skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
But "ease" isn't the problem - the issues OEMs have are because they literally go hack and fork the AOSP source itself (making upstream merges hard or impossible) for sometimes really dumb reasons. This is also the source of constant headaches for us app developers (like the recent case where Realm found out that Samsung broke memmove() on their devices!).

The other issue is that there's zero (0, no) incentive to update the devices. No matter how easy it is - the OEMs see that as a pure cost that won't be recuperated. For each of the (literaly!) 100 devices they churn out per year they need to get new drivers from the SoC manufaturer (and Qualcomm pretty much does not give a crap about SoCs of the previous year, especially lower end ones - which makes this process stop there), update the kernel and move all their specific hacks to it.

I don't see how these changes Google did will change incentives. The only way we might see a change in this field is by a few class action suites from users being left without updates or regulators putting down the punitive damages hammer. Everything else is just Google kindly hoping OEMs will stop being dicks from the goodness of their heart.

In car industry we have strong regulation which demands that your car is serviceable at least 5 years since last unit was sold (and that their security issues are fixed by recalls). We need that for arguably the most important electronic devices in our lives as well.
Disclaimer up front: I work for GM.

GM was definitely involved in shutting down streetcars[W], but it's not entirely correct to say that GM was the cause of shutting down streetcars.

In addition to whatever GM did, look at the expansion of cities in this time period (1920s to 1950s). Paved streets could be added much more quickly than streetcar lines[0]. The automobile was there to use them by this time. Buses can also use paved streets.

Paved streets have a much larger network effect than streetcar lines due to the time and cost to add the streetcar rails. (Think switched network vs old AT&T system)

Faced with the growth of paved streets and the cost of operating parallel transit systems (bus and streetcar lines), many operators stopped operating streetcars - you can replace streetcars with buses, but you can't replace buses with streetcars.

---

[0] There's a parallel debate to be had here about density, but at the time it was much easier and cost effective[1] to grow the suburbs than the city center. A huge amount of american purchasing power was unlocked because people could afford to buy their own reasonably priced homes in the suburbs[1].

1. Again, plenty of room for debate on this.

[W] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp...
Believe is the key word here. This is impossible or nearly impossible to prove, so you can believe whatever idea you want. It just isn't science.

My personal beliefs are similar but I do expand it to the cosmic stage. I can't answer "why is there something rather than nothing?" But as soon as something exists, either through luck or some plan it does everything it can to ensure it doesn't go back to nothing.
Heartbleed is a very different class of vulnerability -- it allows sensitive information to leak but does not provide root access.
Adding Support for Semantic UI with Simple Form
Breaking Up the NSA (2014)
Someone probably got a bonus for inventing that

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20061101-03/?p=...
Even if it was permanent (it isnt). Why would painting dirty/rusty/messed up stuff with a coat of black ink be "defacing our landscape"?
If anything the black ink would cover up the dirt, rust, blemishes, etc with an even coating of black. To my eyes this would be much better looking than disabused and dirty.
So: A makes a product with flaws, B makes an exploit, C leaks that exploit, D adds a harmful payload to the exploit and goes on to extort/profit from E, who has computers systems they failed to patch in time... and somehow B and only B is at fault?
I visited Seattle recently and wondered what was up with that. That and the monorail...

As it is, I mostly walked everywhere, including from the Space Needle over to Safeco Field.
Same here, but they already got my page view, and don't really care if I read the piece too. I wonder if the random scrolling back-forth ensures all the banners get actual time on screen, to maximize ad income.
> But in fact it would probably help the first person to know that their depression isn't, in a strict sense, real: they can get out it by improving their external circumstances, while the second person can't.

But that's kind of the crux of the matter, isn't it?

First off, we still know so little about mental health that we can't accurately tell which is which. And it strikes me as really harmful to categorize people's issues as 'real' or 'not real' based on vague notions. Autism, for example, was initially seriously considered a result of bad parenting, and the consequences are noticeable to this day.

Second, even if we can distinguish between, say, depression because 'raised with too much self-esteem' or 'chemical imbalance', this is mostly relevant for treatment, not diagnosis.

If the person in question cannot find their own way out of the situation, the problem is by definition 'real'. The only difference might be how the situation is handled. In fact, in many cases the treatment is the same, regardless of how someone got there.

I've seen a lot of harm caused by people arbitrarily distinguishing problems as either 'nature' or 'nurture' or 'internal' or 'external'. This distinction is not only extremely vague, it doesn't actually matter to anyone except those who are developing or implementing solutions. To everyone else, I'd advise compassion, support, and avoiding judgment.

