skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The vast majority of governments all over the world allow ham radio, and don't consider it a threat. (Every country except Yemen and North Korea allows it.) You can obtain a license, operate radios, and talk to people all over the world. Standards between countries align quite well, so that many of the same frequencies work across most jurisdictions. It's a model of international cooperation.

A large part of that comes because nobody can hide anything on amateur radio. You can't encrypt, you can't use ciphers or codes, you can't do anything to obscure your message.

If amateur radio allowed encryption, it wouldn't have the universal international acceptance that it does today.
So basically when someone says the web needs to reinvented, you object and in the same breath conflate the web with the internet as a whole?

Or am I missing something?
> PL theorists don't get own the definition of what "type" means.

Every field has its terms of art. "Type" is a term of art in PL theory; PL theorists are entitled to define it how they want. Of course you can use the word however you want, but you can't complain if that non-standard usage results in miscommunication with others.

Besides that, it's very useful to able to talk about the "types" of syntactic terms as distinct from the "types" of runtime values. You can easily reason about syntactic types. You can, for example, use syntactic types to resolve syntax ambiguities (as in C++) or prove program properties. Runtime "types" are much less useful to PL theorists because it's hard to reason about them.
I reported 768-bit DHE on one of Nest's servers to Google security around mid-2015. Do anyone remember the tweets by @NestSupport on Twitter around this time (there was also https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1170833)? It wasn't long after that they had to hire a VP of security (when Alphabet was formed I think).
If it's hosted locally, what stops an intruder from stealing or destroying your server once they break in?
ESLint: Code Style in React Like Airbnb Uses It
hmm, I don't think so.

In England they have to say what they're collecting it for, that has to be a narrow purpose, and they have to only use it for that purpose, and they have to delete it once they've used it, and they have to keep it secure while they're using it.

They might be able to keep it for a long time if they're providing background checks for landlords, but that doesn't mean they can then use it for something else, even if they've said "We're going to keep looking at the data in the future just to keep it accurate and to provide our service".
This is not entirely true. Since we talking about implementing stateful sessions, you could receive a valid token (stolen, out otherwise) after the user has logged out.

You are correct that the lookup doesn't have to be via the database. You could implement a caching system where the cache is invalidated when the user logs out and requires reauthentication. This is the notion of the session. By definition they cannot be stateless.

Stateless authentication is inherently (slightly) less secure than sessions. I think of a blind librarian who gives out keys to the library. Whoever has a key has access. You can put limitations on the timeframe someone has access to the library, but that's it. If your key gets stolen, the blind librarian can't help you as there is no way for him to tell if it's really you.
It depends on the context. I guess rayiner has referred to "untyped lambda calculus".

Thats not a bad name as it is self consistent - there are no type expressions in that language. If you say that it is actally "unityped" it is (just) your (semantical) categorization looking at it from a higher level perspective.

Of course on the other side whole numbers were just "number"-s, before fractionals came, so in the end it may be ok to introduce higher level perspective in naming just to diferrentiate better. :)
> Encryption isn't really banned. You can still speak in code.

No, you can't. Other than one very narrow exception, you cannot use "codes or ciphers that hide the meaning of a message". (The exception is for transmitting control commands to a radio-controlled craft or space station.)
Thanks, IBM EGA9 and CompaqThin look nice.
Why we’ll see more VC growth-rounds for EU tech startups (led by Silicon Valley)
Can you explain how types slow you down for whipping up a proof of concept?
this is a general class of problems that is only going to get bigger.

When I returned my lease car I had to have a bit of a think about what might be sync'd from my phone via bluetooth with it, and what functionality existed to erase that. The answers didn't make me feel great.

The fun pastime of buying old HDD's off ebay and carving deleted files off them to see what might be kicking about is going to get a whole lot more interested with everything-connected society moving forward.
But ins't one of the nice parts about Scala that you can use it strictly for OO programming, use it for strictly for FP or both?
The first line of your reference says that restrict __is__ part of the C99 standard.
>Bitmap fonts preferred for crystal clear rendering and performance.

Where by "crystal clear" you mean terrible jagged edges?
The sexism problem
Why did the cloud provider not revoke his access once his account was expired? Is not the cloud provider also guilty here?
It works reliably, insofar as you are fully able to write and execute a desired contract, but also able to write a contract that shoots you in the foot.

