skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's the same foolish concept people have been reinventing since early secure UNIX's hosted on security kernels. Long story short, it was impossible without breaking applications and lots of staff back when UNIX had "dozens" of system calls. It's not going to work this time.

The solution high assurance security adopted was to virtually or physically isolate a UNIX/Linux stack that interacted with security-critical software that ran directly on microkernel and through mediated interfaces. This resulted in commercial work like INTEGRITY-178B and LynxSecure with Nizza, Perseus, and OKL4/OKLinux in OSS space. Look up "Mikro-SINA VPN" (yes with a k) for great case study. Middleware like Camkes was developed for integration. Similarly, kernels like INTEGRITY and PikeOS developed safe/secure runtimes that ran directly on kernel for Ada and Java.

What this project and all others like it need to do is this:

A. Drop all efforts at rebuilding UNIX in language X.

B. Get a user-mode version of Linux running on it with user-space drivers on microkernel for one, easily-acquired board.

C. Redirect safe language efforts on creating a secure runtime on the microkernel.

D. Create middleware tools along lines of Protocol Buffers, ZeroMQ, or LANGSEC stuff. These should allow seemless, efficient integration between untrusted (esp GUI) stuff in Linux VM and trusted stuff in safe lang uage runtime.

E. Begin on a POSIX-like runtime whose components can be stripped on a case-by-case basis. Focus on syscalls used by critical libraries and services first.

F. The current goal of full POSIX. 99% dont make it to E. If they get here, then great. If to E, then we get at least some apps. If to C and D, then we at least have trustworthy runtime.

That's my two cents worth and builds on what's historically happened in these efforts.
Zombies are not uncommon to see for an app running in a container that forks off other processes. This isn't every program but forking processes is pretty common, enough so to be worrisome.

For instance, some programs watch the Docker event stream and can reload, say, HAproxy configuration to automatically load balance any new containers which come up. In my experience, running such a program in a container can make reloading the HAproxy process frequently tend to create a huge variety of zombie processes - and once they're present, zombies are difficult to eliminate without a reboot.
I don't understand your example. Force Awakens grossed over a billion. In a few months it'll get a DVD run and make more money and then it'll end up on Netflix (maybe) and make more money there. ... So why would the studios ever bypass the cinema money for streaming when they can have both?
Counter argument: Standardization and federation comes at a cost. Facebook can build a more cohesive product with interesting features by controlling the ecosystem completely. That's the whole point; they gain nothing by just being yet-another-protocol.

That being said, Facebook does let you chat via Jabber. I use it (with Messenger on OSX), and it works, but it's a completely mediocre experience devoid of what makes FB Messenger special.

An example: FB lets you send one-click "likes". It's a great feature; it means "acknowledged". Yet you can't send it with third-party clients, and third-party clients receive it as a URL to an image of a thumbs-up. There's dozens of features like this. How frustrating would it be if Facebook Voice Calls only worked with some people, or someone's client didn't support group messages?
GPS still doesn't beat a good driver 9 out of 10 times for city driving. Uber drives consistently miss exits, head down clearly mistaken paths created by GPS errors, sit there staring at the GPS rather than the road

I uber to work everyday and 90% of the time the uber driver blindly follows GPS through an alley that isn't really meant for traffic, ignoring the much simpler and faster route that whatever GPS uber uses can't figure out.

But it's cheaper, cleaner, and will show up on demand. But the navigation of the driver is the big positive for cabs.
Do you think Netflix will ever offer offline viewing? That would be awesome for traveling.
> once you have rules, there are some people who for some reason or another go out of their way to argue that a behavior violates/does not violate the rules and completely ignore whether the behavior was benign or malignant

Maybe projects can adopt CoCs that address that too, and cover both sides of the coin.
REMOTE LATEST 2016  NEW HACKING SOFTWARE FOR MOBILE PHONES AND WINDOWS PC
This Hacking software is the latest and can work remotely without getting access to the phone.
You can read messages, listen to calls, divert SMS, Viber, BBM, Whatsapps, Faebook, Skype message. Delete

photos and call logs.

