skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> the development of complex social organisation and property which led to all of the maladies

Wait are you arguing for or against social cooperation? I would definitely disagree that social organization cause more harm than good. I would say that it is humanity single most important strength. Imagine a place with complete anarchy and disorganization.

> property

Do you think that there was never any property? I am not sure which era you are referring to but when things are infinitely abundant relative to the population there is no need or concern for making them property. No one cares who owns which land when there is endless land. If you decided to take your fellow caveman's spear tho, you would probably get a knock on the head. Have you seen children's natural reactions and jealousy when another child takes their toys? Material is fundamental to survival, and gets more pronounced when things is scarce.
1% of wealth is USD770k in net assets.

However, don't forget to include any defined benefit pension
(state provided or otherwise) to the list of assets.

A pension paying USD$30k/yr (20yr length, 4% growth) costs USD$425k[1]. Add on an employer provided defined benefit pension (e.g.police, fire, military, federal employee), that can be worth a lot of money.

[1] https://www.bankrate.com/calculators/investing/annuity-calcu...
Define "wiped out". If the wealth were simply redistributed, for example the ownership of the companies transferred to the employees, no jobs would be lost.

Not that I am an advocate of that.
You can't imagine any way terraforming sand dunes on mass scale might do damage to nearby countries? It would be akin to diverting a river upstream which was an act of war historically.
> It just spurs on class resentment which is, if history is any guide, just about the worst way to go about things possible.

Indeed, the worst thing slaves could do is to resent against their masters. I am sure there must have been a better way.
Totally disagree with the conclusion. This is Netflix's issue for not validating the email account. Not sure if Uber has changed this since then, but back in the day I used to get the full ride details and receipts from someone else who mistyped their email.

If you are sending private transactional emails you need to verify accounts first.
Is it possible this violates Facebook's consent decree? If they need opt in consent to share information, and need to actually delete information when requested, it would logically follow that deleting information without a user's consent is not kosher.
I really wish that I could tell google to bounce all the emails that don’t match my “dot pattern”

I’m now in complete control of someone else’s commercial business hvac account because of precisely this problem. And the worse part is that I don’t know the correct email to get ahold of this person. They’ve set up library appointments, I received a receipt for a down payment on a lake house, basically most of this persons recent attempt to start a commercial business has been emailed to me.

I don’t want this email google. Please give us the option to make it stop.
A few years ago, I was lucky to work with the brilliant Japanese researchers at the Cyber Interface Lab/Hirose-Tanikawa lab (The University of Tokyo).

Amongst their projects (involving AR, VR and multi-modal devices), some students explored various ways to play with our perceptions and define more sharply the interactions and priorities of our senses. Incredible experiments involving simple contraptions as well as more advanced VR, and a lot of scientific creativity (see [1], particularly Multimodal interfaces)

Amongst those projects, Yuki Ban's "Magic Pot" was very similar to what you described, and I remember being almost upset at the realization that the sense we tend to trust the most (vision) can also drive us in the wrong direction the fastest. (see [2] and [3] for more info)

[1] http://www.cyber.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/projects/

[2] https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2343470

[3] http://www.drunk-boarder.com/works/magicpot/
Digital Art – Versus – The Amiga Demo Chart: Voting Has Opened
Google's Fuchsia could replace Android and unite all devices
One interesting thing to note, for GSuite accounts, the dots do matter. first.last@company.com is not the same account as firstlast@company.com.
Besides the inaccuracies in this "article" the copyright notice underneath the photos is a joke. Showing Marry Poppins with the copyright notice "imgur" just leaves you speechless.
> But firstly, no one wants this infinite set of email addresses. Gmail already provides this in the better form of plus labelling.

What is the difference between dots and pluses? They both have the same flaw: to Netflix they will both be distinct addresses.
I wonder if the pendulum will eventually swing the other way.
T-Mobile Austria stores passwords as plaintext
If beliefs were fluid and adapted continuously and were challenged by the current state of the world I would maybe argue differently. But ask yourself this. How frequently do you change your fundamental beliefs about how the world works? How do you think the people who enjoy success beyond your wildest dreams feel about changing the system that has benefited them and their families for countless generations?

On top of that, which "causes" would you decide to support? Would you choose to support a cause that disproportionately affects your family's net worth in a negative way as long as it made the rest of the world a better place to live? The fact is no one knows the precise ingredients to a healthy society or what the real solution to wealth inequality is, but only the wealthy and powerful get to steer the ship.
I think it's disingenuous to argue against words the above commenter did not actually write.
I keep seeing mentions of Bill Gates, Warren Buffett etc. when people talk about 1%. 1% are lawyers, Doctors, Senior Software Eng. etc. it's over 3 mil. people in US alone. Billionaires are 0.018% of that 1% and Gates and buffet are the top 1% of billionaires.
A Dogecoin precursor, for sure.
This is a country whose government still puts the picture of the biggest mass murderer in history on its money.
PayPal and eBay also don't validate email, not even before attaching a bank account or making a purchase.
Just create a filter to send everything that doesn’t match your dot pattern to the trash. I have a relatively common first name / last name gmail account and it gets out of control sometimes.
Do you also, by chance, have a short Gmail address? I've also definitely gotten signups from other individuals mistyping their address on my six letter account.

