skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They will not be laid off in such numbers because there is little economic incentive to do so. Machines cost a lot of money. And they require maintenance over time. You have to realize how little these workers make. Paying US rent full time a person could barely afford to feed and shelter themselves on the money these workers make.

We are talking 50 cents a bucket. Pennies per item. There is not a lot of room for automation to undercut.

Workers in decision making and diagnosis type roles cost significantly more and mostly only require software(not hardware) to replace. Think about how much a doctor gets paid per cancer diagnosis? Or per cancer treatment prescribed?
Agreed this article is lacking a real thread.

Re spreadsheets, I am one of those dreaded 'advanced Excel' people and some of the comments i hear about spreadsheet limitations are a bit like saying 'this chisel is a rubbish hammer'. Our main use is to take small amounts of data from our ERP and browse/sum/subtotal it in some way for adhoc analysis or sharing, or keep the record of some minor detail over time. I have seen thousands of lower skilled users use spreadsheets in this way and there is no better tool. Indeed accountants often run much more complex stuff, but tend to be very dilligent with their inputs and versioning and have little trouble. As soon as you have concurrent users a spreadsheet becomes a bad database substitute.
Does the paper have to be peer-reviewed? The only arxiv reference on that wikipedia page is the same paper this thread is about.
A metre of snow falls in the Sahara desert
Agreed, number of bases gives little information about the complexity of an organism. Genes is a better metric.
Apps like Lotus and Access get a bad rap that is unjustly deserved. People did a lot of amazing things with those applications.

The presence of zombie Notes apps that spew out of control is more a statement about IT than the platform. My mom, not a power user, was a public health nurse. She put together with a sophomore intern what grew into a good sized disease outbreak tracker after IT failed to deliver. All in Notes.

The IT idiots discovered it and got all puffy. They siphoned off funding and stuck its "enterprise" replacement into some portfolio process. 5 years later and $5-6M spent they launched a replacement that didn't quite do what it needed to do. She retired almost 10 years ago, and that little app still lives for a few use cases.
re the council people sentences: I don't understand the problem. they're ill-defined sentences. we use heuristics to parse them but those heuristics can fail (the council denied the demonstrators permit because they feared violence... and the council was obliging). just teach the computer the heuristics like we learn them.
if they sell a fast lane to netflix, any savings you might get, you then pay for because netflix costs more.

nobody wins here except the people with the more creative sales team.
I remind Jobs saying 'even half done your thing is so revolutionary you owe the people to sell' or close.

Improv is way above the pack... so much it's not a good thing.
>Make no mistake: privacy, liberty, and accountability are not partisan issues.

I don't think they believe that. Or at least they didn't whine so much about Obama, who was horrible for digital privacy. And Hillary would've continued that legacy, but of course they didn't whine about that either.
Yep. Nate also had Bernie at 1% for Dem MI primary.
I must admit I read HN quite a lot :/

I found out about GitLab via Hacker News and the company got started after the kind reaction to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4428278
> The implicit assumption here is that a supplier has some sort of benevolent desire.

The assumption is not a bad one in general, and it doesn't depend on benevolence (if anything, most people's cartoonish view of corporations occasionally involves them hurting their bottom line to screw the consumer). It depends on a somewhat competitive market; as such, it's not a particularly valid assumption for the telecom market.
And it's an international market. Pickers in America are competing against the cost of labor in developing nations.
Advertising is lucrative as hell right now, and is propped up by it's true market value being hazy (FWIW, I think advertising is probably overvalued right now). Neocities would make a lot of money if we put advertising on the sites, but of course, that would also destroy the site, just like it did with GeoCities.

The big cost at most social network startups is labor. Infrastructure expenses are somewhere down there with the free bacon budget and the open bar tab at OSCON (I'm joking, but you get the idea).
I'm with you, I think it's not going to work, but these are the kinds of arguments people make. In some ways it's a question of whose freedom are you defending? The person who put the cable in ground or the person that cable goes to. Both want complete freedom to use that cable as they see fit, but those freedoms can be in tension. How do you choose?

This is one of the issues with "freedom" based arguments, in anything but a trivial system freedoms collide and somebody has to make a call. Ajit Pai seems to lean toward the cable-layer. I lean toward the cable-user. I think he's wrong, but I'm not willing to question his motives. I think he also wants the best for all, and disagrees that putting the consumer first works out better in the long run.
Apple sues Qualcomm over unfair licensing terms
Also search that only uses email titles is still at least 70% as useful as full title+body search. So I wouldn't count this as such a terrible non-feature of e2e encrypted email.
How far does one push that, though? Shouldn't a secure mode go pretty far into the secure side of the security/usability balance?

