skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have discussed it at length with the USAA insurance people, I expect there are policy documents on their web site. The exact discussion was, "If the source of the fire is tracked back to a leaking gas can or a propane tank we won't cover the loss, we recommend you store flammables in a shed away from your house."

My impression from them was they were very dubious about "off book" uses of things as well, which leads to my expectation that they would push back on covering a loss due to a "home made" battery wall. Could I sue them and get them to cover it? I don't know, perhaps. But, as with my propane tanks, I would keep this stuff out away from the house to limit my losses and avoid having to go there.
>They're not governments, they're companies.

You're right, it's important to note they are more powerful and exercise more control over the lives of their employees than many governments, though employees often have the same opportunity to leave their company as they do their government (none).

>It isn't, unless your definition of "personal rights" includes "things I personally want which are neither codified in, nor protected by, laws."

Yes that's literally exactly what personal rights always means. Legal rights are legal rights, personal rights are a conception of what the person who uses the term wants or believes rights to be.
Recording audio and bugging offices is a completely different matter than reading through already preserved text that exists on company infrastructure (email or slack conversations). The records already exist in the case we're talking about.

Presumably the victim would share the harassing messages, but by being able to review the records directly the supervisors can gain more information such as whether the harasser was also harassing others, whether there was coordination between multiple people, or even if the original shared messages were missing some context which would vindicate the accused harasser. There's a lot of reasons why a real investigation will bring up more information than a simple one sided copy/paste would.
One of my friends runs a game shop. He told me a wealthy surgeon would come in weekly and buy $5,000 worth of baseball cards - either as singles, boxes of unopened packs, or whatnot. I remarked that the surgeon must really enjoy the hobby. He replied that the surgeon looked exceptionally distraught every time he made a purchase, but did so regardless.

It's just anecdata, but being able to support an addiction doesn't mean you have control over it, nor that you're happy about having it.

Speaking of which, it's time for me to get off HN and do some real work.
Really impressed about what Karl Sims managed to get out of 1994 hardware. I had no clue these kind of high res/fps renderings were possible back then!

I'm also very impressed on how life-like these models move. I think a lot of it is because of the high framerate.
The v1, at least, wasn't great for action. It has 10 focal planes, but they cover a fairly small range of distances, so it still needed an autofocus to get the range of focal lengths to be centered on the subject. And that autofocus was pretty slow, even slower than what I'm used to on an SLR.

I'd assume the Illum (which I've never had a chance to play with) would be way better on that front.
Exploring Session-Level Google Analytics Data with MapD
The tech behind catching the Austin serial bomber
if a given group has significant power to prevent another group from pursuing life, lib, and happiness.

Viewed from that angle, it becomes clear why antidiscrimination laws favoring AA in traditionally Cauc challenges are legal

I'm not sure it's a good idea to enshrine the idea that "Cauc" have an inherent power over "AA" into law. This seems close to running afoul of Equal Protection.
It’s sad how many bullshit decisions were buldozed by “because legal” excuse. By that logic eveything should be recorded everywhere — including bathrooms.
The available evidence does not indicate a strong correlation between irreligiosity and criminality. Some studies have found that religious beliefs inhibit criminal behaviour, but systematic studies do not indicate that atheists or agnostics commit more crime. It is worth noting that only 0.2% of the US prison population identify as being atheist. Globally, there is a strong negative correlation between religiousity and homicide, although this is substantially confounded by levels of economic development.

http://sci-hub.la/10.1111/j.1751-9020.2009.00247.x
Friction. Yes they could use PGP messages. But most people are idiots and use the systems that are available and simple. If somebody needs to think "I've got to go through these extra steps to be an asshole" then they might think twice in the first place.
Hadn't thought they were actually Americans, since it's usually critical of the US. That explains why they never mention which country they're from.
Never mind the walls: what about the people equipped with literal ears?
Only on a global level. In Rotterdam, Antwerp and Brussels and Amsterdam and even Paris is very close this is now fact among the very young (kindergarten). That means that it's only a matter of time unless something drastic changes. But it would need to be very drastic. Even if immigration stops completely muslims will still be a majority there, at the very latest in 30 years, but very likely much sooner.

And ...

www.ejournals.eu/pliki/art/3178/

Religion has always retreated while great economic progress was being made. And time and time again great economic progress periods ... end. And time and time again ... nobody sees it coming, and time and time again the exact same thing happens : religion comes back with a vengeance.

