skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It remains difficult to observe genome variation in transposon content. The situation is improving as we get longer single-molecule reads, as these let us reach through these sequences into bits of DNA that let us anchor the position of transposons against genomes which we've already sequenced.

I think some people may have the idea that we can observe whole genomes easily, but consider the case of repeats like transposons. Half of the human genome is made up of these, but we still have trouble seeing when and where they are active. A new insertion of a big piece of DNA can be much more phenotypically effective than a little SNP, and yet our observational methods make the latter much easier to see than the first. It seems that structural variation in genomes is a likely place to find at least a partial solution to the missing heritability problem posed by the GWAS community.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_heritability_problem
I'm seeing HSTS on 0/3 of Australian banks (I'm even seeing RC4 on one of them).

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=commbank.com....
https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=nab.com.au&s=...
https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=westpac.com.a...
Return of Coppersmith’s Attack: Vulnerable RSA Generation
Stop panicking (unless you need your daily dose of the End of the World drama).

From the source: In general though, you can try to mitigate attacks against routers and access points by disabling client functionality (which is for example used in repeater modes) and disabling 802.11r (fast roaming).

For ordinary home users, your priority should be updating clients such as laptops and smartphones.

Source: https://www.krackattacks.com/
ROCA Vulnerability Test Suite for Infineon RSA Flaw
Why Hybrid App Is Perfect for Your Business Needs?
Well, I’m pretty sure it doesn’t cost uber any more or less to serve blind people, perhaps aside from some initial investment in getting their app to work with VoiceOver (appears to work fine).

Obviously it costs uber far more to serve people in wheelchairs. So yes, making life better for parapalegics might make life worse (or at least more expensive) for blind people.

And here we have the double edge of regulation. It is not a very precise tool. Want a benefit for some group, but don’t want to have to, you know, actually pay for it? Easy! Just add a new regulation that makes all business owners pay for it! Voila, taxi regulations.

Imagine instead if the government simply gave disabled a stipend to help fund their transportation costs. A diverse market would emerge. Some businesses, eager to tap into the fountain of government stipends, would charge higher prices and offer wheelchair friendly vehicles. Other businesses would offer cheaper services, which would benefit groups like the blind. And not just the blind but single mothers, veterans, and even just regular ol’ people that want to go somewhere.

Regulations make taxis more expensive for everyone, including groups that deserve a break like the blind or the poor.

Stipends paid for by tax raises can be targeted at specific groups, like the very rich.

I have a lot of sympathy for the disabled and support policies that benefit them. But the existing regime of Taxi regulations of are extremely poorly thought out and inefficient.
Infection PHP – Mutation Testing Framework
Sounds like a shitty situation for Germans, but here stateside cable ISPs have been offering 100+Mbps plans for a few years, and Telcos like Verizon ran fiber to quite a bit of their footprint. Gigabit is increasingly available, especially in urban areas.
Wellll to be fair, I'm sure if the researcher said no, he wouldn't have committed.
Do you have a short position on Bitcoin?
New Wordpress plugin for user feedback
Can u share a real-life use case for this problem, even in google, folks don't get past the 5th page. Last five can be accessed by reverse sorting.
Now that it's more clear what role disclosure deadlines play in cooperating with security researchers, it probably makes more sense to just cooperate than point fingers.
Clickbait, this is not how you made chocolate, this is how you handle chocolate chips. Very low quality epistel.
> Perhaps "defect" is the wrong word

It's precisely the correct word. Prisoner's dilemma are simple, mathematically. This was one. OpenBSD defected. The joke's on the security researcher, though, since this doesn't appear to have been their first time [1][2].

Robert Axelrod outlined, in his 1984 classic The Evolution of Cooperation [3] four requirements for a successful iterative prisoner's dilemma strategy. One is retaliating. Security researchers are letting OpenBSD play an iterating game as if it's an N=1, i.e. they're not retaliating. Given the community is playing "always cooperate," OpenBSD's best move is actually "always defect".

[1] https://lwn.net/Articles/726585/ thank you 0x0 [a]

[2] https://lwn.net/Articles/726580/ thank you 0x0 [a]

[a] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15481980

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation
UberEats a bright spot on menu with $3bn potential sales
Well, it's a good gut reaction to have. As you wrote yourself "In reality, both are equally easy to write" - therefore the first one is a good default to assume, because in some cases it may actually matter.

If you choose good default, then you won't spend any more time thinking about it; if you have bad defaults, then you will have to figure out where the slowdown comes from and eliminate it.
I would rather bear the greater volatility of holding the underlying cryptocurrency, and get to enjoy the upside potential, than hold a stable value coin that has no potential to appreciate and a greater than zero probability of going to zero.

