skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
man intro pages, such as:

http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man1/intro.1.html

http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/intro.2.html

http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/intro.7.html

etc.
Can we start putting some blame on the developers the product managers and in general the IT team behind the facebook Android App?

Not only they executed it, they have thought of it, where to store it, how to download it etc.

It is not just Zuckerberg who is at fault.
Dropbox is a lot more than a GUI on top of rsync. Even purely from an engineering standpoint (ignoring product & design) that's incorrect.

You might enjoy this talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PE4gwstWhmc
While I'm sympathetic to your viewpoint and to a large degree share it, you are among a vanishingly small minority to not use a site or service just because of social login. 'jfaucett probably is fine sacrificing losing this small minority.
Someone forgot to take their soma. A gramme is better than giving a damn.
I wonder how these people even get out of bed considering it could be a slippery slope to murder or something in their overactive and moral-compassless imaginations. I still remember how just a few years ago people were saying legalizing gay marriage would lead to legalized bestiality, death camps for cis couples, required gender transitions for children, etc. Nothing like some hysteria from reactionaries.
Apps written by "mere mortals" probably can't get that information. But there's a whole API called "CoreTelephony" that's mostly gated behind an entitlement, http://iphonedevwiki.net/index.php/CoreTelephony.framework

I used to think Apple would never grant this entitlement to any other apps other than those that are builtin to iOS, but then there was that whole Uber framebuffer capture entitlement scandal...
Google location services can be disabled. And there is open Play Services reimplementation, microG.
Heres a lecture at MIT about Ada from a favorite programmer of mine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yXwnk8Cr0c

I do not understand the Medium authors definition of "success". I get similarly confused when web commentators use the term "won" (e.g., language X "won") when discussing programming languages. Won what?

IMO, the presenter (RIP) was quite successful. Im sure Ada "won" many contracts.
Ah yes, the old "maintain a good reputation by behaving honestly" scheme.
edit: misread
Yes and no: SESTA/FOSTA make business liable for certain criminal content on their platforms. But the Section 230 shield wasn't about liability in general, but rather about protecting you from an increase in liability as a result of moderation.

To use an analogy: Sec 230 is like a "Good Samaritan" law that protects people who try to help accident victims from liability for their actions. This is obviously good public policy, because many people are scared of being sued if they make any mistakes (or even if they don't), even though the evidence points overwhelmingly to a net positive effect of such attempts of help.

Backpage used Section 230 like a guy punching someone in the face and then claiming they were trying to protect them from the mosquito sitting on their nose.

The new law assigns liability if you are grossly negligent in allowing certain content to flourish on your platform.

But, the important point is: this liability is independent of any moderation platforms may or may not engage in. The attempt to moderate some content still does not increase your liability.
The list here:

https://support.google.com/docs/answer/148505?hl=en

has 13 items on it. Not exactly unreasonably long list to check, especially if you are in the porn industry where you should be aware that there are plenty of restrictions (justified or not) around porn. If you didn't happen to be aware of that, consider this a lesson learned the hard way.
Your project's awesome! Definite step up from a couple other tools that attempt to do the same thing. Came up with a couple good concepts for an idea I've been tooling around with for a while!
Help Us Cure Online Publishing of Its Addiction to Personal Data
Your ISP is a near-monopoly with vast wealth and political connections, and no trust to lose. A VPN is used by a much smaller group of people who will ditch them en masse if any hanky panky comes to light. There is a ton of competition in the VPN space, and they’re mostly selling the same product, so if they lose trust, they’re done.

TL;DR Very different incentives
Also KeePass and KeePassXC are listed among companies that will not delete your information.

I was not even aware that they kept some of my information. Which information do they keep? Which information about me they will not delete?
I listen to 4-5 hours of music per day (includes commute to/from work and being at work). I don't get how people don't listen to music for that long, music is wonderful...
I may be misremembering/totally off base, but didn't Android go through some rounds of "simplifying" or "renaming" permissions over the years to basically obfuscate and confuse? (Or have they always been terrible?)
Photoshop + Lightroom cost 12 euros. The CS price you mention is for all the apps in the creative cloud, not just the raster image editing bit, so that's unfair to compare $50/month to "alternative to krita or gimp".
12 euros per month is just 2 euros more than many of us here pay for lots of entertainment, such as music streaming services. It's well worth every penny spent just to not have to deal with the horror that's GIMP's UI.
It's a lot cheaper to get access to Photoshop than it used to be before the monthly licensing scheme.
Yup, as the article says, access patterns matter. A lot. Sequential is a lot faster than random.

My MacBook Pro does 2GB/s sequential to/from its SSD. That's 2 bytes every nanosecond. And that's a laptop.

