skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I get that the SaaS model of owning user data is wrong. However, I've noticed that some comments seem to imply that it combats being "locked-in" to a provider. Surely a web-app'a data structure is so tailored to its service that you couldn't switch to another provider easily, with local storage.

What I'm getting at here is that remote storage isn't service agnostic really, is it? Unless the data structures are really standardised/simplistic.

Nonetheless user ownership is worth enough in of itself.
Reverse search with CTRL-r is a handy time saver that few of my technical colleagues seem to know.
There is an important distinction between valuing something inherently with bitcoin and accepting bitcoin for a real time USD conversion. What your are seeing with all these merchants is the latter I suppose, they have an intermediary who accepts bitcoin and converts it to USD and hands them the amount. Until something can be stably valued in Bitcoin similar to USD, it's use as a currency will be a moot point.
Why would they do something as ridiculous as telling you its true purpose?
You can Google "Adpocalypse" for more info on this. Here are a couple of articles on it:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/17/arts/youtube-broadcasters...

http://www.tubefilter.com/2017/05/04/how-youtube-adpocalypse...

It started when some big advertisers made waves about their ads being placed on "extremist" videos on YouTube. Some quit Google's network at the time, too. To beg them back, Google essentially started removing anything that might upset those big advertisers. Like anything at all.

The "demonetization" actually came a bit later when there was backlash against those removals from users, so it was Google's way to "compromise". It wouldn't remove the more "sensitive" (but not extremist) videos, but it would demonetize them without much thought.
Members of congress aren't pro "defend yourself with guns," they are pro "get votes of people who are pro defend yourself with guns."
Security Firm Creates Chatbot to Respond to Scam Emails on Your Behalf
People have been trying to break ME for years, some have been paying attention to it for a long time. There are just more people in the game now
Because despite how great SQLite is (I use and love it myself), removing the "competition" between multiple implementations is removing one of the main cornerstones of the web platform.

A real spec is "loose", it allows wiggle room in many areas, it allows for multiple ways to implement things, it allows implementations to act differently, and in most cases that comes out as a win for the user. Saying the spec should do what a single implementation does is about as close to saying "you aren't allowed to improve this" as you can get.

I really believe that a monoculture is a bad thing. Luckily on most platforms SQLite (while the best in most cases) doesn't have a monopoly on what it does, and while it's a "defacto" standard in many cases, there are alternatives at every step of the way. Saying that a platform must implement SQLite takes that defacto standard and codifies it. It's forcing a monoculture. It doesn't just deincentivise improvement, it almost explicitly forbids it.
CNN said so after reading the wikileaks documents that they said they are legally allowed to look at but I'm not. So I take their word on it. /s
2 weeks ago: https://www.polygon.com/2017/10/27/16556980/youtube-demoneti...

People also need to realize that the alternative is massive amounts of ad dollars simply being removed from YouTube altogether. The demonetization drive came from advertisers' outrage over the lack of control over where their ads appear. Without the demonetization push, they start pulling out en masse and everyone loses out.
Why once a minute?
Intel Management Engine Verification Utility
Conspiracy theories were so much more fun when they were handcrafted artisanal things rather than weaponized administration propaganda.
Would be nice if RemoteStorage were include as an App in Cloudron.io and/or Sandstorm.io, or even better, in NextCloud/Owncloud.
What is the Difference between GCC and G++
Creators aren't paying google. Creators are the product.
CodysLab is the most recent one to experience this, which is really bizarre, and his explanation video (after his channel was turned back on) reveals that Youtube automation had a lot to do with it.
Tech stars split over AI: threat or salvation?
Standard political maneuvering. Change the conversation by focusing on other problems and tooting your own horn in the process so loudly that people can't think straight
Hmm that's a good point about the pipeline operator. But I'm not sure how I feel about having both idioms readily available. In which cases would you choose forwards processing instead of backwards, you know? I'll have to think more about that.