My comedy ownership of someone else's identity is a Staples account. Presumably someone in New York with a similar name had a store person look up their Staples account, which was actually my Staples account, and associate their business name with it. Their business name now appears on mailings I get from Staples and sometimes I get sample pens and the like branded with their business name.
I think we agree that the many eyes maxim isn't as big of a factor as some might make it out to be, perhaps it's more of a "the devil you know" situation. With hardware there isn't a lot of transparency around the implementations that are used, so it just makes me feel uncertain. I'd rather throw my lot in with OpenSSL and GPG than unknown library X.

Also, it wasn't just Yubico products that were impacted by the vulnerability. It was estimated that 25% of all TPM devices globally were impacted, which adds up to millions of smartcards.
> It's an expression.

HN has an international audience. English idiom isn't always easy to understand.
Seem very similar to q

q is out there for years, with a very large community.

q is a command line tool that allows direct execution of SQL-like queries on CSVs/TSVs (and any other tabular text files).

http://harelba.github.io/q/
Schema Design != ...
Something related: it doesn't inspire confidence when the person who runs UIDAI (the government organization running the fingerprint program) says this:

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/aadhaar-data-safe-behind-5-i...

> Aadhaar Data Safe Behind 5 Feet Thick Walls: Centre to Supreme Court

This just shows how poor the understanding of digital security is...
Patagonia vs. Donald Trump
It seems to me that most people tend toward jealousy
Devs do most of their work on localhost. Changes are pushed to an independent server on an independent network in another city. Once those changes are vetted, then the work is mirrored to production.

Each dev has his own cellular connection for internet on his development box. Again, no LAN access. Corporate e-mail and cross-department file servers are on another box on each dev's desk.

The downside is massive over-usage charges for each dev's cell data (40-50 GB/month/dev over). The upside is that devs are effectively airgapped from the company, which I assume is the primary goal of all this.

Also, chat is banned. There have been efforts in the past to bring in tools like Slack, but the honchos believe that it makes the company better as a whole if we speak to each other like human beings, especially cross-department. Even if that means slowing down a project. And even if that means having to walk across campus, or occasionally driving to another part of town to another building. Phones are largely only used when off-site, or we need to talk to someone in another city.

It all sounds tremendously inefficient, but I try to think of it as being like working at IBM or Sperry in the 60's. It seems to work. The company is profitable and expanding, and has been for 40+ years.
I keep getting calls for the previous owner. I would love if i could get something unique.
Once you start to pay attention, looking away again feels like it would be an active evil deed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLkPwxcIji0
I assure you, capitalism has killed more people than that. We just don't call them victims of capitalism.
>I use X every time and only once was I stopped (Home Despot).

Just like sometimes you get a clerk who won't take a $2 bill. Nothing will ever trump human ignorance.
iPad is the iOS sideshow in sale numbers by far -- no reason to prioritize it. And, more cynical, using the parent comment's reasoning: iPad _is_ a competitor to Google's Chrome OS in education, so maybe they don't want it to work too well.
Yes, although I would appeal to Rice's theorem rather than Gödel.
Maybe some keywords relating to causality/attribution. For instance the word "because", used to express constraints.

"Usury is forbidden due to Sharia law."

Or the modern idiom,

"No universal health care, because reasons."

In programming you could do something like

"Foo is constrained because bar", where 'bar' is a set of limitations that are noted elsewhere and can be updated. Not sure if there's really anything new here though, plus it's really just a new keyword not a new linguistic graft.
Wheat was such a fundamental part of European diets until relatively recently that I suspect most serious celiacs died in childhood in earlier times.
This is exactly why you need to normalize email addresses. The people who wrote the email RFCs just plain got it wrong, so it’s up to every SaaS site to do this so that they aren’t putting their users at risk. If someone is using an email with that’s the same as someone else’s except for the capitalization, it should be on them to get a new email address.
Not with this, but intercepting sms's do exist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stingray_phone_tracker#Interce...
>Where is the security flaw here? Some would say it’s Netflix’s fault; that Netflix should verify the email address on sign up, or that Netflix should disallow the registration of james.hfisher@gmail.com when a Netflix account already existed for jameshfisher@gmail.com. But such policies would not add security, and would force Netflix and every other website to have insider knowledge of Gmail’s canonicalization algorithm.

