skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's two major types of monitoring you should be concerned with, log aggregation and metrics collection.

For log aggregation the most mature open-source solution I know of is the ELK stack (Elasticsearch for storage, Logstash for aggregation, Kibana for visualization). Set that up (bonus points if you use Puppet/Chef/Ansible/Whatever to set it up for you), and make sure you can detect anomalies from your visualization interface.

For metrics collection, Prometheus has a special place in my heart, I love its architecture. That said there are quite a few options, InfluxDB is another (arguably simpler) option. You can then use something like Grafana to visualize the metrics.

For configuration management tools, Chef is complicated and you better know Ruby and have a few months to dig into it. Puppet is simpler, but has a lot of weird quirks. Ansible is simple, but not as powerful (or used); so pick your poison, they all are pretty similar conceptually.

Basically at the end of your journey you should be able to kill any server (or network connection, or application running on a server) and be alerted to it in near realtime. You should be able to diagnose what's wrong quickly using Kibana and Grafana, and finally you should be able to destroy and recreate the server using a few well understood commands and have it be completely reconfigured and ready to accept connections. Of course this is pie in the sky (like having perfect unit/integration testing for a very large application), but that should be the goal.
If I found the company really wanted to keep me out of the loop then I'll assume that I'm not a part of the new direction and plan accordingly. They can let me know what they want from me when I put my new job offer down on his desk.

If I'm a new employee then sure, it's new enough to where my life hasn't settled yet. But after I've been there a year or so, a reorg is basically already like getting another job. If I'm not a part of that process then I'm going to regain control of my destiny myself.
Apple Seeds Fifth Beta of iOS 10.3.3 to Developers
Proposed feeder design:

Massive hopper (non-tapered if the tapering causes jams), feeding into slowly rotating (60 rpm) spiral-inner drum, falling onto very fast moving (10 feet per second) belt.

Parts get spread into a ~2 inch thick layer inside the drum, and then falling (at least a foot) onto the fast moving belt will then likely separate them further. For parts that end up entangled, end up on the belt too close together, or are unrecognisable in the orientation they fall, simply redirect them back into the top of the hopper to be resorted.

Even a 50% successful sort rate should be good enough.
Because its convenient and easy to use.
Umm... why do people always assume "hosting it yourself" is more secure and not less? Do you have Slack's security expertise and budget? In my experience when small to mid-size companies attempt to manage security themselves they do a passable job but are convinced they are doing an excellent job - until they get hacked.

Larger companies usually have the budget, tools and expertise. But even then there are lots big companies with mediocre security too.
See http://kaiostech.com/. B2G lives, for now -- the "G" (for Gecko) part is not likely to last. Blonk, not Gonk, coming, I hope with Muon (https://github.com/brave/muon/) included, but the "Muonk" name goes too far ;-).
I do have a robots.txt, but for whatever reason its not found by Google
Long time ago there was an attempt to build an userland in Ada, sadly they only managed to get an handful of developers.
The usual answer is "the self-hosted options are worse to use and make people hate them". Mattermost is a prime example, it's really clunky and uncomfortable to use. I like Rocket Chat and have hosted an instance of it myself, but it's shot through with inconsistencies and annoyances that Slack just doesn't have.

The notion that self-hosted is more secure is curious, though. Slack's security team is almost certainly better than yours, for most--not all, but most--values of "yours". You might be the rare exception (I'm certainly not, and I build reasonably secure systems by habit, if only because I don't have the time or money to focus solely on a chat service), but I doubt it.
Exactly — rewriting a time tested daemon written in an unsafe language to an untested daemon in the same unsafe language. The worst possible option.
Forget air pollution the difference of noise pollution would make electric cars worth it.
There have been billions of $ spent on synthetic hydrocarbons research, so I think "we" have considered it.
> Judging by the increase in accuracy from 16K images to 60K images there is something of a diminishing rate of return here.