Like a certain programming language's features, it may happen to be easier than not.
How Much Does Los Angeles Have to Build to Get Out of Its Housing Crisis? A Lot
I agree, I was immediately turned off by Learn You a Haskell, it felt way to dense to me. This looks like a promising and more approachable(in my opinion) book:

https://www.manning.com/books/learn-haskell
My understanding is that the bug was in a particular contract written using the Ethereum contract "language", not Ethereum itself. E.g., one does not stop using Python because there's a bug in Quora
Satellite phones work well for one-to-one communication or similar; if you need an emergency phone for your own use, or a phone for use in isolated areas away from any cell tower, that's what you want.

But for broadcast communication and coordination in a disaster (e.g. "which hospital can take a busload of people", or "family seeking missing person <name>"), amateur radio works very well.
Probably still an "issue" in their project tracker just waiting... one day... as it gets pushed further and further down the list of tasks.
Think this depends on where you live...
It's hard to take any post on efficiency seriously if the author doesn't indicate that they understand the difference between a cache miss and a branch-prediction. Things like that are so huge in modern processors that you will have trouble understanding how things work without it.
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/l-p-d-libertaria...
Maybe I have to cover a road with 11 inch long bricks and I need to know how many to buy?

The problem is that although perhaps certain units may be good for measuring certain things, the things you use those measurements for will frequently involve things that use different units.

To take your road example again, what if I want to find out how many revolutions it takes a wheel with a 4 foot circumference to travel a mile? What if I want to find out how many yard long strides it takes to go down a road?

The metric units are interoperable. That's their big advantage.
Right, so the complication is just duplicating the interface in C# for interop, which obviously isn't needed if you just use the SDK language. Still, this just hides the complexities of using that language, like memory safety and garbage collection, so it seems hard to definitively state that it's more complicated than it otherwise would be.

What sort of performance issues do you see? Do you mean the p/invoke/marshalling costs?
> the assertion here is that Palantir being unable to defend its own networks against a fairly rudimentary and mundane attack throws its entire business offering around cybersecurity into question

I think you're right. I would imagine this will prompt some tough questions both within their existing customer franchise and in pitches for new business.

Here's how Palantir describe their company cybersecurity platform on their own website[0]:

> With Palantir, your enterprise can finally detect advanced threats that lie hidden within your data. All of it. Structured network logs from proxy to IDS, VPN, anti-virus, DLP, DNS queries, malware tools, and application logs. Contextual data like email, print logs, facility access logs, internal chat logs, and human resources data. Open source and third party data. Our technology integrates it all into a single environment, and separates actionable signal from the noise so you can protect your network.

So the obvious question if you're the CEO or CISO of a company that does or is considering doing business with Palantir is, "You guys have unfettered access to your own network -- you can deploy your own cyber solutions without any restraints whatsoever. And yet you couldn't detect these intruders on your own system?"

Importantly, I'm not sure this would be a fair criticism -- it sounds like the white hat hackers they hired were very very good at covering their tracks -- but there's no doubt this leak is going to result in some tough conversations.

[0]: https://www.palantir.com/solutions/cyber/
This point is so important that Alan has emphasized it as one thing we're mostly missing.

The Alto was not meant to be a personal computer but a "personal supercomputer"—hardware so far ahead of the curve that it could run the software of the future. In other words, not a personal computer but a machine for inventing personal computing with, which of course they proceeded to do. Having such hardware is what makes it possible to figure out what the software of the future needs to be. If you can't run it, you can't create it.

For me this sheds light on a couple of Alan's famous lines: that the best way to predict the future is to invent it, and that people who are serious about software need also to be serious about hardware.

Such advanced hardware is necessarily costly but should still be within the reach of a properly funded research lab. It seems to have been an enormous frustration to Alan and his colleagues that they were unable to persude hardware vendors to make such hardware at any price, especially the Alto's microcode-driven style of hardware. Among other things, that was what had enabled the PARC researchers to make the most of the limited memory they had, since when a task was consuming too much memory they could implement it in microcode, pushing it down to the hardware (at least from the software's point of view) and freeing up RAM for software.
Amateur Radio is a great hobby if you're interested in radio wave propagation, RF engineering, radiosport, digital modes, satellites, etc.

It's surprisingly easy to get a license, and you'll find that many of the older generation of radio amateurs are among the most young-at-heart oldsters you'll encounter.
Bitcoin has turned out to be quite secure technically. The problem with Bitcoin is that anonymous unidirectional remote money transfers are the con man's dream. Bitcoin thus became a scam magnet. The goal of Etherium was to provide something akin to a contract so that remote parties could not just take the money and run. That seems to have failed technically.