I have to admit I am not sure what the fastest DRAM access times are these days, but I don't think much faster than 20ns. If you're only getting a byte per random access, that's around a factor 40 faster for sequential disk vs. random memory.
Three AI technologies that could make chatbots intelligent
> that song is a straight ripoff

No, it's not. The two songs are not even remotely similar. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16669049

> if you wrote out the score on a page and compared, the two songs wouldn't match up

That's because they are not even remotely similar.

> if you objectively compared the audio files you wouldn't find any samples of the former song in the latter either

That's because they are not even remotely similar.
This just in, water is still wet and cows moo. I don't get the profoundness here. I mean, if you're one of those stereotypical hollywood jocks from the 50s that's never read a book in his life until the age of 60...I mean sure... you found a "bitter truth". Yea, learning at a level beyond your local pub's trivia tournament or beyond the 5 minute youtube tutorial video is difficult and takes time. Most importantly, it takes effort. Always has been, always will be... until we get the Matrix style brain downloads to learn kung-fu. No one great in any field, that's worth looking up to, just dances around saying it's as easy as ordering a big mac from mcdonalds. They have more self-doubt and introspective analysis in an hour than most of the population has in a month, myself included.

Plenty of dead ends too when it comes to the path of greater knowledge. Learning and doing new things that you never needed for your goal. Welcome to scientific research of any caliber in any field. If you're lucky, you recorded the Earth shattering kabooms though. If it were easy to be "smart", then don't you think everyone would be "smart". Obviously we all define the terms smart, educated, learned, intelligent and !dumbass differently. But (I hope) you get the point of the context.

Anyways, I'm sure as shit late to the party by a few thousand years (at least) saying this since I've been hearing this from the time of... I don't know, forever in any field I gandered into more indepth. To recognize someone else as above average, or at least capable, they have humility and diligence towards educating themselves. Not complaining that it is difficult, but striving towards it because it is difficult. Most of us have heard similar at the projectile level of ad nauseum. Now I'm thinking it's not really said enough if people still think "learning is hard" after the age of 9 is news worthy. Getting really tired of teens with their "unique profound insight" that's been published since Socrates' time.
Coinbase Open Source Fund: Ruby Edition – The Coinbase Engineering Blog
Yes, you are right (and I was wrong). I admit I stopped reading when they suggested the media was being "ironic" (i. e. hypocritical) on the matter.
https://www.imgur.com/r/desirepath (I used to work at Imgur...)
"otherwise objectionable" is a catch-all.
No. Which company is more powerful with your information? That little ISP who has no real use of it, or Google, the most powerful ad agency with ties to American agencies in the world?

You may be able to bypass Google but almost everybody else won't.

It's time to open your eyes for what they are.
> We can't just keep on operating in a world where everything is free

Agreed! So let's pay fair and square, rather than them shuffling data around in a manner that is not completely transparent to us.
They had valued themselves at <10bn. That has doubled in 24 hours, thats definitely not positive, if not an ipo strategy
> Search

https://ddg.gg is as good as it gets.
The main factor I've noticed having an impact on the enjoyability of learning is: do I feel I have to learn the thing, or am I just choosing to?

It seems like the unpleasantness emerges from anxiety about potential failure to learn the material. If you don't actually need to (not just in terms of external things, but personally, too), then there is no need to fear failure.

The more necessary it is to learn the thing and the more uncertain you are of your capability of doing so, the more unpleasant it's going to be.
Coupons are a fascinating business, with a lot of middlemen taking cuts. From the agency that creates the advertising campaign (and possibly books the media) to the media platforms that display the coupons (whether inserts in physical papers, direct mail flyers, digital coupons via coupons.com/Quotient and retailer sites and emails, etc). Plus the clearinghouses that process the physical coupons for retailers, and the processors that handle the financial aspect of cutting a check from the manufacturer to the clearinghouse and onto the retailer for the redeemed coupons.

There are a few big names in each of those sections; but "doing the coupons" is an entire process that sets off a chain of necessary suppliers, rather than just a single name like Google.
> People hate the other side more than they love their side I find.

I think that's true, especially because often their views aren't very well reflected by "their side's" pundits, it's just the lesser of two evils.
I don't have a Facebook account because I am not fond of them. But then, in Vietnam Facebook is big because it does two good things. First, it brings unofficial news to everyone -- you can follow political dissidents. In the past, people had to figure out to get over the firewalls to get to those sources of news. Second, it opens commercial niche retail channels for free to many people: You can find people selling really weird stuff online that you can't find anywhere. For now, it's still a net-positive for many people in the country and many political dissidents are happy to publish their voices on Facebook.