> In Smalltalk, the custom is to name the variable "each"

Ooh I like that! I think I would like it even more if "each" was a reserved word, like "this" in e.g. Java. But maybe that's a bit much.

> Do you mean algebraic data types?

Yes, sorry. I talk to functional people a lot so we tend to use "ADT" for the algebraic ones (those FP people are all about brevity it seems).

Glad to have that confirmed, though. Just wanted to be sure I wasn't missing something.

> I'm a fan of writing and using curried functions by default. I'm not a fan of Reason's syntax that suggests the opposite.

Could you clarify a bit? I'm not sure I follow exactly what you mean about the syntax being unclear. It seems similar to Haskell, except with parentheses, which doesn't seem terrible.

> No. It is adding a new method to an existing class from someone else's library.

Oh I see! I totally misread that example. Thanks for the clarification!
It's not a family friendliness issue causing this, it's an 'advertiser friendliness' one.

Anytime an ad was shown on a slightly controversial video, an internet outrage mob would descend on the advertiser saying how dare they provide money to <odious cause>.

Advertisers pressured Youtube for ways to advertise only on non-controversial videos. Youtube responded by demonetizing anything even halfway controversial.
> while there are mitigations for the evil maid attack (like an encrypted drive and shutting down -not just suspending, when the machine is out of sight),

That mitigation is useless against Evil Maid. There are much more sophisticated mitigations (using a TPM to measure the boot, and then do something akin to TOTP in order to allow the user to actually verify the state of the machine) which actually could protect against Evil Maid almost completely (assuming you don't have something like Intel ME that cannot be verified by the TPM).

"Once you have physical access it's game over" is a very common response to these discussions, and I find it incredibly defeatist. Of course physical access means that the "clock is ticking" until your data is compromised, but sufficient protections can dampen the impact or increase the difficulty.

For example: IOMMU protects against DMA-based attacks, something that was impossible to protect against several years ago. This doesn't mean that someone cannot launch other attacks, but it does mean that the trivial "just plug anything into a USB port and you have DMA" attack is no longer possible.
Snapchat was snapchat for kids, but then the kids grew up.
What do you think the headline about Intel be in Russian media?
How on earth can parents willingly expose their children to any kind of advertisement is beyond me. Adblocking is a must. Especially at such young age, you should know and control all manipulative media your kid consumes.
This makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the insight!
The master may have had a scribe on staff for these things.
Re:scam is an e-mail chat bot designed to waste scammers' time
Name of the Wind is mine, also. The magic system is amazing and blew my mind when I first read it.
Nice! You might want to check mines, in javascript and with pretty pictures/animations

https://github.com/aguaviva/ArtificialIntelligence
Plenty of people were still saying the Snowden revelations were old hat when they came out, we all knew it was happening just didn't have proof, etc. The novelty and seriousness tends to be out-of-whack with the amount of news coverage. It's a poor way to measure the importance of existing news coverage or lack of it for that reason. What matters is that it gets out and incentivizes developers, manufacturers, company policies, and behavioural change.

There are plenty of hot news scare pieces after boring security leaks all the time bringing awareness to issues that technical people have known well. For ex, I'm hearing about friends older parents putting tape over their laptop cameras.

We love to trash bugs that having marketing brands but these exploits, and more importantly obvious attack surfaces like ME or cellphone modems, often just need the right amount of human-interest story, practical real-life example, and wrapped in good news friendly explanation for regular people to care.

It tends to happen a lot more randomly and without a rational order of priority, but it's still happening more and more often. At the end of the day it's always going to come down to the time and effort of a security researcher caring and the tech community putting the effort in to make the journalists care.
If people who would have moved to Oakland, instead move to SF, wouldn't that lower rents in Oakland?
Is this about that "Spiderman & Elsa have a baby" videos?
Have they been transcribed and made available?
I must confess my 7 year-old saw one of these Peppa Pig videos and I haven't seen him laugh so hard in his life. I think he is of an age where he realises this is something someone has created as a joke, I can see how a younger child would be upset.
In most languages, that's an implementation detail that is hidden by the compiler, and not a part of the semantics of the language itself.

