skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Depending on the accuracy of it, it could be a fantastic solution to do room-by-room presentence detection in a much more consistent way than other solutions (like infrared motion detection), and with much less of an impact on privacy in the worst case (a video-stream person-detection algorithm will "leak" full video of your house if hacked, this will "leak" your approximate location), and it can do all of this with a single unit compared to a unit for each room with other solutions.

One thing i've wanted since I started doing home-automation stuff is a system that can turn off lights after someone has been out of the room for like 10-15 minutes. IR sensors have false readings a lot (if you are sitting still reading a book, suddenly the lights go out...), not to mention the need for a sensor in each room with good visual coverage of the whole room.

Something like this would be fantastic for that use case, and knowing if someone was home when they aren't supposed to be is just an added bonus.

And you don't need a security service to take action, a neighbor can check if needed, or if you are certain that something is wrong, a call to the police.
This is why I hate these sorts of criticisms; they just talk about how much money is spent but never talk about what you are getting for the money. It still might be a waste of money, but we can't know that until we really look at what we are getting for the money, what would happen if we didn't spend it, and then decide if it is worth it.
You might be assuming the employee's side project was writing software using company equipment. I don't think the asker specified that.

I used to work with a guy who sold expensive watches as a side-job. He kept some inventory locked in his desk at work, and managed his hundreds of eBay auctions from his workstation. I doubt his employer would have been able to claim any IP there.

On a side note, I'd guess the watches probably made him 2X what he was making at work. He was a great guy and I think he ultimately ended up doing the watch thing full-time, so good for him!
Is this not changing though?
I can't remember the last time I bought something online without having to either use password or 2factor auth, and there are no places here that do not require a pin code when using a cc in a store.
I'm in Sweden though (but using mastercard).
Actually there is a very good biological explanation for why this is the case: men are more varied than women. Because until the modern era men were expendable and the victors impregnated the women for the next generation.

http://www.denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm
Seems like an invasion of privacy in an apartment building.
Has there been a term coined yet for people with these parts? I don't believe it would be classified as a cyborg since these are not machine-type parts. Although the parts are ironically produced by machines.
It is true that some lawyers do bad things. But what you're ignoring is the great number of bad things that lawyers don't do because either a) they are afraid of the professional consequences, b) they can get their clients to easily back off because they say, "professional ethics!" and people know it's a real thing, or c) they get disbarred and can't act as a lawyer any more.

As an example, look at the Prenda Law guy, who was basically using his status as a lawyer to run a high-tech extortion scam. He's had his license suspended, and will surely be disbarred:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/09/prenda-lawyer-pa...

Or look at Jack Thompson, famous hater of video games, who got disbarred for making "defamatory, false statements and attempted to humiliate, embarrass, harass or intimidate" people:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson_(activist)

And of course there are plenty of people who have been disbarred for cheating and abusing clients.

I too would like the legal ethics to be stronger on the "do no harm to society" side. But there's no denying that legal ethics have real teeth. Our industry could learn something from them.
>In all likelihood, the interviewer doesn’t know what they are looking for with these questions, and they are just being used to fill time.

Wait a sec -- just because the author of the article doesn't know how to get value from those questions doesn't mean that those questions hold no value. It is true that they won't give you information to help you in a tech screen, or to gauge the value of where to initially place a candidate on a team. But if you are trying to decide between a few candidates of equal skill, and trying to figure out which one will work better in a team environment, which will fit more smoothly into the personal dynamics between team members, who will grow better as the company grows, who might be a better leader or follower, and what their trajectory might be as the company and team evolves, these questions can lead you down those paths.

Dismissing those questions as useless makes me think the author doesn't care about the people as individuals, but just as machines to be plugged in to produce code. And that doesn't sound like someone I would want to work for.
Come on. This is a super simple problem to solve.

All you have to do is get rid of all the bad regulations, while keeping all the good regulations. Boom, issue resolved.
I have notepads where I wrote that sentence. I didn't make the mistake of forgetting that the second animal is a dog. I did forgot to include an "s" in my sentence, though. Somewhat embarrassing when I realized I was writing a sentence to include all letters, but didn't include all letters.

I am still a fan of writing. More, drawing some diagrams, which I am terrible at. It really takes an intuitive sense of understanding space as you are drawing. All too often, I have drawn the boxes, without the space for names inside of them. It is frustrating.
Wingsuit and jet engines strapped to a human body?

Exists: Jetman - Yves Rossy (also a TED Video)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2sT9KoII_M

Enjoy. ;-)

(That guy crosses the English channel at ~3:50.)
btw thinking this threat excludes engineers and programmers is delusional
> Gullibility

100 million dead, but it'll work this time!
Another benefit is getting database stuff out of your domain code, makes solving the business problem a lot cleaner.

