skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No snark, but I guess white supremacists also find their model pretty useful. The obvious question is, does anything go, provided it makes some people feel good somehow?
> why isn't what's good for the bastion good enough for the rest of the fleet?

mfdutra's comment that you replied to said: If things go south really really bad, we can just get the private key and sign certificates by hand.

That's obviously an incomplete answer - it doesn't explain how you connect to the server if you can't get onto the bastion due to a directory failure - but the basic premise is that the core system is isolated & contains everything it needs to handle the authentication process.
You could try looking at using ivy instead of helm. Not tried it myself but there was a thread on the emacs reddit last week [1] where people said it's much faster.

https://www.reddit.com/r/emacs/comments/51lqn9/helm_or_ivy/
I talked to the Austrian version of it and they seem useless. I don't think they understand there is a problem but as far as I understand it's the same story in other countries as well.
It's purely opportunity cost. Blizzard makes a ton of money from it's projects. They will have calculated that the expected dollar return is greater by investing in existing products and occasionally launching new high-budget titles like Overwatch.
Create a lending system without requiring collateral from the borrower using this for risk mitigation on the lending side and you will conquer the world.
There's a Makefile in the src directory, seems like you can run "make release" to compile from source.
In the archive.org version, the word "abstracted" is broken across two lines. That's why there's a hyphen.
What business class router do you recommend?
Pfsense routers from the pfsense store
This is about people who think everybody thinks about them and cares. Nope. And wrong.

Explained here why:
http://www.paulgraham.com/love.html

And the ones who do, do because of prestige, biases, and inability to understand they were being manipulated (into liking/not liking sth). Not to mention, that statistical difference between all this life important eating out, is not worth your attention.
That isn't necessarily true. You could buy "shares" in a contract. The contract then uses share capital to underwrite many insurance claims, and you're paid a monthly interest for owning the share capital.

I.e. the money then wouldn't be sitting idly, it could be used again and again to underwrite more contracts, up to the risk limit.
This is why Bezos wins:

<quote>

Our mascot is the tortoise. We paint one on our vehicles after each successful flight. Our motto is "Gradatim Ferociter" - step by step, ferociously. We believe "slow is smooth and smooth is fast." In the long run, deliberate and methodical wins the day, and you do things quickest by never skipping steps. This step-by-step approach is a powerful enabler of boldness and a critical ingredient in achieving the audacious. We're excited to give you a preview of our next step. One we've been working on for four years. Meet New Glenn:

</quote>
I've lived in both US and Brazil and I would say that the level of corruption is more or less the same no matter where one lives in the world, but in Brazil even the street cleaner knows about the political scandals while in the US it's all smoke & mirrors, to the point that only the higher-ups are in on it.

Brazil: "I know about it but what can I do to change it? Let's focus on some talking point instead."

US: "I don't really know about any scandals so let's focus on some talking point."

The problem also isn't exactly political but social, as in what might be called "small/everyday corruption" (running a red light, cutting in line, not mentioning the cashier just gave you more change than you deserved, and a million other things). There's no ML for that, only education [1].

As an aside: when one lives in Brazil (or any country, really), "when in Rome..." seems to apply, at least in some cases. At one point, I lived in the slums and was using internet that was very likely from a stolen connection (known as a "gato", or in this case, "gatonet"), but this was what everyone had and there was nothing else on offer. I also used types of public transportation that were very efficient for me but, afaik, technically illegal yet no one was really policing it. To give one more Brazil example, at a movie theater, I once used a recently expired student card of mine to get half-price. With these types of things taken into consideration, I'd say that the US (my country) is like concrete while Brazil is like water. To each, their own. There's good and bad aspects about both.

1 - In Brazil, there's sometimes a mix-up in the usage of the terms education (educação), which includes concepts of right vs wrong and manners, and schooling (escolaridade), thus in my mention of education I mean to include both senses.
Fast TDD setup for TypeScript
These days it's wise to assume that, if data exists, it's also stored outside of your control somewhere.
It's one of the usual arguments for ignoring the "simulation argument".

