skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>Remember, code reviews aren’t about nitpicking through another person’s code. Use a computer to nitpick. Trust me, they are really good at it.

No, they are not good. They are good at complaining about meaningless things like braces put in an ugly way or how you named a var.

The true errors are hidden inside the logic itself.
I agree that anecdotes are useful, I disagree with publishing them in scientific journals and telling the public that we found significant results.
Gave a talk at React Rally that goes over this briefly. https://github.com/hzoo/so-how-does-babel-even-work, and a basic version of the actual Babel transform: http://astexplorer.net/#/gist/ccb201a61db3d581c8be3161bf7806...
Thought you were talking about Navy Yard, DC. It it just about the same.
Wrapped in Plastic, China’s Farmland Is Suffering
It's a good first step. Other steps we should take are to make it easier (and cheaper) for people who are awaiting trial to get out on bail if they aren't a flight risk and to cut sentence lengths across the board to be more in line with other countries.
They're probably the standardized SAE or CCS connectors so if the Tesla supports those, then yes.
> Uber has the analystics, driver ratings, customer ratings, and all that other data that it needs to deal with fraud, fraud, and bad actors

You can have all the data in the world and still make bad decisions.

Sometimes it's cheaper to just pay the customer rather than hiring more engineers to work out a fraud detection algorithm.

I think Uber has realized this.
Slap on the wrist, guaranteed:

- potentially every one of the 143M people are going to have some sort of trouble

- WORST CASE equifax shuts down, but that doesn't matter. too late.

- if everyone was to win a lawsuit for everything equifax is worth, they'd get maybe $100 minus lawyer fees.

And worse, now we have a financial system dependent on 2 companies. Making a 3rd isn't an easy matter.

::shrug::
Sure it's our job to do that. The job still gets easier when you have the law backing you up.

An excellent example is how many companies are in panic mode right now to get GDPR compliant before next year. There's a lot of security engineers and developers that finally get the budgets and time they've asked for to improve customer privacy, because the potential fallout of non-compliance is too big to ignore.
Move somewhere which has a reasonable personal identity scheme.
I'm not an incumbent in the industry. Nice try, though.

My issue here isn't with industry disruption, which I generally like. It's with hallucinatory blockchain-based hype. For years I've been hearing that Bitcoin or some other blockchain technology will disrupt money transfer and online purchasing. But Bitcoin never got any foothold in international remittances and is actually in retreat in e-commerce. Now the Bitcoin hype had metastasized into blockchain and ICO hype, but I don't think there's any more meat to it.

But if you're so sure, let's put money down. I have $500 that says no blockchain-based startup will get even 1% of the US credit reporting market in the next 5 years. We can put the bet up here: http://longbets.org

You in?
This is not really new; just think of all the stuff that came out of AT&T labs...
Nobody has done that since patch 2.3.2.
Happy to chat about this stuff.

1. Honestly, I can't think of any downside, not in consumer contracts (as opposed to b2b) anyway. I guess there are some cases where particularly favorable courts might be preferable from the corporation's point of view (there's a court in Texas that gets tons of patent suits for that reason, also there are some states that are good for corporations --- Virginia has no class actions, for example). That's about it.

2. I personally haven't. (Though, a long long time ago, I did kick enough of a stink about an arbitration clause in a car loan contract that the dealership put some money on the table to make me stop.) The thing is, most of the time, for most consumers, it doesn't really matter--the probability that I'm likely to get harmed by some transaction enough to want to be part of a class action is so small, that it's probably rational for me on a day to day basis to just accept them. It's collectively that they're a problem, because they seriously damage one of the main ways that the legal system has to hold corporate misconduct accountable. So we really need a collective solution, rather than just individual avoidance. (Obviously, the exception being in cases like this Equifax thing were we know that litigation is on the immediate horizon.)

I've actually thought for a while about some solutions that people in the tech world might be able to work on. One idea that I just finished sketching out for print (will be in the University of Toronto Law Journal sooner or later) would be to build a kind of coordinated contract negotiation platform, where people could commit to saying "hey evilCorp, if a million other people also agree to this, we'll all collectively cancel our accounts unless you get rid of evil terms X, Y, and Z." This would resolve some of the collective action problems with it being individually rational to accept these terms usually but collectively disastrous. If, that is, people would use it...
How Many Years of Life Does That House Cost?
Google's cache of the page [1] seems to work.

