skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Amber Rudd is the UK's Home Secretary not just any minister.

"We need to make sure that our intelligence services have the ability to get into situations like encrypted Whatsapp."

She has said she is "calling in" technology companies this week to try to "deliver a solution".

Marr asks if they refuse to do that, will you legislate to force them to change? She's not drawn on that.

Interview is here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08l62r7/the-andrew-mar... [from 45:18]

I understood that UK IP Bill already mean that she already has the ability to e.g. demand a backdoored version of Whatsapp be sent to a target device, but that's not covered in the interview.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/11/30/investigatory_power...
Hmm, this definitely brings up an interesting discussion I don't think HN has had before, especially something in a similar vein since Apple+San Bernardino fiasco.

Obviously privacy is something that HN holds very close to its heart. But I'm interested in what do people here have to say about the privacy features are used by terrible people to do terrible things.

And I want to share something that I think is one of the best arguments for privacy, complete privacy. I do agree with this completely: https://moxie.org/blog/we-should-all-have-something-to-hide/
In the 1970s, an American president had to resign because of some bugs planted.

Now, private conversation is illegal.

I guess it leads to "ownlife".
Ask HN: Any real-world application VueJS application?
Is there any open-source project using VueJS at scale with implementations of:

- CRUD using validation
- Real-time reactivity
- etc.

All available resources tend to be for beginners, and none for advanced users.
Suppose they intercept WhatsApp. The need to react to each suspicious message within the minute, and be perfectly efficient in catching terrorists while avoiding innocents.

Of course they would need to intercept all other communication services, including home-made ones.
How would this work in practice? I'm guessing you're from a reasonably financially comfortable background so you don't have to worry about loss of security. What happens in 10 years time when the market only seeks Tensorflow experts with a PhD in AI and you're relegated to flipping burgers or driving ubers which you can't do anyway because robots and so you rely on basic income and lose all sense of worth and purpose to society...
Possession of The Anarchist Cookbook has been used as evidence against terrorist suspects in Britain, and also as a crime itself, "Possession of terrorist material". In the latter case, the 17 year old's argument was pretty much what you suggest, and he was cleared.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7030096.stm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Anarchist_Cookbook#Legalit...
you can buy 2 MIG-29 or 2x Sukhoi PAK-FA for price of one F-35. just like you can buy 2 AK-47 for one M-16.
Hiring an independent financial adviser was one of the best decisions I've ever made. It's an occasional check-in to support decisions I make around investments with Vanguard and my 401k. Finding an adviser is the hard part, so it's worth talking to a bunch of people so you can find someone that's comfortable with what you want to do.

I got the Wealthfront pitch when I started with my employer, but I feel much better with my current arrangement. Your comment "I have very little choice but to stay put" is never nice to hear in any context, so I hope you can move along from that place.
Built-In Vim Autocomplete
Not sure if it fulfills all of your requirements, but Gitlab[1] is using Vue.js

[1] https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce
Then you might have to shotgun your resume into online applications but don't be disappointed if you get hardly any response, even the best most qualified candidates get frustrated by doing that.
Well, that's easy: you just keep Slack running, but disable its notifications. Then you check your Slack from time to time and respond to all the questions that came since the previous time you checked it. Text messaging is called asynchronous communication for a reason: if someone wants to talk to you synchronously, they call you instead of writing a message.
Stack, Heap, Ownership,No GC in Rust
as usual she has no idea.
This graph is based on influence relation data from the now defunct Freebase, which combined various data sources including Wikipedia. Gephi was used for the graph layout, node sizing and coloring and Sigma.js is used for rendering in the browser.

For the long version, see below article that is linked via the blue info button on top right.
https://exploringdata.github.io/info/programming-languages-i...
I wonder how they are not even busy explaining how this could happen with all that surveillance already in place. I mean no camera jumped down the pole to stop the car...
Yes, this was revealed by the recent agency leaks. Cracking end to end encryption is still extremely difficult (currently impossible?). It's much easier to get root on a target's phone and run a keylogger or break into the app. The messages are still end-end encrypted, but you can sniff them before they're sent and after they're received since they're shown to the user in plaintext.
I strongly believe that tools are ethically neutral.

A hammer, a knife or a government can be pretty useful, or pretty violent - depending on how you use it. This alone does not imply that a hammer, a knife or a government should not exist or be banned.

edit: words
> How do they want to prevent someone from creating his own end-to-end encryption app?

It's basically impossible. One can also use steganography to hide messages in lolcat pictures, or music files. The only way to prevent this, I think, is to start a totalitarian surveillance state where using Free or custom software or hardware is punishable by death. Even then, I'm not sure this will be enough.
I already scanned their repository few times, but they are not using it for complex components.

