skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The “difficult to tear apart” thing I would give incredible leeway to. It’s very hard to demand a device is physically constructed a certain way without unintentionally harming innovation.

Besides, people have differing opinions on what constitutes “ difficult to tear apart”. I’ve replaced batteries on all my iPhones and while it’s a delicate procedure it’s not particularly difficult, takes just a few minutes, and I’ve never damaged a phone in the process. I remember how much vitriol there was against Apple for not having hot swappable batteries, but I’m sure glad they went that route, and that they were able to lead the market in that choice.

But for the rest of it, they should definitely have to provide parts, manuals, and attacking the independent repair shops is wrong unless the shop is actually misleading their customers.
Possibly, but there's an obvious planned obsolescence angle here for Apple too. Perhaps people wouldn't so readily buy new iPhones if they could replace their old phone's battery, screen, buttons, etc for a more reasonable price from a "non-authorised" repairer. Perhaps they wouldn't get a new one like clockwork every 1-3 years.
Ask HN: What moderation tools does dang use?
And how is s/he so efficient?
I stand corrected. Foreign or domestic, their interests don't align with the US public at large.
While I agree they're not all the same or approaching the median at the same rate, my statement was in their propensity towards editorializing. Whereas people view them (well, typically if they agree with them) as newspeople. I was going mostly by personalities that seem to have the largest viewerships, purely anecdotal though, admittedly.
Congratulations to both Ginkgo & Transcriptic! The newly-forming intimate relationship between bio and advanced digital and automation processes is very fun to watch.
Being asexual and not being interested in night life are faaar from each other. Like, absurdly ridiculously far. For that matter, self control, ability to control impulses, introversion or being goal oriented does not make you asexual. Not does preference for sex only in context of long term relationship.

Nor does modesty in clothing. (RELATED immodesty in clothing does not imply sex with random dudes nor interest in it. Pretty important.)

Evangelical coservative white girls are not asexual either. They do however have opinions about when to sex, who to have sex and when not to.

Edit: also, asexual people do enjoy nightlife and dancing and can wear sexy cloth. They don't care about sex part, but they do care about fun to similar extend as sexual people. After all, many sexual girls like to dance and want to dance, but did not came dance because they desperately seek sex.
Isn't that how protonmail works for non protonmail users ?
When I was an Amazon intern 7 years ago, I went to a presentation of exactly how the duplicate detector works. I won't discuss any technical details of course, but suffice it to say: it should catch these sorts of cases, so long as the books are already on Amazon in digital format.

I don't understand how your friend can get away with this.
Fusion-based rockets are still too far off. We need something now. Chemical rockets are monstrous, but that matters little once they are built and reused. Fuel is cheap enough.

If you really want something that can be put into production in a matter of years, then it would be fission-based rockets. Maybe they'll be more acceptable if they are not launched from Earth.
> Another way to deal with the situation is to sell the book from the ExtremTech web site.

What problem does that solve?
It probably stems from an awareness of the broader context within which they issued that must run script.
I’ve been looking for a source to cite on this and my google-fu isn’t pulling it up. Most of the multiple discussions I’ve read on this research were probably around 18 months ago. I’m pretty sure some of the work has been discussed on HN before so hopefully someone else will be able to pull up a link.
I watch Louis Rossman too. There's something about his straightforward and self-made-man attitude that strongly resonates with me. Plus it's usually very informative.
The really bad-news thing for me here is Google decided it's good for business to try DRM for email, doing their best to take away (recipient) user control and talking about it as a feature. (They've _gone along_ with crummy ideas, of course, but _promoting_ DRM for email's a whole 'nother thing.)

And they do it even though, as you note, there are tons of ways to really do confidentiality much better. The Signal protocol has worked great for chat, to name another example. The problem with that for Google, I guess, is that end-to-end security is more in line with the Apple model of smarts living on the user's device, not the Google model that requires the server to read and understand all of every user's content. (I say that as someone on Android, Linux, and so on. I'm not super invested in Apple or their ecosystem.)

