skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Trouble with this scheme is, the "pie growth", when it happens, is distributed to a very small group of people who have the ability to make big bets - so it compounds.

It seems like the real trouble is that we've set things up so that "big bets" are required.

Huge tomes of regulations that have one-time compliance costs, so the cost to a tiny shop is the same as it is to Comcast or Microsoft, and regulatory capture to keep it that way.

Tax laws that encourage profits to be kept within the corporation instead of returned to investors, which requires successful companies to become conglomerates.

Laws that allow Hollywood and Apple to control content distribution and reject anything from anyone who poses a competitive threat to them.

Fix things like that and you won't have to be so big to grow the pie.
Your view is the one we launched with, but our users made it very clear that it wasn’t sufficient. IIRC the most-requested Sync feature for multiple years was “let me login at the library and view my open tabs and bookmarks”. Should we have rejected our users’ real-world needs, or honored their most frequent request? There’s no compromise path with the crypto - either the former, or the latter, period.
Looking at the language, I fail to see a point. It seems to fix things that are slightly nagging, but not real problems with c (lack of real modules, structs, default arguments, integer sizes) while failing to fix the real problems (strings, buffer checks, metaprogramming, type introspection (_Generic doesn't really solve this, and neither does __typeof__(). A slightly enhanced __typeof__() plus a slightly enhanced _Generic might have a shot)).

No more includes/header files seems to imply no more preprocessor, which is a shame because while it may have been hackish, it was one of c's greatest strengths.

> more logical keywords (public/local replaces static)

My friends, have you heard of the wonderous c preprocessor?

#define func
#define local static
#define public

Agree with what comex said about compilation/building.

For a slightly nicer alternative to c, what about zig[1]?

1: http://ziglang.org/
Side story...

I wish you guys hadn't killed Apportable. It was such an awesome product! From what I could gather, Google acquihired the Apportable team, which then pivoted to Flutter.

For anyone that doesn't know, Apportable was an Obj-C to native Android compiler. It bypassed the JVM, compiling directly to the native architecture, and actually ran faster than comparable Java apps. As a compromise, it also had a Java bridging interface to hook into Android APIs. It was mainly targeted at games which used Cocos2D, but a UIKit bridge was in the works...

When I first heard about Apportable, I was incredibly wary of their claim, but it worked like absolute magic. I was able to successfully port several Cocos2D apps directly to Android with almost no intervention.

Anyway, assuming the core team is still intact, if there is anyone that can pull off what Flutter is claiming to do, it's these folks.
Try finding new blog posts in Objective C. Most are in Swift.
From which browser?
So, here's the other downside to debating the merits of the position "hey, maybe we shouldn't exterminate people because of their race or their religion" - it makes it impossible to progress.

What do you mean, black people deserve the same job opportunities as white people? We haven't even established that we shouldn't be killing them yet!

What do you mean, black people shouldn't be subject to extrajudicial killings in the streets by police officers? My friend here says that we should be rounding them up and shooting them by the dozens.

There are always going to be people who think that some disadvantaged group should be mistreated. If society constantly has to sit down and explain to them why being racist or sexist or anti-semitic or whatever is wrong, then there's no opportunity to try and make actual progress in terms of helping those disadvantaged groups. Every new person who comes in with a terrible opinion sets the discourse back to square one of "killing people is wrong", and when progress is an incremental thing, getting set back to square one repeatedly means that progress doesn't get made. At some point, you need to be able to say "No. That viewpoint is vile, and it doesn't get a place at the table. When you're willing to treat people like people, we'll entertain what you have to say, but you need to behave with a certain amount of decorum before you get to participate in actual discussion."

It's like if you had to explain to your child why smearing feces on the table and plateware isn't acceptable, and you had to do it before every meal. You don't have any time to actually sit down and eat, because every single time you do, you need to explain that no, smearing shit on the plates is wrong. Don't do that.
No. For similar reasons, salted SHA-2 is also not materially better than MD5. You think this is about the strength of the underlying cryptographic hash, but that has in fact very little bearing on the strength of the password hash construction.
> Users who receive a version of Firefox with Cliqz will have their browsing activity sent to Cliqz servers, including the URLs of pages they visit.

