skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The thrust doesn't need to be a linear function of input power for this argument to work. As long as you can get some constant thrust for some constant power input, kinetic energy will eventually exceed the energy put into the system.
> Many non-profits have it worse, because they have broad missions. Their goal is to do good, but "good" often ends up being a broad category

"Doing good" as a goal is not just broad, it is subjective. After all, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Unless the goal is something practical, build something, maintain something, offer some kind of specific service, you are looking at a goal that is highly mobile and likely to be hijacked.
> I have never seen a functional non-profit

Worked non-profits since 1988 and I have found the best place to work and have been with them for 8 years now. Very functional and a great place to work. We provide services for children throughout our area and have around 300 employees. If your actually interested in seeing a functional non-profit we can talk further.
Morally, societies are much better when they are equal.
I actually regret not switching to Spark sooner, since it has support for more email providers than Mailbox ever had. I do wish it would take some cues from Inbox and add the Action support, though.
> I'm not sure I fully agree that things are different because it's physical over digital.

...

> I agree that copying software is far easier than hardware, but it's the design of the tool that's important, not it's physical representation.

So you do understand that software is different. It is easily copyable, and all software is copyable.

> The only way I would agree with the FBI's "just this one iPhone" statement is if they got Apple to crack it and they just returned the data but not the method. Which of course they wont do.

I wouldn't even agree to that. Creating a signed copy of this software creates a vulnerability in iPhones worldwide that does not exist today.
Yea, it may be true for this one case that they are not looking for evidence so much as leads. The problem is this one case affects 100's or potentially thousands of others in the future, by setting legal precedent.

Based on news reports there are currently 100's of criminal cases and many prosecutors waiting to use the "FBiOS" once it is developed. If the DOJ's goal was strictly about terrorism there are alternative ways to solve this and Apple would likely be more accommodating, as it appears they have been in the past. But the DOJ is now looking to establish legal precedent within the courts so it can be used routinely and not just for terrorism cases.
Except that the authorities do want companies to use bad crypto. The only reason they've had to fall back on demanding an attack vector is because they haven't yet been able to force their preferred solution (bad crypto) to be implemented.

Demanding an attack vector should be seen as the same concept as demanding bad crypto, because the intent behind the request is the same. They're trying to convince us that these are different requests, but the end result is the same. A workaround to attack good security is the same as having bad security to begin with. I can't imagine why anybody would think that "bad crypto" and "attack vector" are not very nearly the same thing.
Exactly, web design agencies should pivot or include (and heavily promote) ad management.

I got to see the numbers of a mid-sized web design agency, and they were really an ad agency, but they didn't realize it (and didn't market accordingly).
Because Apple realizes (rightfully so), that it's a slippery slope.

The only way to prevent a tool from being misused is to not create that tool in the first place.

If you _love_ that Apple is making it so hard for unauthorized access to your device, why do you also think they should create a tool that allows unauthorized access to your device? Are you so sure that you'll never be on the wrong end of a government fishing expedition?

I'm generally law abiding, yet I still don't think the government should be able to view my private records just because my name came up on some secret watchlist that I'm not allowed to know about and could entirely be because my name matches someone else's name.

The only reason the FBI didn't ask that Apple fully decrypt the device is because they know that bruteforcing a small keyspace is trivial if the device doesn't have countermeasures - not because they thought they were overstepping the bounds of their request.
The homoiconic thing is not all it is made up to be. That is, you can take (say) Java and parse it to an abstract syntax tree and the manipulate the tree.

Assuming you have a good toolbox of operators, working with that kind of AST is not much harder than working with s expressions. Maybe it is easier if you can build a general notation that can be generalized for multiple languages and also represent more ordinary data such as json formatted, relational, rdf, etc.
This is a neat idea, but for complex circuits, it's impossible to follow. The meaningful elements (bridges and cuts) simply do not stand out against the regular backdrop of the criss-crossing traces. You don't see at a glance where the connections go.

With a regular one-sided strip board, at least the component side jumpers are perfectly clear.

Let's see, suppose I have two pins on separate traces on a regular strip board and these should be on the same network. So that is two solder joints to connect these pins to the board, then two more solder joints to install a jumper. Versus no jumper on the Perf+, but four solder bridges---and on two different sides of the board. A solder bridge near each pin to connect it to a trace.

The advantage of the trade-off is not so obvious at all. It's a bit more work to install a jumper: cutting it to approximately the same length, and holding it in place (with a "helping hands" or whatever) to solder it down neatly, then clipping the excess wire. Versus just solder bridging. The jumper wins in readability, though.

