skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah, and the /r/spacex thread is almost entirely about some of the cool insights he gave to people about the technology, their goals, and what it's like to work there.

I haven't had time to fully watch the video, but just from looking at the reddit comments and the article you wouldn't think they were from the same video at all!

And from the parts of the video that I did watch, it just sounded like a guy talking candidly about how he feels he is putting pressure on his competitors.
They're not "notoriously difficult to enforce", they're specifically unenforcable to non-executives. The CA legislature and judiciary have long since settled any questions regarding these and also have frameworks in place for companies trying to make you an "executive engineer" or "director of blah" to try and get around it.
I understand what you're trying to say, but think about what happens when the military strikes a hospital and calls it "collateral damage." While you're correct that these people probably did not intend to damage hospitals, they could have reasonably foreseen that an indiscriminate attack on computer networks around the globe would have deleterious effects on essential infrastructure.

This means that they knowingly or with reckless negligence unleashed such an attack on the world. If they had been more "scrupulous" criminals, they would have more narrowly tailored their attack on targets they believed deserved to be extorted or where such extortion would not interfere with life critical systems.

I'm not a lawyer, but if they were a nation state, I believe they would have violated the Geneva Convention's prohibition on attacking hospitals.

That said, I think this attack gives more weight to NSA critics that contend that their exploit research should be focused more on defense rather than offensive capabilities. Their carelessness combined with another group wanting to embarrass them is what allowed this indiscriminate attack to be inflicted on civilian infrastructure.
Maybe one day they'll have a separate price plan and app just for Netflix Original content. I'd switch to that right now if they offered it. Then we'd see which side of the fence they're on.
You can get a long way on just buzzwords and big claims
2 billion dollars and 8 years hasn't even gone into such an effort though. The complete rewrite which serves as the codebase for the xbox, iOS, etc.. version is where the majority of that time, money, and effort has been spent. The mobile and console markets were apparently seen as as a much more lucrative use of time and effort vs optimizing the legacy desktop-only Java version which the author himself agrees was poorly written.
Your new employer doesn't have to fight anything. Non-executive non-competes are specifically disallowed by the CA gov't. It's up to your previous employer to prove you were an executive (upper management/c-suite) and sue you, not vice versa.
And unless I see a different selection to everyone else in Australia, the offerings have rapidly gone downhill, C-grade/fire-sale content. Some gems from time to time, but 98% unwatchable rubbish.

Edit: For the price I pay, I don't mind that too much though.
Moom removed from sale due to patent violation claim
That's like comparing shooting yourself in the foot to shooting yourself in the head. There's no reason for either!
also known as "all abstractions are leaky"

https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/11/11/the-law-of-leaky-a...
the maintenance of such a setup is still prohibitive. hardware failure is really annoying.
It will take me a while to read the paper. I saw there is no code inside. Do they have code that improves LZ parsing as used in all general purpose compressors? If they don't have code, can their algorithm be implemented to improve performance of zstd or lzma?
Yes. It's an arms race.

To detect root, apps will try something like attempt to call su. If you're rooted and don't want the app to detect it, you can jail the app and prevent it from being able to detect it.

Note that this is in theory. Almost all apps will implement root/jailbreak detection using the same crappy method, just like almost all of them use the same crappy method to detect if e.g. cert pinning is active. But some will use a very clever method that is not widely known and not well-documented.

While it's true you can theoretically defeat any of these checks, in practice it (like most of reverse engineering) can be made incredible complex and difficult. For example, Facebook/Instagram have (as of the last time I checked) a complex custom system for checking if cert pinning has been bypassed, such that you can't just return-void the checks very easily.
netflix is now pumping out a lot more original content, and a good number of them are complete trash. they still have some of the best shows out there (house of cards, narcos, stranger things, etc), but it feels like they're more interested in quantity, not quality.
Yea, that's a weird statement, however a better one is that Smalltalk doesn't need macros because it has a clean syntax for lambas that remove a common use for macros, hiding boilerplate use of Lisp's lambda. Beyond that, Smalltalk isn't file based, you don't edit some version of the code that gets compiled (and macro expanded) into some runtime version of the code you can only see through introspection; rather in Smalltalk you're actually editing the runtime version in a running image. Macros simply wouldn't fit into Smalltalk in any meaningful way and Smalltalk's syntax is pretty much already ideal for building DSL's without the need to clean it up with macros.

