skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Note, in advance, that I am not saying these should not be free, they absolutely should, this is a problem on the level of the philosophical framework and of strategy -- not a factual mistake on the value level

It seems like this critique rests on one central premise: Stallman is too ideologically pure. He's a zealot. And this is true, no doubt.

But I do wonder, hasn't every successful movement been spearheaded by a zealot, by someone who refuses to compromise? The work of outreach generally falls on these people's followers.

Jesus, Ayn Rand, Lenin, etc...
Tight vs loose coupling is not a new concept. You can write a monolith with bounded-context components which are loosely coupled to each other with an eye towards possibly putting those bounded contexts in different containers in the future.

Unfortunately, this requires an actual architect to think about the design of the monolith ahead of time, and most startups either have trouble recruiting anyone above the junior level, confuse the responsibilities of the project manager (who, in the early days, is typically the CEO/CTO) with the responsibilities of the architect, or simply cannot afford to put an architect on payroll.
That's really useful to hear, especially from you, (presuming you're the same wbond who wrote oscrypto)! Have you written or considered writing a longer-form expansion on these experiences?

And yeah, in spite/because of all its simplisticness, ctypes really does seem to win out among those who share Python's aesthetics.
Civil servants in developed countries are far from being paid crap yet they deliver the worst services ever.

This is rather about the workplace culture than the pay.
Thanks. We've changed the URL to that from https://threatpost.com/malware-evades-detection-with-novel-t..., and the title to a representative phrase from the article.

Submitters: HN prefers original sources. This is in the site guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html).
But why would you? I know of incidents just this year that a child was saved because of amber alerts. It's put out for the same reason that people on here are arguing for "if your surrounding community were more aware or had a personal interest in each other, these situations would not happen"
How Do I Know If My Website Is Good for Google?
War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Diversity is strength.
Guess it went down. This one lacks the outlined breakdown at the end, but try the pdf link here:

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.516....

EDIT:

If you want a really deep dive, you can also check out "African American English: A Linguistic Introduction" from Cambridge University press:

www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/languages-linguistics/sociolinguistics/african-american-english-linguistic-introduction?format=PB&isbn=9780521891387
I turn to that channel and watch that show.

Why on Earth wouldn't I be okay with The Daily Show?
Wouldn't exactly call it a problem...
> Why are you inserting age and race into this discussion?

Because by every metric you can come up with young black men in my neighborhood are in more danger than any one else & it has nothing to do with their criminal affiliation. It is a trivial excercise to find kids that grew up just like me but black, who experience violence levels unheard of where I grew up & the only demographic difference is race. The idea that its only "criminals" who suffer from American urban violence is so trivially refuted that no one who studies it seriously considers it credible. Yet on one of the most affluent tech boards in the world its considered normal to argue the opposite.
Very few teachers, first responders and restaurant workers can afford Manhattan or Santa Monica. And yet both of those places have them in fairly high numbers. Because convenient, fast and reliable public transportation.

Only in SF we're willing to overlook a compete failure of government services and infrastructure and blame the issues on newcomers paying higher prices for the properties and driving up the property tax revenues.
As a bicyclist, I've observed some interesting parallels: It's become virtually impossible to have a civil discussion about helmets or stop signs.
"It might not be mature enough yet for widespread adoption, and it doesn't revolutionize all parts of a cryprosystem, but it is definitely progress in the narrower problems of key distribution and perfect forward secrecy for one-time pads"

I'm not sure. The best minds I've talked to in high-assurance security don't believe it. One, Clive Robinson on Schneier's blog, predicted we'd see classical attacks on it. Something like that happened. I pointed out there would still be software, endpoints, interception, subversion, etc for bypass whereas the tech itself was little understood versus effects of regular electronics. Tried and true beats novel and new if it's high-security I always say.

No, these devices are not trustworthy or even necessary that I can tell. High-assurance key exchange is a solved problem if the organization is the simpler, hierarchical designs likely to use QKD. Many solutions available with the most reliable being a courier and key-handling hardware you can trust that only has part of the secret + another transmitted over various medium with it all using several layers of symmetric to work (eg my polymorphic schemes). All on dedicated, low-TCB devices.

I don't know what QKD costs today but I bet it's still cheaper to courier the pre-shared keys and use tamper-resistant hardware. Do you have numbers on it in terms of amount of keys negotiated over time and at what cost for hardware w/ HA setup?
This is not novel, it's same general technique on a much more simplistic level as those that red pill uses.

edit: I don't really care about the downvote, but would have preferred a reply as to how it is that fundamentally different from silly stuff like checking device names, or even checking IDT location/ITLB contents/timing attacks This is clever-ish userspace stuff, but it's the same general idea and it's not new.
interesting.. what gathered respect for wells were you able to gain from reading this?

the letter is a series of self edifying straw men

to me it reads like someone trying to speak confidently to hide a deeply rooted, or joyce induced, insecurity and ends up coming across as arrogant
There are some very thoughtful comments in response to the parent, and I'm not degrading them. I just want to say in addition to an upvote that yours is more than just thoughtful. Thank you.
Funny. I reported something similar to comcast after finding several of their engineers' home directories on github. Ssh keys, usernames, passwords, scripts, logs, and even code for a DVR machine (no idea). Thankfully comcast got the GH account deleted fairly immediately. It just took a public reddit post to get in contact with them after their posted routes didn't work.

