skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think you may be assuming a position I have been very clear not to make. I'm responding explicitly to this exchange:

'ada1981> Or maybe also people who have religious views about stem cell research?

'nawgszy> I find this hilarious. Not knocking your comment or anything, just fairly sure religious texts didn't say 'thou shall not induce artificial stem cell growth'

You're right in that the comment by 'ada1981 requires more meat, but that doesn't mean you dismiss it because it's not there: if you want to engage you ask for it or at least assume the most charitable interpretation and acknowledge where you're making charitable assumptions. Neither 'ada1981 nor myself have aligned ourselves with the positions of those that hold these religious views (and 'ada1981 has commented further down that they don't hold this opinion). And that's getting to the heart of my point: we can understand others opinions without necessarily agreeing with them.

You're exactly right: we're not mind readers. And I've tried very hard to be clear what mine is: that to have earnest, meaningful, and constructive discussion we need to strive to understand other's points of view.

I've found Daniel Dennett's explanation of Rapoport's Rules to be very helpful, and explains the position much better than I:

https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/03/28/daniel-dennett-rapo...

FWIW, a similar tenet has been recently added to the HN guidelines:

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

This is what I'm pushing against. I would argue that assuming the simplistic immediate assumption of literal interpretation is uncharitable.

If you're reading into my comments that I hold any particular views with respect to stem cell research or treatment, please point them out, because that's not my intent and I've tried my best to not include any (and to see explain various points of view fairly), and I don't think you can find such a claim. My interest is much more in figuring out how people can productively discuss contentious topics. And that's something I can work on as well.

Regardless, I've derailed this much more than I ever intended, so I'll sign off this thread. Best, and I hope you have a good day!

Edit to add: FWIW, I understand where you're coming from with respect to the article and its implications regarding some past ethical concerns. That doesn't obviate how one discusses the topic with others. Almost by definition when we disagree with someone we're going to find something prima facie unreasonable.
I would wager that he's much more likely to be caught driving a Prius at the speed limit in the left lane than a person who hasn't made a comment like that.
Is anyone really surprised?
The AMI is actually higher than the median income in NYC because it includes wealthy suburbs.
Isn't that true for all of us?
Deutsche Post does this in Germany through its PostIdent program.[1]

[1] (in German) https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postident
Your typical E-series based ambulance will laugh at speed bumps at pretty much any speed. Whether you want to be not wearing a seatbelt when that happens is a different story.
I can't wait to see no repairs get made since there is not budget for it.

Communism
They assert it applies even if you are suing facebook for infringing on your hardware / biotech / business model patent.
In my non-lawyer understanding the existence of the patent grant changes nothing in those circumstances (that is they could sue you without it as well with the same merit)
and actually prevents them from suing without you suing them first, however companies do not usually restrict themselves like that and consider it a defensive move so someone who is a lawyer should explain what they are trying to pull here.
The problem I see with that is that people gain and lose interest in a project over time.

Some other people become disenchanted with how the project is going and try to fork it when it doesn't go their way. This is not inherently bad... many good projects come from forks... but it is not an ideal situation to have.
Wordsmith's 'robot journalist' has been unleashed
Just to clarify, the Instant Answers will remain open source on GitHub and maintained in public.

Disclaimer: DuckDuckGo staff
Right click -> view source?
x2.

Put one in a rural area and eventually someone will come along and shoot it.

That's what happens to absurdly low speed limits and moronically placed stop signs. I don't see why a speed bump would be any different.
They also remove the need to make future hires, expanding the workforce to match growth. There is a lost "opportunity cost" of unrealized employment caused by massive automation.

The reallocation of labor during the throes of the industrial revolution worked because the new technologies needed constant care and babysitting. Reliable machines that need infrequent service will not need much maintenance staff.
Except Corporations take it to a uniquely stupid level; things like refusing to pay adequately for internal support, security, auditing, i.e. anything that doesn't have a direct impact on customers.
They would probably have to through a similar procedure as they do to get a replacement social security card. That is, they would have to present at least a drivers license and US passport at one of the local social security administration offices.

At that point, they can regenerate the key-pair and have the SSA official sign the public key and keep that on file.

Now, presumably, it is possible to forge both documents, but I would think that the government could check their records (federal and state) to verify the authenticity of the provided documentation.
Are you suggesting they should be strong-armed into employing underutilized employees? Perhaps we could do that for the finance industry too. Really, by that logic, any company making money should be strong armed into excess hiring. I suppose they could also push for increased wages instead, which seems more tenable once you get close to full employment.
Wear ant ear from normal operation are different than damage from running out of up-travel at high speed.
I don't think they sold it though. This is Priceonomics thing now -- companies pay them to write stories using the company's data as a more highbrow form of content marketing. I assume Earnest commissioned this vs them selling or giving away the data to Priceonomics.
Scrypt isn't badly designd. It's also difficult to misuse.

