skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The Roman Empire got large because of the "military" complex that the society had at the time. In order to advance socially (status, and wealth) being a military commander was a must.

If you had victories in your belt you had more status within the society. Just being rich, didn't give you more status than somebody that was successful in combat, but it gave you the ability to fund wars and expeditions in order to gain more riches.

Hence, since the personal ambitions of important people in Rome fueled the military complex and all the invasions that came with it.

Most wars were justified as need for the the protection of Rome. Even full scale invasion and slaughtering of other tribes (either in the North with Germanic tribes, or South East with Parthia).

This all had an origin when Rome was born and had to fight its neighbor italic tribes to get where it was. Then it was the large Punic wars with Carthage that truly cemented the military complex in the society. It was a brutal war (half of soldiers that fell for the Roman Empire over centuries, died during the Punic wars), that threaten the existence of Rome itself.

So, some of the military complex was justified historically (either be strong, or get subjected), it was hijacked and amplified by people's personal ambitions. (either riches, becoming emperors, etc)....

Similarly, today the military complex in the US was born for needed reasons (WW1 and WW2), but it is so large that it needs reasons to exist, and create wars when not needed (second Iraqi war as the worst example of this).
Is it related to a package that write logs in colors and send visa card numbers to hackers ?
Pigeons and humans share are more similar to each other as you’d think. Facebook has built its like button such that it resembles a famous experiment done with pigeons in 1971. (Yes it sounds awkward and it kinda is)

http://alter-agency.com/2017/03/23/addicted-to-likes/
Most people felt positive about the impact of Internet advertising on political campaigning when the themes of the message were hope and change. It has become clear that those themes are easily trumped by messages of fear and divisiveness. I think it's a fair question, now that we've seen where we're likely headed, to question anew whether we need to adjust course.
I do. Started with only left, but fixed with deliberate practice .
I believe The Unix Programming Environment used this technique to create their index.
I created an account once, in "incognito" mode, but I only sent one message and never posted anything... It turned out that someone who couldn't be emailed or telephoned because he "was only on Facebook" also didn't respond on Facebook. Shocking!
Yes, hence auto-complete.
The Apollo Program set a clear goal (“landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth”) and a clear timeline (“before this decade is out”). The US was strongly motivated to execute on this since it was losing the Space Race at the time.

Right now, no nation really has a clear goal (e.g. the US can’t even decide if it wants to send people back to the moon or go straight to Mars), a clear timeline (a manned mission to Mars is perpetually 20 years away for the US; a similar phenomenon also seems to be going on for anyone returning to the moon), or a clear motive. The US beat every other country to the moon by at least ~50 years, so all China doing a manned lunar mission proves at this point is that their technology and space capabilities are no more than 50 or 60 years behind the US’s. I think the US (either NASA or a private company) will be the first nation to land a person on Mars, although it might be a while before it happens; if at some point it looks like another nation is going to beat us, we might actually develop some motivation at that point.
Ok, I get it that no man is an island and all. But if your happiness is so dependent on other people that even change your life this much, then you already have a deeper problem that is elses fault.

(I don't mean that everyone should get off Facebook. But I do mean it for the crowd that somehow they hate facebook but yet think they are dependent on it.)
I actually only use the right shift and very barely use the left one myself
I think it's

> We don’t discuss all of our security processes and technologies [with each other internally, so dumb stuff keeps happening]
Yes, definitely. Anything that you can imagine, there's a huge constituency that isn't capable of doing things you think are basic
Yes. Typing != information work.
Tron, the $14B Whitepaper with No Product
TLDR: backoffice work in Washington can be automated just like backoffce work in corporations. FiscalNote wants to advertise the message that anything involving capturing backoffice data flows is actually "A.I", which means the career of every politician is in jeopardy, without FiscalNote.
Not AIM and MySpace, but things like XMPP, where you could use one chat client and connect to your own Jabber server, Twitter, and Google chat.

One solution is open, decentralized protocols.

The article addresses that a little bit here:

> ...the internet platforms were able to pursue business strategies that would not have been allowed in prior decades. No one stopped them from using free products to centralize the internet and then replace its core functions.
My opinion, as the designer of Sandstorm, a capability-based server OS:

Capabilities are not the way developers are used to thinking. It may be that if people got used to it, it would make sense -- or it may be that it's simply too complicated and most developers will never wrap their heads around it. I honestly don't really know which it is. In this respect, it feels a lot like functional programming (FP and capabilities are very different concepts, but are similar in that it takes a while to fully understand how to use them effectively).

We do see capability systems appearing by accident all over the place. Unix file descriptors, for example, behave very much like capabilities. Once open() finishes successfully, all access checks are done -- they aren't repeated for every read() or write(). You now have a capability, and you can even send that capability to other processes (even running under different UIDs that wouldn't have permission to open the file directly) via Unix domain sockets.

