skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
See GDPR recital 24 (http://www.privacy-regulation.eu/en/recital-24-GDPR.htm):

[...] In order to determine whether a processing activity can be considered to monitor the behaviour of data subjects, it should be ascertained whether natural persons are tracked on the internet including potential subsequent use of personal data processing techniques which consist of profiling a natural person, particularly in order to take decisions concerning her or him or for analysing or predicting her or his personal preferences, behaviours and attitudes.

It appears like monitoring is closely related to profiling, defined in Article 4 as:

‘profiling' means any form of automated processing of personal data consisting of the use of personal data to evaluate certain personal aspects relating to a natural person, in particular to analyse or predict aspects concerning that natural person's performance at work, economic situation, health, personal preferences, interests, reliability, behaviour, location or movements

If you are trying to eg. predict preferences of data subjects by collecting the logs you are probably monitoring their behavior.

If you are doing this it should be pretty clear to you from the purposes you are collecting information for. Security purposes (such as preventing DDoS attacks) are probably not purposes of monitoring data subjects behavior or profiling.
I think they just implemented it badly. I have seen a similar thing in Typography.js [1] recently and probably because of Baader-Meinhof phenomenon, I saw it multiple times afterwards and just assumed that was now the default way to render underline.

Try the Doelger theme at Typography.js, it looks pretty good actually.

[1] https://kyleamathews.github.io/typography.js/
Dang, okay, that was a stupid analogy I made. It should have been something like "If you're obese and sickly, should you spend your time evangelizing the importance of diet and exercise to other unhealthy people instead of eating right and exercising yourself?" I don't think its even a good analogy anymore though.

I get that 'what-aboutism' is a logical fallacy in general, and it can prevent beneficial action from taking place. Isn't it a special case when the 'other party' is yourself? (obviously this is a US centric comment).
> There are plenty of cars with speedometer positioned in the middle

They are usually set up to mitigate shift from far to near focus and how far you have to look from the road; they actually keep your eye closer to the road than traditional behind the wheel instruments.

The Model 3 megatablet isn't like those displays.
> As your own reference notes, Dart ints are defined as arbitrary precision, but dart2js uses js numbers (IEEE 754 doubles), so it's outside the listed range are problematic with code thst might be deployed via dart2js; it has no issues on Dart VM.

Yes, but it's now a quirk of Dart which is the problem. The behavior of your basic int primitive is dependent on the VM it's running in, that's a pretty bad language design decision.

> Dart’s concurrency model offers shared-nothing parallelism on Dart VM; it doesn't have shared-memory parallelism, which is limiting for some used, but it's not a complete lack of parallelism.

It's the same as JS+WebWorkers which is enough to claim a checkmark in the parallelism feature box without actually supporting anyone's use case (although JS+WebWorkers almost had shared memory which would have helped a little until meltdown/spectre happened). Since all communication goes through an extremely expensive pipe and all objects are serialized & copied it doesn't even work well in a shared-nothing context, which really needs to be able to move things to work well. That barely lets you do basic thread offloading in narrow circumstances when data passing needs are very small, to say nothing of using parallelism to speed something up.
>Days before Omega One announced his hire, Chilton said he wished he had invested in Bitcoin and its major rivals years earlier -- back when he was warning people as a CFTC commissioner to be careful while calling for more regulation. Generally, the wild price fluctuations are “mellowing out,” he told CNBC on Jan. 11.

Hilarious. Just for note, bitcoin (not even going to mention alts) was swinging 10% a day around January 11th and dropped to half its price in less than a month.

I guess once you're on the bankroll of some of these places, you give up on trying to sound credible.
Amazon has agreed to acquire Ring for more than $1B
webpack. My dependency was webpack.