Honestly, would a 'recipient key changed; resend message?' be the worst prompt in the world?
If the particular blur in question has a unique characteristic, you should push for it, sure.
Yes but the point is when would anyone choose to not hire a high performing person just because their culture was different? That seems crazy given the difficulty of finding great people.
Time to break out the HDL then...

http://www.braketlogic.com/
Amazon Virtual Dash Buttons
Submit patch by email to create MR is a feature I think we're open to if people indicate they would actually use it. I have the feeling that if we would that the kernel maintainers still wouldn't use it. But I'll gladly be proven wrong.
It is plausible that she had some input to the paper beyond requesting the work, and artistic feedback. But it's definitely more likely that she didn't.
You can read a lot about it on their blog, specifically this post:

http://blog.elementary.io/post/153360513026/busting-major-my...
We've updated the title from “Trello only generates $4m in revenue, Atlassian earnings report indicates”, which breaks the submission guidelines by editorializing.
I was thinking something more versatile that could have many different uses, but that's cool none-the-less.
It fits into industry-standard deployment systems, yes, but not without sacrificing some inherent benefits of the Erlang platform. In particular, hot upgrades and downgrades are no longer there, as Docker images try pretty hard to be immutable. Of course there are also the effects of flushing all server-local cache and/or memoization upon deploys too. Probably a bunch of other stuff I can't think of now also.

So far I've preferred to stick to the Erlang way of doing things because it let me be laziest and it hasn't failed me, but someday I would like to see tools that allow the Erlang way and the e.g., K8s way to work together.
Announcing etcd 3.1
I could see them passing "insider consumer info" on black markets just like they pass insider information. How handy would it be for a life insurance company to know which of its customers is googling for "chest pain" or "$CANCER_TYPE symptoms". A car insurance company would love to know which drivers go to bars on saturday night, or which ones make it from point A to point B in suspiciously low amounts of time.

Wall street could creep into this by saying to either industry: "let our guys crunch the numbers and let us make book on what these rates should be...because market efficiency". It'll seem like a great idea at first, the data will be "anonymized" (except for when it's not, like when that guy pays a $5k to an analyst at the insurance company for the table mapping "anonymized" customer idns to ssns.

Suddenly hedge funds get really good at guessing which pools should be invested in, or which drivers should be packaged into the high-risk tier. A few years later there's a moderate scandal, a fine is levied equal to ~5% of the illicit gains made, meanwhile the funds have moved on to perpetuate their next round of fraud.
Read the "Persistence" chapter: http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~remzi/OSTEP/
> if they sell a fast lane to netflix, any savings you might get, you then pay for because netflix costs more.

Well, some would argue that those who don't use Netflix pay less subsidized by Netflix. But that's only true if they are selling to Netflix as a monopoly with pricing power (otherwise, competition would drive this down to leave no excess to subsidize anything but the cost of providing the fast lane), which is unlikely unless they are also selling to consumer as such a monopoly, in which case whole they could use the surplus Netflix payment to subsidize lower prices for non-Netflix users, their ore likely to just use the monopoly rents on both sides to increase corporate profits.
I work for a company which does pursue that market (we have everything from the sole freelancer to companies with thousands of workers), and I disagree.

Regarding your example, most of our clients with 2-5 users do ask us to set up different permissions. In fact, I'd say that worrying about that is much more common in small companies, where the manager is often the owner and therefore often hates losing control of the processes.

In terms of database items, the correlation does tend to hold, but the one thing about SMBs is that they vary a lot. If you ignore all those edge cases, you end up targeting just a small subset of the whole market.

And the last point is crucial. You write about the "needs of big companies" and "needs of small companies", but in general there's no such thing. Each company, large or small, has its own needs, and a cookie-cutter solution - even if generally targeted to "small companies" - is simply insufficient for many. But while a large company can pay well to accommodate its idiosyncrasies, a small company can't, because those needs don't shrink proportionally to the budget.

But I wouldn't say the market isn't being served, and the current bet on SaaS is a clear bet on SMBs, which often can't afford to pay for the purchase and maintenance of servers and the sysadmins to manage them.
You know, I've always liked your writing a whole lot. However your behavior in reaction to this story seems bizarre to me.

I see all these people come in defense of WhatsApp using bizarre statistics about domestic violence (big correlation with hacking?). Then someone (tptacek?) was going around saying not a single crypto expert disagrees with their consensus (trucking all over the original source, Tobias Boelter). Then there are all these jokey "Is WhatsApp Backdoored Yet?" expressions. It's a frenzy.

There seem to be a whole bunch of people who take The Guardian article as "omg, after this article, people will drop WhatsApp and use something like Messenger instead!". Which, sure enough, maybe a common scenario, and worse. However, the article was obviously meant to push people outside of Facebook gardens, and into a more secure alternative. It's supposed to make you go "WhatsApp is unsafe, I will use Signal instead". One of those "trade-offs" you're talking about in the first place, just like the security vs. purity one. In this case, erring on the side of activism.