People who really get how to exchange file descriptors build some amazing systems with them (without ever realizing they're building capability systems). But, for some reason, most systems do not really try to take advantage of FD passing, and instead opt to do things like listen on a globally-accessible port and perform an authentication handshake on incoming connections. I guess this kind of design just seems more obvious to people?

But often, as systems get more complex and involve more parties, they end up forced to use capability-ish designs, because ACL-based designs get intractable. OAuth's use of bearer tokens, for example, is very capability-ish, albeit not acknowledged as such, and a fairly primitive form of capabilities. This sort of design turns out to be necessary in large-scale systems. If people would learn capability theory before designing such systems, they'd probably be more secure and powerful.
Email can be made secure, it's just that by default it's insecure and there isn't a Google/Mozilla/Microsoft/Apple conglomerate to penalize SMTP servers by showing "Insecure" in an email display/etc.

* Most mail transport agents can require connections to use TLS, but nobody does because they're afraid of denying incoming messages and because it can be difficult to install a certificate for an MTA, so smaller providers just don't. There should be a LetsEncrypt for mail servers and by default the various package managers and distributions should not install a mail agent that allows non-TLS connections.

* It is possible to store mail messages encrypted at rest, but only by using an encrypted filesystem-- I'm not aware of any MTA that will do this itself. Obviously that needs to change.

* Providers can force TLS connections for IMAP. This is surprisingly easier these days given that most end user mail clients will auto-negotiate these connections.

There's your E2E encryption. This doesn't get you encryption on the final destination, but that's a separate issue.
I love dashes. I do tend to avoid ems for parenthetical remarks – for those, I'll use spaced ens – but I do definitely use the longer for interjections and (roughly) semicolons, as the article describes. Where I break from convention is that, if they're marking an interjection or other interruption, I will put a space in on a single side of the dash— like so —to better demarcate the logical flow. Then again, I also put a thin space before exclamation points, etc. if I can (though unlike French, nothing if I just have full spaces), so I have other reasons to dismiss the complaints about style.
Is everything you think you know about headlines wrong?

Is depression caused primarily by clickbait?
Yes, you're right. The definition of an optimization being ``safe'' is tricky in the presence of non-determinism.

The set of possible executions of a correctly optimized program should be a subset of---and specifically, need not be necessarily equal to---the possible executions of the original unoptimized version.
This is not a claim or a fact, that's probably an uneducated guess, npm is broken on so many levels they can't say anything for sure. [1]

npm is full of fundamental bugs in their software, workflows, architecture, and community. We learnt this in March 2016 when one developers got a copyright claim and had to remove their package. [2] Why is it even possible to remove a package? Why is it possible to create new package with the same name? Almost no software published there have unit tests, asking developers how they tested it in a GitHub issue leaves the issue open with no response. Everything is centralized on GitHub, which was proven to fail many times when GitHub was down in a region or globally due to a DDoS. Why is Node allowed to exist? We're not in 1998 anymore.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16092584 (comment above)

[2] https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/23/npm_left_pad_chaos/
> the published results were that above a certain bar, there was no predictive value to interview results

What I said is not exclusive to this research. These types of interviews are not great, but there's no other "accepted" way and a lot (most?) companies are afraid to try new stuff because making a bad hire is very expensive.

> they will reduce the rate of false positives somewhat, but greatly increase the rate of false negatives.

In addition to what I just mentioned above, the companies that invented and stick to this style of interviewing are well aware of and don't care about the false negatives. Their desire is to reduce false positives and they have a mile long line of willing candidates behind that person if they get a false negative. When you interview at Google/Facebook/etc, your recruiter will tell you that a lot of people don't pass the interview the first time. And if you don't pass, they'll reach out to you again in ~6 months to see if you want to try again.

The companies that use these interviewing processes that don't have a large pipeline of candidates are doing themselves a huge disservice IMO. But kind of like "nobody got fired for hiring IBM"..."nobody got fired for copying Google".
I'm trying to figure out whether node2nix [0] could help avoid package name/version hijacking vulnerabilities. Node2nix can convert a package-lock.json file to something called a Nix expression [1], like this [2], where each dependency has a checksum. The purpose is to make the Nix expression deterministic so that each Nix package is reproducible.

[0] https://github.com/svanderburg/node2nix

[1] https://nixos.org/nix/about.html

[2] https://github.com/svanderburg/node2nix/blob/22d0c19575ecd19...

Edit: fix link formatting
To the majority of your comment, I agree. However, one thing that I want to note, and this is a bit of semantics, but I think very important here:

>Due process was 100% violated in each of these cases.

