skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I am not using UWP apps. Most of the software I use on Windows are either MFC or Windows Forms. These can also be DPI aware and render correctly, but they require proactive developer support, which is not something that is happening in the Windows developer world right now. Either software is abandonware (but still works), or issues are open and remain open or are simply closed with "won't fix" status. Most developers see this as a non-issue or very low priority. I mean, even Chrome does not support high DPI from what I remember. It looked terrible.

Linux world is in the same boat. It's even worse there, because a lot of the toolkits don't support high DPI modes or are buggy, and developers there are even less interested or have the know-how to fix issues.

With the emergence of cheaper 4K monitors, perhaps we'll see a change to the better, who knows.

Multi-monitor support is another issue entirely.
We take logical backups, not physical, and mysqldump is the best option for that. Having logical backups means we can do logical diffs as well (see https://youtu.be/Fe2oLZ4CWD4?t=951), and we've added table checksum support to mysqldump in our branch of MySQL (https://github.com/facebook/mysql-5.6/commit/54acbbf915935a0...)
From what I recall, the Rumpkernels in NetBSD specifically avoided modifying the kernel to instead come up with an easy way to get to (or test) the drivers. I still have Anti's thesis & links saved for when I have time to dig into the concept more. LKL is interesting. A truly modular OS that's monolithic would let you do something like eCos does below under "Configurability:"

http://www.ecoscentric.com/ecos/

Each unnecessary module can be automatically stripped from the system to make the OS specific to your needs. The "Just Enough OS" projects for virtualization were aiming to do similar things with Linux but they kept the kernel that I'm aware. Ideally, you'd be able to select just the API's, drivers, etc you need with the rest being stripped out of the generated source before compile. Similarly for user-land.
Indeed it doesnt support LPDDR4, I was wrong. Thanks!
The goal of encryption in email boils down to preventing your email provider from being able to read the email. (If you don't want to prevent that, then your email is already encrypted from everyone else if you and your recipient uses SSL and you use major email providers that try SSL over the internet backbone). Keeping your email provider away means your email provider can't have your private key, which means you need some way to keep the key in sync between different email clients--say desktop and smartphone.
I got the other end of that email today, saying that an account in my organization had inadvertently downloaded private repos from another customer when fetching from one of our own. Fortunately for GitHub/that user, it was almost certainly our automated provisioning system so we never had any idea and whatever it was never made it anywhere interesting.

The email was kind of funny though, part of it was effectively "if you have this data pretty please delete it without looking at it". I'm sure that's the best they can do, but it still made me chuckle.
Get your apps ready for Touch Bar
A better approach than the Apple touch bar
Apple absolutely invented competent technology marketing.

If you look at the old issues of Byte, you can immediately see the difference. Most of the ads are generic spec/price lists with maybe some crappy hand-drawn graphics. A few are photos and professionally drawn images with some attempts at metaphor, but they invariably look crude, heavy-handed, jokey, or cartoony.

The primary focus in the early Apple ads is the Apple user at home, with his partner. It's the first thing you see before you get drawn into the copy. It's an attempt to sell soft values, not just hardware specs.

This ownership of soft values is a huge difference that most of the industry still fails to get, and which Apple itself seems to be forgetting.

Apple is the only company ever to create technology products that appeal equally to men and women without relying on any traditional gender branding. (At least that used to be true until "rose gold" appeared.)

MS is sort of catching up now, two decades later. But it's not a natural cultural fit for them, so I'm not expecting a stream of great things.

Google is - well, the brand mascot is an android. That's all anyone needs to know.
I mostly meant the software support baggage, but yes, indeed, so many of the Next concepts are still true today in Cocoa API design.
Then it's awfully convenient for me that they didn't perform the survey or do the analysis, then.
New Free tool for checking website keyword ranking
It looks like the Bitcoin fan boys are already rushing to poison the proverbial water hole and hijack this discussion. It's always disappointing to see just how much politics have managed to infect this space. I mean, everyone knows that with politics a person's preferences end up being based largely on whether or not they like a given candidate's character (hence the quote "politics is the mind-killer") ...

But within the cryptocurrency space people are even less rational since after investing their money they now have a perverse incentive to try discredit any competition and the effects of their confirmation bias after investing are truly immense. Bitcoin in that sense, is one of the most toxic communities out there since its entire community seems to be against any kind of innovation taking place outside of Bitcoin and are quick to dismiss any such attempts as "crapcoins."

I wish we could go back to 2011 when people were more opened minded ... It's honestly gotten to the point where no one can work on anything new in this space without some shill from Bitcoin trying to cast doubt on their project to steer people back to it ... So I guess pick your favorite investment and support your side.

