skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I don't buy this motive at all.

OK I'll bite. What do you think the motive is?

According to the post's byline, it was written by Neel Mehta and Billy Leonard of the Threat Analysis Group at Google. Are you questioning their professional judgement and claiming they are individually biased?

If not, are you suggesting that there is some management directive to look for Windows exploits and publish them on an aggressive timeline in order to embarrass Microsoft publicly? Do you think professional security researchers would abide by such a directive?
There is precedent for Microsoft to release patches on days other than Tuesday (they call this “going out of band”) when an exploit is being used in the wild, especially if it is wormable. (This was the case for the hole that was later exploited by Conficker, for example.)
it's relative though.. unless you can go back in time and ask them
Compiling your kernel hasn't been necessary for like a decade by now. Configuring X is becoming a thing of the past, partially because of working automatic config, and partially because of the move away from X to Wayland-based desktops.

I use Fedora on a ThinkPad X230. It works an absolute dream. GNOME is my favorite of all the desktops, and Fedora by default ships a fully setup and functioning Gnome on Wayland session (which will also be the default session in the next release, coming in a few weeks).

The reason I chose to run Fedora on a ThinkPad is because it required no tweaking and fiddling at all to get working nicely. I'm all about that seamless out-of-the-box experience.

I was amused by the post here today about the Touch ID fork of sudo for macOS, because I already use the same feature on my ThinkPad every day, and it required absolutely no configuration or setup (other than enrolling my fingerprint).
That's not the same at all. Credit card transactions are auditable; just compare with the receipt. The same is not true of electronic voting machines with no paper trail.
How Apple could have avoided much of the controversy
CRISPR most likely followed up by the Higgs Boson.
2017 Mercedes-AMG GLC 43 4MATIC Coupe
CRISPR?
It's resonating with white identity politics. No magic here. It's white nationalism. Sugar coating follows:
I see. Could you tell me how many election cycles you did that before you decided you were qualified to vote?
>What really matters for humanity is that something was done, not who did it

I wish we lived in a society that worked that way. The unfortunate truth is that having your idea stolen means you can do something great for society and end up homeless and/or under considerable stress.
I installed them on my walls. It's great, they automatically install themself on the wall with built in glue, while picking the sunniest spots, and automatically drop the shade panels in the winter to increase solar heating on the house.

I have to remove them from the windows, but otherwise they are mostly maintenance free.

But my MBTF was only 10 years, the first set stopped working in the middle of the summer for no reason after almost completely covering the house, and I had to install a second one (this time with 2 spares, just in case). Luckily the first set delivered the new ones to me for free.

My roof faces East-West, my wall is to the South.
Out of touch? Who'd want to be in touch with a war criminal like Hillary? I don't want to be in that touch.

Should a businessman run a country? I don't know.

Should a criminal terrorist enabler run a country? I do know: No.
Thunderbird is a funny example here, because all of its UI is rendered by a web browser...
What is your standard for evidence? Without knowing that, I cannot hope to give 'conclusive evidence'.

Do you have a white-list, black-list, or other standard for sources? What type of evidence would satisfy your standards, and what are the minimum sample size, maximum p-value, and robustness with respect to alternate causes? Do you require some amount of replication, peer review, or publication?
Yeah that shows that he is out of touch with most Americans. He is in touch with the HN crowd, perhaps but someone who is out of job because the factory was moved to Mexico doesn't a give a shit about VR headsets and Blackberries.
Well, the thing is they're getting 'better' and 'better' at dropping standards. They drop things which still see a lot of use, for which there are no viable alternatives which perform at least as well as the current standard. It is almost as if they're trying for some form of abstract 'perfection' as defined by the dictum that 'Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away'. While nice in theory, in practice people buy computers to perform mundane tasks with 'imperfect' hardware with odd interfaces like HDMI, SD or analogue audio. This might go against the purist's dream of a perfect world but it is the one we're living in, warts and all. If you want to buy a computer as a personal statement you may be willing to live with the restrictions such 'perfection' brings with it, but those who want to upload their photos are left out in the cold. Yes, they can use an adapter or some sort of dongle but surely that is even less 'perfect'?
Apple has a general policy of not commenting about features in any future releases: they will rarely even say something currently in WebKit nightlies will be in the next release, so it's merely keeping with their typical form of not making any comment about future products/releases.

As such, I'd read absolutely nothing in to them refusing to commit to supporting it in a future release: that's just their normal behaviour, because per Apple policy they cannot. What actually are signs (whether they're implementing a given feature—typically publicly, whether they're sending detailed feedback on the spec, and what they're willing to say about implementing it off-the-record in private) are all there for WASM. I would be entirely unsurprised if Eich had off-the-record confirmation that it will almost certainly ship in Safari 11.
1. A web IDE is widely used at Google and has instant syncing with the file system so you can use your local editor and immediately see the changes in the IDE. This is probably helped by the fact that your "local" code is actually a distributed filesystem mounted via FUSE.

