skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The tricky bit isn't making sure you don't free pointed-to objects; the tricky bit is knowing which objects can be pointed-to. A consequence of GP's point is that because there can be an arbitrary delay between reading a pointer and dereferencing it, any pointer ever exposed to other threads must be considered in-use indefinitely (the reader could sleep indefinitely then wake up and deref) unless one can prove that the pointer is no longer held by any potential readers.

There are a few common ways to do that. Hazard pointers are one: every thread updates some per-thread pointer indicating what object it is reading, and other threads check this (for every live thread) before freeing an object. GC also solves the problem because any multithreaded GC must somehow examine live roots in every thread -- so it will see the still-live reference in the sleeping reader.

The main point, though, is that it's harder than the lock-synchronized case because one no longer has the guarantee that a reader will hold the lock as long as it's examining the pointed-to object.
Could we get a reference for this claim?

Bluman v. Federal Election Commission [1], which was upheld by the Supreme Court, and prohibits “independent expenditures” [2] from non citizens local or abroad.

I’m not a lawyer, but this doesn’t seem to apply to the seller of the ad, which would be Facebook. It seems silly to expect a billboard company, or Facebook, to run a background check and citizenship verification on every purchase.

Regardless, I picture an easy way around would be to get a former Russian, now citizen, to do it, then poof, no illegality from the buyer, from my understanding.

[1] http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/bluman-v-federal-...

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_expenditure
Suddenly, “De-Dollarization” Is a Thing
How do you find out who sent password reset link
Hey really looking to find who sent a password reset link to some accounts. One was a password reset link for craigslist and the other was outlook. Anyone to find out who sent them for either of these sites??
I'm not going to say you're lying but I think you're being eh misleading. This investigation is happening due to increased scrutiny of the Whole Foods merger and isn't a formal investigation by the FTC.

Effectively the FTC is required to do its due diligence and the FTC has not accused Amazon of anything. It's some third-party group making the accusation.
Yup, everything old is new again. This was part of one of the first capability operating systems in widespread operation back in the 70s: KeyKOS.
Sure, but it's probably boosted by the 10x leverage that mortgages allow.

Let's say it cost $1M with $100k money down, interest-only loan. You get the 1.5% on the $1M, not on the $100k.

So if you measure it like that you get $15000 interest on $100k, so in reality this is a 15% per year return, not a 1.5% return.

Works the same in reverse when house prices go down, of course.
In Wargames they detected a massive preemptive attack. One of the things that tipped off the officer in this case was that it was such a small scale attack, which doesn't make sense because it leaves the enemy willing and able to respond.
Another Soviet officer who also probably prevented nuclear war was Vasili Arkhipov.[1]

"On 27 October 1962, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, a group of eleven United States Navy destroyers and the aircraft carrier USS Randolph located the diesel-powered,
nuclear-armed Soviet Foxtrot-class submarine B-59 near Cuba. Despite being in international waters, the Americans started dropping signaling depth charges, explosives
intended to force the submarine to come to the surface for identification. There had been no contact from Moscow for a number of days and, although the submarine's crew
had earlier been picking up U.S. civilian radio broadcasts, once B-59 began attempting to hide from its U.S. Navy pursuers, it was too deep to monitor any radio traffic.
Those on board did not know whether war had broken out or not. The captain of the submarine, Valentin Grigorievitch Savitsky, decided that a war might already have
started and wanted to launch a nuclear torpedo.

"Unlike the other subs in the flotilla, three officers on board the B-59 had to agree unanimously to authorize a nuclear launch: Captain Savitsky, the political officer
Ivan Semonovich Maslennikov, and the second-in-command Arkhipov. Typically, Russian submarines armed with the "Special Weapon" only required the captain to get
authorization from the political officer to launch a nuclear torpedo. However, due to Arkhipov's position as flotilla commander, the B-59's captain also was required to
gain Arkhipov's approval. An argument broke out, with only Arkhipov against the launch.