Now with that in mind, Facebook compiled to the Vietnamese government's requests to put their servers in Vietnam (alongside with Google) [1]. The problem is, while Google was never blocked, in the past in Vietnam, Facebook was blocked (more precisely, blocked intermittently). I don't imagine it was hard for the government to block it completely. Let's be honest, no one will join a social network if it requires you to have a VPN to access it. Why wasn't Facebook blocked anymore, all out of the sudden? The whole buddy buddy/kowtow gesture of Zuckerberg to Xi didn't help my confidence and trust either. It's very chilling to see a person with little ethical compass like him to have such an enormous amount of power.

I don't know what is more horrible, them turning in to the government the data of "dumb fucks" following dissidents' news and manipulating them, or people having to figure out how to access news via VPNs like it was in the past. At least, I know not every VPN providers give enough fucks about that country to comply with its government's request. Google was known to be kicked out of China for not complying. Can't say the same thing about Facebook.

But then, I can't do anything about any of that stuff, so I might be ok with it.

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u...
The language is very anti-ergonomic in terms of shift key. This plus emacs can destroy your tendons:

with Text_IO;
use Text_IO;
procedure Hello is
begin
Put_Line("Hello, World!");
end Hello;

I subscribe firmly to the school of thought that as programmers, we are not optimizing for keystrokes... but man oh man having to type capital-Put underscore capital-Line instead of just print or printf, 50 times a day. Yikes.
You seem ... to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps.... Their power [is] the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.

-- Thomas Jefferson
Industrial espionage is already covered by IP laws. Do you really think copyright and patents only apply to hollywood?
I've been thinking about this for the last couple of days, and it's definitely a hard problem -- even with steering wheel sensors and eye tracking, it doesn't stop people zoning out and not being ready to react.

I did wonder if you could require the driver to make control inputs that aren't actually used to control the car but are monitored for being reasonably close to how the computer is controlling the car, and then the automation disengages (with a warning) if the driver is not paying sufficient attention. I then realised that may be _worse_ - in the event of a problem, the driver would have to switch to real inputs that override, which may delay action and not be something they do automatically. It would mean they are paying attention more to see if the automation is making errors where they have more time to react though (e.g. sensor failure that is causing erratic behaviour but not led to an emergency situation).

I wonder if a hybrid approach might be viable -- fake steering is used to ensure that the driver is alert and an active participant, but the driver hitting the brakes immediately takes effect and disengages the automation.
I'm not convinced.

For the site owner, they can even more easily pick social login.

As for safety, it's just as hard for a hacker to guess my email password then my website password, what is the difference? Not to mention that if my phone is around you might be able to see the URL from the lock screen, and if God forbid my phone (or even laptop, but it never happens) is unlocked my email client is accessible at all times without a password).
ISPs collecting data means ISPs selling data to corporations like Google, so the concern is still the same.
> those ads are from real companies or organisations - they aren't fake bots or astroturf groups algorithmically designed to tell me what I want to hear.

How do you know this? As far as we know Google was also used to spread misinformation by Russian entities in the elections [1]. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Google invented targeted advertising. Hell, this is the company that boasted about A/B testing shades of blue to earn themselves $200m [2].

Sidenote: Google doesn't have access to your social information or what you "like", which was the reason behind Google+ and the big push to integrate it with Gmail and Youtube. The fact Google failed to get the same breath of social and preference information Facebook has doesn't mean they're more concerned with privacy, it just means they were late to the game and failed.

Google is more zealous about keeping its data to its own though.

[1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/10/09...

[2]: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/05/why-googl...
The content that's being discussed in the article is being created by the uploader. If it's being detected by an automated system, it's a disturbingly intelligent one.
Worth noting the last reference run is on an AWS t2.micro system -- which is a "burstable" CPU instance.

For something IO-driven (sequential reads) that probably works fine. When you don't have CPU the IO can buffer. The largest file was 33MB, which I presume EBS handles pretty easily.

For something CPU-Memory-driven (memory reads) this bursting could hurt a lot more. Particularly if the CPU decides to page. Plus I wonder if these burstable CPUs throw out the TLB all the time. In this case a reused disk buffer may well be a lot better.

For the Macbook Air 2012 - You might see that the SSD has a buffer that is bigger than the files being processed. Certainly will be pretty fast. Particularly on repeat runs.

