skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Rules for Reproducible Computational Research
> I have personally lost the belief that you can actually change someone's opinion on almost anything. So an echo chamber doesn't have to be a bad thing

So you want to change someone's opinion, but not going to allow someone to change yours?
> Wait, missing one mention equates to not reading the entire article? Amazing indeed.

See nardi's comment. Amazing indeed!
Someone always makes a comment like this. Honestly, the black market value (if any) has nothing to do with the whitehat bounty amount. Why should it? The person who's going to do legitimate whitehat work isn't the same person who's going to sell on the black market.

I think of it like drugs. $50k street value of cocaine is not going to do me a lot of good because 1) I'd have no idea where to sell it, 2) if I did know where, I wouldn't have the relationships built and would probably get ripped off/killed/what-have-you, and 3) selling drugs isn't something I'd like to do. So, if there were an option of turning in the drugs to the police for $500, I would take that instead.
100% correct. Java 5-compatible libs tend to work most of the time, but not all of the time. To the casual observer, they both look and smell like Java, and copy-pasted Java code will probably work or be made to work, but the fact that not all libraries work in a drop-in setting make it pretty clear to developers that it's a rather distinct platform.
I lived in Fulham for 2 years and on the one or two days that Heathrow was shut down there was a strange unsettling silence. It would usually take a good 15 minutes to realize there wasn't a plane flying overhead every 90 seconds.
Yes, and this is all in Germany.
...And just distributional knowledge makes it easy to train new models on domain-specific corpora, or new languages. Is it possible to do the same with ConceptNet?

I generally find that expert-derived ontologies suffer from bad coverage of low frequency items, rigidly discrete relationships, and are usually limited to a single language. That said, they're vastly better than nothing for a lot of tasks (same goes for WordNet).
Most recent studies of deep canvassing (redone to fix the fabricated data) indicate that a strong, empathetic listener with leading questions has only about a 10% success rate.

Note this is NOT shooting out facts, not necessarily a close individual who you've built repoire with, and in fact almost zero talking. AND it persists for at least 3 months!

It's small, but it's also viable and completely different than what most people I know think of when we go out to "change someone's mind."
It is only infringement if you do something matching every part of some claim. There may be lots of stuff in the description, and that doesn't matter. That is, if a claim is a system comprising A, B, C, and D, and you do just A, B, and C, then you're fine.
I noted that I didn't read that section, apologized to the first person to point it out, and edited my comment to reflect it. The rest of my points stand quite well on their own and have nothing to do with Milo except as an example.
I don't think people are arguing against ideograms; in fact, I think the argument is very much in favor of ideograms, but simultaneously that icons like the floppy disk save icon are not very good ones. From what I've seen, there seems to be somewhat of a trend away from object-base metaphors and toward action-based metaphors, at least when it comes to action icons like the save icon. Instead of a picture of a storage device, modern or extinct, many applications now use icons intended to represent the act of storing something digitally, either using a an arrow directed down toward a rectangular shape meant to represent local media or using an arrow directed up into a cloud to represent cloud storage. (For an example of these, see Glyphicon's `glyphicon-save` and `glyphicon-cloud-upload` icons[1].)

One explicit advantage that these sorts of icons have is that they allow for a nice symmetry between Save and Open icons and upload/download icons (Glyphicon is again a good example; see glyphicon-open and glyphicon-cloud-download). This ties into another, perhaps more arguable advantage, a blurring between local and remote save actions. As applications become increasingly web-based, device-independent, and portable, it makes more sense to me to intentionally separate the "save" action from it's destination; I don't care so much where or how my data is saved, I only care that it's save and that I can get it back later.

I'd love to hear responses to my thoughts here; they sort of developed as I wrote the comment, so they're rather fresh at the moment.

1: http://bootstrapdocs.com/v3.1.0/docs/components/
Considering that the woman in question literally had musket balls embedded in her thigh, I think Kenji's response is better described as a good pun than uncivil or unsubstantive.
>Kashmir Solidarity Network

Bullshit, it's a bunch of terrorists crying they can't spread their propoganda.
You just argued that it would make more sense for cars to have replaceable batteries than trucks (which I agree with, and contrary to castratikron): we can count on trucks to have specialized charging facilities, but there are car owners who can only park on city streets or other places, who would be well-served by having battery-swap stations (a la gas stations) rather than home-charging.
It is very clear to anyone who wants to look into it that Russia is the culprit. There were two attackers; one used the same tradecraft, malware, and command-and-control servers as the Sofacy group, [0] which we have known to be Russian intelligence over dozens of large attacks all the way back to 2007. The other attacker used the same tradecraft, malware, and command-and-control servers as the "Cozy" group [1] which we know less about but reuses the same technology as other Russian intelligence actors and attacks Russian targets. As far as perpetrators, we definitely have the right people.