That said, you do have a point. Personally I've become more and more convinced that for various reasons, some good, most bad, our current treatment models err on the side of adjusting yourself to fit your environment, while the most beneficial solutions I've seen involve shaping your environment to fit 'you', or at the very least a combination of both. Regardless of whether an issue is 'internal' or 'external' (again, I don't think making the distinction is as valuable as it seems).
But this bug literally couldn't crash any modern OS as the feature is not available in 64-bit mode.
They were hackers who acquired a trove of state secrets and were looking to make a quick buck. I've linked an archive of their initial statement below. I think it speaks volumes about how far the NSA can be trusted that these people were the ones to leak the tools instead of a state actor or someone previously known.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160815124425/https://github.co...
If you like JavaScript you may give Nightmare.js a try. It's so simple yet so powerful. I've used it quite a lot and never had a complaint.
Under those constraints, Chebyshev approximation will probably outperform minimax. Minimax approximations have non-zero error at the endpoints, so they wouldn't quite hit zero at sin(pi) and your relative error would be horrible.
Why not just take the least significant bit and build the random stream from that?

As the comment from matt_walfeck suggests:

> couldn't the exact same results be achieved with a simple USB webcam

Random radiation flipping the least significant bit of the CMOS sensor should be enough. If you're really worried about randomness, you can combine several streams (XOR) and get an even distribution of bits.
just encrypt with the public key ?

Get the private key when you pay...
You are talking about an abstract case. Yes, if an objects lifetime is perfectly easy to determine, manual memory management is faster. But in many typical programs with real dynamic memory requirements, this is not the case. One has to keep track about the life time of objects in the program logic. Either by storing additional information as for reference counting, or careful designing your program logic so the status of an object is always clearly known.

The latter might not bear a cost in CPU cycles, but certainly in programmer cycles, if the program logic allows for it at all. It also puts the burden of correctness on the programmer vs the garbage collector. And for most contemporary programs, correctness is the larger challenge then execution speed, especially with GCs which can run in parallel with your program logic, so can utilize unused CPUs "for free".
Previous discussions:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13566917

https://openreview.net/pdf?id=rJv6ZgHYg

https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/comments/6ailoh/r_u...

https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/comments/5kfs23/r_u...

https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/comments/5cw3lr/r_1...
Presumably it's the fact that syntactic analysis involves assigning parts of speech and function to tokens, which in English and Spanish are usually words separated by spaces:

Say it to me
V Pronoun Preposition Pronoun
\/ \/
VP PP

But "dímelo" is just one word. You need to tokenize it into "dí me lo" before parsing, and presumably that's not immediately obvious to kids.

Another example, this time from formal Portuguese:

Falar-lhe-ei
Lit: Tell-him-[I will]
Why wouldn't they be trustable? You always have the option of building it yourself. (disclaimer, I'm one of the leads & run their infrastructure)
people stand on it, and probably spit, animals pee or poo on it, some paint wouldn't damage it, it would probably protect it. You are so negative, cheer up.
Well, gun manufacturers have been sued in the US. Now they're protected by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.

But NSA is part of US DOD. So the chances of a successful claim are about zero.
He wasn't just involved in c#, he was the lead on c#.
> Take the same training data, but this time randomly jumble the labels (i.e., such that there is no longer any genuine correspondence between the label and what’s in the image).

What's a 'genuine correspondence'? The network has clearly picked out some image features that correspond to the assigned labels. Just because they're not the features you're thinking of doesn't mean they don't exist.
Doesn't work very well when the people you know in real life (and whose judgment you trust) can only rarely afford to eat out.
What sort of upload speeds do people doing cloud backups have?

I could never contemplate uploading 100s of Mb each day with my crappy ADSL2+
This is pretty fucked up.
Most importantly: it must be the backup server that has to log into your computer to backup, and not the other way around. That way, if your computer/server is compromised, the backups are still there. If you make the error to connect to the backup server, a hacker could also log into it and delete everything.

I my backup server uses rsnapshot and you can only log into it with ssh + key + OTP.
So much this. GCs don't mean you shouldn't care about reasonable memory allocations. In hot paths, not allocating will always be faster than allocating. Having a GC does not prevent you from using object pools and buffers, where it is a clear performance win. But having a GC means, you are not required to do so, where there is no bottle neck. The difference between a "fast" and a "slow" GCed language often is, how well the programmer keeps some control about memory allocations.