The esthetic appeal is undeniable: you have a board with nothing but solder and components.
Can you give some examples of searches that don't work for you? I'm also a professional and an engineer and generally find a quick Google search to point me in the right direction every time.
... or flush every toilet in New York at once. Barrels of fun.
How's 737 a small application?

I'm talking cars, bikes and the like...

EDIT: Also, a 737 does not use the type of engine described here, unless you want them to move back to prop design.
Why should they have heard of it? I've been working in the software industry for almost 25 years, and while I think I may have seen a reference to the acronym before, I only know what it is because I just looked it up in order to make sense of this post. It sounds like a specialized bit of knowledge which would only be useful within a particular branch of computer systems engineering, nothing to do with computer science and by no means useful knowledge for all software engineers.
I still think you should have some links bookmarked to drop in conversations like this. Bookmarked so you can just type a name rather than waste time looking. Many in these discussions might think you're speculating or have some toy project rather than the interesting one I found digging through your old posts that backs up your claims.

Maybe even have a series of examples that illustrate solutions you keep mentioning so others can learn and apply them. Just a thought. :)
Siri is powered by Nuance technology. They've been pretty good for a decade now. David Pogue and John Siracusa have been using it to do their writing.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/10/os-x-10-9/23/
I don't remember exactly how I fixed it. The point is, have a backup, and don't use Macpass to do any editing until you're sure you want it.
Not really, unfortunately. Native toolkits aren't designed for this. As an example, I looked into using HIToolbox (the API Apple uses) for this on the Mac, but it was so obviously unsupported and likely to break at any time that I quickly decided against it.
Federighi said:

" the team that does the Dock and the window management on OS X, implemented all their new features for El Capitan in Swift and started mass-converting all of their code, and say that they couldn’t imagine going back and that they’re more productive with it."

So the window management team is also using it.
Saving Memory in Redis with MessagePack and Lua Scripts
It could be useful to incorporate as a "custom hacking area" in the middle of a design that is routed as a normal PCB.
On Linux at least, NVIDIA's drivers do support some acceleration for glyph rendering and other 2D operations through the X RENDER extension. It's not really going to help with SVG rendering, but it's great for boxes, triangles, and glyphs, as well as blitting and compositing which covers most of what browsers do with HTML and CSS
I had the opposite - FIOS is cheaper than Time Warner for me.
He brings up some interesting points in the article, but I think the real reason for failure is 1) creating a niche app rather than a scalable one, and 2) not aligning the business model correctly.
All that money which they spent on buying Direct TV ($48.5 billion, and with debt estimated as $67.1 billion!) they could spend on building out fiber optic networks and upgrading their inferior DSL and U-verse to proper fiber to the house technology. But no, it's AT&T for you. They have money to buy obsolete TV technology, but they don't have any money to actually upgrade their network to something up to date.
I already mentioned sweet-expressions in another comment. And also, there's one important thing we're forgetting when discussing syntaxes, which is the fact that we very rarely read the code without syntax highlighting, so the examples you posted actually look like this: http://pygments.org/demo/3781004/

This does change the situation somewhat.
Once the government can force apple to create software against their will, why do you think they won't also force Apple to hand over signing keys that will let them target any phone they want? I don't see how the slippery slope can end at one phone (and that slope is already sliding to encompass dozens of phones - when it reaches hundreds or thousands of phones, the government is going to decide that they need to be able to target phones on their own, without Apple in the way)
Dragon was sold to L&H, which had been engaging in fraud and went into brankrupcy; some of the technology was apparently sold to Visteon, some to ScanSoft (which then acquired Nuance, and took on its name).

The founder, Jim Baker, lost out and unsuccessfully tried to sue Goldman Sachs (who had been advising him).

And yet, even today what happened next to the Bakers seems remarkable. With Goldman Sachs on the job, the corporate takeover of Dragon Systems in an all-stock deal went terribly wrong. Goldman collected millions of dollars in fees — and the Bakers lost everything when Lernout & Hauspie was revealed to be a spectacular fraud. L.& H. had been founded by Jo Lernout and Pol Hauspie, who had once been hailed as stars of the 1990s tech boom. Only later did the Bakers learn that Goldman Sachs itself had at one point considered investing in L.& H. but had walked away after some digging into the company.

- a 2012 NY Times article "Goldman Sachs and the $580 Million Black Hole"
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/business/goldman-sachs-and...

recent discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10994707#up_11014194
My understanding is that no one is asking them to do so.
This is more of an alternative to strip board than to solderless prototyping.

The jumper wires that are eliminated are those that appear on stripboard designs; those jumpers are soldered in.
Apple's brand was strong enough before this.

The risk of coordinating an attempt would be huge. If info got out, there'd be irreparable damage to a massive company.

Maybe they have their price and literally billions of dollars could have made it happen, but I think it's pretty easy to understand how their success has instead come from attractive and effective products.