What makes both Lisp and Smalltalk interesting is that there's no difference between language and library; the constructs you create yourself are on equal footing with the ones most consider built in. Macros let you build special forms to control evaluation semantics, Smalltalk simply uses blocks [ ] to delay evaluation, and both languages are their libraries. Lisp has functions/macros, if/cond, etc; Smalltalk has objects used in a way you simply do not see in other object oriented langauges. Smalltalk has no if statement, no while statement, no reserved words beyond true, false, nil, self, super, and thisContext, everything else is library including all control flow constructs which are implemented with objects/classes/inhertance, and polymorphism.

They are both "pure" languages in a sense, and that pleases some people greatly. If you haven't programmed in Smalltalk, you really have no idea what object oriented actually means at a deep level. All of the popular so called OO languages are actually just procedural languages with hundreds of special keywords that have classes, but the languages themselves aren't build from classes and objects, they're procedural and defined by the compiler writer as special forms you cannot create yourself. Having objects, and being truly object oriented all the way down, are drastically different things.
It is a joke but a stupid one that harms adoption of the product. It's conceivable the author could decide say, eating meat isn't "nice" and sue an organization using it that packages meat products for consumption. A judge may find it unenforceable but having to potentially get tied up in a legal battle in the first place already makes it unpalatable to many organizations. See one of the replies here about a similarly juvenile clause where organizations got written permission to use a product "for evil". Not sure a few giggles is worth harming the adoption of technology many people have worked hard to deliver.
You still don't always have control over the kernel, although most of the time you can if you want.
Cool. The list above is from a fictional series called "The Laundry Files" by Charles Stross, the same author as the linked Antipope article/story.
Above and beyond? This is a simple yet effective countermeasure that the content providers have likely insisted upon.
Ostensibly what they want to stop is it becoming popular to root a phone to record content.

I imagine the number of people that care about rooting their phone is small enough that it doesn't really matter to their revenue.
Agreed, and it's pretty neat hearing about a startup actually disrupting an industry that seems so insurmountable.
But your next company is getting your prior experience, which becomes more out-of-date every day, not your up-to-the-minute experience on what might be an actively competing project.
>I agree on the first and third milestones. Or kinda -- perhaps the first milestone is only reached for California, or for US highways yet

My anecdotal experience shows that there exist vehicles capable of tooling around on highways and city streets without the need for human interaction.

>but from a I'd-like-to-arrive-at-some-point perspective. Because then again it becomes about human interaction (being assertive without being an asshole, muddling your way through this blocked intersection through essentially non-verbal communication with the drivers around you), and computers will (inherently, perhaps) be worse at that than humans.

There's a good video I've seen about how the Google cars can increase their assertiveness until they can go.

>Except, again, that humans will be able to judge body language or the rules of a game the children are playing, and anticipate instead of being confined to reacting

Not if they can't see the children because, as I said, they're behind trees.

>Perhaps my pessimism also stems from the fact that the oh-so-smart driving assistants in my car are so shitty

Indeed, that's why I clarify that Adaptive Cruise Control isn't the same thing as an autonomous vehicle and you shouldn't use one to judge the other.
I am not a lawyer, but I do have some experience with amending contracts to protect my rights of authorship and ownership over code that I write, and I would encourage all software developers to fight for these rights.

That first sentence is a doozy, but if you can re-arrange the "to [Recruiter Company Name]" so that it comes at the end of the sentence instead of the beginning, then you can add your "on site" stipulation at the end.

Then it would read something like the following.

"The Supplier hereby assigns all existing and future Intellectual Property Rights in the Services and the Inventions and all materials embodying these rights to the fullest extent permitted by law to [Recruiter Company Name] for only those Services, Inventions, and materials produced at the business establishment ("on-site") of [Recruiter Company Name]."

It wouldn't hurt to add another sentence as well to make it clear that you will retain rights of authorship and ownership of code that you write outside work.

Something like, "Furthermore, The Supplier retains all rights of ownership and authorship of materials which are not produced at the business establishment ("not on-site") of [Recruiter Company Name]."

The most important thing in contracts is clarity. So be explicit and make clear what you are looking for in the contract, and that the contract contains the wording to your satisfaction.
Testing and complexity. (in their estimation) There's just not a large enough population to shoulder the additional engineering overhead and maintenance costs of partitioning the data and testing/monitoring with every single release.
A motion effect library that integrates Fingerd and Moved
Well, star trek does have both the ferengi and the federation at totally ends of the spectrum.
> going to an ER could leave you with crippling debt

You're right of course, but having grown up around people in this sort of situation, I'd like to point out that they view debt differently. It's exceedingly unlikely that a trip to the ER is the thing that destroys their otherwise decent credit, and it's unlikely that the collection agency that ultimately buys the debt will take them to court to collect as they don't have anything to put a lien against and may not even have an income to garnish.