Fun fact: the Go GC is written in pure Go code, which does not perform any heap allocations. So there is enough control to write code in Go which does not require any heap allocations. There is even a compiler switch for the development of the GC code which makes heap allocations a compile error.
I can see GDP dropping massively.
Damn. I always purchase the icons, that's really peak that others don't do the same.
Metal and cotton are different materials with different properties. Cotton doesn't rust easily. Iron doesn't get tie-dyed easily.
The OP is talking about big orgs, so it's kind of a dick move to hijack the conversation and proclaim your agenda to be morally superior. You don't have to put other people down to make your point. It's childish, counter-productive, and you leave yourself open to criticism that your work is also The Wrong Thing because you're not volunteering for some greater cause like helping sick and dying people in developing nations. But I guess if a desire to be better than everyone else motivates you to do some good then I guess it's not a total loss?
The take rate on paid software updates probably wouldn't be good enough for that to be a realistic option.
Respecting that much of what you say here is true, and acknowledging that I've got a foul mouth and attitude problem myself at times, as well as an increasing abiding contempt, bred from far too much familiarity, with information technology and the infotech commercial world, the reality is that much of this stuff is, in aggregate and in practice, hard.

For ... various reasons, including a great deal of failure-to-anticipate (or more often: Choosing To Deny) Reality and Consequences. Which Bellovin details, and has been detailing for damned near five decades now.

But that still leaves us Where We Are Now:

* With hundreds of millions of Broken Systems.

* More being shipped daily.

* Strapped organisations and staffs.

After fighting the present fire, some sensible approaches to reducing future threats, including cranking up consequential liability on the firms, and backers, and financers, and stockholders, which produced the present mess, such that future risks are properly costed in to decisionmaking, might be a useful activity.

Thank you for your volunteer service.
> However, money can also provide the means to choose your challenge rather than to be forced to always deal with survival.

This. I agree with the comment overall, but just in case someone is reading my comments from last night, there's another thing that I wasn't clear about.

Living to survive is something that no one can't possibly relate to unless they are already in that situation.

Although I never felt it, I have a mixed background and witnessed some realities of poverty. Let's take one scenario, which may be simple to you and me but can throw an entire poor family off-balance:

Say that you're sick. You may not afford to get medicine, and even if you can, it becomes a choice whether to sacrifice something else, like lunch money for your kids. Say that after a prolonged period of time, you decide that you do need that medicine after all. So your children goes hungry, and if they go to school, it will affect their studies. Their school isn't exactly well-off either. And now they have a parent who's sick, and who they have to take care of because there's no one else to - so they may have to miss school too. The parent has always been the breadwinner so the children are stuck in a deeper dilemma - who's going to bring the money in now?

Cue in multiple scenarios like this, where hard choices have to be made all the time amongst an environment where drugs, prostitution, crimes etc are more easily accessible ... what chances do these children have when they're all grown up?

Clearly when I was depressed, I romanticised those who were poorer than me (though it was true that they had something which I didn't have.) And like the commenter above this post, I agree that rich people can sometimes miss the plot of living itself. But poverty is a terrible master of destiny. It's a cycle that not a lot of people, let alone the generations that come after them, can just escape.

If you are reading this, please remember that you're actually wealthy, whether in money, health, youth, have access to the Internet etc. You can most definitely afford to 'tinker' - and go for it! But never forget the majority who are still trapped and have to make hard choices all the time.
SQL seems to target a weird niche to me.

Basic language containers (arrays, lists, etc.) tend to be much more convenient for lightweight data. No server to install configure and secure - everything can just live in code and the occasional serialized file. On the more heavyweight side of things, SQL isn't really amenable to GPUs - problematic for some heavyweight data crunching, or even basic computer graphics.

It starts to make sense in the context of a server farm, but leaving it publicly exposed to the internet is a security fail - so the first thing you do with this networked appliance is lock it down to only be accessible from your server farm, or even just your local server via loopback if you're feeling particularly paranoid - writing your own layer that exposes a severely restricted API that only allows the exact operations you want to permit against your database. A lot of people will get this far and then still contribute to the CVE statistics on SQLI vulnerabilities, despite parameterized queries solving this problem. Or store blobs and defeat most of the point of using SQL in the first place. Or denormalize and shard their database for scaling purposes, losing many of the benefits of SQL enforced invariants in the process.

It's not so much that I keep reinventing SQL on my projects, so much as I keep failing to come up with a good excuse to reinvent my existing approaches in SQL.
Why I wouldn't be engaging in good faith? I really believe that UBI is impossible.
To be fair that monorail was built a really long time ago. And are any of those things really better than the existing buses?
Operational compentency is something which a sufficiently well-funded and -capitalised organisation can accomplish.

Though there are systemic risks involved ehre as well.

I'm quite torn, myself.
"We've got to install MS17-010; these are serious holes."

"We can't just yet. We've been testing it for the last two weeks; it breaks the shipping label software in 25% of our stores."