Also, they do not use it for complex forms with VueX and validation, which is missing in the VueJS community at the moment.

[1] https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/tree/master/app/asse...

[2] https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/tree/master/app/asse...

[3] https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/tree/master/app/asse...
The recent wikileaks documents from the CIA say that yes it is possibly but instead of blanket backdoor they have to be specifically targeted. Whether that's the current state of affairs of not, I dont know.
> It's hard to read. [...] Despite 15 years of programming experience in python, js, C, etc. I feel like I'm going to have to duck my head down to e chastised for not understanding the language. [...] Don't tell me it's because I don't know haskell, that's why I'm not expending the time to learn it, despite the buzz.

To me you're a classic example of the "Blub Paradox" [1]: languages with other features/language constructs than you're used to just seem worthless, complex, without value and foreign to you.

You mention a lot of experience in hardcore imperative/imperative-OOP languages (C, JS, Python). Haskell, Rust, Scala etc. require a bit of a different mindset and thus have an initial steep learning curve.

Compare it to lamda's. Did you see the value in anonymous functions the very first time you were introduced to the concept? Now that you've probably used them for a while, would you be happy to use a programming language without them?

You're not willing to learn the language because you don't understand it, and dismiss the language as having no value because you don't understand it. Is that really fair without at least having a basic understanding of the language?

[1] http://wiki.c2.com/?BlubParadox / http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html . I'm not a fan of the "I Know LISP So I'm Better Than You" tone of the original article, but I do fully agree with the key point that it's hard to evaluate language constructs you're not used to.
Yes, but the back door must be placed on either `end`, so an eavesdropper needs to intercept communication before encryption or after decryption.
In Haskell and PureScript, `fmap` is a method in the `Functor` class, which is defined by

class Functor f where

fmap :: (a -> b) -> f a -> f b

for which instances should satisfy `fmap id = id` (and you get `fmap (g . f) = fmap g . fmap f` for free). If you can find a type for which you can implement `fmap` and satisfy the laws, then you have an instance of `Functor`.

That's the precise and short definition. It assumes the following knowledge:

0. How partial application works and the . works.

1. How Haskell's type-classes work (`Functor`).

2. How Haskell's methods work (`fmap`).

3. How Haskell's higher-kinded types work (the `f`).

So good luck explaining `fmap` in one sentence unless you already know Haskell and understand its type system to a confident degree, which depending on your background can take weeks to months.
The definition of end-to-end encryption is that the decryption keys are only available to the client. Now your question asks the question of where the backdoor should be.

It is feasible. The backdoor should be at a very low level (not say a sandboxed application) from which basically nothing can hide on the device.
The same way you prevent anything.. they make it illegal for people in the UK to make, or use, such products.

Don't think we can "tech" our way out of this.
Problem is that fire would also increase temperature reinforcing the methane release.
It wasn't free immigration even then: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act
In Defence of the Monolith, Part 2
The line of reasoning you have is correct as such, however, I find the analogy to be less than perfect. I do not need to be taught how to setup my computer for Haskell compilation or how to add numbers in Haskell to understand what is a monad.
How do they want to prevent someone from creating his own end-to-end encryption app?

That's not an issue. Writing solid encryption software is very difficult on its own. You will hear "do not roll your own crypto" all the time from security experts. We don't live in a James Bond universe and it's beyond the reach of terrorist organisations.
Please don't give Lenovo any of your money after all the shady stuff that they have done.
She's probably being led by the intelligence services on this, and of course they have ulterior motives, their ultimate project is to collect all signals, or as many as they can manage, which apps like whatsapp are thwarting at present.

Why can't we collect all the signals all the time?

This is incredibly dangerous for our society, no-one should have that much power. That power isn't about terrorism (or even very useful against terrorism), but about subverting governments, judiciary and businesses.
Not that difficult, but it'd almost certainly have major security flaws that GHCQ and the NSA could exploit, because homebrew end-to-end encryption tends to. The bigger problem is that merely using an Isis-branded chat application is the equivalent of sending a text message to the security services saying "hello, I'm a potential terrorist, please pay special attention to my every movement". Even the Tor project hasn't actually managed to reliably disguise their protocol as something else, and they have a bunch of smart people working on it with the advantage that countries tend to reveal the fact they've been detected through blocking rather than just quietly monitoring the people using it and rounding them up the moment they try something.
I'm going to play devils advocate here, I also dislike the erosion of privacy (enough that I even left the UK).

But you _can_ make the argument that if only outlaws use encryption then they're painting a target on their back, which leads to greater scrutiny by security services.

This is reasonably achieved by the current dragnet surveillance systems in place, along with ISP's logging everything.

I don't agree with it, of course I don't, but that's probably an angle people could take- But the angle Amber Rudd took is even more starved of sense.

