skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You need ECC /and/ pervasive checksumming. There are too many stages of processing where errors can occur. For example, disk controllers or networks. The TCP checksum is a bit of a joke at 16 bits (it will fail to detect 1 in 65000 errors), and even the Ethernet CRC can fail - you need end to end checksums.

http://www.evanjones.ca/tcp-and-ethernet-checksums-fail.html
They admit that doing that redirection will make your miner shut down, that's basically worst case.

The main advantage i can see is that this provides an easy way of proving there really is a kill switch.
there's nowhere to run and hide from the building rage, nor should there be
That is CrashPlan's web restore process.[1] Consider reading The Wirecutter's comparison of CrashPlan and Backblaze[2] to better understand the (significant) differences between these two services.

[1] https://support.crashplan.com/Restoring/Downloading_Files_Fr...

[2] http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-online-backup-service/
I am, like the author, consistently surprised at how few "programmers" understand this. Baffles me.
To add some levity. It's an opinion piece, not a feature article. The whole subject is a bit ridiculous to begin with, so the quip is in the spirit of the subject. Think of it like late show talk hosts.

Not everything is always lawyer speak. Sometimes, jokes are okay.

And yes, in an article about prop 64, a similar remark might very well be found about California.
The difference in demand is highly relevant: U.S. water utilities can't even attract enough investment to replace century-old lead pipes and sewers; similarly tepid investment in internet infrastructure would have left us all with dial-up still.

The U.K. and France have both privatized their water systems and it has worked fine. Conversely, U.S. water systems, which are mostly still publicly owned, are a total disaster: http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2015/09/epa_1_trillion_n....

Economics certainly teaches that some markets are susceptible to natural monopolies and government regulation is appropriate there. But it also teaches that making a kind of business less profitable will drive investment away from that business. The question is how do you regulate to balance those competing concerns. You have to protect consumers, but you also have to figure out how to get sufficient investment into the industry.

The U.K. does a good job balancing the interests. There is a single, regulated monopoly that owns most of the last mile (BT Openreach), but the regulations are designed so that the monopoly is actually very profitable. Most state and local governments do a terrible job balancing those interests with regards to utility companies. Regulated rates keep water and sewer bills low, but dramatically limit the profitability of water utilities. As a result our water infrastructure is hundreds of billions of dollars in the red.
Yes. It'd also be interesting if there was a way to turn the hashers off and on intermittently (does it try again after receiving a "false"? don't feel like reading the code right now). This would be a good way to sell hardware but still preserve their control over hash power by causing devices to have some idle time, which means more blocks and shares from pools for themselves.

While this is obviously a big problem, it is a little bit of a vindication for me, because people have scoffed when I've expressed concerns that bitcoin mining is too centralized. [0]

And if one ASIC vendor can do this, what could a government do? [1]

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14040165

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14166820
Which leaked (bleed) core (heart) information.
Here is an article detailing how ZFS is virtually unaffected by random bit flips because it would have to occur in such a way as to cause a sha256 collision between one block and its parity block in order for it to repair a valid block with a corrupt one during a scrub. Furthermore it goes on to argue that only a highly specific large scale ram corruption could possibly cause corruption and by that time it's almost certain the OS wouldn't boot up.

http://jrs-s.net/2015/02/03/will-zfs-and-non-ecc-ram-kill-yo...
The video in the middle of the story [0] says that they were found in a silt layer (which I'm guessing is aged at 130kya)

[0]: https://youtu.be/HyfSsgCrjb0?t=1m21s
Think of it like this: your public education was provided not for a fee, but for an equity stake in You, Incorporated.b the more you earn, the more the state gets back, like an investor.
Incorrect, heartbleed caused leaks from the servers affected. This is not even vulnerability it's just a stupid design decision that someone can MitM.
What the White House memo actually said was "15% business tax rate". I don't see anything in what the White House actually said about replacing personal taxes with business taxes.
Sure I do. The person walking through the door could mug me, getting a free first punch at me because my hand is on the door.

The question is, what are the odds? Most people walking through the door don't do that to me.

But if the police come to your door, what are the odds that they're going to treat you unfairly? I suspect, higher than the odds that the person I hold the door for is going to punch me. Are the odds with the police unacceptably high? For me, no. (But then, first, I've never yet been treated unfairly by the police, whereas at least three times I've received better treatment than I objectively deserved. And second, I'm white and fairly conservative in appearance, so I'm probably going to get as much benefit of the doubt as anyone ever does.)
owning it by being in another web app? I feel this is solving a problem I don't really have

reality is, github is a website, kobble is a website, there's no real difference in "owning" other than what those websites grant us in their Terms and Conditions.

weird.
Helix: Ruby Native Extensions Without Fear
Correct. ZFS won't do unnecessary file reordering unless a scrub has been initiated.
Leading 30 Data Science Books
Like someone else said, that's like the Mac System menu. The difference is subtle, but very important: Each group is self-contained, so the icons reflow only within that section if the window is resized (if the window even allows resizing).
Property tax is progressive because rich people purchase more property, and real property tax is critically important because real estate is a permanently finite resource.
That 5% rate only applies if you fully utilize the margin for the entire year. If you do not, and do not drop out of the gold tier when not using the margin, your effective rate sky rockets.

