skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Here is a crazy alternate theory for you guys, which I think fits all the details we have so far.

1. Equifax was never hacked.

2. Equifax accidentally deleted a substantial portion of their database.

3. Come up with a system to get the information they lost back, via a "have I been pwned?" checker.

3a. If you enter your details and they are not in their database, they assume it is one of the persons they deleted, add it to their database, and give you a "maybe hacked" message. Obviously a fictitious person would never have been in any of their databases, deleted or otherwise. So, assuming this fake person must be a deleted person, they add the info and show the "maybe hacked" message.

3b. If you enter your details and you are one of the lucky (haha) persons that were not deleted, you get a "you are safe" message.

4. Equifax gets a lot of their database they deleted back with little effort on their part.

What do you think?
Hell of a thing to do, putting your money where your convictions are.
>If they were, they wouldn't be called "gay men" but "women with a penis" or something like that.

What a bizarre thing to say. People used to really think that all gay men were unusually feminine, but they still didn't call them women with penises, because they aren't.

>Otherwise, the proportion of counterexamples only serves to bound the effect size, which is obviously quite small in this case.

But why the interest in an effect which is small if it exists at all, and for which there is little evidence? There are probably hundreds of other features which correlate equally strongly (i.e., not very strongly at all) with homosexuality. This one happens to tap into pre-existing stereotypes.

>A direct relation would certainly be surprising, but that doesn't mean you can't study correlations between sexual orientation and certain measurements of the body. That's science and might lead to insights how and when sexual orientation develops.

The topic of the article isn't a scientific study. It's a couple of people in a business school playing around with deep learning for marketing purposes. They are not doing it because they're genuinely interested in uncovering the mechanisms underlying the development of human sexuality.

>I don't really care what people make of it who confuse correlation for causation or don't understand that statistical significance doesn't imply a large effect size.

In other words, you don't care what the majority of the population make of this research. That's fine for you if you're not gay and you're not affected by it. But the question of how this research is marketed, and how it's perceived by the general public, is potentially very important to gay people. It matters to us what the general public thinks about us.
“Googling for ”visual studio application insights win7 diagtrack“ reveals...”
Just a note: I tried the same thing and was told my information was NOT impacted.

I suspect the reason for this might be that I froze my info years ago.

In some way they must be screening against people who are frozen, or I got lucky.
Nice, thanks! One question: where do you have the dataset from? The gender is encoded as 0,1,2 - which is which? Is this dataset from the Excel that was posted here some time ago? Could you share the link please?

I started to look at the dataset a little, if someone is interested: https://github.com/davidgengenbach/developer-salary-statisti...
I received an enrollment date next week, but wonder if I do not follow through if I've already given up any rights.

This whole thing is just weird.
I would suggest that your disagreement with patio11's post bears no relevance with people who already have credit ratings, have been caught by the Equifax leak, and are at increased risk for identity theft as a result (which, I think, are those the post addresses).

It seems to me you are simply gloating in your ability to avoid credit. Those who are able to avoid credit have little interesting to add to the conversation about credit reporting agencies.
Yeah, but they've got a 99 million year head start on us.
> There is no way to game this metric, other than by paying your bills.

Except the exact situation outlined above, in which a person generated bills that they otherwise wouldn't have needed, for the sole sake of having more bills "paid on time".
You claim that you keep my data safe. You missed it. It's not a trade off, it's a failure on your part...
The distinction is that Common Lisp source code is not text; it's Lisp values. What you see in a text file of "Lisp source code" isn't actually Lisp source code; it's a text serialization of Lisp source code. Other serializations are possible.

As a practical matter, most of the time the distinction doesn't matter. You edit text files. Your Lisp reads the text files and the first thing it does with the contents is convert them to Lisp source code. The source code is then processed as you would expect.

One place where the distinction matters is in macro processing: Lisp macro expansion operates on Lisp source code, not on text. If it operated on text, as, for example, C preprocessors do, then macro expansion would be a matter of string substitution. Instead, Lisp macro expanders operate on abstract syntax trees represented as convenient Lisp data structures, which means that macros are not limited to what can be conveniently done with simple string substitution. You have the full Lisp language available, operating on a convenient Lisp representation, to compute the expansion.