"Arguments are soldiers. Once you know which side you're on, you must support all arguments of that side, and attack all arguments that appear to favor the enemy side; otherwise it's like stabbing your soldiers in the back—providing aid and comfort to the enemy. People who would be level-headed about evenhandedly weighing all sides of an issue in their professional life as scientists, can suddenly turn into slogan-chanting zombies when there's a Blue or Green position on an issue."

Cryptocurrencies are the new mind-killer.
If we replaced a good chunk of meat and dairy with soy, we'd save quite a lot of carbon. That's a good thing.

I agree we should promote crop diversity. But I don't understand why you think this one specific ingredient is a problem. When someone eats bread, do you get upset because it's promoting wheat? Bread is pretty much 100% wheat, and people eat a LOT of it.

If Soylent were the only food people consume, I would understand your concern. But most people don't eat Soylent and most Soylent eaters don't eat only Soylent. So I don't really understand your concern.
Don't apologize - factcheck.org is right; thehill.com is wrong. Just go back to the original FBI report here:[1]. None of the e-mails were properly marked; three e-mails chains consisting of eight individual messages had at least one paragraph marked with a (C), but no header, footer, other portion marks, etc. to indicate classification. The content of two of those e-mail chains were determined to be unclassified based on current classification guidance.

There were 81 e-mail chains from her server that should have been marked as classified because they contained classified information (and thus shouldn't have been sent over unclassified e-mail). Quite a few outlets have made the mistake of conflating being marked as classified with containing classified information. The thehill.com article links to another article using the phrase 'Twenty-two emails in eight different chains of messages were [marked as top secret]', but the article they link to says 'The Obama administration will entirely withhold 22 emails from Hillary Clinton’s private server because they have been classified as “top secret,”...'.

The point of classification markings is to unambiguously identify that the document contains classified information, what parts are classified and how to protect it. If it's not marked as such, there's the possibility that the recipient(s) won't realize that there's classified information in it. The most likely reason that the e-mails with classified information were sent in the first place was most likely that the sender didn't realize that the information was classified, or there might be differences in opinion between multiple government organizations as to whether a particular is classified or to what degree it is classified. An example is drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen - according to CIA that information is classified, but you could read about it in the newspapers.

Based on the description from factcheck.org, I was able to find two of e-mails with the (C) portion marks: [2],[3] Note that [3] was not redacted because it was classified, but rather due to FOIA exemption (you can see that everything after the (C) was left unredacted). [2] was redacted on account of both containing confidential information in the last paragraph as well as FOIA exemption.

[1] https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton/hillary-r.-clinton-... (page 20)

[2] http://graphics.wsj.com/hillary-clinton-email-documents/pdfs...

[3] http://graphics.wsj.com/hillary-clinton-email-documents/pdfs...
The T460s is the flagship. It's built with better materials (https://www.reddit.com/r/thinkpad/comments/466bb9/t460_vs_t4...), and also has the WQHD display option which the T460 does not.

I'm not sure what it was like in older Thinkpads, but for the last few cycles (T450s, T440s), the 's' series has been strictly better: same guts, but lighter and thinner by virtue of a more expensive chassis. The "Carbon" series was always the "super thin and light" option.
LWN's editor has repeatedly said he doesn't mind the occasional subscriber link being posted here.
Maybe I'm an idiot and completely missing something here, but couldn't this essentially be accomplished by enabling screen reader software on your own computer and turning off your monitor?
There's an AWS based auth method based on iam roles and ami ids. Takes a few minutes to set up.

https://www.vaultproject.io/docs/auth/aws-ec2.html
Also, it's not just scaling. Often even if an application scales somewhat correctly, often some elements don't, because it's using some open source that draws something in a terrible manner. Or, assets look blurry because of "16x16 is all you really need" mentality. This used to happen on OS X in the first months, but very quickly and uniformly, developers just fixed their custom code and assets. Not so with Windows developers, sadly.
Surfaces, to be fair, aren't really direct competitors with iPads. iPads run a mobile OS, surface run Windows. You're using Photoshop, Flash, Illustrator on a Surface, not iOS apps.
Wow, this is overwrought. Just buy another inexpensive USB-C stick drive and bam!, you're done.
That is very true, I've never had a Macbook that the OS didn't know how to drive, but the early flakiness of the detach/attach with the Surface Book was very maddening (and the crappy WiFi). Since that time and post "anniversary" update it has been rock solid for me but that was nearly 9 months after I originally purchased it.

But it was clear from both the Surface Book original announcement and Wednesdays thing that Microsoft considers the Macbook the "only" competition it wants to compare itself too.
We just do not need any IoT, standardised or not. Our private information must stay in our homes. It is just that simple. I am not saying that we do not need smart homes (they keyword you are looking for is "home automation"), just these do not have to leak our private information out of our homes. Our home is our final stronghold.

