skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>I am not sure whether an actual "Brexit" will happen, given the recent breakdown in talks with our European counterparts.

I would say that any breakdown in negotiations means that Brexit is going to REALLLLY happen (i.e. Hard Brexit). We are on a 2 year clock and time is running out. Who knows - maybe the UK and EU will pull a rabbit out of the hat. However, I can't get my head around anyone being blasé at this stage.
> That's a good rule, but good luck opting out once most manufacturers no longer give you an option.

The irony is that this is Hacker News and so many people building those things hang out here. If we want to make a difference, we have to start making a difference.
Thank you for your response, it is highly appreciated. Ok, perhaps I'm extrapolating from the situations I've been in too much. I admit I have never worked with truly toxic people before. I have worked with very confident, boastful people however. But such behavior I have always seen as "Ok this person takes my intelligence seriously and sees me as someone who can take on this attitude." I have often enjoyed resulting, hard, conversations but indeed heard more introverted colleagues label such persons as toxic or indeed draining.

I am assuming (yes you are right) that these people get praise of some sort, otherwise why would you ever be annoyed? I mean if such people were ignored, demoted etc why would you be annoyed by that? The problem would solve itself. This is also where my assumption of success comes from. Why be annoyed by self-destructive people without success? Is this too much assumption? If they were truly unworthy of their own confidence, wouldn't they be exposed immediately? How do these people manage? How can they keep faking if results are required? It's not sustainable, there must be something there, they would be to easy to expose otherwise. On the other hand, if they'd fake it till they made it, they have a valid strategy and the confidence was not "over confidence", but justified.

So, if you ask me how to speed up said exposure? Ask them questions in public, don't help them on subjects they claim mastery in, ask them for help on the subject they claim mastery in? Assign them difficult tasks in the area they claim mastery in, tell your pl that a task is better suited for person X, who is a master in Y. I wonder why this does not seem to happen. (Again, because if this did happen, the toxics would be exposed immediately.) What kind of environment is OP in? I find this environment very hard to imagine, unless OP is misinterpreting (which can be entirely on me and my lack of imagination of course).
goto is a stable language feature.
Google has a foreign policy and could easily make hundreds if not thousand of activists killed around the world. It dictates the laws it wants its automated cars to obey.

Apple probably has a better geolocalisation of people than any intelligence agency.

Facebook and Twitter are suspected to have delivered the key to the last US presidential elections.

Uber mocks the laws of several of the richest countries in the world.

Softbank is becoming a behemoth that God knows if it will ever stop growing fat of its robots and AI acquisition.

AI research is driven by web companies like Alibaba or Facebook.

They are not kings, they are king makers.
>even if meditation is nothing more than a deliberate activation of the placebo effect, that's a pretty cool result.

You are misunderstanding the placebo effect.
(one that contacted me years ago and apparently still exists is kind of amazing to read: https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Tobi-Reviews-E315372.htm)
> It's not always nice, and frankly, never actually works.

It works and is profitable. Just ask any advertiser. And it is nice. It increases corporate profits. What could be nicer than that?
/s
"In my experience, the negative ones are usually absolutely reliable!"

Yes. In my experience: Only people extremely pissed off take the time to open their macbook and write a truthful rage at 2am. There are good reviews, but they just don't have the same soul crushing honest factor. Comically, people think they are being anonymous -- but you can't soul crush without knowing -- and people (engineers) quickly put things together.
Very interesting article
PyTorch Implementation of A2C, PPO and ACKTR
I’ve been working on https://github.com/bluejekyll/trust-dns for a bit over two years now. About a year ago a new contributor added Windows build support and testing with AppVeyor, which was awesome.

Originally I started this project more for server side stuff, but recently have been very focused on a full resolver which could be used as a replacement for the OS system resolver.

A question for HN, what would you like to see in this context that would make a replacement resolver on Windows something you’d use? To be clear, it’s not something you could use dropin right now, it can only be used as an internal library to Rust at-the-moment, but I’ve been planning to start working on a daemon that could act as a caching system resolver in the next little bit.
Even if they knew, I'm still not totally clear on what's wrong with running those ads. It seems everyone has such a low opinion of everyone else these days. I really wish the outcome of learning that Russians bought ads on facebook was a cultural antibody to not believe ads, not a call to ever more closely regulate what stuff people should see.
I worked for about six months at one of the worst places of my 28-year software engineering career. I left a negative review on Glassdoor when I left, but Glassdoor removed the review after the company's HR department hit them with a mountain of whinging.