Even in this current period. Where economic progress crashed, an extremely intolerant brand of religion immediately gained an incredible following. Google "Egypt in the 60s". Google "Iran under the Shah". Google "Turkey under Ataturk".

Now this may or may not be happening soon (and soon means something like a decade), but that's another one of those things people think during periods of great economic progress. That they never end. That it's impossible for anything to go wrong. But I must say, even today, one walk around the North station of Brussels through Schaarbeek and Molenbeek will tell you that it's not going so well for everybody, especially if you stop in a street shop for dinner (note: sorry to state this but do not attempt in the evening if you're a woman).
> imply privacy

Workplace provided communication mechanisms do not in any way imply privacy. Best practices are that staff sign an acknowledgement of such, so that there is no such confusion.
From what I understand, Airborn.io has the advantages of being Open Source and respecting your privacy (by storing the data encrypted).
Does Netflix's existing wordmark use Netflix Sans (retroactively)? Will the wordmark be updated?

It wasn't clear in the article. It said "the arched cut on the lowercase “t” is apparently inspired by the “cinemascopic curve” of the brand’s wordmark". "Inspired by" suggests it is not an exact match.
Gosu.ai raises $1.9M to automate game training advice
I've found by experience - some of it very painful and transformative - that if I live according to certain moral standards then I'm more fulfilled and happy with myself. Call it a kind of long-term hedonistic justification, if you like.
Of course it can be solved! I was pointing out that the prior comment was incorrect.

If an employee is in possession of chat logs that if divulged will get them fired, they can simply delete the logs. "Sorry, the drive crashed. IT is working to fix it right now." Stepwise refinement to insecurely re-create security solutions is one of the reasons for many security vulnerabilities.

Logs are well understood, and logging of sensitive information is not just a small technical issue but a security issue. The same way that people shouldn't design their own crypto, when people design logging mechanisms for sensitive data, which is seemingly simple, they will almost always introduce these security errors, as in your post.

Unfortunately, there are also a number of legal issues (and possibly compliance issues) that need to be accounted for from redaction to anonymity and from GDPR to encryption.
> Don't have personal conversations on your company Slack!

You may be discussing unionization on your company Slack, though, and the employer may now use that against you. There’s a lot more than strictly work-related content, and strictly private content. A huge grey area is inbetween, and the employer shouldn’t be able to access any of them (and as the ECHR ruled, the employer may now)
Strong evidence that page size directly affects search rankings
Which comes just in time for the Lytro acquisition rumors:

https://www.androidcentral.com/google-reportedly-buying-lytr...
Well yes, this is a good idea, democratization of the workplace and worker co-ops generally promote better quality of life for employees and the surrounding community, less exploitation, less corruption, more justice and similar or better efficiency as the normal dictatorial corporate model.
ok, quite helpful, thanks!
Those who complain that nothing has been done about China seem to be unaware of export control, Wassenaar Arrangement and CFIUS.
Note that the ECHR has jurisdiction over the European Convention on Human Rights, which is attached to the Council of Europe, which is a pan-European organization that provides the "lower end" of protection in Europe. Even Russia is a member of the COE.

The EU, on top of requiring COE/ECHR membership provides additional protections under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The highest court for EU law is the European Court of Justice, not the ECHR.

Then on top of that, a number of EU/EEA countries have much stricter rules, some are outlined in the article.

So it's technically right in that it is legal in signatories to the ECHR provided they are not covered by other, stricter rules via one of the other routes, and many are.
Is the state eternal or not (ie is it immutable)? Will the state typically change at the same time as some other state (like an address, or stuff related to some other event)?
Uber Is Ripping Off Frequent Riders and Here’s How to Avoid It
Do you think you will go over every single DM to see if your employees are doing this? That's insane amount of time wasted. How do you think you will capture all of that? AI? Good luck. We had a system in my previous job that highlighted conversations which had keywords and we just abused it by mentioning those keywords constanly in "relevant" contexts. And if you really wanted to get the password (one of the monitored keywords) you'd just say: "Can you give me the details for ..."
They have invited us (my wife and I) a couple of times but we have always declined as I don't share the belief that binds them together as a community. I would probably get bored and perhaps a bit "eye-rolly", since I like them being my friends that probably wouldn't be a good idea.

I would never try to say that they are wrong as, while I referred to myself as an atheist in my first comment, I can't prove God doesn't exist in the same way they can't prove God does. I am not well read on the subject but to me Atheism requires just as much faith that something doesn't exist as religious people have that something does exist. It's not so much that I believe there is no God, I just don't have enough evidence so have decided that there is nothing beyond us. If I get to the gates on my death and it turns out I was wrong then I will hope that God is forgiving and sees I worked with the information I had available and got it wrong.

