skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I've had similar thoughts, notably as a way to side-stepping the composability limits of current parsing theory. But these limitation are increasingly worked around...

And looking at rust, I can start to imagine a future where macros are powerful enough to support a lot of declarative coding.

When coding javascript today I write code like:

// can be imported, and api.router() mounted in express
let api = new API(...);
module.exports = api;

api.declare({
method: 'get',
route: '/hello-world',
description: `bla bla bla...`,
scopes: {AnyOf: ['some-permission-string']},
// (more properties)
}, (req, res) => {...});

Effectively making large parts of the app declarative. It's still far from powerful enough. But I'm not sure giving up text is the way to get more powerful building blocks.

Declaring JSON + function is super powerful in JS. In rust macros might allow us to make constructs similar to my "API" creator, but with static typing. And who knows maybe macros can expose meta-information to the IDE...
If code is wrong, yet nothing goes wrong, it's miles ahead of almost all of the software I battle with to get work done every day.
That just looks like a website made by a hateful obsessive.
Think about the presidents and politicians of the future. Every internet comment scrutinized, diced and then selectively used to attack/discredit when some entity desires to. It's a little scary, because when you feel like you are being watched (even if the "watching" is future walking the cat back from NSA archives), your speech is chilled.
Net neutrality and ISP monopolies are important to observe here because only ISP monopolies can control packet level what goes through every single internet connection you make, that is why ISPs and local monopolies are important to the impact of net neutrality going away. ISPs inspecting packets to slow some down also leads to encroaching packet inspection that leads to more surveillance.

Talking about Google here is a distraction and a false equivalency as they control nothing in the lower level of your network like ISPs do.

Google is not a monopoly, they are a market leader with mind share. They were able to get the word "google" as a verb, that is through a good product and marketing.

It seems you really prefer companies that buy their monopolies via legislation and bribes like ISPs (Comcast/AT&T/etc) over companies that build market share in the actual market (Google/Apple/Facebook/Netflix/Amazon etc).

You need to read up on your Microsoft history, you are precluding lots of history, Microsoft is well known to do the "embrace, extend and extinguish"[1] technique back when they were essentially monopoly mind share level. Just one small thing in many that they did, they killed Quicktime, Real Player[2] when Windows player was created by making them not work on the OS level.

ISPs want to do the same thing with competitive products, it is a natural progression for a market leader, you can't blame them you have to prevent it with regulation/laws.

The only control Google has is to control technology via their browser, which Microsoft did with IE4 especially - and you can use others, and what kind of search results you can get. AMP is an overstep and their control but not monopoly level yet -- and they are overstepping on stomping internet standards in a new 'embrace, extend, and extinguish'. But even then, Google has less monopoly ability to control your network compared to ISPs that control everything you do on the internet and Microsoft could control OS level when Windows was 95% share and only desktop existed, which they pushed IE then as well and crushed competition, preinstalled and all that.

I like Google and Microsoft though, they earned their mind share through innovative products. ISPs just buy off legislators and create state assisted monopolies. The latter is very anti-business and anti-competitive much more than building support in an open market.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...

[2] https://www.cnet.com/news/real-hits-microsoft-with-1-billion...
I’ve been driving for several decades. I’m also an avid automobile enthusiast, “will talk cars with anyone” kind of a guy.

But for 30 minutes every day, I’m just an ordinary pedestrian. And I follow the traffic rules and regulations which apply to pedestrians religiously: always cross at a crosswalk, never cross on Red, even if the intersection is devoid of traffic. Why do I do that? Because as a driver and as a pedestrian, I understand the challenges and the dangers of being on both sides. It has to do with discipline and maintenace of the very high standard of living I enjoy in the country where I live. Being undisciplined would erode that standard.