Yep, this should end well.

Mozilla has been trying to sell out for years. c.f.: Pocket
For someone who considers him a genius, Kudowksy is almost unreadable, arguing about such small bickering details and using such cumbersome descriptions for what could be done in whole in 2 short paragraphs. He strikes me as a petty liar. I would believe the community over a single megalomaniac.
Can you suggest some of these "better books" ?
I probably laughed at some of those jokes and as a person who (much later) majored in psychology and realized that "appeal to disgust" is a fallacy (also that almost EVERYONE's secret sexual fetish grosses almost everyone else out... that's just the peculiar nature of sexuality), on behalf of all 80's teens, I apologize.
I'm engineer and I've had direct knowledge of how my work has impacted other departments. I don't even have to ask - sales or ops will just say "thanks to X project, we reduced touch time by 30%" at all hands or general meetings. I can't imagine working at a place that hides this info from either the engineers or most of the company.
Well, the question of measurement in QM is somewhat deep one, and no theory should be dismissed off-hand. The notion of "collapse", in particular, can be seen as expressing the non-unitarity that is intrinsic to considering measurement as a non-reversible process (which means that it there's too many things that get entangled with the particle - not just the eye but also systems in your brain, for example, so that the process becomes effectively irreversible; one can also say that the process that has lead to creating information cannot be undone).
Yes, if it was truly for the security of the end users, they'd at least provide the end user a mechanism to unlock this stuff when things go wrong, such as a hardware jumper combined with software access code. A key principle of infosec is "availability" for authorized users. Therefore, I argue that such devices are not very secure for end users.
That's because there's enough people with enough money now willing to buy the crypto-assets at the higher price. They all understand the game they're playing. This batch of speculators just need to keep the value stable long enough that others will start to trust it could be a good way to profit, and then those people putting in money now maintaining the price will sell at a higher price.. This is the cycle that will have existed since inception.
It's described here, how they deal with that sort of stuff: https://gist.github.com/solso/423a1104a9e3c1e3b8d7c9ca14e885...
Who wold trust a company named “YCombinator”? Or “Google”, which was at one point a sexual slang word?!

Discriminating by name will get you absolutely nowhere.
It can, see eg Bill Cook's "in pursuit of the traveling salesman." I've also wondered how this approximation algorithm relates to the standard asymmetric to symmetric transformation. I should read the paper I guess.
Exactly. We have this weird cultural fixation on having "someone" to blame. What's weird is that if it's a human that made the mistake, that's somehow OK. We give humans a free pass. "To err is human", after all. Shit happens.

But if an algorithm screws up and kills someone, that's unacceptable. We start imagining ways that a human would not have failed in the same scenario. We decry "killer robots" and "cold unfeeling machines". Even if that algorithm has already saved 99 lives from being lost to stupid, tired, drunk, inattentive humans, that 100th life is somehow more important.
An excerpt from my genetics professor:

"Even in the absence of mutagens, an average gene will mutate about once in a million generations. ~10^16 cell divisions occur in a typical life span so somewhere in cells that are part of you each of your genes has mutated 10^10 times (hence cancer)."
The TOR browser is the fork you seek. It already turns off every bit of phone-anywhere that we have, and we work with them to keep that the case. Use it and be merry.
I live abroad now and I can tell you EVERYONE outside of the US uses it.

At least in large sections of the world. Businesses have WhatsApp numbers. You see it on signs everywhere. I now find it a pain that people back home in the US don't use it. I use it daily. I literally just typed a message on there 10 seconds ago.
Definitely not Chrome, I hope!
I think Fuji makes some cameras with a hexagonal grid sensor. All our algorithms are based on a square grid though, so it makes it very tough to work with unless you do a conversion.
I think more importantly was getting together the people to sell it. Much or even all of the product apple had built were already products. But Steve was able to package it and spin it in a way that made it exciting and must have.

