skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
fisheye2rect is just mind-blowing

http://www.fmwconcepts.com/imagemagick/fisheye2rect/index.ph...

I guess I never really understood why fisheye lenses were so valuable, until now. =)
They don’t enforce it. It’ll still let you blow past the tb with one user.
DBVisualizer can export any query you just did to a spreadsheet...
Ada is a systems language, too. It was used in many OS's. Several are below:

Army Secure OS (A1-class design)

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a340370.pdf

Fault-Tolerant, Parallel, Mainfraim-style OS/Platform

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BiiN

MarteOS Real-Time OS

https://marte.unican.es

Muen Separation Kernel

https://muen.codelabs.ch
I remember doing security work for a few companies at the time and discovered some standard SQL injection vectors in databases with upwards of 50k access tokens. It's unlikely, but entirely possible that someone could have stolen access tokens from apps, and subsequently stole user data from Facebook too.

At the time, signing into apps with Facebook meant you were not only giving the app access to your account, but also anyone clever enough to steal the token. In some cases, "clever" even meant anyone who had a basic understanding of sqlmap or other pentesting tools. In theory shady "analytics" firms could have hired a low level security researcher and had him use shodan and sqlmap all day to expand their databases.

Today it's pretty rare for apps to ask for intrusive permissions, and people tend to be a bit more wary of apps that do. Facebook has also made an effort to alert users when the permissions requested are more intrusive than the usual email address and profile picture - often requiring explicit agreement to these permissions.

Nonetheless, if Facebook's "audit" turns up apps that did a lot of suspicious queries, what stops them from saying "oh we were hacked someone took our tokens from our DB, we are conducting a full investigation". Sure it's still bad press, but it's probably better PR to look incompetent than creepy.
As long as they don’t kill people incorrectly…
The principle behind money laundering laws is exactly like the one behind legislation like FOSTA.

It makes people legally responsible for others using the services they provide in connection with a crime.

It legally mandates that third party intermediaries act as deputies for regulatory agencies, and disallow private use of the services they provide.

Laws like this effectively criminalize privacy in entire categories of human activity, in the name of preempting crime.

It's an absolutely terrible way to try to manage risk, and concentrates power in the hands of governing institutions to extremely dangerous proportions.
Are you sure about that?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNAT_Modified_General_Public_L...
I switched. Better search, better tagging, customizable layout, better peformance (apple mail often had problems with syncing flags and folders for me)
Everybody’s Lying About the Link Between Gun Ownership and Homicide
What are Tim Cook's core principles? What are Apple's core principles?
So the problem here is sharing the files out of your drive account. It’s been known for a while that once you share/create a link it gets reviewed by whatever magic algorithms they have.
Spout / Syphon equivilent for Linux.
Did the scandal actually happen? The articles I found only talked of the possibility for abuse by Uber.

https://www.macrumors.com/2017/10/05/uber-removing-apple-gra...
I don't understand why so many people recommend baby Rudin (Principles of Mathematical Analysis). The presentation in Rudin is not merely terse, but also quite dry and unmotivated. I suggest you avoid it--regardless of how much talent or maturity you have. There are plenty of more interesting texts which will teach you just as much: Spivak and Pugh are nice, I also recommend the recent two-volume work by Zorich.

By the way, as you aquire experience you'll gain confidence and get over the urge to always check your answers. Here's a good exercise with a built-in answer key: When reading a text, every time you get to a result (claim, theorem, etc) try to prove it on your own before you continue. You probably should be doing that more often than not.

In any case, don't stick to just one text/source. Shop around, read a few pages here and there before you settle on something. There's no way a stranger on the internet can make a good recommendation: Find what works for you. The most important thing is that you're fully engrossed!
Google's ToS has always indicated that they are free to rummage through your stuff kept on their systems. I still prefer them because they don't AFAIK share the data with outsiders. Sure, they'll use it for targeted advertising, but they do the targeting themselves with the data.
>> which tracks every one of its users throughout their daily lives

Actually you don't even have to be one of its users! Facebook has what they call "shadow profiles" for tracking people who haven't yet created Facebook accounts. That's how they instantly show you everyone you know when you finally create a FB account. You have Facebook cookies on your computer even if you have never visited facebook.com. Try deleting them. Within 30 minutes of browsing random web sites I guarantee you'll once again have facebook cookies. They track everything you're doing online even if you're not one of their users. Then they buy offline data about you from other companies, to complete their profile of you.

Sadly they only way to put an end to all this is by hoping the European Union will introduce new laws -- the only government that actually represents their citizens, as opposed to big businesses.
Because advertising for big companies is all about brand awareness and has little to do with sales per se. You can't follow a P&G add and end-up in a page where you can buy the damn product, 9 out of 10 times you'll end-up in an info page.