In fact i just write a domain model, solve the problem, then write database adapter to persist the domain model. I always think about modeling the domain first, then persistence is an after thought. The persistence adapter can be done however you want, raw sql orm, nosql. So it's not really "abstracted away", it's just no the focus of the application.

Everything just plugs into the domain model.
And a camera would be an invasion of privacy in a bathroom, but that doesn't mean cameras aren't still useful in other areas.
Netflix's Adam Sandler Problem
Sure: transplant recipient.
I'd learn VHDL or C, golang or rust.

I think something with an easy learning curve like web, gets harder before it get's interesting.

A real language starts hard and stays that way.

and there's always fresh blood nipping at your heels in web, and you'll get frustrated at frameworks and not being able to upgrade the latest or greatest.

if you design for embedded or a game (something indie) you can start a fresh with new libraries and new outlook.

in web you'll encounter technical debt more quickly.

If you want to do web anyway, I suggest coding with other stuff in your spare time.
Is the internet not for-profit right now? Comcast doesn't seem to be struggling. ISPs are highly profitable as it is.
rehumans ?

organorgs ?
>I get the same thing--or worse, screen shot pasted into a Word document that's attached to the email, so their two monitors are squished into 8.5 inches and any text is scaled down to illegibility.

Got this from the "IT person" at a small satellite campus of the college I work for. That is how I knew they were not actually an IT person.
I'm afraid I don't read the same tone into this piece of writing as you do. It doesn't seem to be particularly holier-than-thou.
I just wish he was wearing a wing suit and had transitioned to horizontal flight.
While I've personally seen examples of the team leader getting credit for being a self-promoter, I'm not convinced. I've also seen groups where the team leader was the most passionate, and really was the driving force for the project.

I do not know which he is, but I'm not in a position to pass judgement.
Advertising Standard Authority is likely who you want:
https://www.asa.org.uk/
In >15 years of professional development, I've probably worked on only one project in which there were any significant technical challenges. I should probably consider myself fortunate that I've had even that one technically challenging project. It was a lot of fun, but it has been rather demoralizing looking for equally challenging work since then and largely failing to find it.

I think much of the reason for that is that most software projects that deliver business value involve plugging together a bunch of components to deliver functionality that is not particularly complex. It doesn't involve pushing the limits of your datasources or inventing new algorithms. If performance problems come up, it's almost always cheaper to throw money at AWS or more hardware than to spend a couple developer-months addressing the bottleneck in the application. In some ways, I guess that's efficient from the perspective of the market, but it's disappointing for engineers who like to build applications that require solving hard problems.
I'll certainly agree that the rules of professional conduct in the legal profession don't prevent all unethical conduct, but that doesn't mean that they are completely ineffective.

Having enforceable rules may improve ethical standards in the field without solving the problem entirely.

I'd also like to point out that I did not propose a solution. I think it should be considered, but I'm a long way from supporting the idea fully. There are a lot of negatives that come with license requirements that attorneys have.
Not sure if I've missed the point, but good forensic software can parse grammatical structure and use that. The English language has enough flexibility for every person to have a unique grammatical flavor. And that probably extends to each document as well.

If you want obfuscation you really need something that can do heavy simplification.
A guy I used to work with emailed the CEO of our company, a certain cloud software shop with thousands of employees, asking for the company to buy him a plane.

There was some more to it, about using it to participate on a competition representing the company, but it was absolutely ridiculous.

Instead of the email getting filtered out right away, the story goes that it rolled downhill through several layers of management, and apparently, people were asking each other "who is this guy? do we need to buy him a plane?"
That plot would fit into, say, Buffy the Vampire Slayer (which had a viewship in the millions) no problem.

Also, if you're going to say things like "natural difference between men and women that are implicitly understood by people" (down thread), you're going to have to bring some double-blind, peer-reviewed evidence.

This is a controversial subject that's overflowing with armchair sociologists. Right now you're indistinguishable from them.
thats the grey area in a global network. your probably breaking some ones rules. you need a good foundation of what you believe and take resposonsibility and stand up for that.
Like some of the other comments in reply to yours, I usually focus on a technical issue that stumped me for a long while - and then a change in perspective allowed me to solve it, or understand the solution offered by someone else. It's good to deconstruct what you got stuck on once you know the fix, because then you recognize what led you astray in the first place. (((imo)))

I think this question relates to personal growth and overcoming show-stopping obstacles with retrospective analysis? Something something smart-person-speak.
> Female hero? How boring!

That's not what I said.

Your example is not of a female rescuing a weak helpless male and then "putting a ring on it". It's of a female hero who rescues herself after discovering her lover betrayed her. Still the bad guy role played by the male. Still the person worth caring about is the female.

