skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>Those who rule do not have the time to write about it.

History written by the losers... because those who rule cannot write about it?

I think this article is interesting, but the underlying premise of the article really bothers me.

I can think of several glaring examples of manipulation of history that we are guilty of in America today, despite how we feel about ourselves being "free" and generally too good for that.

Here are some glaring examples off the top of my head:

My observations have been that most people in America believe Japan just attacked Pearl Harbor for no good reason. This story is told in the hollywood movie Pearl Harbor. In the movie, there were just kids playing, good people BBQ'ing, and beach volleyball and then these evil bastards just attacked for no reason. They don't know who Perry was or what we did to Japan before this happened.

I have also heard people say, time and time again, that they believe the atomic bomb "saved lives," so the argument in my high school textbook goes, "more people died in the fire bombings than the atomic bombings." This is perhaps the most outrageous manipulation of history. They don't know American generals were begging to not use the bomb, or to at least not use on a civilian target. They have no idea of the history, of Japan's confusion, of our unwillingness to compromise despite they were saying they would surrender. President Dwight Eisenhower said: "the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing." Another quote from a US General: "The war would have been over in two weeks. . . . The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all." However, conveniently most Americans now don't believe the atomic bombs were crimes against humanity, nor that the fire bombings of Tokyo were, either! The US General who oversaw the fire bombings of Tokyo himself said they were a war crime.

I think most Americans know that Germany committed horrible mass murder against races of people, but not that their economy was destroyed by through financial schemes (even Keynes, mainstream macroecon's hero, told of this).

It takes very strong character to be able to stand up and say that you made a mistake, and make good on it and make sure it doesn't happen again. I think one of the best ways this will never happen is just erase those mistakes from history, and declaring history written by the losers would be a good way to argue for that.
It was terrific. I used my Amstrad CPC to dial up to bulletin boards: Preston ROS, Aspects BBS, Supe's Motel. Aspects was known to be one of the best in the UK, and it was consequently the devil's own work not to get the engaged tone.

Early on, connection speed was 300/300 or 1200/75. Later I ended up writing my own terminal program, because I picked up a 2400 baud +compression modem from somewhere, and none of the existing software was fast enough to do the resulting speed of 4800 baud without dropping characters. To get the speed it had to talk directly to the UART in the serial interface, and then write the bitmaps directly to screen: no firmware calls anywhere, they were too slow. Heady days.

FWIW I don't think any of the 8-bit Amstrads came with a built-in serial port. But they were certainly available as add-ons for both the CPC and PCW.
What's great is that they can use the same exact tool in the US, to weed out "fake news"!

It's like the end of _Animal Farm_. Only more perfect...
I think "accidental" complexity is hugely situational and depends on the interaction between original architecture choices and subsequent maintainers of a piece of code. Good maintainers will decrease accidental complexity by eliminating it as they find it, via refactoring or other code tidyup. Bad maintainers will increase it via cut-and-paste coding, bandaid fixes, and poorly structured code.

In a long-enough-lived project, there will always be bad maintainers, so I agree that a language that eliminates accidental complexity would be great, if it were possible.

A lot of those examples seem to be related more to the amount of functionality given. For example, Xerox PARC (I'm assuming you're talking about their early desktop publishing software?) does a vanishingly small amount compared with MS Office.
That actually makes sense. Or maybe there should be prison sentences for corporations. If you mess up you are closed for a few years.
> I'd imagine that this methodology doesn't affect things too much, considering that around 70% of high school graduates go to colleges in-state.

So a full 30% go to colleges out of state? And I would wager that quite a few come to be close to family afterwards. That's a huge swing in the data.
Judging by the incumbents, your next steps are (in loose chronological order):

* begin harvesting user data immediately, prep for sales to advertisers

* slowly change the site until it alienates your original crop of users

* implement a series of user-hostile changes that make it difficult for users to have meaningful interactions with anyone but advertisers

* Use the billions of dollars you got from selling personal data to fund a propaganda campaign about how "privacy is dead" and to buy the mansions all around yours, so that you can protect your own privacy.
I once wrote a classifier to tell whether the metadata on a web page was any good.

