skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This last point was recently covered on wrongthink blog Status 451:

https://status451.com/2017/11/05/i-see-trad-people/

When people think of each other as blank slates and make progressivism the only acceptable viewpoint, maybe those inclined towards social conservatism just come out doing this "progressive in name only" thing, LARPing the themes of the last century in lieu of a consistent set of values.
> I think it makes sense because retail ISPs operate in a two-sided market. Comcast provides access to Internet services, which customers want and are willing to pay for.

Yes, but this is where your analysis breaks down: it's not a free market. The customers are a captive market.

> Similarly, Comcast provides access to customers, which the Internet companies who provide those services (and associated CDNs and transit providers) want and are willing to pay for.

The Internet companies are only willing to pay because they have no other alternatives. They only pay because Comcast has a monopoly and thus acts as a gatekeeper, and then only because Comcast has such a large market share that refusing Comcast would deprive them of a significant part of the market. Calling this "voluntary" participation in a two sided market is absurd. Blackmail is what it is.

When anybody else than Comcast tries this, they are laughed at and told to piss off.

> I don't think there's anything especially wrong with this business model.

There's plenty wrong. The subscribers have already paid full price and now Comcast wants more, this time from the Internet companies, without which Comcast would have nothing to sell.

> It's similar to how a newspaper charges both readers and advertisers for access.

This is just a bad analogy, again. Newspaper readers aren't paying full price for the newspaper, and they are not paying for getting access to the adverts.

> Incidentally, if customers uploaded the same amount of data as the Internet services, Comcast wouldn't get transit fees but it would get additional revenue from the customers, so I think things would balance out.

This just plain incorrect. Comcast wouldn't get a penny more from it's subscribers. Internet access is inherently asymmetrical. Were subscribers to use their upstream more, it would not result in any more revenues.
Except in this case the regulation is saying that the ISP must just carry bits. It's not forcing the ISP to do something to be compliant, it's forcing the ISP to not do something. So the costs of compliance are low, if not zero.

There are short-term consumer benefits, in my country we have zero-rated services, where browsing certain sites costs no data. However this completely undermines the concept of the free market. Any competitor to the zero-rated service has a massive hurdle to overcome, either competing with free, or paying the ISP to have the same deal applied to their service.

And there are also cases of abuse. Mobile operators began charging roughly $2 per MB of data for any VOIP traffic, forcing consumers to use standard calls.

By refusing to subject ISPs to regulations, we subject the Internet to the whims of the ISPs.
Makes me feel odd seeing the MacBook A1181, just having retired mine early this year. It kept on running with Snow Leopard, but the OS started losing compatibility with some popular build tools.
Something I never see considered is that markets exist in a context. It's perfectly reasonable to believe that as a rule of thumb regulation should be eliminated and that competition is good. Both towards improving consumers lives. But it isn't reasonable to assume these two tenets are always aligned or to take them as ends unto themselves.
Réplique Cadran Bleu Rolex Daytona Platinum Ice 116506 IB
See what happen after the burial of the 26Nigeria girls who dies at the sea
To be fair, exploiting peoples fear to keep their attention was in no way invented by the news industry. I bet that one is as old as humanity itself. This is how rulers always kept us fighting eachothers.
Depression, suicide and social isolation are real problems; it's not just people wasting time in pointless apps.
That's what the book said.
> They, and Facebook in particular, probably aren't helping but they didn't cause it either.

Facebook is doing the reverse, if anything. I keep in touch (of various degrees) on FB with people whom I would never keep in touch or even know anything about them without it. Yeah, of course, I could write letters. But who actually does it? Nobody would do it.
Very evil apparently.

Tech is the greediest industry at this point, even comparing with Wall Street, all under the philosophy of GROWTH. Too many pretentious people get into this industry to chase the hot money, it slowly degrades to this toxic, selfish, out of touch culture, that benefits no one except the tech people and their pocket. Worst of all, they lack the blessing of self-consciousness to see it.

Tech is changing the world, but it probably not making the world a better place.
What is the very strong supporting evidence to demonstrate your scenario is the likely outcome?

https://www.cnet.com/news/fcc-formally-rules-comcasts-thrott...

That's effectively what lead to the situation we are in now. FCC said it's illegal, appeal ruled FCC doesn't have the authority to regulate at the time, FCC makes attempts at making "net neutrality" a thing they can control, and now we are on the verge of having them roll it back.

Basically, ISPs starting pushing the boundaries and a war directly against the concept of net neutrality and that fight is the one we are currently talking about right now, this is just the latest battle.
If your security patch kills users' buggy processes or even crash their systems then you are a «bad security person». Please report the bad access first so users and developers of their software have time to fix the bug. Upgrades disabling users' software are a big no-no. After all security is meaningless for a non-working system.
It’s bern prett well proven that research causes cancer in mice.
Google Search Organic Quality Score: Υπάρχει Στα Αλήθεια; – WEB DESIGN|SEO
Less unit tests more logs
"Foxes and other wild animals shit on every field, and they often carry parasites."