(Another big problem with Bitcoin at scale is that you can't count it without access to the keys that let you spend it. This makes outside auditing very difficult and helped to enable the Mt. Gox scam. Etherium doesn't address that. Some multi-signature scheme where external parties could determine that an account has funds without the key needed to take them would be useful for a cryptocurrency. But, as Etherium shows, adding complexity adds exploitable bugs.)
What does 'mono-space' even mean if they're going to do that!
So we shouldn't tell people learning to code is easy, we should tell them it's hard, complicated, exhausting, and exasperating, but it'll be worth it in the end?

Why not just give them some easy code, help them through it, and let them see if they enjoy it?
No, I mean zero smearing with/without anti-aliasing and pixel-perfect versions of the font that fit exactly into the raster. This is certainly a subjective matter, so it's moot to discuss why I fall into the crowd that finds pixel-perfect bitmap monospace fonts most pleasing. Thought it's telling if you see that even Mac users sometimes prefer misc-fixed: https://monkey.org/~marius/beautiful-fixed-width-fonts-for-o...
If you run around telling people how hard programming is they'll never even get to the point that it does become difficult. That's why we tell people it's easy.
Here is some of the old tweets actually:

https://twitter.com/nestsupport/status/606246459822997505

https://twitter.com/nestsupport/status/604682180242108416

https://twitter.com/nestsupport/status/604714262834069505

https://twitter.com/nestsupport/status/604718648595333121

(Notice that they eventually posted a clear screenshot showing the problem and there was still not much of a response)

I still have the old emails from Google Security in my mailbox. June 2, 2015 was when I received the first "received" email. June 3, 2015 is when I received the "triaged" email. June 4, 2015 is when I received the "filed a bug" email. You can see from the Bugzilla bug that it was fixed by June 5, 2015.
dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11719543
I am going to support Cory Koski's comment on your post:

I don't know what your intentions are, but you have a post titled "Stop saying learning to code is easy" and a photo of three women with laptops. Are you trying to make a correlation of women being glib about the difficulty of software development/programming?
Wow. You know the situation is bad when you are actually better off implementing you own security as a bunch of Arduinos with webcam shields on the LAN and a server with a feature phone in the closet.

LOL, just look at this vigilant little bastard :p http://www.arducam.com/arducam-porting-raspberry-pi/arducam-... No one is sneaking up on that without leaving a mugshot.
I'm not sure I agree. The title doesn't match the content. The title contends that learning to code is hard, and I've never heard anybody disagree, learning to code is difficult. But then the content of the post contends that coding itself is hard. And I disagree. Programming difficulty is a function of a huge number of factors. Among which familiarity and experience are paramount. If you're writing a program that's familiar to one you've written before, programming is easy. If you're writing a complex new system with little to no precedent, programming is hard. There isn't a blanket statement that can be made about the difficulty of programming, it is all contextual.
No one tells people being an architect or a writter is easy. Why lying?
You might want to find a better flag graphic.

The people who want to know if it should be flying at half mast are more likely to care that the US flag being accurately represented.
Hitting an API endpoint, pulling data out of a database. Areas that already have an implicit schema require you to explicitly redefine that schema within your application.

I say this not just from personal preference, but I've proctored many timed coding challenges that were language agnostic. The challenge involved consuming data from a handful of API endpoints and compiling a response. Most statically typed solutions took twice the time of a dynamically typed one. We catered the time limit to the static case and it was a simple pass fail so no bonus points for doing it faster, but there was a strong advantage to the dynamic languages.

Note: This is very much alleviated with typed interchange formats like protobuf.
Except it is easy. In fact, it was designed to be easy by the language architect. Unlike engineering where you're dealing with unchangeable laws of physics, computer languages are designed to be written by people.
For those who don't watch the video to know what components Apple has mentioned in the video to partially/fully rewritten to Swift:

* Many parts of Music app
* Many parts of the Dock (rewrote Mission Control, accessibility features, etc)
* Console App new features (e.g. logging)
* Many OS Agents/Daemons
* The new picture-in-picture feature in Sierra
* Xcode features like the new documentation feature
* New Playground app
I assume that is meant as sarcasm, because if I had very little money I would certainly be worried about losing half of it over the weekend because of things like a hack the causes some panic and sends the exchange rate down. And the possibility to double my money due to rising Bitcoin prices would certainly not wipe out my worries.

I would also not be a huge fan of spending tens of millions of Dollars every year on electricity and hardware to heat the planet and process an amount of transactions that could easily be processed by a single centralized server for a fraction of the costs.
Thanks, but unfortunately that's not what I would call consistently serif, more like some letters looking hand-written.
Sorry. I understand the sentiment behind this but disagree with advisory or demands to speak a certain way. It's blatant political correctness and nobody has an obligation to set another person's expectation regarding coding. In common vernacular we say something is easy as an attempt to encourage a person to continue. This would just be changing words in order to achieve the same goal. What difference does it make if some say it's easy and others say it's hard? Let the dynamic range of opinions be. Is it necessary to squash one opinion over the other in an attempt to soothe the struggling of a few newbies?
Locally doesn't mean it has to be stored on the same physical premise thus physical access to cameras does not necessarily mean physical access to storage machines/devices. Great work GP, congrats for taking extra steps.