But in this case its bollocks. The patch is easy and doesn't fuck too many things.

at $work, we've had the same issue. We have three estates Windows, Linux and some solaris. The Linux estate is patched within hours of upstream fixes. Staged, starting in dev, and bubbling up to prod.

Windows, I've discovered has auto updates turned off. The servers are not in config management, or monitored.

Its not because patching is hard, its because its not seen as important, despite being repeatedly hit with cryptolocker malware.

Its just utterly pathetic.
I don't backup end-systems -- but I do have a directory with important data sync'd to several systems and the cloud using syncthing. The rest of the data I care about is in git -- everything else on the system is basically disposable.
Ok thanks for your points too, it really helps me to better handle my case.

I'm comfortable with Android and web dev, but not any php stuffs.
Out of curiosity, what about this attacks feels futuristic? If anything it feels very retro, in that it hails back to the notorious worm attacks from the earliest days of networked computing.
Yup, exactly! You can still use a keyboard and mouse while wearing them.
Out of curiosity, how does that spread?

I'm intrigued because I've seen people claim that "linux is just as vulnerable as windows to user stupidity," but I have a hard time understanding how. The vast majority of windows infections occur because somebody got tricked into running an executable file.

On every Linux distro I've used, scripts and binaries need the executable bit set or be explicitly run through the desired shell. As far as I know, no browser sets the executable bit on downloads. To run scripts, you need to know what you're doing.

Now,

curl http://... | sudo sh

is an entirely different problem. As are remote execution vulnerabilities in the kernel. As are adding random package manager repositories found on internet forums. But all seem a bit more technically involved than opening an executable file with a .pdf extension.
Appears to be an error in the CSV file of the verb database I used. Looking into using the XLS file instead.
Yes, your arguments are also right @brudgers.
Thanks for it.
But It looks like build on an established e-commerce platform can be a pain when we need to add functionalities or customize existing one.
What is your points about, please?
Reminds of that Life Explained As a Video Game... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWIi6Pytde8
macOS uses LibreSSL:

% ssh -V
OpenSSH_7.4p1, LibreSSL 2.5.0

On Linux, at least Alpine is using LibreSSL.
For some commutes, particularly to Capitol Hill and the University District, or into South Seattle or the airport, Link Light Rail is much better than the buses, largely due to it being entirely separated from street traffic for its entire line.
BIOS itself can be implemented as 32-bit code, which contains software emulator of 16-bit code. This emulator runs until CPU is switched to 32-bit protected mode by OS bootloader.
> This motivates many of the conclusions of Stoic thought: the moderation, the development of awareness about one's sphere of control.

I've always admired stoicism but found that the principles aren't exclusive to this. Buddhism, weirdly Islam too, and no doubt other sub-groups of religions such as Quaker-ism.
Where does the article state that zero training error is a good thing? The authors only show that almost every modern neural network can reach 0 training error, even if the labels are randomized (generalization impossible). Hence, they can learn the dataset by hearth. The authors can, from that, use the testing error as a generalization indicator.

Indeed a careful hyperparameter choice is the only key now to have good generalization. As I understood it, the goal here is more to show that the correlation between the regularization of the network and its generalization power is far from being clear as it is for other ML algorithms like SVM.

In short, NN hyperparameters help to reach generalization, but cannot "explain" it. It's the key difference here between practice and theory.
Wow, great comparison. It's seems as if icons make a lot of sense in places that are used constantly (like the iOS screen)
I have no idea. Anything in logs? Maybe move backups to an other location and start a new backup repo to see what happens?
Co-workers?
> I always taught to imitate kung fu, drunkeness, arms crossed like I'm pacifist, etc to encourage enemies to do something stupid to expose themselves to a fight ender. Planned to illustrate it in MMA

That sounds interesting. Are there any fighters at the moment emphasising deceptiveness in their work?
I guess it's because Unity is more designer's tool rather than programmer's - 90% of the time you just click and drag mouse around the UI.
I honestly don't think this article should have been flagged. First, say what you want, but it is an out-of-the-box way to look at the daily, decades-long drag - "hacking" it in a sense. Second, if you disagree and are, say, of the opinion that these people just fuck around due to boredom and lack of productive things to do (I don't think so, but it's possible), even then the topic is interesting to explore. Especially to tech-bent people like myself who rarely venture outside of day-to-day topics.
Big Data Is Fuelling Capacity Building and Impact in Afrika
Depends on the tool - e.g. LibGDX, MonoGame, Cocos2D-x - are more programmer-friendly, i.e. code-oriented approach. Unity, Atomic, Godot - these are designer's tools.