One of their watershed products was the iPod. I had a several mp3 players before the iPod was created. But apple made them cool and thus mainstream.
Your assertion about people is very incorrect. Do a study and see what results you get back. It’ll horrify you.
Interesting, thanks. I ended up with the MSR7NC at home, which I really like. The NC isn't anywhere strong enough for the office, however at home it works great. I love how detailed they are primarily.
javascript:void((function(){var%20loc%20=%20location.href;%20loc.indexOf("?")%20==%20-1%20?%20(location.href%20=%20loc+"?li=1")%20:%20(location.href%20=%20loc+"&li=1");})());

or, taking a bit more care:

javascript:void((function(){var%20loc%20=%20location.href;%20if%20(loc.indexOf('li=1')%20>=%200)%20return;%20loc.indexOf("?")%20<%200%20?%20(location.href%20=%20loc+"?li=1")%20:%20(location.href%20=%20loc+"&li=1");})());

or I guess it could be modified further to change the parm if it's already present with a different value.

Modified from (because I'm lazy):

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/20677974/bookmarklet-to-...
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the text adventure documentary "Get Lamp", so I will. http://www.getlamp.com/
At least one can tell those two apart. To someone learning the language, Swift 2 and 3 are almost indistinguishable.

Lots of fun compiler errors and deprecation warnings were had.
I don't see how the ability to teach others would be an evolved ability. Learning from others, yes. But teaching others is a different skill than learning.
One idea for a deterministic password manager to avoid having to change the seed when a single site is compromised would be to give a simple counter to each site which is hashed with the domain name (or whatever is used to uniquely identify that site) as well the secret to produce a password. When that site is compromised or a password change is called for its counter is simply incremeneted by one.

That counter can be exposed publicly as well as likely a regularization mapping to coalesce variants in the domain name to a single value, having those are pretty worthless without the secret. So I think that just need to be kept secret and then everything else can be kept in dropbox or wherever.

Edit: I missed it on first glance but I see that this is referenced in the link you posted, so nevermind then.
To clarify, when you say “complete browser history” you describe what Chrome does, where the entire browser history is sent to Google for sync and analysis.

Did you mean to say “all links visited in the Cliqz-enabled browser”, or otherwise does the post somewhere express any intention to collect visit data from prior to Cliqz?
IRC. Same nick for ~18 years. I still use it frequently.

Gmail. Since almost day one.
Correction: We bought Pocket, not sold out to Pocket.
We work on Friday evenings, and a lot of staff participate on HN. Enjoy your evening off; I’m spending mine on Hacker News.
Dev tools are completely useless after the update I got today and now they're pulling more anti-privacy stunts. Not a happy user right now.
So... a checkbox in Settings, then?
Am I the only one who thinks it is ridiculous that a re-arranged dial pad can be patented?
White House chief of staff may have used compromised iPhone for months
Hopefully we are on the verge of a new series of text games that can use machine learning. It would be really cool to have pretty much any wording be understood, along with an engine that can respond with more intelligence.
You'll be surprised how soon after you start writing Swift you'll be doing this yourself - and enjoy it. Exploring new features and learning new ways of doing things is fun. Otherwise, what's the point in learning a new language? Seeing more of the same?
Software Industry Jobs in Toronto Ontario
> There aren't that many different schemes. Maybe a grand total of three dozen? I think that the program can simply have a user-updated registry (perhaps that's shared) of schemes, and the generator accounts for this.

> Making them remember an integer that will rarely be larger than 3 instead of a password seems awesome.

Ok, so, we have the "master seed" that has to be remembered. We also now have to remember X from [1..36] of schemes, and a Y version integer.