2. Features of the web IDE that people love: it works offline via caching and syncs back up the same way you expect an offline Google Doc you were editing to sync. It has plugins (e.g vim bindings) that are most common feature requests from developers. You can build your code very quickly (yay distributed building). No startup time, it loads close to instantly like Google Docs does. Split pane editing, debuggers, linters, etc all built-in. Code search also built in, review tool integration, version control integration.

3. Outside of Google people don't want to pay a 3rd party to allow editing / storage / access of their code; it mostly comes down to "if I get used to a tool I need to be guaranteed it will be around forever," (open source solves this), "I want full control of where my code lives" (on-premise solves this), "performance + features" (not sure if this has been solved anywhere, like being able to modify your code locally and remotely and sync instantly)
>I put his support at closer to 40% than 50%.

Based on what?

Most of these polls (as of today), put Trump at within a few percentage points of Clinton:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
"If you value your time at zero, then yes, Windows on cheapo devices is your thing. Oh look, another Win10 upgrade, so good."

Value your time at zero, lmao, condescending affluence at its best.

If you are the 1%, you value your time at a what 1/10000 level of humanity?

There is no shame to admitting you have money and will spend it like this.

But for the rest of people -- the 9999/10000, a few minutes of learning and adaption isn't a waste of time, it's a material gain in skills and money.

Rationalize away ~
One method of avoiding fraud in electronic voting systems is double-voting. It goes as follows:

- Wait until all electronic ballots are set up in their zones in election day.
- Randomly (this can be even done in a public, audited draw) select a few ballots to test.
- Remove those ballots from use and replace them with spares.
- Now, somebody publicily double votes on the tested ballot: they publicily vote for candaidate X in the ballot, and on paper (although just showing the vote allows any observer to keep count indefinetely).
- At the end of the test, print the count from the tested ballot and verify that it is accurate to the publicily counted votes.

What do you think about this?

IMO, while not totally fool-proof, this brings the cost of manipulating electronic elections rather close to paper elections, if the following assumptions hold:

- The draw is fair, so a malicious actor could not program only the selected ballots to be fair;
- The chain of custody of the ballot is solid (easy to do if there are party auditors that never lose sight of the ballots), or that the ballot is not moved out of the sight of the public instead;
- There's no available method to make the ballot know it's being tested, and change its behavior (like in the VW emissions scandal).

The last point is tougher, although auditable source code, code-signing, and reproduction of as many 'true' conditions as the real election (same duration, same time, same voting frequency, etc, maybe going as far as to randomly select normal voters to participate in the process).
Why does all Star Wars movies use aristocratic British accent?
How did that many words get used with out once calling it the "Trans-Atlantic Accent"?
> What counts as proof? Will a jury understand what doesn't count as proof? ... It is not uncommon for juries to accept flimsy and circumstantial arguments no matter how hard the defense tries to explain that the Prosecutor is spewing nonsense.

You're right, those are problems. But they're not problems with this law, they're problems with jury-based criminal justice systems. And the system's had 900 years to evolve solutions -- judges summing up, "No case to answer" / directed verdicts, etc.

There's room for disagreement about how effective those solutions are. Point is, as the main objection to this law, that complaint 'proves too much' -- since essentially the same objections apply to all but the most trivial criminal offences, the solution then becomes scrap juries and go for a Germany-style professional/inquisitorial justice system. (And maybe we should, I don't know).

(btw, this is very, very far from being the most complicated law or subject matter that juries have to face, compared to e.g. complex fraud trials)

(To be clear, I think this is a terrible law! But just because I agree with TFA's conclusions doesn't justify his fearmongering, IMO)
No it wasn't... It was released in 2001
Libya was going to happen with or without US support. And let's be clear the involvement of the US was limited to refuelling, air support i.e minimal.

But remember Gaddafi was imminently going to wipe out significant numbers of opposition supporters. So it was always going to be a lose-lose situation.
NFS in a modern system seems like a huge red flag.
A chance to prove themselves with adult supervision is better than nothing.
Intel can afford to, and also has to, make that 'bet' because that is their competitive advantage.

Intel has 'the best' chips because they literally pay the price for being, at least on their headline grabbing products, a full process generation ahead of more or less the entire rest of the semiconductor industry.
Which mirrors what has been happening in Europe for a while now.
stayed in iraq longer, stop supporting the saudis, stop selling arms to saudi/rebel/others
I suspect that's exactly what's going to happen unless we transition to a completely new architecture, like neural nets or The Diamond Age style nanomachinery.
crap.

Since jessie, I could not maintain my old Sparc V100 server.