It was a dependency of webpack that was broken (you can pick your bride, but you can't pick your bride's family). And the package owner, in a Github Issue said "not my problem, this package should never be used with webpack and should only be used with Browserify." Looking at the date, that Issue discussion occurred in 2015. Which makes sense. But a WONTFIX on a package that obviously is broken (I looked at the code), and is still an issue in 2018 is clearly a problem. The node world is a circular firing squad where no one wants to take responsibility for fixing their shit because each person thinks they are doing the right thing. When, thanks to the mess of npm, no one really knows who the "user" of their package is and you can't just dictate that so-and-so shouldn't be using your package that way. Because someone will use your package that way.

WONTFIX, issues just suddenly "closed" without reason (why, dammit??), or pull request queues 100+ long and obviously unmaintained are way too common for me. I've lost track of the number of times this has occurred.
Great article! I have a question though: when you have a Call us tier, what do you actually talk about when they do? I guess you need to judge value they will get from your service, but how? And then what, charge them half of that? What if they don't know what they want or whether they want on premise or not? Should you travel to meet them? What if they want you to sign ndas or other stuff first? How much effort to spend on it if it's just a request for quote?
You've made a living being self-employed and by doing exactly what you want to do?

Is that it?

How do you accomplish that without communicating with others?
Ok - let’s be real - I lived in Singapore for two years. It’s a great place, but only for two years, and only if you like to travel.

Singapore itself is really pretty boring and it is hard to meet people that aren’t expats and even they are hard to meet.
Every company I know of that this happened to, and I know of at least five personally and others via 2nd hand, disappeared within six months.

One of them went on to start a new company and was acquired by Facebook for a whole lot of money.

But overall the outlook isn't great, and here's why. Amazon is great at the "80% solution". If you're already in AWS, and they have something that does most of what you want, it's way easier to use that than try and integrate with someone else.

So if what you're doing is only in AWS and isn't significantly better than what they offer, the news isn't good.

I'm sorry this happened to you. :(
Just as, if you’re ever in an e-mail chain that includes just 1 person on GMail.
I'm trying to find the scientific evidence that we need airplanes at all. From the Cambrian explosion up until 1910 there was no such thing as a plane and we managed to get by just fine. Now everybody's all like ' I need my Mexican resort vacation, how can I do it with my precious airplanes?'. I'll need to see some evidence for that.
Yeah, Swift was on our list of languages we considered. At the time, Swift wasn't open source and it wasn't clear what Apple's plans for the language were, so we didn't do a deep dive on its technology. It's possible that if we were to start over today that we would consider Swift more seriously.
I can already can change volume, change track, mute, answer/hang-up a call, signal, adjust my lights, set/cancel cruise control, wash my windscreen, and other stuff I have forgotton without taking my hands off the steering wheel
Is Swift that much different? Genuinely asking because it seems like a similar situation to what you described.
I think the idea that this practice signals cheapness is more theoretical than anything. Does a car priced at $54,990 signal cheapness? Certainly not for me. The practice is just too ubiquitous at this point.
Maybe try something like this, if adblocker is failing

1. curl -o 1.htm http://www.electronicdesign.com/embedded-revolution/ryzen-boards-reign-embedded-world-2018

2. sed -i '/<p>/,/<\/p>/!d' 1.htm

3. firefox file:///1.htm
Mazel tov, Nick and team! I'm really glad to see this.
Tried a Peugeot 308 2017 that replaces a lot od buttons (ac,..) with a touch interface.

This being a french car maker they obviously skimp on having adequate performance - interface is slow as hell. Just increasing ventilation is a 30s process.

It actually made me rethink my purchase an go for a different brand.

I know buttons are expensive if you want good looking + ergonomic ones (a tablet is a great cost saving measure), but its worse for todays cars.

For cars in 5 yr time touch will be the norm and not a problem since full autonomy vehicles remove the worry of keeping your eyes on the road.