Your reasoning that due process was violated is that the accused (and the prosecutor) both lied. I'll point out that the reason we have due process in the US is in part to defend against false accusations. As a result, I think that the series of events false accusation -> investigation and case -> acquittal is the opposite of a failure of due process, its a shining success.

This extends to the Roy Moore/project veritas example too, but replace "due process" with "journalistic integrity", and remove the sort abuse of power overtones that make due process that much more important.
In classic TTL the input currents are also very asymmetric, e.g. for a high level you mustn't draw more than a few dozen µA out of an input, for a low level you have to draw something like 1.5 mA or so.

This is different from current-steering based logic (all kinds of ECL, including CML/SCL) were the current in the circuit stays the same, but only takes a different path depending on state. Supply current is largely independent of circuit state with these.
It's spitting out 3 digits for sure. The reporter is just too ignorant to realize that they're not 3 significant digits.
I wish we Americans were sensible enough to implement the suggestions you make here. I'm not optimistic about that, however.
Yea,it's pretty odd that it would be in a cannon if they were reading it lol. If they were reading it, wouldn't they have found bindings?
Different wavelengths?
Ah, didn't know it was still viable. Thanks!
Προγνωστικα: Κλειστό ματς στην Ριζούπολη
Feces Standard Money (FSM)
I use million short to search for howtos written by real craftsmen in their field.

One example is an end-grain cutting board that I made recently. For most things Ike that, the top 1000 are dominated by made-for-Pinterest blogs or major sites that aggregate low quality content that's good enough to get hits but not good for much more than that.
Personally, as a user, I much prefer desktop applications for software of any serious complexity. It's just that much better integrated into the system UI, there's no lag, and best of all: it's running on my computer. (Aside from privacy concerns, I often don't have Internet available...)

For developers, though, I can see why webapps are so much nicer to work with. (See patio11's blog post quoted by drdrey.) So I would posit that the defining metric is complexity: if your software is really complex (and/or doesn't need a server), make it desktop. Otherwise, go for the web.
To save others the hassle: hoax.

More on the late author: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Coppens_(author)
My own favourite metaphor for capabilities is that they are like physical keys. If I have a key, I can easily go to a shop and make a copy of that key, and give it to someone else. That other person will have all the access to the things behind the lock that I have.
I remember wondering if foregoing the front end frameworks and using a simple state machine - such as the type I remember making for compsci assignments - would actually make things easier. But then I thought "well I'm new to front end, surely if this was a good solution to the problem everyone would be doing this and there wouldn't be a cambrian framework explosion".

I'd love to hear if others have tried using a state machine.
> ORMs , code gen, magic wrappers, etc is something that people in that community just hate

Mostly agree except for code-gen --- definitely not so in the real world! I'd say most Gophers on the whole at a minimum don't mind it, and many either outright ---or eventually--- embrace it.

Depends on the nature and purpose(s) of the Go code-base but for many, it's as natural and idiomatic as is the extensive use of the macro preprocessor for many-perhaps-most grown, matured, "non-trivial" C code-bases. (Just fewer pitfalls in exchange for a bit more set-up effort.)
At least one part of the universe really does seem to prefer linear algebra: quantum mechanics. Every quantum state is a linear combination of eigenvectors, and that's unlikely to change within a few decades (it would be a revolution analogous to the discovery of quantum mechanics itself).
IMO Unix is plenty bad enough to warrant replacement but unfortunately its iron grip on computing dooms any good ideas like capabilities in the short to medium term (at least 10 years).
Yves Klein is even more fun.. literally a blue canvas. Granted, it was a shade of blue that Klein invented, but still.

However, in defense of modern art, it isn’t about what’s on the canvas as much as it’s about context. Klein’s blue canvases essentially demolished the status quo of the time. It was like a musical note sounding discordant against the melody of what “art” meant. Brilliant actually.. not unlike how Mappelthorpe’s photos where exactly the images that captured the zeitgeist of the AIDS crisis. Disgusting in many opinions, but brilliant when seen in the context of the time. Same idea with Warhol’s soup cans and Brillo paintings.

And speaking of music, listen to Klein's “Monotone-Sikence” — it will blow your mind that the dude got away with that.

Some have said that Klein was the last of the great French artists. I’m inclined to agree even though he is famous for an f’ing blue canvas and a one note “symphony.”
Soldering looks just fine to me. Some flux residue, but not a problem here. The oxidization didn't come from the factory, and wouldn't be a reliability concern.
Are you saying that displaying a Bible quote, modified to refer to the fact that duplexer3 is gone, is "malicious"?

I believe this was one of the cases of a community member stepping up to publish a package quickly so that malicious code wasn't published.

Presumably they make the claim that none of the code was malicious because they checked.
> I suspect that ~32" 8K displays will be mainstream in a year or two.