As to IB, again my point was there is a trade off between paying nothing for commissions and overpaying for margin vs paying a low commission and getting a market margin rate that only kicks in when in use.
BND is composed very heavily (~66%) of US Government bonds. It's largely effectively like just buying treasury bonds. Worth considering to instead get a corporate bond index fund + muni bond fund.
Perhaps more obviously, if you've been a victim of a crime—especially one you have reason to believe will likely be repeated or escalated without police involvement—while it might not be a bad idea to involve a lawyer in your law enforcement contacts if you have the means to do so immediately, there may be very good reason to report the crime to police without delay, even if that requires talking to them without an attorney. (And, yes, the basic risks of talking to police still apply. But there are, in this cases, risks of not doing so, as well.)

OTOH, I think the advice is strongest in the case where the police are initiating contact, and you don't have a pre-existing and independent basis to think there is an interest in talking without delay that justifies the additional risk of doing so without an attorney.
> As long as you assume them to be profit seeking individuals and not some inconsistent model, then their choice leans far too heavily towards investing in their own infrastructure

How so? How does eliminating net neutrality give them incentive to improve their network? You've provided no support for this at all. (In which you have much in common with Pai!) if it were as simple as "more infrastructure equals more profit" then they'd already be building more infrastructure, neutrality rules or no.

> If they launch Verizon Music, then they'll have to build a service as good as Spotify (if not better) in order compete with Spotify

But that's the point: they wouldn't have to make a better service. All they'd have to do is throttle Spotify's traffic down to the point that their own service seems preferable. Or (more likely) just extract a toll from Spotify in exchange for not doing that.
I wonder if YC would fund a new Bitcoin mining ASIC startup. I often regret not being able to pivot my previous company from FPGAs into ASICs :/
"Ok, so you're saying there is no substance to "radio on the internet""

That's not what they said. They said that there was no substance to Broadcast.com specifically.
> automatic accessibility checking

Can you elaborate on the automatic accessibility checking? Are you testing the sketch file or the react-primitive code for accessibility tags?
What specifically do you find incendiary? I'm not using Washington political euphemisms, but I honestly fail to see anything "rabble-rousing, seditious or subversive" about what I've said. I'm calling it like I see it. Please do explain.
Why do you think simply leaving that in the hands of the ISPs, who have demonstrated in the past that they are more than willing to screw over consumers, is better?
Because the US doesn't have a uniform tax rate, due to a federated power structure.

If you don't like it, you don't have to migrate.
A government fiber utility installs fiber once, just like a government water utility installs pipes once. Making it faster means replacing termination equipment. In what way is Verizon better at doing that than a public utility company would be?
> There is roughly 3% chance of error in RAM per DIMM per year. That doesn't justify buying ECC if you have just one personal computer to worry about.

How do you make that leap?
Little of column a little of column b. The state, it's made of people, including those children.
As a person who still has to support Ruby in production, I find this amazing. Huge potential for cost-savings.
Y Combinator loses first COO Qasar Younis after 2 years
Wouldn't it be fun if Netflix, Hulu, HBO, and a few other streamers all decided to throttle the Washington DC area down to, say, 10% of normal outbound bandwidth for a long weekend?

Maybe it wouldn't touch Pai, but if it pissed off a huge block of his neighbors maybe he'd start to understand the idea.
I did indeed say that a superintelligent AI could realise that we don't want to paperclip the world. But it need not care what we want, unless we're really, really careful about how we program it.

What is "ridiculous" about continuing a task because we're not certain that it's done yet? It's only your human moral system saying that. Just because humans usually don't value things enough to pursue them to the exclusion of all else…
Hackers exploited Word flaw for months while Microsoft investigated
Mastodon really is good, it's fun to use and the fact that you can connect with people on other instances is great.
I think that's one of the greatest head-fakes to take over the internet. You realize that priorities matter
I did a bunch of protocol level design in the 90's and one of the handful of things that taught me was _ALWAYS_ use at least a CRC with a standard polynomial. Its just not worth it, in the 2000's I relearned the lesson when it comes to data at rest (on disk/etc). If nothing else both of those will catch "bugs" rather than silently corrupting things and leading to mysteries long after the initial data was corrupted.