The best features? Look for classic html mistakes on the page. Still using font tags, do they use gifs instead of png, did they include a keywords meta tag, did they specify an encoding or are there windows-1252 characters present anywhere, etc. I came up with 20 or so signs of bad html elsewhere on the page, and collectively those features were much more predictive than any of the content itself.
> UTF-8, for example, allows to encode the character "ä"
> [...]
> I believe that it makes sense to display a warning

Both of these are addressed in section 5.1.1.2:

"If Unicode characters are accepted in memorized secrets, the verifier SHOULD apply the Normalization Process for Stabilized Strings defined in Section 12.1 of Unicode Standard Annex 15 [UAX 15] using either the NFKC or NFKD normalization. Subscribers choosing memorized secrets containing Unicode characters SHOULD be advised that some characters may be represented differently by some endpoints, which can affect their ability to authenticate successfully."

https://pages.nist.gov/800-63-3/sp800-63b.html
To be fair, they probably could've just made the laptop a bit thicker and put in a bigger battery, achieving no net decrease in battery life.
That's true, I hadn't thought of that. Holiday week has my brain off in the clouds.
> Basically, the minor carrier is only big enough to contract out to one major carrier

That depends on the regional carrier. The bigger ones (SkyWest, ExpressJet, Mesa, Republic, Shuttle America, Compass/GoJet/Trans States) have contracts with United as well as other carriers. The pay is still crap and barrier to entry is still very high though.
FWIW, I do use a password manager. But what you say is pure speculation. I don't see any formula for how should I estimate risks here, and the common narrative amongst security folks is "hooray password managers!". I'm often giving that advice myself, but honestly, I'm doubting it more and more.

The truth is that I don't give a fuck about losing 90% of accounts I use (and I guess I'm not the only one). Many of them I could even give you myself as a birthday present. Using password manager as a rule of thumb would imply that these accounts are as important as the most important ones. Which is nonsense. Even if we discard all the disposable accounts, I still doubt that losing your twitter would hit you nearly as hard as losing your main email account or bank account.

However, exposing that all these trash accounts are mine might make me feel uncomfortable.

If that makes sense, then we must actually stop using the rule "password managers FTW" and start using the rule "consider how important is every given account to you, and treat it accordingly, chosing between several kdbx files". Which is much more complicated rule, obviously. I would even say it creates much higher mental load than remembering several sufficiently complicated passwords.
it's just like C's switch, right?

not at all, absolutely not. consider:

switch (count % 8) {
case 0: do { *to = *from++;
case 7: *to = *from++;
case 6: *to = *from++;
case 5: *to = *from++;
case 4: *to = *from++;
case 3: *to = *from++;
case 2: *to = *from++;
case 1: *to = *from++;
} while (--n > 0);
}

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duff's_device
Problem solving .... hmmm

It's not solely a programmer thing. You might like to consider people who have been trained to solve problems eg Engineers or Mathematicians int al - they will probably give you more bang for your buck. They will probably have some rudimentary or rather better programming skills as well.

Bugger bootcamps ...

You pays your money and takes your choice.

Cheers
Jon
> For me it was a case of thinking I know better.

I'm deeply curious: why? When virtually every reputable security practitioner on this site and others has echoed the advice to just use a password manager for years, how do you come to the conclusion that you know better than them?

If it sounds like I'm asking judgmentally, please don't interpret it that way. Your experience mirrors that of many others, and if I can understand how this line of thinking happens then maybe we can find ways to combat it.

This is just one battle amongst many where, despite endless warnings and examples to the contrary, people seem to think they are qualified to go against encouraged practice for password storage, password management, encrypting data at rest, encrypting data over the wire, etc. And in almost all cases, people come to the conclusion that they know better, when they absolutely do not.
This is a huge overpromise.

Why not say something like "We're asking the legal team to consider whether we can still publish our projects on GitHub"
They are no standards.

And both DEBs and RPMs are often distro specific.

Linux releases should be done source only making it as easy as possible for packagers to compile using libraries present on the system; or using a tool like AppImage and packaging everything yourself.
I got my 15" MBP 2016 as one of the first as well. An important caveat when setting up your system is not to clone 10.12.1 from another system and expect no hiccups. I used an app called SuperDuper but this probably applies to CarbonCopyCloner as well. Essentially the image that is on the new Macs seems to have slightly custom drivers which did not make it into the 10.12.1 release.

Either use the official (and somewhat slow) Migration Assistant/Time Machine or after you clone your drive from the old machine, make sure to use Recovery Mode/Cmd-R and reinstall the operating system from the recovery partition. For me, though it took several hours to install, it quietly retained all my data and resolved all issues I had been seeing with stock macOS 10.12.1.
I Residential Mortgage-backed Security Collateralized Debt Obligation
But what pilots would want to work there? They treat their employees like crap!

It's a self-perpetuating problem.
Jeffrey Sachs Praises the Youth Suing the U.S. Government and Fossil Fuel Industry
Investment time – Very good read for the companies
Lisp in Small Pieces (Cambridge University Press, 1996 ISBN 0-521-56247-3; paperback edition (December 4, 2003) ISBN 0-521-54566-8; translated by Kathleen Callaway) is a book by Christian Queinnec on Lisp, Scheme and other related dialects, their interpretation, semantics, and compilation and contains code for 11 interpreters and 2 compilers.
> The first time you actually sit in the car, you have to ask a friend how to get out again...