Please be wise.
Approle should work the same as appid.
Angular core team member here, let me see if I can clarify some of our decisions here:

It's not a secret that we promote Typescript as the first choice for Angular2 - this is a conscious decision based on both technical reasoning as well as feedback from our developer community.

I can count on one hand the number of teams I've spoken to who really want to use ES6 - the vast majority are happy using Typescript.

Typescript also allows us to do the kind of static analysis we use to do ahead-of-time template compilation, something that is significantly more difficult with ES5/6 - we've discussed making this work in the future, but for now it's a lot of engineering investment for something there just isn't the demand for.

A couple of other things I want to mention - "enterprise" gets thrown around on HN sometimes as a bit of a dirty word. We don't see it like that at all - the vast majority of Angular 1 users are exactly enterprise, and we're solving for the problems that large teams like them run into.

Now we're released and stable, I think it's a reasonable ask to add some specific docs on ES6 usage (or at least where it differs from TS), I'll bring it up at the next docs meeting.

Anecdotally, my experience talking to outside teams tells me that TS is not the complexity problem people have - the vast majority of devs coming from ES5-land have trouble with ES modules and bundling, rather than the specifics of ES/TS itself - this is part of the reason we're working hard on the angular-CLI.

As far as Google/Angular's commitment to the outside world - we have a Developer Relations team (of which I'm at member) - our only job is making non-Google developers successful with Angular. Feel free to reach out to me (@robwormald) or @stephenfluin if you've got questions or concerns. We both come from "enterprise" webdev and a big part of our job is making sure outside developers are represented in eng-team decision making.

Also reach out if this is something you care about deeply and want to contribute to the documentation - we'd love your help and I'll put you in touch with the right people.
That subtitles idea is brilliant. I think it's against the guidelines but I'm sure someone will do it.
So a proposal here would look like: redundant resolvers with ISPs and routers failing and load balancing between them along with smarter caching strategies on the entire name resolution stack. Getting more academic and speculative with a “pie-in-the-sky” proposal that would remove both privacy and centralization concerns: quorum strategies over a peer-based, differential privacy protected authenticated database seeded by root servers.

The point here is that “IoT” isn’t the problem. Thousands of traditional servers can do just as much damage (or more) than thousands of IoT devices in a DDoS. You want to stop attacks that bring down DNS? Fix DNS. You aren’t going to be able to legislate away compromise-likely devices and services. That’s an imaginary solution, and likely to exacerbate other issues (IoT privacy).
this is a complete not starter. I had an XPS 15 that stopped turning on after a week and I immediately returned it and did not bother trying a new one. Such a waste of time to get situated on a new device then find out said device is broken.
So what do you propose as a guiding principle in place of utilitarianism?
Are You an Angry Programmer?
Consul-template.
"than a random cast of prima donnas who won't get out bed for less than $1MM."

I mean, if I've already gotten that, why would I want to go to your company for less?
I'm still not clear on how this is a solution. Attackers don't need to target DNS. With massive botnets, they can generate backbone-melting traffic --- which will look identical to legitimate traffic --- without the use of any amplifiers, and which will knock out any service they choose.
Some of us are not such shitty programmers that we can't build critical systems on our own. Crtitcal business use is absolutely the worst time to farm out to a third party.

And quit using war metaphors to feel macho about your work. What we do in no way resembles battle. Neither are most libraries tested to the degree you are trying to suggest. Neither is common usage in several projects a reliable source if testing.

When people say things like "don't reinvent the wheel" or "only for yourself, not for your employer", what they mean is "I know I can't, and who do you think you are thinking you're better than me. Get back in your place."
They didn't invent product marketing, but they perfected the current, most popular industrial design aesthetic and marketing methodology.
On Apple's Innovation and Quality
Not the same since it's on the mining, not the transactions, but here we have the founders taking 20% of the value of the network for the first four years. That's a decent overhead, too.
Effing Taleo. I bail on any application using their horrible interface no matter how nice the job looks. Add Brassring to the hate too. On the plus side it's a clear signal that management of any company using them is tonedeaf on HR issues and probably other important areas too so just walk away and be glad you dodged that bullet.
As much as I'd like to agree with this, I can't avoid to notice that much of quantum mechanics was developed in early 20th century Germany (with some exceptions like Bohr, Fermu and de Broglie) which wasn't exactly following a liberal track at that time.
Twiddler 3 – Chorded Mobile Keyboard
I thought rose gold was more about appealing to asian markets?
>I bet you will reply "Latest MacBook Pro".

