skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I am not sure you have done your research. Trump's incompetence is ironically helping Indian outsourcers as they can easily abide by Specialty Occupation and Employer Employee control guidance specified by H1. Trump's policy actually is ending up hurting folks who work in Googles and Amazons of the world in related positions like Data Scientist, Growth Makeeteer etc. Because some of these roles can be challenged as "Specialty Occupation".

Further, claiming down on Indian outsourcing companies will not increase American jobs, but will lead to lower blended ratio and more offshoring. No one is ready to pay huge wages to maintain an aging ERP implementations
FWIW I'm an Emacs user on a MBP with Touch Bar.

No issues.
Hey look! I told this company about this security breach months ago! They did nothing to resolve it. They literally have a way to find a person's CC info using their phone number.

If people like this don't report it, then bad actors will get their hands on it and put EVERYONE at risk.
It's not be just because of the Washington Post, although that is certainly a contributing factor.

There is also reason to believe that Trump wants to go after Amazon because Amazon is hurting brick and mortar retail, which also hurts commercial real estate, which also hurts him financially. Also Jeff Bezos is very wealthy, and Trump might view him as a rival.

I am not a Trump supporter, however it may be true that Amazon is in fact underpaying taxes. What's repugnant is that I don't believe Trump's motivation is about making sure everyone pays their fair share into the system. It's more just transparent resentment, as well as a tactic to go after rivals.
I look forward to using GDPR to solve nasty technical questions about data retention and sovereignty. Like many saas companies, we probably tend towards keeping data around in case our customer can make use of it at some time in the future. Now we'll be able to just be more hard core about not retaining data "just in case".
Most dating services do. Why shouldn't they?
GNOME has a built in Wayland-compatible VNC server. Install the gnome-remote-desktop package and open the Settings app and enable Screen Sharing.
Value proposition? That's a work in progress.
How to compare 1.1.1.1 and 8.8.8.8
Ping to 1.1.1.1 is 20ms slower as compared to 8.8.8.8
I'm not sure I would paint traditional media companies, like say local news stations, as paragons of integrity, autonomy, and having a strong conscience.

Exhibit A: https://youtu.be/hWLjYJ4BzvI
Wait til you find out what Cisco has been doing for years

http://www.revolutionwifi.net/revolutionwifi/2011/03/explain...
Most statistics, don't classify Surface Pro and other full desktop 2-in-1 as tablets. Small blip for MS was there ARM tablet
I think you're well meaning here, but I have two points in reaction:

1) "...[E]thical to me IFF you don't make stuff up." I think you can have propaganda that uses only facts, but in a disingenuous manner. You just don't mention _all_ the facts, and/or put a lens on the wrong perspective. Is that "dishonest?" I'm not sure - maybe a misinterpretation?.

As an example, you can see this all the time with the arguments against global warming: "some studies show that temperatures are not increasing." If you look hard enough, you'll find data points and/or papers that argue against global warming, but they're a very very minor # of studies, that it's not a fair perspective or lens on the arguement.

2) "I find it imperative to do so." I am not a Facebook fan-person by any means, but I'm not sure I find it morally _imperative_ that folks rally against what they are doing. I have a hard time believing that the 1000's of employees that work there are all evil people, but rather the majority are probably well-intentioned and may just need a correction of direction. Can I prove this? No, but if they were, say, selling nukes to ISIS or something at that level, then I might agree with you a bit more.
Why Wordpress is so popular
Facebook owns and operates the radio station though
> if you use such an approach of considering previous work, you will have the tools to show you why your work shouldn't be dismissed (whether you are believed or not is a different matter)

That doesn't mean you'll be listened to. You might, but that's no guarantee.

There's also a situation you're overlooking: people being discouraged for the cited reason before they even start. "What's the point, if people as smart as you -- and possibly smarter, more senior, and with more of a reputation -- already tried to think of everything?". This can be something that the researcher can tell themselves.

I was explaining why there can still be room for progress, even if lots of smart people have already explored the problem.

