and lends itself to a lot of diversity.
Racism generally does ignore class. One of my best friends is a very successful man who happens to be black - and large, and very dark-skinned. He's a doctor and hospital administrator with strong financial expertise, definitely a one-percenter. How safe do you think he is if he gets pulled over by the cops? If he's walking down the street toward a white person, do you think they get that twinge of fear, or do they think "Actually, he probably makes about ten times what I do, so why would I be afraid he'd mug me?"

Class isn't immediately visible. Skin is.
> They also have no sense of humor and college administrators as a group have no sense of humor or perspective, and they're chronically worried about accusations of indifference or insensitivity (which are themselves as good as convictions).

I don't think this is where I want to draw the argument. If someone makes an insensitive joke, it's true that the social justice movement often reacts disproportionately, but I'm not that worried about people's right to make insensitive jokes. I'm much more worried about the people who are sharing opinions that are perfectly reasonable and necessary to the public discourse and are being squashed. Erika Christakis presented a reasoned argument at Yale for free speech, and people were calling for her and her husband to resign. This isn't a matter of lacking a sense of humor, this is an active campaign to forcibly silence discussion.
"That must kind of suck for those surrounded by people with higher scores."

My experience has been the opposite: you know who has higher scores
than you, yes, and that they're paid more. But you also know what you
need to learn, practice and do in order to raise your scores. It
makes the entire system transparent, comprehensible and above all
means that your pay is essentially something that's entirely under
your control. I found this very liberating.

"so someone's always going to feel treated unfairly."

At some point that will happen, yes. This comes back to the value of
transparency: we strive to create an environment where, if someone
feels hard done by, he or she can have that conversation openly and
safely with the people involved. And it'd be a lot more objective and
constructive than if salaries and their computations were closed.

"I think Joe is being paid more than me, but I don't know for sure,
and I don't know the reasons ..." is a fast-track route to
(justified!) resentment.

"Also, unless you bend the scoring rules ... you have probably reduced
capacity of negotiation to attract talent ... and also probably
reduces your capacity for retention"

So far that's not been my experience. What I've seen is that the open
salary model is a really attractive proposition for candidates,
because they know they'll be paid fairly. The salaries are adjusted
annually based on market changes, CPI, etc.

In terms of being able to compete against companies with higher
salaries, there are two approaches. One: raise the levels for
everyone. Two: compete on culture and other perks (of which we offer
a lot).

One thing we definitely don't do is make exceptions to the model. I
wouldn't recommend it for anyone else taking the same approach,
either: in addition to being the wrong thing to do, my gut feeling is
that backing down on an approach like this would be catastrophic for
staff morale.

Edited: Oh, and we try not to use or think in terms of 'good' and 'bad'. It's not a scale of moral judgement, but a measure of outcomes. Also, we try to keep it as concrete and observation-based as possible. E.g. we don't say "we think this person is a level 4 Fooblerizer", we say "this person has Fooblerized for several clients successfully, and is now leading a team of Fooblerizers on-site".
US Officials Signal Move Toward Embracing Self-Driving Cars
> I can't be bothered to go through the procedure needed to remove or replace the drive...

It's rather unfortunate that most Apple computers (with non-soldered hdd's) still require this level of complexity to change out a routine maintenance component that's expected to fail. (or with some models, the hard drive cannot be replaced at all).
This is exactly why i created that form - i am asking upfront for stuff i am interested in and send recruiter to that url :)
> You have it backwards: all of her personalities were blind, and then the sight returned for one of them.

We are saying the same thing. Some of the personalities are neurologically (not just psychologically) blind, some are not. That's a fascinating result, and certainly suggests that the different personalities are distinct not just psychologically but also at a far deeper level.

> People with DID don't have multiple selves, they have no self at all

It's not clear that your description and the article's are not the same, except for a preference for calling the same state "multiple selves" vs "no self." Both descriptions agree that
something "shattered", and both agree that neurologically the split shards/personalities are remarkably distinct, on every level. I don't think there is a disagreement here.
The problem is that apple expects typical consumers to treat the cable with such care.