More generally, when source code is represented as convenient data structures in the language, it's easier to build tools that operate on it. C compilers do not operate directly on text input; they convert it to internal data structures more convenient for the various stages of the compiler to work with. So does Lisp. The difference is that in a C compiler the representations used by the compiler are private implementation details, and in Lisp they are standard surface features of the language, available to every user.
Why not? Zuckerberg is clearly a smart man, and he seems to be as qualified as any one else. Infinitely more qualified than the current occupant of the office. Just because you don't think of him as a politician doesn't mean that he won't do a good job.
Hey, with the crackdown on tax avoidance, tax havens are in need of new revenue channels. It's not the worst idea in the world.
Maybe part of it is energy efficiency. For humans, being idle doesn't save all that many calories compared to how much we burn anyway to keep our body temperature constant. That's probably different for ants, and thus, when individual ants are not running around without purpose, the whole colony can get by with less food.
Lack of formal training in Computer Science. Most programmers are self-taught and know nothing about the history of the field or prior work.
You don't need to worry. Equifax can say whatever they want in their BS terms, however no judge in their right mind would enforce such language barring you from joining a class action suit. If equifax sent out some sort of compensation check, and you cashed it, that's a different story.
Using QL to find a remote code execution vulnerability in Apache Struts
> If you want to do it in something else then make a better one.
And what is the end result of that? The old code gets deleted, and the person that implemented it might get angry because it sucks to spend time on something only to have it deleted. How is that better?
Smart people can still say dumb things.
If I saw a new account opened in my name I would be pretty concerned and would probably come back to this post for advice. However, is it necessary to get be this thorough (going to the police, etc) for things like incorrect tradelines in your report?

When I first requested my free reports a few years ago all three had multiple tradelines that were not mine and two had a similar situation as Patrick's - namely an account older than me. I used the CRAs' online forms to request they fix them and they did within a few weeks. Didn't seem like that big of a deal.
Redux is just one piece of the puzzle. Let me try to explain the problem it solves. Let's say if you are building a complex SPA with lot of UI components in the view and state changes impacts several parts of the view. You can build this view in several ways:

* Plain javascript with jquery - We can surely achieve it but the code quickly becomes a soup of callbacks and events handlers. After a while the code becomes unmanageable. This is pretty much the approach you're suggesting with getters/setters.

* AngularJS's dirty checking is one solution. It works and the code scales in large teams but perf suffers in complex views due to costly digests. It doesn't provide a way to conditionally exclude a sub-view from the digest cycle. This will become the main bottleneck (for perf) as the application grows.

* React and Angular 2/4 - React (shouldcomponentupdate) and Angular 2/4 (onpush change detection) leverages immutability very well to cut down re-render cycles. This is where Redux shines with its immutable way of changing state. It's uni-directional flow is another great benefit to keep the entire flow predictable and maintainable.

I am not saying all these things are needed for every SPA app out there. But these optimizations are needed for complex and performance sensitive applications. Check this out - https://medium.com/@dan_abramov/you-might-not-need-redux-be4...

Also, I know keeping application state as a single state tree is nothing new. I started this side project (https://github.com/guptag/FinCharts) almost four years ago with React/Immutable.js without any state management libraries (recently moved to electron from nodewebkit). But this code won't scale in large teams (entire ui state is declared in one file, cannot extend the functionality like Redux's middleware support etc).
If all they need is a database of basic consumer info, they could buy that list from one of the other credit reporting agencies and avoid the public scrutiny of themselves and the industry itself.
A friend also told me the TOS for the monitoring includes, by default, automatic renewal of credit monitoring for a fee after the free first year.
Means well? God I hope you're joking. Where Trump is merely a narcissistic buffoon, Zuckerberg is truly evil. We should count ourselves lucky he has no charisma, and that his lizard-like soulless personality shines through as soon as he opens his mouth.
My understanding is their curriculum covers soft skills in addition to algorithms and data structures. For example students are trained on how to communicate well, verbally and non-verbally, while white boarding, as well as how to present their experiences in best possible light in relation to the job description and what the interviewer is looking for.

I'd say that overall they focus more on the interview phase, though I see a potential to extend the curriculum to get engineers ready for promotion or a management role.
It’s a wacky theory but it has legs. At the root is the question that is currently before the Supreme Court in Oil States. Are patents private property or public rights? If they are private property, then actions against the property will generally be foreclosed by any immunity of the owner. It hasn’t been addressed by the Supreme Court, but the Second Circuit has held, for example, that states can’t get around tribal immunity by characterizing a foreclosure action as an action against the property itself rather than the tribal owner.
The CEO of the so-called credit monitoring services (can't recall which one) did that. Had his SSN published on billboards and other advertising.

Used to be pretty common to have SSN pre-printed on personal checks, also. It wasn't until the rise of online fraud that SSN became such a sensitive piece of information.
Scary their tool isn't even hosted on Equifax.

I'm sure Techcrunch verified this is legit, but there's going to be a lot of similar sites shared on Facebook popping up that are similar to get your data.
Some of this has been achieved via widely used PCIe devices, those control registers are now a defacto standard for talking to the outside world.
Really? That's awesome. Respect to that guy.

