skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This has been recommended a lot. I'm gonna buy it on Amazon and work through it slowly.
How devs design the Lego games to appeal to all ages
I did not really understand the benefit in comparison with a sock-puppet account linked to a throw-away e-mail address. That's the universal way for any web registration form.
It does, DASH is also arguably much less secure than Intel's RMT.
Pan-Asian Deep Learning Conference; Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; 2028
I think the only more concrete way you're going to determine intentional vs. unintentional is some type of paper trail being exposed.
Not only that, but the Windows CryptGenRandom bug you're referring to (1) affects an ancient userland implementation of the Windows RNG, and (2) is principally effective as a second-order attack when someone has compromised the entropy pool. And this is the best example we've thus far come up with for a "kernel CSPRNG going bad".

I'm very comfortable with the validity of the argument I'm making, which is that we don't generally need to layer rube goldberg hardware onto our systems to hedge against the likelihood of the LRNG going bad.
> So the only way the US comes out ahead in that situation is through playing games with inflating the currency while lying about it to recoup the costs of servicing the debt.

Or, you know, investing the funds in infrastructure and other improvements that yield more benefit than the debt service costs.

Or—though there are ethical issues with this—using some portion of the borrowed funds to subvert or other displaced the lending government and cancel the debt. [0]

There's probably other mechanisms besides these, as well.

[0] Although eventually this was reversed by an outside coalition, Iraq did the brute force version of this to Kuwait in 1990.
> The US government has been printing tons of money in the form of "QE" and "QE2", but with little or no inflation.

Well, QE happened right after the crash of 2008. In that crash, something like $4 trillion evaporated, much of it in the real estate market. The Fed created something like $4 trillion with QEx. That wasn't inflationary. However, it prevented the crash from being deflationary and destroying everyone who was in debt.
Read up on the "out of bounds" and "indirect branch" variants. Spectre doesn't have much to do with mode switches.
FYI You've got a bug with scrollwheels where all the headers duplicate.
status in the demo scene

...and since the demoscene is closely associated with the cracking/warez scene, the implicit message is always "if you want to know how it works, get a disassembler and figure it out yourself."
Okay cool, but still it is only run by one single entity. Wouldn't it be nice if everyone in the community could contribute to keep it running?
I wondered how many times the Russian takeover in DC was going to be reported, but this story is from last year (June, 2017).

Meanwhile, in 2011:

From the studio in downtown D.C., it's Russia on your radio
(Voice of Russia - previous name for Sputnik.)

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/07/04/us.russia.radio/index.h...

So basically they changed AM to FM.
A number of GC and other resource reclamation systems, especially soft real-time ones, have worked on accounting the cleanup costs to the parts of the system that make the mess in the first place.

In these systems, a function that is very careful with resource allocation will almost never experience a significant slowdown due to the background processing, because they either pay no cost or an amortized cost. For instance, one collector I knew of would garbage collect up to 10 objects on every allocation. If large allocations are front loaded then a full cycle almost never happens. In Swift or C++ or Rust you pay for your allocations as soon as they go out of scope.

In the context of an MVCC system, running a long query causes considerably more versioned data to pile up. If part of the cost of retiring that data was payed at the end of the transaction, several things happen. One, other transactions are less impacted by the overhead. Two, you end up throttling the bad actors, which encourages the problem to be fixed, and in the meantime the high water mark for vacuuming is reduced.
To be honest, I was worried about that as well. But it's been pretty good so far.
Gitmask always adds a comment in the PR mentioning where the PR is comming from, so in the event of any projects/repos getting spammed, I can hopefully disable PR's being opened against those projects.
That's true. However, in general I trust my environment so much more than "the whole Internet" which potentially can gain access to my systems. In fact, I don't think encrypting password managers (even in their simplicity such as https://www.passwordstore.org/) prevent typical use cases: If your home account is compromised, it is easy manipulate the workflow and subsequently decrypt your virtual password storage.
Ahhhh that's this line was about:

> Test performed with AOF enabled

AOF is a type of persistence: https://redis.io/topics/persistence

Most of the time, I've used Redis with (I think) RDB persistence, just in case. Usually we've used it as an in-memory cache.

