skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
We're working on a 'CI only' mode so you can easily use GitLab CI without the rest of GitLab. This is already possible but now it requires some configuration.

For your local use case GitLab Runner has a local mode exec, although that is currently being reworked https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-runner/issues/2797#note...
Since the update, I have no idea how to find people. I even type in their username on their and they're not found. I don't know how it works anymore.
The OTF is specifically a (non-secret) front for Radio Free Asia, whose mission is to work in other countries against their NSA equivalents. The best thing the OTF can do is to fund actually honestly secure crypto, because if there's a hidden weakness the NSA can use, there's too much of a risk that one of the countries Radio Free Asia is trying to work against is going to find it.

(Yes, technically, a keyed "backdoor" would work and allow the NSA alone to hold the corresponding private key, but also Signal's client code is public so there isn't really a place to put one of those without anyone noticing.)
> He took one look at my badge that said "Disney" and started hurling sarcastic insults at me about my employer and suggesting my character was tarnished for working for them.

So, you waved a red flag in front of a bull and got gored. Um ...

I'm sorry he was a jerk to you, but, by the same token, waving "Disney" in front of him is kind of asking for it. A fan would know this.

I mean, if you were a fan of Morrissey and were eating a hamburger or similar in front of him in a fan line, you're going to have a similar bad time.

Many of these people have strong opinions and they aren't particularly quiet about them. If you trip one, you're going to get flamed.

Maybe it's not right or fair, but it's who they are and they are not exactly secretive about their hot buttons.
Millennials Strike Back: An Esoteric Reading of the Last Jedi
>crumbling walls, old textbooks and unqualified teachers

From what I understand having worked with educators the 3rd is the only problem that really impacts results. You don't need a new textbook to study anything about physics math or history below the college level (with the possible exception of certain history topics but even that can be a lesson about history if you want it to be one). They also complained about how administrative decisions made for political reasons (e.g. "We need to be seen using our money on something quantifiable so you're getting new desks" or "We need to look up to date, force technology into your lessons, I don't care how") forced good teachers to perform at a lower level.

Which the article does get around to in the last sentence:

"Increasing the salaries of all teachers in a high-need school district won’t have as much of an impact as identifying high-performing teachers and increasing their salaries."

Good teachers teaching in bad schools get some experience on their resume and jump ship to somewhere better. Wash rinse repeat. If you're good at your job of course you work your way up to some rich district where resources aren't a problem.
This is such a great thread, that it should have its own permanent place somewhere to update or recheck regularly. (other than bookmarking this page).
There's about 50% chance Outlook failed to store it too. Skype for business is really failing at the basics.
I see what I said and what the author said as the same thing. You can read it in many different ways, I'm just making the point that the whole thread of discussion should not be tolerated in a corporate environment.

Maybe the first part could be considered acceptable but towards the end it seems that they know what they are discussing. And even the fact that the first reply is not "Everything is not so bad, if you feel disheartened, there are numerous local community organization blah blah blah" but "get in touch with your local antifa" says a lot.
About the author: "Andrew Burt is chief privacy officer and legal engineer at Immuta, a data management platform for data science, which enables companies to create and manage A.I. and machine learning models."

Hmm.
>Well, not really.

>Financial instruments like stocks and bonds are real legal claims on the real assets of an entity. They are not creating value out of nothing, they are transferring ownership rights.

While an instrument making a claim to a real asset can't create value from nothing, it can create value from almost nothing. For example if the going price for a particular beanie baby is $100,000 a huge amount of speculative value has been created from a very small (basically nothing) real world value. In general it's poor speculation that causes problems, not necessarily the nature of the asset itself
Dropbox files for IPO
House Votes to Renew Surveillance Law, Rejecting New Privacy Limits
So, a spammer uploaded something containing copied data from a legitimate user and npm deleted everything from that user. Oy.

Seems like npm might want to review the policy that allows stuff like that to happen.

Even if a user violates the spam policy (which, to be clear, it seems the affected user in this case did NOT do), that hardly seems to be appropriate grounds for deleting everything the user has ever published on npm.

That is a policy that is just begging for griefing.
You don't think, maybe, Radio Free Asia (funding from the Broadcasting Board of Governors) is providing funding to Signal so Asians (like the Chinese) have a surveillance free communication option? The US government is bigger than the NSA.
Pretty sure there's not a separate chip so much as it's built into one of the chips that's already used. Presumably it's built into those chips for markets in which FM radio support is considered important and it doesn't take up enough die space to be worth making an FM-less version.
Lisp machines (at least, Symbolics Lisp Machines which I know well) didn't suffer from these flaws. They were largely designed to be single-user machines and there was literally almost no isolation between anything!
Hm, I seem to also have issues with Skype history. I can't find a way in the new UI to go back more than ~6 months of conversation history.