I've wondered about this. Fox tapeworm is very common (30% of all foxes in many areas in North-West Europe carry it last time I checked) and (the scary part) for humans, it can cause lethal liver failure 10 years after infection. Not 'lethal' is in 'flu lethal' - like 'might cause you to die in specific circumstances, when untreated, and when you were unhealthy already anyway' - but rather 'will certainly kill you in a painful way, very difficult to diagnose, no known effective treatment'.

So the advise is 'don't eat berries or mushrooms that grow in the wild below waist height'.

However, many/most fruit farms have fruit growing at that height, and the standard cleaning procedures don't remove worms (e.g. vaccinium isn't washed at all, too fragile). I know for a fact foxes (sometimes) enter these farms, I've seen some with my own eyes. How does this work from an epidemiological point of view? When devising health warnings, are there separate measurements for incidents caused by fruit picked in the wild, and from farms? Or is this just one of those things where everybody shrugs and says 'we don't have a better solution' and hope for the best?

On the off chance anyone doing epidemiology research is reading this, this sort of situation must be common; how is that dealt with?
Danone invests in firm selling bottled water from ocean floor
David Brooks... supports the media?! Gasp.

GP fails to distinguish between news and editorial, which this article is.
That makes floaters [1] seem like a piece of cake. I've had floaters for many years due to myopia. As a developer, I always seek out dark themes in IDE's and such because if I have a white background I see the little guys floating by.

Most of my life I managed to ignore them, but a few years ago I became obsessed with the floaters and I saw them a lot more than usual because my mind was constantly looking for them.

So take my advice; if you have floaters - do NOT try to think about them or actively seek them out. It's a dangerous path. It took me a couple of years to get back to where I am now.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floater
A lot of them of them but customers didn’t see their balance move because it was repaid indirectly with their taxes money
I think the question should really be, "How Evil Are The People In Control Of Tech?"
Top 6 Widely-Recognized Web Design Trends of 2018 and Beyond to Watch
Ahem - digit signalling.
Would it not be better to replace the current regulations with ones that protect internet users while at the same time allow more choice?

Surely there's a better solution than complete deregulation.
And to US companies who do business with EU citizens
and to the data of US citizens who have business with EU companies

Or anything that touches the EU, really.
>Imagine if instead of claiming to offer us the best things in life, tech merely saw itself as providing efficiency devices.

Hear hear.
Google has started censoring any anti-war, progressive, independent outlets in an effort to combat "fake news" and "russian propaganda". Here are some extracts from the findings of the WSWS:

"....estimating the decline of traffic generated by Google searches for 13 sites with substantial readerships. The results are as follows:

* wsws.org fell by 67 percent

* alternet.org fell by 63 percent

* globalresearch.ca fell by 62 percent

* consortiumnews.com fell by 47 percent

* socialistworker.org fell by 47 percent

* mediamatters.org fell by 42 percent

* commondreams.org fell by 37 percent

* internationalviewpoint.org fell by 36 percent

* democracynow.org fell by 36 percent

* wikileaks.org fell by 30 percent

* truth-out.org fell by 25 percent

* counterpunch.org fell by 21 percent

* theintercept.com fell by 19 percent

In the twelve months preceding the implementation of the new Google protocols, the WSWS had experienced a substantial increase in readership. A significant component of this increase was the product of Google search results. The rapid rise in search traffic reflected the well-documented growth in popular interest in socialist politics during 2016. The rate of growth accelerated following the November election, which led to large protests against the election of Trump.

Search traffic to the WSWS peaked in April 2017, precisely at the point when Google began the implementation of its censorship protocols.

Another site affected by Google’s action has provided information that confirms the findings of the WSWS:
“In late May, changes to Google’s algorithm negatively impacted the volume of traffic to the Common Dreams website from organic Google searches,” said Aaron Kaufman, director of development at progressive news outlet Common Dreams. “Since May, traffic from Google Search as a percentage of total traffic to the Common Dreams website has decreased nearly 50 percent.”

The extent and impact of Google’s actions prove that a combination of techniques is being employed to block access to targeted sites. These involve the direct flagging and blackballing of the WSWS and the other 12 sites listed above by Google evaluators. These sites are assigned a highly negative rating that assures that their articles will be either demoted or entirely bypassed. In addition, new programming technology teaches the computers to think like the evaluators, that is, to emulate their preferences and prejudices.