Many pedestrians are undisciplined. I see them crossing the road at places other than a crosswalk. I see them crossing the road on Red, while as a fellow pedestrian I patiently wait to cross at a crosswalk when the traffic light turns Green. It angers me greatly when other pedestrians aren’t disciplined, not only because they erode the standard of living, but because I could have just as easily been the driver who unwittingly hits them and has to live with that for the rest of her or his life.
Why Banning Bitcoin and Other Cryptocurrencies Is Not the Solution
>This is the perfect move to put more YouTubers past the tipping point.

YouTube is dead for the ______th time. Now YouTubers will finally move to ______ with monetization strategy _______ and we will enter the golden age of online video.

I agree with the other (downvoted) poster - YouTube has no where to go. They literally have no competition, and bled billions of dollars for years to get where they are today. No one is lining up bleed money on user generated content like Google did.

If you think creators should be compensated for the work they put out anymore than YouTube is doing, then build that platform. Until then no other platform has come close to actually writing checks to actual creators - even Facebook has seemingly decided to not touch that landmine with a 50ft pole - and they were supposed to "dethrone" YouTube with their billions of minutes watched.

It's amazing people think that YouTube is screwing over creators when no other platform has even come close to what YouTube is doing at scale. Facebook/Twitter - heck even most ad networks give you zilch for putting content online.

YouTube isn't just deciding who reaps the rewards, their the only content platform sharing the rewards.
TWiT is the network as a whole. This Week in Tech is just one show (the original show?) on the TWiT network along with Windows Weekly, Security Now, etc.
Drum8 sequences and mixes 8 sounds at once on Apple II computers
What’s all this crap about ‘advertiser friendly’. YouTube ads are targeted to the cookie watching. Nearly all ads I see on YT are targeted at me, and always are irrelevant to the content of the video. I watched cranberry video clips in the past few days, and kept getting ads for software development courses.
> Later we will change the Graphcool Framework to use Prisma as the query engine.

Which includes integrating it into their BaaS/PaaS platform, I imagine.
You can make a bridge in your backyard tho...

Typically those bridges are made the same way as software, attempt to do it, test it a little bit, use it.
I used to think the same it is likely though that in large metro areas e.g. NYC, LA, DC, Philadelphia ... etc. there is strong competition and wide availability of interesting options. Given the population numbers the VAST MAJORITY is more like 50/50
> In 2014 Verizon challenged the order and managed to get the blocking and discrimination parts vacated

"Vacated" means these parts are no longer the law, right?

> NN isn't arbitrary, and seeking to have it restored isn't; it's an attempt at restoring the spirit/intent of legislation

OK, but the courts have decided that legislation of 2010 was not correct, right, isn't that what "vacated" meant above? So, does it mean FCC in 2015 created some rules in the absence of the law, just by its own authority - and if so, why Mozilla argues changing those rules, again by the same authority, in the absence of the law, is against the law?
One thing I've learned far too late in my career is that it's amazing what you can actually get if you just go up to the right person and say you want it.
Silicon Valley’s Founder Factory
Exactly. If they care about monetization, they would sell merchandise or use Patreon or similar.
Oops. I was wrong on that one, sorry.
What works for us (grpc)

Elb with layer 4 and proxy protocol enabled. Behind Elb sits nghttpx (not nginx) doing TLS termination and request forwarding to gRPC.

Proxy protocol is used to keep the source IP.

This setup is all done with Kubernetes using kops for the cluster setup, nghttpx-ingress-lb as the ingress controller. Also we have multiple namespaces/environments in Kubernetes (staging/dev..), so nghttpx does routing based on the hostname.

We tried linkerd before but somehow failed using it as an ingress controller doing TLS termination and upstream HTTP2. Doing the other way of routing everything through a dedicated linkerd port and a dtab worked, but mixing in TLS termination + upstream HTTP2 in a single dtab stopped us.