This is a well-known thing in machine learning. As far as I know all ML algorithms have this property, where the learning curve is basically logarithmic and each additive increase in performance requires multiplicatively more training material.
We discuss nothing sensitive in chat, just as we refrain from doing so over unencrypted email. Pretty straightforward.
I am working with IPA annotated contents and I have linguists in my team. I understand your point (or at least I think I do), but I don't entirely concur. IPA tries to very accurate and thus covers all languages (even the click consonants used by some endangered African tribes). When you have this kind of precision employed in the context of a given natural language, you get the problem of having multiple phonetic transcriptions for the same word or syllable, all valid because from the prospective of a speaker of that language all sound the same. Yet, only one option is the closest to the pronunciation formally supported by a given authority. All you can do is to pick that one when you have to provide, and to just tolerate all the rest when you have to accept. I can hardly imagine something better than what IPA is already offering without loosing the neutral nature, so I'm yet to find valid critiques at IPA's address.
Probably no more selective than a top university.
I really don't see how Blue Apron is superior to, let's imagine for a moment, Amazon next-day delivering Whole Foods to your house with a couple of recipes included.

What am I missing here?

I personally think a much better model is high quality cooked or pre-cooked food delivered to your home. Deliver cooked restaurant quality food rapidly, like the ultimate take-out. Or just pop something in the oven for 20 min, etc. Cooking is time consuming and often annoying, the major pain point (for me and most people I know anyway) is not going to a grocery store once a week or finding recipes which are abundant online, it's the actual act of cooking for 30-60 minutes, for every dinner (or lunch), before 5 or 10 minutes of eating.

Maybe I'm the wrong target demographic, who knows.
> There's no point in considering criteria that cannot be quantified.

Sure there is. You claimed that alcohol has no benefits over water. We don't need to quantify absolutely everything to dispute that absurd claim, but point out that the benefits exist.

> The point is that alcohol is unhealthy. Unhealthiness is a relative term. Relative to the default, that is, water.

Again - not true. Water cannot save you from cardiovascular disease. And water doesn't provide any sort of stress relief, taste, or enjoyment unless you're dehydrated.

> evidence that alcohol is healthy compared to its downsides

From the Harvard article I posted: "More than 100 prospective studies show an inverse association between moderate drinking and risk of heart attack, ischemic (clot-caused) stroke, peripheral vascular disease, sudden cardiac death, and death from all cardiovascular causes. (4) The effect is fairly consistent, corresponding to a 25 percent to 40 percent reduction in risk."

"For a 60-year-old man, a drink a day may offer protection against heart disease that is likely to outweigh potential harm (assuming he isn’t prone to alcoholism)."

> What does alcohol give you that water cannot? Nothing.

Not true and already covered.
That's the thing, he seems to be ignorant of just how redundant and reliable the system is. He uses the example of a worldwide economic collapse if Google went down for a month. Which is probably true. Thing is, that's about as likely as a worldwide economic collapse from the US being nuked off the face of the planet and everyone else left untouched.

The beauty of software is that it can be replaced/repaired quickly. If a power plant gets utterly destroyed, it could take a minimum of months to build a new one. If a piece of software gets corrupted, you load from backups or buy a new copy. Downtime is incredibly minimized for even the worst designed system.

That's not to say disasters can't happen, but they will be limited in time and scope so long as there's enough money to throw as the problem, and if the amount of money-throwing ever becomes too much to swallow then we might finally see some widespread solid security practices.

Honestly simply keeping systems updated would mitigate most of the potential "devastating" attacks, the reason the recent ransomware attacks got as far as they did is lack of funding/will, because it's largely cheaper for organizations to let themselves get pwned then it is for them to protect themselves.
It's not meaningless at all, it's a close approximation of light absorption that happens to be measurably and perceptually indistinguishable from the physical spectral absorption process, save for a few corner cases that are being worked on.

It's amusing that you brush it off with "Oh, there are a few corner cases." Those corner cases are why it doesn't look real.