My reply was a Razer Stealth, but I was told I had to get an Apple. So, I'm getting a $2800 dual core laptop, because I need F-keys. At least I'll be allowed to install Linux on it.
ngrx creator (and ng core team member) here - you'd be surprised at the uptake on ngrx/redux in enterprise I think - a lot of the constraints / guarantees redux offers are really attractive to big teams, and pretty much every big enterprise team I've spoken to in the past few months are using or at least investigating using it.
That's a different class of thing. Both cars and computers are built around base models that are differentiated by additional features. You can either tell me what those features are up front or make me look them up.
A paid Linux! That's what I said on this comment about "Ask HN – What innovation would you want to see", which 84 people upvoted: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12570030

I wish we would have executed on that wish a year ago, because with the two Microsoft & Apple events, it's clear there is demand for "a Surface Studio, but not with Windows 10". Yesterday people effectively said they stay on Macs because of macOS, but envision switching to PCs because the innovation and specs are much better. Had we worked on that, we would have released a credible alternative to Macs, with distrib that would have embraced the Surface Studio while providing 1. the design, 2. the experience and 3.the privacy that everyone is looking for in an Apple computer...

As a reminder, the idea of a Paid Linux is to fund the open-source community with the same flow of money that Apple and Microsoft get from their OS (at $200/yr), in order to provide the same "red carpet" experience for specific profiles of users (either 3D workers, either graphists, whatever profile we target first). At the market level, one great experience for one type of work would develop adoption for Linux on the desktop. At a more selfish level, the benefit to paying for Linux instead of MS/A is that the new improvements are effectively open-source, so we're effectively raising the baseline of what every other distrib can do. The way to make people pay is by only providing their upgrades through authenticated PPAs, which means professionals will pay because it's easier, and hackers will redistribute versions on Torrent, which we don't mind, because hackers are a benefit for Linux. Besides, even hackers understand the value of funding open-source, so they might still participate. A lot of people would rather pay for open-source than closed-source.

I didn't execute on that wish, because I'm not an OS-level person, and I don't have the UX design background necessary for this endeavour. Nor the marketing know-how to execute at a high level. But I really wish someone would do it.
I think you have illustrated exactly why the IoT is becoming such a huge problem for the world at large.

Neither a toaster manufacturer nor the end-user care at all whether the manufacturer hooks a device to the toaster which gives them some bragging rights but can be used to bring down some portion of the Internet when it's security fails.

This is called an "externality" by economists[1]. Similarly to pollution, it's an effect whose cost is not born by those who produce or who consume a given product. And it pretty much require regulation to stop, though the chance of regulation in the present environment seems rather small.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality
They have a killer feature for that! Glued in batteries you cannot reasonably replace, unreliable buttons that fail easily, the like
New Emails in Clinton Case Came from Anthony Weiner’s Computer
You lost it in a minute you came to a conclusion you need or may need a IoT device in you home.

Please do not get me wrong. I am big fan of smart homes and there is long history in this market, but sorry, what happens in my home must stay in my home and not leak out to some remote server.

An IoT device in our home is perhaps not a huge security risk for an individual, but it is even larger risk for the society as a whole.
The Geek Keep: The basis for machine-learning systems' decisions
Legally blind developer here. I still have some vision in one eye and I make extensive use of it as far as being able to primarily code with screen magnification and some spoken text for select code all using OS X). I've had good success in my career but I will say I've had to at times work a lot harder to get the same results as fully sighted coworkers.

I'm mostly responding to encourage you to keep at it, and if you haven't tried Mac OS, maybe give it a whirl. Apple is pretty good about accessibility and their accessibility team is very good at accepting and acting upon feedback.
You seem to be mis-remembering the facts a little. The Think Different campaign was nearly 20 years ago (1997). If you look at the list of celebrities[1], almost all are/were not "anti materialist socialists."

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_different
I think what they are saying is that physical addresses don't necessarily map to bytes in DRAM in the sequential order that you might expect.

Here are more details of how it actually happens: http://lackingrhoticity.blogspot.ca/2015/05/how-physical-add...
It transfers the cost to vendors because their customer has an unusable product. Guess who they call first.

It's tough to defend the rights of citizens to have their internet-of-garbage devices stay online when those devices are turned into weapons of mass outage.
I've occasionally checked on Eve's progress since I first saw it mentioned here on Hacker News about two years ago - nice to see all the progress you've made!

A question regarding the centrality of data: when I first read about this, I thought an important part would be a kind of user interface for building relational databases - perhaps something like fieldbook. You mention Eve already includes a relational query engine - is a UI for modelling tables and for data entry also on the roadmap?
This isn't a proposal to stop all DDoS. That's some crazy feature creep you're suggesting.

Look, if the purpose is to stop all DDoS, legislating IoT devices won't solve that problem either.

You seem to be disqualifying a solution to attacks on DNS because it doesn't solve a problem we aren't trying to solve.

I don't get it.