I think there's a bigger problem with the religious version that you presented. Namely, for any religion/concept of God, you can imagine another one that wants you to do opposite things. How do you know which God's existence to assume? You're back to trying to find evidence for one God against another God. In practice, this would probably also provide evidence against the claim that "no Gods exist". It's hard to think of evidence of the form "If there's a God, it probably wants X as opposed to not X." that really needs that pre-condition.

So the religious person may just as well go back to trying to gather evidence for God against no-God, because they need to gather evidence for God against the God-that-desires-opposite-things anyway.
Actually on a second thought, I don't think that supporting data privacy is the job or the interests of governments. In fact, they are usually the first ones ready to sacrifice privacy in order to provider you with "security" services.

I wouldn't even define data privacy as "public goods" because you now, it's private, it's really a whole different thing than what governments are willing to provide.

Profit making is again in conflict with data privacy, because there are much more money to make by profiling the hell out of your customers then by selling technology to aid real data privacy.

So there's this niche of progress that can't be pushed neither by governments nor by businesses.

So in order for it to happen, there's the need for another force to drive it. And in my oppinion that force is the open source / grass root movement .

And I don't agree that linux is special because Linus is special. We're talking about a mindset here, and Linus is not the only one having it.
How to Root Android Device – IT-Mela.Com
I rather use a REPL environment that combines GUI and CLI, like in Xerox and ETHZ OSes.

Think of DrRaket, Swift Playgrounds or Jupyter like experience.
[Danger, do not try to run in your system] I like this :(){ :|: & };: which is a fork bomb
http://askubuntu.com/questions/159491/why-did-the-command-ma...
Where do you get the 50% number from?

These GPS changes started in 4.0.4 (or was it 4.1?) which means 98% of devices (96%) include this:

https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html
There was a paper a few months back in deep reinforcement learning that got record setting RL results using only a CPU [0]. Previously, these algorithms would play fewer games and run a gpu over and over on the few games they had played. By using a CPU you can generate more samples that are up to date with your learning algorithm. It sounds obvious in hindsight, but you can't exactly run 60 atari sims on a gpu.

[0] - https://arxiv.org/abs/1602.01783
The comedy numbering ironically enhances the article :-), but I found this simple statement to be very true "The complexity of the system comes from the aggregation of many simple parts, not from any complex parts." In fact, in one of my side projects outside work (and one which will be open source and subject to the court of public opinion in due course), this has been something I have considered very important. I'm always impressed how simple language can convey such vital concepts about such complex matters.
It's still less efficient than 'real world' insurance, which also pays out, but does not need the money to be locked away.
Do you also validate the whole source code, including running it through static analysis, before compiling it?
Another good read:

Bash Shortcuts For Maximum Productivity [0]

[0] http://www.skorks.com/2009/09/bash-shortcuts-for-maximum-pro...
please tell more :)
It's worse than that ...

You have to use a third party which fetches the data for you ... So at least 1 third party but likely 2 third parties.

The way it basically works is that someone has a proxy contract to which they can post information to send to other contracts. Your contract trusts this contract to receive information, and therefore implicitly trusts the source to accurately query the information from elsewhere and send it to you.

However, this can be commoditised (e.g oraclize.it), and you could use a quorum of many different proxy contracts.

The trouble is that ethereum operations and transactions (especially involving storage) are expensive, and that there are much cheaper ways of achieving distribution and/or trust for many use cases.
For a finished game product, absolutely. But for a prototype having access to the in house library of thousands of models, animations etc is a huge step up.
"...you can REACH OUT to us using the Support button in the app..."

[Puke!]
How do you, as a root, protect against it? It's unseemly that a non-root can DoS a system.
This is one of the simplest, and most useful, explanations for religious belief I've seen. Thank you!

