skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Why can't Facebook filter out whatever they want to filter out? I mean, you wouldn't want to see penises all over your feed, and not everyone necessarily agrees with you about the appearance of breasts(except me, I want more breasts on my Facebook), so I can understand why Facebook would make such a decision without necessarily deeming it as wrong. Nobody has to use Facebook. And their main criterion, "is the internet raising a large enough stink", seems perfectly reasonable to me. But what a weird world we live in that a short-lived incident about womens' breasts ending with an apology from Facebook gets a news story. Then again, it's the BBC, so I shouldn't be surprised.
Facebook is eventually going to get into more systematic mess over this sort of rubbish.

Have one single clear principle and apply is consistently. Change the principle don't make exceptions if needed. "Educational videos wont be removed" could have been a good policy that Google has had for Youtube.

Or even "No Breasts"can be a good policy too. If you want to show breast cancer videos do it on you tube, shoot it with a prop or link to another page. I dont see why that does not work.
I've heard this argument before and I find it fascinating. Why can't we have something that is both standardized and easy to pick up? Is there something inherent to one that blocks the other? Any ideas?

Disclaimer? I don't use Vue, but I've seen this argument made for Ember (against Angular 1.x) and Angular 2 (against React).
Well-written report. I agree with the recommendation.
Microsoft has hired a large team of economists, econometricians, etc. to help drive strategy in Cloud. Looks like it's paying off nicely.

Preston McAfee is a very clever guy and has seemingly been able to recruit top tier econometricians out of academic positions:

http://vita.mcafee.cc/
> So glad I'm evaluating other email providers and use Privoxy for ad-blocking.

I find it to be not that easy to find good alternatives.

In the long run good products require money, and money is massively flowing at advertisement currently.

That's why the big players are Google (ads), Facebook (ads), and I suspect that's why Microsoft is starting to massively collect user data (from Windows 10).

Building good competition requires money flowing at them, and people don't seem willing to pay for such products.

The only alternatives I see currently are:

- A change of rules (laws) regulating advertisement and personal data.

- A change of the funding system to give more opportunities to people to unite and bootstrap their own initiatives (basic income?).

- A subscription-based subset of Internet were you pay $10-$30 each month and can access to a high-quality service providers (news, email providers, etc).

- A major actor benevolently sponsoring such efforts (states or other wealthy entities with funding capabilities).
Microsoft has been doing an incredible job lately. With the announcement of native support for Ubuntu binaries, I've been excited to try Microsoft products for the first time.

Additionally, as someone who writes a lot of bash scripts, I'm excited that I'll be able to use them across platforms. The two main reasons I use Apple computers instead of Windows are build quality & the UNIXy background of macOS, and with their recent moves, they remove the last reason as a differentiating factor.

Even their cloud offerings are exciting. I use R to do a lot of statistics work, and now Excel has support for integrating R scripts hosted on Azure. This makes it much, much, much easier to get R code working in an enterprise setting, which has been a major hurdle for me previously.
I disagree. Windows is more awkward than ever. VS is more bloated than ever. All[0] of their developer solutions are geared towards the Enterprisifacation[1] of everything.

[0] I love generalizations.

[1] IE: Overengineered for the sake of developer resumes everywhere.
Best practices for building an Android SDK
Can you tell something about your favourite alternative to RoR way?
I wrote a post about this a while back: http://kasrarahjerdi.com/2016/08/on-developer-hiring/

Basically I like job listings that include _specific_ information about the role at the company. Maybe that means listing some of the hard challenges the other people on the team have worked on recently, maybe it just means listing the frameworks and libraries they're using, but anything to help me differentiate their Android role from someone else's Android role.
I can't even tell where we disagree anymore. I think we're mostly just haggling over terminology at this point. So I'ma peace out of this now.
This is why we need strict, very harsh penalties for abuse of copyright (and patent laws). This has NOTHING to do with copyright, yet these Samsung assholes file claims with Youtube? How about 1% net revenue fine for every wrongful copyright claim (like, but not limited to, a bad DMCA claim), increasing by 1% (with no limit other than at 100% you lose the business) for every wrongful subsequent claim? But of course, this will never happen. Personally, I see these kinds of attacks as justification for piracy and the willful disobedience of our incredibly stupid laws (in the US).
Microsoft in the old days used to drive a lot of competitors out of business.
In the general case, we could just ignore general recurrsion and circular definitions or self refferencing functions. Then we win.
Great, it's still RC vs RTM. Past history doesn't mean forever. This is still your interpretation of what an RC means getting you into trouble.
Web security based on PKI model based on 100's of "trusted" authorities is just broken. And yet, the "security industry" continues doubling down on "moar TLS" "moar green locks" model instead of coming up with a better model.