Also, this idea is salvageable. You could have "request expiration," etc. and maybe you honor by default but don't suggest you enforce it. And managed work environments can try any DRMish stuff they like (though it will still be unreliable!), because the boss is the customer and if they want to make it a pain for the user to do certain things they can. But as it stands now, false sense of security for the average user, and an entirely valid feeling for those parsing the details that companies like Google are more than happy to erode user control.

I would love to see this idea ridiculed for how broken it is. Maybe it will even inspire less broken privacy features from competitors.
There is no incentive to vote for a compromiser when the other side won't. All you're doing is sacrificing all your footing for the sake of movement in the wrong direction.

We're at a gridlock because a significant portion of this country is woefully misinformed about just about everything and are puppets to an incredible machine of profit and no-holds-barred capitalism.
I started a project to make websites like this for all websites, but didn't get very far. I feel like pretty much every other website could use a lightweight and fast version. Creating those versions is a lot of boring work, though, as you're just parsing DOMs or APIs and there is no challenge to it. (Never mind when they change the HTML again.) Thanks for creating this one!
Maybe I'm simple but I'm sometimes at tradeshows as an engineering authority. Its hard at times not to say too much, because it's just kind of natural. You have questions and I want to help. I want to share knowledge. I can absolutely appreciate why I can't tell people everything they want to know but it's not my natural state to decline to do so.

An example from this week. Someone was asking about the usual questions. Stuff on our website that I can comfortably answer. Then they casually led the conversation to the tech side in appreciation that I'm an engineer doing a great job. He eventually asked, "what feature in your latest release are you the most proud of?" I badly want to tell you because it's fucking cool stuff. But I won't because you're an investor for our competition.
> That's enough to turn a dollar into 16 billion in 5 years.

I think it's actually 1.6 trillion
Hurray for the oligarchy.
Tom Clancy called it the Canary Trap. Each document had very slight differences, and were tracked to each recipient so leaks could be found.
The thing is, as far as I can tell, GNU Social and company seem to be Twitter clones and Diaspora is Facebook clone.

Whatever one thinks of Facebook, the two interfaces aren't equivalent and just having one won't give you the other. Especially, "Micro-blogging" doesn't give structured, moderated discussion of any kind.

And well, I personally think in the social network world, a large portion of Twitter is a pox on humanity, not by its control by particular entities but by the interface effectively working to elicit and amplify shallow, reactive, emotional responses.

The Facebook interface has its problem too but it's structure is more ambiguous, you can get "deeper" discussion are restrict who's talking and moderate well. And you moderate feed as well as groups, on Facebook itself.

Personally again, what I'd like to see is Twitter dying and Facebook being cloned by a better peer-to-peer. But in any case, just cloning Twitter wouldn't give you a Facebook competitor.
Now looking forward to the leak the memo about the leak of the memo about the leaks.
It is actually wrong. The assumption is that y is a linear combination of the covariates in X. You can run regressions like y = x + x^2 (i.e. you permit a quadratic relationship) just fine.
The Facebook leak gives an opportunity to the media apparatus controlled by Dems to promote the idea that there's a link between Russia and the electoral result in the last US elections. I have not read an article about the FB without direct or indirect insinuations that it changed the US elections yet.

The underline narrative is that everyone who voted the wrong candidate was ill-informed or tricked on purpose, while everyone who voted for the right candidate is educated and well informed. I'm in mid-30s but in the world of politics, I never saw such a ferocious reaction form a losing party in a western democracy. Politically speaking, we live in very interesting times I believe.

However, anything that improves awareness about privacy issues is to be welcomed IMHO.
Because corporations are trying to erode the concept of ownership itself for the common human. Copyright and trademark are the vehicles they're use to attempt to deny you the fundamental notion of ownership. The corporations are getting quite close to it in the US.
Ballistic missiles use stars mid-flight and inertial guidance system during the terminal phase. Cruise missiles follow terrain.