This is a bizarre quote. The fact that "Netflix should verify the email address on sign up" would not "force Netflix and every other website to have insider knowledge of Gmail’s canonicalization algorithm".
Interestingly Gmail will let you filter in a dot sensitive way. Anyone missing my dot gets sent to a folder called “wrongguy”. Whenever I drop by to look at it it’s full of spam.
> Your $30 phone likely cost far more to build, perhaps hundreds

When the platform was still new and well supported, and without any discounts or contracts, you could get Windows Phones at the ~$100 USD price that were every bit as fast and fluid as described. Phones like the Lumia 520 / 530 / 535 series.

So, if the discounted price bothers you, just read it as "For a $100 phone", as that was the brand-new day-one price at the time, with no subsidies / discounts / contract / credit-checks / loss write-off / etc.
Marx and Engels most certainly did not think equality of outcome was a cornerstone of communism, on the contrary. Just think about "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" from Marx Critique of the Gotha Program. Clearly administering goods according to need is antithetical to equality of outcome.

Marx/Engels thought that equality in general, was a concept used by the "bourgeoisie" to manage scarcity. They thought that equality of outcome was impossible, and that communism would be so much more efficient than capitalism at providing goods (because communism would be based on pure cooperation rather than 'energy intensive' class antagonisms of capitalism) that nobody cared any more about equality, because everybody had more than enough. In other words, with communism, the desire for equality would whither away.

See e.g.

- F. Engels, Brief an Bebel (1875), MEW 34, 129

- F. Engels, Anti-Dühring, MEW 20, 9599
Flying takes a ton of energy. Hummingbirds are an extreme example but they have the highest metabolism of any animal and can eat multiples of their body weight in food each day
IMO It's not Netflix fault, actually emails with dots in different positions should be different emails. Also, not sending a confirmation email is a common pattern now. Maybe an email about "you created an account :D" should be enough mitigation, but this is not their fault.
> You can't isolate unsafe operations from only having isolated effects to the block of code flagged.

You can focus your manual verification efforts on unsafe code. That is pragmatic. “Well, shit happens, and I can do nothing about it” is not.
It's easy to accidentally type "bob.foo" instead of "bobfoo", and it's also easy to miss the difference if you're the recipient of a malicious attack.

It's harder to accidentally type "bobfoo+abc", and it's harder to miss the difference if you're on the receiving end.
Many programming languages have naming conventions which act as a sort of inflection. Classes may always be capitalized, whereas functions and methods not be. Constants might be written in all caps, while private variables might be preceded by an underscore.

You can draw comparisons between natural language and programming languages just fine. Maybe functions are like verbs and arguments are like the subject. And maybe partial application of a function is like having an intransitive verb. Maybe a decorator is like an adverb and a type constraint is like an adjective.

In general, though, I think the metaphor about programming languages is wrong: programming languages are instructions, not really languages. A programming language should be easy to read out of order more like a magazine than a novel, it should be possible to get a general grasp of what it's doing by glancing at the code, and the code should eliminate ambiguity and uncertainty. Natural languages don't work that way; they're repetitive, vague, and rely on context (social and otherwise).
Type system or not, why isn't there an autogenerated setter with guards for it? (Or at least an option for it?)
Lets step back and pose a meta question - how does a state go about providing services to its citizen if the state cannot identify citizens as its own and as unique entities. Both being necessary conditions.

A well functioning state needs to be a strong (sorry libertarians) and benign (cf. Somalia and North Korea) to take care of its citizens. You can take birth, live and die in a weak state without the State ever knowing you existed, let alone provide you with services.

Things we take for granted in the so-called developed economies e.g. getting a birth certificate, accessing public education, voting rights, drivers license - rely on smaller units of government providing unique identity services which are then chained up the ladder. My local hospital provides a birth certificate which is attested to by the county recorder's office which then serves as proof to get a driving license, passport etc.

In a weak state like India, the local entities are thoroughly corrupt. A blue eyed/blond 6.5 foot viking can get a birth certificate in an indian province where most citizens are under 5.5 foot and caramel colored for less than a hundred dollars.

So I posit my meta question - how is a nation state supposed to provide unique identity authentication?

Aadhaar is a 12 digit random number assigned to everyone by the Unique Identification Authority of India. The project was led by one of the founders of Infosys who ran as a Member of Parliament for the opposition Congress party. Each political party takes potshots at it when they are not in power but it has support across the aisle. From my (albeit limited) understanding, Aadhaar is simply authentication - and not tracking.

The intelligentsia in India defines themselves by opposition to Aadhaar. There is a huge cacophony of bollywood stars, writers, intellectuals and of course civil libertarians opposing Aadhaar. What is lost is the colossal leakage (euphemism for corruption) in benefits, the lack of existence of hundreds of millions of citizens and the resulting parasitism of political machines to get them benefits of the old system.