More specifically, if the language won't allow me to do both:

foo.method(x)

and

method(foo, x)

and have them behave the same way, then I submit that, regardless of what's going on behind the curtain, a n-arity method is not really the same thing as a (n+1)-arity function in that language.
It’s true, some of this is frivolous. It’s valuable though, since we think in narratives and achieving milestones helps us feel progress. It's like how Floyd Mayweather just achieved a contrived goal of "undefeated in 50 matches," or the long list of Roger Federer's achievements, all made up "firsts" or "mosts."

There’s a non-frivolous side too, I think. Firsts (and other data points) help to timeline the use of written language and its development. The Akkadian/Sumerian finds are really good for this, because of the quantity of finds and the ease of translation (Akkadian anyway). King List, Laws and other political/governance texts. Epic/mythological tablets and other “religious” tablets. Historical tablets. Some clay tablets are reproduced in the bible, and still form core parts of culture. A tremendous amount of accounting tablets appear in very early periods suggesting that clay was originally a finch startup idea.
I was pulled over once for doing a U-turn on a street (There was no No U-Turn sign) to pick up a friend from work whom I saw was walking. It was a very cold night and he had on only a T-Shirt. I didn't have my wallet on me, but knew exactly where it was at home.

I sat in the back of a police car for a hour while they researched everything about me.

Again, there was no No U-Turn sign. I was simply suspected of something, of which the police never informed me of.

That was the day I learned I always needed my license, for apparently any reason, in the US. Even if you're white.
Oh noes, poor YouTube, poor Google. Their prime motive is making money. They are not forced to distribute it all for free. If they didn't, then maybe people would go back to the great days of selfhosting or distributed systems would finally become commonplace. I would prefer that.
> It's not a family friendliness issue causing this, it's an 'advertiser friendliness' one.

What's the difference? In my mind those are the same thing.
What is bitcoin futures? Is this speculative pricing on the speculative 2x fork?
I think we can all agree that this is a move towards something new and big. The significant questions are will it work, and is that something a 'good' something.
They are carving out a Youtube Kids channel rather than filtering content for everyone, so you should at least be indifferent to this.

It's a business, they are going to do things like this to make money.
It gets better: https://prokopetz.tumblr.com/post/123010716162/thesparkofrev...

> But this guy, this Ea-nasir, he kept all of his angry letters - hundreds of them - and meticulously filed and preserved them in a dedicated room in his house. What kind of guy does that?
I warned a friend about these weird videos maybe 2 months ago, since he has a 2.5yo who watches a lot of YouTube Kids.

This is a speedy response?
Or, they could create two separate ad categories by including an option like "Allow ad to be displayed on potentially controversial, offensive or profane content". That way instead if being demonetized videos could simply be moved to this bucket and get ads from less high profile brands, that don't care about this.
Kind of funny that this was right next to this item[1] "Human sperm steer with second harmonics of the flagellar beat". Apparently one regresses in abilities over time... \s

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15666714
Alternate take: video creators can already use Patreon; Google adding an equivalent feature doesn't help them. It would actually be harmful if Google decides to pressure creators to move off Patreon onto their own system, since the creators would need to rebuild their paying subscriber base from zero. The only party that would benefit from Google adding that feature would be Google.
Musical.ly lip-syncing app acquired for up to $1bn
To run Vanguard, 'you have to be willing not to be a billionaire'
Collected Works of A.M. Turing: Morphogenesis (preface)
That is why I love reading ancient books that have survived to our days.
> There are also dozens of sealed federal indictments pending, which I'm told is quite unusual. The assumption seems to be that they are related to Mueller's investigation although I've seen no compelling evidence that this is the case, aside from timing and wishful thinking.

