skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I understand what you are OK with. I am saying that I believe, from a fairly long scope of interaction, you are a better person than that.

They've disseminated widely an attack strategy to people who didn't have it. Nobody except AMD can fix the problem, regardless of the good intentions of other actors--on the other hand, many bad actors can use that information. That's as shoot-the-hostages as it gets.

Security researchers owe "strangers" (which is a really weird term for "society at large" that I don't think you, specifically, would be using with such connotations outside of a security context where you'd already made a decision) the same courtesy they owe everyone else: to not endanger people unnecessarily. I agree with you that this is a relatively minor vulnerability, I'm not hyping it or anything--but it's still a vulnerability, it is still more widely known now, and there is a bigger pool of bad actors than there was last week able to use it against people, irrespective of AMD's stock price.

There's certainly a gray area, if a vendor hasn't acted to fix something you know they know about. I'm not talking about that. But 24 hours and briefing the media before letting AMD know, as it very much seems like they did, is well outside of what I could consider any reasonable gray area.

If you care about end users, and you should because they are your fellow people, you don't publicize how bad actors can hurt them. You just don't. It's just...minimal decency, to care about other people. I can't see it any other way.
For a more casual experience, yet still filled with interesting questions, you could check out Ghost in the Shell, the anime (unfortunately, the movie largely skips going into this in any serious way).
Free listening is just as important a concept as free speech. I get to decide who and what I listen to.

It may be good for me to hear an uncomfortable truth, but ultimately I get to decide whether I listen or not. If I want to live in an echo chamber, I can do so, but it should be my choice. Equally if I want to hear uncomfortable opposing views, I should be able to. (Somewhere. Not necessarily on Reddit.com. The site's owners can publish whatever they want.)

This is true in practice, because as a last resort I can put my fingers in my ears and say “la la la not listening” loudly. So frankly, advertisers should give up trying to force me to see their adverts — they can't — and persuade me to listen instead.
My go-to list is this one from interviewing.io: http://blog.alinelerner.com/how-to-interview-your-interviewe...
Do you know where to find their emails? I'd like to weigh in as well.
I disagree with your first line of defense, but I do that on more general discussion.

You are on solid ground otherwise. :D

Norms, established members, and the concepts of owning our end of a discussion, as well as weighing what others say can do wonders for general fuckery.
... And yet they give 24h notice.

Yeah, right, this is definitely not being used to affect the share price!
That's fair. I've talked to some people working in retail who mentioned that some people abused the policy mercilessly.
How is the CPU in these? I have an X220 with the i5 Broadwell (I think, model 2450m) and the CPU is mostly fine. The Core 2 Duo in the T60 seems to be a quite a step down, though...
It looks like there's 512GB of space committed, but contains less than 256GB of content. There is no protection against the hidden volume being overwritten, if the content in the explicit volume grows too large.
is it common for DNS hosts to provide delegated access at the granularity of individual records?

I don't want my webserver to have the ability to change my entire zonefile just so it can authorise certificates!
> In the case when you die, but your brain still exists, and it starts processing it again in a new host (computer or organic), isn't that not you anymore?

I've yet to come across any evidence of a "self" that exists outside a brain.

> Is this a solved philosophical problem for which literature exists?

It's a problem that was hypothesized (and not solved) by philosophy, but as far as I know there's no evidence the problem exists.

You can hypothesize any number of problems but if there isn't any evidence they exist, there's not much urgency in solving these problems.

What if invisible monsters are breeding all around us and building up numbers before they wipe out the human race? There's equal evidence that this could be happening, and the consequences are more immediately dire, so perhaps we should discuss that first?
I'm happy to accept ~pc86's correction up above, but I disagree with this rebuttal. The risk is minuscule in the absolute sense (several hundred fatalities per billion miles), and if you are driving drunk (or tired, or on painkillers, or while texting), your odds of collision certainly go up.

But just because you aren't doing those things, doesn't make you any less at risk from other people doing those things. You are still on the road, surrounded by, in some areas, hundreds or thousands of deadly machines operated by people who are generally almost capable of handling them.

I just finished an excellent book on this, "A Deadly Wandering", which examines distracted driving specifically but also touches on a few other related subjects. In the primary case that the book follows, and in the few others it mentions, distracted drivers walked away from wrecks where they had killed innocent other passengers or motorists.

Being in a car (or bike, or motorcycle) on the road is one of the most dangerous things the average person does on a regular basis.
Admittedly no, but considering AMD is up ~3.85% as of this writing, I'm not sure I'd have benefitted from doing so.
> It's really unfortunate the posix link() system call takes a pair of paths. It should really take an inode.

