skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
When you say "low-level", might that mean assembly code? If so, got a resume?
Obviously government should not be allowed such power. Simply because it cannot be trusted. Everyone knows it will use this backdoor against everyone without limit. And everyone knows the lengths to which the US will go to spy on their people and everyone else. The fact that this request is being made is further evidence of the government's intentional malevolence. This behavior should not come as a surprise anymore. I mean any reasonable person by now knows what to expect from US government.
yes this is very interesting!
Default permissions are the ability erase everything. It actually requires work to remove those permissions.

Probably just your exchange admin doesnt have an incentive to change the settings.
> Why does the operating system have any say on what applications get released and how often?

Because it's a curated experience. But debian (or any distro) don't force you to use their versions. You're quite able to install your own on your free, open source software. Find your own repositories, set up your own repositories, manually install downloaded packages, configure/make/make-install your own software... debian not only doesn't stop you from doing this, but is built around letting you do this (as are all major distros).

You're not forced to use a repository at all.
Show HN: Asteroid, an alternative js client for Meteor
I'm probably stupid, but I honestly don't understand this device and Google startegy...

It's called Pixel instead of Nexus, (it's running Android), so it's confusing to many people, on the market positioning side...

At the same time, on the technical side, Android team, after telling us to use Fragments to have nice tablets+phone experience for a few years, seems to not care about fragments anymore. Notably appcompat and design libraries don't work correctly in Fragments anymore... And the Google apps show this very clearly.

If Google apps are not supporting tablets correctly, why should we?
Well if they price it a bit more reasonably then that would work. Some of the offers out there are truly mind boggling. I seem to recall a 10meg data cap as the cheapest option I saw (15 usd or gbp).

200meg @ 5 GBP sounds more reasonable...enough to surf a decent bit but not enough to affect overall speed.
Bernie Sanders, a proud socialist and outspoken advocate of wealth redistribution, just pulled even with Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for President. In the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries, voters under the age of 30 broke for Sanders by 70% (compared to 57% for Obama in 2008). Meanwhile Donald Trump, who has the most liberal social record of all the GOP candidates, and who continually insults the GOP establishment, is 20 points ahead of the rest of the field. For us fans of politics, this is like witnessing two black swans simultaneously emerge within one pond and begin loudly mating. Your populist rebellion may be here.
This is a good high level overview from Twitter (who created Parquet): https://blog.twitter.com/2013/dremel-made-simple-with-parque...
Uber and American Airlines Team Up
Your comment implies that Instacart pays their employees $0. That can't be true.
But Darpa sees 20 years ahead, and if they decide to ban a technology ,i'm sure the legal process will be expedient enough.
I think you misunderstood what I'm trying to say.

I don't have an issue with featuring third party reviews of your own product on your own page. But if you're going to show those, and they're only 3/5 star reviews, the assumed law of self-interestedness would seem to indicate that that was the best you could do... 3/5 stars. You're stating publicly that you can only satisfy your customers to 60%. Why are your standards so low, I would ask?

Store.apple.com ALSO shows reviews, but they're almost all at least 4 stars. That's something to be proud of.
Does linking another e-mail to my Gmail mean that Google will go harvest all of the e-mails from the Inbox of that account in order to deliver targeted ads?

I ask because I don't want to link my 15 year-old Hotmail account to it if that's the case. I'll just stay with the web client.
> useless because scrypt(password,salt,work_factor) on the server is plenty hard to attack.

It enables DoS attacks, though, right?
As someone currently preparing to interview with Google I'd take 4 hours implementing real code over a (recommended) 2 weeks of basic algorithms, data structures, math, etc. revision.
The owner is alive, the phone is owned by the government and always has been.
I researched them in the past but couldn't find any public list of the banks they support, so it's hard to tell how much coverage they have compared to Yodlee.com for instance.

Do you have to be a paying customer to pry that information (i.e. list of banks they support) out of them?
This article is full of "no kidding" like, oh:

> In fact, metros with greater shares of renters have higher wages, higher productivity (measured as economic output per capita), and greater concentrations of high-tech firms, according to Mellander’s basic correlation analysis.

People are attracted to where the jobs are, and so everything gets bought up and inflated, and the late comers have to rent.

In related news, you never see rental apartment buildings among rural grain elevators. Gee, why is that?

Correlation analysis? Yeah, we wouldn't want to jump to any premature conclusions like that the jobs and presence of industry leads to renting; there is a glimmer of hope that we might be able to prove that renting actually causes higher wages, higher productivity and the presence of high-tech. It could be that people come to the city just for the privilege of participating in expensive rent. Then when their bank accounts drain dangerously low, they realize they need high wages, and so they create companies and give themselves salaries.