I have wondered before about whether intelligence organisations would be smart to co-opt/fund rising communications companies, but there'd be too many people that'd have to be kept quiet. Probably not practical.
It's not that you can't it's that it makes no difference since it's the final program that has to be validated, not just its components.

There are cases where individual elements of a system must be validated separately, but even then, the system as a whole still has to be validated.
> Why not? Can't apple just delete it?

Are you kidding? Law enforcement across the country wants to use this on thousands of phones.

Even if it were truly going to be used only on one phone, there's still a risk that the signed software gets out. That risk is exponentially increased when you realize that Apple will be required to retain this software for responses to law enforcement requests indefinitely.
Maglev: A Fast and Reliable Software Network Load Balancer [pdf]
Tesla Motors Ludicrous Speed Legend Crushed by Croatian Production EV
But that's simply not entirely true. The encryption keys for the phone's data reside on the phone and are only available with the PIN/password.

Apple does hold the keys for software updates, which can be pushed without user approval. Maybe that's what you were referring to.
Don't you still have GC issues for heap allocation/destruction? Swift uses the ARC pattern so no GC lockups or performance issues.

[1] https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/Swift/...
> They may never make their money back on it.

That's not true. FiOS is actually pretty profitable for them (this data is public). It's pretty much the only thing that is profitable there. Their copper networks are not proftiable. The reason they don't want to invest in it is the conflict of interests and shortsighted stupidity of their current top management. They want to spend money on wireless, from which they expect to get more profit margins short term. Investing in landline networks is a longer term investment and they simply can't think in such categories anymore.
Footnote? Man the jokes just write themselves.
Boyd's ideas are laid out really well by his acolyte Chet Richards in his book Certain to Win which applies the military theories to business. If interested at all in this space, check it out.
>This comment doesn't make sense. All attacks are not equal. Some require physical access; some do not. Some require seed data; some do not. What exactly are you talking about here?

I'm not a security expert, more of a hobbyist. So I'll let someone else quantify potential specifics. To my understanding, they would not require physical access and would be able to guess any passwords generated (once an attack has been found/created).

>That's not what I'm worried about. I'm worried about given that they do exist what is the risk to me? What is the likelihood that my account has been broken into?

The chances of 0 becoming 1 are not quantifiable because it requires knowing unknowns. It is, however, non-zero. For a small list of unknowns:

1) Who knows about the attack

2) How practical is the attack?

3) What software/websites/people are they choosing to attack

4) Are you even using any of the software/websites that are being attacked?

5) Are they going to accept cracking <10%~ accounts if they can do so in <24 hours or is their goal to crack >50%~ accounts? Many crackers only care to scrape the bottom of a barrel. What are the chances you were in the part of the barrel they scraped?

I assume the worst because being compromised is a zero-sum game. I've been compromised or I haven't. Therefore my variables are:

Everyone. Extremely. Only things I use. Of course. Doesn't matter, I'm in the targeted group.

I wouldn't make any bets on security through obscurity.
I don't know about France, at least publicly they are not very excepting of privacy arguments, specially after Paris. I have no idea about the secret part.

Germany is somewhat different because of its history. We know quite a bit about what the BND does, in terms of monitoring extremist groups. We have pirates in pretty important positions and the CCC is regularly working with government in oversight commissions.

It is pretty hard to hide all that you are doing, both in terms of physical infrastructure and in terms of financials. Now it may be that the BND is extremely clever and hiding all of this from basically everybody. However given the competence displayed by the BND on various action that they have taken, it is a really hard sell that they are operating a infrastructure close to the US or UK one.
You can now attend RC Retreat for six weeks
Unidirectional data flow in Angular 1.x apps
I'm genuinely pleased /you/ haven't been burned by it.

You know sometimes people think those who disagree with them must be stupid? You know how not everyone being paid the same wage is actually worth the same to the business? You know how managers want to lose the "dead wood." You know how we see firing as a part of corporate culture and it comes up here often. "If you aren't willing to fight to keep them you should fire them." Optimal staff turnover ratios that managers are judged on etc.

That.

"I just don't think you're really committed to the goals and ideals of Disney corporation and would be better suited working elsewhere."
What if I told you that we are releasing a successor to Personas but that accomplishes a lot more and in a different way?

You can have accounts at various different communities and have your experience instantly personalized when you arrive, without the sites knowing anything about you or being able to track you across sites. When you are ready, you can use oAuth to build up your profiles in different communities and use them to authenticate with each other. Finally, you have full control over which of our contacts in a community can see when you join another community -- that whole thing of "Your Facebook friend Frank Smith is on Instagram as Bunnyman123". With our protocol and reference implementation, as soon as you arrive on a site you see all the friends in your communities that also used that site -- if they decided to share this -- and your social graph is instantly connected everywhere you go. When a friend joins chess.com you'll get a notification from the friend, that they joined. If they want you to know. Maybe they wanted to check it out anonymously.

