skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
indeed. i think apple has a general software quality issue and should now think about hiring some senior devs from microsoft to help them sort their process out.
Parallel queries baked in from long back. I think Postgres got this just recently.
This Japanese home assistant wants you to be her 'master'
I'd heard that in passing, but in trying to research it, the best I can find is that studies of xenophobia are all over the map and completely contradictory:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:rPNS83u...

The only thing anyone seems to agree on is that the French really hate foreign workers.

That said, I hope you turn out to be right, and the populist/nativist zeitgeist burns itself out.
A false disease positive or negative can easily fuck up your life. Lots of follow-up tests are invasive or expensive and take time. The FDA is totally right to require high standards and premarket approval.
The problems you've listed in reply to my sibling commenter are all on the tooling side, not with the language, and yes they could definitely be fixed by spending "billions" on people and resources dedicated solely to improving them.

You didn't specify anything that says Swift isn't a "halfway decent programming language."
The various open source solutions that Oracle EOL'd which are now offered by ForgeRock have seemed to be decent alternatives in this space, but of course they are now making the source less accessible:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13068512
In Cairo, most of the roads during rush hour are so packed with cars that you can't drive faster than 5km/hour. Those packed roads with slowly moving cars have the lowest accident rate in the country.

So yes, you can definitely reduce accidents by forcing everyone into high traffic situations where they have no choice but to drive extremely slowly.

In IT security, you can also reduce hacked computers by making so many security regulations that nobody can actually use the computers. It does work, but nobody really gets their job done.

Or at least, in the case of the state department, it works until your secretary of state moves all of her email onto her own server to avoid your regulations and you end up with a political firestorm.

At some point you probably want to try find solutions that optimize safety and actually getting something done at the same time. Creating traffic isn't a very good solution in the long run, I think.
From my personal experience what the parent comment stated is actually very true.

As someone who is actively trying to get into the JS world coming from the back-end side it is extremely hard to find best practices that do not change every other week. In the beginning of the year, tutorials were made with grunt, yarn, yeoman and the likes, then they were written to use gulp, bower and now it's webpack and what not. I can't even catch up on what the tutorials have used. To be extremely fair, every other week there seems to be a new tool I need to know and I can't even catch up on why I should learn or stop learning/using the previous. Every tutorial/documentation does something differently - there is no unique set of tools and instructions that do not change over time. I cannot find the best practices docs, because everyone has their own opinion of something and bashes the other guy for having an opinion in the first place.

I know it might be a bad analogy - but I usually compare the state of the principles of RESTful APIs to the state of principles of the front-end stack. They are design principles and you have set of instructions/best practices you should follow regardless of the language, framework etc. Thus I can make RESTful APIs in Python, Go, Ruby etc. On the other hand, Javascript is very opinionated framework. I cant seem to find the principles wrapped in a talk, book or docs. Offer me a choice, let me make it, do not make it for me. Let me make a mistake, let me learn how it does not add up to the whole picture.

Every JS documentation assumes something or fast forwards through an important part of the process - the set up. Why the heck do I need to use something, and why is it good with another tool you have in this stack. Why shouldn't I use something? Don't just copy the gulpfile or any other js file I need, explain it.

You said it is a good thing to try a new thing every month - how do you have enough time to observe it and test it properly in production or wherever? I don't see a new framework every month as a good thing, the frameworks don't mature in your environment and neither does my deep understanding of the framework. That makes for constant struggle to optimize a way. People in the JS world, at least to me seem like, hmm, this does not sound cool anymore let's change it up with this.

I hope I don't come of as a hater, I'm just speaking as a front-end newbie.
We did a performe comparison on handling Geo data.

SQL server came out on top.
A neutrino interaction with the electrons or nuclei of water can produce a charged particle that moves faster than the speed of light in water (not to be confused with exceeding the speed of light in a vacuum). This creates a cone of light known as Cherenkov radiation, which is the optical equivalent to a sonic boom. The Cherenkov light is projected as a ring on the wall of the detector and recorded . . .

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-Kamiokande#Description
I searched a little bit but couldn't find smth to connect new iPhone 7 EarPods with Lightning Connector to my mac pro

Few options:

Lightning to thunder bolt.

Headphone to USB.

Bluetooth with iPhone (if possible)
Call support?
The sad part of it, is the vicious circle that side projects aren't accepted as experience, even if cool ones, and one doesn't get the contracts to actually be able to earn the experience as official customer projects.

Been on that path a few times...
My guess is the 'new owner' was involved in trafficking people for sex exploitation (the overnight journey to the shelter in France - somewhere vulnerable people could be easily tricked with a work offer and easily moved within the EU due to the lack of internal borders).

Meeting the 'Russian' woman and going along with her irrational story and the suggestion of drugs being supplied and her 'loving' him all sounds like an exploitative relationship. Consistent with a sex trafficker.