> How can you consider your views as non-sexist?

I'm simply not concerned with whether you consider my views sexist or not. I just want to have a realistic understanding of human nature.

Now, if I said that women should have _less_ rights than men, then I would be sexist (in a bad way). But I never even implied anything close to that. So why should I worry about my views being sexist?
I wrote an application that's primary function is reclamation of unclaimed AP credits / duplicate payments. You might be surprised by how much space there is for better controls here in large (Fortune 500) companies.
Nomx Passes Security Tests After Blogger Claims to Have Penetrated Nomx
I always thought this kind of thing was abstruse and impractical until I read Type-Driven Development with Idris[0], which made basic dependent type examples--like those demonstrated in the posted article--completely straightforward. Turns out that this kind of thing isn't actually that hard with the right language and tooling.

I highly recommend buying the book and checking out Idris if you found this article interesting. Read the free "overview" chapter[1] at least.

[0] https://www.manning.com/books/type-driven-development-with-i...

[1] https://manning-content.s3.amazonaws.com/download/a/580d6ba-...
Well, one major advantage for the Rust compiler is that it compiles Rust code, which I happen to have a decent bit of.

Joking aside, I'm not arguing that the Rust compiler is "better" than any other compiler. The Rust team seems to have done a great job with it, but I'm neither a PLT guy nor a compiler writer so I can't profess an informed opinion there. What I am interested in though is the Rust language semantics (which the compiler enforces, just as every correct compiler enforces the semantics of the language it compiles). Rust-the-language provides benefits that we (my company's engineering team) finds to be valuable for writing our software -- a strong, flexible, static type system; Option/Result types; the ownership model that promotes good practices and prevents a lot of concurrency bugs that a GC would not help with; drop semantics which allow interesting and powerful techniques with smart pointers. As a bonus, Rust-the-ecosystem includes some excellent and ever growing tooling that lets us focus more on solving development and business problems.

As for Rust-the-compiler, others have already done a better job than I think I can, so I'll let those comments speak to the issue.

Other people accomplish great things with other tools. Rust works really well for us though, and I like to share that.
Oh man, that's me for sure. I always backstory my tales to death. It does successfully take a minor conversation and turn it into an elaborate and interesting discourse but yes, as you say, it's not focused on the original punch line.
only 10 years too late..
>some kind of rules for professional conduct and an organization to enforce it like the lawyers have.

... how's that working out for you guys?

I mean, no offense, but the two professions require roughly the same mental acumen and amount of investment in learning materials (though lawyers go down a more academic path and must pass a bar exam, strictly there is more they "must" master) -- but out of "sleazy lawyer" and "sleazy programmer" which do you hear?

Likely because lawyers must represent their clients - some if whom are sleazy.

But I wouldn't take the ethical standard set by the legal profession as a paragon for other professions to emulate. Obviously it has severe limits.
It's definitely hard. There was certainly no clear cut solution to any of the problems I included on the card in the picture. We evaluated 8 or 10 different solutions for out of the box stuff, found things we liked and didn't like about all of them and eventually decided it was best to build our own. At each step there was a lot of debate because we knew this would probably be used beyond just the Careers project and be used in the Q&A project as well (separate at the time), so it wasn't just worrying about my team's concerns, but everyone's. We won some debates, we lost some debates, it was very hard.
As you might expect, lawyers have a fairly crisply defined set of rules about what their ethical (sorry, "professional") responsibilities are [1]. On the Multi-state Professional Responsibility Exam (part of the bar exam required to practice law), there are questions where you are penalized for selecting an answer that is too ethical (i.e., where you may believe it to be the right thing to do, but where the Code of Professional Responsibility imposes no such duty on you).

[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/ethics/ny/code/NY_CODE.HTM
archives:

http://archive.is/EC8ph
https://app.printfriendly.com/print?source=homepage&url_s=uG...
I don't think the author was saying don't do anything wrong / unlawful, but rather don't do anything that you feel is wrong if you don't want to. I.e. don't let others pressure you into it, and lie to them to get out of it if that's what you need to do.
SiriusXM acquires connected car company Automatic for over $100M
Sometimes surveillance tools are really interesting to build though.

I made a tool that injects into the winlogon session and keylogs it, so you can steal passwords before the user ever logs in.

For one reason or another I'm deeply motivated by a little malice in ways that I'm just not most of the time. Maybe I'm just a bad person.
do people actually fall for this? It's so clearly just writers passing it off as an AI because ML is the buzzword of the month that gets funding and attention.
Another problem with the question: if the hardest thing was something you solved then you're probably not stretching yourself. If I answered this I'd really be answering "tell me about an embarrassing failure."
>If nutrition facts regulations went away tomorrow, I suspect the market would enforce their existence anyway.