The tragedy is, that most of the internet access is now happening from mobile devices and majority of that is coming from native apps. The apps need neither the same trust model nor have any "green locks". But PKI/TLS based orthodoxy has such a death grip on the industry that people continue to use this broken model for native apps where it makes even less sense than it does for browsers.
Actually as of 2013 - ICANN required registrars on the latest contract to standardize whois output, further next year a new protocol RDAP will be available that will add to this. So I'd say their are much more workable solutions here and more coming soon.
You can't go wrong picking React. To get started, install the official create-react-app [1], follow Facebook's tutorial [2] and that's it.

[1] https://github.com/facebookincubator/create-react-app

[2] https://facebook.github.io/react/docs/tutorial.html
But Comodo can issue a certificate for google.com or yourbank.com

They may have, for that matter. Do you check the issuer every time you go to a secure site? Do you trust them to do a better job securing either of those domains than they did with a large telecom in Austria?
We sell a business management SaaS that aims to cover 80% of business operations in a niche space.

After building a MVP with a handful of businesses and people with industry experience we learned through the sales process that there was a vast amount of differences between each individual business.

We (the founders) had to be the initial salespeople to gain knowledge from several hundred businesses to identify the commonalities and weed out the crazies and formulate a dev plan on how to cover these differences.

I guess my point is that you don't know what you don't know until you do something. Having this knowledge funnel down through a non technical salesperson would have been detrimental.

It gets better! 18 months in and we are successful with having a dedicated salesperson with limited product knowledge backed by a technical onboarding team.
Honestly this objection always seemed very handwavey to me, especially given how much abuse the incompleteness theorems endure during extension beyond statements about the Natural numbers. Like, what exactly happens if you try to write a bootstrapped theorem prover? Does a deity descend from the heavens to unplug your keyboard? I'd be very interested in reading a paper or blog post documenting a practical attempt here.
Have CAs always been this sloppy or are we just hearing about it more nowadays?
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying.

The scenario is that my local network's caching DNS resolver retains resolutions beyond the authority-provided TTL in the event that a TTL-specified refresh at expiration fails. Therefore, my web browser may—in the very rare situation where this arises—make an HTTP request to an IP address of a server that has been intentionally moved by a service provider (let's assume they did so expecting their authoritative TTL to have expired). Since this scenario only arises because my caching resolver wasn't able to reach the authority, I'm not seeing a downside.

But if I understand your reply correctly, you are saying that the web server I've contacted may, in turn, be using a DNS resolver that is similarly configured to provide last-known-good resolution when its upstream provider/authority cannot provide resolution. This would potentially result in that web server making an HTTPS API request to a wrong IP, again only in the rare case where we have defaulted to a last-known-good resolution. I'm not really seeing the problem here except that the HTTPS request might fail (if the expected service was moved and no longer exists at the last-known-good IP), but how is that worse than the DNS resolution having failed? In both cases, the back-end service request fails.
Good thinking. That's exactly how they did it:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12762224
Assuming you understand the structural difference between a self signed and a CA signed certificate (ie: subject pubkey sig vs issuer pubkey sig respectively) the difference is clear.

You cannot determine provenance of a self-signed certificate. The sig matches the subject.
With a CA signed, the hold of the CA private key is the only source (with high probability), so it is attributable.

If you trust the company or not -- play with you trust store. Otherwise this is apples and oranges.

The only time when this comparison would be apt would be the compromise of the Comodo Private Key. This would allow anyone to issue Comodo certificates, thus removing their provenance.
Of course then their cert would be revoked and we wouldn't have this conversation.
frequently, yes, if it uses compcert or cakeML or something.
Must be trying to stop the latest Julian Assange leak.
The OP I responded to said that startup founders going to Thiel for advice/investment were 'foolish', because his inability to make good decisions in politics must mean that his startup advice is bad too. Whether or not you agree with his moral/political positions is irrelevant to understanding why that statement is so wrong.
I hope that one of these days (years?) we might start seeing formally verified versions of code for dealing with standards that don't change rapidly and that have proved to be security problems in the past. I'm thinking of things like font rasterizers, TIFF readers, full PDF readers, and JavaScript engines intended for browsers.
Same thing happened with hover last week... Same attacker perhaps? Maybe hover was just a test drive of their DNS DDoS machinery?

https://twitter.com/HoverStatus/status/786296893013766144
Did their bust occur due to insufficient demand for their products at the time? (or at least projected future demand) It would surprise me if that wasn't the case.

