skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Failure rates for contraception are surprisingly high, even if you are using it responsibility. 1% is common, but that's not even over a person's lifetime, that's PER YEAR. That make lifetime failure rate more like 20%.

On top of that some people can't tolerate the most effective hormonal birth control methods methods.
Can you name any services currently available and useful for anything other than speculation?
OK, but that just makes it a horrible precedent that's arbitrarily enforced.
> This is how it works at almost every company. Call it horrible if you want, but everyone stops short of describing in detail the exact architectural replacement. And when someone does, it inevitably has flaws that make it impossible to meet business goals.

No, it's not how almost every company works, and yes it IS horrible. Do you know why people stop short of giving details of what should have been done? Because that is a full time job for a entire team of people in any place that needs real security, and part of that job is to be constantly rooting out flaws in both design and implementation and fixing them. And guess what, if your business involves storing and retrieving sensitive personal information on millions of people, then security needs to be one of your business goals. If it is not, then that is negligent.

> It's too easy to handwave this away as "well, get a better architecture." Everyone knows that; the hard part is, what architecture? How does your architecture work in practice?

It is also easy to handwave away the real work that real security professionals do. Security is not a just some module you can strap into your systems, it is an ongoing process that requires vigilance and competence. Yes it is hard, but being hard is not an excuse

> Encrypting items won't help when the keys need to be stored in the same place to access the data. The attackers will just go after that box instead of the DB. You can guard it more carefully, but the point is that some box somewhere needs access to a substantial amount of the data at any given time. It's the nature of a credit bureau.

So you are implying that data encryption is not useful for protecting sensitive data because you have to store the keys somewhere. If that were the case then data encryption in general would be useless, we know that is not the case. This is a design or implementation problem, not an encryption problem.
This is the obvious answer, no?
It's even more complicated because I only want YouTube to autoplay when I open it in a foreground tab.
> Is there some reason that people might buy winning lottery tickets?

Money laundering maybe. It wouldn't make much sense for the seller.
Dealing acid in 1982 and that’s when I first met Vladimir Putin
The article suggests that people who owe back taxes or certain legal fees would have their winnings garnished. So they find a "clean" ostensible winner to claim the winnings, presumably paying him or her a smaller fee.
I won't begin to pretend that I'm a lawyer, but ESEA was fined $1MM for this not too long ago: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/20/esea_gaming_bitcoin...
IIRC, from a NICAR listserv discussion with the Florida reporter, it's not that the claimed winners actually bought the tickets from the ticket dispensers. It's that the actual purchasers of the winning ticket sell it to these frequent buyers at a slight discount, so that they (the actual purchasers) don't have a financial paper trail. Not necessarily for tax purposes (the second-hand buyer would have to eventually pay for that), but for things like child support and divorce alimony.

Searched through my old emails and here are a couple of excerpts (from Mower, and various other reporters responding to the thread):

> "Once we zeroed in on these "prolific" winners, we discovered other bizarre patterns. They were winning from dozens of stores across multiple counties, would start their winning streaks out of the blue (versus spotty wins over a long period of time) and most were owners or clerks at places that sold tickets (we had to do that research on our own)."

> A lot of tickets are second-hand, which may well be illegal and is probably often used as a dodge around child-support payments

edit: In terms of why it doesn't raise red flags, it's because in most bureaucratic systems, there just aren't red flags built into databases and record-keeping. Florida is probably by far one of the best states in terms of transparent and computer/machine-readable recordkeeping, but someone has to have the initiative to do the analysis, even if it's just a simple SQL query. From an unrelated investigation from another Florida outlet about bad cops getting rehired:

https://ire.org/blog/on-the-road/2011/12/20/behind-story-tra...

> This was a case where the government had this wonderful, informative dataset and they weren’t using it at all except to compile the information. I remember talking to one person at an office and saying: “How could you guys not know some of this? In five minutes of (SQL) queries you know everything about these officers?” They basically said it wasn't their job. That left a huge opportunity for us.

edit 2: In the case of the original Florida story by the Palm Beach Post, it appears that the actual problem was that clerks were actively deceiving and stealing from the winners:

http://archives.cjr.org/united_states_project/palm_beach_pos...

> The stores that sell lottery tickets in Florida all have a machine that will scan a ticket and determine if it’s a winner. People who buy the tickets bring them back to stores to see if they’ve won. But they’re often relying on the store clerks to tell the truth about what the machine says. So the clerks can tell the buyer, “Hey, sorry man, better luck next time,” and then pocket the guy’s winning ticket.

In other states, the problem is money laundering.
Somebody will build some dumb IoT device with that feature enabled.
My guess (and it's a terrible guess) is this may be about 4mo growth... and they might take the opp to retire older lower capacity drives and just keeping up the build-out.