As a sideline observer with very little crypto knowledge, I think Boelter presented an interesting case, while the anti-Guardian crowd reacted like crazy people, pulling fire alarms, hurling insults, and Streisand-effect-ing the story into a huge controversy.

I mean, the EFF article itself, in defense of WhatsApp and against The Guardian, says:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/01/google-launches-key-tr...

> If you are a high-risk user whose safety might be compromised by a single revealed message, you may want to consider alternative applications. As we mention in our Surveillance Self-Defense guides for Android and iOS, we don't currently recommend WhatsApp for secure communications.

It goes on to qualify this statement by saying that's a rare threat model. However, that right there, is enough to justify the original piece. The idea, I think, is that everyone should be on something like Signal, so that merely using Signal wouldn't be taken as a reason for suspicion. If you disagree, your argument could surely be better than jokes about white text.

Just my two cents as a nobody.
ZeroVM: Virtualization based on Chrome's NaCl
Without knowing more, not particularly sympathetic to either party involved here, (lawyers are good at drafting statements about how hard done by their companies are over patents infringement and royalties/damages), but qcom have done well out of e.g. cdma patents http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB112056555346377303
> But don't expect Elixir to fit into 2015-class deployment systems just yet.

With what you've described -- a package manager that works -- it would seem that it fits pretty well. By 2015-class I'm thinking those systems, like buildpacks, that leverage dependency metadata to build a deployable tarball. What are the parts that seem missing to you?
>But it's definitely more likely that she didn't.

Why is it "definitely more likely"?
This is nonsense. The EFF has been extremely critical of the Obama administration - especially in the wake of the Snowden revelations.
> > Spam checking on content isn't possible

> This is probably your best point. It's definitely harder to do well

I think it's possible, just slower and more complex (like search) - and would have to occur upon unlocking your inbox.
If you are interested in working in NLP, feel free to reach out to Kapiche. The website, Twitter or hello at kapiche dot com are all good options.
You could have an opt-in so people could participate in "neighbourhood celebrations" and all show a ribbon for a particular event, say, TimBL's birthday or something, like Google Doodles.

Either way, this is bloody awesome, good luck with it all.
Charged a close friend $3,000 for a few days worth of work?
Same, lurker but I'm in NH if you make it this far north. The thing with NH is the Liquor is controlled by the State Liquor stores, so I'm not sure how that would work.
> The completely pointless escalation forced him to compromise all of his users

How has he compromised all of his users? The service was shut down and emails kept encrypted. Am I missing something?
We also have a "mentions-of-gitlab" channel in our chat that will alert us of any mentions of GitLab on any major place in the internet.
I of course prefer either LFE or Erlang, they are much simpler, Elixir has a bit too much fluff for my liking.
Whatever did or didn't happen in the past, I for one am pleased to see another organisation attempting to make email more secure. Especially when governments have gone surveillance crazy. Goodluck Lavabit
MMDB−The Mathematical Movie Database
Donald Trump Just Replaced the White House Climate Website With… This
There are other languages, just read the reference.
Why do people on HN love to mention how they haven't heard of someone conventionally famous?
Yeah, that and an alternative email is required. Too much personally identifying information is needed for a so-called privacy oriented service.

I understand an additional email is needed right now since it's basically a pre-order, but I would hope that once fully launched this requirement would be removed at least.
I don't think it's common to build and deploy from your laptop once you hit a certain team size -- with builds going through Jenkins &al. -- but maybe this really does a make difference for smaller teams.
That's actually the current state of affairs. Firefox, and Firefox-related products, hang out under the Firefox umbrella brand. Mozilla's policy, outreach, community, and education initiatives -- remember, Mozilla is a non-profit -- use the Mozilla brand.

Mozilla hasn't been a product brand for a long time.
If you reread my post, I said those types of business systems were sufficiently served by off the shelf software.
The premise of your post implies that Pai and those who subscribe to his policy stances are somehow malicious in nature. But what you're missing is that they could simply be idiots.

Just like someone who believes in fantastical theories, like the Earth is flat. We obviously know the theory he believes in is irrational, but he could very well be a good person. He just happens to be a moron.
> That's true, but the same respect-for-others is valuable in the other direction.

Very true! And certainly not all change is bad, and not all new things are worse than their older analogues.

> Consider that there are more ways to "be productive in a group" than e-mail -- there's a reason many of us in our work lives have transitioned to using Github or similar web-based repo-collaboration tools, rather than e-mail.

True enough, but I wonder how much of that is not because they are fundamentally better but because email has gotten popular. I can't easily review source code via email because I have to wade through meeting invites, corporate communications and recruiter spam.