I lost an semi-important document that was shared with me over skype because of that.
My dreams are never third person. I'm swept up in a sequence of more or less bizarre events and happenings, and I don't question it, or otherwise bring my rational faculties to bear on the situation. It feels like passive participation; reflective deliberation is rare. Often, there's a strong emotional tone or undercurrent to it, and disproportionately often, I'm escaping or confronting some danger. Sometimes the danger gets me, at which point the sequence always ends, like a "game over" type of moment.
LangSec says that we should use the weakest model of computation that can get the job done. Patterson specifically recommends hewing to regular expressions as much as possible, but otherwise going no higher than deterministic context-free for ordinary programs.

Null-terminated strings can be recognized by a regular expression, but once you introduce a length field, you (theoretically) need at least a context-sensitive grammar, which is excessively powerful (read: difficult to reason about) for ordinary programs, according to LangSec.
Did he missed a connection between the top red blob and the green one?

Also, what's the name for the process for transforming a "map" into a connected network, just like he did at the beginning?
Speaking strictly about the "look and feel," I must say I love it. It's one of the most well-designed apps I've ever seen.

Per-UX, I've found Skype very difficult to use since the last major redesign a few(?) years ago. I'm not sure if the update made it worse. I feel generally confused just the same.
Much more leeway for "unintended cheating" with 2D signals. Think of all the imperceptible patterns that could be used as distinguishers. ML methods basically search for these shortcuts.
I don't see how this is fundamentally different than timing attacks and other side channel attacks that have been well known before, and to the best of my knowledge, simply hasn't been the focus of the "prove it correct" approach.

Whenever you want to prove something correct, you need to make assumptions about the execution model, and about what correctness means. Now "we" as an industry found a bug that makes the actual model differ from the assumed model, so we need to fix it.

The same is true when you can measure the power used by a microchip during some cryptographic operation, and infer the secret key from that -- even if the cryptographic operation has been proven correct, the definition of correctness likely didn't include this factor.
This brings to mind the quote often deployed against climate-change deniers: "Your inability to understand science is not an argument against it."

The whole 'truthiness' aspect is mildly surprising to see on HN ("It feels right, so it must be true", and usually it applies to others - never the poster or their organisation.)
House rejects effort to curb NSA phone surveillance
They can still lawful intercept. All they have to do is push a MITMed version to suspected law breakers. It's going to be closed source just like WhatsApp, so of course, it will be easy for LE to defeat while shedding crocodile tears publicly about how it's uncrackable.
Your google search queries use english words, but do not resemble english. (Or at least, I hope they don't.) Humans adapt to tech just fine.
MENA includes Morocco, Tunisia, et cetera.
Skype For Business shudder
The two seem orthogonal - you don't need to use FM/UHF to avoid the Internet, just use whatever protocol you want over the mobile network.
Why would you want to assess what's actually running on their servers? Even if you know the code on it, you have no guarantee it's not running inside a hypervisor that logs the contents of memory, or something.

In terms of cryptographic robustness, it's good for an app like Signal to have a closed-source server, because it forces you to not trust the server.

(This is of course separate from whether it's good for the Signal server to be free software for inherent free-software morality reasons.)
how about 2d in frequency domain?
I want a shared drawer across everything. Anything else eats screen real estate.
The article is a poorly argued response to a strawman.

The NYC and federal advisory councils would be tasked with providing lawmakers with impartial advice on A.I. writ large. That's reasonable. Bias in algorithmic credit decisions and bias in algorithmic sentencing are different problems, but share a lot of the same underlying technological realities/problems. These areas do have cross-cutting concerns, so a legislative brain trust dedicated to disseminating knowledge about these cross-cutting concerns is a wise use of resources.

No one is suggesting "regulating" general AI, so the author's red herring question about "what is AI anyways?" is completely off-topic. Even "alarmists" like Musk and Hawking are proposing much more concrete legislation, such as banning algorithmically generated kill orders in weapons. And to the extent that those people are interested in safe general AI, they're currently trying to achieve that goal by throwing research money at it (rather than proposing concrete legislation regulating general AI). Which is hardly a reasonable thing to criticize!

Furthermore, the proposed approaches in NYC and at the federal level aren't incongruent with the author's proposed sector-by-sector approach toward regulation! These are, after all, simply proposing advisory councils.

Therefore, the author does not provide a compelling reason to oppose any of the concrete legislation mentioned at the beginning of the article. And the arguments that the author does make betray, IMO, a superficial understanding of the proposed legislation.
I’ve been wondering if I can do away with the web layer all together and provide RPC directly to certain contexts fairly trivially over web sockets. REST feels really tired when working with state containers IMO.
That update pushed me away from Skype to Signal.
I skimmed that link and couldn't figure out what they mean by "processing". (It's related to compliance with a law, so I assume that the common sense meaning of a word isn't necessarily what is meant.) Do you understand what they mean by "processing" in this context?

