skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Human beings happen to be tuned for face to face communication. They exchange a relatively low bandwidth but high importance information through facial gestures, eyebrows, eye contact, etcetera. As long as businesses relationships are still happening between such human beings, there will be a value placed on seeing each other's faces.
Good questions and I don't have answers for them as of now, will do a Show HN thread in the coming weeks to get some initial feedbacks.
Yes, it's impossible to disable the disk encryption on iOS. If you don't set a passcode, the disk is still encrypted (but only with a per device key), this prevents recovery of data after an erase.
SNES preservation project on hold due to missing $10,000 package
I write software as a developer. This is how I earn my livelihood.

Four years ago, I determined that while development work might seem to be near the top of the food chain, there will at some point where my work will be replaced by AIs.

This is not so different from how word processors replaced the specialist job of typesetters. Word processors make "good enough" typesetting. You can still find typesetters practicing their craft; the rest of us use word processors and don't even think about it.

At the time, I was learning to put the Buddhist ideals of emptiness and impermanence to practice, and to become more emotionally aware: the _main_ reason I had thought I would never be replaced by an AI writing software has more to do with wishful thinking and attachment than any clear-sighted look at this.

I also made a decision to work on the technologies to accelerate this. Rather than becoming intoxicated by the worry, anxiety, and existential anguish, I decided try to face it. Fears are inherently irrational, but just because they are irrational does not mean it is not what you are experiencing. Fears are not so easily banished by labeling them as irrational. Denial is a form of willful ignorance.

Now, having said all that, whether our tech base will come to that, who can say?

Since then, I have been tracking things like:

Viv - a chat assistant that can write it's own queries

DeepMind's demonstration of creating a Turing-complete machine with deep learning using a memory module.

I watched a tech enthusiast write a chat bot. He does not write software professionally. Talking with him over the months when he tinkers with in his spare time, I realized that in the future, you won't have as many software engineers writing code; you would learn how to _train_ AIs when they become sufficiently accessible to the masses. Skills in coaching, negotiation, and management becomes more important then some of the fundamental skills supporting software engineering. And like typesetting, I can see development work being pushed down the eco-ladder.

It's not surprising to me to see that Wired article about how coding becoming blue collar work. And even that will eventually be pushed down even further.

It's not surprising to me about Google's site-reliability engineering book, branding, and approach. I have done system admin work in the past, and I can already see traditional, manual sysadmin work being replaced.

It's easy to get nihilistic about this, but that isn't my point here either. I know the human potential is incredible, but I think we have to let go of our self-serving narratives first.
I thought this is how Silicon Valley works. The churn|acquisition|procurement is how everyone makes money, at least that is how it looks to an outsider.
One thing that could help is having the ability to pre pay/load credits, so you could have a small discount that way
Most everything you're describing is a part of the new beta hangouts.

If you're a part of a large Google Cloud account, have your IT person contact your gCloud account manager and get on the beta. Actually, if you're a part of a large account and your IT team is risk tolerant.
That is not correct. Some artists sign deals guaranteeing them more than 100% of total face value. Others put tickets on the secondary markets themselves.

If any system does not funnel a huge amount of cash to the artists it would be changed immediately.
> If you don't trust that individual to vouch for others then they are treated differently in your web of trust: set their trust level to "none".

Whom in the world do you actually trust to vouch for everyone else in the world? For me, at least, the answer is 'no-one,' — which is why neither XPKI nor the Web of Trust work for me.

> But it works for many others; it doesn't make it broken.

I suspect that no-one (older than, say, four years old) trusts any other human being or organisation to vouch for every other human being and organisation, and thus that the WoT is in fact broken for everyone — but that most folks just try to ignore that.
Make it so you have to buy at least 2 months then
Cool, but how is it different\better than Steam? Thanks for your suggestion.
When you deploy release-like builds to your QA team (as you should), a tripled-build time is a bit problematic if you're trying to iterate quickly.
Extreme heat threatens desert songbirds
I was watching this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywWBy6J5gz8 and wondering why it was different from this post's animation.
Agree it's great for small meetings (2-3 people). P2P without any server in between, works as good as your connection.

One thing that bugs me though is using it in Chrome in Mac. 50% of the times the microphone doesn't work and I have to kill coreaudiod and restart the session. I came to a point where I do it before I start a meeting just in case.

It's not appear.in problem though, it happens in Hangouts in Chrome as well
Note the Big Red Button.
> they didn't tell anyone until weeks after the fact.

Unfortunately, this is fairly standard practice in the industry. Companies want to make sure the vulnerability is closed, positively identify what was compromised, who was affected, what legal liability exists, and so forth.