But who knows...
Team is basically code for what I will call the Three P's: pedigree, pattern, and proof.

* Pedigree: Do you have a track record in this domain? Have you been involved in success stories before? If nothing else, do you check the requisite Stanford/Google/Facebook/Apple boxes?

* Pattern: Does this team more or less resemble successful teams the VC has seen before?

* Proof: Who is vouching for this team? Who else is interested in this deal?
Mitogen, an infrastructure code baseline that sucks less
Angry Whale Attack Sim 3D
Join the rampage to bring out the scavenger inside you and unleash it with this Angry Whale Attack Sim 3D. Killer Whale are angry all the time and looking for a prey to demolish. Become the wildest and hungriest whale ever. You have limited time to find new time points & kill the hunter.
This comment is always more annoying than any comment that prompts it.
If the Cubans are following
an evolutionary path from
the device concealed in the
Great Seal in the 50's then...

That is the furthest idea from my conceptual model of what this all might be. I don't think any of this is accidental. I think deliberate harm is being done, and that willful animosity has permitted the rationale that U.S. officials represent a population of human test subjects, as expendable resources, for a weapon with unknown neurological effects to be used against aggressive enemy combatants.

I think it's a directed energy weapon.

I think kinetic energy is being applied in a novel way, such that patterns of constructive interference are created by alligning harmonic waveforms so that their intersection creates high-signal regions with deleterious effects for biological tissue within said region.

Much in the way electromagnetic directed-energy-weapons can be combined and focused to achieve greater effect, either ultrasound or infra-sound is being used as a kinetic analog with similar results. This is not "The Brown Sound" but something worse.
> A disdain for tools which have not yet been refined by a long history of use.

An uncharitable person might call that disdain parasitic, inasmuch as technological advances in the last couple of centuries have proceeded to a large extent through consumerism. The Amish feel free to use the resulting innovations, but because they themselves refuse to be a consumerist society they do not contribute to the process that sustains and brings forth those innovations.
True. My bad :)
Follow the cheese.. JPMorgan's top quant strategist, echoing CEO, compares bitcoin to 'pyramid scheme'

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/09/15/jpmorgans-top-quant-stra...
My wife uses a local mail client. So recently, I was helping her find an attachment. And I happened to browse the embedded images folder. She was very surprised ;)

Anyway, putting someone on a CP spam list, and then getting them busted, might well do it.
Command Line tool to get up to date with soccer games
I think it is interesting, particularly how GDP changes and quality of life indexes don't reflect things like this.

Our quality of life in the first world changes for the better somewhat, but we had 150 trillion dollar equivalent devices we carry around?

I also think one of the comments is interesting, that indoor plumbing is so cheap but provides such an insanely greater improvement to QoL.
I don't have a car.
When Caddy made their announcement earlier this week, I shook my head with pity at what they were about to endure. I could have given them a list of all of the shitty (and merely unhelpful) things people were going to say to them, because I've heard them all, too. There's a deep streak of meanness, and, as the post states, entitlement, in the OSS user community (much less so in the developer community, which doesn't overlap as much as it once did, though sometimes developers do it, too).

And, the really awful thing is that if the project continues, it'll never stop. Every once in a while someone or some group will get a bee in their bonnet about the thing not being open enough, or the authors not following or not understanding the license (as though the copyright holder needs a license), charging too much for the one little thing they reserve for paying customers (no matter how small that amount is...we charge as little as $6/month, and we still get complaints about price).

And, there's always a huge misconception that because an OSS project has a lot of users it must be making a lot of money, especially among the people who won't tolerate any action that would actually make money for the project.

What I'm trying to say is that OSS is a hard-as-hell way to make a living (I've done it for my entire professional life, over two decades now), and there's gonna be a handful of users who will make it unpleasant. I love it when I can build some one-off thing and just throw it over the wall onto Github and never think about it again...where I can take a "use it or don't, but don't ask for my time" attitude. Making a business out of an OSS project makes it harder to select good users (who become good customers), though you have to in order to survive.
I roughly frame mobile PC's as libraries, letter carriers and proof assistants saving trees in books and car hours. I live in DC near the National Cathedral, don't drive and cook my food at home from scratch. These guys are smart. I admire the Anabaptist "Punk" DIY ethic. The music Punks were too loud. Live music is not Lo-Fi.
iirc he works on zircon now.
This post seems to be a summary of an entire series relating to 'Improbably Frequent Winners'.