It seems like you're saying that analyzing IP addresses a user connected from in order to determine their likely employer is against the UK's GDPR guidance, even if the data is released only in aggregate (but that it might be fine to keep that IP data since perhaps there are other uses for it which would be legitimate). Is that your understanding?
We Analyzed 100M Flight Searches,  How You Get the Cheapest Flights
“Adventures in negative vs positive reinforcement experiments via ‘studies’ shown as social media content”
Anatomy of a Scam: The End
Here, let me quote myself: What's interesting to me is that the ACA never had majority favorability until repeal was legitimately on the table.

Also, best of luck with your poll unskewing. I had thought that the legitimacy of that ship had sailed all the way back in 2012. Guess not.
Yes probably.

I've already written the paper and it's just got to survive a lot of peer review. It turns out that it would be real easy to envisage an in-order processor that has some mechanism for speculation that was actually vulnerable to spectre and variations of meltdown and the paper explores that - so hopefully it's an interesting paper even if the tl;dr is we claim to be immune.
Apply for jobs with a selfie video
Love, the Eastern Way
Does mean the consumer Skype or the corporate Skype?
Rowhammer I can understand, but how do you come to that conclusion--"neglecting the EE side is dangerous"--from analyzing Spectre? Does speculative execution rely somehow on physical effects? I can't find anything ( for example here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectre_(security_vulnerabilit... ) that suggests there is a physical component to this vulnerability.
Confessions of a PCB Designer – Tetris Placement (or how to embed components)
A new market for old and ugly fruit and vegetables takes shape
I've read up a bit on the research, and it sounds like a next-day or 48-hour "blues period" is par for the course after an MDMA session. They mitigate this problem by making sure that your schedule is clear of obligations the next day and warning the patient about it ahead of time.

The impact of MDMA in these trials is that it's not "a few hours of excitement": the drug often helps the patient make large, permanent breakthroughs in their trauma or self-image that wouldn't be possible without the "life preserver" of the substance. Going through the trauma and reorienting oneself to it in a new, healthy way seems much more possible (to many people anyway, certainly those with full-on diagnosable PTSD) with the help of MDMA.
The thing is there is no narrative or story telling element to image style transfer. Think of Beethovan's 9th symphony. It develops a narrative its not entirely abstract, the theme of the Song of Brotherhood gets subtly developed through the course of the composition. This is story telling. This is the same reason why its much easier to use ML to generate credible poetry. Generating a real novel with ML faces the same challenges as generating music, even instrumental music has a narrative and a story its telling. Story telling is far more difficult a problem than style transfer.
Probably there are no separate "chips", but functionality built in into the same integrated circuit as CPU and other things (SoC). The reason to include it into SoC is that the same SoC is used in various devices, not only phones, and it's not so complicated thing, just heterodyne and ADC.

Mainstream media loves the word "chip" and uses it in any context they like.
My personal feeling is that you should only work for people you actually trust (https://codewithoutrules.com/2017/01/29/job-contradict-belie...).

Thus:

Option #1: Just quit, and keep your mouth shut. Do you really want to be party to a fraud? And, given it is a fraud, will your equity ever actually be worth anything? This is the easy option.

Option #2: Quit, tell world you think this is fraud. Better talk to a lawyer first, you want to phrase it the right way (and may get sued anyway).

Option #3: Stay on, try to convince them it's bad idea. In this case I'd go for "I think this is fraud, it's too risky", with nice broad paper trail that will be trivially findable by discover if they get sued later, and copies of paper trail kept by you. You may well get fired. And do you really want to keep working for these people?

Thing is, if company's choice is "fraud or bust", it's dead anyway. So you're not losing anything by quitting (and maybe you can get them to pay you a lot of money for transition to replacement CTO.)

If you do quit, leaving behind the nice paper trail for lawsuit discovery might discourage some bad behavior.

(Not a lawyer. Not legal advice. I'm random person on Internet. You probably want to talk to a lawyer.)
This is a nice analogy, but these days I feel like abstraction is usually a bad thing. By its very nature, making things more abstract makes it less clear what you are actually doing, you end up going through all these layers of indirection. If I want to use the data from some node (aka object) way over there, I should just be able to use it, without it getting pulled through all of these other things first.

To use the same node graph analogy, when you focus too much on reducing the number of colors, you end up needing to create tons of nodes between the nodes that actually DO SOMETHING. Your software ends up more complex and difficult to manage.
An entire article about William James and pragmatism with nary a mention of Charles Sanders Peirce. Curious.