Truly decentralized identity and contacts that works seamlessly across sites.

If you liked what you just read, tell me -- how can we best position it for those people who were sad to see Personas not take off?
Thanks Simon! Oof, has it really been that long? More like 7 and change, but still, twice as long as I was in college, and that felt like an epoch.

We're coming to the Python world finally, after bouncing between PHP and Ruby.

And belated congrats to you too!
That's actually not always enough. For example, to fix this login CSRF on HN, you need a per-visitor secret an attacker can't read (like a cookie) plus a form value based on that secret. Note it can't be tied to the user account, because the visitor hasn't logged in yet.

A random CSRF token on a login form is easily defeated - the attacker just requests a valid one and uses it when submitting the CSRF form.
Show HN: literally.deals, randomized discounts from Amazon
We're talking about two different things. Safety is the lack of Hazard that a Device presents to the Patient (or Operator). If the device doesn't exist, then there's no Safety issue.

What you are talking about is access to medical care, which is an entirely different topic
Hmm. I suppose if you could show that the Linux kernel source files required to build zfs.ko were all LGPL, then distributing it as a binary module might actually be legal.
I'm honestly not sure if I would have had similar issues verbally. I think they maybe sound very slightly different when most people pronounce them, but there's a good chance that's just my brain adjusting based on context. But I don't think reading is the same, and I definitely think some misspellings, even of homophones, can throw me off and cause me to re-read.

In any case, I went out of my way to not be snippy! I just thought it might be helpful to you to know that the mis-use slightly tripped up at least one person. It's hard to know who will find it helpful to have things like that pointed out (like some non-native speakers trying to learn) and who will just get annoyed. Mis-judged this one!
My current thought process is you use a relational db like postgres with json support to go from hobby / early startup to traction where you would need to start being concerned with scaling. At that point you switch to kafka or related hosted tools.

As far the data you put into the stream, I would think it could be everything if you treated all data as immutable even admin actions? Only thing that seems up in the air is transactions.

That is as far as I got though. I don't work with a company that has that kind of scale to use this, but I'd like to start working with it.
Any idea who would have
"126 million images along with their accompanying Exif location data."?

That seems an insane amount to me.
C is the king of raw performance, there's no denying that. But for the vast majority of high-level, user-facing applications today it's a bad fit.

Clojure is more than fast enough for serious server side programming, often coming close to Java in performance with minimum amount of tuning needed in the average case. When you add multithreading into the mix, it's not even a contest; the amount of time you'll have to spend to make an idiomatic Java or C++ run both correctly and fast is gargantuan compared to a language where concurrency was built-in from the start.
Thanks! Bookmarked.
Yeah I'm feeling a bit jaded from seeing stuff that was decade old technical debt that's never been maintained, yet critical to the code's operation. At some point early on when you do have customers you want the reengineering crew in otherwise you will end up with a monster which requires far more bodies and stress to maintain than otherwise necessary. but I see a lot of places where they don't seem to care about stress and bodies piling up.
I think the reaction will be exactly the same except that many of the people in the debate will immediately switch positions :).

Many of the people who take privacy and the 4th amendment very seriously have no qualms being very nuanced and "progressive" about the 2nd (and vice versa). I find that fact entertaining
If it's such a low-hanging fruit why don't you prove it?
Would that even be possible? I know I've never been able to get GPS to work reliably on any phone I've owned while on an airplane (even holding it up to the window), and presumably cell tower location wouldn't be available either above a certain altitude.
Even Racket says loops are unRacket like and so does R. I avoid loops at all cost and use list whenever possible.
1) They'd still need the Apple signing key otherwise you can't update the phone. The software, without the key, is totally useless.

2) The same thing that prevents the FBI from subpoenaing Apple's key. There isn't a good legal basis for it. It's almost definitely unduly burdensome for apple to give out their key.

If the FBI were to win a case like that, it doesn't matter what happens in this situation.
It feels like the author is confusing cancer with sperm count. So he spends half the article discussing how cell phone signals don't have the energy to cause DNA breakage and then cause cancer. But this is about sperm count. All you have to do to lower sperm count is increase the temperature. It's been shown that just bathing the balls in a bowl of hot water daily drastically reduces sperm count. So heat is definitely contrary to sperm production, and it isn't as tough to produce as DNA breakage. That said, there is no permanent damage. Sperm production resumes when the temperature returns to normal (which is below body temperature for the balls hanging out of the body).