EDIT: Though it looks like it didn't necessarily turn out so great for him.

https://www.wired.com/2010/05/lifelock-identity-theft/
If you are familiar with modern web development, think of Vue.js or React's reactive bindings but as part of the language syntax. See https://qmlbook.github.io/en/ch04/index.html#qml-syntax

e.g. when in "C++ Qt" you'd do :

connect(m_button, SIGNAL(clicked()), m_object, SLOT(on_clicked()));

or more recently

connect(m_button, &QPushButton::clicked, m_object, &MyObj::on_clicked);

or even

connect(m_button, &QPushButton::clicked, this, [=] { /* do stuff */ });

QML would be :

Button {
onClicked: /* do stuff * /
}

Even better is stuff like

connect(m_slider, &QSlider::valueChanged,
m_object, [=] (int val) { m_item->setWidth(3 * val) });
m_object->setWidth(3 * m_item->value());

which becomes

Slider {
id: slider
}

Item {
width: 3 * slider.value
}

It has a slightly stronger type system than JS; not as strong as TypeScript though. The idea is that when you really need strong typing you do it in C++ and expose your objects to QML (which is a one-liner: every object part of the Qt meta-type system can be used from the QML's side and have its signals and slots called there).

Of course, the big drawback is the performance loss that you get from going from optimizable C++ to Qt's modified V8 engine. However, if you had a graphics-heavy C++ Qt app that relied on QGraphicsScene / QGraphicsView it could be faster in QML since there it's all OpenGL / D3D12 (and hopefully Vulkan) + a modern scene graph, instead of CPU rendering. So like always, benchmark benchmark benchmark :)
It's my understanding that FICO scores are all created using software from FICO. So I don't think the term has become generic as the article implies.
You Don’t Need to Do a Prolonged Fast Before Surgery
> With Zuckerberg/Sanders/xyz-not-establishment running, I think we may have a chance at beating Trump for the second term.

If the democrats nominate Zuckerberg, they can count me out. I might even vote for Trump to keep Zuckerberg out. He's the only possible candidate I can think of who makes me even more nauseous than Trump does.

Even among friends of mine who have been life-long democrat voters, I know for a fact that I'm not alone on this.
Chase isn't charging me anything for the privilege. I have two credit cards with them -- one with a $0 fee and the other with a $450 yearly fee (but on which I earn way more than $450 in rewards points a year so it washes out).

They charge interest, but you don't pay any interest if you settle the full balance every month, which I always do.
Why not?

you have a function that takes something that is polymorphic in the sense that I can be added. A string and a number aren't the same type, but they share some kind of interface.
> But nobody should pretend that RCE on an on-prem webserver wouldn't be game-over,

The system/network I inherited at new job it absolutely would be, it won't be in a year though.

We aren't a fortune 500 but there are simple, practical things you can do to limit the damage an RCE on a webserver can actually do.
Reading about CVE-2017-9805 it was really interesting to learn that the company that discovered it was using a Datalog-like language in order to query Java code for vulnerability patterns.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semmle
That's the problem, an asymmetry in transceiver size does not really lend itself to bidirectional unless its relatively short distances like cellular phone networks.
A small benefit they can enjoy while providing an enourmous benefit for Allergan. Did Allergan experience a genocide too? Let's look at who has more to gain here.
I'll be posting a separate blog post about probability soon. Anyway, thanks for the suggestion.
For some, it only takes discipline while you're establishing the habit, then it is very easy to keep it rolling.
It doesn't matter what you call it. What matters is that you somehow distinguish between situations that are clearly true or false and situations that are not clearly one or the other. The exact mechanism by which you do this doesn't really matter (and what you call it really doesn't matter). What matters is that you don't discard the potentially valuable information that you just tried to do an operation that doesn't make sense. Making null>=0 return TRUE is like making 0/0 return 1.
good > perfect is somewhat standard thinking in AWS.
> The DNC conceded nothing to the Sanders side during the nomination, turning

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-most-progressive...
Yes, they can indeed.
IHAVE Never HAD AN ERECTION ALL MY LIFE'- 32-YEAR OLD SPECULATED RAPIST UNCOVERS
So, how does one get over in gaming this metric? Take out a lot of credit accounts once your credit is good and then default on them? What's the end game where they come out ahead? See prior comment about the bank job... that's just called having and ruining your credit.
TL;DR: EFF is against criminal liability of internet platforms for the actions of their users...specifically in this instance for a law targeting liability for sex trafficking.

To understand this position from a legal perspective it's helpful to understand mens rea, or the mental intent of the criminal.

There are all kinds of legal standards, from knowing/willful all the way down to strict liability, including between such as reckless and negligence.

Strict liability is a very rare standard in criminal law, but basically means you will be guilty of a crime regardless of your intent. The most common/famous example from law schools is statutory rape. Normally crimes require some form of intent, but in the case of statutory rape the act alone is enough to convict. The extreme hypothetical is the case of a man meeting a girl at a bar that is 21 and over. The man takes a woman home, who should be 21 based on the circumstance, but in an abundance of caution checks her ID and confirms she is 21. Turns out she committed her own crime of possessing a fake government issued ID and she is really 16, the man has no legal defense based on lack of intent (lack of knowledge, willfulness, or even recklessness or negligence). The act occurred so he is guilty.