I would really count touch as a minus for tesla, but it sure is visionary. Kindof like we hated iphone for going with touch and no physical keyboard. It's stkll shitty bur we addpyed. Sort-off ;)
I'm a (fairly expensive) consultant that specializes in marketing to small business owners. You can absolutely reach them on Facebook, AdWords, or Direct Mail at huge scale. Source: Grown campaigns with OnDeck, Zenefits, Segment, many other SMB targeters. Here's a recent case study: http://www.kevinlordbarry.com/facebookleadads1.html
An Analysis of Deep Neural Network Models for Practical Applications
You should try installing Mac OS on your current system, it will probably work. I run it on my main system, although the only game I play on OS X is Starcraft 2, and it runs poorer than on Windows. Still I prefer the Mac environment.
Did you happen to get a timeline from those companies on their price increases? I'd be curious to see if there were any common milestones for when the companies decided to increase prices.

In a few cases, I've taken the strategy of increasing prices over time as I've solidified and polished my offering. Discounting the product initially to gain enough usage stats to rough out edges, develop an internal support knowledgebase, and suss out unexpected use cases and user segments early on. I'm not sure if those products would have been as successful if I had charged more out of the gate and cut my teeth on those higher-paying individuals.
The newer Prius speedometer (etc.) is a more distant, behind the console display. (Previously, Prius used behind-the-wheel.) The angle might be similar (though the Tesla looks significantly lower), and the Tesla display seems (again, from photos) to require nearer focus.
Product Design Manager
Not sure if I would agree, given that estimates suggest that homo sapiens had evolved approx 400k years ago, and most of recorded history (with the somewhat stable hierarchies) lasts, at most, 20k years. So potentially much of recorded history, but certainly not proven to be necessary for evolution.
A Practical Guide to Design Visioning
oh, I can assure you there are a great many of us who don't find this lack of evidence surprising!
I always wonder how to handle existing customers with such raise. Have you just sent a mailing and started charging double price from their CC the following month?
Surprising? Just to the hacks at Vox.
I suspect you're getting downvoted for this line:

> In the US, the current party in power is always on the verge of instituting totalitarianism.

And I'm pretty sure that you didn't mean it like people are taking it. Let's start with, I don't know, FDR. He was on the verge of implementing totalitarianism. Really! Just ask the Republicans of 1933! Clinton was. So was Bush. So was Obama. So is Trump. Or so some vocal minority says.

I'm pretty sure jerf is dismissive of all that noise, and intends to ignore it... within limits.

> My plan is to start worrying about it when people face systematic government consequences for actually mouthing off about the ruling party. Right now, to a first approximation, nobody has in a long time. Any examples that anxious partisans will rush to contradict me will simply further demonstrate my point with how minor and unsystematic they are in the US.

Downvoters, I think you're misreading one line, and reacting based on your misread.
Your username is ironically relevant now. And this is quite a refreshing rebuttal. Just had to comment
Could anyone explain to me a scenario where bitcoin and/or blockchain does not make a huge impact on the world within 5-10 years? There seems to be so much excitement and real action moving in its direction that I have a hard time imagining how exactly this would all just go nowhere.
Those seem to be 25+W CPUs, plus whatever the rest of the system needs.

What's available these days that's x86_64 and is 15W or under, and comes on mini ITX boards? Slow is fine, as long as it's reliable.
> The Lakota and Cheyenne can be considered more objective than white accounts of the battle that are tainted by Eurocentric bias

I'm not denying that the white accounts are biased but let's not pretend anyones account is objective.
Ring was on the TV Show Shark Tank, and all the sharks passed on the deal. It was $700K for 10% of the company.
And now it sold for more than 1 billion $.
Thanks for the reply!

For us, the ability to self-tune is one of Heron's most attractive features. Tuning components/executors in Storm was a big pain point. Have you guys ever tried using the Dhalion autoscaling combined with hardware autoscaling from a cloud provider (i.e. Azure, AWS EC2)?
95% of the value to me of self-driving cars is being able to sleep/nap on the way, so I'd agree with you that a slower trip is generally going to be more tolerable.
I have never actually met a scientist who espouses the dreaded "scientism". It is, I have come to believe, a bogeyman used to silence rigorous thinkers when they attempt to speak in a social/political setting.