Neither diminishes the overall point of the article - which is you should benchmark your own scenarios.
GPDR has a clause that requires companies that uses data from the EU to explain exactly how they used the data and how the algorithm reach the conclusion it did. Deep Learning is currently a black box where you train it and it knows what to do, but we can't explain exactly how it did it.

https://www.kdnuggets.com/2018/03/gdpr-machine-learning-ille...

edit:typo
Yeah. https://www.usenix.org/conference/srecon16/speaker-or-organi...
> You're still the exception

Depends in the measure, I guess. Recent versions of Chrome have started blocking certain obtrusive ads by default. That's getting pretty mainstream.
Parallels Desktop 13.3.0 Crack and Activation Key Free Download
Rent out your GPU to AI researchers and make ~2x more than mining cryptocurrency
Ah I see, I think it's a case of ambigious copy being misinterpreted by some of us:

"Tech Companies That Won't Delete Your Information
Services with the highest scores have the worst policies"

I read this as 20 is worse than 1.

Maybe something along these lines, explicitly explaining 1 is the worse.

"Tech Companies That Won't Delete Your Information
Services. Those with the highest rank have the worst policies. A rank of 1 is the worst offender"

I think this is somewhat a problem of English missing a term that unambiguously means "1 is highest".
It's 1 TB for <= 5 users.
Google is preferred because the one thing you know for sure is that nobody uses google+ so there’s no risk of unintended social leakage (have done surveys)
ISPs can sell it to Google, no?
Not sure how that relates to them tracking calls.
A Skinner box for software
There were no Constitutional grounds to overturn the lower court ruling. There were, however, numerous procedural grounds to do so.

The Constitution says explicitly that the purpose of copyright is to "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts". I'm pretty sure that letting someone copyright a whole genre will have the exact opposite effect.

A reasonable person could argue the opposite: that allowing a person to copyright a genre would provide a terrific incentive to create entirely new genres, opening up far more modes of expression than a single new song would do.
Blatant false dichotomy.
I would recommend everyone download their archive. I just did. 1.8mb for me. All of it benign and boring. I honestly feel a little left out. But I did get to read a lot of conversations I forgot I had. It was fun to remember "the good old days".
Modern vehicle headlights temporarily 'blinding drivers'
imgur is nearly unusable these days, they keep removing features and trying to prevent people from actually using it as an image host.
I really do think the momentum has become of Facebook’s demise.

Another side effect is that any other tech company (like Twitter) might close down their APIs etc even more.

One basic problem which I don’t understand from Facebook which could’ve prevented most of all this is: why aren’t the default settings of an account more secure and private?
The key fallacy you are promoting here is that pointing out instances of similarity is indistinguishable from arguing that this particular collection of similarities constitutes copyright infraction.

You first promoted this fallacy when you exclaimed "Wow. Those two songs are not even remotely similar." You then firmed up your misdirection by jumping to the conclusion that all music containing elements that can be construed as similar to elements of other songs will imminently become illegal under this interpretation.

Spotting this obvious farce, I decided to refute your fallacious argument in just the isolation of similarity, at which point you interpreted all of my points as my arguments as to why Blurred Lines violated copyrights.

I rest, assured that you will continue to promote this fallacy.
Ask HN: How do you become a better founder?
This is a question that has challenged me for a while.

The practice techniques and resources for becoming a good programmer or a baseball player are fairly well defined. How do you progressively become good at successfully building solutions for real world problems?
How I cracked the Bitcoin keys in Andy Bauch's Lego artwork
I don't feel like many people would though, even if it was a one-time $0.99 purchase.
How many millions of people do you need before it’s mass?
It's upsetting that we've known about this for decades from an insane random experiment that would never pass review today. Consider the 1966 study by Rosenthal and Jacobson "Teachers’ Expectancies: Determinants Of Pupils’ IQ Gains"[0]

> Within each of 18 classrooms, an average of 20% of the children were reported to classroom teachers as showing unusual potential for intellectual gains. Eight months later these “unusual” children (who had actually been selected
at random) showed significantly greater gains in IQ than did the remaining children in the control group. These effects of teachers’ expectancies operated primarily among the younger children.

[0]: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.495...
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pygmalion_effect
> That little ISP who has no real use of it

Those little ISPs like Comcast, Verizon, Cox, AT&T etc. I can't imagine those small companies would want your data or want to use it after bribing politicians to get the right to do it.

Everyone knows Google tracks you, same with Facebook. They offer a service and people understand that. You aren't paying you are the product.

You are paying your ISP for access to the internet and privacy, or at least that used to be a selling point. You are paying AND you are the product and they have competitive services they want you to use so they'll mess with competitors. Your entry to the internet should be objective and independent, what you use on top of that is up to you. You can still route around Google and Facebook, you simply cannot route around your ISP.
Yandex is $100/year for 1TB. How often is that less than unlimited?
Web Application Penetration Testing Cheat Sheet