Ok, that makes a lot of sense, thanks!
Outside of JavaScript frameworks, which is just one area of dev, there is _significantly less_ churn. You do not have to keep up with this churn to be a developer.
I think that Charlie Kaufman is also a contender for top modern original film director.
are you thinking of this? http://yarchive.net/comp/powerpc_page_tables.html
To be fair, Mailgun is in the practice of sending email. It just happens to be that email is one of the main conduits of spam.
Here's an example, though -- a former employer has dealt with scaling by staying just this side of what top-of-line hardware can support in lieu of going distributed. Because it massively simplifies ops / possible failure modes of dist systems that simply aren't present in single node systems. I'm still on a slack with them and they're very unhappy. They don't have this type of available overhead available on their pg or redis instances.
This is cool. I've been looking for an "open relay" to help with collaborating on GitHub-hosted projects that's easier than doing account resets.[1] I'll check it out later.

Side note: the Git project is enforcing the Git trademark now.[2] If you want to use "Git" for your branding, you'll need to get approval.

1. https://www.colbyrussell.com/2016/02/13/keeping-a-low-profil...

2. https://public-inbox.org/git/20170202022655.2jwvudhvo4hmueaw...
Yes, AMD's PSP runs a full OS which was made by Trustonic.
You can still do that, even more so on systems with memory protection as you will not break OS's interrupt handlers by doing that.

Notably pixomatic (Rad Game Tools' SW rasterizer) compiles Direcd3D shaders into i386 code which uses ESP as general purpose register.
You're confused. Only very basic arithmetic is needed to prove that any particular TM halts (if it does halt). You might have meant to say something like, "can only prove that N of the Busy Beavers are really Busy Beavers".
To that end, you may want to include a prominent note on the website about how to report abusive activity and what your policy is for dealing with it.

Simply having that easily accessible may got a long way.
The FCC Disqualified Several Rural Communities from Internet Funding
https://www.apple.com/feedback/
Given the current circumstances, it's pretty clear what it is about.
Non-engineer here, this bit is key right:

> However, suppose we flush our cache before executing the code, and arrange a, b, c, and d so that v is zero. Now, the speculative load in the third cycle:

> v, y_ = u+d, user_mem[x_]

> will read from either address 0x000 or address 0x100 depending on the eighth bit of the result of the illegal read. Because v is zero, the results of the speculative instructions will be discarded, and execution will continue. If we time a subsequent access to one of those addresses, we can determine which address is in the cache. Congratulations: you’ve just read a single bit from the kernel’s address space!

To my understanding it is that saying that by...

1) ...flushing the cache so you have a 'clean' state, you can get...

2) ...the speculative execution to 'pull in' to cache the address user_mem[x_] but...

3) ...the particular address that's pulled into cache, 0x000 or 0x100, is determined by whether...

4) ...the illegal read of kern_mem[address] 8th bit was a 1 or 0...

5) ...which you can then subsequently determine the value of by...

6) ...timing how long it takes to access that user_mem[x] address once again and...

7) ...thereby leaking the value of kern_mem[address]...

So you still have to perform some logic on the result of the speed of the access to the secondary address read right?

If read of 0x000 is slow you know kern_mem[address] was a 1 and if fast kern_mem[address] a 0, and if 0x100 is slow you know kern_mem[address] was a 0 and if fast that kern_mem[address] was a 1?

Is that correct?

If it is it seems that timing is the key right, and actually the clever leap of creativity in completing the exploit, at least to my untrained mind.

Please do correct anything I've got wrong, I'm not an engineer/developer!
Are you legit suggesting tying the cost of GC to transaction commit in a database platform that is very commonly used for OLTP workloads?
creating another account is an option, but Gitmask also strips github comments, strips the author info (which comes from your ENV and .git config), and squashes the commits.