That's about what kind of risks and rewards you want for your investments or savings. If you consider the unit of account for a debt, it seems unlikely that you'll have the same preference.

If a trustworthy stablecoin arrives, you will probably want to collateralize some of your other assets to lend stablecoin just to participate in trades and contracts. Most people don't want stuff to be priced in a volatile unit.

Of course I have to believe this because I do some work on Maker!

By the way, Maker's idea of a stablecoin (the dai, the planned successor to sai) isn't pegged. The dai value floats on exchanges while the issuance system reacts to the market prices and tweaks its own parameters to incentivize medium term stability. In the longer term, the stablecoin might be somewhat deflationary or inflationary even compared to its own stability anchor (the SDR currency basket).
He said it's ok this time, but won't be so in the future (pretty clear from the future action). So your decision is still subject to the criticism.
Attaching the value of a fiat currency to something is very unstable in the long run. This is independent of if what it is attached to, be it gold or another fiat currency. Imbalances will simply pile up over time and doom it to fail. This can be exemplified by your examples, but also by the currencies going off the gold standard during the Great Depression.
The intent is to have as many fixes available as possible at the time knowledge of the flaw becomes widespread.
VA conceals shoddy care and health workers' mistakes
and why would North Korea attack Australia?
tl;dr As you'd expect, AMD's chip is a no-brainer on bang/buck.

I wish more reviewers would compare chips at various price levels, because I think that's how most people think about their purchase.

If you want to build a $1500 gaming rig, you're going to look at the whole system cost, and you'll designate a certain price for the CPU. You'll want to buy "the best CPU for that money".

Similarly, if a medium development company has $10,000 to upgrade some of its systems, does it buy 6 Intel CPUs or 10 Ryzen CPUs with that money?

Comparing product brands like "Intel's top of the line" vs "AMD's top of the line" is not very useful, especially if there's a 2x delta price difference between them, while the performance delta is nowhere that big.

This should be even more the case for data center purchases, where total cost of ownership is king.
Apply forThe Getty Foundation international paid graduate internships in USA
QA is about how you work to ensure you build a quality product
QC is about the tests you do to ensure a quality product has been built.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/10/crypt...

"The flaw resides in the Infineon-developed RSA Library version v1.02.013, specifically within an algorithm it implements for RSA primes generation. The library allows people to generate keys with smartcards rather than with general-purpose computers

...

While costs and times vary for each vulnerable key, the worst case for a 2048-bit one would require no more than 17 days and $40,300 using a 1,000-instance machine on Amazon Web Service and $76 and 45 minutes to factorize an affected 1024-bit key. On average, it would require half the cost and time to factorize the affected keys. All that's required is passing the public key through an extension of what's known as Coppersmith's Attack."
Or "social media" can cover "human connections" adequately as a better description without being one and the same or inextricably tied.
So the problem here is one of framing. Without the polemic slant, here's what you've effectively said:

Gun control.
Cost: lessens ability of one societal subgroup to wage a violent revolution, the possibility of which puts a check on society at large, when that subgroup's grievances are legitimate.
Benefit: lessens ability of one societal subgroup to wage a violent revolution, the possibility of which puts a check on society at large, when that subgroup's grievances aren't legitimate.

Strong encryption (and other anonymizing technologies).
Benefit: lessens society's ability to curtail the activities of people the society doesn't like (who just happen to have different points of view).
Cost: lessens society's ability to curtail the activities of people the society doesn't like (from people that are actually bad).

See, the thing about both of these things (from the point of view of an individual) is that they both form direct checks against society.
In the case of encryption+anonymity, society can't know who to target, and in the case of firearms law, society will think twice about attacking others physically.
So you're not going to need to deal with, say, parts of society that actually have the power to get you fired because you have a political opinion that contradicts theirs- maybe it's something completely ridiculous (like you're an actual 1945 Nazi), or maybe it's something more subtle (maybe you're Brendan Eich or James Damore). Or maybe you're an environmental or civil rights leader with some dirty laundry that would hurt you if aired.

And reality bears this out. Ever wonder why Germans are highly protective of their privacy? The Stasi, that's why- the dominant group in the geographical area of East Germany wreaked absolute havoc because society trusted them to do the right thing (just like they trusted the Nazis).
Ever wonder why the Czechs are highly protective of their firearms?
Same deal- their people could not advance and prosper because a certain other nation kept killing them (also the secret police thing).

These people know the evil that society does when it runs amok, and know why it can't be trusted with these tools.
They favor strong protections that individuals can use to escape society's fickle desires (like banning whatever boogeyman's in the news this week).
And society is notoriously bad at determining good from the bad and right from wrong; when it gets it really wrong, lots of people die.
Germany, China, USSR; all societies that have very little in the way of stopping the majority from abusing its power, and all who have killed tens of millions of their own people.