It's like she didn't ask the appropriate question: "What could we have done to prevent this attack" and the follow up "If we had direct access to his phone and all of his communication information, what could we have caught" and the answer is _nothing_. He used tools commonly available to him, acted alone, probably told nobody.

Anyway, tell the bad guys you're watching the comms and they'll figure out how to talk, they're motivated and smart.
And they all do.

Mozilla's rules are public so you can go read them, and indeed you can help write them. But most famously they required all CAs to disclose loads of stuff, and they require CAs to do lots of stuff in public where everybody can see it, not behind closed doors where we don't know what they're up to.

Google's rules include lots of stuff about their Certificate Transparency idea, which has helped no end.

Microsoft's rules famously include them getting a veto where they can order any CA to revoke a certificate or else leave their trust programme. They mostly use this to zap malware / phishing sites.

Apple's rules forbid having lots of roots at once. Although apparently this didn't apply to Symantec, or various other people. Huh.
It's just reverse psychology.

They have the means to break, degrade or bypass the encryption and they emit statements like these so people remain confident that they're not being spied on.

This routinely happens after leaks reveal that certain type of traffic is being targeted. In this particular case, Wikileaks.

In the past after all the PRISM collusion was revealed, all the PRISM partners started their PR campaigns showing their "commitment to privacy", and the soap opera with law enforcement agencies claiming they couldn't decrypt devices. In reality they have many tricks they have used for years now, like setting up a fake cell antenna, impersonate a phone carrier to take over a device.
Seriously, have you seen any US news lately? You Brits look like geniuses compared to what we have.
There be dragons: dataviz in the industry
You've just formulated one of the core concepts/techniques PostgREST relies on. You don't expose your core tables as an API, you expose views that extract data from your core tables, even if in the beginning those views are nothing more then "select * from some_table". As the api evolves, you are free to change the logic in those views without the need to touch your core tables
It's interesting when you extend that discussion to guns, in the UK guns are quite difficult to get hold of, I wonder what the incident at Westminster would have looked like if they were as available as they are in the US.

As always it's a trade off, some people loose the right to arm themselves at home but that means other people may not loose their life to a shooting.
If you are referring to the current state of the Labour party then that's irrelevant. Even when Labour were "strong" opposition, or were in power with large majorities, they have had very authoritarian positions on this kind of thing.

Labour were supporters of the recent IP Bill (it actually applied restrictions to some of the crazy powers the last Labour government gave to the police, which gives you an indication of their general position on these things). Labour have had authoritarian positions on crime and policing issues since Blair became shadow Home Secretary (1992). It has been part of their 'tough on crime' strategy of attacking the Conservatives from the right since that point and was a core part of the New Labour strategy.

The only thing a "stronger" Labour opposition would get you in this situation is a parliament even more united in support for restrictions on encryption.
From [1], linked elsewhere in this discussion, and referring to a failed plot in India:

"The Hindi-speaking handler guiding the men in Hyderabad also insisted on using a kaleidoscope of encrypted messaging applications, with Mr. Yazdani instructed to hop between apps so that even if one message history was discovered and cracked, it would reveal only a portion of their handiwork."

"the handler taught Mr. Yazdani how to use the Tails operating system, which is contained on a USB stick and allows a user to boot up a computer from the external device and use it without leaving a trace on the hard drive."

Even if the British government is successful with WhatsApp, can they do much against free, open source tools?

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/04/world/asia/isis-messaging...
How much your computer can do in a second
I read this as "lets throw a "might" in to be less blatant, but this is what i believe".
Why should I enroll in a US college? I mean, I get probably the best education as an engineer for free, not counting that the scope and orientation of an american bachelors degree is more like german abitur than a bachelors degree here.

To clarify: Most countrys have cheaper high education. That's probably the thing you should fix First.
> languages with other features/language constructs than you're used to just seem worthless, complex, without value and foreign to you.

Document the Haskell code and not stuff so much logic into one line. I think that's a fair thing to ask for in software engineering.

Anyone who complains about Haskell seems to have either a.) not programmed it b.) weren't programming "correctly" c.) a xenophobe/blub/NOS

I know what lambdas are, I know there are functions and folds. That in and of itself doesn't tell the story of the data that's actually being manipulated and the expected output. So that's why you have a 20-30 line comment block explaining what's going on in important API functions.

You could program python, JS or ruby similarly; wrapping multiple functions on the same line until you have to actually trial each function to figure out why your not getting an expected result. It feels clever, at the moment, but we don't do it because we're not helping colleagues understand it.

> You're not willing to learn the language because you don't understand it, and dismiss the language as having no value because you don't understand it. Is that really fair without at least having a basic understanding of the language?