[1]: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:wP7nTG...
EquiFax declares bankruptcy, re-orgs and rebrands.
Non-paywalled link: http://estonianworld.com/technology/possible-security-risk-a...
Actually, I looked into it, and aside from the $10k initial fee for ICANN (which might be avoidable?), it didn't look all that difficult to set up.
I remember using Beej's guide to learn how to do TCP/IP stuff in C around ten years ago. Very well written and easy to follow.

http://beej.us/guide/bgnet/
It's not ironic, it's exactly what I pointed out: for lack of a proper universal secure ID, people (including the federal government itself) started using the improper insecure one which was there as it was universal enough for most purposes.
Wouldn't it have been simpler and more secure to ask you for the address? I can rattle off all the addresses I've stayed at in the last 15 years with ease.
Especially when pinch zooming on an eink screen with approx. 1fps...
UBlock Origin Scope: A tool to measure your exposure to third parties on the web
There's a substantial faction of the American right wing which is vehemently opposed to any sort of national ID scheme.

Oh, I doubt it's a left-right thing. I'm pretty lefty these days, and I oppose a national ID. Some minority groups, like say Jewish folks, might carry bad connotations about putting everybody in a big database so we can keep track of (and categorize) them.
The rules are a bit more complex than the original, but I'll try to summarise them.

* An empty cell has a chance to breed if there are two or more neighbours of breeding age (10-65).

* The chance of breeding slightly decreases for every neighbouring cell that's over 35 (the older they are over that age, the lower the chance of breeding).

* All cells have a small chance of dying on any turn.

* Cells that are "children" (under 6) or "elderly" (over 65) have an increased chance of dying, depending on how young or old they are.

* Young and old cells have an increased chance of dying from loneliness (less than 2 neighbours), which increases based on how lonely they are.

* "Adult" cells (6-65) have an increased chance of dying from overcrowding (4+ neighbours), which increases based on how crowded they are.

Unlike the original game, there's an element of randomness in the ability for a cell to breed or die, which means that it's not a repeatable simulation in the same way that regular GoL is.

I started the rules relatively close to societal norms (breeding from 16-45), and found that nothing could breed enough to sustain the population for long. I thrn tweaked the rules to their current set just to get populations to at least hold. You can get some more interesting patterns if you play with the death limits, but I haven't spent too much time looking for the perfect rules yet.

Pretty much all the limits are changable through the constants at the top of board.js.
Things I wish I knew about Stripe
As someone who is finally getting into Python development (via Django) after following tons of tutorials over several years: should I be using pew, virtualenvwrapper, or something else? This article is from 2015, how relevant is it today?
I think it's a fruitless effort to try and secure all of the data in the world. Our data is lying in too many places, the databases holding them are too complex, as another user stated, a breach is really just about money and time. Our systems are too complex to merely increase security standards.

I think we can significantly improve the situation though with increased data collection laws, and then also more cryptography. Equifax shouldn't have all that data in the first place. A lot of the reasons that companies need data (besides machine learning) can be covered with cryptographic arguments that exclude the data itself.

For example, cryptography exists that would allow me to use my driver's license to prove to you that I am over 21, without ever actually showing you my real birthday or name. You could be 100% convinced that I both have a valid ID and that ID indicates that I am over 21 without learning anything more than those two facts.

If you can do things like that, you can make it illegal for companies to hold more sensitive information. If there's a big data breach that loses sensitive information, the company at fault can be charged for illegal data collection.

I know it's a big step from the data driven world we currently live in, but I think it's the only way to avoid a scenario where pretty much all details of every person's life (including politicians, secret agents, military figures) are public knowledge. We're just collecting far too much data, putting it in far too many places, and it's technologically infeasible to protect all of that.
Perhaps the gentle chiding will encourage people to read the article before commenting in the future?
You can use virtualenv without `bin/activate`. Just refer to `bin/python` (and other scripts in `bin/`) explicitly. Don't bring in the magic until you need it. And when you need it, consider what kind of magic you need. If you're typing `bin/` too much, do you need something that adds `bin/` to your path, or do you need to write a script for this task that saves you from having to type both `bin/` and a bunch of other command-line flags?