It's the little guys that get the most out of digital advertising, especially e-commerce sites where they can link ads to products.
"Zero round trip time," i.e., if your web browser previously had an encrypted session with the server and cached the cryptographic keys involved, the next time you visit the website, it can immediately encrypt an HTTP request to that public key and send it in the first packet.

Normally there's a handshake involved: your browser and the server send packets to each other to set up an encrypted channel, then the server uses its certificate to prove that it's in control of its end of the private channel, then you can send a request. So if you and the server are, say, 50 ms apart, there's usually an extra 200 ms for this handshake, which 0-RTT can save you.

The danger is that because your browser isn't setting up an encrypted channel but just sending a request and hoping for the best, someome who can capture the packet can just re-send it to trigger the request twice. Duplicaing the request is fine for, say, the HN home page, but annoying for a comment reply and a real problem for an online purchase.
> it is not _just_ Zuckerberg who is at fault
Why tariffs on steel and aluminium are easier said than done
We programmers are paid for the time we do at work, but side projects like this very often aren't taken into account for the things we are expected to do during the regular work week. That is it's own problem, but this happens to a lot of people. You are paid for doing "the big projects", but then someone asks you to do this little thing on the side that gets bigger and bigger, but it's taking away time and focus on the big projects. Your boss probably doesn't think the side thing is what your job is.
- A nuance: Consider a hammer with a cracked handle.

What's key is not the hammer crack (bad enough?) or the duct tape repair (good enough?).

Instead it's the generality (portable, abstract concepts behind it like 'gluing' 'joining') and availability (common, cheap, simple) of the duct tape that enables the (w)hack.

People don't buy duct tape to fix cracked hammers.

- Afterthought :
A Stack Exchange user answers: "why use duct tape when you could just use super glue" (or rubber bands, zip ties...).
Yes, it's like everybody is gaming the stock market options. Or finally the reality of social media is catching up with the populus all at once.

I suspect the peak won't be reached until we read a court transcript with the quote "show us upon this dB schema were Facebook touched you".
Sure, the article describes the Coriolis Effect. But only as a part of a larger narrative analogy describing how two groups of people can each be entirely convinced that they are right and that the other group is delusional. Each group has a different frame of reference.

My best summary: In order to understand the conclusions of another group of people, one must first be willing to experience the world as they do.
According to the lecture, for Ada I guess it would be winning avionics. The presentation has some interesting artifacts, such as one student asking what "portable" means and another asking what is "object-oriented" programming.

Maybe "hyped" success is sometimes confused with "real" success. The later type may not always be as visible.

He addresses this in the lecture. He suggests people often make statements about programming language usage in industry without actual knowledge of what some organizations are really using (beyond what is announced publicly, or hyped).
Except when sensible restrictions on gun buying are propsed, that same lobby loses their mind and immediately opposes it. The NRA is no longer a sporting association, they are a far-right political lobby and are finally being recognized as such. They can change this and get back to their original mission, or continue their current collision course with the rest of America who want sensible gun policy.
"[Facebook] systems were so laxly designed as to actively encourage vast amounts of data to be sucked out, via API, without the check and balance of those third parties having to gain individual level consent."

That is a gross oversimplification of the issue. There were controls in place to stop excessive data collection.
In fact, the only app in this situation that was allowed to "suck out" "vast amounts of data" was the Obama For America app. According to Carol Davidsen, Obama's Former Campaign Director "We ingested the entire U.S. social graph" [1], despite the fact that less than 1 million people actively authorized the app to access their data. Approximately 99.5% of the hundreds of millions of people whose data Obama took, with Facebook's blessings (actively allowing it to bypass its data collection limits for apps), never knew about or authorized Obama to have or use their data.

So only one app was "actively encouraged" to suck out vast amounts of data in the history of the existence of the API. All the rest of them were subject to relatively strict controls, requiring months or years to collect even a small fraction of the data that the Obama app was allowed to collect. The API was not a data free-for-all, except in one unique case with the explicit authorization of Facebook.

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/facebooks-ru...
How about Google? They didn’t do this on iOS because they can’t.

Why the hell was this an option? Why wasn’t there a really big ‘holy hell are you sure you want to do this’ dialog box? How do normal apps even get to ask for this in the first place?
This is interesting actually. In theory it makes sense for them to offer a subscription that gets rid of ads, and if priced well it could make them more money on a user than ads. I'm sure a few people would be pay $5.99 - $9.99 for ad-free Facebook, especially if this means getting rid of video ads too.