Motive is less clear. In reality, they probably hacked the DNC because everybody hacks everybody; that's the reality of modern cyberespionage. America hacks the Russian political parties, they hack us back. But this time someone screwed up and they got caught, so now we need a cover story.

The coverstory of trying to manipulate the election is basically convenient for all involved. It is far fetched enough to sound unbelievable, so it provides diplomatic cover. It also provides cover for why there's no similar story at the RNC, which is better than admitting either the Russians couldn't do it, or they could and they got away with that one. It provides cover to Clinton who can now claim the Russians want to elect Trump so please focus on that instead of anything to do with email, and it provides cover to Trump who would like to keep the word email in the news. This is the story that all our characters are happy to go with.

But the Russians being the perpetrators? That part is definitely true. There is way too much evidence over way too many years. The DNC did not create a Russian intelligence organization in 2007 in order to cover up their email leak in this election.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sofacy_Group

[1] http://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/36195/cyber-crime/cozydu...
> The Elites have decided that the "commoners" are too stupid to be trusted with actual decision making… I only see real Democracy working in small, relatively wealthy and homogeneous countries.

It is a scientifically verified truth that we are puny monkeys playing at God. The problem with leaving democracy to small groups is when the small group’s decisions affect the entire world. For example: San Francisco neighborhood associations’ affect on the housing market and technological development.

Another example: The “commoner” reaction to oil prices going back down, first after the OPEC embargo, and now during this weird fracking + Saudi thing. The “elite” Elon Musk is still going ahead with trying to get us off fossil fuels, but the commoner keeps trying to use more.

Learning enough to have an informed position makes you an elite. One problem is there is so little connection between being a political elite and being a smart, benevolent elite. There’s a reason why Obama is seen by Republicans as condescending and dictatorial.

> Oh, you're a blue-collar worker and globalization and immigration actually end up destroying your town's economy - too bad, maybe you should have been a banker or software engineer or bio-med researcher!

Why should you “be” a blue-collar worker, banker, software engineer, or any other job description? You are a human, and you can learn and do anything (modulo actual physical limitations). Lifelong learning is the goal, and research and personal experience suggest that lifelong learning actually gives you better quality of life than the alternatives.

But the US education system is horrible at that. It is shaping and limiting people’s options from the time that they enter elementary school, and are immediately sorted into, oh, you’re bad at math and good at reading, or you’re bad at reading and good at sports.

By and large, globalization has been good. We have more access to stuff and communications than any society in the history of the world. Past performance does not guarantee future results; we are still monkeys playing at God, so globalization can cause problems. When the US is exporting our restrictions on freedoms, for example.
I tend to agree. LastPass is literally in the business of securing passwords, and was giving them away.

I think the bounty should be: 10000 < bounty <= 100,000

This bug would have been exploited, sooner or later, and would have had massively disastrous results. Those results are now avoided, and that's worth a lot more than 1k.
What, like an independent third party? Cause that's what they did.
If you're Verified, you have access to a Verified Twitter stream, which means you can avoid seeing anything from people who are not verified.

This provides a civilized version of Twitter that is mostly populated by smart and funny people.

So Twitter removed a professional jerk from the Verified streams while allowing him to continue as a rabble-rouser.
this is not my thread, but I - and I think probably many other users - do appreciate the increased process transparency on HN, and the clarity and alacrity of decision explanations. Even if people should disagree with some decisions, at least they know what the official positions are. I look forward to more of this increased community information, responsivity and engagement as much as is feasible. Thank you.
I think it says a lot about the early environment at Google. Mayer herself began to plateau at Google after a while, which is why she ended up going to Yahoo instead of running Google.

Major successes take a great team and a fair bit of luck and good timing. This is (I think) why very few highly successful people manage to do it again when starting from scratch (even with the advantages of lessons learned the first time).

I think one problem with human society is that we want so badly to respect success and put individual people on a pedestal, which creates an unfair expectation of genius, when in fact it was likely partly luck and partly timing.

In leadership roles, where the development of a cult of personality is helpful (Mayer, Trump, Clinton, etc.) the name brand of the leader is part of the value proposition, but it reinforces the idea of genius which is usually not remotely true. But it can work because of the desire of humans to align behind chieftain and themselves avoid risk of failure.