Now it's my PowerBook G3 Pismo :(

(to be true, it wasn't very usable anymore, 45 seconds 100% CPU to load the main gmail page just to give an idea).
A little earlier than that: August 2001.
2001, not 2011. Time flies. :)
So we're just going to keep moving the goalposts?

I don't believe you're arguing in good faith.

What does it take to convince you? Does video evidence of people involved in the Clinton campaign bragging about voter intimidation suffice? Or do you not think voter intimidation counts as rigging an election?

So what's good enough? We've got some pretty damning emails that can be proven not to have been altered (DKIM) -- is that good enough?

Clearly, voting machines supplied by companies with ties to the Clinton foundation having "glitches" that always work in favor of Clinton isn't good enough.

Do we consider Clinton having received debate questions beforehand to be rigging? Or do we just ignore that a candidate for President of The United States has just been proven to have CHEATED -- because that cheating wasn't dishonestly counting votes with PROVABLE INTENT?

I could bring up the "coincidence" of the Democratic Party bus caught illegally dumping raw sewage on the side of a road in my hometown -- miraculously coinciding with an unprecedented early voter turnout. But why bother? We'll just move the goalposts further.

Whatever. It doesn't matter. Because even with a completely rigged system -- we're going to elect Trump anyway.
I'd say it's likely that the most significant discovery of the past 8 years hasn't gone too far past the initial discovery phases.

CRISPR is a good example of a discovery that has just come into the public consciousness in recent years, but history for that dates back 20 years!

LIGO & Higgs boson too, decades upon decades of research have gone into these.
if that were true, which it's not, what does it matter? it's not their country... sovereignty is a thing still
> What fractionalized votes can do:

> They allow “weighting” of races. Weighting a race removes the principle of “one person-one vote” to allow some votes to be counted as less than one or more than one.

This is extremely inflammatory language. What I think they mean is:

> They allow “weighting” of electoral contests. Weighting an electoral contest removes the principle of “one person-one vote” to allow some votes to be counted as less than one or more than one.

However, what they wrote seems to heavily imply a racial bias to electronic elections. Why they would choose to use such racially charged language around such a benign topic at this time seems only to drive links to their site over such a non-controversial issue.
Yes, it's also made visible in the documentation.
I guess I'd turn the question around and ask what problems are browser based IDEs trying to solve and what advantage do they have over regular IDEs?

I'm a full-time C++ developer, which probably isn't the target for most browser IDEs, but I'll throw in my two cents anyway.

My perception is that browser based IDEs are inflexible, fragile, slow, and don't scale. It's not even clear to me how a browser based IDE is supposed to work in my environment. Do I clone our source repo locally and open the file from there somehow? Do I clone it to the cloud somewhere? How does a browser IDE handle the third party libraries we link to? Where is compilation done? Where does the executable go? Am I able to debug and step through the binary in the browser? What if there's a GUI component?

And don't even get me started on the clunkiness of text editing in a browser compared to an editor like Emacs or Vim.

The whole concept of a browser based IDE just seems like a poorly thought out abuse of web technology.
Yes, I believe what you describe in your second paragraph is most likely to be the case, given that coordinated disclosure is the standard approach to protecting users.
lots of emotional liberals as well
I'd be happy with "tabs not visible go into stasis".
I Was a Teenage Randroid
Reminds me of that old joke from the '80s(?) about what if MS built cars? You would get the blue screen of death while driving on the highway, and have to stop your car and restart it, you would get cryptic error messages when you were running out of gas, etc....
As a sibling comment mentioned, the mere potential for auditing increases the cost for a malicious actor to perform manipulations, since the chance of getting caught is higher, and the penalty for getting caught is potentially disastrous.
Obama's probably significantly less likely to create as many Libyas and Syrias than Clinton or Trump.
Stop defending Aleppo.
That's what most people would have said about investing in Facebook vs. Lehman Brothers in 2007...
Might want to brush up on your world affairs.

Iraq is a sovereign country. They asked the US to leave and quite rightly they did. And all of this happened under GWB's watch.
Surely they'd fit a braking resistor to cover this case? Most VSDs support them so I'd be amazed if it was too much trouble to use one with a car controller.
The servers were registered to Alfa Bank, and the DNS traffic showed communication between the two servers in question.

It could have been done by some Trump employee checking his bank balance, but what's unusual is that no one else seemed to be using it and it never sent traffic anywhere else but that Russian bank.
The difference here is that we're much more likely to see moderately short term adoption of the technology as we already have 'downscale' companies using much older, cheaper to buy second hand equipment.

If a wall is hit, the companies that /make/ the equipment will still need to sell units to someone, so the market equilibrium will push them closer and closer to the source cost for the (very often small batch/one off) parts. The race then between the rate they need/want to produce units to stay in business, and how long those in the market can defer purchasing new units.
I'm curious. From a global warming + CO2 perspective (and total costs, maybe), are we better off:

- by making mirror roofs that bounce as much light as possible back towards the sky (therefore not trapping heat, and reducing the need for A/C in the summer);

- or by using heat-trapping solar roofs that produce electricity but act as heat-sinks and require more A/C usage in the summer?