So for now we keep this simpler setup and we probably are going to check out Istio/Heptio/Envoy
I don't see how they are putting customers at risk of discrimination "on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex". I haven't seen any evidence that FCC intended to tolerate or actually tolerated such discrimination, or even that any of the ISPs ever attempted such discrimination. Could you explain why you think FCC violated this part of the mandate?
I think the site is run by an ex-employee. There is a lot of drama about nothing, however there are some cases were Leo is clearly not a "good" person especially when it comes to how he treats his employees.
I made a lot of bridges and cranes in my bedroom. They all failed spectacularly but GI Joe didn't seem to mind that the shear strength of a Lego pin was inadequate to support his tank.

The difference is that I don't then promise a municipality that I can build them a bridge that can take their citizens across a river, even in case of a 100 year event. Or an early warning system that can save their citizens from nuclear holocaust. This is the difference in maturity between software "engineering" and real engineering disciplines.

You're free to experiment with your own resources but as soon as you make a promise to the public or your customers you should be required to meet your promises in all circumstances.
Actually we do have traffic lights. They are just optional.

Jokes aside, the conditions are different. Most traffic in India is extremely slow moving, which makes those risks possible. Go to a country where the to Urban driving speed is over 50 kph (~30 mph), say 80-100 kph, Indian drivers will refuse to take those risks.
What if the only things that monetise are vlogs presented by cheery rich, happily married white American Christians that never swear?

This is bad news for advertisers too. Say your product is in demand by people outside the supposed ideal target audience then you won't be able to reach them.

Or if you do not care who buys your product so long as it sells. What if half of your audience are watching stuff deemed to be not monetisable? It doesn't matter if you vote Trump or not so long as you could drink more cola.
Automated Google hacking
A Bad Start on Reforming Fannie and Freddie
I'm trying to translate this into Australian. Is there anyone here who's run/worked an ISP or WISP in Australia that can weigh in on how applicable this is to our situation? Confidence in our telcos is at an all time low, and seeing smaller WISPs crop up to put the transnationals back on track would be fantastic.
We’ve increased our productivity by quite a lot over a five year period by ditching most testing on smaller applications.

Basically our philosophy is this: a small system like a booking system which gets designed with service-design, and developed by one guy won’t really need to be altered much before it’s end of life.

We document how it interfaces with our other systems, and the as-is + to-be parts of the business that it changes, but beyond that we basically build it to become obsolete.

The reason behind this was actually IoT. We’ve installed sensors in things like trash cans to tell us when they are full. Roads to tell us when they are freezing. Pressure wells to tell us where we have a leak (saves us millions each year btw). And stuff like that.

When we were doing this, our approach was “how do we maintain these things?”. But the truth is, a municipal trash can has a shorter lifespan than the IoT censor, so we simply don’t maintain them.

This got us thinking about our small scale software, which is typically web-apps, because we can’t rightly install/manage 350 different programs on 7000 user PCs. Anyway, when we look at the lifespan of these, they don’t last more than a few years before their tech and often their entire purpose is obsolete. They very often only serve a single or maybe two or three purposes, so if they fail it’s blatantly obvious what went wrong.

So we’ve stopped worrying about things like automatic testing. It certainly makes sense on systems where “big” and “longevity” are things but it’s also time consuming.
Need ft.com subscription to read
first to come up with microarchitectural attacks

I'm not saying that. There are definitely earlier attacks which exploit microarchitectural features (including caches).

What I am saying is that as far as I'm aware I'm the first person to demonstrate an attack consisting of

1. Information being leaked from a process into the microarchitectural state of the CPU, followed by

2. That information being retrieved by another process.

This is the model which the vast majority of attacks over the past decade have followed, and it's the model which Spectre/Meltdown make use of.
These are only opinions, just like the article. I agree with the author that mobile isn't enterprise. Even if enterprise is clamoring for it now, it is a fad for precisely the reasons that the author pointed out. It's a local minimum of productivity that we will eventually tunnel out of; to an area where a real productivity curve exists (mouse, keyboard and monitor most likely).