I personally think the "leader as servant" model would have been most useful for Mayer, but instead she immediately ended some perks and reined in remote workers. This suggests that she fell into the trap of feeling like she was entitled to authority she (as a leader) hadn't yet earned.
My brain doesn't reliably shut down in the evening when the rest of me is ready for bed.
I don't see it as a stretch to expect that we can go further in a given direction by dedicating resources to accomplish it, compared to what might happen accidentally by chance.

That's not to say that such a thing is without danger. I'm particularly wary of unintended consequences. But the people that are pursuing vast reductions in emissions aren't giving very much thought to the unintended consequences of their approach, either.

My point is that the arguments are being made with a huge amount of assumption on all sides. That's not the way to get to a good answer. We need to really consider what the likelihoods of possible outcomes are, in terms of lost human utility; and we might be able to do about them, including their costs and likelihood of success. I don't see a lot of real pro-vs-con debate - most of what I see is the Al Gore tactic of intentionally exaggerating claims to frighten people into acquiescence.
What an insightful piece. It is interwoven with Eco's experience as a kid in Fascist Italy, but written 50 years later. At the end is a little listicle of typical characteristics of a Fascist movement, with a careful indication that not all will be present.

Being written in 1995, the training set is independent of the test set, and one is thus free to find parallels in the current moment:

"Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action’s sake. Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation."

"Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks for consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural fear of difference. The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders."

"To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country. This is the origin of nationalism."
US intelligence agencies are definitely part of multiple conspiracies.

I don't find them particularly reliable. Their heads perjured themselves in front of Congress not long ago, let's not forget.
Canada bank regulator tells banks to test resilience to 50% drop in home prices
It's not the issue that there are inputs other than the wishes of the delegates, it's that those other inputs almost totally override the delegates and make the whole thing a sham.

As it is, the only purpose the delegates have is to fool people into believing in the result.
Wow. Shipping an extra NSLog statement in a privacy-focused app is an embarrassing mistake, but the response[1] from Pavel, Telegram's founder/CEO, should be the real story:

> @k_firsov This applies only to texts that were copy-pasted from clipboard, and such texts are open to all other Mac apps anyway (1).

> (2)... AppStore apps can NOT access syslog (starting 10.12 also true for unsigned apps). But ANY app can read your clipboard.

> (3)... AppStore apps are sandboxed and can only WRITE to syslog, not READ it

> (4)... Malware apps are unsigned/not from AppStore and so, of course, are not sandboxed. But it'd be a game over scenario.

> ...(5) So while copy-paste can not be secure anyway, I see such logging in the stable release redundant and will see it gone.

> ...(6) However, if you find anything really serious, let us know at security@telegram.org to claim your potential bounty. Thanks.

Basically, he's saying this isn't a problem because other App Store apps shouldn't be able to read syslog, and any malicious app already present on the machine could be reading the clipboard in real time. But he willfully ignores the fact that by saving clipboard data to the syslog, it can be accessed much later by a non-App Store app or someone with possession of the machine.

[1] https://mobile.twitter.com/k_firsov/status/75687561187282124...
Absolutely could not agree with you more!

One thing I'd add - likely related closely to survival and relevance is around product sustainability and platform responsibility - I'm talking mainly in regards to consistently demonstrating due-diligence of maintaining, servicing and supporting the platform / services such as widespread, timely security patching controlled and measured across a reasonable age range of products while also responsibly protecting customer privacy.

While on the surface this may seem more like measures of product quality rather than success - I believe they are critically important, key indicators of a successful product / deliverable.

As you say - winning is not solely about market share or pure profit, but also sustainability and social responsibility which in turn then feeds back into both relevance and survival in the long run.

*Pleasse excuse any typos, rushed my reply just on my phone late at night when I should be sleeping.
It takes a lot of energy. If we built enough clean energy to have some to spare for pulling carbon out of the atmosphere then we would already have met the goals of decarbonizing the economy. This would merely be going the extra mile on top of that.

And we already have self-replicating zero-emission carbon extraction machines. They're called trees. You could just plant trees, wait a few decades and then drop them with some weights into the ocean if you wanted to get rid of carbon. Of course you would have to do that at industrial scale and somehow find a way to replace all the nutrient minerals you're also sinking into the ocean.

And we're talking about gigatons per year. The only thing that's comparable in human production is concrete. We would have to build all our roads, cities and megastructures out of carbon to reverse current emissions.
If anyone else is wondering what the heck "word embedding" means, it's a natural language processing technique.

