skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
We have more of a chance solving complex problems better than AI, than if we were solving "simple" problems like chess, or even, Go.

EDIT: Added rabbit ears for simple.
What then is good for the masses?
They might also look at the timestamp between the clicks. If they're all together they might realize it's just someone opening multiple tabs at once. If they're a few minutes apart that may mean something else.
Because Facebook is known so well for their respect of privacy.
Apply HN: reinvent ownership
I feel like one of the biggest problem with society is the "ownership class." One solution to ownership concentration is "Basic Income" I'm proposing something else. What if the more you used something the more you owned. We have stop gap solution like stock in companies, time shares,rent to own, mortgages, even squatters rights, which provide legal options for fractional ownership. But, these are awkward solutions because our laws and society is setup for the full ownership. What if you create a registry of "rent to own" items, property, etc. that the more you use the more you own. Which allows you to collect income from. Rent a movie then pass it along to some else a little income stream. Rent house to house to house create little income streams that eventually maybe offset your rent. You could still own things you just can't rent them out without losing some ownership. A block chain or something similar could implement the registry. Is it a company or a non profit? Not sure. Could it completely change the fabric of society, hopefully for the better, yes. If your looking for moonshot let's reinvent the concept of ownership.
By definition not in our lifetime then.
> Open source does not mean your binary is secure.

Open source is necessary - not sufficient - for security. Other work has to be done. With closed binaries you can't even begin that work.
What happens when I log on to WhatsApp Web? How they send my private key from my phone to my web browser?
You could use a decentralised network such as Bitcoin to send messages.

I would also implement Bloom filters to lower my network usage and confuse the nodes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom_filter

I would choose random nodes to cause a bit more noise.

And finally my messages would have some sort of Bloom filter derived destination address. So as to confuse it all a bit more.
I use 4K Video Downloader. It has lot of options, download subtitles along with the video, download playlists, 3D Videos, 4K Videos and lot of other options and supports lot of websites apart from YouTube.

It supports Windows, Linux and Mac, very user friendly, perfect for parents who use PC to download videos. They even have a telegram bot to download audio from YouTube, SoundCloud, Vevo, Vimeo, Dailymotion, Facebook etc.

https://www.4kdownload.com/products/product-videodownloader

Telegram Bot : https://telegram.me/FourKDownloadBot
IMHO it really depends on what you are doing;

- Chatting with friends? = Whatsapp

- International drug deals? != Whatsapp
Interesting! We are doing the same thing but with R/C cars to keep the costs down and make it accessible to more people. R/C cars come in una variety of types and can pretty much run anywhere. Programming and setting up a safe racing environment is much simpler because yoy can have a reusable temporary V2I infrastructure setup for a race. The biggest hurdles right now are the price on some of the sensors required and making a programming environment that is accessible to non-programmers.

If this sounds like something you'd like to give access try feel free to drop me access line. This project is in the pre-alpha stage but there is already research underway with live samples (not simulations).
What's the context?
I fear that they have jailing opponents in mind.
TL;DR from https://www.reddit.com/r/netsec/comments/4dvifg/im_not_a_hum... (though you may be overly-cautious as blackhat.com seems to be the webpage of a computer security conference [1]):

"""

Live attack To obtain an exact measurement of our attack’s accuracy, we run our automated captcha-breaker against reCaptcha. We employ the Clarifai service as it shows the best result amount other services.

Labelled dataset. We created a labelled dataset to exploit the image repetition. We manually labelled 3,000 images collected from challenges, and assigned each image a tag describing the content. We selected the appropriate tags from our hint list. We used pHash for the comparison, as it is very efficient, and allows our system to compare all the images from a challenge to our dataset in 3.3 seconds. We ran our captcha-breaking system against 2,235 captchas, and obtained a 70.78% accuracy. The higher accuracy compared to the simulated experiments is, at least partially, attributed to the image repetition; the history module located 1,515 sample images and 385 candidate images in our labelled dataset.

Average run time. Our attack is very efficient, with an average duration of 19.2 seconds per challenge. The most time consuming phase is running GRIS, consuming phase, as it searches for all the images in Google and processes the results, including the extraction of links that point to higher resolution versions of the images.

"""

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hat_Briefings
Unless there's a page 2 I'm missing, this is a terrible article.

He seems to dismiss the singularity with 3 points

1. We don't understand human intelligence

2. "We've" been wrong about it before

3. Moores law is ending

1. Who says it has to be human intelligence?
2. That's not an argument
3. Moores law -might- be ending but datacenters are getting bigger and bigger
Customer Service for Web Project Owners
It doesn't matter if they do or do not. They will recoup something and that's better than nothing.
I made something like that over Christmas..it's pretty shit but it works to download youtube videos as mp3 :-/
http://akagetsu.com/youtube/
>I don't want my kids being turned into stoners [and] the law should be on MY side

Should it? It isn't on your side if they want to (as consenting adults): ride a motorcycle, drink alcohol, go heliskiing, visit a strip club, buy condoms, or go bungie jumping, for example.