"Even though Arkhipov was only second-in-command of the submarine B-59, he was in fact commander of the entire submarine flotilla, including the B-4, B-36 and B-130, and
equal in rank to Captain Savitsky. According to author Edward Wilson, the reputation Arkhipov had gained from his courageous conduct in the previous year's Soviet
submarine K-19 incident also helped him prevail. Arkhipov eventually persuaded Savitsky to surface and await orders from Moscow. This effectively averted the nuclear
warfare which probably would have ensued if the nuclear weapon had been fired. The submarine's batteries had run very low and the air-conditioning had failed, causing
extreme heat and high levels of carbon dioxide inside the submarine. They were forced to surface amidst its U.S. pursuers and return to the Soviet Union as a result.

"Immediately upon return to Russia, many crew members were faced with disgrace from their superiors. One admiral told them "It would have been better if you'd gone down
with your ship."..."

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasili_Arkhipov
I'm sorry you lost money, sincerely. One of the reasons that I'm so vocal about my opinions on Bitcoin is that I think that, when it achieves its true value of 0, it will wipe out a lot of geeks of good will.

I cannot agree that you had insufficient notice from me regarding my opinions of Bitcoin or operations in the Bitcoin economy. That tweet went as close to the line as I could without risking arrest, contemporaneously. It was preceded by probably a few hundred comments on HN and Twitter about Bitcoin and businesses in the ecosystem.

I appreciate that you want a list of steps you can take in the future. I have described a way to reproduce the unpaid, unpublished original research project which I did, in sufficient detail for any competent researcher to reproduce it.

You think that that series of steps is not actionable. I respectfully submit that you are not capable of reproducing it; these are two different things. You are illiterate in the language that the research was conducted in. I'm sorry; that is true, and it is the nicest possible way to phrase it unambiguously.

You should, in the future, not make investments which you are incompetent to evaluate the risk factors of. If you must, you should secure the advice of competent professional advisors. If you believed yourself competent to evaluate the risks of doing business with Mt. Gox or believed the quality of the advice you had to be adequate, you should be skeptical of your self-assessments of your competence or your ability to evaluate competence in a professional advisor, and apply this skepticism to your reasoning process about future investments.
Hedge funds aren't about hedging anymore.

Ted got the biggest market crash in last hundred years and still got trounced.

He can't admit the truth because it's destructive to his very business model.

Hedge funds as a group over time always trail the market because of their high fees. Funds of Funds layer yet another layer of fees, making this bet suicidal.

Ted Seides is a Wall Street con man grafting fees off poorly informed investors. He was delusional to make this unwinnable bet.
Joining Latent Semantic Models with Natural Language Inference
This remind me of a recurring theme in "Doctor Who" fictional stories (I'm bing watching right now).

There no such thing as an unimportant person because countless time in the stories the world or even the universe have been saved by ordinary people and nobody will ever know about them.

Only this is real life, this is deeply amazing. I feel so much gratitude and kindnesses for this man. RIP Станислав Евграфович Петров

PS: added emphasis on Fictional stories for clarity.
It's interesting to contrast that with the story of Ordos Kangbashi, Inner Mongolia:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2017/06/30/ordos-ch...

I'd first heard of that a couple years ago and shook my head at all the wasteful misallocation of capital. Ordos recently appeared in the news again, but instead of an empty ghost town - it's apparently a thriving metropolis, center of the worldwide Bitcoin mining industry.

Capitalism is remarkably effective at redirecting misallocated capital into productive uses. The original builders go bankrupt, and it sucks for them, but usually an enterprising firm picks up the assets at fire-sale prices and does something interesting with them.
> the "failed IPO" is their true business model.

Might be an overstatement. I would say let's see until they innovate on something that people like and would pay for. Until then, I wouldn't call them a failure until they actually run out of business
Kids Coloring Book: Princess Educational Apps for Kids
> everything is an "object" (sounds similar to Plan 9's file descriptors)

The nice thing about Plan 9's everything-is-a-file setup is that everything has the same file-like interface. Saying everything is an object does nothing to convey any sort of standard interface.
> In a universe where every possibility plays out

I think that's an assumption.
The whole problem boils down to a choice :security or availability.