Finally, the precision of this operation strongly suggests that there is an additional range of exclusion techniques involving the selection of terms, words, phrases and topics that are associated with socialist and left-wing websites."
5 years ago, even HN looks at Google relatively favorably. Proof, Google Reader is still alive at that time, and Google Plus is not there yet. Comparing to now, it is like heaven and hell.
I disagree; incentives matter, and when one earns more by promoting harmful behaviors, that's what many will do. They mention the example of Snapstreak, which is designed to keep you plugged in; that's not a symptom of technology, but a symptom of the economic model of the group of people developing it.
Damn, I always abused apt-preferences to achieve the same effect as apt-mark hold|unhold. Thanks! Does 'apt-get dist-upgrade' respect held packages?
Do you remember the article(s) in which he talks about that, or any other keywords? I found
all of "In the Pipeline", but my Google-fu ends there.

Also for the mice getting fatter over time? That's fascinating!
Apple cares very much what kind of software you run on your iPhone. Also, Apple news is a competitor to google and the web. You don’t deny that google and Facebook are both similar and are basically media companies themselves.

Seems like you’re getting hung up on a relatively minor detail.
I moved the crypto funds I had on Bitfinex to other exchanges a couple of days ago because the tether situation was making me uncomfortable and distrusting of Bitfinex.
Whichever is greater, Apple would probably pay about 20 million * 400 (going by 0.01%) => 8 billion dollars.

Which I think would hit Apple rather hard.
Updating ME Firmware on a Lenovo Without Windows
The first woman to manage a spacecraft launch (NASA 1964)
Actually I've just stumbled across a very(!) active HN poster that seems to be against it on a popular micro blogging platform..

The common counter argument seems to be that "Regulation is bad for the open market" and that "Better options would come up if an ISP starts doing weird shit, if the market demands it".

It's interesting to me that the very same people seem to be pro Freedom of Press/Freedom of Speech (as a German, the US Freedom of Speech is something I'm not used to, something that doesn't align with my culture/upbringing), but feel different about this subject because it involves a "market"?
I haven't been able to use magit. I've tried and tried, but it's too slow for me. It literaly takes 30 seconds just to magit-status the project on a windows machine. So I'm using vc and git-gutter+ for this job. You can see the changes, stage them, view the log, annotate your file (what commit modified each line), commit, ammend, etc.
(In the EU) companies are already required to tell where my personal data goes to. There is no specific fine for violations as far as I know though.

Essentially we need a price tag on personal data. Let's say 1$ for each email and password leaked to an unknown number of entities. That would be a 114M$ incentive for Uber to keep their data secure.
Very pragmatic. He sees software in the overall context of getting a job done with a computer, imperfect though it may be, instead of dying because it was not perfect.

Unlike a segfault from a user space program that indeed merits a 'kill', the kernel should strive at all costs to keep running, since kernel panics are so much more inconvenient.
Quick question - doesn't Linux driver model (they run in kernel-space) create a giant attack vector because of that?
Ask HN: What can those of us outside the US do about Net Neutrality today?
Not sure how this is at all exclusive to ""tech"".
"This can be done if the blocked and the innocuous sites are both hosted by the same large provider"

Netflix probably doesn't host other people's sites.
That's a consequence of an "old" issue in the IT security field - security researchers and developers sit at opposite sides of the table, they've got different concerns and agendas.

Pick some security researchers; now tell them to build any nontrivial piece of software; I doubt they'd be able to do it, and if they succeed their software will be full of bugs, including security ones.

Security is part of the correctness and of proper building of the software, so it should be integrated into software development. Security experts can (and should) still exist, but the current state, where the infosec people appear to rule, is pointless - exactly because the same infosec people wouldn't be able to deliver better software than current developers.

I highly regard somebody who can write a software without security bugs; I don't regard as highly somebody who shows me the bugs, but would be unable to write that software at all.

Let's turn the infosec objective: not to undiscover security bugs, but to write software without security bugs. Then we're at the same side of the table.
I have good experience on ggtags with GnuGlobal. Here's my setup.

1. Install the ggtags.el package in Emacs and install GnuGlobal outside.

2. Make sure /GnuGlobal/bin is in the path environment variable, so that the global and gtags executables can be launched from Emacs.

3. Build the initial index database outside of Emacs. Emacs will update the index as you add new code. I usually just run the following commands on the root of the source directory. You can modify find to include or exclude certain files.

find . -type f >> filelist
gtags -f filelist

Now M-. should pick up the word at cursor and jump to its definition, or display a list of all its usage if cursor is already at the definition.
Many dogs are natural hunters, but like bears, pigs, and humans, but unlike cats, dogs are omnivores. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnivore.
Adding multiple cloud providers to be resistant on a global outage of one cloud provider and then adding a SPOF by cloudflare loadbalancing is one of the least intelligent ideas i heard this week.
> Grsecurity will rather terminate userland programs or, in some rare cases, panic the kernel if it finds itself in an undefined state. This is exactly what you want if you care about security, but it's not a trade-off everyone is happy with (including Linus).