Should all potentially harmful activities of any kind be criminalized as well, because you have kids and the law should be on your side?
Yeah think things will go faster than people expect. Just takes one unexpected key breakthrough and BAM way more progress than forecast.
Keywords being cost, benefit and every individual. Those are all big variables. Everybody will define what the cost and what the benefit of everything is differently, both from their own perspective and from the perspective they perceive that others has/should have.

So you'll have more "perfect" answers than people, and no way to select any one of them.
haaaaaaaaa! Might as well say Obama is the inevitable outcome of 50 years of narcissistic, pansy, Me First hippies.
I'm projecting but hopefully because Swift is in some ways 'higher level' than Rust or Go. From my brief examination Swift has slightly more the conciseness, readability, usability and flexibility of dynamic languages.

(I'd love to see native Android apps in Python (or Nim) but that's probably never going to happen. Failing that I could live with a language like Swift.)
Do you know if this allows consolidation of multiple copies of the same resource from different hosts?
Ironically, parliament awarded CryptTalk an innovation award last week.

http://budapestbeacon.com/economics/crypttalk-given-innovati...
If you have enough market makers trying to arbitrage you, they compete, so you can buy the stock that enters the S&P 500 for a reasonable price.
TLDR the singularity hasn't happened yet so it will never happen. Typical low quality technology "journalism".

"For starters, biologists acknowledge that the basic mechanisms for biological intelligence are still not completely understood, and as a result there is not a good model of human intelligence for computers to simulate."

Duh. We don't know how the brain works yet. A big chunk of The Singularity is Near deals with how we build that understanding. Once we know how the brain works, computing will take advantage.
They intend to jail anyone who uses GMail, WhatsApp, or any other encrypted service? Such a effort will fail, if only because there isn't enough space in the jails...
Another way they get triggered is when people use browser/desktop based rank checkers.

There are also plugins some SEOs use to pull lots of requests. These tools are quite old now and not very useful, but people still use them.
Yes, you can sell them to anyone down the line. I agree that early access would be a cool feature. Investors would be taking a stake in a writer as a whole, almost like a race horse, and can help their own bottom line by acting as a beta reader for said writer, telling people about "their writer's" books, tweeting links to their storefront, providing editing, cover design, deal making. Mentorship. There's a lot one can do if you like someone's style enough to take a risk on them. Mine are for sale, back-alley way style. Free e-book pdf's available on request.

I don't think the legal needs to sell these are too complicated. A simple contract would look like "The holder of this contract is entitled to x percent of the monthly royalty payments paid to y author" and the investment instruments are instances of said contract.
Also, once something is contributed to the registry it's like open source it stays there. You can fully own it eventually, you just can't ever rent it out again without using the "rent to own registry"
> If you're around I'd love to hear specifically what you mean by this. Internally Logstash is very thread friendly, we only recommend multiple processes when you want either greater isolation or greater fault tolerance.

Right, we considered using multiple Logstash processes, but we really didn't want to run three instances of Logstash requiring three relatively heavyweight Java VMs. The total memory consumption of a single VM running Logstash is higher than running three different instances of LogZoom.

We looked at the Filebeat Redis output as well. First, it didn't seem to support encryption or client authentication out of the box. But what we really wanted was a way to make Logstash duplicate the data into two independent queues so that Elasticsearch and S3 outputs could work independently.
Why some people got "you are end to end encrypted with your friend" while their same friend got "the connection is not end to end encrypted with your friend"?
Don't you think you're being a bit more angry than you need to be, man?
Please provide a link to a "scientific" but easy understandable comparison of crypto communication software that educates users about what is important to understand about this complicated issue. It would be great if you could motivate the crypto elite of the world to contribute to such a comparison site. Thanks!
I cannot open the page. Can some Hungarian provide context and explanation. A lot could be lost in translation. Or bias.

The title suggest that it will run afoul of a thousand EU regulations.

But it is hard to be alive in Europe and not run afoul of any EU regulation - but that is another topic.
I like the idea of a three-tier threat model:

Tier 1: potentially inconvenient but maximally secure, in an OPSEC sense (PGP, for instance, though I would personally put Signal here too). Use carefully for security against state-level adversaries.

Tier 2: convenient mainstream applications with strong security but some tradeoffs. Your default choice, security against criminal adversaries. I'd put WhatsApp and iMessage here (but not many others).