8K would require new HDMI cables and ports, would it not? I'm pretty sure that many people are still stuck with legacy hardware in this regard.
Who are they? What do they do?
Journey on the Deep Dream [video]
I thought it was known that not everything is a set?
I can type. I use auto-complete all the time.
At least get the company name right if you have to make guesses about what they know internally and what they don't. (lol, and edited it silently so my comment looks dumb now)
Facebook's monopoly is a problem because, increasingly, Facebook's dopamine-driven tools replaces traditional civic society. They're easier. They're superficially more pleasing. They're often addictive. And any company in control of the sphere in which people congregate and interact then controls /how/ we congregate and interact. And if you control how we congregate and interact then you control how we exert control on those who we chose to rule us. As soon as you change that quality, quantity and ability you change the whole basis of society. And therefore how that society presses its current rulers and chooses its future rulers. And this is happening and has happened. And it may not be for the best.
It's a solution to a separate problem. You need to make something easy to use for the masses, you need to make it safe from bad actors and you need to actually advertise it.

It's easy to talk about open and decentralized protocols but social media is a popularity contest, not one based off the best or most free platform. As the article mentions nothing was and nothing is stopping them from capitalizing on open and free products, followed by gutting and replacing them.
I guess because it's 1997 and your free readable programming languages for convenient text processing were limited to... uh... does Perl count as readable?
The correct question should be: "what firewall and IDS do you use?"
Actually Van Gogh didn’t create a myth either— that cake much later. But I still agree with your points..
I'm happy to see something with professional specs coming from Apple. I have serious concerns with the iMac Pro in terms of heat while rendering for many days of the year.

The Mac Pro trash can is notorious for overheating, so I'm not sad to see it go and I look forward to a new Mac Pro in 2018. The market for that unit will pay a premium for serviceability as well. I'm expecting a heavy price tag.

It's nice to see a real world example of the iMac Pro in use. I do a lot of sustained renders for TV and feature length content. Our PCs run laps around our trash cans, but a mixed environment is far from ideal. We spend more time troubleshooting with editors than anything.

I have more concerns about macOS High Sierra than anything at this point though. I've upgraded a few machines and we're seeing more crashes than ever. Sierra might have to be my staple for a long while.
Tangentially related:

I'm not sure if automated decisions are a good idea. But it would be really cool to improve productivity of politicians.

How can we expect our politicians, let alone our lay people, to understand all of the law's in a country? There is just too much text to grok.

Software developers build abstractions, write tests, refactor and simplify older code, yet no such trend seems to be occurring for law. Why not?

Politicians already do use references and bucketization, i.e. write a law for schedule one drugs, then add or remove entities from the schedule one bucket. Can't we abstract even more?

Recently I've been wondering if it is feasible to create a syntax for lawyers. Like a law language with a compiler, package manager and similar tooling to compile laws rather than write them from scratch.

Anyone familiar with such research?
I've worked with a number of engineers in Europe who couldn't type without looking at the keyboard. I assumed that it's not part of every school curriculum there. Or maybe they learned and then went back to hunt-and-peck afterwards.
> I'm familiar with the research about the harms of being a minority and the impact it can have on performance, but as far as my claims about segregation go, those arguments are irrelevant.

I strongly disagree. You have to respect the human in the equation if you want to facilitate inclusion, and make sure that you do everything to facilitate the change you desire. Otherwise you risk filtering for people that check the right boxes that happen to be similar to the people already working there.

Research from 2007 to 2015 in [1] indicates that what we are currently doing is not working:

- The number of black women in the industry declined by 13%, the study found.

- There was also an increase in Latino executives, but the overall representation of Latinos declined from 5.2% to 4.8% and they still represent a very small fraction of corporate leaders.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/oct/03/silicon-v...

> Hiring minorities solely into majority-minority teams is a form of segregation.

I never proposed solely recruiting minorities for these kind of teams. I said: "It is a tool that should only be applied at discretion and when appropriate, and to make it work it needs support."

Also, the definition of segregation is:

- the action or state of setting someone or something apart from other people or things or being set apart.

which does not appropriately describe a team that is mixed and where some members come from one or more minorities. Also, I would again like to point out that minorities can still choose to work on any team as this is a tool applied at discretion.

Of cause, as I stated you need to do extra work to make sure that minorities can choose opportunities freely and be supported appropriately after the choice is made.

The definition of ghetto is:

- a part of a city, especially a slum area, occupied by a minority group or groups.

Which for the same reasons does not properly describe the proposal.

Note: I think I've shown here that you've used historically loaded terms like segregation and ghetto inappropriately to describe parts of my proposal. This is a very dirty rhetorical trick when the proposal is intended to apply to minorities, and it is not appreciated.