In other words "leave you with crippling debt" isn't nearly as scary to the people in that situation as it is to someone who isn't.
> A company is paying me to work for them, they're not paying to own me.

True. But said company may not want your experience, let alone anything you learn about their business, to benefit competitors. Indeed, they may consider your training with them to be an investment, which gives them rights about what you do with it.
Bluetooth equivalent would be cool, then pairing bluetooth and wifi MACs based on temporal correlation. If one changes you can infer from the other. Over time you could split it to howmanylocalsaround verus howmanyvisitorsaround.
If for some reason in the future you lose access to the devices you have already logged into Keybase with then you'll permanently lose access to that account with absolutely no way to recover any of the files, messages, etc... it contains. It may be unlikely you'd lose access to multiple devices at once but seems risky to even continue using that account without the paper key. Luckily you can generate a new one from the app.
This looks really awesome. According to google scholar it went through peer review. Seeing that it would improve compression (linear time LZ77) would be cool but not only does it do that but also compute search index data structures. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Space-Efficient+C...
No one ever remained illiterate because they didn't have access to books! /s
The last time I had an abscess, I went to an urgent care. I paid cash ($80), told the doctor that I believed I had an abscess, and asked for a prescription for antibiotics since I was traveling and it would be at least a couple of days before I could see my dentist. He did a very cursory oral exam, wrote the prescription, and we were done.
I'm not a (neuro-, or any other) scientist, but I'm suspicious of the common narrative that sleeping on the problem => unconscious background processing => solution to the problem. IMO, when you're "stuck" you're basically in a local minima that's not good enough. With computers you just restart at a random point and continue, but people are really bad at being random.

Moreover, there's the: don't think about an elephant right now => you just thought of an elephant, "problem". That is, the more you've been thinking about the problem a certain way, trying to force yourself to think differently only reinforces the original line of thought, leading back to the same local minima.

Thus, IMO the more likely mechanism that walking away from a problem and coming back to it later leads to a better solution, is more that you get a better random restart, and you have time to forget the prior line of thought, so you're more likely to think differently / explore a different branch of the search tree.
"Dialog boxes asking for passwords are a very popular social engineering tactic designed to trick users into giving attackers their passwords"

Apple is extremely guilty of normalizing the frequent entry of passwords. I recently reinstalled a Mac and an iPad, and for each device I must've entered my Apple ID password seven or eight times. in the normal course of getting things done I then enter either this, or my local login password, many times a week.

When your password is twenty characters of line noise or an extended passphrase this is thoroughly irksome, especially on virtual keyboards like the iPad. It is no surprise to me that less security conscious folks, faced with this onslaught of excessive credential demand, choose shorter i.e. easily cracked passwords; and no surprise that everyone becomes less suspicious of the sham password dialog.

So when reading of yet another photographic burglary from a cracked iCloud account, we should always lay part of the blame at Apple's feet, for systematically normalizing the frequent entry of credentials.

That is not the end of Apple's social engineering enablement shame. Another glaring blunder is in Apple Mail, where the "To:" field is shown with your real name, even when the sender did not include this. The humans respond positively to the use of their given name, so this heightens the verisimilitude of scam messages.
Some would compare it to a form of slavery, and I think such comparisons are reasonable.

"The only difference as compared with the old, outspoken slavery is this, that the worker of today seems to be free because he is not sold once for all, but piecemeal by the day, the week, the year, and because no one owner sells him to another, but he is forced to sell himself in this way instead, being the slave of no particular person, but of the whole property-holding class." (Engels)

"The slave frees himself when, of all the relations of private property, he abolishes only the relation of slavery and thereby becomes a proletarian; the proletarian can free himself only by abolishing private property in general."

The idea that you can "quit at any time" is a farce; you must then find employment under someone else in order to survive, or manage to amass sufficient capital, something which is not an option for most people, especially with family. An extreme example of this logic utterly failing is in those developing nations with sweatshops.
I don't mean to come off as harsh, but your reasons are wrong. Piketty isn't some random guy who threw together some numbers and came up with a theory. His work is extensively researched and reviewed. He's thought of and responded to every objection you made. If you are interested in the topic then you should definitely read his book.

Take a look at your numbers again. You have made multiple mistakes. Your 8.4% annualized rate is wrong - You can't just take the start and end points to calculate an average. Plus, you are plugging quarterly data into yearly calculations.
The issue is whether people exercise their rights "under the protection" of more powerful (but private) entities. For example, in some of the cases cited in the New York Times, courts acknowledged that non-competes were not to be enforced -- but only after the hiring company went to bat for their new staffer.