And no, it's not 99.9% accurate. You may be thinking of constrained scenes, where e.g. you shine a laser on a substance of a specific color and then measure the resultant color combination. But the complexity of real life defies such analysis.

If you're going to say I've missed some recent work, you'll need to cite sources. Then we can debate those.

EDIT: To clarify:

Your argument is attacking the non-simulation aspects of rendering without addressing whether a simulation that is simpler than real life is acceptable. If I can't tell the difference, does it count?

My argument is that if you get a bunch of people together, show them simulated video and real video, and ask "Which of these are simulated?" they will correctly identify the simulated video as "not real" with significant accuracy -- given modern techniques, probably >95% accuracy. The simulation needs to be of a non-trivial scene, like a waterfall or a valley. When you show real video side-by-side with simulated techniques, there's no contest.

If we truly knew how to make simulated video that looks real, without mixing any real-life footage, then the observers in the above scenario wouldn't be able to do any better than random chance. But they can, because we can't.
It seems like this page is trying to show a bunch of Musk's "failures", and really its showing how ambitious he is. He is succeeding at many things not just any one thing.
Just because I own my own house doesn't mean I can blast a jet engine I'm testing inside it... there are rules and laws that exist in the world.

If you think those rules and laws have a negative impact, then work to fix them.
I often think of something in a way that is not a voice but more a compressed idea, then a subsecond later my inner monologue says this to me and as it's doing it I think "you are wasting your time inner monologue I know what you are going to say" yet never manage to suppress it before it is done. I hope that does not sound too mad.
The point of using a simple respelling is to show it is not pronounced "Fran Kice". Anything better than that is an improvement.

"say" and "seh" sound pretty much the same to me, but I'm not a monolingual English speaker, I grew up in Germany and the US, and I might also mix up things.

I find the first syllable harder to describe, since there is no way to note these nasal sounds in English (actually, I think they should be called anti-nasal, since no air goes through the nose when I say it, but I disgress). But I think in general, some basics of French pronunciation are known to most English speakers, so using a French word is a bad example.
I think it's cool.
Wow, that's really interesting. Hadn't noticed the change in the mission statement. For reference, it used to be: "Give people the power to share and make the world more open and connected."

They changed from making the world more "open" to making it "closer", which are antonyms in a certain way. They changed from the idea of having Facebook be this sort of universal community of people getting together to searching for more intimacy, getting people closer, etc. but they keep talking about "the world."

I've always thought there was room for an "anti-Facebook" that would be the opposite of their original vision statement. Its goal is not to "share things", i.e. to make things public, but to create more private communities that are tighter; not to make the world "more connected" (everyone having 5000 friends) but better connected (i.e. the value of relationships is higher).

It seems like FB may be trying to go in that direction after all, but who knows what they really meant.
I am a mature worker looking in the Washington dc area. There seems to be a lot of competition. Do you think I would have better luck in Atlanta?
Show HN: Newsbin – annotate news with wikipedia summaries
The most successful software apps in the world are built with PHP. Facebook, Wikipedia, Slack, WordPress, Flickr, Yahoo. Users don't care about your tech.
Corollary question: Why do you assume that Slack's security expertise and security budget is greater than your own?

All we can do is assume that Slack cares about security enough to be sufficient. Last I checked, they didn't have any form of compliance certification, yet HIPPA, PCI, etc. compliant clients use them without reservation.
Here’s a related experiment:

Try counting without “talking.” That is, without saying the numbers in your head.

Try tapping on the desk or your lap an arbitrary number of times without going “1, 2, 3..” and see if you can still know how many times you tapped.

——

Follow-up question: Is language necessary for thought?

Try forming thoughts without forming any words in your head.

You might notice that there’s a much faster “higher priority process” in the head that already “knows” what to say before you “hear” the words of that thought forming in your head..