I agree that I think a large shared belief is probably beneficial but not sure how we can create something in todays world.
There's a 3rd alternative. I recently signed a non-compete, but hired a lawyer to write an exception to the non-compete for my own nights & weekends startup. As part of that process, the company hiring me and asking for the non-compete agreement had to agree that my startup was not currently competing.

It was some of the best money I ever spent, and it allowed me peace of mind, and also allowed me to sign the company's contract, so there was some peace of mind for them as well. The language of my non-compete (and most non-competes I've seen) is so vague that just writing any kind of software for someone else could be seen to violate the agreement.
Every thing you can think of has been misused at some point in (not necessarily American) history.
Unfortunately, my courses seem to have the opposite problem, but at least there's always Wikipedia.
You can also use ORDPATH[1], which is built for tree structures but should work just as well for a flat list as it does support "in-between inserts."

[1]: http://www.dbis.informatik.hu-berlin.de/fileadmin/lectures/W...
The European Court of Human Rights recently ruled that an employee's communication may not be monitored without prior notice and without specific reasons. [1]

This ruling applies not only to the whole EU, but to the 47 member states of the Council of European, including for example Russia and Turkey.

[1] https://www.coe.int/en/web/human-rights-rule-of-law/-/echr-m...
A little off topic, but there is a plan for an official recovery from lineageos?

TWRP is fine, but full device encryption is not supported on all device that are supported by lineageos, and also it dosen't seem to support OTA update from lineageos updater.

ps: Thanks for the AWESOME work!
See "Can I post a job ad?" at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
> If two people want to have a private conversation

You response is based on a false fact: that anything you use official company communication channels for should be considered private.

HR functions can and will access such communication to investigate complaints about behaviour and similar. Compliance and legal functions can and will access such communication to investigate complaints relevant to them. They can, will, and often must provide access to such communication to relevant external bodies (legal authorities, regulators) under some circumstances too. Heck, in some regulated environments compliance functions are required not just to view your communications for specific reasons but to actively monitor them for certain activity (if they fail to do so they could be liable for punishments for a due diligence failing). For instance our email is monitored to block distribution of client data, accidental or otherwise.

If you want a private conversation, use a truly private channel not an employer provided/related one.

> they'll just find another means by which to do it

The fact that people will find away around rules, restrictions, and monitoring, is not a good reason for not implementing such rules, restrictions, and monitoring in the first place.

If the private conversation is in no way a problem then, well, there isn't a problem.

If it is something that would cause the participants trouble if performed over an official channel then when/if the matter does come to light it shows malice of forethought and planning (i.e. that the participants knew they were in the wrong and took specific action to hide their behaviour rather than correct it).

> I would quit a job

In many (most?) industries you would not even get a job without explicitly agreeing to the fact that your communications using employer provided/related services can be accessed by some functions of the organisation and distributed to external authorities, so you would not be in a position to need to quit.
Well, if you work at Google anyway.
That's funny because there is another book [1] with exactly the same title and also about computer security, although it predates the one you mention by a decade.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Tangled-Web-Securing-Modern-Applicati...
> Can I post a job ad?

Please don't post job ads as submissions to HN.

A regular "Who Is Hiring?" thread appears on the first weekday of each month. Most job ads are welcome there. But only an account called whoishiring is allowed to submit the thread itself. This prevents a race to post it first.

The other kind of job ad is reserved for YC-funded startups. These appear on the front page, but are not stories: they have no vote arrows, points, or comments. They begin part-way down, then fall steadily, and only one should be on the front page at a time.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
It's less efficient storage-wise, sure, but there's no "occasionally take the hit of shifting" problem.
It's easy to ignore the ads if you know they are ads. What about sponsered content in movies, music, tv, news, etc? We have seen all of these used. The drive to promote a message to someone goes waay beyond advertising.
> If two people want to have a private conversation,

Emphasis is mine. If one person can have a private conversation with an unwilling participant, that is entirely different. I have worked in places with heavy logging requirements, and for sure we created ways to have private conversations. The point is that everyone in these private chats was a willing participant, and could leave if they wanted.
I had assumed they already did this.
One of the benefits of Postgres is having user-defined extensions like this that are effectively drop-in. Yeah, it's a trade-off. The whole submission is a discussion of the trade-offs between various implementations. One I'd make is using a custom datatype rather than custom PL/pgSQL functions (and I've written my share of those, including in this domain—they can be tough to get right in all of the edge cases) as the type is likely more efficient and correct.
Sure, but then the communication doesn’t happen in the space where your boss is partially responsible for what's happening there.