With the software, you can monitor and know current location and know exactly where he/she is, listen to

he/she calls and see who he/she is chatting with at real time.

the software works remotely without getting access to the phone.
Mobile phone spy, latest software spy, cell phone hacking, cell phone spy, Mobile phone tracking, spy phone,

spy mobile.

Contact us now for your own copy.
Skype: harklodz
http://yezlodz.do.am/
Jabber: yezlodz@jabber.ru
Email: yezlodz@gmail.com
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ow1ktm5nwy6um5f/Screenshot%202016-...

Excuse the formatting. That's the top 10 by fatalities weighted by population.

Short answer: it's all over the map.
If doing this sort of thing, make sure to accomplish it in a single step (image layer) in the Dockerfile. Otherwise you won't be doing any good as the "removed" files actually persist behind a layer which specifies them as removed.
HP was designed a "flat memory" OS based on vast amounts of cheap memrister memory http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/536786/machine....
But when I googled gfor this article I saw the project has been delayed.
Its important to note that WhatsApp is not part of Internet.org. The telecom providers in India are not happy with messaging apps as they are cutting into their text messaging revenues. And they want to charge people for WhatsApp access (its already happening). With Facebook's help they get to create a tiered internet under the guise of "helping the poor".
Netflix in my country is like living in the 90s.
Synthetic Network Monitoring on Debian/Raspberry Pi
I know exactly how much "crap" customers are willing to deal with. The difference is that unlike you, I don't take it as a given that they are wrong to do so. Is your computer crap because it's not a blue gene? Are you dealing with crap by driving a Honda instead of a Bentley? If people willingly choose conditions you think to be horrible, try to at least consider the possibility that you might be the one misjudging things and not them.
> being able to cost themselves lower than conventional cabs because they have such a massive amount of capital

Is Uber less expensive than regular cabs?

My experience in Uber so far has been uniformly excellent and my experience in regular cabs has ranged between ok and dismal. I think I would probably be willing to pay around a 25% premium to use Uber over a regular cab.

The traditional taxi operators haven't needed to care about customer experience for so long, that I'm not sure they can change.
Totally understandable and acceptable, but then you can't complain that your CREDIT card isn't being accepted. You can very easily get $500/mo limit credit cards these days. Or indeed, you also have prepaid top up Visa and Mastercards.

Just make sure - if you get a credit card - to pay off the balance in full each month.
Smith's invisible hand in action.
We were.
I think the difference is, when you called someone in the 90s to ask to say borrow a cup of sugar:

Call neighbor. 1 minute of small talk
Ask the question
Get answer
more small talk.
Say goodbye.

Today it would be (via txt):

A: can i borrow a c of sugar?
B: y. come over
A: k

A lot of communication happens through text messages which dramatically reduces the number of words you say to another human being.

I think what is more damaging is that most people can solve their own problems without ever having to rely on neighbors or even family. Cell phones, uber, and other services remove the need to ask for help. You don't really ask people for directions, ask the time, find out how to do something.

Yes. people still talk to neighbors, family, friends, etc. But it happens much less and in much different contexts. For instance the vast majority of people would not call their neighbor to check on their kids because they are stuck in a storm.
NetBeez makes sure that users on large and distributed enterprise networks have access to the applications and resources they need. As soon as an app or the network connectivity goes down it notifies the network operator.

It works by installing software agents/bots in the network that simulate user behavior. We use Raspberry Pis to host our agent software, because their low-cost, size, and power consumption make it possible to scale to hundreds of agents from a pricing and technology perspective. It does wired and WiFi monitoring.