Does anyone have anything else in mind that would work better? Or is this simply opposition for opposition sake?

(edits for clarity)
Which is really annoying. Still getting calls, two+ years in, for the previous owner of my number. Including from medical providers.
> "...the notion that sitting in traffic each morning to reach a room where one stares into a screen for 9 hours - every day, for 40 odd years - is desirable is the greatest con capitalism has ever pulled."

I think you're ignoring the biggest benefit of capitalism. While many people will do something fairly similar to what you're describing, it's not explicitly required or unchangeable. You have the ability, even if extremely challenging, to strive for better. For a person washing toilets, this could be the dream of sitting in front of that screen one day. For the person in front of that screen, it could be starting their own business or taking an early retirement and living the rest of their years off the beach.

Capitalism enables people to move up. The system you described would actually be perfectly reflective of a more social economic system like communism. The government would measure your competency and then offer you a series of jobs. You would take that a job off that list and you would do it til the day you were allowed to stop working. All without any chance for ever achieving something better beyond that list of jobs they decided you were qualified for. And of course you'd receive the same compensation when you're 18 as when you're 50 with decades of experience, because that's fair...

I think it would be phenomenally interesting to live in a pre-industrial time, just to experience it - but I suspect we'd quickly find that the tedium and unfairness of the systems we have to do would seem like utopia compared to the tedium and unfairness of those times. And so too can we expect people a few hundred years from now to live in what we would consider a utopia, yet themselves lack contentment striving for something better which will indeed come about a few centuries beyond. It's the nature of man to always strive for better and, at least to date, achieve it.
Pluses are part of email standard, dots are some nonsense Google thought was a good idea.
I think these are orthogonal issues. The dots do matter, but Netflix should also validate email addresses. However, I don't think it's as critical. Lack of email validation means I receive someone else's ride details (I agree, annoying), but dots-don't-matter means I might accidentally pay for that person's rides.
You can assure me all you'd like, but it's data that I find compelling. Many of the deaths in Maoist China were of starvation, a direct consequence of Mao's crackpot policies. Venezuela is a striking modern example of the same phenomenon.

If you can find an example of a government's commitment to free markets directly resulting in the starvation of tens of millions of people your argument would be much more credible.

EDIT: This is re: the comment below. We've reached HN's maximum allowable comment depth.
Prefrontal cortex as a meta-reinforcement learning system
Microsoft and Nokia had a really good balance of software and hardware, and it's still a unique contrast to what Google and Apple are doing. I really liked their colourful cases (although the N9 did it best), and I'm still envious of the dedicated shutter button. Why hasn't anyone else done this? It makes way more sense than that goofy "press the volume button to take a picture" hack that Android and iOS have been doing. For one thing, the shutter button is actually on the right side of the phone. With the volume button, they don't even know if it's at the edge. (It probably isn't). And they keep coming up with these weird things like flicking your phone at the lock screen to open the camera app. No, Google, just add a button.
That same problem can happen even without dots. People can simply mistype their email and have it be your email. That happens if even if neither of you have dots in your email.
I assume lots of emails get validated like this by people who doesn't know what they are doing.

Sad, really...
This article gives a good overview of the promises and issues of the Aadhar system. I might be wrong but it doesn't add anything new which hasn't been covered in other Aadhar related articles submitted earlier.

The system has done some good. Mostly in the public schemes area where it was originally intended to stop corruption.

But, there are some serious issues with the system.

First is the internet infrastructure. As mentioned in the article, a lady had to register for it thrice because the system wouldn't load the data. That doesn't surprise me a bit because the internet infrastructure is so poor that even 512kbps is defined as "broadband".

There is a funny interview of a supposed Income Tax guy:

https://youtu.be/AnxrJiS5uKU?t=135

He equates "cloud computing" to actual clouds. And posits that if people's data in put in cloud and rains then the person is screwed out of his benefits. As stupid as it sounds, over reliance on Aadhar means people might not get their benefits if the Aadhar system is down. And given the poor internet infrastructure, that is a real concern.

Second is the creeping coverage. The system is slowly outgrowing is intended usage from public schemes to invading into private lives. Now telephones and banks need the data. It was promised that the data will never be used for forensics. But given the data stash, it is not stopping lower courts from trying to access it.
Problem is the other SDC companies are doing dangerous things trying to keep up with Google.
That is actually a very good way to describe it, thanks :)
I'm a little surprised that the proposal would have to be operational within five days of being awarded. That means that there are companies that already have something like this operational. There is no way that you could create something like this from scratch within five days.

Hopefully this won't be abused to silence anyone that does not toe the party line. Whichever party that is. Now excuse me while I put on my tin-foil hat.