If you prefer to have systems 100% up (no downtime for patches and fixing potential issues after the patch) then it is fine. The actual risk (described beyond "having security") has to be accepted by the owner of the data / service and the problem is over.
I have yet to see a CFO who will accept in written that his systems are prone to hacking, theft, manipulation.

Until the CISO does not force the company to sign off such risks, he or she will be the one who fucked up.
Err, it's worse than that. Vastly expanding undergraduate degrees would make them functionally equivalent to high school degrees. Something that everyone can fairly easily get is the new "bar" that less and less desirable jobs would start requiring.
Ted Seides got the worst market crash in a hundred years and still got crushed. Volatility and hedging never matter in the long run, fees do and Teds structure is a fee maximization device that's a winner for him but a loser for investors.
It's a function that wasn't as visible as it should be, but they've already fixed that and they're improving the control in other ways.

I'd say very minor.
Buffett alone is proof enough that Alpha is real. The real problem is, how can you or I pick the next Buffett instead of the next Ted Seides? The answer, we can't.
I don't think I have a copy since userscripts died, but on cursory inspection this Reddit script looks like it does similar things - http://userscripts-mirror.org/scripts/review/170091
You seriously think that open source drivers would have fewer CVEs than sandboxed drivers?
I'm not the person you're replying to, but I also didn't think much of the book. I read it 13 years ago, so it's hard for me to remember specifics of my criticisms.
"This article was a surprise, because the interview was a few years ago for a book the interviewer was writing."

The interview probably predates Swift playground. Alan's critique was probably part of making it available, I heard it was part of why Scratch was eventually allowed.
Russia bought ads. The US flies over countries distributing propaganda for their favored candidate. Why is there a conflict?
According to this Amazon job listing [1], DynamoDB isn't even the biggest (in terms of throughput) data store that Amazon uses.

[1] https://www.amazon.jobs/en/jobs/447605/systems-engineer
Google’s Tez payments app just went live. We tried it out to see how fast it is
Other way around. Microsoft screwed project Natal badly, spending >$1B to buy 2-3 companies in a row and still unable to make Kinect. In the end they were forced to license from Primesense, because alternative was no Kinect at all.
The designer in the software team gets to decide what is available. Software that has no design has in itself been designed, but the choices were made by a developer instead.

There is nothing inappropriate about one vendor making choices. to continue the Apple example, they make 8 of the reasonably complete smartphones you could choose to buy. If you were forced to buy Apple's phone, that would be another matter, but you get to choose.
what'd that cost?
I have 4-6 hours of hyper focus, the rest i use for emails, spreadsheets etc
It's interesting that while the S&P did beat these hedge funds, Buffet's own Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.B) seems to have beat the S&P handily[0], with an increase of ~130% from $77.93 in 2007 to $179.89 today.

I know Berkshire isn't actually a hedge fund, but is very analogous to a giant mutual fund, albeit one that takes a very active ownership role in the companies whose shares it owns.

0:http://quotes.morningstar.com/chart/stock/chart.action?t=BRK..., look at the 10-year chart.
You seem to be describing the ideas underlying smalltalk, which uses the word 'objects' instead of 'discrete modules'. Every piece of functionality is an object - any object can talk to any other objects, etc.

If you're proposing something different, can you contrast your ideas with smalltalk style OOP?
Repeatable experiments that don't rely on whisks of statistical credibility.
People need to stop thinking gait is a useful metric. It's been disproved as an effective biometric, and is largely ignored by the (non-fraudulent) biometrics research community and companies offering products based on said research. There are simply too many trivial things that significantly alter an individual's gait to make it a meaningful metric.
docker swarm. it really is as simple as installing the docker daemon on a cluster of machines and issuing a command to link them together.
That's true. My personal educated estimation is that only 5-10% of income is spent on R&D in established companies.
"don't put devices on the network that don't meet your security needs"

Does it not disturb you that the mere presence of a device on your network could compromise everything else? Why is that?