Neither the total number, nor timing, is particularly unusual; then speculation about Mueller is mostly based on the number in D.C. between the Manafort and Papadopoulos indictments being somewhat higher than would be expected by random chance, but even that is fairly weak. There is basically zero evidence of anything unusual with sealed indictments.
Something out of Lovecraft, I think.
Read. Read a LOT.

I'd recommend books on business, books on sales. Also, books related to the technologies you want to master.
I've never bought into the "NSA/CIA made Intel create this" line of reasoning because, as you say, there was a legitimate use for this technology (misguided as its implementation was). Of course, I have no doubt that the NSA/CIA may have added further backdoors, or are withholding vulnerabilities in ME.

However, one thing that I've always felt conflicted about is why this feature is present in _all_ CPUs. Usually if someone wants to use Intel's AMT then they have a giant support contract with specialty hardware, so it seems odd that the core CPU feature necessary is present on all CPUs despite no user actually using outside of enterprise.

Is it because the bring-up, other low-level stuff, and things like PASP (DRM) were implemented on top of ME, and so it was not considered viable to re-do that on chips that didn't have ME (though I was under the impression that very early ME was not used for anything else)? Or was it just a matter of "it's easier to just use what we have for every chip"?
Picocli 2.0.3 Java command line parser with ASCII colors&styles: bugfix release
Constraints on physical reality arising from a formalization of knowledge
They wouldn't. As I said, this is to the best of my knowledge.

However, I believe I would know because it's not like one day the CEO came to us with a folder filled with requirements to be implemented. This is something that started very small ("find a way to force reboot a PC remotely if it's non-responsive") and evolved from there over months/years. I endured way too many meetings were design decisions were made. Unless there were secret CIA agents disguised as my colleagues, I really believe it was designed by Intel engineers all the way through.

I have no issues with people criticizing the product for its failures. I agree with them. But every time I see someone claiming this was a CIA thing, it actually hits me personally.

Then again, I'll never be able to convince anyone of anything. I just felt like saying something this time.

I guess I'm having a bad morning :)
For me, "TL;DR" inevitably implies a certain laziness. If a person really means, "I tried to understand this but I'm not getting it", maybe they could say that.

Given that the top reply to this post is a copy and paste from the first paragraph of the about page, I could see why people suspect the querent did not work very hard before posting, and so values their own time more than that of other people here. That might not be true, but I think it's on the asker to make that clearer, not the readers to guess.
That's an incredibly optimistic take on this problem. Google, Microsoft, EFF, et al need to win every single battle or they lose the whole war.

The DOJ just needs to find one sympathetic test case, or one sufficiently horrible incident to get the laws changed. Like the Patriot Act in the US, or the new French surveillance law that passed after the Bataclan attacks.

It's the classic asymmetry problem that makes security so hard in general. Only now, the party with all the money and power and time is also the one who only needs to win once.
There's very little value in adding new domain names solely to serve as redirects, because the best practice is to only have a single canonical domain name anyway. We are starting to launch new sites on our TLDs, e.g. https://registry.google https://domains.google https://ai.google https://blog.google https://pride.google

Don't forget, .google is far from the only closed TLD we have, too.
5 Dangerous MVP Pitfalls That Have Left Startup Owners Grasping at Straws
Another, experiencing a 90%+ drop in YouTube revenue since the latest update:

Sid Alpha: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pe5eODFxwy0
exactly, most web apis feel like kv stores build on top of sql
Is this even slightly surprising (or unreasonable)? An ad placement agency--which is effectively what google is acting as from an advertising perspective--wants safe, uncontroversial placements for at least most of their clients, especially big mainstream ones. They're mostly not looking for "edgy." The main surprise to me is that advertising support for a fair bit of non-mainstream content has held up as long as it has.
it's like the instagram of the new generation...no surprises here!
I didn't say only fascists, I said authoritarian types. And I maintain people ambivalent or opposed to them are not prone to Soros conspiracy theories.