There's a tendency to write off creationists and theists as completely irrational and stupid, without giving any thought to their motivations.
Congratulations for this release. I've struggled with time series in MySQL. Is support for in-memory time series I could join with in the roadmap? Thanks!
I sort of feel that whoever made this site should have read an article somewhere entitled The Six Dumbest Ideas in Web Design.

Also, amusing quip 'if "Penetrate and Patch" was effective, we would have run out of security bugs in Internet Explorer by now.' although I guess the real case would be the less pithy if "Penetrate and Patch" was effective, we would have run out of security bugs in Internet Explorer 6 by now.'

also if Penetrate and Patch could be replaced by someone just writing a browser that was not hackable because it was not supposed to be hackable which browser is that?

I mean I understand that a system hardened by trial and error is not as enticing as a system made hard from the start, without holes, but I guess there is very few of these to be found and probably what is best is a system that has been tried to be made as hard as the programmers could from the beginning and then tested for holes after that.

I mean listing penetrate and patch as a dumb idea sounds like one of those jokes - The only thing stupider than using Penetrate and Patch to fix security holes is not using it at all. Probably I exaggerate there but (given the number of companies that don't even do that) I don't think I exaggerate by much.

On Edit: I mean I sure use the phrase I mean a lot. Sorry about that, have some long running conflicts at work that are boiling over right now. Probably shouldn't comment on articles, but I do it to take my mind off things.
histreedit is also pretty useful especially when a substitution fails.

shopt -s histreedit

If set, and readline is being used, a user is given the opportunity to re-edit a failed history substitution.
Exactly. It's pure fantasy. Looking for shreds of intelligence in it is foolish. To
See also Marthin Luther; Protestantism.
I completely agree that those are not gameable. The thing I wondered about was why there can't be any other ungameable algorithm.
I'm not convinced it would be so hard. I imagine something like ForegroundToken's:
Activities (now plural with multi-window) in the foreground (onResume) gain access to a ForegroundToken. The service requests require you to pass in the ForegroundToken. This token is then validated at the moment of the request.

When the app goes into the background the system invalidates the token, so any work waiting in queue somewhere will actually fail on the token check when it comes up.

If you want to ask a background service (of your own), or fire off an intent, you pass the ForegroundToken with it. If the work starts while your app is still in the foreground peachy, if not, it fails.

In a foreground > background > foreground cycle, your app gets a new ForegroundToken on every onResume event.

If you want apps to have true background access to a permission, that is a separate toggle (yes more complicated I know, but theoretically possible). They then can pass null into the ForegroundToken argument.
> Is the Google example oversimplified,
> or is my history wrong?
> It's reduced here to a "simple database search"
> but I thought some of Google's novel search technology
> was there from the get-go

The article called it "a simple database search returning ranked results based on the number of backlinks." Therein lies the rub. Larry Page came up with the idea of backlink counting, inspired I think by how in scholarly writing a measure of importance is the number of other scholarly writings that cite it. He first called it BackRub, then later renamed it to PageRank.

Of course there were other pieces of evidence in their secret sauce, and they are ever tweaking it. But I would say that backlinks made the biggest difference. In those days Hotbot and AltaVista returned a cacophony of results based on word matches in the body of the page itself. Google I believe was the first search engine that went by the text in the links of other websites pointing to it. One of Sergey Brin's and Larry Page's professors tells the story of being introduced to their prototype, searching for "Stanford," and for the first time the top result was actually stanford.edu.

A few times people exploited this. For example, someone got a bunch of their friends to link to George Bush with the link labeled "miserable failure," so that when you googled "miserable failure," the top result was George Bush. This is called google bombing.