This is like saying "bcrypt is badly designed."

Note that you are specifically attacking scrypt with the title -- "login.gov encryption" can be substituted with "scrypt."

If you were to say it's illegal for them to be using scrypt since scrypt is not an approved KDF, that would carry more weight.

Cryptographic flaws

1. scrypt is used as password-based KDF, which violates NIST 140-2

This isn't a cryptographic flaw! The phrase "cryptographic flaw" means something.

5. hash(E) is stored right next to the ciphertext from (4). Who thought that storing a hash of the encryption key right next to PII ciphertext encrypted with that key was a good idea?

Storing the hash of an encryption key is fine, as long as the hash function is strong.

It's frustrating that a government website is making solid cryptographic choices and then being lampooned like this. It would be far more productive to make scrypt an approved NIST KDF.
> a patent grant

if you called it a patent 'clause' - rather than a grant - then does it make more sense? More clauses == more legal conditions.

The fact is that patents are obsurd in software. It should be treated like in the fashion industry - notice how clothing design is _not_ patentable, and the fashion industry has not an iota of being un-innovative or impeded! In fact, the very reason of being able to make any design copy in fashion leads to the large proliferation of innovations, as each designer tries to one-up another.
The game is playable at the Internet Archive: https://archive.org/details/msdos_Portal_1986
This leads me to think a good technical interview will identify people who strictly fail all or a large majority of the problems posed.

Someone who you would want to consider is someone who can reason and navigate most of the technical problems put forward - and it would certainly be great to have someone who can solve them all.

I like the previous responder who said people skills/communication and time management are important. Regardless of if a person can solve a problem or not, I'd want them to identify things to discuss or be able to deliver a solution at the end of the allotted time for a question. I want deliverables. You can't move forward without feedback.
> Remembering 'Portal,' Activision's...

Aside: After programming, I can not bring myself to place separating punctuation inside quotation marks. It seems entirely wrong to place characters within the quotation when they clearly come from without.
Threesome Dating Is Full of Fantasy and Fun
If all else remains equal the yes, if you are happy with what you get already you'd be fine.

However we do not live in a society with static rules. Corporations and to a lesser extent individuals are constantly competing and lobbying to get rules changes in their favor, look at the current net neutrality fight. If workers have an ever decreasing share of GDP then they have an ever decreasing amount of power with which to counter that lobbying or lobby for themselves, and it's the sort of thing that can snowball
We're creating a curated list of Awesome Privacy Conferences
Just to clarify for those missing the joke, we don't (or didn't) have a service called DuckDuckReader. Got a nice ring to it though :-)

Disclaimer: DuckDuckGo staff
Absolutely. If a person can't tell good from bad with that, they shouldn't be interviewing.
The average user's needs are so small.

You do not even need "Google level" for most of today's web users.

You can deliver what users need with respect to web search with much less than "Google level".

For example a simple "<title>" search. This is how Google started.

The entry point into the web should be search for domains. A "<title>" search can do that.

Most users today do not do much searching within websites via Google. They search for websites using Google.

Anyway, you are right about storage space and offline search but obviously that truth misaligns with the "cloud" business narrative and coaxing users to store all their personal data in datacenters instead of on their desk or in their pocket.

Expect much opposition to this simple truth.
That would be great but our society, as it currently stands, is built around having a job and so people losing their jobs in large numbers is a big problem
This needs to be more up-voted, so that mis-understandings about the license doesn't perpetuate! You only "lose out" on the patent grant if you sue facebook over patents - _NOT_ when facebook sues you.
I don't think "NIST" approved is that compelling of an argument.

If the author wishes to identify known vulnerabilities, that would be interesting.

FIPS has some various issues that actually increase vulnerability and not decrease it. Eg, FIPS approved OpenSSL was always an anchor that caused more problems than it solved.
Want to help with recent disasters? Join a humanitarian mapping group – OSM
This reminds me of my core mission: sterilize myself or self terminate.

Everything I've experienced and felt since youth indicates that my seed is unwanted by humanity, and it's clear suicide helps evolution by eliminating bad genes. I think about suicide constantly and have done so since youth. This is my brain telling me to help humanity by leaving. Hoping to complete that mission ASAP.
Couldn't we do this thorugh a system that's similar to PKI? That is, have each person generate a private-key and certificate signing request (that's signed by the appropriate government agency)?

