skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Unit testing

Integration testing

Distributed logging

Build with distributed and fault tolerance in mind. You should be able to knock out a random server and still run with no effect.

Monitoring with alerts when certain are broken

Build a continuous delivery pipeline, and keep working on it till your so confident that deployments become none events, which can happen at any point. see automated testing.

Replicas, and HA setups should be the norm.
Yes, nice read, thanks!
Probably my biggest annoyance with OpenGL mode is that it completely changes the UI logic form standard mode (arguably it makes the interface more Windows-like, or probably Altium-like). The standard mode UI is weird but surprisingly usable so I tend to do most of the layout work in standard mode and only switch to OpenGL to use push-and-shove to avoid major ripup-and-reroute cases and for diff-pairs/length matching.
Look into identity server 4. YouTube some videos about it and it should get you going. The rest is just picking what's popular for your platform/language.
> What part of the cache was doctored? What was left out? The big publications know that and won't be provoked.

This is a very good point.

However, I don't think it applies in this case, since for this to be true, it would imply that had this been Trump's campaign manager's email account that was hacked with similar Trump-related campaign revelations contained in it, the mainstream media would refuse to report it for the same reason.

And I don't believe that for a tenth of a second.
The users here are the users browsing the web store with the intent to purchase something, not the server operators. Both are victims if the malware author's intent is successful.

In the usual sense of a server having a vulnerability, there are just two parties involved: the server operators, and the malicious party exploiting the server. That's the case in which GitLab is saying to not publish a list of such vulnerable servers. In this case, the server operators are not yet victims; responsible disclosure is supposed to help us (the good guys) keep it that way.

But in this case, we have an already exploited server. The server operators are already victims. The point of publishing lists here is to attempt to prevent the malware from further skimming credit card numbers off users attempting to purchase goods from the infected storefronts. Like before, the point here is to prevent more people from falling prey to the skimmers here, but the action we must take to do so effectively is the opposite.
Many contributions that people make to a functioning society can't, and never will be, quantified.

One way around this is to assign a base value to a person because they are a member of the human race and a citizen of your country, and then let them demonstrate additional value through the usual capitalist means.

It's imperfect, certainly, but it works well enough in many developed countries, and it's more accurate than the model that says what can't be measured has no value.
... and now this Ask HN thread is getting flagged? C'mon HN! We're better than this...
The README suggests this one is written to be Flask-like, and Koa is based on Express/Connect.
But didn't those very dumps expose the collusion between Hillary's campaign and the Democratic National Committee to marginalize Sanders and his supporters? Not that two wrongs make a right, but two negative make a positive...or something like that :-)

edit: speeeling
The bias here on HN means that this will get flagged and nobody will care.
The amount of FUD that bitmessage is receiving is strange.
It's both easy to use tool and powerful. It's shortcomes are obvious so you rely on your opsec (mainly managing your multiple identities) which is the only way to be anonymous anyway.
I'll continue using it and bet on the future of bitmessage
Linux tcptop (top for TCP) using bcc/BPF
What is the future of Windows 10 and what will happen to UWP
How do you guarantee the App Store doesn't serve limited edition binaries to selected recipients?
It doesn't come close, it's the dictionary definition.

There's nothing wrong with censorship. It's just a matter of choosing (and being able to choose (which as a father I have Views on)) which censor.
I don't know what's actually going on, but there was some discussion on HN yesterday about the C2 wiki being down.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12705774
Sure, but twitter, facebook, and youtube have been in the news lately about their selective enforcement of policy violations. THAT is definitely of interest to this community.
I've seen articles in the past few days about the email leaks on the washington post, and looking on CNN right now I see an article on the Podesta emails on the politics page. I've seen a lot of talk about hacking and emails this election. I would say the media is talking more about Trump's sexual assault accusers right now because either:
a) The emails haven't been verified (as far as I know)
b) There's nothing in them as scandalous as a sex scandal (as far as I can tell)
c) Trump keeps saying scandalous things, which draws attention to himself.

A lot of the problems with the media, as far as I can tell, stem from the fact that no one is paying for it anymore. This leads the media to going for attention grabbing headlines, which means a sex scandal will always win out over any allegations of corruption.
How Russia could spark a U.S. electoral disaster
Back in the day, mod_python also supported PSP (Python Server Pages), which was similar to PHP/ASP in that it allowed you to write a file as a mix of HTML and Python code inside delimiting tags.
I would very much appreciate it if someone could explain to me the appeal of this art form. I understand that many people enjoy experiencing it and discussing it, but I don't feel like I have the context to understand why. Is it just the joy of an intellectual exercise wherein there is no right answer? Is it one of those things where people are having fun being a part of something that others don't understand? I would guess it's a mixture of many motivations, and if someone who enjoys this art form is willing to explain it to me I'd be very happy to listen!
The taxation system is a man-made thing. If Americans wanted to raise the minimum wage, but redistribute the costs of it to the upper and not middle class, that is absolutely possible.
I try to avoid making assumptions, including what your assumptions in your definitions of your two uses of the word "intelligence" were. If you used them coherently then that's wonderful but their definitions are not distinct outside your head. Their general (ie. dictionary/scientific) definitions are not absolute.