You can do something like this on Linux for open file descriptors via linkat(..., AT_EMPTY_PATH). However, you need the CAP_DAC_READ_SEARCH capability, which limits its usefulness.
Not at the kind of resolution you'd want to be using on, e.g., Twitch. In that setting, you could just use chromakey, though? That's '70s technology, cheap and very reliable.
Well there was a big community push a while ago to have the new AMD cpus have an option to disable the PSP.

I'm gonna wishfully think this was intentionally done to allow us to disable the PSP.
They are not the only CA that issues certificates for free. For example, AlwaysOnSSL[0] was on HN a few days ago[1], with some important differences (as pointed out in the HN comments)

[0] https://alwaysonssl.com/

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16566031
Assuming there is a cost, the trade off is reduced money to your heirs or charity.

So while it is non-zero, that doesn’t mean it’s worth the cost. That’s why I brought up backups.

Remember Zip drives for backup? Imagine if there was no reader at time of launch. And how likely it was to build the reader without any changes to spec that the existing Zip disk could be used to restore without any problems. Even with read and write available, those things didn’t work well. You could say “0% chance of restore if you don’t buy, but non-zero if you do buy; therefore buy.” But that only works if the cost is zero.
https://techcrunch.com/2009/09/01/salesforce-launches-lightw...

salesforce shutdown desk.com and invites user to salesforce Lightweight Contact Manager
> Maybe you noticed how much advertisment squarespace...do

I would intuitively estimate that about 15% of educational youtube videos are sponsored by Squarespace.
So it's not just a matter of "scratching your own itch", a lot of it is politics.

Absolutely. I don't personally believe that open source projects are above criticism - just explaining why the question was likely asked.
What's the use case for this? Is this for crypto sensitive code or password matching that is vulnerable to timing attacks and such? Or is this for avoiding things like Spectre in a more general sense?
Although I would not feel immortal knowing that a copy of me would live forever, I would if I could gradually replace each of my neurons with invulnerable* synthetic ones.

* which grew and pruned themselves the same as organic ones
That has to be balanced against the potential pain for users who will be accessing that software whilst vulnerable to having that information snooped or modified. Perhaps for social engineering purposes, perhaps to serve up the latest zero-day, perhaps just for the lulz... who knows?

SSL has a history of being a pain in the ass. There are a lot of pain in the ass implementations out there. Everyone gets that.

At the same time, it's never been easier, and basic care for what you're serving your users demands taking that extra step. What Google is doing amounts to disclosing something that's an absolute fact. Plain HTTP is insecure (in the most objective and unarguable way possible), and it is unsuitable for most traffic given the hostile nature of the modern web.

Do you want your users being intercepted, engineered, or served malware on? If the answer is no, secure it. The equation is that simple. Any person or group of people who in 2018 declines to secure their traffic is answering that question in the affirmative and should be treated accordingly!

That's not "zealotry" friend, that's infosec 101.
I agree on the premise of moving the market but they don't necessarily need to be only short sellers, they could have hedged both ways and still made money.

They could have exercised puts if it went down (which it did in the morning) or bought stock/calls both before the site release and in the case of it going down because they knew it wouldn't be a concern or dispelled by AMD.

Unless, this is truly a flaw and in that case, they can still buy more puts and just wait for AMDs official response.
The team behind Detectron have published an enormous amount of really good research, but the Detectron codebase struck me as "good research code" rather than something you'd ideally want in production.
Wow that’s really entitled behavior. When you buy something, the intention is for you to own that item. It isn’t a trial period meant to facilitate an in-home shopping experience. It’s tacky to make it a habit of regularly returning things where the reason for the return could have been prevented.

It costs a lot of money to process returns for a retailer, and that cost is often written down. It’s meant to be an exception during the sales process (not a normal condition) and offered as a curtosey, not a defacto right.
If you're interested in that question, you might want to take a look at a game called SOMA.
There was a recent one in Canada where the folks running the lottery were arranging for themselves or their friends to win.
I concur with this, and also add that the smaller winnings accrued along the way adds to their sense of validation.

They spend $1000 on tickets, and the day where their next $5 ends up winning them $100 on a scratch-off makes it all worth it.
I don't feel too bad about it. If economic growth stays even slightly positive it won't take too many generations for our descendants to be unimaginably more wealthy than we are. They can put up with our brain banks and dry their tears with their one dollar notes that are worth $1,000 in 2018 dollars.
What is the plan to make money off this? Sell what you read in my emails? Charge me a monthly fee at some point? Also my initial reaction was that I wasn't aware that composing an email is slow.
Wow, that document is really informative. Thanks for sharing that. Great point about not-liking-it being an insufficient threshold for returns.

If I were blocked from returning things due to returning, say, a camera or a trio of phone cases that weren't the right ones, and then later had a defective washing machine or monitor, it seems like Code 53 (Not as Described or Defective
Merchandise) would be a valid reason for a return, though.

But, as others have said ... this seems like a compelling reason not to even be a customer.
I had forgotten about this. I bet I subsciously used it.