Resetting it outside the normal certificate expiration time would require that one go to the local branch of the government office to do so (much like getting a replacement social security card or replacing a lost or stolen passport). At that point, you would have to provide proof of your identify that would be verified by the government agency.
Same. I've only done microcontrollers/asm in college.
> get pushback from your team or higher-ups about the licenses for the software.

how is this different from pushback on (any) other issue?
If your implication is that 18F has the same reputation as past Web-related efforts in the federal government, you may need to look into 18F more closely.

It's only 3 years old and was specifically intended to fix all of those stereotypes and make the government software production efforts more similar to those in Silicon Valley.
> This is a terrible way to manage identity. From afar, a Social Security number looks kind of like a password. But you can change a password, and you shouldn’t use the same one with every service.

Going on a tangent, Apple has made the same mistake with TouchID.
The reallocation of labour also worked because demand for consumer goods increased dramatically as mere living effectively became cheaper.
> Whoever said it, the quote about digging with spoons instead of shovels and backhoes comes to mind.

Often ascribed to Milton Friedman, but it seems more likely to be William Aberhart originally.

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/10/10/spoons-shovels/
China Fossil Fuel Deadline Shifts Focus to Electric Car Race
If there's a legal requirement (FISMA is pointed to as a requirement) that would be rather compelling, no?
Who are you to say what is the right amount to pay for security? Do you know how much life insurance I should have?
Why does the opinion that patents on software are wrong, never help anybody but patent trolls, and slow down progress not scale to larger companies? How could an opinion that's right for a person not possibly also be held by something larger?

Empirically, almost no large software companies have ever used patents offensively. They have repeatedly spoken out against the very idea of patentability for software (and "business methods").
That's a funny term to apply to this type of interview process, but it fits. Kudos.

Agree on the invalidity of technical interviews. We hired a guy who correctly answered every question I asked, but he could never ship a product. He always got distracted by silly things. He was great at solving tough little problems, but never could grasp the big picture.
Not what I said at all. I'm just saying they shouldn't get more credit for a non-release than for a release. Apparently the HN attitude is:

* Release lots of software with a conditional patent grant: awful.

* Release lots of software with no grant (e.g. BSD): OK.

* Release very little software, and that under the no-grant license (e.g. MS): you rock.

Sorry, but that's completely f-ing backward. It's literally impossible to get to there from open-source principles, so what what principles are people starting from?
Yes to my non-lawyerish understanding making it a clause in the BSD license would be different - it would no longer be a BSD license but rather a new (non OSI) license containing provisions regarding patents.

I agree that software patents are evil but then so are many other parts of the modern legal system, but even with them it feels that what facebook (and other companies) are doing shouldn't have any legal standing - see my comment down the original thread.
What happens when those patents are no longer potential and have been granted to Facebook?
This is a rather sensational title for an article that amounts to "Login.gov does not use FIPS 140-2-compliant cryptography". Its main argument (aside from point 5) appears to be that scrypt is used in multiple locations, without passing judgement on scrypt itself.

Given that this is a US government-run system, this is still a compliance problem, but that's a different issue.
Ngrams aren't entirely reliable, but if you manage to corral a concept sufficiently, they can often turn up the timing of a phenomenon entering into general consciousness. Occasionally the specific point of origin.

I've run this on a number of concepts -- "democracy", "rugged individualism", various brand-name liquors, a whole slew of more recent political trends and concepts ("school prayer", "right to life" "anti-abortion", "creationism", "gun rights", etc. -- most are quite surprisingly recent), and more.

The most interesting finds to me are concepts which are generally treated as essentially eternal which are not. There are also concepts which I'd have thought more recent, which turn out to be long-lived. In general, though, there's a sharp inflection point where these concepts emerge or break out.
No, the point is that two entries in the top five are are in the same commute zone. There's a reason it's called Silicon Valley or the Bay Area often when referring to the job market and not just San Francisco or San Jose. It's an economic region with a strong technical economy. If you combined them, where do they sit on the list, as that's more useful for deciding how the economy of the area is.

Also, is that including jobs from Palo Alto, Sunnyvale and Mountain View? I assume it must be, since that's where many of the companies actually are, but there are jobs all over the area, and I believe in a higher concentration than in many other metropolitan areas.
Yes. We regularly have this, cooked by Nonna or my wife...
> The fact is that every big company named by that post undoubtedly has an expensive cross licensing agreement.