Is there any open-source/documentation that is accessible to more people (not just network experts) on how to do this kind of setup?
There are two things that are rapidly becoming negligent not to offer:

- 2FA (mobile, yubikey, duo)

- basic monitoring and notification when login patterns change

These are both relatively simple and effective. You needn't force 2FA, but please offer it.

A password I shared across a couple of test accounts for various services was compromised when one of the sites storing cleartext passwords was popped.

A Microsoft account was the winner of the day - they notified me that a login from $home followed by a login from Brazil looked suspicious, and they were correct. This is basic and often effective.
an employee is afaik also liable if he deletes customer data after he's been let go but his credentials hadn't been revoked yet.

shouldn't that be essentially the same thing?
A PL theorist would note that most of the time when people talk about ‘types’, that they really mean ‘classes’, and that all of those things your mentioned would be considered to be the latter. Types are rather the elements of your program that correspond directly to logical propositions (which your program proves to be true).
Nope. Being insecure isn't a crime.
How much more water can LA get out of the Colorado River?
I think the reason of comparing two programs in two different languages is exactly to have an idea of how expressive one language can be to generate a performing program given its inputs and outputs are the same, the way on which the code is written is the second factor being evaluated. The benchmark game is the perfect exemple of this, anyone can write a better version of a program and improve the language "score" until no one will be able to improve it. At this moment we can see how the language design impacts the resulting program. This should be the only way to compare languages.
Drawing from direct personal experience in the defense contracting industry, I can guarantee you that if a major Class-A clusterfuck disaster hits somewhere in the US, you'll see the military and federal response heavily using satellite. In-the-clear VHF, UHF and shortwave radio, sure, a lot of it, and the military equivalents thereof for their own communications, but you'd also see things like homeland security command trucks with 1.8 meter VSAT terminals on the roof parked outside major metro areas' hospitals.

Satellite can also be used to quickly restore portions of a badly damaged telecommunications system (mobile phone carriers and LTE networks) by giving an islanded/disconnected network a new multi-Mbps uplink to the outside world. With the right ground terminal equipment and transponder capacity you can do 130 Mbps full duplex through a relatively small portable satellite terminal. Such a pipe can be connected to a LEC network, to a mobile phone carrier, to a major ISP, to just about anything given the right network engineering expertise.
So what? This is a normal procedure. Authorities set ceiling of no more than 5000 dwellers there. That was ignored. Face the concequences.

For those curious - China is colonising Tibet, nothing wrong in industrial nation wiping out the weakling. When the British colonised Americas they did the same with more than 600 First Nations. They just did it earlier.
I did look at KeePassX - but it doesn't seem to have reliable autofill in Chrome & Firefox (where I use 99% of my passwords). It also means I have to manually synchronise the database between phone, PC, etc.

The hunt continues!
This. Bitcoin is currently paying transaction fees through inflation, but as the halving process continues, those fees will shift back into the marketplace in a less implicit way, as miners need to continue being paid.

https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction-percent
Their goals seem at odds with the economic incentives in the entire developed world. It's a beautiful dream, but we're not sufficiently civilized to make it reality.
What's with the "cloud" security systems? Why don't they just provide hardware where you store the information locally?

Ignoring the privacy implications mentioned here, and that you esentially pay monthly/yearly for storage, if your ISP has an outage your security system is becoming useless. It also is a weak point for smarter thieves (just make sure that Internet access is cut).
Yeah, I kinda agree - I'm not very skilled at graphic design so I used a premade icon for launch, but I may try my hand at rebuilding the SVG in Illustrator.
I get the feeling that tsunamifury is suggesting that chat, rather than a document browser, ought to be the metaphor for the end-user Internet -- that's what "vast majority of the planet stores knowledge in people and references it via direct communications" seems to be alluding to.

Chat interfaces are certainly all the rage right now. Having a properly threaded log of your interactions with a service provider is one benefit of messaging vs. browsing; lack of exploitable UI space for distracting advertising and pointless branding is another. At the same time, the UI paradigm for chat apps isn't even yet up to '70s state of the art. It's only good for very short interactions with limited or obvious choices.
Jller is an apparatus that sorts pebbles from a specific river by geologic age