Another part of their algorithm that proved how far off course most people, including me, thought that the Web should be organized was laid out in Sergey Brin's research pager, "Extracting Patterns and Relations from the World Wide Web." While everybody, including me, thought that the way to bring order to the chaos of the Web would be to somehow persuade more and more people to write better web pages (semantic HTML, microformats, etc.) Sergey Brin just took what he was given. As an example he talks about finding author-title pairs on the Web. He starts with a seed list of, say, five author-title pairs:

Isaac Asimov, The Robots of Dawn
David Brin, Startide Rising
James Gleick, Chaos: Making a New Science
Charles Dickens, Great Expectations
William Shakespeare, The Comedy of Errors

and just combing the web for patterns between the elements of each pair. Instead of pristine microformats and "proper" HTML, he takes what he gets:

<LI><B>title</B> by author (
<i>title</i> by author (
author || title (

and other patterns.

He uses these patterns to find more pairs, which he uses to find more patterns, and so on (http://ilpubs.stanford.edu:8090/421/1/1999-65.pdf).
Dva 1.0 – a lightweight framework based on react and redux
This paper is a theoretical contribution, not a practical one, similar to Solomonoff Induction. Solomonoff Induction's contribution is essentially "there exists a formal mathematical process that inductive reasoning on evidence corresponds to" which, among other things, pretty much solves epistemological puzzles like the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven_paradox from philosophy.

Yeah, the actual performance of Solomonoff Induction is uncomputable, but to me the useful point is that "induction can be done mathematically", and then what we do heuristically in our brains can be thought of as a low-fidelity analog of that. If I'm understanding the page correctly, this is the same idea but for statements based on proofs and logical theorems. Which seems to expand the scope somewhat.

(I'm really excited about this, actually, just as a person who enjoys learning about this stuff from Wikipedia. I feel like I've vaguely thought about how Solomonoff induction would work on statements that are derived from each other (or when combined with type-checking, since type-checking is closely related to theorem-proving), but had no idea how to even ask a precise question much less make anything of it.)
The implementation seems quite novel, but I can't shake the feeling that its a bit over-engineered. The additional complexity of this over a standard solution (eg FreeIPA + SSSD) may introduce other issues that need to be mitigated.

The approach of using certificates over a cache like sssd is just shifting the issue from cache expiration over to certificate expiration. With certificates, you are likely to set some period where the user certificates expire, and if u have an expired certificate and CA is down u still cannot log in. If you dont expire your certificates u have a security risk.

With FreeIPA you can also map public keys to specific users and have sshd pull authorized_keys from SSSD instead of the actual file. So if a user leaves the system, his keys get removed. So no need to worry about old keys lingering on your servers.

As somebody already mentioned, LDAP (which FreeIPA uses as backend) has a battle-proven HA capability. With some sane configurations of the underlying servers (separate physical equipment, networking, etc), you don't need to worry about your backend mysteriously going down.
Nvidia Debuts New Chips in Race with Intel to Provide AI Engine
I looked into this before. I just don't get it. There is definitely a trusted 3rd party in play which to me breaks the consensus model of having something decentralised. Maybe you can have many trusted 3rd parties and they all agree I don't know. But then insurance is a lot trickier than just paying out automatically when your flight is delayed. How do you even know the person took the flight. Maybe that doesn't matter. But lots of other questions probably do e.g. If we have a major event which delays worldwide flights would that bankrupt the insurance scheme. What capital must the decentralised insurance hold to be liquid. Who can recapitalise it if there's a black swan event. I am not against these decentralised models I just know there are a multitude of very difficult questions which insurance companies have already answered. P2P, decentralised and smart contracts can't be the answer alone?
No, I think the same. The Pix photos look a bit washed out. Faces are brighter, but it doesn't look natural to me anymore. I'd rather use a flash for the pictures where faces were really dark, would probably deliver better results.
Should set user process limitations, in /etc/security/limits.conf
I understand () about dietary fibre and glycemic indices.