And what about shingles that go from mirror to black from summer to winter, to decrease the need of winter heating as well as summer A/C?

What if we take in account the amount of CO2 needed to manufacture the solar roof?
> Technological progress is plateauing (at least single-threaded CPU speeds), and this will naturally need to more stability.

That's a surprisingly narrow perspective on technological progress (although convenient for your argument).

> once we can no longer rely on Moore's law to make our computers faster

Moore's law is still making our GPUs faster as planned. Our only hope is Amdahl's law. :)

> I think computers will take longer and longer to become obsolete

No need to look at the future. The average lifespan of a computer is already 4 years and maybe even more. We are starting to see the same larger lifespan for smartphones. (The biggest issue with keeping my phones for longer is actually the availability of Android updates.)
Pay to get SFW only gifs. :frown: Sure, if you're paying for slack already... but if its "just" a bunch of friends, the idea of shelling out money to make sure that NSFW images don't show up in the wrong window... Yes, I know its a business model, but it disappoints me that that is one of the price differentiators between the plans.

I've switched my team's integration to gif keyboard which has a search and approve workflow so that someone has to say "I want that one" to have something NSFW show up.
Oh, they don't include the distribution/transmission charges? Then they're totally useless; on my bill the transmission charges are larger than my generation charges (transmission is about 60% of my bill; generation is 40%).
You can sort of look at Moore's law opposite the usual way -- as a commitment to make the investment required to make it happen.

Took a long time for physics to start to get in the way.
Dirty COW – (CVE-2016-5195) – Docker Container Escape
> Since the average is $33666, we can assume half are above, and half are below that price

Maybe you're not stating a symmetry assumption about the distribution of prices about this mean, but in general you can't actually assume that.
I think the better approach is to highlight progress. Sure, many people still live in difficult situations, but overall, we've made a lot of progress over time.
I posted it also and it went nowhere. Not being in the US, I find timezones can work against stories I think are interesting and post.
Food Allergy seems to be a much more likely cause to me.
You could run your own DNS server so your lookups don't wind up in the logs of these guys.
It had to do with the comment I was replying to.
I'm looking forward to work on manipulating the generated SVG and reflect the change in the text diagram then render it back to SVG. But that will come a long way.
re: why should I pay for my neighbor's solar installation?

If you don't think solar is going to be a valuable part of our nation's energy infrastructure, then by all means, vote yes on this.

But, if you do think that solar has a valuable place in the future of our nation's energy production, then I'm not sure why you would want to place the burden of upgrading the power grid to support solar 100% on the backs of the small minority who are using solar right now. It would create a chicken and the egg situation where no one would want to install solar because of all the extra fees you'd have to pay to get the grid upgraded. And, the only way to bring those costs down is by sharing them with more people, but you never get that because the fees are too high. You'd never achieve critical mass for your solar installs.

That is my understanding but I could be 100% wrong. It's impossible to get real information on exactly what this amendment would do. Most of my info is from the ballotpedia site: https://ballotpedia.org/Florida_Solar_Energy_Subsidies_and_P...

If that argument doesn't convince you with its logic, just look at the Audio recording leak on the ballotpedia page. That should basically tell you that the opponents are right: "The campaign was based upon the argument that Amendment 1 was designed and funded by utility companies to deceive voters into thinking it was a pro-solar measure, when, in fact, it was written to benefit utility companies and inhibit solar expansion.". Why would you vote YES on that?
Brocade Communications in Advanced Talks to Sell Itself
At the same time it allows exploit writers to quickly add this to their kits.

I'd expect AV vendors to already have signatures for this given that it's being actively exploited, which means there must be malware samples to know this.
People seem to forget there are a lot of smart people working at Apple on the business side who know what they are doing.

Apple has calculated how many customers will be upset, lost, indifferent and gained due to various product decisions.

Apple is not perfect or flop-proof, but they must make product decisions. These decisions, whether short term or long term, consider customers, competition and technology trends. Every decision has benefits and costs.

I agree Apple may have lost its way a bit and taken too far the old Steve Jobs' approach of "don't ask the customer what they want, they don't know, a company has to show them what they will want".

If you have decided not to upgrade to the new MBP because of the price or lack of ports. If you are going to buy a non-Apple laptop next time you do need to upgrade. Apple already knows this, you/we are statistics, and while they want customers to stay, they know a certain % of customers will not.

The removal of the headphone jack on the iphone went through the same calculations.

Still worth voicing our opinions, Apple listens as does the competition. Someone will offer what enough people want.