(I do add my virtualenv's `bin/` directory to my path, but mainly so my editor can find the right tools, so I do it from elisp instead of bin/activate in a shell)
Right, I was mostly looking to see if it was some dodgy cert provider - Amazon is on my mental list of questionable-but-not-obviously-scammy ones. EV certs, to me, just mean 'this cert is intended to secure company x's sites', not 'company x controls this site'. So an obvious on-page-text mismatch to the cert raises red flags, for example.
You don't think Equifax have lawyers? Of course they do, and they know that the clause exists. Just having the clause in the first place is a conspiracy to abuse consumers.
143 million people, or essentially every US citizen over 18 (give or take a few million.) It most likely includes Senators, Congressman, Donald Trump etc etc. So, yeah, a lot of people will be inconvenienced and pissed off, ad for a very good reason.
If SSN didn't exist then some equivalent (perhaps driver's license number and state? that would be convenient for non-drivers!) would be used, because the problem is actually at a different level. The way the laws governing banks and the credit industry are structured, it's possible to be on the hook for debt without a reliable proof of having agreed to that debt. If the laws changed to require that proof (e.g. creditors must have a video of the debtor stating "I am Alice Smith my birthday is July 1 1970 I live at 123 Main St in Springfield and I agree to pay $100 on or before January 1" or something similarly difficult to fake at scale), nobody would care about SSNs anymore. Of course that would introduce friction to the process, but with consumer debt at its current levels maybe that would be a good thing?
Thank you for stating my thought likely more clearly than I would have.
That is an incredibly pro-corporate anti-individual jurisdiction. Where is this?
Have you been to Colorado? If Coffman is any guide, the AG's attention is for suing the people on behalf of large corporations.
What I really want is to be able to type "<magic> foo.py", where <magic> creates a list of all necessary dependencies to run foo.py. Then "<magic> run <that-list> foo.py" would automatically do whatever voodoo needs to be done to run foo.py regardless of where you run that command.

The idea is that we all have global pip installations, which is great for hacking. I have a ton of Python scripts that depend on my pip installs. All my scripts run successfully on my box. The goal is to be able to send you one of my scripts along with <that-list>, then you can run "<magic> run <that-list> foo.py" on your box, and everything "just works."

That way there is literally zero configuration. I don't have to tell any tool anything, and it's effortless for you to run it with all the benefits of a virtualenv.
Certainly a lack of mental investment. The NSA and these credit agencies are not a comparison, as their jobs are quite different. If nothing else, the NSA has to be connected to public networks to do their covert operations. Not so with a "credit rating agency". They should not be on a public network at all. Before the Internet, they were not, they were on private leased lines.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the NSA leaks have all been the result of internal employees leaking outward, rather than outside people reaching inward where they shouldn't. That's a meaningful distinction, IMO. They call for two completely different types of defense.
I cancelled a ride after he drove past me 3 times with no effort to look around at the person with luggage waving like crazy at him on the sidewalk. Got charged $5, complained and got a refund.
And this is why I run datente.com

And why I use RSS to drive a channel on Telegram

Agree with the item or not, whatever pops up next is next from wherever you've subscribed

It's great
Or less exploity "dlopen".

Sure, dlopen does tons of more stuff behind the scenes, but ultimately it is about loading bunch of bytes into memory and executing those as functions.
And this appears to be the case!

Dodgy rumour on QQ: https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/2YfePTC0sGsFjHvf-HUqqA

Effect on price (screenshot from Coindesk this afternoon): https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/wp-content/uploads/2017...

Nothing to see here :-)
If there was insider trading on the breach information, they'll be in the slammer soon enough.

It would be pretty stupid, considering how easy it would be to get caught, and to avoid a mere ~14% decline on your share value?
Yes, people can be stupid and greedy. I guess we'll see if this applies to these execs.
Senators, congressmen and Donald Trump himself all had their data previously leaked at least once before. Nothing changed as a result.
It isn't that nobody cares. Many people definitely care. Maybe not everybody cares, and maybe even among those that do there's only some subset that's actually capable of proposing effective solutions to the problem. But I know plenty of normal everyday people outside the techsphere who would prefer if data privacy and authentication worked better and are scared by data breaches like this.

The apathy is really more of a practical matter -- they don't feel like they understand the problem or know how to solve it, and they don't feel like they'd have the power to do something even if they did.

They correctly realize that we don't have a system where entities like Equifax are accountable to individuals that care. The only way you'd get that accountability is through some kind of collective action.

Same thing is true for widespread adopting of PKI-based schemes. Saying "nobody cares" is about as true as saying nobody cares if the oil in their car gets changed -- they don't want to have to pay attention, they don't want to invest in understanding/adopting, and maybe rightly so because there's so damn much that already requires attention. But you might get adoption among private institutions that matter by some kind of legal policy.

A state-run identity registry and authentication solution isn't the only way, to be sure, and I think it's a weird shibboleth in the context of democratic republic run by elected representatives, but since it's not the only solution, nobody needs to die on that hill.

But by the time you're talking about society-wide improvements that address the relevant problems, you're almost certainly going to be invoking government-like powers. The issue you've discovered here isn't about who/how many people care, it's about one of the limits of market-like institutions to transform some forms of concern into effective action. Something even for people who don't trust the state to think about.*

(Also: "people who use this kind of language to insist that the only way to achieve this is through the state are just looking for excuses to be mean to people who don't trust the state" deserves an eye roll so hard. It's manifestly true that there are people out there who enjoy trolling, but the idea that's the only possible motivation is a non-starter and not a good way to indicate you yourself are approaching a conversation in good faith.)