If you are network engineer and have any Raspberry Pis laying around install an agent on them and play with NetBeez.
I'd suggest some duct tape and a newspaper. Those are less conspicuous and you might get away with it without ending up in handcuffs.
I'm not sure I would call Slashdot a tech news site anymore. They seem to loathe tech.
They are proxied through servers.
I've got a question for you since you mentioned that you use it to take class notes. I have attempted this in the past and I have found it pretty hard to keep up with a professor while they talk and write things down. When it is just straight speech I am taking notes of there is no problem of course since it is just normal text. But when math starts being quickly written on a board I find it hard to keep up.

Writing out all the symbols names and getting the formatting right seems to take a fair amount of time and I typically get behind.

I have a Microsoft Surface I use for class, so what I have just switched to handwriting the notes now on the surface.
A security-focused microkernel does three things (simplified): isolation in time and space of various partitions; mediated communication between them; facilitate management of hardware resources. Note that nothing on this list prevents damage within a partition, just between them. So, one still needs to secure the partition's code and data against attack if it must be trusted.
Fascinating. Where were you in school?
Cómo hacer dinero con un blog del sitio
You can submit a pull request to.. oh wait you can't... never mind.

You can complain about it until they add it just to shut everyone up.
> Is there any one in the community who is actively working on the verification story ?

Not sure. I'd look out for videos to show up at the RISC-V workshop that's ongoing (http://riscv.org/workshop-jan2016.html).

The problem is verification is where the $$$ is, so even amongst people sharing their CPU source code, they're less willing to share the true value-provided of their efforts. A debug spec is being developed and will be added to Rocket-chip to make this problem easier.

With that said, MIT gave a good talk at the RISC-V workshop about their works on verification, and we open sourced our torture tester at (http://riscv.org/workshop-jan2016.html).
Re: low-level Rust, I've been really enjoying following this series:

http://os.phil-opp.com/

It shows a variety of ways to safely wrap unsafe code and then provide strongly-typed safe interfaces to the hardware, no pointer twiddling required. A particularly good example is the section "Some Clever Solution" in the "Page Tables" post.
What definition of "original content" do selfies fail to meet?
Testing Already Written Code
Cobalt salted hydrogen bombs are one fairly plausible route - how many and how large they'd need to be is another question.

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

[Of course, they don't exist at the moment - but they wouldn't be that difficult to make as one advantage of a Doomsday bomb is that you don't need to deliver it so it can be made as large as you want through staging].
>> And criminal background checks are useless if you haven't been in the country very long; how are they going to check your background in Pakistan?

Recent immigrants have been through the US boarder enforcement regime. It isn't perfect, but it is something more than the average american goes through. So it is incorrect to say that being a recent immigrant renders any background check pointless.

Remember that is the US with the reputation for difficulties re background checks. Getting a definitive answer as to someone's convictions in 50+ different jurisdictions that make up the US is far more complicated than from a unified justice system as found in Pakistan, Canada or India. And given some of the gibberish I've seen from US agents, their english is far more comprehensible.
I will miss the transportation market taxi cabs provide. When the constraint is on supply-side (drivers) but the cost is constant (that is, given a sufficiently capable driver, your fare should be about the same) you're only limited by hailing a cab, which has become quite a bit easier now that everyone is using Lyft and Uber. Oh well. I get that the QoS is not as consistent with cabs, but I always found that part fun.
Given that people in the U.S. have the right to be armed, with anything from nail clippers to 18-wheelers, I demand a bit more justification for a violent intervention than simply carrying or controlling a weapon.

So you are correct when you say armed with a toy and armed with a functional weapon should be treated in the same way. But I don't think possessing an object that may or may not be a weapon is sufficient justification in itself for the use of lethal force. I think police need to exercise every available opportunity to de-escalate conflicts, with the goal being to deliver the suspects alive and unharmed to the courts for arraignment. That may actually mean that the cops have to let the suspect fire a shot before he gets a lead shower. That would leave no doubt that yes, it is a real weapon, and yes, the suspect is willing to use it inappropriately.

I don't want 750k Judge Dredds on the street, acting as judge, jury, and executioner.