Why should I have to buy 2 chargers (at $99 a pop, no less) when one charger for pretty much every other laptop company out there will work for years with "rough and careless" users, and only cost $20 to replace?
I own my own company. In fact, I own two companies.

One of my customers is a fortune-5. I am contracted and I have a small team that I manage within.

If I must explain, I'm a serial entrepreneur. I've owned 3-4 companies in my past including a cable TV company too. It would be more accurate to say I have my hands in many things with not much time on my hands.

THe fortune-5 company is an automotive company genius.
Do We Need a Neuroscience of Terrorism?
Wow! you made me thing of Eldrich Palmer, of The Strain fame.
When in doubt, the answer is no. At least until you ask. Is it really that hard to send an email, "Hey, do you mind if I pound your site with my vuln scanner?", before doing so?
> The general prison population is subject to less post-conviction scrutiny. However, it's subject to more pre-conviction scrutiny

No, its subject to less pre-conviction scrutiny than those charged with murders; at least, from the public defenders I've talked to, PDs assigned to homicides tend to be:

(1) the more experienced, skilled attorneys in the PDs office, and

(2) have the lowest caseloads, and thus the most time and resources to devote to each case.

That means that -- at least as regards those defendants relying on public defenders -- those charged with homicides have more effective representation to subject the prosecution to pre-conviction scrutiny. (For those not relying on public defenders, things may be different, but I suspect even there you'd find that the consequences faced means that more resources of those available to the defendant are devoted to the defense when the charge is murder, thus still subjecting the charges to greater pre-conviction scrutiny.)
I wish they'd use larger images.
> If you're saying mean/hateful stuff online, you deserve to have your real name attached to it.

Says killface?
I'll preface this entire post by saying I have no idea what I'm talking about.

But it makes sense to me. I read an article a few years back about an elderly man (90+ years old) that attributed his longevity to donating blood regularly. It would not surprise me if simply "refreshing" your supply had health benefits.
I liked how he challenged our edge-detection NN in lesson 3. With a gray paper, it is possible to use a dark and white pencils, making 2D looks like 3D.
He does it again in lesson 8, drawing some leaves.
A little meta, but I am noticing more "startups stories as content" out there. (It maybe the red car syndrome, you drive a red car and so see them everywhere) but more and more podcasts, news items are about the real honest it's not all rocket ships to the top stories.

It's good to hear, despite the angst, uncertainty, stress
Sometimes I really wonder about how some commenters on Hacker News extrapolate things like this. My guess is that someone feels badly for the wrongly accused (which is quite understandable), and wants to do anything in his/her power to defend him, like bringing down comments like yours that may reveal any wrongdoing or mistakes on the website creator's part.
We all know that blanket statements are just a convenient way to speak for what a group does or tends to do "in general".

The fact there are outliers doesn't mean a blanket statement is "racist" as long as it's accurate for the most. It's doubly not racist if it's positive (and "understanding how the world really works" is a positive thing).
مؤسسة فهد المسيليم للمقاولات العامة للمباني
How Bad Is Charred Meat, Really?
Well, I'm not in the profession, but my partner has and she has seen a focus on male students at her school, as well as a preference for male nurses in hiring. These are completely anecdotal, of course, so what do we get if we google "men in nursing"?

American Assembly for Men in Nursing: http://aamn.org/

Census report on men in nursing fields: https://www.census.gov/people/io/files/Men_in_Nursing_Occupa...

An article from Men In Nursing magazine: http://www.nursingcenter.com/journalarticle?Article_ID=65843... (admittedly on the second page)

The Male Nurses Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/MaleNurses/

I just thought male nurses was a particularly poor example, as people are interested in increasing the number of male nurses, and looking at the census report they have been having steady success.
Re-base: A Relay inspired library for building React.js and Firebase applications
Self-Driving Cars: A Coming Congestion Disaster?
Yes, ALL of HN thinks that! What a violent online community!
We as the society can probably learn a lot from these people. A sort of live time capsules, you know, providing some "more stable" benchmarks for our life, habits, intents.
Your comment reminds me of the Allegory of the Cave. DID is fascinating, another area of study that I think is interesting is Evolutionary Psychology.
So, I hope I'm using this term correctly, but it seems like you're building a straw man here. I certainly never made the claim that everyone has the same experience and outlook regardless of race. However, as I mentioned in another one of my replies, making a blanket statement that 'black people have no alternative to understanding how the world really works.', reeks of racism to me. In this day and age, people are born into many diverse situations, regardless of shared racial makeup.
"3) Force OEMs that wish to compromise Chrome to write explicit Malware that will be much harder to handwave away and thus be a bigger risk to their reputation."