The person who uploaded them there did government security before joining comcast, so it doesn't surprise me even for a second that this was a mistake. Though, the repo also had updates after his employment there ended.
I find the article to be a gross oversimplification: It's very hard to put oneself in other person's shoes. The same external behavior might be caused by very different internal mechanism.

I have met people that are labeled as introverted that are just what he describes: One on one conversations about their behavior, with people they trust, show that they really dislike most people, and will never feel at ease in any group. They are selfish people that don't care about others at all. But there's more to it. For instance, my son avoids parties because he gets sensory overloaded very quickly: He'll hide in a corner, covering his ears. Is he selfish? I don't think so. We are doing our best to help him handle such situations, but it'll probably be a struggle for him most of his life.

I also think of my own case: I am a bit of a recluse, but it has nothing to do with not caring about people: I am just painfully aware of the terrible first impression I give, regardless of what I try. It's been described as me seeming a bit 'off' in some fashion, as my non-verbals apparently say terrible things that have nothing to do with what I mean. At the same time, I get to see all that rejection as it happens, making the whole thing exhausting. I do it when I have to, but it's unfun, because it feels absolutely hopeless. It's far easier for me to fix it in smaller gatherings, where I get enough time to override that awful first impression.

On the other side of the coin, I know people that are love large gatherings and social situations because they crave novelty. One example that I got to know pretty well happens to be awesome at fleeting connections: She'll leave a party and half the room thinks they got a great connection, which makes her be seen as a wonderful person in many social circles. But what happens when you look deeper? She is a novelty addict. Travels away from home a lot just to feed this. Her marriage is in shambles, because, of course, she got tired of her husband. Her daughters wonder why she is on the road so much. Friends last her about a year, by the time they are either discarded, or they have run away from the selfishness: People are like chewing gum for her.

Sp when it comes to selfishness, introversion and extroversion, it seems to me that the situation is far more complicated than the article makes it seem, and we should all do our best to take a while before we judge people, as first impressions aren't necessarily correct.
Fixing E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial for the Atari 2600
All aboard the anti-bandwagon bandwagon!
As somebody who's actually paid to implement devops practices for many clients at scale, this is nuts. The only performance argument for a service-oriented architecture (and let's be really real, the overhead of HTTP means that microservices rarely have a performance argument at all) is when and only when you have specific requirements that cannot be solved by horizontally scaling a monolithic system. Until you have an actual, metrically verified demonstration of the failure of horizontally scaling your monolithic architecture, sticking with it will in almost every instance outperform your "microservice architecture". Reliability, too, is a joke argument; building a single application (whether or not you internally segment the code with an eye towards later service segmentation) means that you have N instances of every component, rather than N of some, M of others, and so on. And nothing related to deploying your very bloggable microservice should differ from a reasonably developed monolithic system in the first place.

The set of companies that have any sort of reliability or performance-oriented need a "microservice architecture" is three, maybe four orders of magnitude smaller than the set of companies building web applications. They--and you--have been sold on a trend that is actively antithetical to the goals of delivering a product.

Build your application. Use an auto-scaling group and an ELB. You have more important things to do until you reach the scale where you can pay someone (hi) to do them.
You have obviously never taken a toddler to a public place. Try taking a toddler to a zoo, park, childrens museum, just about any play area...and see how quickly they dash from one area to another. Having 2 toddlers, it's easy to have one child go in a direction and the second in another. Unless you have reasonable cause for neglect, it's easy to be at a zoo, look at an animal for 10 seconds, and then see your child is suddenly 10 feet away from you. Anyone who says "what a horrible parent" does not have children.
I've started using Wunderlist with some success. I really like having a notebook for a task tracker but the issue is that the notebook isn't with me always. The problem with Wunderlist, as with any method, is that it requires discipline to keep checking and updating it.
I get the stop sign anger, but helmets? Drivers really think bikers should be required to wear helmets?
My love-hate relationship with LuaJIT (2015)
I caught them on the spot :-)
Try "Tacos on Tuesdy," "We invite you to eat Tacos on Tuesdays," "Tuesday is a Taco eating day," etc.