Now sure, individuals in a given society may vary in how comfortable they are with trusting said society (there are some good things that can come of it; environmental regulations and affordable healthcare being two notable examples)- but to say that there are some liberties that are fundamentally incomparable is disingenuous.
Unless the society you trust tells you otherwise, of course.
Here's one that involved the entire plane seat rather than a parachute: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juliane_Koepcke
Meta: why doesn't YouTube normalise volume. Why doesn't my OS/DE do it. (Mostly I'd want volume compression too.)
As an Android user is there any mitigation for this other than ditching my handset and switching to an iPhone or waiting (hopelessly) for a patch from my vendor.

This really does highlight the absolute disaster zone that the Android handset market has become as far as updates are concerned. I'm sure the Pixels will get a fix relatively quickly but almost every other Android user is going to be left in security limbo.
Project Euler is like weightlifting for your brain. And don't think that computer is so fats that you just bruteforce the answer. Some problems are computationally expensive so naive solution will take you too much time and you will need to think about more clever solution.
Ostrovit Caffeine 200 100 tabs 200mg Cafeina Pura
Siri, why aren’t you better yet?
It is believed to be the primary reason for the great depression.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_Great_Depression

Deflation or Hyperinflation on the other side is nothing compared to the crises we have today.

They are both a path for disaster, this is the primary fear of economists.

Good explanation: https://www.quora.com/Why-is-2-the-ideal-inflation-rate
Ah, ok, thank you, that explains it a little bit at least! :)
> this can somehow be detected by the software.

I don't know that it was necessarily "detected by the software" as much as "the software expected them to behave according to Apple's spec and they didn't which caused the bug". We don't know if the fix somehow only works on only the third-party screens or if, for example, Apple just relaxed tolerances for all screens which then fixes them.
In your hypothetical wouldn't BTC would have to be at least as volatile as the world's RGDP?
I have received a TON of utility and joy from Gimp over the years... Happy to help!
Here is the commit that landed the fix for LEDE today:

https://git.lede-project.org/?p=source.git;a=commit;h=bbda81...
> three years of domain-specific education, and a network of people who trust you to--no, who depend on you to be able to get things done with that knowledge

This might be the case, but he's now like the janitor who unplugs the toilet. His work may be appreciated, and it might be necessary, but it's not respected or well remunerated. I guess he gets a little bit of respect for unplugging more theoretical pipes, but a little respect isn't a PhD.
Use an always-on VPN?
Hi, I am the person you are accusing of mischief.

I didn't break any agreement. I agreed with Mathy on what to do, and that's what I did.

The fact that Mathy decided to get CERT involved and subsequently had to extend the embargo has nothing to do with me.

(edit: typo)
But that is different to what I replied to, which was the question of whether he'd have a vested interest in trying to stop high speed rail.
> His argument that static typing introduces coupling and reduces modularity is convincing.

It's absolutely bogus. In Java, C#, C and C++, I can pull in dependencies via scanning a plugin directory that searches for JAR resp. DLL files. The only coupling is the interface, which in a properly factored system will be a single module containing only the related set of interfaces.

Claiming this exposes the author of never having worked on any actual medium or large system in any commonly used static language. (Maybe the more academic ecosystems like Haskell or ML require implicitly pulling in dependencies via textual imports, but this is absolutely not the only way to do it.)
Nice analysis. It definitely seems to be the case.
what would happen if we want to install, for example, two different versions of ruby at the same time?

This is treating the symptom instead of the root cause, that being ineptitude to design backward-compatible software. We as an industry should fight such band aids and take a stand. Yes, designing backwards compatible software is hard, but exactly that is the difference between engineering and amateurism. And if one is getting paid to program, I’m going so far as to argue that it’s one’s job to have their head hurt solving such difficult problems so that users of computers don’t have to.
Meh. The author goes on a rant against Trump, complaining about how views are being pushed upon him.

Yet he also goes to CNN, which was shown to be colluding with the Clinton campaign (and runs overwhelmingly slanted coverage. Something like 90% negative on Trump, hugely positive for Obama.)

He's picking his preferred poison. But he's not getting a balanced world-view, if that's what he's after.
Ultimatum games [1] are a subset of prisoner's dilemmas. That covers Nos. 1 and 2. Assuming researchers want something from those they disclose to, it makes sense for them to cast the widest net possible while minimising the risk of defection. Balancing that optimization is a game as old as civilization.

> This turns it into a security monopoly where the big vendors get exclusive rights to embargo and exclude smaller vendors and control the disclosure process on their own schedule.