I also interviewed with a well-known company two weeks ago and they told me, during the interview, that they've had to have Glassdoor remove comments about their idiotic interview quizzes. I still look at Glassdoor, but I don't take it as seriously as I do reviews on Amazon or Yelp.
It did, but I'm not sure how well it really works. In my own experience, I still see lots of networking failures if I'm far enough from my house for the network to be dodgy but not so far that it disconnects, or if I connect to crappy public WiFi.
good article / research. props!
I have some experience here, I had a client who came to me saying they wanted to use Squarespace but would pay me to setup and maintain it. I was a bit confused because I felt the platform was made for that audience - so they didn't need to come to me and pay my rate.

I went a bit further and setup a dev environment so I could do custom tweaks if required but almost all of it was pretty simple and could be done from the UI. (There were some wonky responsive things that I had to take care of manually but that was more a personal issue since I hate leaving something I touch looking a little off).

I handed back the keys and said you're good to go. Weeks later the client attempted to do some updates and the contact form wasn't working and some weird other issues propped up from their changes. I quickly went back and fixed it.

Many people haven't put in the time nor do they have time (they are likely focused 100% on the literal business!) so this saves them headaches and maybe allows them the comfort to hang out with their family instead of tinkering with a website.
VFX Assemble – a crowdfunded trade union for London VFX workers
That's the ecosystem that developed because of MySQL's early performance advantage... that wasn't until later on.

The performance issue is actually a core part of MySQL's history.

We have to go way back to the early 90s.

Back then Postgres didn't use SQL. There was a project called mSQL that created an SQL layer on top of Postgres... but it didn't perform very well on the slow computers of the early 90s. So mSQL created it's own lightweight DBMS to replace Postgres.

mSQL was popular in the mid-90s, and it's performance started the creation of that early ecosystem that you're referring to.

Later MySQL took mSQL and added more features, had a more liberal/cheaper license, and kept the mSQL API.. and that ecosystem that developed around mSQL continued with MySQL.

So the performance advantage that gave MySQL it's lead, began pre-Postgres95 (that added SQL to postgres), that created the ecosystem that kept MySQL popular.

When MySQL passed mSQL in popularity in 1997, Postgre95 was a little over a year old, and was just recently renamed to PostgreSQL (while mSQL was about 3 years old at the time).

If Postgres was more performant, mSQL would have been based on it, and MySQL probably would have never existed. Instead, by the time Postgres addressed the SQL issue, they were 2 years late, and by the time they addressed the performance issue, they were a few more years late (by the early 00s, IIRC the performance was comparable).. and by then MySQL had cemented its lead in the market.
To be more accurate, the last two panes of that comic would would be set as a FB feed with the first character posting the FB is evil and the second character replying “told you so”.
There were the below two items [0], [1] which are runtime and tooling pieces. I've used them years ago in side projects and they were helpful but haven't kept up with them recently. They both help find or handle argument validation issues as enumerated above.

[0] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/debug-trac...

[1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/pex-and-mol...
What would that look like?

Consider an example:

You have made a little web app that beeps at certain times of the day to remind me to do something.

Is it complete?

Oh, you want a calendar integration. That makes sense. You add it. Is it complete?

Oh, you say you want to release mobile versions? Okay, now is it complete?

Sorry, but the iOS version needs to be updated to remain compatible. Now is it complete?

There is a new popular cal app that everyone uses. Should you update it to work with that?

The problem isn't that the software is incomplete. The "problem" is that the world keeps changing.

To the extent that the environment doesn't change (unix), you can "complete" your tool.
Companies are popping up hoping to crowdsource temporary security patches:

patching a 0-day: Windows gdi32.dll memory disclosure | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13774397 (Mar 2017, 43 comments)

>sst8: Live patching is gaining the momentum - see Ksplice, Kpatch, kGraft, XEN and similar

>dielel: Our micropatch (7 of them, really, for 4 different Windows OS versions) for CVE-2017-0038 is user-mode. As are currently all our micropatches. Processes using gdi32.dll do not need to be relaunched to have it applied.

--

The list of hot-reloading alternatives was awesome; I sometimes wish I could 'star' a single file like that README: https://github.com/RuntimeCompiledCPlusPlus/RuntimeCompiledC...

This technique of manually NOP-ing out things at runtime is definitely beyond my usual approach of setting a breakpoint and then choosing where to continue execution manually!
The positive ones are not.

I worked for a ecommerce company and the CEO gave anyone who wrote a positive glassdoor review a $50 credit on the site.
In my experience, the data points most accurate in Glassdoor are those related to tone from the top and the CEO or owner. I've not seen one that didn't match my experience either as an employee or as a customer.

But it's important to remember that these are static data points in time, so there are certainly factors you should weigh based on other available data. For public companies, it can be important to assess changes in organization structure including and around the CEO. For private companies, sale of company is worth considering, though that top leader may still be in place post-sale.

Depending on the role you intend to enter, a negative tone may be what you're looking for -- lots of managers enter roles to help turn around a company. That the problems have been called out directly provides an important starting point in understanding whether you will actually be in a position to fix the problem. And public disclosure of the problems also provides a clear target for response through subsequent Marketing/PR and corporate improvements.
No. They tend to skew negative, in my experience.