I argue it's because of complexity. We don't really know how these devices behave outside of very controlled circumstances.

And the vulnerability could be anywhere in the stack. I remember this bug from a while back:

https://lcamtuf.blogspot.com/2014/10/psa-dont-run-strings-on...

The gnu strings utility was vulnerable to untrusted input! Who would possibly imagine that would ever be the case!

Honestly, that bug just made me give up. Software cannot be reasoned about any longer. I used to believe that solid components strung carefully together could add up to something understandable. But no, we are beyond that.

I'm not talking about crazy James Bond hackers that somehow infected your compiler or something. I mean that, by accident, a basic utility does something crazy.

This is not math or science or engineering any more. It's wizardry, witchcraft, and alchemy.

(I'm exaggerating a bit, but it really is discouraging to me.)
These losers that lost the battle of ideas really want to push a message that anything that goes against their narrative and interests automatically implies evil, criminality and debauchery. Nobody cares if people in Russia did things to influence US culture. People from different countries can speak to one another and exchange ideas. The only people who oppose this are authoritarians that want to shut down the discourse. All sides push propaganda, who cares if it comes from Russia? Why specifically is it "sabotage" and "meddling" when it comes from Russia? We are talking about internet ads that push a certain kind of ideology, not criminal acts. Hilary Clinton lost because she ran one of the most embarrassingly awful and out of touch election campaigns of all time. Even if Russia did push lies and manipulations, if it resulted in denying that terrible cow the presidency then ultimately it is still a good thing. The US should be easing sanctions on them because of this, not constantly berating them in the media.
I would love to have the option to pay with CPU cycles so that I dont have to subscribe.
Very good solution, convenient and practical.
> By "the embedded space" do you mean "devices running Linux with Rust in userspace?"

No, I mean TockOS with the Hail dev board: https://www.tockos.org/blog/2017/introducing-hail/

> Rust is way more complicated than it should be

People often make this statement, but I don't know exactly what it means. The type system is great for writing finite state machines, which I'm finding to be a nice quality for the toy programs I've written on Tock.

> Rust also has the shiny fad status working against it IMO.

Rust is 2 years into it's stable life. It's young, will it ever exceed the number of lines written than C or C++, almost definitely not, but I wouldn't dismiss it off-hand because people like it, there might be a good reason for that.

> If, say, 5% of C hackers understand low level programming and/or kernel hacking, then maybe 0.5% of Rust hackers do (if that).

I wonder about this statement. I've noticed quite a large number of people in the community working with Rust in the embedded space. According to the people who responded to the Rust survey this year, https://blog.rust-lang.org/2017/09/05/Rust-2017-Survey-Resul..., it was nearly 17%.

> C is boring

I've met more undefined behavior that makes me not agree.

> and straightforward.

:/
Maybe give everyone the last 2.5 hours off every Friday and they won't spend that time during the week looking for a new job.
Can random bits of DNA lead to safe, new antibiotics and herbicides?
One thing about Slack is that communication and chat is literally their core business. With offerings from Atlassian or Microsoft et al, they could just let their platform wither when they have a mood swing. But it is all Slack has.
Whoever was responsible for the fault that detected the sun rays as incoming missiles.
No, the grandparent post is correct. In my experience interpreter means anything other than executing machine code directly. That could mean interpreting the source directly (as was often done for BASIC), parsing the source then interpreting the syntax tree, or compiling to byte code and interpreting that. If you have any kind of innermost "engine loop" to fetch the next instruction and figure out what to do with it, you have an interpreter.