Weeks is, frankly, pretty quick to go through that process.

> There's not much more to say -- they are dead.

Huh. Funny, I'm still hosting things there; their prices are competitive, there are no rumors of acquisition or shutdown... Seems quite alive to me.

> They will be hacked in 2017.

And, as I stated originally, I have no reason to think they will be unique in this.
> The centralization of computation is likely not a good thing in the long run.

I agree. It only makes sense if you need special data for statistics, AI training, etc.

In all other cases the classic way of programming on pc and notebook is smarter. If you do everything in the cloud, what if you lose Internet connection? I had that experience several times over the last years.
Top Drinks for Weight Loss
I read the comments here and I'm reminded of a Tweet I read yesterday:

"Next programmer bro who explains his clever travel information security hack has to change his name to Mohamed Hussein Ali and try it at LAX"

https://twitter.com/thegrugq/status/831316334973579264
Other commenters have already explained it to you. Reviewing existing knowledge on popular topics will often save you time and increase the enjoyment of participating.
Just to muddy the waters a bit, you also need to add in familiarity with standard libraries and conventions. To use an example that hopefully a sufficiently large chunk of the readership is at least passingly familiar with, if you're familiar with the Java Spring framework and its conventions then understanding an annotated piece of code is usually fairly trivial. Without that understanding however it's going to be utterly confusing as none of the code would seem to bear any relation to the rest.

Programming is in many ways the act of artfully layering abstractions to concisely express a complicated concept. If you are unfamiliar with, or do not understand some of those abstractions you're obviously not going to fully understand the concept being expressed.

Part of the advantage to a strong type system is that you only need to learn a particular abstraction once. Once you learn how a particular type (or set of inter-related types) functions, anytime you see that type used from then on you immediately understand something about the system its being used in. This is in contrast to a weakly typed system where the only thing you know for sure is how the author encoded his expectation of the system at a given point (this is important, you don't know what the author intended just from the code as the author could have made a mistake). In a weakly typed system it's left as an exercise for the reader to try to divine the expected behavior from clues left in the code. This is of course not even touching on the case when the runtime behavior deviates from the expected behavior in often quite significant fashion.

Looked at from another perspective, strongly typed languages promote modularity and re-use of concepts, while weakly typed ones tend to favor explicit and single use concepts. That is, the abstractions in the strongly typed system are implicit, but often re-used across many code bases, while the abstractions in the weakly typed language will tend to be explicit and either re-used less often, or else customized for a particular use case to the extent that it's unsafe to make assumptions about the expected behavior of the abstraction.
yup, I naturally grabbed it to go back and forth.
> Symple is Venmo for business payments.

This seems a close enough industry as Simple to be confusing: https://www.simple.com/
They asked him to provide the password, they didn't ask him to produce the contents of his property.

> They eventually returned and said they’d release him if he told them the password to unlock his phone.

How have I hindered official action or lied to a federal agent by providing one of my passwords?
>I have never yet seen a system that cannot be beat by scalpers, including paperless ticketing, and I find that most venues and artists want to maximize profits and, more importantly, minimize risk anyway.

What about charging more, so there is less (or zero) spread between what scalpers can charge vs. the official price (or whatever they call it)?
What does commute mean in this context? I'm getting the impression that it means that the original line of code that the patch references and is going to change is where the patch expects it to be.
The URL has tracking data on the end, and likely that's why it wasn't recognised as a duplicate.
My "only half joking" premonition is that in a few years you're going to need a permit to travel outside the US. And I don't mean a passport. I mean an application that is either approved or denied each time you want to go somewhere. And if you dont stick to the approved itinerary (or you dont come back), feds come bring you back and charge you as a felon.

Each one of these border issues (phone passwords, checkpoints inside the US, travel bans) increases the total law enforcement "resistance" we face when traveling internationally. As the resistance increases, at what point does it become an "open circuit" ?
This looks like a really great library for simplifying API interactions.