I disagree that UWP is synonymous with mobile and the author has used the two interchangeably incorrectly. UWP, in theory, runs on all devices but - newsflash - Windows mobile is completely dead. It's exactly like having a go at Linux because it supports DEC.

All UWP is, is a more modern version of WPF that supports more than one execution target (CLI, JS or native). It so happens to run across many devices. I can't see why you wouldn't develop your enterprise software using it (apart from the horrific store) because it's no different from any other stack. If you don't care about it working on mobile, don't deploy to mobile. If you don't care about XBox, don't care about XBox. If you care about one platform only, support that one platform only.

The bonus is that if you aren't enterprise, and do care about the platforms you support, you can carry your skills there. Now, you'd be utterly mad to actually use it (as you would depend on users mad enough to use the store) - but that's the idea behind it.
DJB is probably one of my favorite people in the tech world. Ever since I read about the court case he won against the US government while representing himself, he's been a sort of hero of mine.
If you can do 10 hours of work a week and have nobody notice, your company has more serious issues.
Edit: I should add "and/or resigned" next to "usually content" up there.

Women in South-Asian and Middle-Eastern countries are also expected to cook for guests. The males hosting while the women hosts make tea for the guests is an iconic feature [TODO: find a better term to describe that] of society there.
"Proof-of-Stake" as applied to copyright. I like it.
"that comparison oddly compares living in a frat-like house in SF to having your own one bedroom apartment in Toronto."

1. His Excel sheet shows cost of living with 2-3 roommates, across many different cities, including Toronto

2. The frat parties you attended must have really sucked if they were held in 3-bedroom apartments
My biggest takeaway from qmail has nothing to do with security, but rather that excessively restrictive licensing, highly opinionanted/unusual setup, and unwillingness to collaborate on its development squandered its potential.

If it wasn't for all that, we might well all be using qmail-based mail servers today, as qmail was really ahead of its time in so many ways.

It was kind of like the Amiga of mail servers, back in the day. It could have easily dominated the market, but it wound up a mere historical curiosity.
None of the legit exchanges listed BCC.
What part of net neutrality proposals would prevent ISPs from offering lower speed plans at lower prices?

Also, where has anybody argued that net neutrality would prevent the customer from choosing to block all but a specific host?

You've come down against net neutrality in every thread I've seen about it lately. Have you come across any arguments in favor that are persuasive to you?
Could someone please explain to me why there is so much focus on Spectre vulnerabilities in Javascript and not really any on HTML/CSS, when it seems that a server could also be able to cause the client to perform speculative execution via pure HTML? Or is it not possible for some reason? The focus on Javascript as though it's somehow special is rather baffling to me, making me wonder whether I'm really understanding the fundamental issues. (?)
Trust me - you are 100% completely wrong.
Southwest sues startup that monitored airfare changes
Sure, but why does YouTube need to care?

Those videos get me to YouTube in the first place. Once there they can try to get me to watch 'better' videos and the videos I do watch gives them lots of useful information about me that they can sell to advertisers.
Look at it as an icebreaker - just 1 year passed, 7 more left.
Show HN: The Atari 2600: A Personal Journey into the Past
Hmmm, I think it's too early to tell.

After all, we've witnessed move-fast-and-break-things social networks (Facebook, Twitter, Reddit) that had no desire to influence society in a big way get hijacked by state actors to achieve political goals.

We're also witnessing toasters having web servers pre-installed on them with no thought into what happens if the company that pushes patches (if they do at all) goes bankrupt, thus creating vast oceans of botnets that the rest of us now have to deal with.

Again, I think there's a long road ahead of hard lessons when we don't take our own power in software seriously.
Can any explain to me what an RPC is?
This is a horrible article.

>When you’re bashed on the head, the effects are similar to a dose of LSD

Again, this is a horrible article.

But I guess the target audience are members of the “i fucking love science” Facebook page.
They don't have an obvious foreign power to which they may have pre-existing relationships. They could still be motivated for financial, ego, or ideological reasons.