Also, virtually every branch of science utilizes both quantitative and qualitative tools. I'm not sure if you meant to be dismissive of the often subtle methods for reconciling these different scientific tools, but it seemed to me that you did.
Right now the systems in public domain reach 97% accuracy. Facebook doesn't need you, even if you get a million people to try to "trick" the system, you won't do anything. The verification is to fine-tune it.

By the way, you forget that Facebook can simply exclude almost all those who know about this. What are you going to do? Do you think nobody will notice the 10M user fan page themed "Fool facebooks AI"?
It just knows an extra thing about you, that you don't want to be tracked, so it'll hide news about tracking from your feed.
How many pictures do you have of yourself on Facebook? I see the setting, but it states that 'this is not yet available to you'.
You are thinking about this based on your experience with traditional cars. When you drive today, think about all the moments of interactions that you have with the car while driving. It is fairly limited. You would change volume controls, turn on wipers, skip music, call someone etc. And almost all of those controls are either available via the steering wheels knobs or readily available on the giant screen (e.g., climate controls). The touch screen is really there for secondary controls such as vehicle settings and user preferences. Most people are thinking that you have to navigate some menu to increase volume. But that's not the case.
> 1. It sounds like the mechanism for killing cells is very general. Why do histatins not attack somatic cells?

They semi-specifically target a receptor on C. albicans and other pathogens. They're also cationic [1], so they bind anionic lipids in bacteria and mitochondria that aren't found (in large quantities) on the mammalian cell surface.

> 2. Do mouth wounds simply heal faster because the mouth is cleaner?

From that second abstract:

"..histatins were actively internalized by epithelial cells and specifically used the extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2 (ERK1/2) pathway, thereby enhancing epithelial migration."

It's a relatively simple assay: Just grow a lawn of the skin cells, scrape a line down the middle, and see how quickly the line is filled in (with or without exogenous histatin).

So those peptides tend to do both: kill bacteria and lead to wounds healing faster.

[1] http://aps.unmc.edu/AP/database/query_output.php?ID=00505
The dongle is one more thing to buy, to keep around, to carry, to plug, to replace when misplaced...
What's the link between yesterday and today?

Chavez was the previous ruler and hasn't been gone so long that the systems he set up have been washed away by time
I'm a Christian, and what most would consider a fundamentalist (though formerly strict creationist), and I at times feel that science is incredibly dismissive of historical and traditional knowledge, often out of a default presupposition of beliefs.

But this is the great benefit of empirical science to our understanding of the world. I truly believe in the philosophical principle that the person stating the positive position in an argument has the burden of proof on it's shoulders.

So while we would all love for our deeply held beliefs to be treasured by science, it's for our benefit that scientists don't work that way, and that we should have the burden to prove what we believe.

And if it's truth, there should be some way to reason to it, whether scientifically or philosophically.

So when traditional knowledge is validated, I say great. But let's not start cherry picking according to our biases and using that to somehow infer that "science" is the issue. Sure, some in the scientific community can come off as condescending, but that's a personal issue and one of approach, not one that is fundamental to the empirical study of the world.
Yes, way back in the 1600s, Mr. Capital wrote as much.

Less sarcastically and more substantively: there's no such thing as orthodox capitalism requiring growth or any such thing.

Capitalism is what you get when a) you have private property, b) freedom to trade property, goods, and services (labor). Everything you associate with capitalism is either a consequence of this or of not-capitalism market distortions (which we often fail to recognize as such, and then we associate them with capitalism).

Growth will stop when people stop needing, wanting, or being able to afford growth. Clearly, we're very far away from that: clearly people worldwide want the standard of living we have in the U.S., but the world is far from being there. So we have some growth left. Clearly, too, there is a limit to demand for growth, and we see this reflected in fertility rates the world over.

If you're aching to put an end to growth then I counsel patience: we're on our way.