Not necessarily. It turns into a monopoly of those who can show themselves to be credible partners. This exhibits incumbency bias which in social context we call track record. It's not nearly as exclusionary as you're making it out to be.

> Then there's the assumption that the monopolised vendors are trustworthy which is 100% impossible to validate and therefore invalid

This is common in trust problems. You don't need to be 100% sure everyone you're dealing with is trustworthy to work with them because we don't live in a single-iteration game. Again, iterations of retaliation and forgiveness remove the need to have 100% certainty about a player's intentions.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimatum_game
i don't get how they can run a mitm attack without knowing the secret passphrase, can someone explain this in laymans terms?
* Working something out step-by-step always helped me remember the logic behind algorithms.

* I have also learned along the way that the math that I took time to work out stayed on in my memory for longer.

* Sometimes, the beauty of the algorithm is in the details.

* By repeating a certain exercise for different numbers, I have come upon special cases of the problem that enhanced my understanding of the problem.
This is one of those things that should be better with modern handsets and the security patch level for Android. Hopefully a fix for this is included in the November set.

In general most bigger manufacturers have been somewhat decent in updating their flagship devices. With a Sony flagship from the last 18 months for example, you usually won't run more than two months behind on security updates. Samsung is similar if I remember correctly. Hopefully a big exploit like this will be enough of a kick in the butt to get manufacturers releasing security updates faster.
I worked as an embedded developer for many years and I hid the fact that I struggled terribly in maths and had in fact had failed higher level courses several times.

I've felt for the better part of three decades that my colleagues who were proficient in maths had superior capabilities and this has always been reflected in disparities in pay and promotion.

I took early retirement and returned to uni to learn something new... After all these years I'm still struggling with maths but if there is one thing I've learned with near certainty is that the learning process all but demands working out all the maths with pen & paper. I think it's just part of the way the human brain works.
Based on all the Uber- and taxi-related threads I've read on HN before, in many jurisdictions, taxis are legally "obliged" to accept credit/debit cards, pick up non-white customers (common U.S. anti-discrimination laws), etc., yet they manage to find ways to consistently fail to do so without meaningful consequences. Is there any evidence that they actually fulfill their obligation to serve customers with disabilities?
Tesla isn't a startup though, they've been building cars for ten+ years and have a lot of smart people working for them that could've looked to wikipedia to figure out how the other car manufacturers manage to be efficient.
If you look at how Toyota's dealership network operates in Japan (Toyopet, Netz, etc.), you'll see that Toyota is capable of vertically integrating the entire distribution chain very well. My own experience of buying (in my case a Suzuki kei model) a domestic car in Japan was quite eye-opening: my dealer came to my house and had tea with us, found us the best, least-expensive configuration of the car, dropped it off at the house some weeks later, and then stayed in touch like a member of our extended family, checking in every few months to let us know he was available. When I accidentally left the dome light on overnight night, he drove an hour each way to deliver and install a new battery, at 10PM, in the rain. And we had to beg him to invoice us. Sure enough, when I sold the car about a year later, I offered it to him first. He took the Shinkansen from Nagoya to Kyoto to pick it up, had tea with us, handed us an envelope with about 70% of the original purchase price in cash, and drove it home without even so much as an inspection. (By the way, the purchase price was $13K for a 2017 model that got around 80mpg.)

The inefficient dealership network is not something that emanates from Japan, but is Japan Auto adapting to local customs, legal requirements, and standards.
There are other R implementations, see https://radfordneal.wordpress.com/2013/07/24/deferred-evalua... for some pointers.
I know it's not ideal nor user friendly, but you can get a device that is supported by lineage os.

You get updates every week.
'All wifi networks' are vulnerable to hacking, security expert discovers
While Switzerland is one of the countries with lower amount of homeless people, most of EU is much lower than - say - the UK (in Brexit times this might be interesting), but this kind of numbers may well (and actually are) very debatable because of different ways the "homelessness" is calculated.

Also you have to consider how in continental Europe there is an ethnic group, the Romanis (more commonly called gypsies) that traditionally move across the various countries and that may be counted one way (homeless) or the other (or not counted at all).

And comparng a single smallish country with the whole US makes little sense anyway, usually homelessness (like in this case talking of Seattle) is concentrated in very limited areas (usually in or around large cities) where the rest of the country is unaffected.
To be clear, I accuse you of nothing less than playing a rational response to the researcher's apparent "always coöperate" strategy. "Defect" in a prisoner's dilemma context does not mean "breach" in a legal one. (For example, an OPEC member defecting has zero legal consequences. It does, however, affect their standing in the next round of negotiations.)
https://plotnine.readthedocs.io/en/stable/