Make a thought experiment. Would you say you do not in any way support the policies and rhetoric of Orban, Putin, Trump, Assad, Chavez/Maduro? Without ifs, buts and what-about-Obamas.
He spent the bitcoins to a new UTXO that the Feds didn't have access to. Since these "accounts" exist on the block chain, which is replicated on computers all over the world, I guess every account is an offshore account.
MVP sans the third-party frameworks works pretty well and is easy to read, maintain and test. I prefer it to MVC, for sure, but if you really wanted to... you could still write lightweight view controllers using a lot of abstraction (and don’t forget to inject your dependencies). I have nothing against VIPER, et al, but I think the author makes some really good points on complexity and the inability to understand your system when you have to rely on some of these architectural patterns.
China Eases Limits on Foreign Ownership of Financial Firms
Previous Discussion (11hrs ago): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15667753
Advertisers from France will never agree with advertisers from America on what is controversial. Not even speaking about advertisers from Saudi Arabia.
Site seems to be momentarily down, I'll make a note to come back later. Thanks for posting this, OP.
I understand law enforcement's frustration. However, this is quite simple.

Encryption relies on keys. Either the government has everyone's keys, or they don't.

Any stockpile of encryption keys would give access to millions of people's and businesses' data. It would be a hacking target of inestimable value, targeted by criminal organizations and foreign governments using every technique imaginable.

It would be stolen. Period. And every citizen and business would suffer disastrous consequences.

We can't say this enough in this debate: making everyone's keys accessible to one entity means they absolutely will be stolen. Whether we trust a government entity's motives isn't even relevant. They do not and cannot have perfect security, and that should end the debate.

If anyone doubts that the keys would be stolen, please see:

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Personnel_Management...
- https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/qkjkxv/fbi-flash-...
Also Bro Science Life and Gaad Sad.
5 design philosophies to live and design by
Ooooor, Google could pony up and have a human look at AI flagged demonitized videos (or even just those whose appeals are consistently succeeding) instead of their usual "kill them all and let God, err, appeals sort them out" routine.

They're effectively sacrificing an entire genre (Gaming) at the alter of advertisers. A great way to lose the very content that brings advertisers and viewers to the platform in the first place.
None of that is true except the fat part. Do you really think people don't know when they're fat. Do you think they don't realize other people are fat? And leadership to do what?
Based on who the complainers I’ve seen are, I’m sure that at the very least youtube threw out some baby with bathwater. But that said, their monetisation has not been successful. They do need to make big, hard changes.

A lot of what monetisation did was encourage spam, or content quality just above the spam threshold. Meanwhile, patreon (though obviously which a much smaller footprint) seems to encourage the kind of content youtube should want to encourage.
This is fascinating stuff, thanks for sharing. It's amazing that I can totally relate to an almost 4000 year old stuff, it's kind of cute.
I don't see how this is a substantive reply. Yes, once your key is known you no longer have security. That's true regardless of how many keys your scheme employs.

Just like in traditional encryption scenarios, your personal key remaining secret is a part of the assumption. That there are now two secret keys doesn't alter the analysis substantially.
GP is right, and you're the one being harsh and offensive. It is indeed a shame to see people thinking 30 year old ideas are new because they are uninformed. Humanity is supposed to progress, not spin its wheels.

The post is indeed uninformed and poorly researched. I would rather not see it posted.
Burn the Programmer
I guess it's because of how much has changed, both culturally and technologically. But some things are just human nature
The most interesting thing about the graphs isn't the slope, but that "perceived score" is far more tightly coupled to the individual's perception of their overall ability than their actual score. But that could be an artefact of how and when questions about ability were asked
(conjecture: I haven't read the original paper)
I used to do this on my standup arcade "Battlezone" machine before I got the video system working. I didn't have Z blanking, so all of the repositioning line segments were visible, but it was completely playable.