There's two ways to "remember" these triplets. In your head. I which case you have to remember, for all 50 [1] different logins to all the sites you have, a triplet of <master,scheme,version>. Master will be easy, as it will be typed enough times to be easily remembered. But remembering that site A, that has not been visited for 4 months, used <master,14,2> while site B, that as not been visited for 6 months, used <master,27,3> and so on for 50+ logins will be untenable.

Or your 'deterministic' generator really has to store the "scheme" and "version" parts of the triplet somewhere in a local file/db, associated with each site, to allow it to work. At which point, you are 80% of the way to a proper password manager that would allow each password to simply be a proper randomly generated string of characters, tailored as need be, for each site.

> Worse case scenario, they can keep trying until they get the right one.

Unless, because of breeches or general password rotation they are now up to "version 12", but the site only allows three tries until lockout. Now you have to start trying "within 3 steps" of 12 or else you are guaranteed to be locked out.

[1] In the manager I use (Password Gorilla, https://github.com/zdia/gorilla, which is one of the many Password Safe compatible managers) I've got 371 stored entries, of which 285 are actual passwords for various sites that wanted a registration of some form or another along the way. That is something you learn quickly when you start using a password manager. The sheer number of websites that want you to 'register' in some way or another is actually huge. This is after about 13 or so years of using a password manager.
Doesnt have to be about money. I reduced page load times by x%, measured it with the chrome inspector network tab and it was brought up in an interview.
This looks like it is the new link.
No abuse here. I honestly think you are missing the point of what is upsetting people.

Nothing in your full quote makes it any more palatable.

No matter how nice your intentions are. No matter how transparent you are. No matter how sincere your wish to contribute to a greater common good is. Do not... Do not... Do simply not collect my browsing data. They are not yours to have.

Whatever excuse is brought to the table I will take it as dishonesty. It can come as no surprise that even the slightest privacy concerned users will take offense of this. They simply hope it will fly under the radar of the common users - because "we do good".

(Please do not take the "yours" as a personal attack - english is my second language - some nuance has been lost in translation)
"Members have their own jobs and bank accounts,"

https://www.voanews.com/a/a-13-a-2001-08-07-25-hog/395182.ht...
Search engine lock-in is a serious and real problem to us. Search engines aren’t effective vs. long-tail sites. A search engine that takes into account recent browsing is vastly more capable of surfacing relevant results. Google has done this for years under the head on “Personalized Search Results”, but continues to force users into Google Accounts to derive a benefit, complete with the horrendous privacy policies that comes with. We’re trying to solve this without violating privacy. We encourage and work with the TOR project, which builds ESR with all server-side functions disabled. If you require inaction, request denied.
Neat. Looks like some source from their iOS app on the left, too.
Someone has to say it: So, there are really people reading the interviews!
See this from earlier research results http://www.mdmaptsd.org/research-category.html

> A long-term follow-up of patients who received MDMA-assisted psychotherapy revealed that overall benefits were maintained an average of 3.8 years later.

(This is after 2 total sessions)

See here for more http://www.mdmaptsd.org/infographic.html
this really looks like a point on the interpolation between C and Go. not that thats a bad thing.

but assuming that I think they should just have pulled in the type syntax from Go
Google closer to using balloons for telecom in Puerto Rico
I like asking my Uber drivers what they think about the future of self driving cars. I don't ask in a mean spirited way. Hardly any any drivers mention being phased out. I agree it's inevitable.
I like the physical source manifesto much better. Which actually addresses the _actual_ problem with monetizing open source: that people can just copy your project and send it to someone else.

https://daplie.com/articles/physical-source-an-honest-altern...

EDIT: seems link is dead, here's an alternate url:

https://git.daplie.com/Daplie/daplie.com/blob/db7a9d0a72fa34...
We certainly hold ourselves to a higher standard, no matter what people say to the contrary. Endless never-ending arguments for a very long time about all of this. Whatever else you think of us, at least remember that we not only care but agonize over this stuff at length.
Never heard of the "appeal to disgust" fallacy before, looked it up. Interesting. :)
Which dev tools, specifically? What functionality is broken? Is this in 56 or 57?
Mirror: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:XksJ5T...
As the full story lays out, production experts commented that its highly unusual to be shipping production cars without the line being fully installed. It’s not that the process should be autonomous, it’s that workers are literally hand-muscling parts of the body into place and aligning them by hand while they hand-spot-weld them.