Celery has more water than pretty much all fruits (www.herefordshireccg.nhs.uk/download.cfm?doc=docm93jijm4n7467.pdf)

Celery also has more fibre than honeydew melon - 1.6% vs 0.8% (the source this time was just googling "fibre celery" and "fibre honeydew melon", the data is on the results page and credited USDA).

I guess the sugars in melon are inside cells and therefore a little harder to get out and into my blood stream. However, I'm pretty sure chewing frees enough to make almost no difference by the time I swallow it (I can't find any data on that).

So, it seems that table sugar + celery is better for me than melon.

I'm sure I have a lot more to learn though.
An registration company I used to work at was using .NET 1.1. Being the super ambitious junior developer I was, my first move was to upgrade our software to the latest and greatest: .NET 2.0. After passing all the tests and signed off by QA, we moved it to production, and we pat ourselves on the back, having done A Good Thing (tm).

Soon afterwards, however, we started receiving reports of our users not being able to refund or charge credit cards. All that information should have been in the DB, encrypted! We quickly discovered that, on occasion, the encrypted data getting corrupted. Immediately we did what every engineer would do in our place - blame the previous engineer's code, then try and find the bug that would prove our theory right. After days of studying source code and testing theories, nothing explained occassional corruption.

Eventually we traced the beginning of our problems back to our server/framework upgrade, and found a Backwards Incompatible Change: invalid unicode code points would now be silently dropped, rather than being allowed. It turns out that all of our credit card numbers were being encrypted properly, but then DECODED using the UTF-8 Encoding and stored in an NVARCHAR column in the DB! Everything was fine in .NET 1.1 (and SQL Server 2000) but .NET 2.0 silently drops the invalid UTF-8 code points. With those code points missing, it was impossible to decrypt the data and do anything with it.

... I suppose that makes it more secure though, so there's that ...

We felt that .NET 2.0 was a big enough upgrade that it was worth adding some new warts to our system. The final hack: we found an unused pc and built a .NET 1.1 web service with two functions: encrypt/decrypt. We store credit card numbers in the database in plain text, make a call to this webservice with the row id, and it encrypts the data. This solution lasted almost 5 years before our boss accepted the pain of an hour of down time and we exported/decrypted/encrypted/imported the entire db.
Ask HN: Most impressive wearable technologies?
Slack has an option to display full names, which you can set. An admin can also make that the default.

Secondarily, the reason for @username is because you basically have to use usernames of some kind to ensure you can directly refer to another user consistently. Users can also setup "highlight words" which will notify them if someone says them in a channel they're in. This could be their name for example, or other things.
A better way is to first teach them logic. Then tell them they're wrong.
Ask HN: Why do human babies cry?
I haven't observed babies of other animals cry. Like pups and cubs and kittens.

Why human babies?
Android users can't update their devices themselves, so citing the age of any particular OS version is no defense.

It's also the reason that Android turned out to be a big fraud.
I don't see why Ethereum-based insurance contracts necessarily lock money.

For example, the contract could give another address the authority to take risks with some percentage of the deposits, or pretty much any other arbitrarily complicated setup.
How does a system like this detect and cope with insurance fraud?
Mostly not creationism specifically but my religion.
It doesn't seem to be actively used in the past few years, though; isn't there a process one can use to claim unused github user / org names? Might be worth talking to GitHub staff about...
Sure, but you still wind up dealing with the craptastic device. The router I currently use which is forced upon me by my ISP will hang for a few seconds if it encounters a DLNA packet. That means several seconds of packet loss and some TCP connection being closed.

I have wasted so many hours on the phone with their support without getting anywhere. They wouldnt even acknowledge there is a problem until I showed them graphs. Then they sent an "engineer" over who also knew fuck all and accomplished nothing. He then seemed to have reported back there was nothing wrong and now they ignore me.

I should switch ISPs but the performance of the network compared to the price is excellent. Just this shitbox of a router.
In that case NASA better hurries up with sending an American to Mars.
I would like one.