You could even write in small but not too fine print at the bottom of your sign/ad that you have been told to cease and desist from using the Taco Tuesday mark. This is merely a factual statement.
As someone that doesn't know what you're talking about, can you elaborate?
I'm almost positive that's not what virtue signaling means.
That analogy doesn't hold up because HN isn't a publication, it's a list of links.

It's nearly always trivial to figure out who the author of a post is. The question is whether that should be emphasized in the title, and HN's traditional default is no. Focusing on content rather than personalities seems to produce better discussion.
I think it might be more other bicyclists, some people are extremely vehement that everyone needs to be wearing a helmet, while others consider that a gross infringement on their rights.
This is great, but they're missing a great opportunity by renaming a "the cyber building" anything other than "the cyber building".

I mean, have you ever been in a cyber building? I wish we had a cyber building at work.
Spend a lot of time in bad neighborhoods?

One of my son's classmates, Elijah Sims, was just shot in the head and killed less than a mile from our high school. He used to live east of Austin Blvd, which divides Oak Park (our wealthy suburb) from the neighborhood Austin on the west side of the city. He and his family moved into Oak Park to get access to our school district. But of course he had friends in Austin, and he'd ride his bike 5 minutes or so over to Columbus Park to hang out with them.

He wasn't a white dude on a bicycle with a backpack with a $2000 laptop in it. If he had been, the car that drove alongside him and his friends and opened fire on them would have driven right by. They're not interested in "victimizing" "techies".

Can you tell me more about the "street drama" Elijah was caught up in?

You think his story is unique? You're right! It is! His family had moved to Oak Park, and students at OPRF don't routinely get murdered. It was newsworthy. You can search "Oak Park student murdered" and get story after story.

But kids in South Austin and for fuck's sake Englewood and god help you if you live in or around Gary --- they're in "street drama" as soon as they set foot out of the house every morning. We techies in Oak Park and Logan Square don't hear so much about it when they got shot.

I go to Gary every so often; there's a couple of really good beer bars out near there. You know how scared I am to be there? Really not scared at all. White dude. Nobody has to guess if I'm affiliated, and I'm not there long enough to catch a stray, like Zariah Muhammad did in Park Manor --- near Uncle John's Barbecue, a Chicago foodie destination. The white dudes who venture out for hot links and rib tips don't seem to get shot. I guess they're better at "not taking sides" and "getting targeted by a particular group of people". Zariah got caught up in street drama, too, I guess. She's 6 years old.

Come to think of it, when I lived in an apartment in Bayview in '98 --- when the murder rate in SF was, it looks like, 50% higher --- I was never worried either. And I was the dumbass parking a BMW on the street.

So I guess long story short is, I'm questioning the logic you're applying to rough neighborhoods. Are you sure you know what you're talking about? I mean: maybe you do. I'm really seriously asking.
The only times I got these alerts was when I'm asleep. I have no idea how I could be of help to a search party while still groggy. So off they go.
Rural Indian Girls Chase Big-City Dreams
For the last 100 feet, yeah sure, you'll need someone to handle the package. But my box of PCI express network cards didn't get a boot print on it in the last 100 feet. My box of a replacement drum unit didn't get thrown about in the last 100 feet. Someone picking up a box and walking 50 feet with it usually isn't where shipping damage occurs.
>My personal opinion is that we should absolutely say no

We don't disagree that there's a problem: medically fighting to the last breath should be replaced by gracefully accepting the end at the appropriate time (for both cost reasons and for the quality of life at the end for the patient, etc.)

We do disagree on how. If you want to make progress on that front we should have education and cultural growth around accepting death and doing what's best at the end for doctors, patients, and families. We shouldn't have a bureaucrat forcing the decision on anyone.

---

>This current issue with epipen is a simple issue of rent seeking

It's not an issue of rent seeking specifically, but abusing government granted monopolies (patent protection, trademark protection, forcing schools to buy, etc)

> Are you suggesting we spend more than we can get away with hoping the slimeball companies will reinvest their profits into R&D?

No, the high cost of R&D and slimeball behavior are often intermixed, but separate issues. I'm suggesting that a whole lot of the money for expensive drugs is actually going towards R&D. Lots of foreign countries are getting steep discounts and not paying equal shares because the drug companies are taking the path of least resistance. They can get funded in America more easily so they don't fight as much in places that are more difficult to win.

America couldn't magically get the foreign prices because the R&D money wouldn't appear from anywhere else. America's prices go down but the rest of the world's prices go up to meet in the middle ... or a lot less drug research happens (or a bit of both)

There are lots of things happening, and a lot of the problems are due to lacking regulation. What can get patented and for how long is wrong; more research should be publicly funded with stipulations that the results are free to society; drug approval mechanisms need to be more efficient; some barriers between national drug markets need to be broken down (you should be able to sell across borders between economically equal nations)

There are a lot of things which could lead to a healthier medical environment which aren't being done. We've got some small reforms out of the way, but there are still huge inefficiencies.
Jason Santa Maria does a good job of giving examples of typeface pairings and explaining why they work in his A Book Apart book:

https://abookapart.com/products/on-web-typography
Thanks for the link. I found the regional breakdowns interesting.

