skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Banning the possession of insecure devices would make it much harder for security researches to find vulnerabilities in them.

As soon as they are successful, they'd be breaking the law.

Just make the owners of IoT devices liable for damage they cause.
Permainan Jospoker Uang Asli – Poker Online Terpercaya – Onlineqqpoker
Emojis are utterly stupid and should never have been added to Unicode. They are not human language, at all.
Why I’m deleting my Twitter account
There is a giant table of earnings by major and a discussion of the figures
Look at the statement from the numpy group:

The NumPy project has supported both Python 2 and Python 3 in parallel since 2010, and has found that supporting Python 2 is an increasing burden on our limited resources;

That's a real team saying that they just can't support 2 major versions of the language any longer.
Absolutely. Privacy is basically security through obscurity. It's never going to stop a malicious government or even employer. We need better mechanisms to prevent such entities from becoming malicious in the first place.
The First Man to Have His Genes Edited Inside His Body
It's not clear to me how this compares to the work from Voltera [0]. Can someone with more expertise weigh in?

[0] - https://www.voltera.io/
Revolutionary CRISPR Gene Editing with Nanoparticles
Well, yes I can see how "the demolition of technological/industrial civilization" might be considered anti-democratic but in fact, once Soros has destroyed industrial civilization, the remaining 12 humans alive will vote on everything so really it's a win for democracy.

Or maybe we can find slightly less cranky sites to reference in our political discussions.
I am cautiously leaning towards the perspecive that Schneier is right. This problem is not going to be solved by market forces. Ordinary non technical consumers will buy things like wifi security cameras for the absolute cheapest price at $45/unit, based on them having attractive retail packages or what appears to be a good feature set/spec/price. I have not seen any signs that people are moving away from known-insecure things in droves, because in my estimate, only 1 to 5% of users of such things actually care about the operating system/under the hood software configuration of their IoT devices.
Why does HiQ have any right to my data in the first place?
But those people will have to pay for the new version. They're not getting the upgrade for free either. They're either paying monthly for those features or they paid for the latest version that includes those features. You paid for the software you've been using the whole time that they haven't been using. I don't understand this attitude where users of old versions are entitled to full version upgrades for free.
It'd be good to have your support for whatever comes next! Check out the reddit post/slack group: https://www.reddit.com/r/Techshop/comments/7d7e0m/san_franci...
What size of iPad are you using (you and parent post)? I've been considering getting a pro+pencil for this purpose. I like to scribble on paper, but I'd really like archived, searchable copies that don't take up physical space.
White noise videos.

Recently I've been listening to this one a lot:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WbEGmghn_jo (Airplane jet engine)
"most" is a great exaggeration. Yes, I few more names have been added. Also, it was always known adding namespace STD could cause problems. The same issues arise with import * in python.
I was just talking to my mom about this. She was born in the early 1950s, in Bangladesh. She was talking about how she grew up reading science fiction books and when the U.S. made it to the moon, thinking that we'd have space colonies and stuff. But, in her view, technology has progressed much less than she thought it would have by now.
It's hard to get people to donate their money directly. You might be able to get more people to passively donate CPU cycles and electricity than to directly donate money. And please don't argue there's no difference because people definitely are more likely to do something if you make it easy for them to do it.

I understand from an engineering perspective this has a cost but the idea is clearly to find a way to get more people to donate to a worthy cause.
I can still run java 1.2 code fine (I say 1.2 as I have a bunch of 1.2 code).
> Take a look at the approval ratings for U.S. Congress, President Trump, Putin, Xi Jinping, Mugabe, or any other powerful figure and then tell me, with a straight face, that they are loved.

Trump is demonstrably a historical aberration in approval terms in the US (and has been stunningly ineffective at implementing legislation); I doubt meaningful polling can be done in China or Zimbabwe, and Congress isn't a figure, while individual members of Congress tend, generally, to have fairly high approval in their own districts. So even though I agree that there is at least a sense in which Machiavelli’s statement is true, I don't think the specific thing you’ve asked people to look at does much to make the case for it.
Probably a good time to mention there are hundreds of hackerspaces throughout the USA.

My local hackerspace in San Francisco is Noisebridge[1]

[0] https://wiki.hackerspaces.org/United_States_of_America
[1] https://noisebridge.net/
Which premise? Isn't that just re-inventing multiplayer gaming?

Or do you mean targeting web games, much like was discussed in this HN post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13264952
I'd argue that they're 2 sides of the same coin. Understanding the differences in incentives between people gives you an idea of who has the power.

If you took a subsection of grad students and said that if they missed any teaching commitments, they'd be expelled, you can reasonably guess that those grad students wouldn't be sleeping through any 11am teaching commitments.
I don't want to minimize the importance of common interests or the ability to find positive-sum interactions that make everyone better off. They're certainly abundant, and when possible, people should take advantage of them (I certainly try to).