Swapping SIMs (to change phone identity - albeit poorly) and only using for a few weeks indicates someone used to taking steps to avoiding tracking/identification. Not someone new to criminal activity nor evading detection.

Being overnight at homeless shelters suggests he was more likely exploiting women at these shelters rather than him being homeless and sleeping there (I'm astonished the filmmaker started for feel sorry for him at the idea he was homeless - that's just naive; this was someone already demonstrated to be heavily involved in criminality).

Trying to confront him at the property and finding an aggressive person with a strong smell of drugs at least gave a reality check. This is a dangerous criminal and it was reckless to go near him.
I agree with the author on a few points:

1. the telephone number system is terrible (but only in hindsight)
2. a telephone number should not be used for security

But his premise of a DNS for phone numbers is ridiculous. Does he think the PSTN was invented when smartphones came out? What about the wide plethora of legacy phones that would cause countless issues?

If someone did manage to complete he herculean (if not impossible) task of making it happen, it would be a massive waste; the PSTN will become obsolete in the not so distant future as internet based solutions take over.
You have the math wrong.

> Nothing short of a 50% fixed rate will not be a huge tax break for us in the 1%.

The current highest bracket in the US is 39.6%, which doesn't come into play until you've made more than $400K. The vast majority of "middle class" people pay 28% marginal rates or less -- anyone up to $190K for single or $231K for married filing jointly.

A household making $200K currently pays an effective tax rate of ~22% -- and that's $200K after all the deductions. To meet the same effective tax rate with a flat tax against a $12K/year UBI would require a flat tax rate of 28%.

Moreover, to be in "the 1%" you need household income in excess of $400K.

And most of the actual 1% pay the long-term capital gains rate, currently up to 20%, whereas with a 28% flat tax they would be paying 25 to 28%.
Do please announce the finished product on HN. I think it might be interesting to more than just me.
I think it is, considering that hackers traditionally tended to value hacking above certain other mundane, authority-governed pursuits, as noted by the OP, and now she wants them to care.
The 2+1 roads mostly used to be 1+1 with no middle barrier, I believe. If you wanted to overtake a slower car, you had to time it well so you could use the opposite lane while it was (hopefully) empty of oncoming traffic. Or you'd hope the car in front, and the oncoming one were polite enough to move over to the curb. Some more winding roads had bad visibility, so you could never pass safely.

I take the 2+1 any day.

The newer 2+1 roads have cable barriers in the middle, so even a drunk or sleeping oncoming driver won't kill you. They just total their own car.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable_barrier

Source: Being Swedish.
Now now, you mught get scolded by an admin!

Nothing quite like a double standard around here. The poster makes a valueless comment, I make a mild joke and the original poster is ignored.

P.S. I laughed at your response :-)
They are. Nodes on the internet should be identified by public key hashes, not IPs. Whoever can respond to a packet with a message, whose signature verifies against the public key that it's destined to, is by definition the recipient.

Servers would have relatively static keys, while client keys could be as ephemeral as wanted. So rather than specify an IP address (location) as destination, you specify the recipient, by encrypting a request with eg. Google's SSL public key, signing it with your public key, and delivering it to something that will route this packet to Google (at whatever IP address that may be), so they can decrypt it, and produce a packet encrypted with your public key.
The Twit network has some very detailed podcasts about Wosign's sliminess:

https://twit.tv/search/wosign

This is a CA death penalty situation as far as I'm concerned.
I think Baudrillard's concept of simulacra was a pretty useful one.
The war on cash being justified for “stopping crime” is the worst excuse
The big difference there is that the gameboy didn't have a way for you to draw on the screen directly. It was a sprite/tile-mapped only system. Same with the NES and SNES, which is why a co-processor such as the SuperFX was needed, to generate the tiles needed for arbitrary graphics. the Megaman X series also used a coprocessor (in 2+ i think?) that allowed them to use compressed data and arbitrary rotation of a sprite by generating the tiles on the fly.
> After many years where the two camps were largely separate, what we're seeing recently are more cases where JIT and AOT compilation get combined in new and interesting ways:

The sad part, in regard to mainstream languages is that mixed AOT/JIT enviroments were already available with Lisp, Eiffel and Oberon systems, for example.

JIT for the programmer workflow, development environment, with AOT for release builds deployed to production.

As Alan Kay says, the industry would have so much to gain if it wasn't a pop culture.
A postmodernist would challenge the very notion that "empirical proof" is required to back up any claim and point to the numerous flawed studies in "soft" areas like sociology, ethnology and economics, where a questionnaire may be all the empiricism required for a published paper.

Personally I'm on the fence. I totally believe human behaviour is way more complicated than can be reflected by questionnaires and simple rigged observational studies, but there is a point where we absolutely can measure something. The efficacy of medicine, subatomical particles in accelerators or human effect on global warming – those are measurable.