(* I also don't trust the state, just like I don't trust many forms of private power. But it turns out both can be situationally useful and beneficial if you can get the balance right.)
That was a great use of maps.

Thanks!
France's Macron calls for democratic conventions to rebuild EU
It is an addiction. But it is a good one, at least to me. Because otherwise I would be surfing around useless stuff on the internet, at least here I gain new insights everytime.
I don't think the point is for the jury to strive for some sort of moral reasoning that is beyond the understanding of the Society, and I don't think it's possible for a jury to be completely independent (what is independent completely in the world anywhere?) but I see what you mean, you bring about a compelling point. This person was already convicted in the hearts of the jury, not really leaving much room for the judiciary process. The process, however unbalanced and messed up it may be, still has a lot of merit and potential. In the ideal way, anyone who is innocent will never ever be found guilty, and someone who is guilty will probably be found guilty. For my personal point of view these days, I think it is more important for no innocent person to go to prison, than to make sure that all the guilty ones (and some not guilty ones) go. That's a big question of implementation.

The tricky thing with a case like Shkreli's is that what you are being tried for, and what the jury wants to put you into jail for, are potentially different things. Very difficult to extricate. If he was in court for grand theft auto and he had a perfect alibi, he still might be found guilty just because it's an opportunity for the jury to deal out some "righteous punishment" given the opportunity. Is this judiciary morality and ethics? Is it a greater-scope of ethical absolution? It's really hard to say. The court tries you on a specific set of bullet points, and if you don't get convicted you're free to go, but the emotional closure may not have happened.

At any rate, I don't think "Punishment for the Crime" is the only adage we can continue with in our modern society. We also need to make provisions for rehabilitation, amelioration, healing, and in general promoting the psychic health and welfare of people who are deemed "perpetrators" instead of labeling them as lost causes (until of course they re-emerge into Society and the issues have been substantially compounded).
The A/C units are rated in tens of thousands of BTU per hour for a car. 10k BTU/hr is 2.9 kilowatts.

Fans might work, but not the A/C.
And any central database of this information is vulnerable to a one time leak. One period of vulnerability and potentially this information is out there forever. Once that happens automated identity verification becomes much less reliable/convenient and there will potentially be a need for a more Turing-complete and/or hardware dependent process.
One of the reasons to love Postscript:

[ (Hello World) /print cvx ] cvx exec

Of course, procedures are just shorthand for executable arrays, so

{ (Hello World) print } exec

does the same. Oh did someone say "C"/machine code? Never mind ;-)
Google has more incentive to fight click-fraud. People prefer to buy ads on platforms that have high conversion rates.
Could be worth looking at graph theory and graph colouring algorithms. Also maybe a Turing machine with colours instead of symbols, you could hand execute the state machine and end up with coloured patterns or even a Lo-res picture.
But if you would otherwise be checking reddit or your prefered news website it is better to check HN 15 times.
Got an email from my Dad today:

"I checked myself, my wife, you and your brother. To the best of my knowledge none of us have Equifax accounts, but it says they probably got our address & driver's license for all four of us.

I don't want to waste money on LifeLock. What can I do? Just watch my accounts?"

Is Visa, MasterCard, etc. at least partially to blame here for picking a bad solution? My personal ties are not with Equifax, I have no direct means as a consumer to express dissatisfaction. Can I sue Visa? They are they ones (I presume anyway) who did the actual information collection from me, and then it was mishandled.

We need more tools for dealing with data breaches. Things aren't slowing down, and they aren't going to unless something big changes.
"No amount of governmental regulations can solve the current date breach trends." I'm sorry, but that is just flat out false. That type of thinking is just bizarre to me. It would make a gargantuan difference. Hold executives personally accountable, with whistle blower laws protecting the developers who identify weak security. It would change the freaking world over night.
There is plenty of evidence that people who recreate results often tries until they get the same result as the original paper. For example a scientist made a mistake when counting the number of chromosomes and reported that humans had 48, a number that was replicated for over 30 years. In this case it would obviously have been better if the original paper was never published.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16463025
Ah, being able to rebut evidence is good and necessary. For your general question, I must say No; but how can we defend the judicial system from exclusively showcasing "purchased experts and evidence?" That's what I'm interested in clarifying.
I've dealt with Americans that would make your skin crawl, but, of course, most are decent, average people. It's the same anywhere. To think otherwise of Chinese people is to give in to our racist, tribal instincts. Resist!
I couldn't. I am a city dweller living in a climate where almost like clockwork a post-two year rent hike makes me decide to move. not only that, being on a grid system every address tends to be some 4 digit combination of numbers very similar. Was that 1124 or 1421 10 years ago? I'd have to sit and picture the cross streets to figure it all out.