Just in case there's any data leakage.
All of this seems to be well-known and convincing. Yet, GDP is still the only metric media and politicians seem to care about. Is it a another case of the "emperor has no clothes"?
Glad that systems works for you!

But for many people it doesn't, and this is for them.
Disabling branch prediction isn't mitigation it is effectively a recall without having to worry about logistics because if you disable branch prediction completely you might as well throw Zen based CPUs to the trash.

I really hope that this is just poor wording and that branch prediction is either disabled in extremely rare circumstances or they just exposed some control mechanism like Intel did which allows you to control the branching.

EDIT:

AMD's response was that mitigation from their side isn't needed for SPECTRE either:

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-rsponds-on-amd-processo...

I really wonder what has changed, and if now they are vulnerable to variant 2, have they underestimated MELTDOWN as well?

I'm also looking forward for people to look into the victim cache that AMD has implemented with Zen and if InfinityFabric and the added latency between CCXs can't be exploited for side channels attacks.
Meltdown on Linux allows to read all physical memory, not only the kernel data. The defence against it is only dubious if one does not rely at all on process isolation as extra layer of defence.
Anaesthetics stop diverse plant organ movements
The PSP is already quite long in the tooth. I think AMD will switch to ARM's recently announced "SecurCore" soon, just like Qualcomm did for the Snapdragon 845:

https://developer.arm.com/products/processors/cortex-m/sc300...
Thinking about this, at the moment, I don't think static typing is a replacement for testing (or vice versa!). Although, apparently, with something like LiquidHaskell, you can get more logic "into" the types and checked by the compiler, but I'm unsure how much you can do when it comes to more complex business logic.

Regarding testing "glue": static typing often gives evidence (but not proof) that code is glued together appropriately [refactoring even small projects without tests in Haskell is a joy: the compiler essentially tells you what to change]. However, it doesn't give evidence that the high level behaviour is what it needs to be. So I think higher level tests are still needed.

I think maybe changing the first question from...

> Am I confident the feature I wrote today works because of the tests and not because I loaded up the application?

to...

> Am I confident the feature I wrote today works because of the tests and type checking, and not because I loaded up the application?

will probably help you to answer the question about how much static types allow you to forgo tests. My instinct is that in most cases, high level tests are still worthwhile.
(offtopic) go threema...
We're the only animal that can mentally model the future and take deliberate actions to alter the outcome of events towards a specific goal.

We're basically sorcerers, by animal standards.
Is a gun-free America is possible?
Do you mean "SHUT UP, LISTEN, then come to the expected conclusion"?

Expressing thought on the subject doesn't mean one hasn't listened, so it seems like the only way to pass this test.
It does not get emphasized enough, but the caste system in India is a very very complicated issue. Any effort create a simple mental model for it (say, by mapping it to racial apartheid) would not take one closer to real understanding.

For those interested, here is a good piece by Venkatesh Rao which touches upon this subject:
https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2016/11/10/king-ruinous-and-the-c...

As to the specific incident in the news, I would only say that it is not hard to find a couple hundred men for Rs. 500 who would go about trashing cars and buses for a few hours, while the police would have instructions not to act too strongly against them, for fear of further conflagration. Once this is done, it is all up to journalists, op-ed writers to offer up (and amplify) their favorite perspectives.
Only external TRNGs, or even ones built into SoCs or CPUs, like RDRAND?