I remember that day!
> Safeway only sells Safeway brand, Costco only sells Kirkland, CVS only sells CVS products

This seems to work pretty well for Trader Joe's. I trust their stuff.
For higher dimensions, a RadViz plot with lower alpha is really useful too.

[0] http://docs.orange.biolab.si/2/widgets/rst/visualize/radviz....
If they have a serious argument backed by evidence, they should make it public. Hillary Clinton may have a personal concern about the issue but it's a very serious issue for all Americans (and the world). She shouldn't have a veto.
I don't mind putting ads up there (I have), considering it's a free site to use. But I'll keep this warning in mind.
I must have watched the Painted Spider a thousand times when I first started climbing in the early 90s. It was so inspiring!
http://www.chockstone.org/media/Review.asp?Action=Show&BookI...
> The methodology makes the whole study suspect.

No it doesn't, it's a footnote that affects a few states significantly but has little impact on the bigger conclusion about inland states losing out to coastal areas.
Man, if Joel were blogging today he'd be dominating the HN front page...

The thing is, Eve isn't an abstraction layer over your existing layers, it's a set of choices you can make layer-by-layer to swap out the old "unique" way of doing things with Eve's more uniform way of doing things. The unique way was arbitrary anyway.

Like, if the whole world all decided to start speaking Esperanto, that wouldn't create too much of a leaky-abstraction issue.

The one issue I can see is how to scale when you use it as your database layer and make fancy queries. But every database's query engine has its own implementation challenges and I don't think Eve is special in that sense.
The phone thing is complex too. Where I live (suburb of Austin), it's legal to use your phone but about five miles down the road it's illegal.

Likewise, if you are in California, you can't send a text while driving, but you can enter an address into the GPS app (probably).

All Apple and Google would have to do is warn you that recording calls may be illegal.

Radio Shack sold phone recorders in every state and AFAIK, nobody ever sued them.

I have Google Voice and Google lets me record calls on that. I'm not sure what the big difference is for when the call is over Android.

Edit: There have been cell phones that had call recorders built in, just none that run Android or iOS (AFAIK). I know a lot of Motorola phones included the functionality.
I'm going through it as a tech professional who is a non-developer. I know how to code, I just don't do it professionally (and I don't know Ruby, let alone Rails).

I'm loving it. Obviously the "here are some commands" and "go find Google Chrome" made me laugh a little but I understand the audience they're for. I love how quickly we get into actually creating something, it keeps my interest when I see progress. It's been 15 minutes and I already have a Rails blog set up, yay!

Seriously, I haven't gotten that far in, but right now I'm fully believing there is a success story with your teaching method. Congrats, that's not an easy feat.
The last revision of the Thunderbolt Cinema Display used two separate cables. USB-C is the first single-cable solution I'm aware of.
Thanks so much! I've been working on a side SaaS project which I intend to target primarily to Enterprise customers - where I expect to make money (like how Slack does, but it's nothing to do with Office Communication ofc). I've always been looking for details and generally most companies/devs don't like providing info.
And New Zealand, where it was like Sweden, but backwards. 0 made 10 pulses, 1 made 9 pulses, and dialing 9 would make 1 pulse.

This is why the emergency number in NZ is 111, we had equipment from the UK, where the number was 999.

As to why it was backwards, I have no idea.
Sure they didn't say Clinton won a state that she really didn't win nor did they say she won the election when she didn't. It is possible to be quite dishonest through exaggeration, omission, and sensationalism. It is also possible to be dishonest by producing models that are later shown to be hilariously wrong and passing it off as incompetence rather than misinformation (98% chance of a Clinton victory anyone?)

When I see the kind of blatant bias that the anchors on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN etc showed on election night I can't help feeling like the networks that write their paychecks are intentionally trying to misinform people for their own gain.
My memories are blurry, but I clearly remember how surprised I was seeing mentions of modems on the manual.

Got me to do a little youtube digging : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WPMq80wYFY
> They look visually identical, yet fail any string comparison.

That's a non-issue. You should normalize unicode strings to a common form (preferably NFC) before any comparision.
What if you want to sell users data? Isn't that what most free web and mobile apps are really selling?

I have a lot of great software ideas (great in that I wish they existed and want to use them), but no clue which could actually be monetized effectively. Billions of users seems like a tall order, and not a sensible thing to pursue.
The reality is that passwords are being deprecated as strong security boundaries.

We've been working under this fantasy that it's acceptable to make a "strong" password and have a meaningful expectation that you can maintain the security and integrity of access. Multi factor authentication is the best solution to this problem -- a moderately complex password with MFA is stinger than a password.

If you want to compromise somebody long-term, you move laterally within the targets network and infect multiple devices.
Domain Password Auditing Tools (DPAT)
Elasticsearch as NOSQL (2013)
I don't see the problem with having a beginner-oriented interface rest on an extra abstraction layer.