USSR/Russia was more often ideologically motivated people (and very small amounts of money). Israeli spying in the US has been "for the benefit of Israel" (and possibly tacitly supported by some of all of USG, potentially somewhat officially). Chinese spying seems to be largely of the "loyalty" form. A lot of it is pure commercial or military technology from commercial entities.

All things being equal, someone with minimal foreign relations is going to be a better security risk for USG than someone with extensive relationships with foreign entities. For intelligence aimed at a foreign country, it's obviously an asset to have a lot of interconnectedness with that country, so it's a balancing act; you'd probably be willing to take that risk for a case officer but probably less so for a support staff. For positions where technical skill is required and in short supply, it may be worth that risk too; you'd have to look at the totality of the situation.

Since China has such an active intelligence program focused on the US, it's a greater risk than, say, Germany or the UK.
Except that he wasn't actively calculating more digits of pi, some part of his brain had remembered the digits and was playing them back. Maybe some sub-conscious part memorized it, but it was still memorization.
All of them. He flirted with them all. Jaiku, Identi.ca, App.net, etc. He was always trying to find an alternative. I've been listening on and off to him since my first iPod, so over 10 years. As each new one came out he jumped on it. He was the same with Android/iOS and Windows, Linux and Mac OS X.
Also grpc web is coming along

https://github.com/grpc/grpc-web
> Especially since the models did seem to adapt well to the modified domain when trained on it.

But only when trained on it. The models trained on only one modified domain didn't generalize well to the others. Although the model trained on all datasets together generalized quite well to the corresponding test sets, that doesn't mean that there isn't some other kind of modification that can fool it.

This is what the authors say:

Our last set of experiments involves training on the fully
augmented training set, which now enjoys a variance of its
Fourier image statistics. We note that this sort of data augmentation was able to close the generalization gap. However, we stress that it is doubtful that this sort of data augmentation scheme is sufficient to enable a machine learning model to truly learn the semantic concepts present in
a dataset. Rather this sort of data augmentation scheme is
analogous to adversarial training [40, 9]: there is a nontrivial regularization benefit, but it is not a solution to the
underlying problem of not learning high level semantic concepts, nor do we aim to present it as such.
Amazon is pretty expensive for bandwidth, scaleway.com sells cheap VMs and baremetal with 200 MBit/s unmetered bandwidth at like 3 EUR/mo.

Building a reliable service, handling peak, etc. is hard, and driving down latency will probably cost more... But 40TB can be done a lot cheaper than 3-4k USD.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_procedure_call
Some folks already doing "it":
https://www.reddit.com/r/tDCS/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcranial_direct-current_st...

This is the same method as one of the research that's linked in the article has used to "Facilitate Insight by Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation":
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal....
Really? Spying on other countries is a bit of an open secret. Hell, the US often spies on allies and vice versa.

My understanding is that as long as protocol is followed, it's just a fact of life. If a country oversteps it's bounds then then the spy (often using embassy employment as a cover) is expelled.
Chemical imbalance theory still disproven
Still waiting for tulips to recover back to the January 1637 price.
If they do, then that is great. Since there is no compensation from youtube, these creators should upload the content to a bunch of online streaming platforms.
It states: You become immune to current BGP-level attacks, such as prefix hijacking.
Is it because quantum entangled particles propagate their changes at the speed of light? Making the invention work, just not any faster than normal methods?
The poor logic is your unfounded assumption that naturalized citizens are somehow more prone to this type of crime than citizens by birth.

If you want to assert that, you'll need to back it up with evidence. Until you do, there's no reason to assume it -- if anything, one could flip your logic around and claim that birth citizenship should correlate with higher risk since a born citizen didn't have to do anything to "earn" it and so doesn't value their citizenship/country as much as someone who had to put in significant effort and jump through a lot of hoops to get naturalized.
Maybe they don't get targeted?