The point where something goes from empirically possible to measure, to impossible, is hard to find. But I do think it exists.
I love Postgres, but lack of parallel query processing (same query leveraging multiple threads) has been a deal-breaker for some projects. Thankfully, Postgres is finally starting to make some progress here.

Also of note, In November MS added a number of previously enterprise-only features to all versions of SQL Server 2016 (Service Pack 1 and later). Examples: In-memory OLTP, ColumnStore indexes, are available even in the free Express edition now. Native Postgres, to my knowledge, doesn't have comparables for these yet.

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/sqlreleaseservices/sql-serv...
Information and data are entirely about the intent of them. The same number can mean a movie file or a math equation in different interpretations, yet still have the same physical representation.

The difference between passwords, DRM, and proprietary software is then intent. They all serve the same function - secrecy - but for different purposes. The secret password is meant to provide security to the holder in regards to the information they hold. Proprietary software and DRM are meant to provide secrecy to the rights holder in regards to software other people hold.
As I understand it, you could sum it up as: categorizations and abstractions are primarily instruments of power and control, rather than tools to further understanding. The true purpose of categories or classifications is to place people or concepts outside of them, and thus to denigrate and dominate them. Categories or labels have no "real" meaning except to serve this malign purpose.

Part of the reason why these people originally wrote in such a strange way was because they wanted to try and write without applying the traditional categories and modes of thought we've all been raised with.

Disclaimer: I'm not qualified to tell you this and you shouldn't listen to me. I'd welcome correction from someone who actually knows what they're talking about.
Even if you are using python, R or java you are still best off linking to matrix subroutines in fortran if you want to solve or diagonalize, get eigenvalues and such. This is not just about raw performance but also correctness, ecology of roundoff errors, etc.
I remember playing that in high school! That's really impressive use of the tech, and was staggeringly impressive to me at the time. Learning z80 assembly on the TI series got me into programming at an early age.

It's worth pointing out that the TI-83(+) contains a proper z80, running at 6MHz, with full support for the z80's extended instruction set and 16-bit arithmetic functions, which certainly helped this game out quite a bit. The Gameboy itself is somewhat underpowered in comparison; its Sharp80 processor is considerably stripped down, lacks most of the extended instruction set, and runs at a slower 4MHz. Given these limitations, I'm (a) staggeringly impressed to see Wolfenstein running on the thing in any capacity, and also (b) totally understand why the coprocessor is necessary to make it work, especially at that buttery smooth framerate. There's no hardware graphics scaling for one, all tech demos I've seen that do scaling appear to be doing so entirely in software and using hblank trickery to speed things up a bit. Doing a raytracer without hardware scaling for the texture lookups (or any ability to rewrite VRAM mid-scanline for that matter) would be pretty tough.

It's also curious to point out that this probably wouldn't be possible on the Black and White Gameboy (Pocket); from his frame disassembly, he's using the arbitrary DMA copy hardware exclusive to the Gameboy Color, and I don't think a straight sharp80 copy routine would be able to complete all 120 tiles during a single vblank and still have any room to do much of anything else.

I'm presently working on a Gameboy Emulator in Lua, and it seems like this is another esoteric cartridge I'll have a ton of trouble supporting. An entire additional CPU inside the cart! What sorcery :)

http://bgb.bircd.org/pandocs.htm#gameboytechnicaldata
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TI-83_series#Technical_specifi...
What would you have called it a few years ago before the pages concept started and it was just pages of people? A community?
> If you have a combined hash that is XYZ = weak_hash(m) XOR strong_hash(m), then you still have a birthday collision attack available. Just keep permutating the message in various ways, and in 2^(hash length / 2) operations you have two identical hashes with different inputs.

You understand what "good enough" means, right? Brute force is irrelevant if your hashes are long enough (e.g. say, 256 bits). Again, like the other guy, you're confused: we're trying to guard against broken hashes, not brute force attacks. Brute force attacks are trivial to guard against just by changing the length.

> Edit: yes, this isn't new, but it is strictly weaker than to append the two hashes. It increases the difficulty as you have two hard targets you must hit with the same input, vs one target, which may even be weakened.

I thought I already explained this, but I'll explain it again.
For a brute force attack, sure, it's weaker. But like I said, that's already trivial to guard against already, so that's irrelevant.
For a broken hash, it's MUCH STRONGER, since in the concatenation case, both hashes can leak information about the input (meaning breaking one can help break the other), whereas in this case it's the opposite: the adversary won't get any information about the input unless he breaks both hashes simultaneously.

You're thinking about the problem wrong.

> You also forgot timing attacks and other sidechannels in layered encryption.