If you compile to machine code, you no longer need an engine loop -- the CPU does it.
I wish there were more notification customization. For example, have the icon on your browser or taskbar be changed when you receive a message but not get a pop-up notification for some chatroom. And for other chatrooms, get pop-up notification. This will help me separate from immediate response level vs "respond sometime today" level
I think it's a reasonable distinction--one basically can't be defended against, and the other can benefit from ubiquitous surveillance (theoretically) in advance.

The problem is that if random acts of violence are conflated with systematic terrorism, we grossly inflate the numbers in such a way as to be constantly crying out for further surveillance and erosion of rights. And when the attacks keep happening, because they're spur-of-the-moment lunatics, we will proceed to clamp down harder.

So, no, we have to draw the difference between the two.
(For context, I edited out "if you'd made a ruckus on HN, you could've prevented a lot of suffering" from my previous comment. Mostly because I disagreed with myself that it was up to Patrick to do that.)

Patrick, I respect your writing. But your answers are rarely straightforward. Even now, when you risk nothing, you refuse to reveal precisely what you knew and how you came to know it. I'm skeptical that you knew anything of consequence, and I think this is a way for you to appear prescient. But if you say you discovered something, we have no choice but to believe you on reputation alone. I wish you'd share with us what the Great Sages know, but who can blame you for wanting to stay a member of their ranks? It's only through secrecy and obfuscation that you can maintain the aura.
As the first comment [1] says, it's a silly architecture for them and completely unnecessary.

All modern databases are essentially the same: they receive changes, save them to a write-ahead log or journal, then materialize the data into indexes and tables. This is the event-sourcing + compaction + materialized views model that kafka/confluent keeps pushing but inside a single piece of software that does all the hard things for you with arbitrary queries, reliable backups, etc. There's a reason why this is the common model for decades, there's nothing new here.

Splitting up all that logic into separate event streams, processing pipelines and datastores is certainly valid but only really necessary at the 1% of companies that operate at that scale. For most people, a relational database running on a mid-range server is plenty of power and far better long-term storage.

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15184640
The purpose of a court of law, at least historically in the US, is to make sure that evidence is brought out and the situation explained and explored. We should not dismiss that lightly.
The service is very cheap and easy to replace, so such valuation makes sense actually. Do you really expect Slack to bring in 10x more business than it has now?
I was going for hyperbole and I do agree. I just think the speculation is getting out of control, not necessarily with Slack in particular, but with tech in general. I'm really curious to see what happens with Airbnb and Uber's IPO roadmaps. If either flops I think the market could see an unpleasant correction.
Most of us in "charmless" Sunnyvale happily do without living among the unique "blessings" of San Francisco.

Events in SF are just a rail ride away, and you often return to find your car intact.
I haven't had any problems with missing notifications over the past year on the iOS client, and I'm signed-in to three different teams simultaneously.

My only complaint about the iOS app is its RAM consumption (it's not an Electron app on mobile too, I hope?) as iOS seems to suspend it and thaw it whenever I switch to another app. Oh, and it's still kinda slow, switching between teams takes 3-6 seconds.
> most users don't care

The reason most users don't care is that they don't understand what's going on: They've been programmed to believe that law ≥ morality when there exist so many painfully simple - even modern - examples where this cannot possibly be the case.

People used to buy a car with the expectation it last 20-30 years and would not think about buying a car that they had to take to the manufacturer for repairs or aftermarket upgrades, after all: You need your car to get to work, and everyone knew if there was a malfunction and the manufacturer refused to repair it under warrantee (like a broken windscreen) you could at least get a competitive best-price repair from an open market of repairmen. Without this, how could you possibly trust the purchase of a car?

Now they do, and indeed I know people who rotate cars as often as they exchange their phone for the newest version. If the manufacturer won't repair it for free, they can charge as much as they can get away with - far and above the best price -- and the only reason they can do this is because they have a technical monopoly on some secret keys used to perform updates and upgrades.

If there's a user who, given the choice, would protect a manufacturers' "right" to price-gouge them, then they're a fucking idiot.
Modern Ways to Use C++ in JavaScript