Back to what is capitalism... I talked with an economist friend once who told me that "we need to develop an alternative to capitalism". My answer was: "well, given that capitalism is what you get when you let people be free to own and trade, what freedoms do you propose to deny people?!". Oddly my friend did not challenge the premise of my question (see below)... Instead he admitted that he hadn't thought of it that way. Sadly we never discussed it again.

Many here at HN (and elsewhere) don't see capitalism this way. They deny the premise that capitalism is just freedom. But... where is the force being applied (by whom and to whom) to make capitalism what it is, if capitalism isn't freedom?? (I'm not referring to regulations here, or laws against crime for that matter. Socialist countries, for example, apply lots of force or threats of force to get people to do what is expected of them -- this is what I'm referring to.)
The US Federal Government, as originally envisioned, had much less direct representation, with the House of Representatives being the only directly elected body. The Senate was elected by the State governments, the President by a group of directly-elected "electors," and the Supreme Court appointed/confirmed as it is now.

The vulnerability of a democracy to a demagogue who would do things like run on a platform of "elect me and we'll take Taiwan back by force", has been known since the Ancient Greeks. At least in the American system, the solution has been to "separate" those powers so no one individual or small group can exercise them, forcing a consensus. You see this still working even today, with Trump, whose the most demagogue-like president in memory. He's mostly foolish talk, since most of his actions have been held in check by the courts or his inability to get legislation passed.

A tendency towards deadlock has been the major failing and problem of American democracy (at least in recent memory), as I see it. I don't really see a good democratic solution to it either, besides reversing course back towards a more decentralized republic with a weaker central government.
This has never happened as far as I can detect.

The only country that does this sort of thing is the US.
You attest so legally binding. The legal system does not function on mathematical proofs. If it turns out you did not speak the truth, you can be fined, and maybe even jailed. That's how it works.

Also, we are not talking about forgetting someone personally, but deleting their data. I assume that's clear.
There have been paintings and drawings of people for centuries. And there are possessions of those people, things that they wore or touched when they were alive.
If only it was that easy. A reasonable reading of GDPR makes standard web server logs (which contain IP addresses) a punishable offense, even if you don’t have a nexus in Europe.

GDPR is a wonderful idea that will be insanely expensive to comply with, act as a continuous drag on developing new technologies, and end up offering only nominal protection to end users. This is just going to be another way for EU regulators to smack around Google and Facebook. They probably deserve it, but the potential fallout for the rest of us is really going to hurt.

Don’t get me wrong, treating user data with respect is the right thing to do. But we’re all going to be paying for this overly broad and under specified legislation for years to come.
I went for a microatx b350 chipset motherboard, ryzen 1500x (overclocked by 300 MHz), and a $85 geforce1030 2GB for my home media system. The geforce1030 has far superior H265/HEVC and similar GPU-assisted video decoding than anything possible with currently shipping intel or AMD CPUs. Same architecture as the 1060/1070/1080 in a low power fanless version. You wouldn't want to use it for 3D gaming but for high bitrate 4K video, it's perfect.

The highest bitrate movie I have plays with about 22% CPU usage spread across all four cores.
you have to sign up for an account! :)
I'm going to be That Guy and suggest you give Rust a try. It's got the best of imperative and functional mixed in.
I understood the context of the article, but I was encouraging you to go a bit deeper. "bad guys" are not the only group that might be motivated by having your browser mine bitcoin. And "publishers" make the API call out to the ad network and get the ad ready to show in their page pipeline.

I was insinuating that there is a financial interest by the publisher to "make more on ads" that is abetted by injecting bitcoin mining into the ads they serve up. Doing this in the ads gives them a great 'out' when they are discovered "oh its bad actors in the ad network, what can we do?"

The Salon article is a demonstration that publishers do in fact consider this as an alternative. I doubt Salon was the only one and I doubt that all publishers would be so ethical as to "ask first" given their behavior in the adblocking war.