I think RDRAND is well worth the negligible cost of including it. It can give you entropy immediately, even during early boot (e.g. for ASLR); no need to wait or have any logic to deal with entropy not being ready yet (at least if you can rely on it being available, which should be true in the future). And compared to other approaches, it’s a lot harder to screw up or misuse, eliminating a whole class of potential vulnerabilities (especially if you use it directly rather than just seeding a kernel PRNG with it).
You're saying that a male is less unique then a female programmer? Males and Females are equal. To say otherwise is extremely sexist and immoral.
Feedback: not sure what your site is doing, but it appears to have an overlay over the content and it takes several seconds to load. Granted, I have a terrible connection, but I could not read the site (which was loaded) due to a blank layer on top of it.
Apollo-link-state – Let's manage state with queries
Are index funds communist? (2016)
SafeButler (YC S17) rewards $20 if anyone beats their auto insurance quote
you can cancel out static noise with multiple readings
While the delivery leaves something to be desired, I second what he's saying. You're essentially telling people "please do the work for me since I'm too lazy to". It's the kind of low effort post that plagues reddit. I love reddit, but appreciate that there's an alternative for higher quality discussion. Part of keeping discussion high quality is signaling to others what's acceptable and not acceptable. Simply ignoring your question wouldn't communicate to others that questions like yours should be avoided.
We all, all living beings, are eaten. Such is life. If might be sacrophitic fungi, earthworms, and bacteria, it might be a wolf, it might be a housecat, it might be a vulture. It will likely be a combination of them. But our big brains doesnt escape us from nature, we are every bit a part of the grand life experience that all life shares in. Our desire for a softer gentler life while noble, doesnt check us out in any way shape or form. It just seems nicer. The one invariant on this earth, is you will be consumed. If that concept is obscene, then so is all of life.
That doesn't make a ton of sense to me. Aren't mainframe CPUs developed using modern techniques?
You linked to the journal abstract, but your quote is from this article: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/01/04/new-study-from-scripp...

Please attribute your quotes correctly.
So I guess the interesting thing here is that if you visit http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ahttps... you'll see that yesterday's version of this document claimed that the fix for CVE-2017-5754 was "Available for: macOS High Sierra 10.13.1, macOS Sierra 10.12.6, OS X El Capitan 10.11.6" (search for "2018" to find "Entry added January 4, 2018").

Now it just says "Available for: macOS High Sierra 10.13.1". (search for "2018" to find "Entry updated January 5, 2018")
Redddit has been running like garbage the last few days-I bet they're getting slammed with their instances needing mass reboots+big performance decreases
State of the World 2018
We aren't talking about a stinky pig farm or a loud car repair shop. We are talking about a building that is slightly taller than the ones already there.

How is stopping someone from making their own house one story taller an acceptable use of the power of the state?
In addition to down-voting your comment, I've taken the unusual (for me) step of flagging it for the following reasons: off-topic, flamebait, and introducing politics into a non-political story.
A $8 Crypto currency display using an Arduino
A lot of people quite obviously love the suburbs. But the people who like cities want to live in the center. This means that as long as there exist some number of people who desire urban living, the prices there should continue to rise. What's being valued is the proximity to other people. And that supply is necessarily constrained.

Certainly some people live in city centers out of necessity. But the super-wealthy could live anywhere they want. They choose Nob Hill and SoHo (and so on). And they will continue to do so. Transportation options have very little to do with it.

Better transportation options for everyone else will be great! But the U.S. is an enormous place, so it's really only the city centers that should continue to see price pressures (because there's plenty of room everywhere else and better transportation options improve that situation).
Right? JS evolves every year, set somehow AS3 has hung in there. I think it really says something positive about its maturity
> The US government has been printing tons of money in the form of "QE" and "QE2"

“printing” is inaccurate, and more importantly “has been” should be “was”; the series of rounds of QE (QE1-QE3) ended in 2014.

> When all of our wages collectively go up, you can bet the cost of goods will also go up, with no change in affordability since the same amount of your work in man-hours is needed to both produce and purchase the goods.

This would be a tolerably reasonable argument based on the (inaccurate in both cases, but understandable) ideas that prices are entirely driven by supply-side concerns, and ultimately all costs are labor cost, in the case of a global wage increase, but domestic wage increase won't have that effect in a global market even with the inaccurate assumptions that would justify that conclusion for a global increase.
hmm, good to know. I'll have to look into that
We want a number, and GDP is a well-known number. As the article notes, there are various replacement proposals, but all get significant push-back from economists, and none of them have gained enough critical mass to rival GDP as a thing people quote. So GDP wins by default even though many people are unhappy with it. People are also unhappy with it for pretty different reasons, which doesn't help in consolidating an alternative.
Let's agree to ignore vendors going to the additional effort of putting in intentional back doors in their chips for the moment. That's not the issue I'm discussing in any of my comments.