If I may excerpt from The Complete Idiot's Guide to Philosophy,

“
Peirce's pragmatism eventually became well known, thanks largely to the work of William James, who drew attention to Peirce's ideas. But Peirce objected to many of James' views and sought to distance his own thinking from that of James. At one point, he rejected the term, "pragmatism" for his own philosophy and proposed the term, "pragmatacism" in its place, joking that the new term was "ugly enough to be safe from kidnappers."†
”

† As has turned out to be the case!
Alternative hypothesis:

Brand new frameworks have zero docs and zero questions in Stack Overflow. Older frameworks have (hopefully) complete docs and a library of SO questions. In between you get a gradient.

I'm just not convinced that the data they're looking at means what they think it means.
A Prime Number Could Be the Answer to Bitcoin’s Power Problem
It seems they're using data from a company called MaxMind https://www.maxmind.com/en/geoip2-isp-database#features .

Quoting their website, "The organization name is available for about 40% of corporate, government, and educational networks."
Been checking the Mill forums manually waiting for a detailed post from yourself or Ivan about the matter.

For reference, there is an interesting thread from someone who seems like they knew the nature of the issue before the disclosure, to which Ivan replies discussing some of the complications of implementing branch prediction [0]. Ivan concludes with:

> "To answer your final question: no, branch prediction is not actually necessary, and Mill uses exit prediction instead. But so long as memory latency is much longer than a compiler can see, and path fanout remains larger than hardware can handle in parallel, prediction of some kind will be necessary for performance."

This is interesting as many people are now debating just what types of speculative execution, if any, can actually be performed without exposing security risks.

[0] https://millcomputing.com/topic/prediction/#post-3049
This is a good post-mortem with clear, policy-based remediations. Nicely done.

I wonder why they are only preventing republishing for 24 hours. Is there a good reason to allow a package namespace to be recycled with less than, say, a week? Is it based on the assumption that the only case where it comes up is during an incident, and 24 hours is enough time to assume an incident will be resolved? I'm curious what went in to that number.
Article refers to consumer Skype, not SkypeForBusiness.
Secret chat frienf
I.jeehan23
The AI industry regulates itself by periodically going bankrupt
Yes, works fine for me. :)
To solve the problem of inner city poverty, we need to take public money and give more of it to some privileged college-educated person who likely doesn’t even live in the neighborhoods plagued by poverty? We’re going to address the economic disadvantages faced by black and Hispanic children, by giving more money to teachers (80%+ of whom are white)?

Trevor Noah makes a really good point in his autobiography. He recounts the story of someone giving him a CD writer, which enabled him to go into the bootlegging business in post apartheid South Africa. He explains that what poor people need is capital, like that CD writer. You can teach a man to fish, he explains, but if you don’t give him a fishing rod you haven’t done him any good.
There are so many To-Do applications/services/features out there. I guess I'm not surprised by MS breaking into the scene, but I have to ask the age old question. How many engineers at MS are just standing around where they can waste time on products like these which probably won't be around in two years time.
What to expect from dev.to in 2018
The major feature of git is that it's distributed, not that it's decentralized.

Git's got two big features over SVN:

1. Automatic, private, per-user branching. Git's even nice enough to keep the private branches out of the main repository, and lets you pretend to be the authoritative repository without creating a branch if you really want to. This is what clone/push/pull actually does, and it's what a distributed VCS really brings to the table. It lets every dev pretend to be the project manager when they're writing their own code.

2. A much improved merging model. The graph model of git is just much better than the linear model of SVN.

The second one is what people thought they wanted when they started using git. The first one is what they didn't know they wanted before they started using git.

Git gets around the problem of "Well, if we do #1, how do we know which repository is authoritative then?" by saying, "We're not solving that problem. This is an exercise for the users that's easily solved by file permissions." So by refusing to solve that (rather hard) problem, the VCS becomes internally decentralized. That doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't centrally manage your repositories or have an authoritative repository. It's just that git itself doesn't care about knowing which repository is authoritative.
Ask HN: What resources do you recommend to learn how to sell software?
Depending on your industry, E2E encryption is actively not a thing you want because you have legal requirements to keep logs of conversations.

Also, it's not clear it makes much sense, even if you don't have that requirement - in just about every company, you want the helpdesk / IT department / some other central authority to be able to do password resets, which means that the central authority has the cryptographic ability to impersonate any user in the company. (Maybe this triggers logs, but protocol-wise, they can still read and write messages.) So E2E isn't really helping you; you might as well just encrypt all the messages to a key held by the central authority.

E2E is great for conversations between members of the public, where there isn't a central authority that determines identities, and where if you forget your password, the right way to regain access to the conversation is to meet your conversation partner in person and re-exchange cryptographic identities with them, end-to-end.