I'm an intelligent person. I know lots of intelligent people who are stupid and I know lots of stupid people who are intelligent. And I'm one of them, and I don't even know which one.
It is swarm intelligence: How does the system keep finding successful paths in a changing environment? Can we take inspiration from this behavior to create better optimization algorithms?

Simulation can be a very beneficial experiment. See for instance: https://papers.nips.cc/paper/5351-searching-for-higgs-boson-...
Euclid as Founding Father
>whether compliance personnel should receive stock incentives.

I don't this is about underpaying them but rather about legal complexities of inherent conflict of interest between compliance and stock based compensation. E.g. You don't want a compliance officer to look in the other direction to ensure her stock appreciates. This seems like a reasonable question/topic for a meeting of lawyers.
She also says, "We agree to abide by scientific standards, ethical norms, and mutual respect" while throwing around terms like "terrorism", "destructo-critics", "vigilantes", "data police".
children aren't independent from their parents pretty much by definition. They do have individual thoughts, but if their thoughts are concerned with their dependence, are those thoughts really independent?
The point was you don't, but plenty of people do. And those people haven't sounded the alarm on any red flags.
I totally agree with the idea - we should own the means of production - in this case the cloud and software and not surrender them to Google, Facebook and Ebay.

I was thinking on a similar line, but in the domain of general economics. People should become more self reliant in order to prepare for the mass layoffs in the age of automation. Government investment in self reliance would replace the need for UBI.

People will still be involved and retain agenthood, instead of being passive recipients of UBI. We need a people-centric system to balance the capitalist system. Such a system would benefit from advancements in AI and tech, such as automated farming, cheap solar energy, and automated manufacturing.

There's no reason people need to receive a monthly allowance in order to subsist. People can meet their own needs, are versatile and can use technology to their advantage. The state should promote that kind of self reliance by investments and research.
I'm curious. Why is it meaningless? What would you measure?
Interesting article, I didn't know what Dada was before, I can see the appeal.

I don't know enough about either to really be sure, but I got the sense of some parallels with metamodernism, in that both seem to be a form of life as performance art, playfully both serious and silly at the same time. This video helped introduce metamodernism to me:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6dsECbVahBw
Why? I don't see any problem, the message seems quite clear; wikis (similar to forums) are hard to maintain (spam, server load & costs); new inventions are hard to promote (federated wiki mentioned in the post); and maintenance work on hobby projects is gruesome and taxing (thus any chance at getting some leeway by any means available is invaluable).
You know, instead of assuming a vast conspiracy, you could use regular ol' common sense.

On the one hand we have an email dump that, while there seems to be some amount of smoke, doesn't itself represent much of a fire. Just the usual Clinton crap: lots of shady stuff that rides the line of ethics, and veers pretty far into a inside political baseball.

On the other, we have a wildly controversial presidential candidate caught talking about sexually assaulting women, followed by women coming out and saying he actually did it.

Based purely on the assumption that news == entertainment, which story do you think will get the headlines?
He's telling you "Google 'federated wiki'". It's a pretty neat concept, actually.
I was afraid that they'd get taken in by this federated wiki nonsense; I fear we might have lost one of the greats to second system syndrome.

Federated wiki is a cool idea and all, but I don't want to have to build my own wiki of everything, or decide what concepts should be included in my own wiki. The whole strength of wiki to me is that it massively multiplayer user curated content, where the whole state is determined by everyone working together. I don't know what happens to that curation if there's no authoritative source -- it seems like federated wiki isn't really wiki at all, and is something else entirely.
Eve/Otele/Ofise/Tekneye Gelen Bodrum Escort Bayan Sınırsız Eda
No sarcasm here: when was GitHub ever that? I don't remember GitHub ever being open source.
The Surprising Backbone of the Internet of Things
"Moderated", not "censored". Neither GitHub nor GitLab have stopped the message going out from outlets other than their own. Would we be comfortable calling the moderators here on HN "censors"?
you can (and should :)) use it (token auth) with ssl. To get SSL is not a problem today, and will cost you nothing if you use letsencrypt.org
I was thinking that too, but I think to remember that they wrote some apps with it. Educational stuff, etc.