Many of those systems were designed before GPS became operational, but even now relying on GPS is not particularly prudent.
And yet, forcing people to implement opengraph tags, forcing people to drop flash, forcing people to use HTTPS, forcing people to drop Symantec certs, forcing people to drop SHA1 certs – so often the actors behind the WHATWG have managed to get website authors to change what they use.

Hell, Google has AMP, which is far more intrusive than XHTML ever was, and yet, they’ve managed to get every major website to implement it. https://www.ampproject.org/docs/troubleshooting/validation_e...

And yet, somehow, implementing some stricter spec is supposedly impossible?
D, Objective C, C# come to mind. Further away, Eiffel and Ada. More esoterically, Fortress. And I don't even really pay attention to the world of programming languages.
> otherwise introducing an entirely unrelated topic.

Are you even reading my comments?

> I'll go a bit further and say that criticisms based on theories aren't worth very much when the belying theories do a bad job of predicting the observations.

True, but only if the observations you make include both direct and indirect impacts.

Following your example, it is true that very little software uses type system-oriented languages, but you are ignoring the impact such languages have made on other languages, tools, frameworks, and libraries.

For instance, Haskell is not a widely used language, but some of its ideas have impacted other languages and domains in various ways.
Wow, coinlib.io looks really good. It's a lot more advanced and it looks like they do live updates without refreshing the page.
There may have been no real disambiguation by the original author from "Turks" as an epithet for Ottoman citizens and specifically ethnic Turks as well.
I agree that Facebook is a bigger issue, but you can't just build on more frequency. There's only a small, already claimed amount, that is suitable and allowed for broadcasting tv
Can manufacturers not sue Amazon for selling counterfeit goods?
The part about fear of diseases, for example. We've always feared diseases, and the fear was due to having seen babies or young people die of diseases that have now almost disappeared, such as measles.

People that think they know better, however, have lost this fear and are responsible of the failure to establish herd immunity, and of the occasional deaths of immunodepressed or just unlucky people due to preventable diseases.
Nah. The 1st Amendment does not protect shouting "fire" in a movie theater. As coveted as it might be, the 1st A doesn't give license to a free for all of junk food. There are licensing for plumbers, electricians and hair stylists. __None__ of those are essentials to a healthy democracy.

There is also the legal concept of false advertising. If you're saying (objective) "news" and it's (subjective) editorial, then that's clearly false advertising.

This wasn't the most exciting things I ever read, but it was helpful.

"Freedom for the Thought That We Hate"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_for_the_Thought_That_W...

re: "News, editorials, and political commentary are nothing at all like the ingredient list on the back of your soda can."

One, this is editorial pure.

Two, it's also false. We know that you are what you consume. Whether that's what goes in your mouth, your lungs, up your nose, or into your brain.

Is you can't label Aspartame as sugar, then why should editorial being called news be allowed? Context matters.
And there are always ad blockers, if you dislike ads but do hate Google!
> Why?

Because he’s a former Apple employee: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dpkonofa
I thought this was a superlative article, that mentions many gotchas that I haven't seen collected into one place in this way.

I strongly recommend it.
> Why would it matter that Microsoft, Google, Mozilla, and/or Apple object to W3C DOM 4.1 if they don't implement it?

It matters to the utility of the W3C DOM spec that it doesn't represent either what browsers have implemented or what they will implement.

> Why would Microsoft, Google, Mozilla, and/or Apple care enough to object to W3C DOM 4.1 if they aren't implementing it?

They care enough because they want the W3C, if it is going to write purported web standards, to do something that won't confuse developers and lead to browser vendors fielding complaints from developers who mistake useless W3C documents for something meaningful.

> Why would they even give any effort to a competing specification and just allow it to die from inactivity?

They don't want to have a competing specification, though they do not seem opposed to having a specification with a different focus but consistent with WHATWG to the degree dictate by the purpose.)

> Why does what is in W3C DOM 4.1 matter if the high 90s percentage of users are served by a browser in the WHATWG DOM camp?