But there WILL be words. It may seem almost impossible to suppress the formation of words while thinking.

Do “feral children” that grow up without any human contact have the ability to “think?”

——

Also, during inner monologues or what have you, do you refer to yourself in the singular or plural?

e.g., do you go “I should [do that]” or “We should [do that]?”
Because when you host it yourself, it can be off of the public internet.
Intelligence is overrated, hard work is where it's at. Your peers not as smart as you will get much farther through hard work.
Or you've made some pretty shitty decisions and need to fix your life! Sometimes the voices are trying to help!
That literally doesn't matter.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13766092

The submitter is editorializing.
Yes, 30 minutes nap.

It takes practice, routine and the actual need for a nap, to fall asleep immediately, though.
Hosting shit yourself != more secure, and only someone with a highly naive view of their capabilities as an organization would make that assessment. Facebook is written in PHP too, but you don't see that being a huge secure vulnerability, do you?

Slack has an entire security organization dedicated exclusively to securing its stuff. My security team is focused on securing our operational systems.

Do you run your own bank? How could you outsource something so critical (literally all your money and financial details!) to a 3rd party who doesn't even let you audit their stuff?! It's just a matter of time before there's a huge incident.

Do you run your own electrical generation facility? How could you outsource something so critical to a 3rd party? I bet they don't even have an SLA!

etc. etc.
If you describe how to compile Python to JS, that's technically interesting.

When it's framed as "Remove JS from the world to make it better", that invites a lot of drama.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqAsOxUrXIw at about the 54 second mark you can see how this system does size sorting of trash (legos are not trash)

A combination of pins and holes will get you roughly sized items.

A vibrating table with lots of W snapped channels underneath is going to help too.

A belt with "scoops" is a great way to feed out of your initial hopper, if you drop it onto a perpendicular belt (one with W grooves) your going to get a good initial separation more naturally.

Air knives and puffers are your friend as well. Since you already have a detection system running it twice might be of benefit to you, just puff off anything that you can't sort as a single item.

I don't think "quite" and "lego" really go together so no happy solution for you there other than sound isolation.
I think both options have tradeoffs.

If you use a service, you're outsourcing your security to perhaps more competent people, but you're making yourself a larger target.

Self-hosting makes you a smaller target, but you're taking all the risk on yourself.

Neither is a panacea.
Perhaps there should be a 0% chance that those things are on networks and a 0% chance they run a normal consumer grade OS.

If the software in power plants were treated like their hardware it wouldn't be a problem.
That's not very useful for your CEO/CTO/CFO/sales/etc when they are offsite or traveling.
Right, humans have a massive global supply chain available to them. The variety of foods available to a raw food dieter probably come from multiple continents and travel hundreds or thousands of miles to get to them. Obviously the energy expenditure required makes this sort of diet (and really any modern diet) unsustainable on just the calories consumed by eating.
I don't hear a voice in my head nor do I really have the sort of internal monologue or dialogue that many people describe here. My thoughts are much more spatial, for lack of a better word. A sense of expanse and topology, neither visual nor aural. I have to go through a step of composition to put thoughts into words, whether writing or speaking.

I've had close contact with a paranoid schizophrenic relative, and from what I can tell they really experience intrusive "other" thoughts and perceptions. It's not always a voice talking in their head or over their shoulder, but sometimes a sense that ideas or beliefs have intruded from elsewhere with no clear sense of arrival or beginning. Like a glitch in the matrix.
Not not saying that there isn't room in America's big economy for that, but the topic was "Which professions are paid too much given their value to society" -- Real estate agent is an easy, immediate answer to this question. The essentials of the home buying process are provided by the lawyers, inspectors, and appraisers.
The parent asked you to compare it to alcoholic drinks, not compare it with lower intake of itself.
The game under discussion doesn't collect PII, and all personal information was freely published by Hamill himself, so there's really no problem here. However, the same would not be true of most similar circumstances, and I'm encouraged that at least some people are aware of the issue.
I do this too. ctrl-meta-q is really all I need... Sometimes i'll do rainbow parens if i'm feeling festive.
I don't understand napping, never have. Are you really that tired that you must sleep in the middle of the day? Maybe you just need better rest at night, or maybe you need to exercise more or eat better food? Unless you're a toddler then napping feels like compensating for something else.