It’s very simple: use your employers tools and networks only for business stuff, do personal stuff unrelated to work in your own networks and software...

Besides that, just in case you didn’t notice, the original poster did not say hes reading employee private messages for fun, but only to act as law prescribes.
You realize this has far more to do with than workplace harassment, right? Have you never heard of employees using a competitors proprietary information? Or arranging fraudulent financial transactions to cover losses? Or discussing how to mislead investors or watchdog agencies? What do you expect this company to do when they are involved in a legal dispute like this, and have to explain to the court why they have company sanctioned, un-auditable computer systems/applications that helped their employees break serious state and national laws?
Show HN: Modern Altcoin's Mining Pool
Discretion still has its place, but that's different from privacy and compliance.

Most admins aren't going to spend all day reading other people's conversations, and good companies have explicit policies as to when they will do so. The thing we're discussing here isn't whether companies should spy on everything their employees do- it's about what happens when an issue does occur where they do need to look into things.

I would not work for a company where I thought my managers were looking over my shoulder at every single thing I was doing, but at the same time I would not refuse to work for a company just because they could look into my conversations if I was accused of wrongdoing.

People are also ignoring another aspect of this- if a company does get sued by an outside party they have to make internal data available through discovery. These laws about corporate compliance also exist to make it so corporations can be held accountable.
Not everybody is going to send one time pad private key encrypted messages using a 1000 characater password.

It turns out that having access to slack alone would probably catch 95% of situations.
> If a government directly does it, it's not called terrorism.

Considering that the modern use of “terrorist” and “terrorism” traced back directly to description of actors and actions associated with the Terror in Revolutionary France, that would be erroneous. It's true that much of the modern focus is on international terrorism (which necessarily excludes internal state terrorism, which is a form of intranational terrorism), state terrorism remains a significant thing (both internationally and internally.)
Google can read your documents, if I understand correctly. Airborn can't.

Whether that's important to you, only you can judge.
Businesses are society, we are forced to spent the vast majority of our waking life under the thumb of one so we should absolutely decide how we want that life to go.
I agree with the concept of free-range parenting, and I see where you're coming from re. civil offenses for frivolous reports, but that carries the burden with it that perhaps some things that should be reported will go unreported. Isn't the reverse better?
And if the harassment itself wasn't over Slack, but just the discussions of it between 2 harassers, then what?
The idea the homeowners insurance doesn't cover the homeowner being negligent or stupid seems to betray a misunderstanding of what homeowners insurance is generally used for, namely protecting the mortgage lender from a catastrophic loss of the property's value.
+1 on this. This is one of the things I also haven't been able to find replacement for outside of FB yet.
I guess it might be because it it almost too simple of a problem, to easy so no one makes a solution all can come together on. All an event mostly is is a message thread to which you can pin some information about when and where, right? In that case I would almost say the functionality is probably already there. Just that we have to change how we do things.
No one is watching you or treating you like a child. This is important for security and legal reasons.

Insider threat is a serious, real world problem - consider employee harassment, exfiltrating data, sharing secret information, a compromised slack account DM'ing people malware, etc.

No one wants to read your messages, and it's probably a small set of people that even can.
Yeah I think OP is highlighting the presence of the over-broad definition of neglect in the first place.
You can tell the person to fuck off, but if they call CPS then CPS still has to come talk to your kids. This happened to me as a child (not for being allowed to walk to school, but for something similarly dumb).
Replace "are using Slack" with "discussing at the bar across the street from the office" and what changes about the situation? If the company has an obligation to look into something, they have to look into it. They don't necessarily (and in my opinion shouldn't ever) have the need to, say, record audio of everything you ever do. What does the gray-er area of conversation in the break room at the office look like? What about the darker, gray-er area of conversation in the parking lot before you drive home at the end of the day?

My personal opinion, having avoided the MS IM client at work, is that you never say anything in writing that you wouldn't walk into the CEOs office and say to him in person. Chat of any kind, Slack included, is "in writing" and will have the same full force legal effect as email, so who's honestly surprised by this news?
I'm skeptical of your determination of Facebook's outlook based on your social circle, which is limited in size, geographical location, wealth, social status, and a bunch of factors.