Woz mentions some apps:

http://www.woz.org/letters/apple-basic
One of the few companies out there who give me hope. Switched all my projects to GitLab a while ago, never looked back.
My latter point was that widespread title inflation has the property that if you "defect" and don't have title inflation it has an actual negative effect on your future employment since it is nearly impossible for a random observer to know whether or not there was title inflation at your company.

As meaningless as "CTO" is, having a title worse than that could be seen as non-meaningless as a negative signal.
In my fork of TV Tropes, All The Tropes, I explicitly compare software patterns to entertainment tropes, as they're essentially the same thing.
I wish I could pay for iplayer as well. I'm guessing it's complicated because of BBC being publicly-funded EDIT and international content licensing issues, but if they're producing the content and they own the IP, I'm not totally sure what the hold-up would be. I'd gladly pay $10-15 a month for an all-access pass to BBC content on streaming.
The law has certainly evolved over time into the business judgment rule...but that only muddys the waters more than the maximization rule from dodge v ford. We see new types of cases from shareholders against boards/officers all the time, including, but not limited to political donations; increasing corporate expensive for more environmentally friendly supply chains; and similar issues of selling product for loss.

These shareholders would likely win all the time under dodge v ford, but now they win some and lose some under business judgment rule based on the taste of the jurisdiction/jury. The reality is case law provides only some clues and the waters are muddy until a given set of facts is tested, and I'm not saying I like the shareholder maximization rule over business judgment but I do prefer bright line rules over balancing acts.
Oh, I'm feeling the heat. I'm just saying we shouldn't make Donald Trump head lobster, even though he has a wonderful red face – and he's is the exact product of nebulous conspiracy theories about the media and the elite and how they are all controlled by some secret cabal.

That just distracts from the actual causes of problems, and actual ways to solve them. It mistakes failures on outcome for flaws in the system. An example: I am fundamentally opposed to the PATRIOT act and warrantless wiretapping. But I don't think it was passed because the Military-Industrial complex controls congress. I believe it was passed in a completely legitimate way by democratically elected politicians voting for something they actually believed in. I also believe that at the time the PATRIOT act would have received overwhelming support from the public. I just think those congressmen are idiots, and the american public is largely idiotic enough to deserve them.

So it doesn't help screaming obscenities at NYT and WSJ reporters. You have to make your actual case to actual people to change anything.
I'd read it not as "Google (the company) federated wiki (product name)", but rather as "google (verb) federated wiki (keyword describing a technology)" - i.e. https://www.google.com/search?q=federated+wiki, or http://ddg.gg?q=federated+wiki if you prefer.
I mean... it's art, right? Different forms resonate with different people. Usually, trying to justify why results in either fairly personal statements that either apply to you (in which case they probably don't teach you much) or don't (in which case they don't get you any closer to understanding the appeal), or in very verbose and dense academic justifications that don't do much for the vast majority of people. I get the historical, linguistical, etc significance of Shakespeare, but I still find his plays painful to read/sir through and much prefer 20th century theater.

These things also change with age. As you experience various life events, works that didn't appeal to you in the past suddenly hold much more interest; and similarly, things that once seemed deep and insightful seem trite and superficial.

That being said, studying a bit of art history elevated my understanding of it all; understanding that pretty much all art is a dialog that the creator has with past works was a big key. To reuse my previous example, I still can't stand Shakespeare but at least now I get why his work is pretty significant.
Well, that's a rather weasel-y non-answer answer, but it sounds to me like you think I am calling people "stupid" and that isn't what I am doing. I do know something about the background of intelligence testing and what not for humans. That definition of intelligence is inherently problematic.

Again: My point is that people frame things far too often from a third party point of view. This inherently causes problems in decision-making. Sometimes, humans can kind of muddle through anyway, in spite of that default standard. But AI is much less likely to muddle through anyway when coded that way.

If you (or anyone) would like to engage that point, awesome! Otherwise, I think I am done here.
Suchflex video. Flex your computer's muscles
Out of order could be fun. But backwards or upside-down was even more fun. (Clip all the corners of the card so it won't be noticed.)

More fun could be had with card patches (used for corrections) and card saws (used for clearing the worse jams -- no, I'm not kidding.)

The best card patches were transparent or conductive tape, because they'd be read differently by optical vs. brush-contact readers, and many shops had both.

The IBM 1443 printer used a "type bar" instead of a chain...

http://archive.computerhistory.org/resources/still-image/ibm...

https://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/roger.broughton/museum/iomedia/p...

...on occasion a column hammer would stick (they were operated by electromagnets) and some of the little sets of metal type would pop out of the bar. Note that the woman is holding two bars; one with more type on it than the other. That's because there were two bars: the "13-character" (0-9, +, - and $) and the "43-character" (26 alpha, ten digits and +-=.()$ ) bars, and the 13-character bar printed much faster because it didn't need to move as much to put every character in front of every column hammer.