I was actually thinking of Logan’s Run when writing my comment.
"Seriously, who decides to employ those dialogs?"

Usually some out of touch marketing, SEO, advertising, etc. person. Most web developers aren't the decision makers in situations like this.
We're basically opposed to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splinternet

We have "too-big-to-fail" companies running all of the services that most sites and users depend on, which they can shut down at any time with little-to-no repercussions (Google in particular is notorious for this). We've got governments erecting their own firewalls to shut down opposing views. We've got ads, trackers, and biased algorithms that help ensure you stumble upon their sponsored content.

Of course this sort of stuff should arise "naturally" by man, but we can do better.
> developers who just want their software to work.

Those devs are gonna be really surprised when they find out that unencrypted connections are routinely tampered with.

> they either don't know or don't care about all the effort and pain they're creating

You have not been paying attention to the hundreds of tools available to make HTTPS painless.

> until someone at Big G decided they weren't.

And Mozilla. And countless research papers. And real-world attacks that are reported over and over again. The fact is that the global Web has become hostile, regardless of your prejudice against Google's Web security teams.

> In many cases the cost of the security is not worth it.

The problem is that it's not YOUR security, it's other people's. If websites don't implement HTTPS, it's the users of
the Web who pay the price. It's their privacy being deprived. And the website becomes easy to impersonate and manipulate, increasing the liability of having a website. HTTP is bad news all around.
Michael Hendricks' take is the best:

>
“Burdening future generations with our brain banks is just comically arrogant. Aren’t we leaving them with enough problems?” Hendricks told me this week after reviewing Nectome’s website. “I hope future people are appalled that in the 21st century, the richest and most comfortable people in history spent their money and resources trying to live forever on the backs of their descendants. I mean, it’s a joke, right? They are cartoon bad guys.”

We are on the verge of great shifts in climate and energy resources. Millions of humans are already migrating across continents in search of food security and an escape from perpetual war. We're already seeing climate refugees from vulnerable island nations, consumed by the rising seas. Entire governments have been toppled in the Arab Spring, replaced with authoritarian regimes installed to protect the borders of the west.

And a few of the richest people in human history are using their unimaginable resources to try to live forever.
Never read it, but I just looked it up and will order it soon. Gotta make sure we don't make the same mistakes ;)
Definitely not something we're going after, haha!
He was 68. Folks die without Putin involvement sometimes. Especially Russians who lived thru the nineties, with all the excesses of that time.
Implementing FizzBuzz on an FPGA
The only hitch? The parts weren’t approved for installation on an aircraft. “I said, put the button on,” Neller told the National Defense Industrial Association last week. “Print a bag of them and hang them there.”

This is a great story about disruption. The Marines seem to be on top of trying to continue thinking outside the box. That turns out to be very difficult to do in any large, old organization. I heard an interview with the Commandant last week. They asked him what kind of tech he wanted most.

"Better batteries"

Bingo. Better batteries would change everything, not just the Marine Corps. There are few technologies like batteries. Cost-to-orbit tech is one of them. If we change those technologies, we change the entire rest of the economy. I believe the service used to call things like that "force multipliers". It's neat to see 3D printing _perhaps_ becoming a force multiplier in many areas.

Putting on my cynic hat, expect to see a lot of pushback form the establishment where this technology disrupts the most. Those folks with button standards aren't going to go down peacefully.
> So no matter what you think, the one from a minority is certainly preferable for hiring?

I think the idea is to include as best as possible what may be hard to assess factors such as difference of experience, culture and upbringing and using that, make a decision as the hirer who you think will benefit the company best, not to choose a person and then override who you think is best just because of one factor.

All this really takes is valuing an outside perspective. An yes, sometimes just the skin color can be enough, if that skin color has affected how people see them or any unique problems it has come with. That does mean it is or must be enough though, just that it may be something worth including.

As a simple example, I'll leave you this: How We Accidentally Made a Racist Videogame.[1] It should be easy to see how a slightly more diverse group of developers and/or QA testers could have avoided that problem. Similar things exist with dealing with other cultures or countries, or people with disabilities, or if you're really unlucky, just people of the other sex if you're unlucky enough to have that much of a homogeneous set of coworkers.

1: http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2017/01/12/how-we-accidentally-made-...
If you are following the recommended practices, it's every 2 months, and ACME would have to be down for a solid month. I think that's fairly unlikely
(async () => { const result = await Promise.reject(1).catch(e => e); return result; })()

// =>Promise {<resolved>: 1}

As you can see, the variable contains a promise returned by the .catch. It's not equivalent to try/catch (in that case the variable won't be defined for one thing), but it does allow for error handling without using try/catch if one is inclined to do so.