The commenter was heralding the project as a "great example" of "real-world haskell" and recommended contributing to it. I was shocked to see 8k stars and a paltry 50 contributors; of which, only the top 10 have contributed over 100 lines of code. That's half the contributors, proportionally, to something like neovim or redis, and even worse compared to node.js projects.

And, I looked at the code of the project, which is open source, and didn't see code documentation.

I'm trying to be generous. My advice: stop packing the code so close and document it, probably more than normal, since the symbology in their is highly dense.
I added The Time Machine by H.G. Wells. (unsure if on Project Gutenberg, but it's at least free on Amazon). btw, when I submitted the form the thank you message was off-white text on a white background.
She did admit during the interview that these incidents couldn't be completely stopped.
How We Built Testable Go API Server
Read the Pew study linked by the article. The decline in the middle class definitely seems to be a real thing.
> Beautiful interface

Lol? It's 2017 and you're describing a text mode UI.

A "Beautiful theme" would be more appropriate.
So they get a backdoor into WhatsApp and terrorists just move onto some other non-compromised tool. Rinse and repeat. You can't ban maths ffs.

TBH I am surprised attackers do not better destroy their electronic equipment just before they carry out their attack. Pop your phone and SSD/flash drives in the microwave on high for a few minutes is pretty much going to destroy all evidence on them, and if not then chances are you are dead anyway so whatever data they might be able to get off will most likely be useless to them anyway.
When Protesters Strike Back: Anti Narita Airport Protests
> But hiring employees who are willing to work for less, or for longer hours, is basically exactly how a competitive free market is supposed to work.

Unless you are willing to work for less or longer hours, but are still not considered because of some external factor..
Info:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narita_International_Airport#C...

https://throwoutyourbooks.wordpress.com/2014/02/11/narita-ai...

EDIT:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs6jhn_9xaU
Does anyone else do this? I can switch to autopilot and apparently hold shallow conversations with people, even when deeply concentrated.

I don't remember any of it afterward, no idea what I said, but apparently it's good enough and coherent to get people off my back. "Yes, tea please."
What about guns, tanks or hydrogen bombs?
"What could we have done to prevent this attack"

Actually there is a lot they could have done to help him in his obviously troubled life but that doesn't fit with conservative ideology.
Nobody is saying write your own crypto just your own app. Plenty of excellent crypto libraries out there.
Well, he wants to ban secret hiding places, not bombs. I am sure that might work.

Come to think of it...

Sorry, he is a she.
Ballot 193 subseqently passed, limiting maximum (Web PKI) certificate lifetime to 825 days from March 2018.

That's definitely not enough to keep Ryan Sleevi happy, but it may be enough to buy CAs a bit more breathing space.
>do not roll your own crypto

Sure, but what's to prevent someone from building something on top of OpenSSL or PGP or whatever? Can't be that hard.
I was pretty surprised to learn that some of them have human lifespans - 50 years and up.

I had never even assumed that an animal that small could live that long.
The thing is, banning encryption to fight terrorism makes as much difference as banning knifes to fight murder. Encryption is simple enough (in theory at least) and prevalent enough that banning it will only stop legitimate usage (e.g. personal privacy) without having any real impact on those who want to break the law. Modern steganography techniques make it easy for enterprising individuals to tunnel encrypted data over unencrypted channels; there is just too much randomness in the real world to exploit.

Regardless of what delusional politicians want, encryption is here to stay. It's just a matter of how much people are willing to give up to feel safe.
How much in benefits do you think people making $25,000 a year are getting today?

Anyway, It'd be interesting to see a binned version of the real compensation information. And also I think instructive to look at percent of income spending for things like housing and healthcare for the same bins over time.
Integer Performance Comparison for C++, C#, Delphi
I came to the same conclusion. If you have someone around who can't help interrupt you, either by directly asking you for responses or doing distracting behavior, it's wise to simply get your own room, in the house or in a coworking space or a proper office. It doesn't matter how much you try to coach and train someone to respect your need for peace and quiet while working. It only leads to arguments and bitterness. It's much healthier to solve it by physically moving to a quiet place. I found that while it's possible to get work done in that environment, moving to your own space by yourself is a whole different experience. You can finally concentrate without fear of distraction (which is itself a distraction).
Coming from the same government that wants all ISPs to keep a log of all the sites you visit. These people are beasts and as dangerous, if not more, as the perils they are supposed to save us from.

If people knew the damage these idiots do, they would be in the streets.

Oh wait, they already are in the streets...
You don't really have to roll your own crypto to create such an app. There's always openssl and the signal protocol, which you'd only need to implement without designing anything.

Sure that can go wrong as anything can, but it's far from rolling your own crypto and makes things a lot easier.
tools designed to directly cause destruction are not similar to tools designed to provide privacy.