Sorry, that's simply not true.
A design that technically violates a law, but is not actually dangerous - suppose the law constrains designs in a way that requires them to be less effective or safe - is not necessarily a poor design, unless "complies with law" is a higher priority design objective than "functions safely as intended".
Please stop calling SMS codes “two-factor” authentication
Hypercanes would be pretty intense; wind speeds of 500 mph would destroy most buildings, and almost all skyscrapers (which are not built to withstand such lateral loads).
Impressive. (Not you, D-Link)
But seriously, why? Just why? I haven't even gotten a degree in security or anything, but I know better than to store a password in plaintext, at least!
The author has many good points however it's either his writing style (thinking), ideas, or conceptual mental model where he is missing the point of open source. It is actually a bit confusing. His title doesn't correlate with what he writes later which contains several somewhat vacuous statements. People love to work together and produce something for the common good, humanity wouldn't be here without that good feeling and collaborative spirit. open source comes from people's time, time has led us to a point where open source is everywhere. Not all people are greedy, every coder owes another coder their livelihood. I think this draft just needed like 100 more edits. Also, "Many" does not equal 3.
As a parent, I've realized that all the things I used to love about cities are things I have no time or interest for now. Cities seem best suited for teens and young adults, but that's a minority of the population at any given time.

I'm sure there's a notable group of people who want to live in a city all their lives, but I also don't think it's a coincidence that as people start to have kids, they seem to start wanting to move out of cities.
You're right! More people should open independent bookstores, groceries, and gas stations like they used to. Well, maybe not those things. Maybe a car dealership? Only if Elon Musk doesn't succeed in lobbying them out of existence.

Concentration of wealth leads to the ability to outcompete any small business, increasing the risk of operating independently. It's like playing blackjack in a casino. Even if you could eke out a small statistical advantage, the house can stay solvent longer than you can through volatility (and that assumes an otherwise level legal/regulatory/lobbying framework).

Even Silicon Valley's startup culture implicitly acknowledges this - bootstrapped companies are a footnote. Only those companies with the financial resources of insanely wealthy investors stand a chance at mainstream success. That means the (decreasing proportion) of insanely wealthy people have a growing amount of say in what companies are allowed to succeed.
“Cryptographic vulnerabilities in IOTA” is a sham
Can anyone explain why scrypt would be inadequate or flawed?
> If I'm using React and I decide to sue Facebook for infringing some other software patents I hold, I lose the patent grant for any potential patents Facebook might hold concerning React. Which they could go after me with if they do indeed hold such patents. There's nothing proactively forcing me off React.

It seems like you're assuming that there's a decent chance that FB doesn't actually hold any patents on React. This seems unlikely, and is contradicted by what the author wrote (indicating that popular React alternatives may also infringe FB patents). Or am I not understanding your line of thinking?

My view, as a former lawyer, is that if you want to sue FB for patent infringement, you would be very unwise to continue using React. Willful infringement = treble damages.
If anything, this is an argument to expand FIPS, not an argument to deauthorize login.gov.
This is mostly complaining about a lack of FIPS 140 compliance. While that might be a regulatory issue for a .gov site, technically-speaking FIPS compliance is a hinderance to building a sound system, not an aid.

Putting that aside, there might be some valid points in here: using Hash(IKM + nonce) to generate a key is probably not ideal, depending on what Hash is. That's generally a job for HKDF. The post also mentions a "non-approved KDF" elsewhere, but doesn't say what it is.

On the other hand, storing Hash(key) isn't immediately an issue unless something else in the scheme depends on Hash(key) being secret, but the post implies without justification that it's some sort of obvious error.

So there might well be some issues here, but this post doesn't provide sufficient detail to condemn login.gov out of hand.
The dynamic graph makes a lot of sense to me, in terms of models that combine ideas not traditionally explored in the NN mainstream eg topology.

May I suggest the name "entelechy" (the realization of potential) as a candidate name for the framework.
I had to scroll all the way down just to see if anyone else had noticed. I want to know what the marketing team were on when they did that vid.
I was intrigued by the idea of using a blockchain to anonymize and secure lending, so I looked it up and a trial of such a thing was run a few months ago. I found this gem:

> TransUnion and Equifax said they are always assessing new ways to secure consumer credit data, an area that is tightly regulated by governments around the world.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-canada-blockchain-credit/...

The irony aside, it seems like the exact sort of thing a blockchain is good for: verifying transactions with a high degree of anonymity among parties that fundamentally do not trust each other. If I say I've had transactions that I say I have, I should be able to send you a code for you to verify it. There's no reason why I shouldn't have to consent for my private financial information to be disclosed to strangers in the first place.
> Sohan Gill once saw his medallion as such a good investment — ”better than a house”

If something looks like it's an impossibly good investment, it may actually be.

It's a shame that US city governments let this happen by retaining the medallion monopoly system. If cities let the taxi supply adjust to demand, a taxi license would have been worth the same as any other business license.