I once got a bad review because I had the audacity to quiz a candidate that said they'd done work with databases before about SQL. We're talking 'what's the difference between INNER and OUTER JOIN' level of questions. They were interviewing for a position where they'd be expected to write plenty of SQL. At that moment I completely discounted Glassdoor.
Thank you for these posts. I have struggled to make this point many times and have never seen it communicated so clearly and neutrally.
I shared it on #general and nobody complained.
I finally figured out how to apply a functional / unidirectional data flow architecture to the (demanding) case of an editor. And yes, there are plans to integrate this into CodeMirror at some point.
How much Spec do you sprinkle in your code? I'm often using a keyword to query a map. Should I always spec/assert the return of this simple and common task? Because if you type the wrong keyword, a typo or just because you confuse different keywords in your mind, then it doesn't matter how much spec you have applied to the top-level data structure, the function arguments or other things, you still end up with a very easy nil or just incorrect value floating through your data transformations.

The only way I see to have a lot of confidence is to add Spec to every new binding that is created, confirming that all named values are exactly what you think they are. Perhaps that is how most Spec users are working? That would mean asserting every item in a "let" for example.
> How long does one have to wait until a President is allowed to take credit?

Depends on whether the hearer likes or dislikes him.
The Unix server vendors had these features long before Intel did. Having a common out-of-band management interface is hugely valuable for fleet management.

It's not valuable at all for individual retail consumers; in the long run, SGX probably does for the entire Intel customer based, including retail, pretty much everything that the ME might have done for retail users.
What if revealing that information would ensure your permanent imprisonment and the immediate death of your family and friends? Because this is almost always the case. Interrogators are not trying to find things out because they are curious, they are looking for your allies in order to kill them or capture and torture them.
This is such a useful input. Thanks mate, I will update the copy of landing page tomorrow. :)
> so if they pick yours they are likely to stay.

We all know that our idea of what a job is before we pick it is much different after we work there for 3 months.

People are always looking to leave. More money is made leaving. Companies aren't willing to adequately pay to retain talent.
> FYI: When clicked, that link takes you to an image of a testicle in an egg cup captioned with a sarcastic comment about Hacker News.

jwz has strong opinions about Hacker News
Great, I will split test ;)

Thanks for your input friend :)
> Simple rule: I buy it, I own it and it should not need an external service to operate. If it does then I'm not buying it.

While this sounds like a wonderful idea (and one I would subscribe to), it doesn't address the fundamental problem with IoT security.

Most operating systems have updates made available on a monthly, weekly, or even daily basis, in order to keep them secure. Mostly, we know how to do this, the operating system generally auto-updates, and the people producing the OS keep up to date. This is necessary because the time from discovery of a bug to exploitation of a bug can be very short.

IoT devices rarely have this. A Meile washing machine should last 20 years, but there is no way I'm leaving a computer with a 20-year old OS on the internet. That's just asking for trouble. There's also the point that OS makers generally have a clue about computing security, but IoT makers generally do not.

A computer with no way of updating the OS for security (i.e. an IoT device) has a usable lifespan of maybe a couple of months. If you're lucky.
I tend to think that it is not as much about how much you use it. You either do use it or don't. If you do, you are already being tracked.
Fat free.
Soapware EHR Company is shutting down
I’d be curious to know more about the workloads that failed. What kind of data were you streaming?
Shake One Vanilla
This used to be their landing page, you can look at the google cached version http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:tZMBR6x...
Big Ask
He was just using that as an example where we should question our assumptions. Particularly when the subject comes with many 'common sense' automatic assumptions it's good to give extra scrutiny to the subject.

You don't have to be doing something "by default" in order to prove or disprove an hypothesis.

There is more the enough historical evidence that any type of violence or extreme pressure creates false confessions. Nor do you have to rip off someone's fingernails to find out humans will tell you anything to make it stop. You can always extrapolate from more humane experiments, if data from a previous era is not available.
No, I think his point is valid. Some of the biggest errors are subtle failures in the implementation of business logic. Cases where what the code does and what it looks like it does fail to line up.

Static typing can be brought to bear on those (encode your business logic in the type system), but what parts that fails to cover still need good testing. Plus, how do you test that your types correctly encode your business logic?

I'm still more in the static camp than out of it, but I can recognize that the problem is not as cut and dried as we want to believe. There's are reasons this pendulum has swung back and forth over the decades, and I don't see anything to suggest those reasons have changed.
Could the Technology Companies of Today Be the Financial Advisers of Tomorrow?
This sounded oddly familiar, until I read about the projects Libmill and Ribosome. And yeah it's a post already submitted in 2015 and should be labeled 2015.
So people are angry that a media engine was used as a platform to deliver content designed to sway their opinions and behaviors using various forms of mendacity, exaggeration, obfuscation, prevarication, suggestion, dark psychology, titillation, and propaganda.