When a man takes cover and points a gun, he should be ordered to "show me empty hands" [0], then given a reasonable opportunity to assess his situation and comply. If he even fires the gun, and injures a cop, he should still be given an opportunity to surrender and make it to the courtroom alive.

[0] As "drop the weapon" is confusing to a person not actually carrying one.
This is so true, the world has changed greatly and not everyone has gotten the memo. I saw a really cool device made by Texas Memory systems which was a "ram disk" that was all ram with disk backing, and when you lost power it flushed to disk. I wanted something that worked better for a storage paradigm and designed/invented a network accessible memory appliance[1]. Basically using ethernet packets you could store 8K integrity protected chunks right there on the network. Initially I wanted to use a typical low power CPU with a bunch of DRAM attached but the CPU bottleneck got in the way, so we redesigned/rebuilt it out of FPGAs so that it had a couple of terabytes of RAID protected RAM in an appliance with a very simple network protocol for storing and fetching 8K blocks out of what was essentially a linear address space. Two of these on different power subsystems provided all of the fault tolerance you needed and you could have a terabyte of 'structured' data live from the moment your computer booted (made for very fast recovery from reboot).

[1] https://www.google.com/patents/US8316074
Amazon drafts blueprints for its own home router, IoT gateway ARM chips
Its philosophical. Note how you discuss if the CoC is controversial, not the maintainer wanting to enforce it, or how you phrase it as "there is a CoC" rather than "the maintainer will apply force as necessary".

Folks with agency or autonomy will personally act to eliminate harassment, without need for rules, for example. Troll on my turf, I will ban you. Not some set of rules taking action, a human (that being me) will exert authority (that being the mighty banhammer) and that's how it will be. There are no abstract rules or rule lawyering involved.

The CoC view is passively sugar coating some abstract set of rules which will enforce itself, kinda. Its very weird because the person applying the CoC is too passive and has too little agency to, say, wield the banhammer and eliminate the threat without need of formal rules and regulations. Yet, has enough agency to force everyone else to work under a CoC, which simultaneously implies the same people that can't autonomously be trusted to exhibit common sense will none the less be forced by the rules to apply the rules they were too timid to apply by themselves without the CoC. Its very weird logic twisting.

If you trust individual leaders, the CoC is useless because the have the agency to wield the banhammer with no need for rules. If you don't trust the leaders, the CoC is useless because they won't enforce it.

So what is the use of a CoC? Well, for one thing instead of banhammer swinging we can raise awareness and have a debating party about what violates the abstract rules. No one can be kicked out without a long painful debate. Its a rule's lawyer's paradise rather than a developers paradise.

CoC's are very passive, someone else will enforce the rules. That paradoxically leads to worse behavior. Pretending you're not in a benign despotism merely confuses and slows down necessary responses by all concerned.

Its sort of a generic opposition to all that is Dilbertian, along the lines of not requiring casual IRC / SMS message conversations to be conducted as per "Robert's Rules of Order" Its not that the rules are in themselves bad, its that if you think you need Roberts Rules of Order for IRC something is hopelessly off the tracks and you can only hope you don't show up as a satire in a Dilbert or xkcd cartoon.

Maybe a bad bar analogy is the bartender tosses out obnoxious drunks. Installing a set of formal rules that drunkards must be formally recognized by the chair of the meeting before speaking as per Roberts Rules and if you don't then an abstract someone should toss you out implies you're probably in one messed up bar.
> Background checks are a canard. How do the cab companies check the background of someone from Uzbekistan?

In other words, "Hey, Uber hires known felons and its okay because I can think of a scenario where background checks fail."

By that logic, stop visiting the doctor, using seat belts, or any safety device known to man because it can fail for some non-0 fraction of the time.