I'm curious though if there's any way to indicate that a component depends on more than one end point. Would you just wrap it in multiple `connectRequest` wrappers?
The caveat here is that with flux/redux, I'd argue "make as few components as reasonably possible interact with redux" is a best practice. If "things popping out of nowhere" is a problem, you probably have too many components listening on your stores.
So what did the ACLU say when you contacted them? I'm curious how it turned out.
I think the point is that you may not be expecting the P tag to auto close, in the case of things like Address.
> Then if you’re asked to hand it over, there won’t be any personal data on your phone

That would probably look even more suspicious.
If words are hateful they must be so with adequate context.
Australia does have some outrageous laws, so I suppose they want you not to be destroying the things that are governed by those laws on your phone. But I'd rather take the fine than have them find out, if I had such things.
That is probably the most free-market way to solve the problem: just increase supply until you can sell to everybody who wants to buy.
What IP, besides the domain name? Yours redirects to some game. I don't think you have a brand to protect.
> I used to have a device with buttons that fit into my pocket that was able to locally hold my entire music library. I could control the device through my pocket without needing to look at it or hold it in my hand

Companies still make standalone MP3 players that use dropped-in files and dedicated button controls. In fact, they're cheaper and more available than ever. https://www.amazon.com/Sandisk-8GB-Clip-Player-Black/dp/B00V...

> How hard is it to examine iOS or Android at the individual file level? How hard did it used to be?

It's easier than it used to be, as iCloud on iOS effectively added a shared file system that didn't originally exist.
My bank did that with a JavaScript number pad. They went back to a standard password field with the new design of the site a couple of years ago. That made me feel less safe because I understood why the were complicating the input.

Another strategy I've seen is to ask some random digits of a longer PIN, with a mask to fill out.
If the UX is so bad that people can't make it work and have to resort to putting someone's laptop at one end of the conference table instead of using the conference room AV, then it doesn't matter how good the other three quarters of your system is.
The Round Up 45
There's one thing that really annoys me about EBS volumes.

You can't attach existing (unattached) persistent volumes to an instance at instance creation time.

So for instance, I can't have a machine boot and expect to see ebs vol-xyz on device /dev/xvdg at boot. I have to boot the instance, use the API to attach it and then have my instance mount it.
I don't think there's any reasonable arguments left to defend Linode with.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10845278

There's a clear, undeniable pattern of incompetence here.

I also suggest reading this glassdoor review: https://imgur.com/sJd56AT

And this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11136743
A few points, as a sometime Wikipedian.

1. Yes, Wikipedia has its challenges, there are flaws in the underlying assumptions of its originators, and it's not perfect. But it is better, in general, than any other resource to date, and is widely transparent to boot.

2. Conflicts over editorial content are nothing new, nor are they distinct to open collaborative projects. A few months back I turned up an instance from 1874, in which the British publishers, and American printers, of Chamber's Encyclopaedia had significant differences of opinion on a number of topics, including on the topics of free trade, (economic) protection, slavery, and biographical details of Elizabeth I and heirs. It's a rare in sight to the process.

https://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/4xe2k1/chamber...

Another set of conflicts of which I'm recently aware concern Joseph Needham, biochemist and sinologist, whose research and writing were emperiled by his naive participation in what turned out to be a Chinese- and Soviet-led propaganda campaign. Documented in Simon Winchester's The Man who Loved China.

3. I've authored or contributed to a number of Wikipedia articles myself. In some cases, particularly in noting the blatant disinformation campaigns of Koch Industries and Libertarian partisans in particular, especially on global climate change, I've been rather frustrated. I've originated a couple of articles. One, on the present NPR president Jarl Mohn, was slated for deletion on numerous grounds when I first submitted it. The result of working with other more experienced editors was a substantially improved and strengthened article which still stands. I'd created the article after being surprised to find it didn't exist at all.

Yes, camping out on and watching articles may be useful to avoid more serious disruption, particularly on contentious topics. And Wikipedia does have a problem, as does all media, on ideologically-tainted topics. No, the truth doesn't always win out.

But it does pretty well, all told.
Opinions and arseholes, eh.

To build on the point made by the author - while it can be a useful label to describe what appeals to a majority of people within a certain group, there is ultimately no such thing as good art and consequently no such thing as a critic getting it right.

We could of course try to define "a critic getting it right" as predicting and matching the majority opinion within a certain culture/time period, which I suppose the article does and it's certainly a valid approach, but then we come dangerously close to implying that that is equivalent to recognizing the intrinsic value of some work.

As astutely observed in the quote by Terry Eagleton, "value" is by its very definition a subjective and transitive term, completely meaningless without context.

Critics (so I guess pretty much everyone, this being the internet) tend to shine all light on the subject of their criticism, while themselves trying to stay in the shadows, as if keeping their personal context out of it somehow makes their opinion more objective. I'd argue that the only people this doesn't do a disservice to, are people eager to find a solid, reliable opinion they can subscribe to in order to join in the pretense of knowing what is good art and what isn't.

A more honest reader turning to critiques to help answer the question "What is valuable to me?" in an infinite sea of content is much better served by a critic openly exposing their biases, their personal framework and context, clearly showing where they are coming from and how it flows into the image they paint of their subject. When it comes to talking art, any attempt at objectivity is doomed to fail, so I say do away with it altogether.