> If you aren't looking at earlier work

At no point was I suggesting people shouldn't look at earlier work.
After seeing this, it completely discredits all of the 'scholarship' part of the author's post. Looks like the author should do his research first.
It still astounds me that many people I know are unable to decouple the source of the information from 'Google'. It usually goes like this: someone I know will state some odd claim about some natural treatment for something, I will ask for a source and invariably get the answer 'Google'. I will then try to use the radio vs. radio station analogy and then ask for the source again, to be often told that they don't remember where the claim came from. Facebook seems to be the same: I will often be told about something someone 'read on Facebook' but they are often unable to say who posted the information.
This is my favorite naming scheme, although I usually skip the codenames and assign functional names to everything:

https://www.mnxsolutions.com/devops/a-proper-server-naming-s...
Northrop Grumman Corporation | Boulder, CO, San Diego, CA, Orlando, FL, + multiple sites in each state| Full-time | ONSITE
Northrop recently won two huge government contracts and is desperate to find engineers with security clearances.

Work life balance is incredibly good here. We work a 9/80, meaning we work 9 hours a day and get every other Friday off. I usually use that off Friday to go surfing or hiking. There are a multitude of projects here that you would never get the opportunity to work on in the private world. Technologies include: C++, Java, C#, SQL, Machine Learning, Embedded software. Salary is competitive!

Here's a list of positions that are open now at multiple sites across the country: https://ngc.taleo.net/careersection/ngc_pro/jobsearch.ftl

I can almost guarantee a competitive offer IF you have a Secret or Top Secret security clearance already.

If you find a position that you're interested in, shoot me your resume at my personal e-mail jipotastic1337 @ gmail.com [remove the spaces]. I will have it forwarded to the correct manager, so they can take a look at it directly.
Are you planning write a postmortem on this project? I really hope you do. I'm sure you have plenty of insights to share that would be super helpful for other people exploring this space.

Many of us here would really love to read up on the ideas behind each iteration, the specifics on what went well, what didn't go as expected, the target market and their feedback. It doesn't need to be a fancy paper, even a short but detailed bullet list for each iteration would be fine.

From my outsider perspective, it seems like you were trying to build a "silver bullet". For example, both FiveSquare Eve and WikiEve look promising. FiveSquare could be a great WYSIWYG website/app builder. WikiEve could be a great note taking tool. Just because they aren't the future of programming, doesn't mean they aren't useful!
I'm not speculating from first principles as to what might be happening, I'm saying what I've seen from a fairly large sample over the years. Though again, it's limited to my market (SF).
While I am sure that there are clueless people that have worked on the security team at Equifax, I'm willing to bet that there have been good people too. It's hard to sort out the good from the bad and what problems are individual and what were systemic.
Switch to a very high fiber diet, like lots of leafy greens. They slow digestion and can help lower your glycemic index. Most grains are simple carbohydrates, which mean you'll have a rapid increase in your blood sugar, this causes an insulin response. High insulin causes your body to convert said sugar to fat. Over time and weight gain your body can become resistant to the insulin, so it stays in your blood stream longer. Ask any diabetic that has taken too much insulin, that insulin hanging around is a bad thing. You will feel extremely hungry, causing an overeating response, which again raises ones blood sugar. Another insulin shot is needed, and if not dosed correctly puts too much insulin the blood stream. You can see who this leads to a very destructive cycle.
Bitcoin is precisely like beanie babies that can be transfered electronically without middle men.
Ahh thanks for pointing those out I missed those skimming for `Wh`.

"Storage needs to provide 55GW" seems to come from peak consumption rate considering gross yearly generation was at 556TWh in 2014.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_France

This seems to be assuming that there will be 0 generation and all must come from storage which is not really a something that will happen in practice and also over night (when all solar is at 0 generation) consumption is usually a lot lower than peak.