> I do and what you are claiming is:

That is not what I'm claiming at all. The datasheet is the hardware equivalent of an API interface. I have not stated otherwise.

> Knowing the datasheet = Knowing exactly how the chips are being used.

By having the datasheet and the kernel source code you can see how the chips are being used by the operating system.

Without the datasheet, you have to reverse engineer what the OS/kernel is doing to the chip.

If you also happen to lack the OS/kernel source code, then you have to resort to black box reverse engineering.

> Knowing the datasheet just gives you the functionality definition and capabilities of a particular chipset.

This. Is. Exactly. My. Point.

Apple is still, to my knowledge, not publishing any datasheets for the T2. Therefore you CANNOT KNOW the "functionality definition and capabilities of" the T2 inside the iMac Pro except by the methods I describe above (either source code inspection or black box reverse engineering).

None of my comments have been about the internal operations of these chips or what nefarious nation states or three letter agencies may or may not be doing. It was entirely about Apple replacing components with datasheets with a component lacking a datasheet. jfc
In the past few days there were a handful of links dated as far back as 2006, directly explaining the attack vector, or strongly hinting at it. So, the likelihood that NSA and a bunch of other groups knew is 100%.

Unfortunately, Intel knew, too, and didn't bother fixing it in the next 6 generations of their CPUs since they originally admitted the issue with the Intel Core 2.
> I'll turn the argument around. If you want to pack yourselves into cities, go move into cities.

The similar situation would be: you want to live in a dense urban neighborhood, but instead of moving to the city, you get a law passed that requires any new buildings in your suburban neighborhood to be a mid-rise condo. It's not a question of whose aesthetic preferences are more valid, but whether it's legitimate to invoke aesthetic preferences to limit peoples' property rights.
How many people do you talk to that were going to buy a Pro or a Mini? iMacs and laptops, which most people buy, have been regularly updated. I don't agree that it has hurt them because the obsolete lines are barely visible* to people who don't understand how to evaluate a computer purchase, and presumably anyone who understands how to shop isn't avoiding all of Apple over this.

* See a Best Buy in-store display or https://www.apple.com/mac/ for evidence of this.
Not really. We could burn the money and then default: we'd still have received $1trn worth of gadgets.

Sure, it'd be better to use the money productively, then we get two things: $1trn worth of gadgets + whatever $1trn bought in the U.S.

And, of course, one could do worse than burn $1trn. One could finance one's enemies, for example.
Introduction of Quantum Mechanics and Introduction to Electrodynamics, both by David J. Griffiths. He also wrote Introduction to Elementary Particles, but I have not read that one.

Both books masterfully take exceptionally complex fields and break them down into easily digested chunks, with a clear progression of ideas as you go through the book. Do note that these are "Introduction" books written for Junior/Senior Physics majors.
I think "remote" here means "host to TPM chip". Which is still bad, but not on the level of "install a rootkit on a powered-off machine" like some of the Intel ME exploits.
My argument is that programmers have never cared who you are. Only that you wanted to learn. That you are encouraging people to doubt the limits of their own potential and their reception into programming by making it out to be some horrible occupation that only bigots and homophobes go into.

Why would women want to join such a horrible and sexist place if that's their impression? Especially since it isn't the reality. I've come across a few assholes, but they were assholes to everyone. If you have a chip on your shoulder constantly to think "Someone may not like me because I'm x" you're handicapping yourself. Instead seek out the good people, who are the vast majority. Stop with the identity politics and who is the most discriminated or offended and get to coding.
Yikes. This is why historical responsiveness to this type of issue is so important during vendor selection. WD appears to have left its customers out to dry.