Yet, if too many people opt for the paid option, technically advertiser value would fall, since less users would be targetable. Moreover, $6.50 average per user means they probably make close to no money on some users, but a lot of money on others. If only their high-yielding users opt-in to an ad-less Facebook, this could mean big losses for them.

I guess this is why they haven't offered a paid version as an option ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
We've banned you for repeatedly violating the site guidelines.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Hi HN, one of the founders here.
We created mysafe as a way to help users take control of their online lives.
We started mysafe 2 years ago and has been in development and now used by some small groups.
The key concepts are:
- you control ALL the privacy of your data
- your data is encrypted completely
- data is owned by you, not anyone else

We would love to go through the technical way it works because it's imperative that the everyday person understands the privacy benefits of using mysafe.

In light of the recent Cambridge Analytica Facebool scandal, mysafe is the answer to manage your digital identity.
If people working at Google can look at the drone partnership and still try and argue that they're "doing good," we've really entered a whole new era of cognitive dissonance.

(FWIW, I think there are good and moral people who work at Google. But if they're not going to organize their labor or quit to stop this stuff, it doesn't really matter either way)
F# has this too. Other languages too, of course. Heck, even Pascal has a limited form of it - enumerated types and user-defined array types etc. - years ago.
You've moved the target. You said it was all PR, it isn't.

As for liability, it stinks to high heaven.

Age discrimination was picked out for extra protection, shortly before the layoffs began.

It is the only form of descrimination where forced arbitration was applied.

It was the only place where a complaint was required to be kept secret.

And the only complaint where you could not join others with similar complaints.

None of this is damning, but it is highly indicative.

Most of the bigger companies, like IBM has in the past, will increase contractors in a demographic if that demographic is overly proportionate in a layoff. It's a simple PR stunt that helps show that it isn't likely intentional.

Or issue numbers, or statements, like IBM has in the past.

They have done nothing to show the public this wasn't on purpose, despite having successfully done so in the past, under the same PR director.
There are also groups within an existing hierarchy missing. For example. rec.games.roguelike.development is there but rec.games.roguelike.nethack is missing.
> What I really meant was that you can't have Vec<T> where T is a trait without also wrapping that in a box

In what language can you do something like that? In C++, it would compile but anything that you put in the vector would get sliced down to the base type. In Java, everything you put in would get boxed.
Ask HN: What is your hourly rate as a freelancer?
Use a password manager! Here's an article to get you set up:

https://leclan.ch/password-managers/
to me it's not that learning is difficult, is that society incarnation of learning is a bit blurry if not twisted: in school there's social pressure and single point of explanation for a mass; not optimal but somehow necessary. Then there's competition in jobs.

About the pointless part, sometimes learning something means killing its magic. Or at least you end up in plato's cave, with your expertise surrounded by people mania. It's not a great joy to render a piece of knowledge dull.

And a meeting point between the last two paragraphs. Society teaches you things so you can work but in the end it's also to help/serve others; which makes your knowledge valuable by giving something to someone. And a lot of value in knowledge is when you can share it.
Figure 3 in the paper.
I built apps on FB back in 2011-2012 and was gobsmacked at how much data we got about the friends of our users. I also knew of several shady people building apps. Because I saw how much data we got without consent, I realized other shady people could get that data about me via my friends.

Which is why I severely curtailed my FB use around that time.
Not entirely true. Facebook, like Google, has tracking pixels on pretty much every site now. I find Google and Facebook both to be fairly terrifying in their immense power. I also fear Amazon, I used to be an avid Amazon shopper, but now I try to go out of my way to not use them if I can help it. I never thought I'd live to see companies like Apple and Microsoft being more of the good guys than their competitors (relatively speaking.)
Facebook tracks everyone that comes across a page with a like button.

They also purchase data from 3rd parties https://www.engadget.com/2016/12/30/facebook-buys-data-on-us...
I would have agreed with you 5 years ago, but currently, I don't see the same in my business, nor in the businesses of my close friends or relatives. It could of course just be that we're in a niche where ads don't work too well!
Okey dokey. To my knowledge, in my country, no unions do. It's beyond their remit.