But as a topic for discussion, they aren't particularly interesting, because usually your course of action is pretty obvious when you've found something that benefits both you and others and has no known drawbacks. Do it. Duh. The interesting dynamics happen when peoples' interests are either non-aligned or only partially aligned, or when two parties find something that benefits both their common interests but harms a third party who isn't present. Then there are trade-offs involved, and big questions about whose will is enacted and who is ultimately harmed.

(Besides, aren't the vast majority of complaints - both here, on the Internet, and within the developed world in general - of that form? Two parties colluding to further their common interests, at the expense of a third party who isn't privy to the discussions? That's the bulk of entrepreneurial complaints about investors, of investor complaints about other investors, of employee complaints of favoritism, of minority complaints about discrimination, of citizen complaints about politicians, of citizen complaints about corporations, and so on.)
I wonder if these researchers ever visited the Chinese internet? They dissect their heirarchy and composition, yet not their effectiveness or reputation?

The Chinese people see 50 mao bots from 10 miles away. The very nature of the internet makes humanity question truth and authority. So many sources to visit, so many opinions and so angles to reflect upon. Themes and patterns don’t go so quietly unnoticed on the internet.

It seems that even many, many of these sources are far behind, though it is a new policy that US researchers are encouraged to dissect Chinese institutions publicly.

This paper would have been groundbreaking in 2010-pre Snowden. Sadly, it is a hay in the growing stack of a US-engineered lashing at Chinese domestic policies.
Just like car safety we have to keep raising the bar.

Checklist car safety means a pretty safe car these days, and the companies that go beyond do amazing things.
Enough that they can command fairly substantial wages. People are always going to need residential, commercial, and industrial space.
I'd downvote you if I could.

How would you know that the people buying groceries in your store are not criminals?

It's how a currency is used not by whom. I'd say guarding your life savings against the reckless actions of your government is a legitimate use case.
Why on earth would you want a RTOS for HPC?

RT is all about privileging latency over throughput, whereas in HPC throughput is everything.
I'm not willing to take that chance. There are enough shitheads in management that would see something like this and pounce on it, to where it might become an actual problem for lots of people.

Remember, we live in a world where coffee shops and Jimmy Johns (sandwich shop) decided that they needed to subject their employees to pretty draconian non-compete agreements.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15650663
Yeah, it is an ultimate cause I suppose, with other factors mentioned above my post as proximate causes. One needs to know how to utilize the resource, and to have the incentive to use it, economically and culturally. A lot of knowledge was lost after the Romans retreated, and coal is, even if more energy dense, more polluting than wood, for ordinary urban heating purposes and thus in less use.

Looking forward, Germany started industrializing some time after, and China is now reducing their coal-dependence. Now we are asking how India will industrialize without coal - underlining the importance of energy in industrialization.
Being paid to do something does not automatically make all that is involved in the doing of that thing property of they payee.

If I am being paid to produce some deliverable product or deliverable service, then the infrastructure used to create that may very much not be a deliverable or property of the customer.

My point isn't "you are wrong", but rather, there is not necessarily an automatic assignment of such intermediate products. And depending on the type of work (and/or customers / employers you're working for), the answer may vary. Law, custom, employment contracts, and/or engagement contracts will almost certainly play a role here.

If that governing rule is "you shall maintain a project journal and that journal is considered work product and property of the employer", then yes, that is part of what you're being paid to do. Though this may still give you rights to the contents of that journal.
Big woop? you just said its highly doubtful they have any idea about your demographics, I explained you how they can easily do that and much more like know your race and income bracket.

The days of just targeting you based on the content site are over, now demographics and your search/click history plays a role too.
The Comic Book Story of Video Games (Hennessey and McGowan)
* book preview: https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Comic_Book_Story_of_Video_Games.html?id=Z9gzDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button#v=onepage&q&f=false

* reviews: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/33595688-the-comic-book-story-of-video-games

(I only heard a talk by the book author but have not yet read the book; it sounded well-researched though; I got the gist that the book covered tech required for early games development and perhaps not a lot of coverage of modern video games)

* article by author about writing historical graphic novels: http://www.signature-reads.com/2017/08/write-graphic-nonfiction-teaching-history-comics/
Bail Bloc: mine Monero, generate CO2, send less to charity than it cost to mine
> Now the only limit are the CPU and RAM available to the browser.