Tier 3: unencrypted or dubiously encrypted mainstream applications, unsafe against any adversary, but potentially useful as an endpoint to (cautiously) bootstrap communications. Google Talk and AIM would go here for me.
There's a good argument to be made, that doing the market is harder than NP.
Meya – Turnkey scaleable cloud hosting for your bots
No. Just because you want it to exist or think it needs to exist, doesn't mean it actually exists.
If anything, to me a lot of deep learning literature seems to lack the statistical insight and theory that's available to other subfields in machine learning (whether the Bayesian/graphical models camp, the statistical learning theory camp...)

If this book is trying to do more to bring statistical or probabilistic insights to bear on deep learning than I think that's a very good thing. It might make it less accessible to those coming from a pure computer science background, but potentially more so to those who like to think about machine learning from a probabilistic modelling perspective.

If they're using stats jargon in a gratuitous way that doesn't actually cast any light on the material then that's another thing, but from a quick skim I didn't see anything particularly bad on this front. Do you have any examples of the kind of jargon you're talking about?

To others reading, I just wanted to emphasise that statistics is really important in machine learning! Deep learning lets you get away with less of it than you might need elsewhere, but that doesn't mean one can treat it as an unnecessary inconvenience. It's a language you need to learn, especially if you want to try and get to the bottom of how and why aspects of deep learning work the way they do. As opposed to just an empirical "using GPU clusters to throw lots of clever shit at the wall and see what sticks" engineering field. Bengio seems very interested in these kinds of questions and I'm glad he's leading research in that direction, even if clear answers and intuition aren't always easy to come by at this point.
If you are merely confusing the metadata, it's irresponsible to tell people that your app does something useful to resist metadata discovery.

It doesn't necessarily make it useless to implement the obfuscation, but short of an implementation that guarantees resistance, it's likely to be harmful to tell people that it resists metadata discovery.
Location: Vilnius, Lithuania (Baltic States)

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Maybe

Technologies: Everything JavaScript related, ReactJS as framework, Ruby on Rails.

Resume: http://www.karolisram.com/resume.pdf

Email: hello[at]karolisram.com

Hi, recent graduate here looking for new opportunities. Cannot relocate for another year but if anyone thinks we would be a good fit given remote working, hit me up!
wait wait, I got this: It's Bush's fault!!!!

Nothing is EVER Obama's fault. Unless it's good, then He Did That.
There's never a single right solution, but if traffic analysis was the issue, endpoints could introduce latency, use Tor, sync/mix traffic with other endpoints via P2P, inject fake traffic, etc. - though if the core system leaks metadata, this would be pointless.
The real victory for privacy here is that a tool used by the masses has given then end to end encryption, and that alone is a game changer:

- This enables network effects for private communication, i.e. it's harder for privacy to be breached by an insecure partner

- One can avoid being singled out for using an obscure tool to hide their communication

Sure, it doesnt fit all the marks EFF would desire, but it's undeniably a very positive achievement for privacy.

The only thing missing is a canary to signal some sort of back door, since it's not open source. Then again, diverting users away from their app is not in their interests.
Events (Script Notifications) in OpenCart 2.2.x. What Has Changed?
I think the biggest privacy / free speech issue is sustainability. Or the OpenSSL / OpenPGP problem.

What's a feasible monetization / business model look like built around software that is privacy-focused and customer-centric?

Because it's all well and good when you have a massive social data-mining company to bankroll your development, but what happens if that disappears / priorities change / the US government leans hard on FB?

Sustainability is important in code development too.

PS: In no way is this intended to diminish the efforts of the team. Hats off to everyone at WhatsApp for implementing this, FB for supporting it, and EFF for their general awesomeness!
Comment I answered to was removed!
This article raises literally zero new points that have not been addressed over and over by futurists, "transhumanists", and others optimistic about the singularity.

1.) Moore's law still holds true at the moment. If and when it does stop the argument will begin to have some weight. The claim that Moore's law is about to stop has been made over and over since the 90s. Until then it is empty.

2) Moore's law continuing ad infinitum is not a necessity for the singularity. Distributed computing, neural chips, quantum and biological computing all provide avenues for continued vertical hardware evolution, not counting the Google method of rigging together thousands or millions of average machines to produce incredibly powerful supercomputers.

3) The sheer amount of data we are collecting continues to increase exponentially. (http://techcrunch.com/2010/08/04/schmidt-data/), much of which is applicable to machine learning algorithms which brings us to point 4.

4) The efficiency and adaptability of machine learning algorithms continue to improve year on year. See DeepMind's early videos playing video games., etc., etc. To imagine that we won't see new innovations just as incredible almost every year from here to 2050 is incredibly naive and unrealistically pessimistic.

So considering that in each of the fundamental areas that we know are necessary for an AGI -- ie raw computing power, processable/interpretable data, efficiency/cleverness of algorithms -- we are achieving exponential growth year on year, it is reasonable to conclude we will get a machine that can pass the Turing test in our lifetimes.