When a type segment popped out, it could get lost inside the machine, and a supply of replacement type segments were at hand. One night (at a bank) the segment on a 43-char bar that had the numbers on it popped out and was lost. The operator on duty duly replaced it with a spare...which turned out to be from a 13-char bar.

It had all the numerals on it.

In different places.

So all the numbers on the bank's transaction journal and general ledger balances had almost-randomly wrong digits in them sometimes, depending on where in the stroke the bar was and which direction it was moving in for that line on the report.

Good times...
I suspect OP meant "open" as in "not shielding thoughts and decisions in secrecy, and willing to engage" rather than "open source".
LiquiGlide: Nonstick coatings leave zero waste behind
Failed to Load Dashboard
TypeError: this.painter is undefined

HN effect?
Search reddit for word popularity over time
A friend of mine (who signed up recently) tried to use Tor and got hellbanned within an hour. Another friend tried using a VPN provider IVPN and was banned from the get go. But it is possible that this is happening because of IP rate limits. Would appreciate it if a HN mod can confirm.
I would be interested to know exactly what it is about Wire that OWS doesn't seem to approve of
t-SNE is used very widely in ML, both to analyze input data and to analyze learned representations.

To me, the canonical example of people using t-SNE this way is visualizing word embeddings, like this: http://metaoptimize.s3.amazonaws.com/cw-embeddings-ACL2010/e...

Also, some lovely examples of using t-SNE to visualize conv net representations: http://cs.stanford.edu/people/karpathy/cnnembed/

I think people have found it very useful as one of the main tools for understanding what deep models are doing (along with optimization-based feature visualization) and to just check that your model is learning. I haven't really heard about people using it to pick input features, but that's probably mostly because I don't really work with anyone doing feature engineering.
It seems weird that Alan Kay would have an Alto that is just a jumble of incompatible parts. And that YC bought a random mouse on ebay and didn't tell these guys about it.
I have raised two children. They are now in their twenties. From the get go, I dealt with them as beings who did things for a reason, and that reason was generally assumed to be about dealing with their needs, not "doing" something to me. Many parents expect kids to "behave" and that definition of "behaving" is rooted very much in what adults see and think about the child, not what the child is experiencing. This is inherently problematic.

Children may be dependent in many ways on their parents, but once they are outside the womb, if the parent dies, the child does not automatically die. They are a separate being. They have separate experiences. Their reasons for doing things come from their first person experiences.

Then parents very often try to impose third person motivations -- people-pleasing expectations -- that frequently interfere with the child pursuing its own needs.

We need to get better at dealing with kids as separate entities if we want to have any hope of dealing with machines functioning independently.

Your remark just reinforces my opinion that people do this badly. You think dependence is a given and I am not even sure how to go forward with this conversation because of this stated assumption.

Thank you for replying.
> On the one hand we have an email dump that, while there seems to be some amount of smoke, doesn't itself represent much of a fire. Just the usual Clinton crap: lots of shady stuff that rides the line of ethics, and veers pretty far into a inside political baseball.

You do not seem to be very familiar with them.

>On the other, we have a wildly controversial presidential candidate caught talking about sexually assaulting women

Demonstrably false. Say what you want about the unsavory nature of the quote, the only way it can refer to sexual assault is if you willfully omit the last part of the quote (" they let you do it.")

> followed by women coming out and actually saying he did it

Then followed by several witnesses who came out and said "I was there, and nothing remotely close to this happened." These were also to my knowledge not reported in the mainstream media with the exception of the New York Post, which covered the witness to the allegations of sexual assault on a plane.

> Based purely on the assumption that news == entertainment, which story do you think will get the headlines?

My issue wasn't that they weren't getting the same font size as the groping allegations - my issue is that they aren't getting covered AT ALL.

So do I believe the stories contained in the wikileaks dumps are more newsworthy than "Donald Trump got fresh with me 30 years ago (and do me a favor and ignore anyone who says otherwise? kthx)"? ...Yeah, I don't think it's much of a stretch to say they are.

Or again, you could "use regular ol' common sense" and ask yourself 'If I replaced the name 'Clinton' with the name 'Trump' in this case, would the outcome be the same?"

If you don't think so, I'll give you my Skype username so you can look me in the eye and tell me the media wouldnt pounce on a story of Trump's campaign manager complaining about "needy Latinos"
This trended to 1 in another submission https://about.gitlab.com/2016/10/15/gitlab-reinstates-list-o...
Perhaps people are responding to your unwarranted, toxic tone, your rudeness elsewhere in the comments, and your inability to give even a modicum of respect to the developers who've not only designed and openly published groundbreaking advances in secure private messaging protocols, and not only implemented them and freely distributed those implementations, but have also worked to have those designs incorporated into the some of the most widely-used messaging software in history.