Insufficient demand can happen for many reasons, some of them can be caused by poor decisions within the company, some of them can be caused by the overall economy.
I'm at work so, and I'll get the rest later tonight (Twitter won't load for me now anyway):

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3023

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/4776

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/10808

wow, what the heck, I'll get more later but a lot of sites just aren't loading

[edit: guess its not just me https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12762397 ]
I wished that they had expanded further on the past as in Utopia S02E01 but they unfortunately didn't. The conclusion was satisfying, though.
Brushes are not pure transmitters of intent the way that, say, Photoshop is. Brushes (and paints and most artistic tools) have an artistic character that makes its own contribution to the artwork. I also think you ignore the interplay between medium and artist, the way intent evolves both during the course of an artist's careeer and during the production of a single work.

I don't think I'm hair-splitting here. Creativity is something conscious entities do. Once we have conscious machines, they could well be creative. But until then, the creativity is the artists, even if they are using generative systems to create art.

And that's nothing new. Every landscape painter and photographer is using a generative system, nature, to find interesting things worth turning into art. Giving the neural networks credit is akin to crediting the haystacks rather than Monet.

More explicitly generative art, where humans set up systems to produce works, goes back hundreds of years. That interesting patterns can emerge out of randomness plus systems is obvious to anybody who has played Yahtzee. That we use more dice and more complicated systems does not change where authorship lies. Bigger systems may produce more novel outputs, but novelty and creativity aren't the same thing.
Most people don't. It's a distinctly gendered word.
Assuming it was Russia, and that they did derive it from some secret means, public announcing they discovered it but not giving the source makes that inference more likely.

That's why eg in World War II, the allies only acted on Enigma intercepts if there was a plausible alternate source.

So my inference is that they're lying about having sufficient evidence to definitively point at the rooskies, or they're being reckless with sourcing.
NYC, fios: github, twitter, soundcloud, heroku back up for me. Tunneling through an ec2 instance on us-east-1d gives the same results - can't find anything that is unreachable now.
I think in general since the number of programmers grows, the majority must be novices, and the language growing most rapidly has relatively the largest amount of novices. I know it sounds like snobistry and not a statistical blanket statement, though.
This company, for example, has a 99.999% uptime SLA. Thats roughly 5 minutes per year.
I saw this and was instantly struck by it's resemblance to ColdFusion, which is a nightmare! Let that "language" die
Funny how people tend to view things like malls and social media as public places. It's a mass illusion we all place on what is inevitably a biased corporate product fully intended to make money.

It would be interesting to see what a municipal social media platform would look like.
Github and Twitter are both unreachable for me still. Chicago area.
> "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it." - Donald Knuth

"Beware of people slinging around the famous Knuth quote as if it invalidated progress in program proving." - Me

(Not a reference to you personally, but I think that this quote is too often used to disparage all work on program provers, rather than as just—as I take it to be—pointing out that, no matter how good your prover is, you should still check your code.)
It is not completely unrelated to JavaScript. CFScript is (based upon/implementation of) ECMAScript, which is in turn closely related to JS.
Spotify has a terrible network connection algorithm that will sit there and spin forever trying to open the app if it thinks you're on the network but you're really not.

Put your phone in airplane mode, then re-open Spotify, and magically, all of your offline playlists will play.
Boy, this is really going to blow up in their face.
Which is great given they're precise statements about what you want to do that are easier for humans and computers to analyze. They don't have the language-level problems either. Tools can then turn those into code or do much of the work from there.
Yep. Biologist here lol.

It would be interesting to know how much biology this dude truly explored before plunking down his $100M on some other dude promising him to revolutionize the brain.
> Is there a spectacular downside to doing so? Since the last-known-good resolution would only be used if a TTL-specified refresh failed, I don't see much downside.

Because you would keep old DNS records around forever if a server goes away for good. So you need to have a timeout for that anyways.
Worth noting that we've open sourced the toolset used to generate code for the Little Bird, available at http://ivorylang.org
Gigabit Ethernet FPGA module with TCP/IP offload engine
Even when it comes to blowing up, Apple beats Samsung, hands down!
Every time I see these I think the same thing: this shouldn't be an issue. If we weren't allowing so few players to define so much of our experience of the internet, it wouldn't matter that much what any single one of them decides to censor. Hopefully it will be that way again someday.
How did the demo go?
Let's all celebrate "The Cloud" as half[0] the East coast internet is blacked out by a DDoS attack.

[0] I love exaggerating for drama.
Internet outage takes down Twitter, Netflix, PayPal and many others
Historically, doing this has been a source of a truly awe-inspiring amount of pain.
Curated List of Startup Funding Resources – Launched Today
> The Department of Homeland Security told CNBC that it is "looking into all potential causes" of the attack.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/21/major-websites-across-east-co...

Is this par for course for all large DDOS attacks or did something tip them off?
We have always been at war with Eastasia.
>It's well documented. He was interviewed in Sweden and left weeks later after notifying the police. That means he isn't a fugitive.

EAW.

"Fugitive" isn't a precisely defined term, but he is subject to an arrest warrant and isn't complying with it.