> U/L do carry insurance for their drivers when they're driving a passenger, and it's probably more than the regular cab companies carry (which is why SF Yellow cab is going bankrupt: they weren't insured for enough for one of their incompetent drivers, according to the article)

http://www.propertycasualty360.com/2015/02/09/uh-ohuber-has-...

http://www.buzzfeed.com/kenbensinger/ubers-yawning-insurance...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/harrycampbell/2015/10/07/why-are...

> Drivers can answer no and effectively lie to their insurance company (while also committing insurance fraud) but still receive coverage, or they can say yes and they would be immediately denied coverage. Additionally, they could even be dropped from their policy for disclosing that they are a rideshare driver.

> Since it’s not really in Uber’s best interest to disclose the lack of collision coverage during Period 1, many drivers don’t discover that they’re not covered until it’s too late. I’ve been researching rideshare insurance options in Nevada since Uber went live and spoken with hundreds of Uber drivers yet we haven’t been able to find a single insurance carrier willing to insure rideshare drivers. Some carriers offer a commercial policy but the cost is prohibitive at $3,000-$5,000 a year.

> Meanwhile, risk-averse insurance companies have been excruciatingly slow to adapt to this new and innovative form of transportation. I maintain an up to date list of insurance options by state for Uber drivers on my site and you’ll notice that Nevada is not currently on that list. There literally isn’t a single option for drivers which unfortunately is somewhat typical. A majority of states in the US still don’t offer a rideshare friendly personal insurance or hybrid policy for Uber drivers which means a whole lot of drivers are forced to lie to their insurance carriers or find a different line of work.

There are some pretty significant gaps in that coverage that shift the burden to drivers, depending on the state.

In fact there is an entire business built around the fact there are massive holes in that policy:

https://www.metromile.com/uber/

> Traditional auto insurance policies may not provide clear coverage for drivers who participate in ridesharing programs. The partnership between Uber and Metromile means you’re insured 24/7, whether you’re using your car for personal use or driving with Uber. Now, Metromile offers complete clarity to Uber driver partners.

The difference with Uber is the driver gets fucked instead of the Taxi/Uber company.

> As for health insurance, from what I've read a lot of cab drivers aren't full-time employees either, so they also don't get health insurance, or benefits.

I'm not even going to bother with this one. I've pointed out enough holes already.
> Standardization and federation comes at a cost.

At a cost that provides long term interopraibility benefits. But these just care about short term rip offs and as well causing interoperability problems for their users (i.e. preventing communication with other services). We must be extremely lucky this didn't stay like that for e-mail.

> they gain nothing by just being yet-another-protocol.

That's the point. They measure their gain in how much they can mess up their users (by preventing them from communicating with users of other services). While gain should be measured in how useful such services can become (enhancing, not crippling communication).

> That being said, Facebook does let you chat via Jabber

It's not federated (which defeats the main purpose).

> I use it (with Messenger on OSX), and it works, but it's a completely mediocre experience devoid of what makes FB Messenger special.

If they wanted to improve things and thought that XMPP can't reach that goal, they could propose their non XMPP chat as IETF standard. Same as Google could do with Hangouts and so on.
This is the worst use of the neologism I've yet seen:

(1) It's not perfectly clear what the definition is in this particular context. Usually the word is used to indicate "our stuff is rad fast bro" implying that speed is obtained through cleverness such as the use of efficient code or an efficiently scalable architecture, but the linked article violates this definition by comparing apples (CPUs) and oranges (storage). It's nonsensical in the manner of "my word processor is more performant than my fractal renderer".

(2) Normally, use of this neologism saves time by replacing a long phrase. This use in the linked article is backwards: the word "faster" could have been used in place of the longer "more performant."
The traditional taxi business in the US hasn't exactly been the model of regulatory compliance. Regulatory capture on the other hand...
I like you.
It helps in fault containment which helps availability primarily. Without IOMMU, they still can wreak havoc. So, drivers shown to be safe is still beneficial. I've so far seen that done with Ada/SPARK, w/ static analysis, Java w/ driver partly in JVM, and most recently ATS language. Rust would make a nice experiment.