THIS. Shame on you, Google, for allowing anyone to defeat the certificate pinning you advocated for in the first place!
The TV News re-served the 'first time ever' speech tonight. I sighed.
No, I have my own hosting company. It is not related to the Fortune-5 I was speaking of. To clarify, I own an IT consulting company and I have been on contract with the fortune-5. I supply contract heads else where too - H1Bs.
>It is when it ignores class and takes people of different ethnic and economic groups and treats them as homogeneous based on skin color alone.

You mean just like a racist society does (which makes the statement even more accurate)?

Because even a "rich/european/etc" black person is still a n... when it comes to a racist society, and while his experiences might be better, they'd still be shaped by racism.
A corporate network (or any other end user) should have no trouble enabling some sort of explicit override option. Having the ability to override certs is fine; the problem is that it's default behavior.

Dell would (hopefully) be a lot more reluctant to ship one of these certs and show specific intentions by changing settings to allow this kind of override.
> However, I would say that a blanket statement about all members of a race such as this, 'black people have no alternative to understanding how the world really works.'

Context matters: in a discussion of percentages of a population holding particular views, where it is offered to explain why a certain percentage of blacks holding a view is improbable, that's not a blanket statement, its a statement about the relative frequency of experiences relevant to the belief in question.
Alupis: I should have clarified that I was speaking from my own personal experience with supporting hundreds of laptops. You're right. I admit that my evidence is anecdotal, but there is a lot of it.

As others have already pointed out, no, MagSafe is not gone.

Dell's chargers, as do many other PC chargers over the last 10 years, routinely break the charging port on the computer if they get yanked on too much, which is of course far more expensive to replace than a new charger.

You're bitching a lot about my evidence being anecdotal because it's only based on hundreds of chargers, and you're right, but your evidence appears to be based on, um, a single Dell charger that you think is awesome. That seems pretty weak.

Lastly, I do agree with you about the new USB-C charger for the MacBook. I think it's stupid and a step backwards and I wish they had retained MagSafe on that model.
> Because it's mind-boggling to me that you don't think there is incompetence and corruption.

He didn't say that. He said "much".

There are things that need to be fixed. Is the whole system rotten? No.
>How many guilty people would you set free to avoid imprisoning an innocent person? You said 10.

All of them. With the difference in terminology: They are not being "set free" after being "knowingly guilty" but "remaining free" after "uncertain evidence".

>But probably some of those 10 will be repeat offenders. So how many innocent people will you see murdered in order to avoid imprisoning an innocent person? That's a different question, isn't it?

I'm well aware of the entire argument you are trying to make. Which is why I said the false conviction rate exists. People are willing to trade security from potential repeat offenders at someone else's expense, while never imagining themselves as that someone else.

Let me ask you this:

Would you serve a lifetime prison sentence for a crime you did not commit?

If you are not willing to serve one yourself - you have absolutely no right to ask someone else to do so for your or societies' security. That is my stance on this. People are only okay with this because they never imagine themselves becoming a part of that statistic. Likewise, nobody ever thinks they'll be the one to die in a car accident and even less that they'd be at fault for the accident. But it happens.
Plenty of pets and plenty of livestock. The xkcd biomass graph is a great example of how unnecessary this kind of thing is.
Show HN: Your business, delivered in a box
My takeaway is that public defenders seem to be practically worthless.

I wonder if the problem can't be fixed with a bit of self-help. Black communities could contribute to a fund that would be used to keep a law firm on retainer to deal with criminal accusations on any of their members.