"Even with Tesla Model X (which has the biggest battery currently) you'll need 260 millions car to provide enough storage for France"

This is just strange figures considering that the Model X base model battery size is 75kWh. Why would France need 19.5 TWh of car based storage? Even at a peak of 55GW usage, this fleet of 260M Model X cars would power all of France for 2 weeks!

Realistically, vehicle to grid will only be a portion of storage and to get into the 90% renewable range only 12 hours of storage would be required which would be ~600GWh which even if all had to come from cars (overly expensive, not practical etc..) that would be <20 million Model X or ~30% of current cars on their roads (assuming owners would only allow their batteries to become 50% depleted).

Again, this is assuming 0 generation over night which with a lot of wind all over the country would be unlikely, AND peak load over night, which doesn't happen in practice.
They aren't. You see QR code everywhere. I feel they are at the point I was before going into deep learning: they recognized the buzz pattern of an overhyped tech and won't believe it provides immediate gain until they try.
It's also just a cherry picked example too. Surveys of experts show there isn't really a consensus, but they generally aren't that optimistic.

https://nickbostrom.com/papers/survey.pdf

>We thus designed a brief questionaire and distributed it to four groups of experts in 2012/2013. The median estimate of respondents was for a one in two chance that high-level machine intelligence will be developed around 2040-2050, rising to a nine in ten chance by 2075. Experts expect that systems will move on to superintelligence in less than 30 years thereafter. They estimate the chance is about one in three that this development turns out to be ‘bad’ or ‘extremely bad’ for humanity.
One of my favorite quotes from back in the day:

"If Hitler owned Haliburton, it still wouldn't be as evil of a company as Ticketmaster."

https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/c4704/fuck_you_ticket...
Sigh, those AT&T gateways are such a dumpster fire. What's sad is that it's not likely that there will be an easy way to fix this as those gateways do not have any kind of bridge mode which is a crime in and of itself. The best they've got is DMZ+ mode which fakes giving the LAN device the public IP address but it's still doing NAT behind the scenes and routing everything as normal so it doesn't work for any IP protocol other than TCP, UDP, and ICMP so no IPSEC tunnels or GRE with those modems.
Like basically all researchers in CS these days, I keep all my papers freely downloadable from my webpage. Easily findable via Google Scholar, or just a regular Google search, for anyone who cares to look.
Why? Mr. Trump is only talking about Amazon and USPS at the moment. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/98006358159204761...

If Mr. Trump were complaining about Alibaba or even doing something about it, maybe then I'll chime in on that discussion. Otherwise, it seems kind of irrelevant to the greater discussion that our President is putting forth.

Unless you think that Mr. Trump, the FCC or the other powers that be are actually doing something about the Alibaba thingy? Or that Mr. Trump even cares about this issue at all: http://a.abcnews.com/images/Business/abc_donald_trump_made_i...

The only reason Mr. Trump is talking about Amazon is because Jeff Bezos owns Washington Post, and Mr. Trump doesn't like the articles that WashPo are running. When Mr. Trump stops using Chinese labor, and his own company stops abusing these same rules... then maybe I'll trust that he's taking the issue seriously.

If your point is that you support tariffs on China for unfair practices, then I agree with you. The part where I stop agreeing with Mr. Trump is where these tariffs start to affect US Allies (ie: Canada, Australia, UK), or close US Trading Partners (Europe, Mexico, etc. etc.).
It's not that hard.

You don't need to be a Programmer to understand security.

They just don't care because consumers don't seem to care with their information.

I wish technical people made it to CEO/CFO. They're supposedly bad with business, and people?

I've bever understood the process of hiring the head honchos.

My college sweetheart is a big wig in the valley. Besides being WASPy, and having a spotless resume; I wouldn't trust her to feed my dog.

I look back on her cheating her way through college, and the Star Trek ensamble she proudly sports now--and just don't get it.

But---these are the one's in charge?
As someone who receives vague security emails from folks who say we have a 'vulnerability' and ask if we have a 'rewards program for bugs' and try to ask 'how much money I will be paid for the bug', Dylan's first email is very legitimate and specific. It comes from a non-generic domain (ie, not a "john.smith.1234@gmail.com" email), with an identity that could easily be verified.