Somebody already mentioned this in another comment chain. I initially thought of it but then forgot it, yeah. But it's just something to watch out for, not an argument for not doing it in the first place. It's also trivial to guard against if you apply a standard layer first (which doesn't preclude applying another standard one last, and putting your own layer in between).
Ok so what I'm reading is that:

1) you can get EFI to load grub but
2) actually loading the live system image isn't working

So given those assumptions my next question is:

Is the kernel and initramfs loading? If you're not sure try:

* holding shift to display the grub boot menu on power up

* hitting 'e' to edit the default boot menu

* removing 'splash' from the kernel command line so you can observe boot messages

* continue booting by hitting ctrl+x

See if you can glean some more info from that
Wolfenstein in still under copyright. This project would not be lost because of extended copyright law.
How well does this scale? Let's say I have 500MB of JSON files from restaurant info and user reviews.
IP addresses have nothing to do with identification. As the name implies, they're for addressing.
Odd that wikipedia itself isn't in the list
But if you try it on ghci you will see that it breaks. (ghc 8.0.1). So it dependes on how you "interpret" the code. `ghc -O` is sophisticated enough to make the right decisions when compiling your code. You probably don't want a space leak, so it doesn't generate one.

GHC will have more trouble making the right choice in more involved computations. It will revert to "just do what the coder says".

Consider this C code for example:

unsigned int sum = 0;
const unsigned int n = 1000;
for(int i = 0; i<n; i++) {
sum += 0;
}

If you look at it, you can tell this is O(1) in space for any valid `n`. A spohisticated enough compiler may replace it by

unsigned int sum = 0;

and be done with it. But even an unsophisticated(but correct) compiler will produce O(1) space wise code.

EDIT: format

EDIT: What I was trying to say in my original comment is that, in haskell, space leaks my appear even in the most innocent looking code. And that it may require a bit of experience to identify and avoid them.
We are not talking about the same thing here.

Your graph starts at July 1994, when the Brazilian currency changed into the Real. The central government did try to keep a stable exchange rate with the US dollar as you said, and that lasted until the late 90s, when they were forced to let the exchange rate float due to the asian financial crisis.

But I was talking about the Unidade Real de Valor (URV), which as a temporary meta currency introduced during the Plano Real. In 1993 the currency used everyday on the streets was still the old Cruzeiro Real but all prices and contracts were valued in URV, which was pegged to the US dollar. Every day the government released a table with the conversion rate from Cruzeiro Real to URV.

In 1994 they finally converted the URV into an actual currency, which is why that graph you posted starts at 1.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unidade_real_de_valor
That's an interesting thought, especially with the addendum of the no-cloning theorem.

This fits with a Hofstadter-like perspective that consciousness is about "strange loops", where we somehow repeatedly evaluate simplified models of the world including yourself. Doing such repeated evaluations requires (at least partial) "cloning" of the state of the world outside for the purpose of evaluation, and cloning quantum states is impossible, hence consciousness must be a classical phenomenon.

I like that line of argument.

Note: I wouldn't state it as being unable to perceive things that can be described as complex numbers, but rather complex linear combinations.
I don't see any restrictions in the article. You can edit it and add your info with a reference.
Slightly off topic:

> Maya never panics, and always carrys a towel.

Nice reference!
Network, put yourself out there, let people know you are in business, do good work, and reach out to help others. The leads will eventually come, and some of them will even pan-out!

Work boards only make sense if you're in some developing country where dollars will go further. In a developed country, they're a waste of time.
OMG clicked on https://neil.fraser.name/news/2016/11/21/ (G-train link) and i just can't get past those nails..
Do we have to run certbot every few months to update the certs? Can we set up a cron to do it? Thoughts welcome.
I think the claim was along the lines that if you want to restrict people's freedoms in this country, it's best to get a law passed allowing you to do so. That's oversimplified, of course, as is common in such online discussions, but it makes considerable practical sense.

Your claim seems focused on other categories of wrongdoing.

Now, the two areas could overlap in the future. To date, there's been a lot of illegal surveillance that has gone unpunished, but few people have actually suffered, at least in the US, because the government has been quite restrained about its actual domestic use of the resulting information.

In the future, of course, the government might not show such restraint.

By "future" I mean, for example, the period starting next January 20.
There's a difference between the positive (this thing is like that) and the normative (this should be like that).

Positive questions are subject to empiricism, period. There is no cop out saying a positive statement is not testable. Even prohibitively difficult empirical questions (like in macroeconomics, psychology, biology, etc.) Are subject to testing.

Normative questions can be discussed without empiricism, correct, but you can't use this to infer on how things are. So if you want to say there should be no objective reality,fine. If you say that factual statements are a tool of oppression because there is no objective reality, you stepped into the testable.

Cultural criticism threads this line back and forth in a much too cavalier fashion. If you make a statement about how culture is, you've made a testable statement. There are plenty of ways to test cultural expectations, ask empirical psychologists and sociologists
Not to mention the valet service currently available at overly-popular superchargers.