This is also ignoring the multitude of other areas that contribute to the likelihood of an intelligence explosion. Brain to computer and brain to brain interfaces are in their early days but already exist. As they become more practical they could lead to exponentially more efficient research. Systems like Watson will speed up scientific research as they evolve. Nootropics and electromagnetic brain stimulation also help in this area.

Capitalism strongly incentivizes innovators to produce technology that automates ever more complex problems, or create tools that improve the efficiency of creating complex problem solving technology. This is an iterative, continuous process that we are all a part of, knowingly or not.

Now that humanity has been connected with a sort of digital nervous system, and is thoroughly incentivized to all aim towards this intelligence explosion, one way or another, it is naive to think we won't continue to find novel ways of improving the efficiency of every single system we utilize no matter how macro- or microscopic, which creates an intelligence creating feedback loop. The singularity has already happened, its just not running fast enough yet for it to 'feel' magical and miraculous the way it will once human level intelligence is shown across multiple fields by integrated computer systems.
But the point the EFF makes is very important. If the code is not open source, we just cannot verify the security of the application. All applications must be considered unsafe unless we can review the code. We can't review Whatsapp's source code, and therefore Whatsapp is to be considered unsafe.

So yeah, Whatsapp has made a probably positive move, but it is still largely unsafe.
They do not. They create a e2e connection between your phone and your browser. Everything goes threw the phone.
Here is new leak – USA Driver's Licens Database
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11454106
IMHO the “Singularity” will be achieved when AI will invent new things. We have only reached the point where AI can only do improvements of something humans have created...
Innovation is something hard for humans, so I don't know if we will see AI innovations anytime soon.
The same way that I feel about "Industry Analysts" charging you to read a report that describes clients who paid to be in the report.

If you don't know why certain kinds of companies gladly participate in this fairly obvious type of grift, you have no business playing the game.

See also: Paying money to be in some kind of dog-and-pony show or hackathon in the hope that investors attending the event get interested in maybe setting something up to discuss who else is funding you and whether they might want to follow-on.
so the whole idea of the "singularity" has been overblown by fiction and media. The reason we call it a "singularity" is because it is part of the "acceleration" which is the observation that the rate of human progress in technology is increasing faster over time.

The "singularity" is the point beyond which the rate of change is faster than humans can internalize and react to it. Super AIs and being uploaded to the great server in the sky are just ways we imagined an event literally defined by our inability to imagine it.

The singularity could have a few outcomes:

- The classical "humanity gets left behind by it's creations" doomsday

- The rate of change caps out simply because humanity cannot drive change much faster than humanity can react to it.

- The rate of change asymptotically approaches our capacity to handle it.

Interestingly, even after the "singularity" happens these three states may be indistinguishable to us.

Right now I am leaning towards the second outcome, that the singularity has come, and now we are simply crap at predicting the future because of it. I saw this a few months ago and considered it a potential symptom of that outcome https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEIPfpxFrlg.
Seems to be a lot of people thinking Moore's Law ending means that innovation in computers is over. It's really just the opposite. We can't rely on simple scaling anymore, so we need to take more innovative steps to push computing forward.
I didn’t know credibility was measured in dollars.
They intend to jail anyone they don't like, not anyone who uses certain programs.
That's like saying if you don't have a GPS the travelling salesmen problem isn't at least NP complete because you don't know what the weights are and every edge has a different weight, which would screw with your calculations.

It's not a valid argument against the fact that everyone does have their marginal benefit and marginal costs for every good and service that can translate to a binary decision of whether they would purchase a good or service at a given price.

Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there. And I'm not saying it's impossible to find out individuals marginal benefits and costs, because in markets you very well can. Stock traders, when evaluating whether a stock would go up or down, would often buy a bunch of stock, see how the market takes it, then sell a bunch, and by measuring how fast the market eats his orders, he can estimate the aggregate marginal benefit and cost of holding the stock, and then speculate accordingly.
When Marissa Mayer was working on Google User Experience she mentioned that Google did this : https://youtu.be/LT1UFZSbcxE?t=3462
What else is there with a decent client that is open source?
For me, the tl;dr on the entire subject of the Singularity can be summarized as:

"...the field of artificial intelligence has a long history of over-promising and under-delivering..."

That being said, I think we are finally at the dawn of "useful AI," like when my iPhone correctly guesses where I am headed and gives me a time estimate. For normal humans such as myself, this is WAY cooler and more exciting.
Its worse than that even, my company has a Vanguard fund that I pay 0.05% in my IRA, but the 401k provider charges 0.3% and pockets the difference!

Frequently, the people making 401k provider decisions (HR) are not well versed in finance or the incentives are misaligned (companies are looking for cheap vs good for their employees).

This is a situation that congress could easily fix, get rid of 401k plans that are attached to employers, and instead have employers contribute directly into employee IRAs.