Here's a nice blog post about it: http://sebastianruder.com/word-embeddings-1/

It can process something like this: king - man + woman = queen

Neat-o.
Totally unrelated. The Panthers were actually taking charge of their own community to police it because the police would not. They fed the hungry and took care of the poor in their communities because people would not. The FBI then ruined them by selling them illegal guns through Richard Aoki, and arresting the people who bought the guns.

Jake, on the other hand, talked at conferences and took credit for tech work. Then he raped some people. Plus, he's one dood. Sooooooo, no, no similarities at all, actually.
ICML 2016 was awesome
There's a PR open for supporting the beginnings of incremental recompilation in Rust, so hopefully it lands soon!
Introducing Microsoft Pix – A Smarter Camera App
We do but it's not part of our MVP ;)
Being banned from a particular subreddit with a particular set of rules by mods of that subreddit only on that subreddit is not banning from an entire platform (twitter) ALSO that sub in particular gets massively brigaded. BTW at Trump rallies, protesters didn't just get kicked out. MANY remained there, and he addressed certain ones with answers. Some were kicked out when it was clear they would not stop distracting those who were there to see TRUMP.

Also, reddit allows you to subscribe, but twitter creates a stronger relationship between poster and followers. You'd be subscribed to a particular person but when they are banned, all their history is gone, you no longer see anything. It's like someone came into your house and took away one of your favorite TV channels, as well as anything you had recorded from that channel on your DVR.

Who is this THEY you keep referring to anyway? You keep saying 'they' like readers are just supposed to know.
Your logic is sound. I agree with the GP post about the increased value, though not for his same reasoning.

Fixing this bug before an exploit is worth a LOT to the company. I think they have a moral obligation to pay more than 1k to fix it.

I also think it makes sense to award good-sized bounties, as at this point I would have no interest in their bounty program, were I hunting bounties.
Any public company's valuation is the sum of every vested actor's belief in the stock's promise of (future) value. It definitely doesn't mean that Twitter has $11 billion in the bank.

If anything happens that makes vested individuals doubt that Twitter is worth as much as it is, its value will drop, as it did right after the Q2 2016 earnings report was released.
The Yin and Yang of DevOps Transformation
I agree and disagree (in a friendly manner!).
Yes, Twitter can be (and often is) a violent battleground.
IMHO, this is not the reason it is failing (in fact, these battles drive high engagement).

Politics get violent, no matter where you express them, no matter the character limit. That's just the nature of the beast - half the people in the world disagree with the other half. Censorship is too difficult to execute at high level, because as it has been shown in the past, the people controlling the censorship are often biased.

The way I have found Twitter to be enjoyable is to not get involved in political threads (and yes, I have made the mistake of doing so, several times). I do not share the same political ideology as many of the people I interact with on Twitter, but I nonetheless respect their right to have an opinion. So long as I do not turn Twitter into my soapbox, I enjoy it (same thing applies to Facebook for me). If you completely block out people you disagree with (as many tweeters do), you will have a very narrow view of the world.

I think there is value in Twitter, and it could easily repair itself if it cared enough (unfortunately, it seems to care very little about improving itself at the moment).

One thing Twitter has done right: I have made more real-world friends (as in, people I have met in person) via Twitter than I have Facebook. Twitter encourages befriending people you do not know, Facebook still carries the privacy stigma.

Here are things that Twitter should do if it wants to improve:

- Fix the blue sticker. Stop handing it out to arbitrary people, and ignoring real influencers (example: thousands of video game streamers have the sticker, but Richard Garriott, one of the most influential game creators, does not). Allow people to apply for the sticker with a nonrefundable paid application (just enough money to pay the staff to evaluate whether or not they warrant the sticker).

- Monetize popularity the right way, and get rid of all the fake followers. Get rid of people who follow then unfollow just to get a high follower/following ratio. This makes people who build their follower base the honest way seem underrated/undervalued. Come up with a better ranking system than number of followers (i.e. how influential are your top 20 followers?).

- Emphasize and reward the flagging of fake accounts. Put the twitter population to work at eliminating spam and fake followers.

- Sometimes I want to express things that are not exactly advertisements, but if I want to promote them (using money) they will get marked as an ad ("promoted"). This just cheapens the value of whatever I want to promote. Its really not necessary; let users figure out what is an ad and what is not - it is pretty easy. Think of all the people willing to pay to get real exposure for their tweets (not spammy tweets, but just people that want to broadcast their ideas or content). This could be a business model on its own.

- Fix your software. I've noticed it makes my browser grind to a halt on some machines. Others have issued complaints across various platforms.

- There is much more, but I have probably already gotten too deep.