... and in Germany, the data cap if you're on mobile. Video ads with autoplay, tons of trackers, no wonder I regularly hit 3GB a month, which is actually the biggest package my provider offers.
I mean, the fact that in the Prince, he encourages the Prince to create a Republic as it's the best way to maintain the strength of the city (aka a good prince needs to put the body politic over his own desires, even the desire for power)...and the fact that Machiavelli's other great work (The Discourses on Livy) openly and fervently talks about how republicanism is the best form of government...yeah, I think you might be on to something there.
Just adding my random piece of anecdata:

docker-compose uses Python2 and has encoding issues on Windows that have no real workarounds other than upgrading to Python3: https://github.com/docker/compose/issues/2775
It's part of an ongoing process.

It's a bit of systemic investment which provides future payoffs.

How valuable is your past journaling in the absence of such a system?
Not having a story for interoperability between 3 and 2 was incredibly shortsighted. The migration path from Objective-C to Swift is an example of how to do this sort of transition right; Python got it wrong.

Widespread adoption of Python 3 would've happened years earlier if you could start a new project in Python 3 and not have to worry about libraries you want to use not supporting it yet.
Most people didn't learn to work around unicode issues during the 2.7 time frame.

Many third party modules tended to explode spectacularly with encode/decode errors, when they were fed non-ascii strings, when used by people who write using all these funny characters.

Just the correct handling of strings in Python 3 alone is a hell of a reason to switch to it.
Stop it, you tease
Yes, yes. My Python life is mostly about impelemnting odd protocols with Twisted. Will probably get serious about asyncio soon, but I have a lot of historical Twisted to deal with ATM.

I've noticed that the "Who cares about Python 3" types are not the people working on the kinds of problems I am. So my conclussion is that for many kinds of problems the benefits of Python 2 are kind of meh, so people stay in their comfort zone. For some kinds of problems, Python 3 is a huge, huge win over Python 2. Whether or not someone is a Python 3 advocate says more about the kinds of problems they work on than anything else.
The future import technique works well for syntax changes which only affect a single module.

It doesn't help with objects passed between modules. For example, if s is a byte string, then "for c in s" returns a 1-byte string in Python 2 and integers in Python 3.

But if the string was created in a Py2 module and passed to a Py3 module, then what API should it present?

In principle there could be a wrapper to present the correct API. However, that's complicated, and not interesting compared to, say, a new methods for doing asynchronous programming.

This sort of backwards compatibility can be done. I've heard about IBM doing it for ... REXX, perhaps? .. where a program and perhaps even a module could declare which version to use. But it's expensive. And despite its popularity, there aren't scores of companies paying millions of dollars to ensure this level of compatibility,
That's called a ratchet.
Because their accuracy is abysmal.

Maybe they have a few percent better accuracy than guessing at random. And that might be worth a few billions. But on an individual level they just don't have the slightest clue.

edit: State of the art tracking seems to be "look at what products user x has looked at, show the exact same product everywhere after he/she probably bought it".

Now if you do have and use a facebook account that is another thing.
It makes sense though, because a supercomputer installation is exactly the kind of place you'd expect to have its own experts that support and customise the OS.

And there really aren't that many supercomputer installations, so any that RHEL does have are probably more for the prestige than the revenue.
Whenever I see news like this I think of John Gilmore's quote, "The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." Perhaps decisions like this will hasten a move toward a decentralized and an encrypted Net where politicians and their corporate sponsors have far less influence.
I don’t think you have the correct picture of what the US “accreditied investor” laws are about.

Anyone can invest in publicly-traded companies. The law prevents unaccredited (i.e. not rich) investors from investing in private companies.

A company has to go through a number of processes, such as disclosure and underwriting, when it goes public. These processes effectively make it a much safer investment vehicle, amenable to purchase by pretty much anyone. A company that hasn’t gone public hasn’t gone through these processes, and therefore might just be a huckster’s sham.

For a look at what it looks like when private companies are allowed to raise money from the public, don’t look at other countries (which have similar laws) or at Bitcoin (which nobody but rich people even understands.) Look at early Kickstarter, before they put in more stringent disclosure requirements; and look at Indiegogo, which still doesn’t have such requirements. Especially look at projects that started on Kickstarter, were kicked off for not meeting the disclosure requirements, and then went on to raise money on Indiegogo. You know what percentage of those are scams? It’s not small.

Early US stock market investment, before the requirements to IPO were made stringent, look a lot like Indiegogo. Anything and everything was up for investment, without examination. Many people did lose their livelihoods.
I hope you are correct, coins are the right abstraction for shares. It requires talented people to take a risk.
I think you missed the point there, but never mind.
Implementing ngrx as a state container
https://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2010/201041/index.h...

The St. Louis Fed tends to have the largest set of articles on economic policy, generally.

Here are 632 results for "fractional reserve":

https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Astlouisfe...