As someone with 15 years of high-volume manufacturing experience (not in automobiles, though), I’d agree that it’s very odd to be shipping units to customers or claiming to be in mass production before your final tooling is installed on the line and qualified, even if it might change later.
Google accused of racketeering in lawsuit
That says more about the weirdness of our intuitions than reality. Reality is not weird. We are.
Just ship the source code, the experience is going to be so much better, no matter the language. Programming against binary-only libraries is a PITA.

If you don't want to open source your code, at least give it to your paying customers under a proprietary no-redistribution license.
We don’t want to know who you are. We obsess over not knowing who you are. None of us want to know who you are. I know this is of little assurance, but all the same.
Checking for one- or two-dimensional palindrome strings
Hah, yep. Wallet and keys in right pocket, phone in left... as a right-handed person.
I find this all very jarring.
Hey buddy. I got one yesterday. Such an adventure. Coming from the MacBook experience, I will say it's glitchy AF. But I still haven't linuxed it. Doubt that will help.

I will say it's fast.

My complaint is the Thunderbolt 3. It is a lie. First you need an adapter because of course you do and the only one at the store is Apple's. I have a bunch of Macs and displays and peripherals and zero success talking to any of them.

I don't know if I'll even complain. I have an Intel desktop mobo that after several years learned to drive a display over Thunderbolt iff it's connected on boot and that's all. So I'm not expecting much.
Vladimir Voevodsky, 1966 – 2017
This is utterly maddening. I had a similar experience, except that at first they didn't believe me regarding the vulnerability. I basically said, "cool, I'm glad it's not a problem, so when I release the deets and write up a blog post you have nothing to worry about ;-)"

After they finally acknowledged the problem they started treating me like I was a criminal who attacked them. I strictly follow responsible disclosure, but it's crap like that that makes me want to reconsider sometimes.
> To be fair, the SEC losing their patience with ICOs and turning on the whole sector would do it.

They are already doing just that in the last couple of months, and bitcoin remains unaffected.
Relying on your browser's password storage is very risky:

Sorry, But Your Browser Password Manager Probably Isn't Enough
https://www.wired.com/2016/08/browser-password-manager-proba...

Why you shouldn't use your browser to store online passwords
https://scotthelme.co.uk/storing-passwords-in-browser/
Type theory is only useful up to a certain point; there are plenty of languages that appear identical from a type-theoretic viewpoint but that have deeper richer interpretations in category- or set-theoretic settings. Check out the actual diagram in the article; it shows off some distinctions that would have been totally washed out if only types were considered interesting.
I think, the Cliqz browser extension will do the same: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cliqz/
Further optimization of Glimmer VM – Ember's render engine
For anyone wondering if there is a set of Hazelcast like data structures and primitives that actually have safe, strong consistency (based on Raft consensus), check out Atomix:

http://atomix.io/atomix/
Nope. It was the first thing my wife and I thought when we saw the tiny asterisked text under the second image.
No, that just changes where programmers can put their computations. Scheme and Rust are not more powerful for their macros than C++ is for its templates; both can put unreasonable demands on the compilers.
I agree that any company that cares about security already has the emails setup, however I don't think it's completely useless. So many companies really don't know what they don't know regarding security. Easy digestable steps can be helpful. But I agree that in practice 95% of companies won't give a crap about this and therefore won't do anything with it.
That's just saying it's the wrong algorithm, not that it isn't an algorithm. Every computation of pi has truncated the result, which is a 'heuristic' decision, but that doesn't invalidate the fact that pi is computed using an algorithm.

All algorithms approximate things, after all. That's simply a consequence of abstraction.