There is another line of cases regarding "burying your head in the sand". Example, you take a package from person x who pays you $1M to deliver it to address Y. Turns out it's drugs, the common defense would be, there was no intent to possess or transport drugs, but case law holds you can't escape criminal liability by burying your head in the sand.

I think the EFFs position is a slippery slope, sure we don't want criminal liability of internet platforms where they really didn't know about sex trafficking and even would have stopped it if they had known, but we don't want platforms claiming a la Uber, we are just a tech platform if people are using our platform to break laws we aren't liable for that. Yes, platforms should be liable when they help hide and facilitate crimes, especially in the case of Uber where their business model is facilitating drivers in illegally operating as taxis or rides for hire (as they do/did in many jurisdictions).
I use both - multiple cursors and keyboard macros. It is not only esthetic difference, but practical as well.

For multiple cursors you have instant feedback on multiple edge cases, and more importantly - you can undo and fix mistake immediately. While with keyboard macros you have to either: redo all from scratch or edit macro as text or execute stepwise editing - and none of them is as convenient as instant multi-undo-fix.
Moreover, for multiple cursors phases of places selection and actual editing are distinctly separated, while with keyboard macros you are doing both movement and editing in single iteration, and it is possible to catch interference between place-movement and editing-movement

On another hand, keyboard macros are very powerful.
They are not limited to "for each" workflow - steps of iterations can sequentially depend one on another.
They are also not limited to "edit/manipulate multiple places" workflow. With them you can jump between buffers/windows/frames, For instance I used this to emulate "debug step into" in source files based on extraction of file:line from trace log output in separate buffer.

Regarding performance - with Emacs I am usually working with source files, which are not big, and taking into account today's memory throughput (RAM: order of 10 GiB/s for single core; Cache order of 100 GiB/s) - sequential multi-tossing of several MiB gap buffers is not a bottleneck. Even if it would be real bottleneck - that means that bottleneck should be fixed, but not abandonment of multiple cursors. (for instance it can be fixed by switching to other data structure - multi-gap, rope, etc or maybe postpone execution for out-of-screen cursors).
That being said, I have to admit that in some cases Emacs is not fast in doing movements, editing, maybe it is related to complexity of some of major modes or maybe some other under-the-hood stuff - and this affects both keyboard macros and multiple cursors. And here, what really matters performance-wise - is that with keyboard macros you can fire-and-drink-coffee batch execution, while with multiple cursors you have to suffer multiplied latency for each single step. But multiple cursors are so connivent, that I am ready to pay occasional price of switching to keyboard macros or even to shell-command-on-region.

I understand, it can be appealing to stick to single tool and single approach, but what I observed from my experience - it is counterproductive to artificially limit yourself to single tool, and trying to find contrived excuse for not using other which is more appropriate for particular problem.
I do use and even combine Linux and Windows; statically typed and dynamically typed languages; scoped-based lifetime and garbage collection, Emacs and Vim.
I do use and even combine keyboard macros and multiple cursors.
This Is Exciting – Event Ticketing on Ethereum
A taxonomy and analysis for finding good restaurants
"Weird" is not the adjective that I would choose. "Despicable" is more like it.
good job man.
i would like it if i could face directions using mouse.
sword swing is too slow

ps. i made braains.io and krew.io
Does Your Genome Predict Your Face? Not Quite Yet
How do people vote who don't know how to read/write?

Japan's literacy rate is very high, but it's not 100%.
Seth Moulton would be better off with a more experienced pol like Steve Bullock.

Although, I think a Zuckerberg/Gore ticket would be very interesting. Complementary experience with a central theme.
> I think this highlights the general problem of Java EE style architecture.

Sounds like you didn't even bother reading the article and jumped at the opportunity to criticize something you don't like.

The breach has nothing to do with Java EE and everything to do with Equifax' absurd network configuration.
Im pretty sure lawyers would tear appart such a shitty tactic. But it will at least keep them busy.
It very much is a trade-off, because the expense that would go in to making a large enterprise network reliably secure would be extreme, and would drive prices up, retard economic growth, and most likely result in software engineers making substantially less money.

I'm not saying you should like the tradeoff, or that the existence of the tradeoff doesn't have implications for how we should regulate banks and credit ratings agencies. I'm just saying that if you think there's some other CRA that has reliably protected its IT assets from threats like this, you're wrong.
While it is a fluffy marketing sentence, it seems clear to me. It's an application server.

Then the next section explains that you can run different kinds of applications and even different versions of the base software like different versions of PHP or python all in the same server.