In fact, as someone who would work on the API facing side of things, even that report would be enough to discover the areas to dig around and find the vulnerabilit(y|ies). There must be an API or HTTP or some other endpoint that takes in a user id, rewards card, zip code, phone number or something similar and returns data for an arbitrary user(s). Let's audit all our endpoints and see where the vulnerability might be.

I've also reported similar vulnerabilities before, and I have received a whole range of responses.
Fabric for Deep Learning on Kubernetes
Not if the OS starts to intrinsically view itself as a node in a distributed system. Mainframes sort of see SMP and separate nodes connected over a network as two sides of the same coin, just loosely vs. tightly coupled.

https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSGU8G_12.1.0...
> Do you think he....didn't know how to decrypt the PGP encrypted description? And that he was too embarrassed to say so?

The first part is OK, he is a director, not a grunt. The second is harder to understand. He should've handed the entire thing over, starting with the PGP thing to an actual security knowing engineer.
Ask HN: What would you automate first?
Hey guys what would you automate first online if you were given advanced work automation tool? List examples, pain point what ever you want.
He mentions NEAT, which is good, but not any of the work on playing Mario, much less any work on evolving neural nets to play Mario. There's quite a few papers on the topic, not just mine.

Note that I don't say that SethBling is wrong. Seen as tinkering, this is perfectly fine, and he did a great job with the video. No hard feelings. I just use it as an example of how it is not research, because of the lack of scholarship.
Hummmm, in Asian we can't graduate high school without memorizing the whole damn thing.
My only question is if they actually use ARM for their next-generation architecture, or something completely new...
Again, not trying to go to bat for Facebook by any means, and I think you're well meaning with your point, but I worry think this is a dangerous argument to go down.

1) While they're not perfect, I'm not sure I believe they're doing more harm than good. As an annecdotal example, my family loves Facebook, because I live pretty far from most of them, and they like the ability to know that I'm healthy + happy, and/or if I'm travelling that I got back safely. They're generally older, so not that tech-savvy, and I do give Facebook Design a lot of credit for making some really intuitive choices in a lot of areas that make it accessible to older / non-geeky audiences. Could I just text / call them? Sure, but I'm a busy person like most people here, so it's easy to just throw up a picture or post to FB and make their days a bit better.

2) A lot of the arguments that they're doing "harm" are pretty pseudo-scientific, if you look at the claims/articles closely. Many rely on "correlation over causation" views, anecdotes, and the like. It's only recently that some true studies have tried to prove this [1], but even then arguing for putting FB on the level of tobacco and guns is a strong claim to make off of minimal peer-reviewed evidence. We might as well toss Google + Amazon + Twitter into this same boat.

[1] https://hbr.org/2017/04/a-new-more-rigorous-study-confirms-t...
Converting an Object to String in JavaScript
Spot on. Note that the issues are different (and not as bad) for Reddit and HN type things.

> It ought to be able to work out who your close friends are, and what kinds of things you normally click on, surely?

I wish this didn't even seem right to anyone, even from the beginning. It's different whether I happen to click or be interested in something once than it being what I want to see again. If I go to a movie, that's not evidence that it's my sort of movie — I don't know if I'll like it until I see it! Priority really has to be on the evaluation of things and the explicit desire to get more, not on reading things into the fact that I was open to something in the first place.

With the what-I-click approach, one day I am prompted for some reason to click one sort of thing… then I'm shown that more the next day… then one pretty-arbitrary starting point is turned into a defining filter for me forever. This reality means that simply clicking something out of curiosity threatens to define you and your experience for years.