Fact is that renting is not some way of the future or a shift. Even if 99% of the people rent, it will be because they have to, and all will continue to foster the dream of owning a home, and continue to envy the squirrels in the park that de facto own their own space in the hollow tree, or the birds that have their own nest, and don't pay a fucking thing to anyone.
I was a college student at the time. I was long on money and short on cash. I was also far less experienced than I was so there were a lot of new things for me then, like those fascinating "callback" thingies I had to figure out.

Nowadays if I were given roughly the same assignment it would have taken me about 3-5 hours at best, which, given my graduated-and-employed hourly rate, is actually quite in line with what I was paid. So it paid as much as I would have charged for a Saturday hack.
Yes. The onsite means the company is investing just as much time and effort into the process as the candidate.
Why force everybody on the plane to pay for it even if they aren't going to use it?

I personally find the price for in-flight WiFi to be an excellent deal, considering the technological feats required to make it happen. You're communicating over hundreds of miles from a metal tube going 600MPH. Often you're talking to space! And you get to use this for, what, ten bucks?

I don't always pay for it, but it's a great deal when I need it.
I'm not saying it's easy but it's easier. Different cloud services let someone else take care of replacing faulty hardware, upgrading hardware, adding new servers, software updates, backups etc. It's very difficult and time consuming to replicate all this reliably with a couple of dev ops guys.
Non-tidy data
I wish there was a way to scale the "add feature to FOSS project we use" thing. Scale is a concern here because I see this exercise being doled out more than a few times, which means that every instance must involve someone deciding what features should be added. There's also a limit to how much can be added to the same handful of projects over time.

Can't ask all candidates to add the same feature over and over, or else this becomes throwaway code as well, which doesn't address any of the valid negatives you've raised.

> I know within an hour or so of talking to somebody if I want to work with them

Ha ha! I've had an HR department at a BigCorp tell me that there was a minimum duration to each interview (30 minutes for phone screen, at least 45 but preferably an hour for in-person), regardless of how they were doing. Their thinking was that more time spent by us would cause the candidate to consider us a more desirable employer. You can imagine my anguish at having to speak endlessly with people who would clearly never cut it on my team.

"But you can't just walk them out after an hour!"
Dasks' out of core dataframes are just a thin wrapper around pandas dataframes (aided by the recent improvement in pandas to release the GIL on a bunch of operations)
I've tried to find out what Instant Articles is. So its a Drag&Drop HTML editor with image and code optimizer to make those big picture articles? Thats it?
No. Sid
Nope; it was different times in 2008. There are things you can get away with when a company is small enough to fit into a Yaris.
This is all well and good but the 5th amendment doesn't apply to corporations. So United States v. Hubbell is irrelevant.
I remember an article about a month ago called "Google's Plans to Kill the Password." In any case, this is not a new problem and many smart people are trying to solve it because passwords suck.

I don't have a solution myself, but I hope there is one some day.
React Refetch: Declaritive Data Fetching for React Components
Haha. Imagine the horror of trying anything like that in the US.
We work hard to get back to candidates quickly - in some cases the same day as they interview, but at least the day after if not. We know the market is very competitive and want candidates to make the best decisions they can - so it's in our best interest to act quickly! We are always working to improve how we screen, interview and respond to candidates in hiring, so will take this feedback to heart. Thank you for providing it.

Regarding the focus on OR, that was definitely the case for our first few years, and while it's still important, we have definitely expanded our focus beyond it.
How do you know that it will ever produce returns?

Valuations are made out of belief (whole cloth).

The requirement is not a must, but you should take into account startup's burn rate over funding, which should eventually turn into burn rate over revenue. (without taking extra funding into account)

So, a startup that would have a huge burn rate should be much less valuable, as you're liable to lose money both short and long term. Same as with the bets, taking large bets with long timeframes is more liable to turn you bankrupt (both VC and startup owner) than taking small bets often, since you can back out at any given time.
(I'm not talking about motivation, that's a separate thing.)

However, markets are not rational, so startups with high burn rate are considered very valuable for some reason.
The slope is that if they can order Apple to engineer one thing, they can order them to engineer another.

It is possible for Apple to the weaken the secure enclave on all future iPhones. It would be reasonable to do so from the point of view of giving law enforcement a useful tool. Therefore since Apple can be ordered to do engineering to make law enforcement easier, why should they not be ordered to do this?

That is the slippery slope.
In my experience this hasn't been the case. The closest I've come was an employment contract that required me to notify my employer of any work on the side. This has happened only once over more than a decade of work in this industry.
What a wife you have. One in a million, indeed.
So if they do well in the take-home test, you give them an offer? Or do they still have to do the all-day on-site after that?
Detect low power mode using Swift
> First: What do you mean when you talk about Stoicism working - What do you think is the goal of Stoicism?