If someone enters into an unenforceable agreement, they should be freed of it speedily and inexpensively. Maybe the terms of the agreement are such that its' unenforceability is non-obvious; but it is ultimately the one bringing suit who should bear the cost of wasting everyone's time in that case.
Knowing how to pirate is quite different from being able to pirate easily. Torrenting is a small niche now (at least in the US) because of ISP DMCA notices etc., whereas billions of people own smartphones worldwide. If someone releases a netflix-ripper app, it would quite likely see a higher adoption than bittorrent.
ya, a couple years ago.
Ask HN: Software Engineer to Technical Architect
How can a Software Engineer (Web developer) move into the role of a Technical Architect. Would like to hear from those of you who took this path.
It ain't
Reminded me of the Fat City game on the Apple II:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ejm2zUXgMxo

Never really thought about the name of the game, which involves smashing down buildings.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Fat-City-Washington-Wastes-Taxes/dp/0...
https://qz.com/981277/the-fast-furious-franchise-is-huge-in-...

Hollywood movies do well in China but aren't particularly profitable.
Yeah. The feudal arrangement was always understand as "reciprocal" and one can argue, it was pretty good relative to the alternatives at times.
I've never seen a dental plan without a yearly maximum benefit.
I think all these are stopgap measures until proper hardware DRM comes of age.
Nice.

I was experimenting for a long time till I decided that kisrhombille was the way to go. You can do a lot with it.

And it is smooth scaling, like square and equilateral triangle tessellation. I mean you can describe the same shape with an arbitrary range of resolutions (unlike with hexagons).
Yup. My Apple password is one of the very few remaining ones that isn't a random string generated by 1Password because Apple makes me enter it all the time. :(
>There are going to be people that blame Netflix for this, but it's really not their fault.

There are going to be people that continue to excuse netflix and believe it is all pressure from content providers.

News Flash for people that believe that, Netflix is a content provider now. They fully support DRM for their content, they are not being "pressured" by content providers to do this. They support anti-consumer policies like DRM, and are just like the MPAA in this regards

Stop allowing Netflix to hide behind their PR machine and blame 3rd parties for polices they fully support and endorse

No I do not believe for 1 second Neflix is being pressured by anyone to enact these draconian drm polices nor where they forced to support EME in HTML5.

Netflix is just another anti-consumer, anti-freedom corporation.
> Lisp and Smalltalk actually suffer from the same problem: late-binding sucks.

That's a feature, not a bug. Late binding rocks.

> This plays havoc with your ability to do static analysis, and languages that hinder static analysis should not be used in real-world systems.

The real world is full of late bound languages; much of the internet runs off late bound languages including this site. There's a million Rails and Python apps out there, so basically this "opinion" of yours is not bound to reality.

All of biology is late-bound, cells communicate via message passing, so the oldest and most complex real world systems we know of are late bound. To dismiss late binding is naive at best.
I skimmed the abstract and the paper and didn't see any, but that doesn't surprise me either. This is a theoretical computer science paper. It doesn't need code to show correctness, as long as they prove their claims. I'm curious why you're seeking such code?

edit: why the downvotes? Theoretical CS academics basically do math and very few write any actual code to supplement their papers.
Full transcript here: https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/6b043z/tom_mueller_...

His comments regarding competitors are pretty obvious, and have been given by SpaceX executives in the past 5-7 years. I doubt Tom Mueller will have much issues for the comments themselves.

That said, for those following SpaceX, there is some very good parts of this speech + Q&A
What I would love to see is a reason. Any program that requests elevated privileges should have to state to me why it wants those privileges. It's really frustrating to get this dialog pop up and have no idea what it's doing.
In general the techniques in zstd/lzma are much faster than using compressed text indexes.

As a somewhat expert in the field I doubt that this paper has any practical implications.
The World Is Getting Hacked. Why Don’t We Do More to Stop It?
Baidu often gives me better results than Google for Chinese search queries, particularly when looking for pages not blocked in mainland to share with people there.
I am sure it is, I am also sure if netflix has a ethical problem with DRM, and is actually in active opposition to DRM they would put forth the effort to allow their content DRM free, eliminate geo-fences, and allow the app on Rooted devices limited to only Netflix owned content

They however are not opposed to DRM like many people believe, they are Huge supporters and developers of DRM technology.

If you oppose DRM, Netflix is just as much an enemy as the MPAA is
What do you think is more likely - that the man you saw is ignorant of alternatives to bank accounts and has attempted to solve the issue in good faith, only to be unable to find any way to get a bank account or proxy... or that he was lying and hoping to play on the sympathies of passers by?