That being said, I think this research emphasizes that AAVE is anything but standardized. That's not meant as a pejorative statement: it's just acknowledging that, like most languages in history, AAVE has not gone through a process of codification and standardization to formalize it.
For instance, web forum threads about the necessity of wearing helmets will almost instantly turn into flame wars. Likewise, if you admit to rolling through stop signs, you will get attacked, even though most cyclists and car drivers roll through stop signs.
Candi Prambanan, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Oh god, that last line was chilling and all too familiar. I actually felt my heart-rate increase. There's nothing worse than being institutionally punished for having a good idea.
Zero-day exploits for Cisco ASA and Fortinet firewalls, amongst others. See https://github.com/nneonneo/eqgrp-free-file.
Don't these definitions have a more solid statistical economic meaning here? As in: middle "class" is the middle quintile of income. This makes the other strata fall pretty reasonably too:

80%-100%: Ruling Class

60-80%: Upper Class

40-60%: Middle Class

20-40%: Working Class

0-20%: Lower Class
Oh yeah come to think of it I've gotten the same. But it's usually people trying to sell "used" helmets. I just assumed it was part of the hard sell and ignored it.
I'm of two minds about it. On the one hand, I wear a helmet myself, most of the time, and using one seems to make sense. I don't bother with a helmet if it's a short trip on tame roads, such as the 1/2 mile from my house to the grocery store. On the other hand, I can't point you to supporting evidence for a benefit to making helmets mandatory.
Upfront, I want to say that I agree with just-about everything that you have written here. I would have upvoted you and move on if it weren't for the lame "placebo seat" comment. It's beyond me as to how anyone could watch that talk and agree with Mr Levitt's conclusions.

He flat out admits that his only sources of his "research" are 1) the DoT NHTSA's FARS [0] and 2) four crash tests that were run by an anonymous test center.

I can't think of a better example of a red herring argument. He's basically saying, "Don't bother second guessing my data because I have these videos from a person who will NOT collaborate the results."

The FARS data is heavily biased as well. First, it only reports _accidents with fatalities_. It's a completely voluntary survey, it's up to state and local governments to enforce their police jurisdictions to comply. At the time of the video it spanned 30 years of data, 1975-2005. There's incredible amounts car safety improvements in that time frame. I'll defer to an expert here, but air bags and crumble zones will top that lists; I'm sure there have been improvements to seat belts and car seats in that time. Point being, most of that data is irrelevant.

And, then his ego shines through when he glorifies economists superiority over "scientists" because economists "look at real world data"; if his opening wasn't awkward wretch inducing already, then that surely should have done it.

If you want to be an advocate for Mr. Levitt's ideas proceeding for actual scientific inquiry, have at it. But, don't spread a cockamamie pejorative, like "placebo seat", because you watched a terrible TED talk.

I can't help, but feel my response was overkill for having taken offense from two words. I attempted to find some follow up studies based on Levitt's TED talk, but as it should be to nobody's surprise, neither side seems to have taken it seriously (to progress nor retort). The only source that I found which I actually liked is called "What If These TED Talks Were Horribly Wrong?" [1]. In which, Levitt gets top billing, and there is link to a study called "Effectiveness of Child Safety Seats vs Seat Belts in Reducing Risk for Death in Children in Passenger Vehicle Crashes" [2]; it's freely available, but I have yet to read it.

[0] U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Report System, http://www.nhtsa.gov/FARS

[1] https://theawl.com/what-if-these-ted-talks-were-horribly-uns...

[2] http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=20506...
The App That Runs China's Economy
San Diego man seeking help with effects of stroke gets stem cell treatments that leave him partially paralyzed and with mysterious tumor.

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2016/sep/20/patients-san-diego-stem...
Normal when you're or went through similar. It's a way to download the rage you had for yourself into others, because doing it to you would catalyze your friend Ego. But beware, words have power. And if you say shit like that to a mentally-weak person, it can have serious consequences. So how about you shut the fuck up. That's completely unnecessary.
do you ever feel good energy from a stranger and have this amazing interaction even if it lasts 3 minutes?

I thought for a while to recall, and, well, not really. There have been circumstances where some external situation affected both me and a stranger in some way and we mutually complained or otherwise acknowledged it. It was a connection based on a shared experience, rather than being all that random. Maybe that counts. But you have to be open in order for those more serendipitous instant connections to happen that you enjoy, and I'm just not open. It's an attribute of my Aspergers-induced introversion, I think.
No, I don't know, probably, no, no.
Yeah, I recall polymorphic malware toolkits being sold in mid-level marketplaces back in 2010.