I suspect, but cannot prove, that today in the US a new union will not be able to make everyone stop writing game software. What do you think? Is that within their power?
Projective Geometry Video Playlist
You will regret raising too much money if you are successful - Sam Altman
You can build most any software application with $0 invested and be cash flow positive before writing a line of code. There are lots of people (myself incljded) that take an idea to potential customers, turn them into actual customers and then get to work. For B2B it is not hard to say "I will solve this problem for x dollars per month. That will make you y more or save you y dollars per month. Sign here and I will provide the solution in # weeks." And that works just fine.
And supporters of these kinds of laws, whether it be anti-money-laundering-laws, or anti-sex-trafficking laws like FOSTA, show no consideration for the general pattern of unintended consequences that stem from undermining particular legal principles.
Or with something like CryFS.
Sure, but all of the examples you give are of bad actors trying to influence the opinion of the general public. In 2018, the same bad actors are using private information to change the opinions of fragments of individuals in certain electorates, who each share a certain set of beliefs/biases.

The difference is huge. Why? Because when propaganda is crafted from the unique kinks of an individual and then secretly projected back at them with button-pushing messaging, it forgoes any chance of call-out from public scrutiny.
I would say almost the opposite. If there is anything hurting the Internets potential as a platform for free speech it is the inability to understand that not all cultures, countries or people want unfettered access to drugs, guns, gambling, prostitution, pornography or violence. You could not convince most countries to block politics on the Internet. You can convince them to block politics as part of enforcing their already existing laws or social rules concerning vice.
Hopefully it takes the pressure off Sydney as a hub and encourages British visitors to spend a few days in WA before heading to other destinations.

It's good to see that the Western Australian government is building a rail link. I have previously caught the bus - it is cheap but follows a slow meandering route through the suburbs.
Citizensgbr.org:

Email 50%
Facebook 35%
Google 15%

Our email setup is a passwordless/magic-link implementation built on top of Firebase's email login, similar to Medium and others. We get a significant amount of grief about it, mainly due to emails being delayed or ending up in spam/routed folders. But also due to the links sometimes opening in a different browser to the one currently in use. There is no plan to allow users to set their own password.

We generally suggest using social login when there is a problem with email but we have a lot of push back. In our experience people using email do not trust social login, based on what they think we are getting access to, and what we might do with the data. [To be clear we collect the absolute minimum data required for social login, (email address, name, Id, avatar url) and use it only to create the account/authenticate the user]

We are considering trialling mobile phone auth in the not so distant future.
> I'm definitely in the market for a good e2e encrypted cloud storage solution.

mega.co.nz may be kind of what you're looking for
Stop being pedantic. It's Google.
There's another really cool way that I've started using lately - doPost[0]. You can set up a js (appscript) function with that name and then publish it for anonymous use (such that the long endpoint url is the secret key).

You can for example set up a cron job to post some json to that endpoint and have the js validate it and update a sheet accordingly (or even create a new one).

[0] https://developers.google.com/apps-script/guides/web
Yes, let's hope this gecko and XUL based application never gets rewritten using web tech...
I don't know percentages, but it does seem like most major SMTP servers support opportunistic TLS, so your messages are at least encrypted over the wire.
Law enforcement also has a legitimate interest in being able to walk into my house, examine and copy my stuff, and make sure I'm not doing anything against the law. They also have a legitimate interest in stopping me on the street at random and demanding my identity, proof of citizenship, a blood sample (to make sure I'm not doing any drugs that are against the law), and a list of the people that I've talked to today, and about what subjects.

Oh, that's not "legitimate"? I've seen serious proposals for those in the past few years, and not a few actual instances. All invoking the L-word.

What do people mean by "legitimate" then? Mostly, I see it as begging the question, an attempt to redefine and color the argument. Of course their interests are "legitimate" -- whose are not? Does passing a law make something legitimate? What about an unconstitutional law?

History has proven that capabilities like the ones proposed are always abused by power, and that compromised security systems grow more compromised over time.

My head is not in the sand.
70% through FB, 30% through email/password. This is for a consumer-facing mobile app.

Though just yesterday 2 people signing up said "I probably shouldn't use Facebook now" and referenced the Cambridge Analytica news.
It kind of does. I may have misinterpreted the article, but the proposal seems to be forcing hardware and software vendors into key-escrow schemes.

So the decryption key on your phone (or perhaps a key to the key, same thing AFAICT) would have to be stored by the manufacturer so that it could be accessed by various US government agencies.

If it’s a Chinese company, that means the Chinese government would have access, too.

And if such a law and precedent was set by the US, the likely reaction from other countries would be to enact similar laws.

So, lots of people all over the world will be able decrypt your data, for lots of reasons.
I quit my job, booked a one-way flight to SF, and hacked the job search
Thanks for the reply. It's a shame you're the only person who saw what I wrote before the yes-man crew came along and downvoted me.
Yeah, LineageOS devs actively disapprove/hate/censor anything MicroG and Xposed related, don't EVER mention those things if you want any "official" help. I find it appalling, but too few care about it to backslash so that it had an effect.