I just had this discussion (about why TCP's checksum was a huge mistake) a couple days ago. That link is going to be useful next time it comes up.
I think a big part of the reason why hubris is bad is because it causes you to make mistakes when determining truth from error. If someone goes around telling people a claim is false without sufficient justification, and they're doing so as a reaction against people believing in the claim for bad reasons, then you could say that their hubris (or something like it) caused them to make an error in judgement.

There is a difference between saying that a belief in a claim is not rationally justified and saying that a claim is false. Both sides of these debates can make mistakes. Those against believing in the claim can make the counterclaim that it is false, and they might not actually have justification for that. On the other hand, often those that believe in the claim misinterpret the other side as making the counterclaim when they are in fact not doing so.

In the case of autism there has been extensive research since the moral panic began, and no evidence for a link has been found where it was expected to be found, thereby bringing increased justification for the counterclaim. I think this is also true with many other unsupported claims out there that are popular enough to have been exposed to systematic scrutiny.
Except the largest Western nation in the world...
A simulated heart does not pump real blood. Also in the process, why should one start or stop at cell level, seems arbitrary, go further down to atoms and electrons etc. or go higher level to mental state or what not.

There are completed projects of smaller organism whose all neurons have been simulated, there hasn't been any revelations.

Our brain doesn't contain any 'data', so whoever decides to extract data from it will have to decide what the data will be or why it would be of any use. There has also been many objections made on why brain correlates are more or less useless on question of mind/intelligence.
Sure, but an unpopulated Australia is hardly a place of low resources. The expansion possibilities would be enormous.

Even if your colony is surrounded by impenetrable deserts, I'd think you could always propagate along the coast, living off the ocean.

That I'm just some internet guy speculating without any deep knowledge is probably obvious, but let me make it extra clear!
I've heard more than a few women complain that all the bots in the "service" area tend to get female names.
Fair. That number did seem improbably high, I should not have included that in my argument.
That's lip service so the big players can have their regulatory burden reduced. High startup costs and anticompetitive practices are the most significant mechanisms preventing new market entrants.
This is libertarianism, not conservativism
Still hasn't guessed my MenuetOS box.
Why do people think they're the one who will go to NK and be the one hero who will bring back "what they don't want you to see"? Pro tip: you're a useful idiot. Someone knows what you're doing 100% of the time.
We choose to use deep learning not because of hype but because it’s convenient to model user interaction with a single LSTM like network. We will soon publish technical aspects
Why don't they just use iron pans? It's more affordable and more natural, you don't have to put something in your food, and it's being heated directly at the bottom.

Did they just invent this iron fish to create more jobs?
TNP is about the only quality tech reporting left.
The comment includes highly partisan and uncivil language:

> spewing bullshit

> the clownshow in office

> D's get to clean up the mess

Regardless of how right (or wrong) the commenter may be, this type of language does not invite or encourage the civil and productive discourse that is strongly valued on HN. There are ways to express such opinions in a civil way, though it requires more effort. Given the current polarized environment in the US, it's difficult enough to engage in constructive discourse on political topics: on a forum such as HN with only text as the medium of communication it's even more difficult without using language used above.
"Understand Go pointers in less than 800 words or your money back"

There are multiple pictures each of which is worth 1000 words. Where is my money?
RISC OS solved the "file open/close dialogues are a different view on the same objects" problem. In RISC OS, a save dialog is just an icon in a box. You pick up the icon and drag it into a folder window to save. Done.

You could even do simple OLE by dragging the icon into another app, instead of a folder.

I so wish other OSes would copy that model.
Is there proof he got in early on all these and made money?

I think it's been pretty established he got in super early on Twitter and made a ton of money, but I don't know about the Uber or Instagram.

I sound like a hater, but just because you "invested in" those companies doesn't mean you made money or were a smart investor.
found it

http://arnon.dk/malicious-traffic-detection-using-traffic-fi...
Yes, that's what I'm saying. If you can make an AI that's roughly human IQ (even like 80 IQ), but thinks 100x faster than a human, then that's something very much like, if not identical to, "a superhuman AI."

So when you say, "Here's how we'll get superhuman AI: We'll network together bunches of 80 IQ AI's that think 100x faster than a human," it's kind of assuming its own solution.
> ultimately there's very little you can actually do reliably if your memory is lying to you

1. Implement everything in terms of retry-able jobs; ensure that jobs fail when they hit checksum errors.

2. if you've got a bytecode-executing VM, extend it to compare its modules to stored checksums, just before it returns from them; and to throw an exception instead of returning if it finds a problem. (This is a lot like Microsoft's stack-integrity protection, but for notionally "read-only" sections rather than read-write sections.)