The first post of the actual series, which is a lot more in depth, is here: http://www.pennlive.com/watchdog/2017/09/defying_the_odds_pa...
He owns 22% of shares.
Sadly there's not. I like Vue, but it doesn't have the maturity or ecosystem of React. Plus React Native is a great addition to open source that Vue has yet to fully counter. There's also GraphQL, which is published by this license as well. Lots of great, revolutionary tech impacted by this license.
24 MHz? I can’t make that work with a simple typo...
Probably more since the end of 2015, since they've been increasing the number of vehicles.
On what basis do you expect to see 1500?
FYI, there is no FOSS -- that expression is a misunderstanding. There is the free (libre) software movement, and there is the open source non-movement: two different viewpoints based on different values.

See https://gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html for more explanation of the difference between free software and open source. See also https://thebaffler.com/salvos/the-meme-hustler for Evgeny Morozov's article on the same point.

Regarding the term "FOSS", see https://gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.html
Relocation of Hibbing, 1919–1921
It's unfair to point to one exponentially increasing technology and use that as an index for general technology.

On the other hand, it's interesting they choose to use the semiconductor industry as their example because progress is slowing in the semi industry due to the laws of physics with respect to standard CMOS and innovative rescues in either architectural form or through novel device physics are very unlikely due to industry's glacial pace and apparent allergies to innovation. A field that scorns young entrants is bound to die someday.
Well you could also argue that cs major would take offense at that fact that all the years of his education in the relavant field are effectively useless if you would not consider what education the candidate has while securing the job.
To put this in context, $1.1b is about 3 weeks of operating profit for Google. Considering the upside for Google if their experiment pays off, this seems like a pretty smart bet.
Marx's Theory of Alienation argued that individuals in modern, mechanistic, specialized and capitalist societies see people become estranged from the fruits of their labor. He argued that they lose connection between ones own self worth, and what one produces. In his mind this dehumanized people and society.

Personally, I'm not a Marxist, but I think he was right about this.

Whatever that intangible human aspect it is he was talking about -- At some point tech and science is probably sufficiently abstracted from normal human experience such that this concept is no longer relevant.

Also, on this topic I really recommend reading Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, a thought-provoking book on quality of life in our age of human interaction with technology.
> See how silly the kind of assumptions are that you made?
Oh gotcha, thanks! Really appreciate the info, I'll go read up on root certs.
> Hegel, Marx, Freud, Darwin, Nietzsche

Darwin seems very out of place there.

First, he was primarily a scientist, not a philosopher. Second, his theories are for the most part still very much dominant and accepted as true in his field - not just some overall insights and direction (as with Freud) - but the actual details. Modern biology very much believes in and is based on Darwin's theories. It's remarkable how right he still is after all this time.
Outliers exist obviously. Why Education is irrelevant in engineering would you want a self taught doctor operating on you ? Why are you okay with unqualified person handling privacy if 150 million people ?
It would certainly not OK unless you also painlessly kill my wife, family and friends. Of course I would still be afraid of it because we have the irrational existence bias built in. I'm not particularly upset about the fact that I didn't exist 100 years ago so why should I be upset about not existing 100 years from now as long as no suffering is involved. Of course knowing that our existence is about to end causes as agony due to our biases. That doesn't mean though that we as a rational society should allow these biased to set or goals. We need to take them into account though.
What is EZ and GP?
MLC flash stores more than one bit per transistor. Otherwise the numbers seem sound.
Agree for the most part, but question the lack of network effects here:

Is there not a potential interoperability / safety gain if all the cars on the road know how all the others will react? In a game of chicken they know they should each veer right to avoid an accident, so to speak.

I guess the answer depends to some degree on just how much inter-car communication is part of the future and whether those will be fully standardized. And even if standardized whether additional proprietary communications will be permitted between the same species.

Finally, isn't there a race on to collect as much detailed driving data as possible to train these systems? So the more a system is deployed the faster it will improve and therefore be more attractive?

I guess my question is really whether meeting minimum safety standards is going to be the sole question that purchasers of self-driving tech ask before buying. It's not too hard to fathom different techs being a "smoother" drive or maybe even able to handle more side roads (and thus more shortcut options) that other techs aren't ready for yet.
What is Iceland for $500, Alex?
I sincerely hope that the states would be willing to look at Oregon and Florida's solutions to the requests. I actually also really like the CD being issued, because it's a physical thing that you could take into court in contrast to a web page (which often isn't quite as useful these days because all of these fancy web apps) and know that it hasn't changed one iota.

It'd be better if it were a usb thumb drive if it's to be a bit more modern.
Definitely for worse in many cases. Every time I buy a new phone with better specs, I expect that things will be that much better, but they never are. Instead, the power is wasted on useless things like animation, apps that I can't shut off running in the background, etc.
This was pleasantly nuanced and comprehensive. The gamut of reactions to license changes is always a fascinating roller coaster.