Eve : Markdown :: Eve-based tools for everyone : a WYSIWYG editor
Only if the listener is an idiot.
Actually I think your type of comment is exactly why this type of story is being flagged/buried. I wish HN commentators would be able to assess and discuss these types of stories without involving politics.

This is not a political issue, and it would be nice if it was possible to discuss potential issues related to democratic processes, particularly when it intersects with areas where the HN community may be able to provide valuable insights. Perhaps that's just not possible.
In finance this is called efficient market hypothesis. And as I understand, generally considered false.

From Efficient Market Hypothesis: Is The Stock Market Efficient? | Investopedia http://www.investopedia.com/articles/basics/04/022004.asp#ix...
"Conclusion
It's safe to say the market is not going to achieve perfect efficiency anytime soon. For greater efficiency to occur, the following criteria must be met: (1) universal access to high-speed and advanced systems of pricing analysis, (2) a universally accepted analysis system of pricing stocks, (3) an absolute absence of human emotion in investment decision-making, (4) the willingness of all investors to accept that their returns or losses will be exactly identical to all other market participants. It is hard to imagine even one of these criteria of market efficiency ever being met."
I think "rate limiting" is used as an indicator of malicious intent rather than in the QoS sense. If we classify traffic as malicious we drop it.

The single SYN will fail the 3WHS test, so we would drop it. For DNS we can usually fingerprint the attacker and block traffic. Because we are a full proxy we can do packet inspection as well. ;)

There's a fair amount of intelligence already built into our products which we of course make use of (BIG-IP LTM/AFM/ASM, "IP Intelligence").

Eventually it may well come down to the SOC monitoring and adjusting the filters in real time as required - that's life.
What part of the business' only imperative is to make money for its shareholders did you not understand? Do you really think any of these people care about any of the values that you hold dear? Maybe in the back of their minds. Maybe. But business as usual means that you do whatever to make money, and to make more money and increase your social and political power and market share. Sell secrets to governments? Sure. Unless it gets out and causes bad P/R. Then you do damage control, that usually involves scapegoating a someone, but that's just an opportunity for another company to exploit, and there are an infinite number of those and a limited number of consumers.
The importance of this NIST standard cannot be understated. It has a requirement that passwords be hashed with a random salt! Microsoft Active Directory does not use salts!

I am trying to imagine the consequences to all the businesses and agencies that must adhere to these standards suddenly coming to the realization that they must replace their Active Directory installations and what that will mean for administering all their Windows systems. It's not going to be pretty.

You might be thinking, "but these are just guidelines!" Yes, but actually there's loads of existing business contracts with wording that states the business must adhere to all NIST (security) guidelines. Also, you can bet that once this gets finalized other standards will follow suit.

It will be interesting to see what Microsoft does because salts were expressly not added to AD because so much functionality cannot work with random salts in place. They're going to have to break backwards compatibility with a lot of functionality and many 3rd party products that synchronize with AD. Entirely new APIs are going to need to be written.

It will also become seriously annoying to create keytabs at large organizations since only domain admins will have that power once random salts are in place; making automation very difficult.
Obviously oil companies today still get subsidies from the government. The most egregious of which are the liability limitations on deep ocean drilling as evidenced by the Deep Water Horizon disaster. The rig never would have been built if the US Congress didn't indemnify BP for all damages over $70 million dollars.

The article in the post tries to claim that the ratio of fossil fuel subsidies to renewable is 100 to 1. But the time frame of that pie chart belies a serious misrepresentation of fact. "Cumulative Historical Federal Subsidies" suggests all federal subsidies throughout all of history, which would include subsidies paid in the 1930's.

It would be much more enlightening to know that ratio just for the past 5 years.
SMS 2FA is only as strong a your voicemail password.
> The only exception I know of is Google's 20% program

Is that an exception? Letting people work on whatever, for the company, is different than letting them work on whatever then walk off with it.
If you allow unlimited length, that a DoS attack. Ask the devs at Django
Serverless Architecture – The Way Forward?
I'm not a libertarian either but that would kill businesses. Who wants to trade when all possible variables can are ALL of their life. Or maybe there is an insurance :))
You can use a laser to transmit audio to a LDR or a light sensitive transistor/diode, which can then be used to run a speaker (with a battery attached). Essentially fibre optics through the air.

I did it once, the quality was rather lacking, since it used amplitude modulation instead of frequency modulation.

Here's an instructable on it: http://www.instructables.com/id/How-to-Send-Sound-using-a-La...

It's not quite what you're asking, but it's probably the closest you can feasibly get. I'm fairly sure that's also the way that laser microphones work as well.
This flaw is occurring in a system for which the products in question are unregulated. Imagine how much worse it would be if the libertarians had their way and deregulated everything else.