As the goal of Stoicism is maintaining happiness -- and I'm referring to living in peace and harmony 24x7 -- via virtue, then it is said to "work" if it can achieve the said goal 24x7.

> Second: This criticism is applicable to just about anything; does capitalism not "work" since just about any implementation has aspects that can be considered flawed?

Irrelevant. One is a complex social phenomena; the other is pertaining to human psychology with specific goals. I could as well pick an example from the other end of the spectrum (of simplicity): eating less, for instance, leads to weight loss (or maintaining weight) - and this can be consistently demonstrated ... hence eating less "works".

> You cannot generalize about an idea from people's failures to be consistent with their professed belief in it (other than perhaps that it appears to be difficult to act according to it in a consistent manner).

I wasn't generalizing anything, and an idea/ belief is not necessarily a fact. The idea/ belief of the stoics is that virtue is sufficient for happiness. There is no doubt, in the mind of stoics, that virtue always leads to happiness (no exceptions). And it of course "appears to be difficult" - because virtue, being a higher-level cognitive function based on morality ("thou shalt remain calm" for instance), cannot consistently override the core emotions (wherein lies sorrow and malice), as humans all throughout the centuries have demonstrated time and again.

> In the case of Seneca, it is also difficult to say whether he attempted to apply Stoicism 100%, how good his attempts were ("objectively"), or whether it is even possible at all.

I doubt it is even possible at all (see above paragraph). Hence my "if it doesn't work, what is its measure of success?" question. If success that one is striving towards is ill-defined, one is probably fooling oneself.
It's bad security to tell your manager your passcode/passwords, even for accounts they can get into through admin channels. The risk isn't the manager, the risk is that someone overhears you telling them the password, finds the piece of paper it's written on, etc.
Your first example has nothing to do with UK law. It is illegal tax evasion that is possible in any country.
What's intimidating about sun glasses and ear pieces?
But none of that matters for either kind of developer, does it? For the awesome ones it's just noise, and the bad ones will just ignore it.

Why does it matter if it is a simple counter? It'll tell you exactly the same information, with a lot less cluster. And it'll help people reading through issues that are littered with it.

Personally I think having a +1 counter is a win-win solution. And I detest all the +1 comment spam in issue threads, it is noisy and doesn't contribute to the conversation.

Until then, why not create a bot that deletes all +1 posts but edits the main post with a counter of +1s?
Wow, all I can say is that sucks to be you.

I work in higher ed now, and I can do whatever I want outside of normal hours, as long as it doesn't interfere with the work I was hired to do.

One benefit of having firmly rejected Silicon Valley is that I'm no longer at the whim of jealous employers who know I could find another job across the bay at any time and keep my home and social circles.
why are there no legal issues with giphy.com?
A third of 18-24-year-olds scared to check bank balance, poll finds
This is a startup that literally sells compliance services! The fact that SVers are dismissive of this is actually very troubling.
The bottom line is, you're trying to explain why big money is able to produce policies that go contrary to the wants of most voters without also assuming deficient reasoning on the part of those voters. You're trying to do that with a key claim that the bad-idea-money[1] is able to drown out the non-exploitative idea such that most voters never hear such an idea even once (else they would, on average, switch to it), even from hearing friends talk about it or other non-paid means.

That is a huge assumption that doesn't seem to match the world we live in. Your best attempt to justify it is with a claim that voters, while not morons, make a small amount of errors that is somehow enough to fail to appreciate the tidal wave of "let's not get exploited" advice they hear from friends, who would want to spread it like the dickens.

I don't see how that constitutes a reasonable model. At some point, you have to blame the voters themselves.

[1] And I'm going to assume you know here that I mean "bad idea" in the sense of "the purported idea that goes contrary to most voters but gets propped up by money" so as to save me the talk about "there are only bad ideas for particular voters".
At the same time you can overdesign something based on how it 'should' be engineered to the point where you haven't shipped anything and your company is bankrupt. You need someone that can pick a decent enough pattern which can get the job done in the time allotted.

I would not hire someone that has a list of a hundred 'shoulds' which need to be met for any project to be shipped. That's a recipe for never shipping.
Geez. I would hope so. Too bad it took them the better part of half a decade to listen to users. I've already moved a number of my personal projects to Gitlab, Bitbucket or a self-hosted Gogs installation.

I've still got reasons to stick with Github for some projects, but it's not the new hotness it used to be.