Yes, because people are used to it now, so they'd be suspicious of products omitting them. Nonetheless, I suspect even that would slowly be eroded over time.

>you would get many startups who study what makes something healthy

You have plenty of diet purveyors telling you what to eat now. Most of them are not particularly evidence-based, and many of them are straight up wrong, but people listen to them and they make money regardless. People have little way to judge their accuracy.
This reminds me of another home security product called Cocoon, which uses sound instead of RF.

Side note: if you have a smart home security system that you're actually happy with, I'd like to hear about it. I've been doing research, and it seems almost nobody is happy with the current offerings. It is either equipment problems, or long, expensive contracts.
Yes, same goes for Amazon.
But then what, no one is allowed to own a compiler or interpreter until they get a degree?
I'm not a frequent flye but I would really appreciate some clarification on this topic. How does an airline selling more than the number of physical seats it has increase efficiency/effectiveness more than if it sold the same number of tickets as the number of seats available? Do they have that big of a problem with people canceling flights? What are the return policies usually for flight tickets?
This hits home. I am also a faculty kid. You grow up thinking the university is awesome. And it is. You get involved in the university when you are older and find that the students for the most part treat the city and its residents like crap. The word townie is thrown around in a derogatory manner towards the locals. You are left thinking why the heck should I support this university when the alumni base has such a bad view of the people that actually live in the city. I realize that not everyone at the university is like that but its enough that it seems like a real cultural problem.
No, you should not be breaking the law.
Let’s Build a Simple Interpreter. Part 13: Semantic Analysis
The alpha and beta classes were not living in a dystopia. Seemed quite nice. Freedom to pursue intellectual endeavors, freedom to have sex with whomever you wanted with no consequence, a life of privilege.
> if I said that women should have _less_ rights than men, then I would be sexist (in a bad way).

That isn't the definition of sexism.
What Chess Can Teach You About Life (And Business)
> Fathom surely has uses beyond those the OP mentioned.

(Author here.) In fact, Fathom isn't particularly coupled to the DOM, apart from the dom() call that acts as the initial source of data and some of its optional utility procedures. With a few tweaks, you could use it for any score-and-rank problem.
That is true. I guess one constraint would be the effectiveness of pregnancy testing i.e. how early can it detect conception?
Because, for the most part, retail investors are not well-informed investors and are willing to cross the bid-ask spread. To simplify dramatically, suppose Citadel thinks the fair value of a stock is 25.185, the market is 25.18-25.19, and a Robin Hood customer wants to pay 25.19 to buy 1 share of the stock. If they buy from Citadel, Citadel makes $0.0050 on average. Given those basic economics, it makes sense for Citadel to pay, say $0.0018, to make sure that the Robin Hood customer buys from them instead of from Knight.
The odomoter is driven by the speedometer in many vehicles.
What's the difference in motivation between doing things this way vs with functional dependencies?
> My bigger concern was what doesn't get caught because it appears after a noun rather than a pronoun,

Yeah, some clever gender/name lookup would be a good idea, many subjects in plots are the characters' names. Maybe even more subject names than pronouns.

That said, it seems unlikely that there's a pronoun-substitution gender bias, so it would probably just yield more samples of the same trend.
The annual budget of $29B certainly puts the half billion in perspective.
Great advice. I once let a company license legitimate software (a history cleaner before browsers offered this functionality) I wrote and they wrapped it in adware and caused a lot of people headaches. It felt gross. They didn't make it clear what they were going to do with it beforehand, but there were signs I should have noticed--their business model description sounded too good to be true. You can't just wash your hands of these things and have a clear conscience because you didn't do it personally.

The low point was finding their adware on my mom's computer.

Personally, I made it a rule after that to avoid business relations with the morally questionable. They drag you down.
One of the better horror movies that I've seen in a while, Hush, features a deaf woman as the protagonist. She is writing a novel in a cabin in the woods, but then is taunted by a psychopath and she has to fight like hell to survive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hush_(2016_film)

There is one pretty chilling and awesome scene where the psychopath uses the hand of her recently-murdered friend to knock on the window:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9p2KPPRp7ZY
Convincing others not to cheat is a useful strategy. Not cheating yourself is less useful.
It's true, but making sure that the tests perfectly cover the product requirements, and making sure that the specified product requirements actually match the expectations of the product are both barely solvable problems for any sufficiently complex product.

Trying to keep pace with most markets, it's hard for software developers to maintain detailed enough requirements to even hope to ever achieve exhaustive automated testing.
Ethics aside, at a certain point, you realize you can make a lot more money legally and legitimately using your technical skills than through any sort of "clever" technical scheme that involves hacking odometers or scamming people in some way.