Doesn't that describe all advertising?

Also, shouldn't we be slightly happy that US tech companies were able to export US-audience advertising capacity to Russia, even though the dominant social network in Russia is now VKontakte? How much of this is just bellyaching because Facebook is making it too obvious that you are its product and not its customer, by selling its product (you) to foreign (to you) interests?

Russia would not have been able to get impressions for so many so cheaply if the US valued critical thinking skills over the mindless consumerism and status signaling via re-sharing certain types of content.
> I suppose you could wrap get, get-in with a nil check or something.

Indeed I suppose the solution would be write wrappers around common getters that allow you to pass a spec to the query and have them automatically assert that everything is what you expect.
Man I dunno about giving weird Rorschach monologues in general, but if you're really compelled to.. at least don't punctuate it with an XKCD.
But one main alternative to that value neutral statement and one major outcome of truly caring about the context of technology is literally Ludditism- like, if we figure out a way to make unlimited free energy with zero waste, do we REALLY want to restrict that because it'll bankrupt the coal industry? Does it become the inventor's responsibility to care for coal miners displaced by her/his new tech?

I am in the end for your argument - that is, I think you are generally correct that we need to consider the context, but I am at a loss as to how to regular that sentiment, because the 'care about context' sentiment gets to its absurd extremes REALLY FREAKISHLY FAST.

Example: I can say with some ease that Uber has gone rogue and is bad in it's context, but I am not joking or hyperbolizing about the previous suggestion about coal and free energy. What about radical lifespan increase? Rich people will start living 5x as long as poor people, making them functionally different SPECIES from us, especially in the context of humanity currently (they'd be like elves to our low men). Our alternates are reasonably scarce - we can push for regulation, but seeing as the regulators are captured by private interests at present, THAT has AT LEAST as much possibility to run amok and extend beyond those of us who push to begin it as our science/technology does!

So neo-feudal hellscape or no, I assert right back at you: technology and science are value neutral, or even automatically value positive by virtue of increasing knowledge, and this argument is detached from "we need to regulate the stupid crap Uber/whoever else is up to," that you're making. Fighting the argument you want to fight here merely leads into a rat's nest of impossible options. I say stand above that and regulate behavior before regulating technology, and where that is impossible, adapt to new reality and/or revolt, because getting lost in squirrel fantasy rat's nest of regulatory oversight on what technology is even allowed to HAPPEN isn't going to prevent that hellscape - it'll speed our descent into it.
If there is such a warning, it should be along the lines of:

"This device is inherently insecure and could be remotely operated by persons unknown anywhere in the world."
I've made them a little brighter, hope that helps.
I agree, but I think companies who build a product where the end user isn't the customer unsurprisingly tend to be worse.
Google is building an anti-Amazon alliance, and Target is the latest to join
I don't know the answers to these questions, but what I do know is:

1. Elon Musk has thought about them more than we have.

2. If his initial concept turns out to be incorrect in some way, he will change it until it is workable.
True! Oh god there are some many awesome inputs here from you guys, I have to take out my notepad and start taking notes!
Agree with this completely. Spent over a year job-hunting and found Glassdoor reviews to be a useful tool.

I'd often remember to look up a company on Glassdoor after an iffy interview. It sent me running away from a couple places I was on the fence about.

And it's just as llaith says. I'd usually have to wade through the sockpuppet froth at the top to find the detailed reviews from developers 3-6 months ago describing the dysfunctional culture or 60+ hour workweeks.
Reviews often say more about the reviewer than the reviewee. Keeping that in mind however, the reviews of my former employer were accurate.
No, nobody notices.

Your existing followers cannot tell if your account is public or private, because they see your profile.

Your prospective followers encounter either a closed down profile, which is still being promoted for some reason making them curious.

Or they are presented with an open profile, which is still being promoted for some reason and worth following.
I do not think anonymity == privacy. They are two different things. It is one thing to maintain privacy and want to keep your actions and preferences private from the outside, but anonymity is more about making public statements and maintaining an anonymous persona. I would say anonymity in making public statements has greatly increased with the rise of the internet, while privacy has diminished. In fact, a lot of the data which these companies collect is anonymized.
Because we'll only be 3/5ths as good :)

Or maybe because we're only trying.

https://riot.im/app/#/room/#tridactyl:matrix.org/$1507907809...
Yes, LINQ not var.
As long as it isn't the Pebble Time Round, and the battery doesn't swell and require replacement...
One could make the meta-argument that this is an attack on our trust in Facebook, a news conduit, and that the end result is people are more reliant on traditional news monopolies.