The ethical way to handle this is to do some mix of (A) giving back control to the readers for what they explicitly choose to follow (not whatever they happen to click, and not even what they "like" because liking should not equal following) and (B) doing the opposite of bubbling and actively insert some mix of stuff-they-don't-usually-click, i.e. novelty so that people are actually exposed to new ideas and perspectives they might otherwise not even know exist.
In retrospect that’s a hilarious statement but at the time it did make a lot of sense.
Cannot disagree with this more. There was far more than due diligence demonstrated here.
Or he could google it. I don't know how to PGP decrypt something off the top of my head, but I'm confident that 5 minutes of googling would lead me to any number of web pages to show me how.
Exactly. The big platforms are getting to mature to get a pass on this stuff anymore.
This is all true. However, the large publishers (IEEE, ACM, Springer) these days all allow you to self-archive on your own webpage and typically also on ArXiv. So you can (and should) make your papers freely available. I have done that since the start of my career. It's just a matter of looking.
Mining, or intentional computational busywork, is one method of allowing anonymous transaction processors, uh, process transactions. A logistics system does not need anonymous transactors; it can rely on it's own network of trust. A logistics solution is much more like Proof of Stake model, where reputation is the collateral instead of a fictional financial token.

In this model, I'll refer to it as Proof of Reputation (PoR), an actor might be a certified as a reputable party in the network. You might be a certified producer of bananas, verified and certified as fair trade and humane organic hand-crafted conditions by other organizations. I'm a buyer of bananas, but I want to make sure I'm buying fair trade bananas. I can look at your certification-of-origin and verify that you are reputable as fair trade. A port authority can confirm that I bought your bananas and put them on the USS Boaty McBoatface destined for Los Angeles to meet the huge banana split market. You as a consumer can check these certifications at the store.

As it stands, all of these processes operate haphazardly and it's insanely difficult for major countries to coordinate and verify what is going on. The coordination technologies, like Ethereum's GHOST implementation, combined with public-key infrastructure helps reduce the "deadlock" time of coordinating these large public and private bureaucracies.

I know I'm not explaining this well. I'm still working on a more concrete model. In my mind the process of creating, signing, and verifying a cryptotoken transaction is eerily similar to what logistics management is all about. You need to prove the origin, verify they made the transaction, and then have a reputable actor process said transaction. There's still a lot of manual work, but the system of sharing and coordinating that work is also painful and manual. The technologies that power cryptotokens can help with the latter problem.
I'm no expert, but PCI requires that companies protect stored cardholder data, which includes cardholder names. They have badly failed to do so, so they don't appear to be PCI compliant.
Interestingly, there's a parallel for this in the Rwandan genocide. A lot of the violence was prepared and fueled by a Hutu-run radio station:

>Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines (RTLMC), which broadcast racist propaganda, obscene jokes and music, becoming very popular throughout the country. One study finds that approximately 10% of the overall violence during the Rwandan genocide can be attributed to this new radio station.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_genocide#Preparation_f...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_T%C3%A9l%C3%A9vision_Lib...

The two founders and one announcer were sentenced to life, subsequently ~30 years in prison, the people who built this particular radio and the broadcasters together
This is hardly a discussion of previous work. The author of the video states the paper he implemented.

In any semi-decent peer reviewed venue, you would cite a wide variety of papers that solve a similar or related problem or introduce a concept related to the method in the paper.

The related work section of a paper is one of the most important parts since it puts the research into context. By citing other work, the authors explain what has already been done, and what contribution their work makes.

A related work section should also illustrate the downsides, limitations, and differences of other cited research. Limitations of other works are often poorly understood since very few people have had the time to evaluate them beyond the initial experiments done before first publication.

Research is not simply about presenting new techniques but also understanding the trade-offs that arise when choosing different solutions to a problem.
"The WLC intercepts client DHCP discovery packets, inserts it's own IP address configured on the egress interface into the relay agent field, and unicasts the DHCP packet to the configured DHCP server."

Mess with DHCP packets, that's a paddlin'.
Bitcoins can be sent across the internet without middle men. As long as it maps to market value, Bitcoin is digital value transfer without middle men. Do you really believe this is valueless?