3. Treat all such checksum failures as a reason to immediately halt the hardware and schedule it for RAM replacement. Ensure that your job-system handles crashed nodes by rescheduling their jobs to other nodes. If possible, also undo the completion of any recently-completed jobs that ran on that node.

4. Run regular "memtest monkey" jobs on all nodes that attempt to trigger checksum failures. To get this to work well, either:

4a. ensure that jobs die often enough, and are scheduled onto nodes in random-enough orders, that no job ever "pins" a section of physical memory indefinitely;

4b. or, alternately, write your own kernel memory-page allocation strategy, to map physical memory pages at random instead of linearly. (Your TLBs will be very full!)

Mind you, steps 3 and 4 only matter to catch persistent bit-errors (i.e. failing RAM); one-time cosmic-ray errors can only really be caught by steps 1 and 2, and even then, only if they happen to affect memory that ends up checksummed.
Chinese smartphone on sale on Amazon and eBay contains built-in malware
I wonder how it is different from Magic

https://getmagic.com/

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9087819
Digital Transactions Jump in India thanks to cash ban
Redirecting auth.minerlink.com to point at 127.0.0.1 is not a permanent way to bypass the issue.

If the next patch includes a localhost server that can proxy communication to auth.minerlink.com, the issue returns.

If the next patch updates the url to auth2.minerlink.com (or any other domain), the issue returns.

If the next patch flips from default-allow to default-deny, all customers will be out of luck until they patch and come back to the central control mechanism.

If the next patch implements some form of authentication such that you can't easily spoof a "True", all customers will be out of luck.

If the remote code execution is used to patch code without the administrator's knowledge/permission (haakon has a link saying remote code execution is possible) any/all of the above are trivially easy to take advantage of.

Lastly - my understanding of bitcoin is a little fuzzy, but I believe with 50% of the computing power, you can rewrite transactions as you please, capturing as many bitcoin as you want. If you had a plan to not centralize those accounts, it would be extremely difficult to sort out.
Say village A is upstream from village B. A poops in the water. How far downstream does B need to be for the water to be drinkable? Or is there no safe distance? If there is a safe distance, in theory, you could teach the villages in A to drink upstream and poop downstream. By the time the water gets to B, it's clean enough to drink?! Then teach B to poop upstream and drink downstream... You probably don't want to put me in charge of public health :P
Κλείνει το ζευγάρι του τελικού με το ΠΑΟΚ – Παναθηναϊκός
Conventional legal mechanisms against your home server cabinet can be handled via full disk encryption and a reed switch on your cabinet door connected to your power strip.
Building modular web interfaces
> If housing were monopolistic in supply, and completely inelastic in demand

Right, and we should bear in mind that housing competes not only against identical units in similar places but also longer commutes, alternative living arrangements, and leaving the area entirely.
We've had third party software systems fail before because they check into the vendor's system asking if they were authorized, the vendor at that same time had a database issue which caused it to return false for us, thus taking down all of our infrastructure reliant on that system.

So yeah, just because it explicitly looks for false doesn't mean it's a non-issue.
Their privacy policy is concerning.
Stopping talking because the questioning has taken a turn can be used as evidence of your guilt. Salinas v. Texas found:

"When petitioner had not yet been placed in custody or received Miranda warnings, and voluntarily responded to some questions by police about a murder, the prosecution’s use of his silence in response to another question as evidence of his guilty at trial did not violate the Fifth Amendment because petitioner failed to expressly invoke his privilege not to incriminate himself in response to the officer’s question."[0]

Combined with some circumstantial evidence or a mistaken eye witness, you've given the police reason to start building a case against you. Unless you're the one reporting the crime, think twice before you volunteer information to police.

(Not a lawyer, not legal advice, etc., just interested in this stuff.)

[0] http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/salinas-v-texas/
The Reddit thread on this seems somewhat evenly divided on whether this is a real issue: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/67qzsn/antbleed_exposi...

Surprising, as it seems like a straightforward, real issue.
If the police are suspicious of you, it makes it more likely that they will be inclined to view information recieved from other sources in a light unfavorable to you, and devote resources to investigating you rather than others. Depending on how focussed that gets, you run into the "Three Felonies a Day" problem.
>Point being that everyone has an opportunity to work hard, put themselves in the right situations and eventually earn the right to be in a "place of privilege".

I don't actually think that's true. And the fact that the vast majority of tech investors and wealthy elites are white men is proof of that.

Either it is that everyone else doesn't "work hard and put themselves in the right situations," or there's some other factor (like prejudice and extreme privilege) that is creating barriers for others.

I'm not arguing that white men that have "made it" haven't worked hard to go that last mile, I'm just pointing out that these types of blog posts often fail acknowledge that their starting point is far ahead of everyone else. That lack of awareness is what contributes to the myth of "here's how to do this, and it's a meritocratic process."