The "most maintainers have very little to lose" point is one that isn't emphasized often enough. For every famous, high-profile FOSS developer who gives big swaths of their life to their projects, there are dozens or hundreds of people who are: a) contributing stuff they build for their job that they convinced the company to open source (hopefully out of good will, and not out of "maybe community PRs can fix our garbage fire") b) contributing code they wrote while learning something new for personal or professional enrichment, or c) just doing it as a fun activity.

The give-your-life-to-a-project folks are important, and prolific. Hats off to them. But so are all those other contributors. They might write less code than the lifers, but their code isn't any worse because they spend fewer hours per week developing it; it just takes longer to get written. And there are a lot more "casual" FOSS developers than lifers. Many FOSS projects started out in that "casual" realm before they became household names today. Sure, a lot of people think some of those casual projects aren't great, but that's not unique to small FOSS projects (cf. systemd).

All this is to say: be careful when communicating, especially negatively, with FOSS maintainers. If ethics and basic decency isn't reason enough to treat your fellow humans with compassion, try self-interest: a lot of these people are so un-invested in the projects you depend on for your {fun|living|freedom from the soulless void of the blinking cursor in an empty terminal} that your "How could you be so stupid?" or "Guess this project has gone to hell" comment on their GitHub PR might be enough to make them abandon it entirely.

Edit[s]: I accidentally some words and punctuation marks.
Actually I do agree with that as well. Where I'm much more of a bigot is when it comes to the much more obvious issue of how we treat animals. I was a vegetarian for several years but have up on it because I didn't believe it was making a difference. If we had a vote though to ban animal slaughter and especially factory farming I'd vote for it in a heartbeat.
It does, thank you! I've designed a flow that I think will work based on this and the other comments - I think the understanding that there's not an easy way without a shared secret has been helpful. What I'm going to do is use a shared secret can be used to sign a public key for each machine, since the secret will presumably only be shared with machines I control, as long as I can prevent other security concerns from compromising them.
I've been following bitcoin for a while and understand that there's been interesting stuff going on the the space for a while. That said I really can't understand what fundamentals could possibly be driving the recent price rally. I started to get into it more heavily back in late 2016 when there was legitimate volume and fundaments due to use as a instrument to avoid Chinese currency controls. But now it seems like it's solely a speculative thing, albeit with some relationship with the greater blockchain ecosystem. Even if blockchain technologies do take off, why would bitcoin benefit or gain a some fundamentals in the market?
Well, okay. But the monopoly would have also kept costs down. Yes - all iPhones would have looked identical, but everyone would have had one!

Another plus - the software stack would have been far smaller. You wouldn't need a 32 Gig phone just to install some apps. All processing would have been done in the cloud, on the mainframe. The apps would all have been dumb and only screen viewers for the mainframe.

:)
tokens. [1]

[1]-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cba2GA3haYM&feature=youtu.be
Yet as all this tech and progress marches on at an incredible pace as things get better and better, the results are we've just hit a 30-year high in suicide rates in the US.
That would highly depend on the nature of migration :)
Economists like deLong are obsessed with the idea of ever increasing growth to justify the assault on the lifestyle of working class people. A 1957 US middle class family with a sole bread winner (union job) makes for a very uncomfortable comparison with 2017. Thus the need to focus attention on products and technologies that weren't very advanced 60 years ago.

Frankly though modern houses, automobiles, indoor plumbing, central heat, washing machines, vaccines, 50's era medicine, were a vastly larger jump in living standards than smart phones.
>>> I believe the Genesis creation story.

>Which one? The one (Gen 2:4-) where the order of creation is man, then plants, then animals or the one (Gen 1:1-2:3) where it is plants, then animals then man?

Both.

They both are true, and they both are talking about two different events.

In Gen 2:4-, it is talking about men (men here = Adam and Eve) inside the Garden of Eden, while the Earth is still bare.

In Gen 1:1-2:3, it is talking about men (men here = Homo-sapians) outside of the Garden, on Earth.

So basically, God created men (Adam and Eve) inside the Garden of Eden at a time when the Earth was still bare. God then created the plants and the animals inside the Garden of Eden too (remember that outside, the Earth is still bare at this point).

Then, outside of the Garden, on a bare Earth, God created the plants. Then the animals. Then Homo-sapians, who will roam the Earth and evolve to eventually "have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."

Adam and Eve, who are inside the Garden of Eden, are NOT the same as the Homo-sapians who roamed the Earth, though by the time Adam and Eve were kicked out of the garden, the Homo-sapians will have already evolved to look like humans too.

In other word, in the Garden, Adam and Eve were created as perfect humans beings already. Meanwhile, outside the Garden, primates had go through an evolution process over millions of years to reach the point where they look like humans.