$10 says the next new feature is voting on issues.
Gah, yes, thanks for that. Edit button is gone or I'd fix it ;).
Which functionality?
Data protection.
Building Large Flask Apps in the Real World
Yes, I understood to begin with; I did grow up with a PhD economist in the house and read the textbooks in middle school while bored. This description you've just picked is no longer quite as misleading, except I'm not sure what you mean by "electronic circulation" (making loans off deposits long predates electronic record-keeping). Are you trying to impugn the value of the money in question with the adjective in order to facilitate outrage?

If not, I still don't understand why the existence of a money multiplier is a reason for Bank Hate as indicated before. It's a trivial property of any system which permits lending.
There's more to being a productive programmer than knowing the semantics of a language.

Someone who has been programming for a while but is learning a new language will have a ramp-up period when their code is ugly or unidiomatic, and they will take longer to write it, but it will capture the correct algorithms and abstractions. Compare that to someone who is inexperienced and writes a pile of exponential-time spaghetti that is slow and unmaintainable in any language.
>> "The two Mac laptops I have, they get hot and the fan is noisy, especially my Macbook Pro."

What are you doing on them? I'm generally running browser/Xcode/iTunes or Logic Pro X/iTunes/Browser and my fan never spins up. In fact it spins so rarely I tend to think somethings going wrong when it does. It freaks me out. I'm on the lowest spec 13" MacBook Pro.
>I mean, let's get real for a second. The toolchain already exists. Apple has the source code, hardware simulators, debugging harnesses, and the original engineers. There's no magic. As long as those things exist, the danger of a hack getting public is real, especially if the source for iOS is ever stolen, or one of the core engineers goes rogue. If Apple's own internal security can't keep a more polished tool under wraps, they won't be able to keep the subcomponents of it under wraps.

>As long as those things exist
This is false. Apple could hand you all the things you mentioned and you still wouldn't be able to break an iPhone 5C. You would still need Apple's master private encryption key.

As you are framing the question, is, the government should force Apple to hand over their private encryption keys. If thats so, should citizens in other countries be wary of the fact that their data stored in Apple servers are privy to the US govt? Or should Americans be worried that China can coerce Apple to hand over encryption keys?

In terms of global politics, The vault maker in this scenario has to worry about other strong men asking for such a master key when they need to hunt down gay men or something as trivial, once they realize this is possible.
it almost certainly will, as it includes google now cards (which are built off data mining for your interests)
Do well in the take-home test? Come in, meet the team, do the culture-fit thing. Then you get an offer. And this doesn't need to be an all-day thing. Who wants to keep selling the company to a candidate all day long? :)
There are two things that guarantee at least a nominal level of competency in those fields:

1) For junior positions, both have professional accreditation, with standardized testing that ensures a basic level of competency. Not to mention the mandatory schooling (in most cases).

2) If you screw up as a doctor or lawyer, you can end up with official sanctions on the public record. If you screw up too bad, you lose your ability to continue to do your job.

I've worked with plenty of dead weight developers who wouldn't pass even these nominal competency tests.

Further, it just seems to me it's easier to benchmark your successes as a doctor or lawyer. At least in a way that has meaning to your potential employer.

I think part of that has to do with the fact we pretty much all work on teams. The actual projects themselves might be somewhat verifiable, but figuring out that developer's actual contribution is a pure crapshoot.

I list of successes for a doctor or lawyer are going to be both more individual, and also verifiable (i.e., less likely to be bullshit).
> At one time I drank a large cup/week, but then I came to my senses.

I'm going through this right now with trying to wean myself off a bubble tea habit. There are just so many amazing options near my office and I have at least one giant one per week. The struggle is real.

How did you successfully cut down?
Thanks Mr James Comey. We have finally found our generation's Edgar Hoover.
We've worked hard to open source projects whenever we think they'll be useful broadly: https://www.instacart.com/opensource. There is definitely more of this we can (and I hope will) do in the future.
Tim Cook was asked at a shareholder meeting to only do things that were profitable. He passionately rejected the idea, and named accessibility for the blind, environmental issues/climate change, and worker safety as areas where Apple invests because it's right, without considering the "bloody ROI". [1]

Compare to GE, which rolled over [2].

So I believe Mr Cook when he says his opposition to the FBI's request is rooted in a desire to do the right thing, and not the bottom line.

[1] http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/tim-cook-soundly-reje...

[2] http://www.nationalcenter.org/PR-GE_Climate_Change_022114.ht...
>Partial enforcement is a practical reality because we're willing to accept the injustice of partial enforcement rather than live in an Orwellian police state (a decision I'm thrilled with!).

False dichotomy. If all laws are fully enforced, bad laws will soon be done away with by popular demand. If the government won't do so willingly, then they will be forced to do so by the people.
... that's what the HN link is
Well, that and what it says in your profile should make for a popular topic.

(Although demanding audiences want 'two orders of magnitude', perhaps 25x can squeak by ;-)