In practice, I've been using async/await extensively in Node.js/Express, and I'm yet to write a single try/catch. In Express, I simply use a wrapper function that catches promise rejections and siphons them to error handling middleware:

const asyncIt = fn => (req, res, next, ...args) => fn(req, res, next, ...args).catch(next);
Same here. But I use the ESR version which is still mantained with security updates, right now its at 52.7

For me, it's: save MAFF format, foxyproxy, downthemall, "Image and flash blocker", tab mix plus, self exploding cookies, Torrent Status Tool.

It's sad.I guess I'm getting old and grumpy.
Nope, never. Also, to clarify my earlier comment, I have never scanned a receipt QR code code with a walmart app, and I'm pretty sure that I have never scanned one with any other app, either.
I think people are constantly misreading Putin OBAMA included. The guy is executing his plan step by step he should not be underestimated.
Or Logan's Run.

(Ritual suicide embedded in culture, age 21 in the novel and 30 in the film)
If consumer use of the web focuses on a handful of sites, then, effectively, the web is centralized. At least with regard to the article.

How to improve/fix? Some random thoughts I have had of late:

• Disallow comments on YouTube. What honestly would we lose?

• Users can delete their Facebook accounts (I did)
Is it still you when you wake up every day?

What about after general anesthesia?

You only know you are you because of your memories. The future brain will have the memories, so it will think it's you, just like you think today that you are the same you that were awake 3 days ago and 10 years ago.

Are you afraid of nonexistence when you fall asleep, and envy the tommorow's you that he will live in your body and get to see what the future brings?

I don't think there's much difference between these scenarios - the conciousness is interrupted in both cases.
"Not as Described" generally covers "unsatisfied". The return policy being not as described may even qualify.

Visa tends to side with the cardholder on chargebacks more than is probably fair, too.
> Unfortunately, this technique is not guaranteed to work. Even if you write, flush then rename, the OS and disk may decide to apply these operations in a different order, breaking your guarantee.

I've heard about lying disks, but do you know of any that are still being sold today? My impression was this isn't really a thing anymore.

I don't think the OS lies if you're sufficiently careful: write the new file, fsync it, fsync the _directory_, then rename. [edit: on OS X, use F_FULLFSYNC. grr.] Now it's guaranteed that the filename has either the old or new contents. Another fsync on the directory to guarantee it's the new. I'd be interested in any evidence to the contrary.
Well, after doing a little more research it seems that if they had any overlap, it would have been exceedingly brief. Hubble was working on his first paper at Yerkes in 1915 just at a time when a number of older astronomers, including my great-grandfather, were retiring.
I'm a fan of effects, and I think they would work great for Rust. (I/O just probably wouldn't be one of them, or else it would be "on by default" like `Sized`.)

I'm not sure how they'd give you a unified mechanism to implement these kinds of things, though. The Monad typeclass lets you implement new instances in libraries. Is there any work on defining effects like async/await in libraries? If so I imagine they'd still have to use something like continuations.
I'm not disagreeing with you, just saying that there are both benefits and costs to having rules.
Well you can happily use other CAs if you want to 1. Pay money and 2. manage certs manually. As you did/do it always.
How does this compare with running AWS Lambda's on CloudFront?

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonCloudFront/latest/Develope...
Why Is US Health Care So Expensive? Some of the Reasons Turn Out to Be Myths
That is one of my concerns, too. I think that they must have used the CC info.
These guys are essentially more black hat than white hat
Would you pay 5% of your net worth for a 10% chance of recovery?
It doesn't sound a whole lot different than my current living situation or former living situations. I currently rent a bedroom in a 3 bedroom apartment with 3 other people, share a shower with one roommate, and keep 99% of my possessions in my room because my roommates like to party and I don't want stuff stolen or broken. It's not a great situation for dating or being social and I have to be extremely efficient with space, but the room works well as an affordable place to crash after work.
> and state sales tax and fees will not be reimbursed

Does this imply they just pocket the sales tax or receive it as a refund in some way?
> Wow that’s really entitled behavior. When you buy something, the intention is for you to own that item. It isn’t a trial period meant to facilitate an in-home shopping experience. It’s tacky to make it a habit of regularly returning things where the reason for the return could have been prevented.

Actually, quite a few of clothing retailers advertise with that.

Most famously Zalando ran constant TV ads everywhere here for a few months promoting the "buy, if you don't like it, send it back".
I really don't know if I agree with yours. As a developer in a rural area, while there are certainly jobs for programmers, they are never advertised. You have to find them by word of mouth. It could easily take more than a week just to discover what jobs are available.

Moving isn't realistic within the span of a week. Remote might be an option, but brings its own challenges.
This is stupid. Facebook, reddit, twitter are trying to make the internet this beautiful family friendly place. This is bullshit, we as humans are toxic. This is the way we function. This is the way react on things. Censoring all of this might affect things we should not censor. Fuck family friendlyness if it has a chance to affect free speech.