>Sweden has also conducted interviews with suspects in foreign countries during the period of time they've been trying to make Assange return,

As has been repeatedly said, the investigation has reached the point where the prosecutor wants to charge Assange, not merely ask him questions, and according to Swedish law he must be in custody before they can do that.

> A declaratory judgement that Assange's alleged actions pertaining to leaks would not be against Swedish law even if committed on their soil. With that there would be no legal basis for extradition.

I doubt that this is possible. At least, you appear to be the only person who has suggested it. Has anyone with the relevant legal expertise indicated that this is a possibility?

>I think that if they asked him to appear remotely via video, with the world watching, and serve a fair sentence in an Ecudorean prison if found guilty, that he would abide by the results.

I don't see any reason to think so, given that he is already ignoring the EAW. Why should Sweden take his word for it? They're not under any obligation to conduct the investigation in accordance with Assange's wishes.

> I'm sure if they asked Ecuador nicely, with a well-respected judicial result in hand, that Ecuador would transfer him to one of their prisons.

How on Earth can you be "sure" of that? Are you on intimate terms with the Ecuadorian authorities?

>Of course I'm urging people to deviate - when to follow the procedure would cause a greater injustice.

You already accept that Sweden can try Assange. Why would it be more unjust to do so with him present at the trial than it would be in his absence?
"Orange Tree's proprietary GigExpedite chip "GigEx" is a TOE that handles all the Ethernet communications protocols. This leaves the Artix-7 FPGA completely free for the user's application, and means the user does not require any knowledge of Ethernet protocols. With the main processing engine implemented in TOE hardware, sustained data rates over 100 MBytes/sec are achieved."
A privilege escalation in MM daemon would still allow you to write and read any user memory.
Just not kernel memory or execute anything not covered by memory access capabilities. For nearly all intents and purposes, it is root.
Seriously. And it goes for pretty much all of these. Has this guy never taken a subway? Flown on an airplane? Left the city?
It's in the picture:

http://deepspec.org/
You can pick up a great chair at 1/3 the retail price

Pretty much this. I picked up a used Steelcase chair (don't remember the model, but it was listed for $800 new when I checked) for $65 at an office furniture liquidation company and it's the best chair I've ever owned.
Boulder here. Can't resolve Wufoo or PayPal using 8.8.8.8
You cannot determine providence of a self-signed certificate.

Exactly, though I think you meant "provenance". It's exactly like how we now know we can't determine the provenance of a Comodo certificate, agreed?
For the love of God, why has Mozilla not suspended Comodo yet? Too big to fail, my ass -- give a few months of warning before the notBefore cutoff date, and everyone will have plenty of time to switch over to a competent CA.
Had a similar nightmare trying to get a code signing cert. Luckily I went through a reseller who were very prompt about issuing a refund.
It's also 'illegal' for women to have their faces covered in some countries.

Does this mean that there should be no pictures of women on Facebook?
I'm probably wrong, but this is how I see it (not sure about the OP).

News cycles happen fairly rapidly, so if you could take down a number of sites that might be friendly to the dissemination of potentially damaging information just long enough such that it's forgotten about, or the attack is so large the media talks about the attack instead, then you might be able to successfully avoid widespread public knowledge of such information. Though, this would be best aided with collusion or cooperation (intentional or otherwise) from the media. Toss in a few unrelated services as a bonus for collateral damage, and you might be able to avoid scrutiny or, at the very least, shift the blame to an unrelated state actor. It won't prevent the release of information, but that's not the point--you want to prevent the dissemination and analysis of that information by the public at large.

This is all hypothetical, of course, and not likely to work. It also comes with the associated risk that if you were discovered or implicated, public outrage might be even worse than if you allowed the release of the information you hoped to distract from in the first place! As such, I can't imagine anyone would be stupid enough to try.

I'll take my tinfoil hat off now.
Nice != sucker.

Suckers are people who are easily conned or persuaded to do things they don't want to do. They're gullible or weak-willed or something.

Nice are people who care about other people. But they won't, necessarily, go so far in helping or doing things for others that they harm themselves.

A nice person gives you a lift home.

A sucker drives you to the 7/11, watches you rob it, and then drives you home.

EDIT: commas are hard, formatting
Pre-emptive reminder (especially since not everyone will read the full article with the paywall):

Time Warner Cable was spun out from Time Warner, Inc. seven years ago, and they no longer have any relationship with each other. Time Warner Cable was permitted to continue using the name under license, though they are now trying to rebrand themselves as "Spectrum" in markets where they already had a presence (such as New York City).

AT&T is reportedly talking about buying Time Warner, Inc, which is a media conglomerate that owns either part or all of brands like Warner Bros, CNN, DC Comics, and Hulu.
Agreed. Since I switched to my Dell Chromebook 13, I haven't found anything that is remotely as good at that price point.