Honestly, though, GitHub doesn't really give me a whole lot, other than centralised issue tracking and a data store. I never use its git UI; I just use Magit locally. I've actually been thinking about how a team could use commands to manipulate text files in a git repo to manage history for that repo — then one would never need to leave one's editor to manage issues. With a central file server open to users, merges and PRs could just be operations on the repo itself.

My idea's not fully fleshed out, but I think it'd be awesome, and more productive that using GitHub via a web browser.
7 Learnings: Building Your First, Great Sales Development (SDR) Team
> "sequenced a genome" — what does that mean, exactly?

It means we got the sequence of As, Cs, Gs and Ts; but in practice, we don't even achieve that.

The human genome has approximately 3 billion nucleotides in 23 chromosomes. So you would think a "sequenced genome" is 23 strings over the alphabet {A,C,G,T} with a length of 130 million or so each. However, it is only possible to sequence a few hundred nucleotides at a time. So you end up with a jigsaw puzzle of tiny pieces, some containing errors, some missing, some exact duplicates of each other. Putting these back together corectly isn't even possible, doing it approximately is still difficult.

So in practice, a sequenced genome is a sequence of medium size strings, arranged in the mostly correct order, with many small and a few large gaps, so they form a good chunk of the long strings that would really be a genome. And even if all of that was completely correct, we still wouldn't know what most of these nucleotides mean.

The first "draft" of a genome is usually even worse. If you simply dump DNA fragments from a mammal onto a modern day sequencer (Illumina HiSeq), and run software to kind-of solve the jigsaw puzzle, you end up with a million pieces, each about 2000 nucleotides in length, in no particular order. Since most genes by far are longer than that, I'd say it's fraudulent to call something like that a genome, but it's being done all the time.

> Do we ever sample more than one member of a species?

Yes, but not in the same way. Instead of (approximately) solving the impossible jigsaw puzzle again (that's called de-novo assembly), we tend to compare the puzzle pieces from a new individual against the big picture we got from the first genome (that's called mapping). This way, we can see small differences (single substitutitions, small insertions and deletions), which is most of the variation present in a species. What we can't see is large scale variation, like duplicated genes, or rearrangements of large pieces of the genome, or insertions of retroviruses. We know these exist, it's just more expensive to look for them. (All of this changing as sequencing is becoming cheaper.)

Multiple individuals of a species get sequenced when there is interest. Probably tens of thousands of humans have been sequenced by now. For model organisms, the number is much lower. For pathogens, where everything is much easier anyway, the number could easily be higher.
It's never seem that way to me [1].

[1] https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Aeff.org%2...
5 Cool Things Canonical Does with Go
But the thing is, it's not labor saving. It's labor displacing. That's not to say we shouldn't try to automate this kind of thing; as you said, it's terrible work. But it's still work that someone depends on to be able to support themselves and their families. And usually, with this kind of thing, there isn't much thought put into how to help those who are displaced by increased automation. Those people still need to be able to support their families.
Soli: ubiquitous gesture sensing with millimeter wave radar (2016)[pdf]
I look at #3 and ask "What are x, y, and z? How did they get into this scope?"
That was very well written and very informative. Thank you!
OoCities – Geocities Archive
Not true. Majority of bacterial cells have far less genes than 15,000.
Professional hacker for hire
if you need the service of a professional hacker for hire for any form of hacking exploits of any such you should reach out to gontarbradford@gmail.com
Part-time university lecturer here. If I could ban phones from my classes, I would. They are distracting, rude and affect concentration like you would expect. I introduced my students to pomodoros for practical work (phones upside-down, on silent, and only music without singing allowed on headphones) and the results were fabulous. This was not a scientific study, but results are result.
Duh. She's a girl and everyone knows girls can't program. </sarcasm>
I wonder how much of a difference using a separate destination buffer would make. Apart from some memory/cache/invalidation/magic thing that I'm not certain might occur, it would allow one to use the extended instructions used for scanning.
So they're using a HSM to protect the SSL key this time. Makes me wonder how many HSMs out there are already backdoored.
That's what the first chart in the article showing twitter conversations throughout all of 2016 regarding the election aims to prove.
>> Defensive programming is one thing, but sometimes your RAM stick gets hit by a cosmic ray. Shit happens; have a plan.

This is sort of my big reason for constantly wanting to sit down with erlang/otp/beam. No matter how good your Ada is sometimes you want software that can fall over elegantly.
I was going to comment this exact article earlier but I thought I would just seem like some vocal minority. I'm glad you linked this.
Can somebody explain to me what the reclassification of internet from "information services" to "common carrier" accomplished (besides cellphone companies buying consumer satellite tv companies)?