Not only does this make it easier for a reader to better place potentially interesting works within his context by comparing it with the critic's, it would also provide more value to the authors/artists themselves. It's okay being disliked by people you're not trying to reach.

The other thing that really gets me is the disrespect of suggesting something is so bad it shouldn't have been created in the first place.

It takes passion and courage to put a personal creation out there. It takes a great and exhausting amount of bad work to finally create something good, as anyone who's ever build anything worthwhile can confirm. All it takes to take a dump on it and feel powerful in the act is an internet connection.

Then again, maybe destructive criticism creates a necessary hostile environment, testing an author's/artist's resolve and allowing truly great art to emerge, similar to how children need to be exposed to germs in order to develop healthy immune systems.

I do not like critics.
On most recent phones, the system is encrypted by default and a factory reset erases the keys, which does make it unrecoverable (unless the key is elsewhere, which I haven't heard of).
“In IT we have a saying; stay away from the Three Os: Orientals, Old People, and Ovaries,” he allegedly replied.
Very nice!

And the documentation looks pretty good.

Congrats for the good job!
> This is huge, IMO. The "low-level" abstractions of files and folders are good, because that's the level software operates on. All those attempts at abstracting files away only lead to your system actually lying to you about how the data is structured, and this can be confusing to people because different software now tells different lies, and they don't add up to a coherent whole.

I honestly feel that the only reason this happens is so that business-people can insert more "value-add" into the equation
The replies to your comment took a turn to whether we will need programmers or we won't need programmers in the future, let me take it in a different direction.

I think what he's explaining is that for most (maybe all? no empirical evidence to back this up) programming and computer software in general is a means to solving a problem.

Operating Systems solve the problem of needing a foundation in which to develop higher-level tools that enable computing. Whether the higher-level problems are complex astrophysics calculations or hailing a ride, as you travel down the stack, each piece of software is solving some problem domain.

Point of this sentence is to say, as you move forward in your career, you (usually?) develop knowledge of an industry, a customer base, a constituency or some other problem domain in which you combine your skill in engineering with your knowledge of the domain.

If you don't do this, and you say "I can do anything but I have no special knowledge of any problem" then it's more likely a person with both problem-specific knowledge and engineering knowledge will be given the job.

However, there are so many problem domains in the world of computing, it's very easy to pick one or two that interest you personally.
Thank you for posting such a long explanation. It's very valuable to both realize the power of open source (by indirect means of the fear it created) and how hard it is to sell it when it has to fight against an up hill opponent... I am not surprised by these facts but I'm quite surprised by the power of the forces at play. Thanks again !
We moved >1K$ hosting per month from them to StormOnDemand because of the lack of transparency on security issues, particularly the PagerDuty incident.

This was heartbreaking because Linode's value (performance, reliability, support, price) is almost impossible to match if your requirements fit their VM configurations.

But in the end, we did not want to risk another security or DDoS fiasco. We estimated that the risk was high that they would be targeted again, we could not believe their promises to get better at face value considering previous transparency issues, and we did not want to tell our customers that a company that had experienced security issues for the past three years had suffered from another attack[1].

They seem to have invested quite a lot in their networking infrastructure (kudos!), but I believe they still use their old coldfusion applications.

[1] Non-technical customers often ask us why we are not hosting on Amazon because they heard it's where serious companies host their servers (!). We used to explain why Linode was a more cost-effective choice, but Linode was not a nice name to google in early 2016.
It is bizarre that we don't have any consumer protection law around requiring an option for online cancellation for subscriptions that offer online purchases.

edit: spelling ;-)
Bringing Learning to Rank to Elasticsearch
Tell me more about this Silicon Valley place where everything is magically free?
Convenient option on Cyanogenmod. Been using it for about 2 years and it's surprisingly easy to get used-to.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_citogenesis_...

Note that of course, like everything on Wikipedia this is probably neither complete nor necessarily accurate.
Walky: New video communications and presence app
Show HN: A web directory for us to share and rate websites among each other
I agree with the sentiment, but I think you meant to use "bizarre".
That reminds me of that other episode in which Bill Gates sends an email to some Microsoft people about his failure to find information and run some program in his Windows machine, saying that everything was horribly difficult and obscure.
I'd tend to expect the same (and agree that "not an expert" is vague), but I'm actually a bit more curious about the proposal that it's a normal distribution. Why would it be? If I had to guess, I might go for something downward-skewed, or maybe even some kind of typically bimodal thing.