I'd also like my kernel to halt whenever an assertion does not hold, for the sake of keeping my sanity; not just for security.

Why would you not want this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality#Arguments_again...
You missed the point.

> Apple's are aligned with those that buy phones.

For all we know, that's what they want you to believe. The fact that you are so certain this is how they are incentivized could just mean that they did a fantastic job at marketing and making their users believe this image of themselves they've worked on.
http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2017/10/20/bad...

http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2014/12/15/cel...
My grandfather was a slaughterman for a while and a really good butcher. When he talked about the animals going to be killed he said he could tell many of them at the end probably knew what was going to happen to them. It clearly did bother him a bit and he did feel sorry for the animals but said it was quick and humane overall. In everyday life he hated to see animals mistreated or suffering. There’s no hypocrisy in showing some emotion, especially when it’s something you’ve not experienced before.
Amazing that this is downvoted while all the other points are accusing David Brooks of... shilling for the nyt? I dunno
What is your impression of libjit? It looks really nice. I've only tried GNU Lightning, and I made Python bindings for it (although, today I would have used cffi to interface with it instead of my ctypes approach, because of the header files): https://github.com/cslarsen/lyn

I'd love to see a comparison of the various JIT libraries. I guess both give you optimizations and register allocation for free. Of course, the JITting speed is quite important as well.
do you want to know why your (random big company) does not do software development that well. when was the last time you saw an email like that from the chairman of the board to all employees? with Please in it. and long winded explanations?

companies need to chnage
A dumpster is not a bug, it's a social issue - http://www.mit.edu/hacker/hacker.html
For the cases where it was a false-positive.
AFAIK you must be root to load kernel modules.
I don't think there's anything that we can do besides spreading the word and taking it as a lesson for when this happens in EU.
Two decades into my career and I absolutely shudder every time I get a request to "integrate with <xxx>'s API, it'll be easy!"

It almost never is.

Everything about the experience sucks. The documentation is usually a mess and the code flow is usually strange as hell. But I can live with that.

It's the completely opaque error states that kill me. The article dedicated an entire section to it and I hope people take it to heart. When I pass bad data or something you're not expecting give me some clue as to what it might be!

I just spent 60+ hours working on an integration. 95% of that was spent changing parameters and encodings hoping that something would magically fix the 400 I kept receiving back from the server.

It turns out a shared secret had a typo (on my end).

The thing is this bad design is costing that company real $$. Not only was it a frustrating experience for me, I took a couple of hours of their engineers time trying to hunt it down. The lack of error handling made it difficult for them to track the issue down on their side as well.

I'll never forget the first time I touched Twilio's API. Everything was so clear. I had screwed something up, and got a clear message about what was wrong. It was magic.. and the whole thing was up and running in less than an hour.

Give me more of that please!
I once shared an office with another happy user of Emacs and org-mode. We did a small project together and used an org file to manage the project tasks inside the source repo. Even that did not work out so well, because I would also see his tasks on my agenda. I guess this could be improved with tags and filters, but my point is that collaboration with org-mode is difficult beyond the issue of agreeing on the same tool to use.
That's not a fair (or useful) assessment. Obviously, the narrow-minded security people you describe exist, but they're a minority. Many security people are developers who specialized in security, and are very much capable of building software.

The kernel code is question is exactly what you ask for - instead of finding and fixing single bugs, it's a mitigation that prevents all occurrences of a particular class of bugs.
And these are not caused by apps in isolation; suicide rates today in the US are lower than what they were in the 70s. Young people are the least likeliest groups to commit suicide or have depression. Again, that is not to say that there have never been cases where social media and apps have caused suicides or severe depression. It's just not a significant driver of deaths like illness like tobacco.
But the big tech names are the most egregious offenders: Apple, Google, Facebook, Uber... how does that mesh with a brand that claims to be about saving the world, community, yadda yadda?
The problem is advertising supported media has it's incentives aligned with the advertisers not the viewer.

You really can't fix this by trying to build a better advert supported service. For the service to be worth running it has to hurt the consumer. If it doesn't the people paying for it will go bust.

The fix is to regulate away advertising supported. It will have to be done gradually or else the disruption will be unbearable. But if the service ain't worth paying for it shouldn't be worth having.

Perhaps agents can save us, if every bit of information you get and every transaction you carry out is mediated through your own decision making software then maybe you'll pay for your own journalism and avoid the traps of brand recognition and so on.
That company just keeps giving.
The title is misleading and the content seems a bit pointless. The author doesn't appear to have solved any problems, just created further abstraction from cron itself...
> Last year, he spent his bonus on a 50-inch TV

That made me chuckle
They can't not do this. They need the clicks.