To each their own, if it works for you that's great.
Release Notes for Safari Technology Preview 34
You should look again:

https://slack.com/security
It also is the exact opposite of what's in the article. If people do this, there will be more JavaScript not less. This is nothing more than a thinly veiled advertisement.
nope. water also reduces the risk of heart disease [1]

https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/155/9/827/58224/Water-O...

not to mention alcohol has many negative side effects you're not mentioning. it's a home run in favor of water. again, if it's so good for you, would you give it to a child? no, no you wouldn't. why? because overall you know intuitively it's not good for a child.

how about you show me all of the studies of all of the bad things alcohol does for you. water has no negative side effects, by the way. even if you're right (you're not), a small benefit is irrelevant. heroin also has benefits.
A selection of reasons I have heard.

- Because self hosted HipChat / IRC / XMPP / is not cool enough.

- Because we are all supposed to use Lync / Skype for Business, but it sucks on OSX / Linux / in general.

- Because we are a small team, and maintaining a chat server is too much for us.

- Because we don't know (or want to know) how Slack works.

- Because shiney, such giffy, such memes.

- Because its free.

- Because my software engineers don't know how to connect to IRC

There is varying levels of good and bad reasons in there. (personally I am still a irrsi / IRC person, but I fully acknowledge I am not in the majority anymore)
wrong.

https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/155/9/827/58224/Water-O...
"ou seem unaware that Bork's Antitrust Paradox only came out in 1978 [1]"

I'm quite aware.

" Antitrust [in 1960] was about protecting small businesses."

Citation?

I gave you a case from the late 40's that was about protecting consumer welfare.

You give me a news article about a law professor who loved robert bork's work?

Look, Bork was influential for sure.

I can and have cited you cases where, over a short period of time, the supreme court decided that the sherman act was unworkable (see all the various changes around resale price maintenance, over the years as well), and started pushing towards other theories for antitrust.

Contrary to these claims, it's not "Bork wrote a book, things changed overnight".
That's just a history rewrite.

Bork was the final nail in the coffin.
Php is more secure than C.
You should assume that chat logs can become public at anytime, if you host it yourself or not. Don't put sensitive/embarrassing unencrypted information in chat or email. People forget this is still data at rest.
Hey Siri, an ancient algorithm may help you grasp metaphors
and what about if your network is compromised? For most small-medium businesses, that's more likely than Slack being compromised.
Docker on OS X: Hyperkit Not Ready
You might notice that some of the articles have the letter 'S' highlighted. I added S accidentally yesterday, Wikipedia (apparently) has an article about the letter S, and I haven't removed it from the database yet.

I need to find a way to filter annotations a bit more.
I jumped straight to, "dental plan"
Legitimate problem, and legitimate question. This is the kind of thing I come to HN to see asked and answered. Too bad no one's taken a stab at it. Maybe that's what the "Facebook killer" will get right. Or Facebook themselves, to prevent being "killed."
>> It's just a matter of time before there's a huge incident.

I suppose that's correct. When (or maybe if, but probably when) Slack gets breached/hacked/owned it's going to be huge because a huge number of people are going to lose something that they didn't want to lose.

When I'm self hosting something and that thing gets breached/hacked/owned it's going to be huge for me because I and/or my company are going to lose something that we didn't want to lose.

I don't believe I can keep my stuff much safer than the big guys, though the point about Slack having a massive target is a good one. Maybe that makes it less secure?

I really don't know what's better for us in the case.
Improve your React development experience with Storybook and Percy
I'm pretty sure the "hug" part means it's not an attack.