And limiting to 2010 and subesequently, 27. None declaring the concept dead.

https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=site%3Astlouisfed.org+...
I understand the general concept of what Google might do if it was actually doing this, I was looking for some kind of evidence that it was actually happening in reality.

I watch a vlog about EVs on Youtube, and the host of that complains about being demonitized by some new algorithm. I'm fairly sure he's not a fascist that's been put on some list by the Googlestapo, so it seems likely that other people may just be jumping to conclusions.
You might've posted a different video than you thought. At least, there's no ascii art (or video) in that at all.
What's Your Data Strategy?
> what has changed in Python 3.6 that they're happy to do this now when they were pissed off about it a couple years ago?

Most of mine have to do with developer productovity and I didn’t find until Python 3.5.

– @, the matmul operator

– fstrings (f”{foo}”)

– parameter typing (foo: int = 0) which has exciting work with Cython

– other async features. I forget what library it was (tensorflow?) but for Python 3 it had better async support
> think about it: the last guy who wrote a treatise on it - Machiavelli - got his name synonymized with "evil"

(1) Machiavelli isn't the “last guy” to write a treatise on power (even, specifically, political power.) In fact much of the field of political science is just such works (which are also found in other fields.)

(2) Machiavellian is basically used to mean putting the pursuit of power ahead of other (including moral) concerns; it's not synonymous with evil, though clearly lots of people see such an orientation as evil or at least amoral. OTOH, it's exactly what the advice in The Prince is directed at.
You people definetly should fight this.

We had something like this under "ban pedo" umbrella, now this thing filter anything that is against the party rule
How to Make a Hydraulic Powered Robotic Arm from Cardboard
Well, average desktop app size exploded too.
With my statement I make no assumptions on the intentions or advocacy that they reader may want to relay. I want to keep the conversation focused on the topic at hand, with relevant discussion.
Duncan in particular gets much better at doing his podcast after a few dozen episodes. I'm pretty attuned to audio issues and almost dropped the podcast about halfway in, but eventually he figured a few things out and it got a lot nicer to listen to.
Bail is broken [0], that's the assumption they're starting with. They and many others have observed that bail lends the wealthy an opportunity to walk free with little cost, overfills jails, creates debt/costs for innocent people who are never convicted of crimes and has created a market for businesses to profit off of justice system inefficiency. Whether you agree or not is for another argument. They believe the bail system is not working and that it's a worthy cause to raise money for people that would be stuck behind bars because they can't afford bail.

And while there are clearly engineering costs to mining, this app provides users a passive way to donate to the bail reform cause. The theory is clearly that people who otherwise would not donate will download the app and donate CPU cycles. Getting people to open their wallets is harder than getting people to donate their CPU cycles. "Direct donation is more efficient" is only an effective argument against this if it is the case that every potential user of the app is equally likely to enter their banking information and donate a small sum monthly. I suspect many people who would not be willing to set up a small monthly donation would be willing to donate CPU cycles & electricity.

0. https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2017/07/12/536905881/epis...
this is short sighted. while its 'nice' to buy when the housing market is going down, essentially what you are saying is that a house should not appreciate in value. but in reality, there is virtually no good reason to own a home unless its an appreciating asset.

after owning a home, i have nightmares about water. that was before the city flooded my basement with 3 feet of water (destroyed my washer, dryer, furnace, water heater) and said they have an ordinance that they cant be sued by accidents they cause. you may not get it, but anything that breaks, YOU MUST FIX. it doesn't matter if you had a hard day at work or you have to take your kid to the doctor that day, it has to get done and you need to have money available to do it.

the fact that homes ARE appreciating assets is what makes them so good everyone (even if you rent)

I think the better question to ask is, when will certain people learn that a continually 'weak' housing market is bad for everyone. dips in the housing market give good opportunities for people to get a home cheap, but they are still bad overall for the economy. its also only an opportunity if the housing market turns around and goes back into its upward trajectory.

the city collects taxes on me even though my home is not on the market. when I bought my home, I spent at least 8000$ at home depot, IKEA, etc, plus another 3000$ on a new roof and water heater (because the existing water heater was from the 70s and super energy inefficient). see, even good for the green crowd. although i wish i hadnt, the city was about to destroy it a year later anyways. i digress.

and while you think a trashed housing market would be great at lowering your rent, you might be surprised to find out landlords would have no incentive to keep your facilities nice if it was not a profitable endeavor.
What should happen is irrelevant to the conversation. We’re talking about what WOULD happen.
A more common criticism of Carlin is that he is not thorough. That isn't a shot at him, usually (though a couple of the historians I know aren't big on his sources), but a lot of that is the format he's decided to go with--when you are limited to mere hours, you're going to necessarily be shallow about things.
TechShop closes doors
Kitaro Presents Free Concert for Healing Community Raven Performing Arts Theater