The idea is not to have opposing camps, though if W3C insists on making it an opposing camps situation, thst becomes a real issue.
Yeah, but still their laptops are much more durable than the competitors'; https://i.imgur.com/eKq8ZCG.png

Someone who repairs a single brand of products will have a skewed image of the big picture. He'll basically only receive items too damaged to be repairable by others, but he has no data on whether he receives 1/million or 1/2 whatever and makes the assumption every single one of them are like the ones he receive. I've watched Rossmann's every video for a couple of years on my youtube subscriptions until he started with his political opinion and investment recommendation talks. It's a guy who thinks his opinion is the infallible fact and that there are no other possible explanations, and it undermines his professional opinions as well.

I've done repairs on my own Apple products once they've been out of warranty and it's not as bad as he makes it sound. Parts are easily accessible either as China-clones or working spare parts from dismantled products, because almost every model of anything Apple makes are made for a very long time and in large volumes. You'll have a much harder time finding something like a spare motherboard for a 5 year old random Acer laptop and such. Apple does carry service parts for a long time for their products as well and they're accessible to the authorized service providers, but the pricing is very steep and not really worth it unless it's the only option you have, or if it's paid by insurance.
> They're called tags, not annotations, per the spec (https://golang.org/ref/spec). I don't know what you're trying to say there, but it's using wrong terminology.

My mistake

> How is that possible? As you say on the next line, they don't need to conform to any format. How can my linter know that I don't have a package that parses "josn" tags, and that I typoed? Please link me to the lint rule if it exists.

https://golang.org/cmd/vet/#hdr-Struct_tags
Hi HN,

Do you think ever about this problem? I build a solution.

How it works: https://www.key2lyf.com/how_it_works/
This is a really interesting comparison of human brain wetware versus silicon hardware.

On the one hand "The fastest synaptic transmission takes about 1 millisecond" which is far slower than the hardware limitation which is basically constrained by Speed Of Light.

On the other hand "the brain also employs massively parallel processing, taking advantage of the large number of neurons and large number of connections each neuron makes. For instance, the moving tennis ball activates many cells in the retina called photoreceptors, whose job is to convert light into electrical signals. These signals are then transmitted to many different kinds of neurons in the retina in parallel. By the time signals originating in the photoreceptor cells have passed through two to three synaptic connections in the retina, information regarding the location, direction, and speed of the ball has been extracted by parallel neuronal circuits and is transmitted in parallel to the brain."

On the third hand (to quote Niven and Pournelle) "Another salient property of the brain, which is clearly at play in the return of service example from tennis, is that the connection strengths between neurons can be modified in response to activity and experience—a process that is widely believed by neuroscientists to be the basis for learning and memory. Repetitive training enables the neuronal circuits to become better configured for the tasks being performed, resulting in greatly improved speed and precision."
Where do you get the idea that Apple or anyone else for that matter can dictate the after market service level?

The appropriate move is that everybody on the market to deliver the schematics of the device to the purchaser, not to the service shops. And while we're at it (since as you said, Apple is not fighting the right to repair) provide also the complete source code with all the private keys they use to brick repaired devices into oblivion.

You might want to reconsider your position on defending idiotic corporate behavior against individuals.
Apple is a scam.
If I was starting over I’d pursue Wall Street over Silicon Valley.
Sorry. I lost my head there for a sec, most of my posts are more constructive/on-topic than that (I'd like to think). I'll try to be better going to forward.
The only logical conclusion (apart from Amazon being managerially incompetent) is that they make more money this way.
Sites like https://steemit.com http://minds.com appear to be gaining some traction with actual users. I felt Diaspora had failed to take off and lost its opportunity, although now that FB has lost its halo in suburbia there might be new opportunities for change in people's habits...
I presume this is sarcasm, and if so, jolly good, but if not, god save us all
I’ll remind you that the AMP spec has an extremely strict validation requirement: https://www.ampproject.org/docs/troubleshooting/validation_e...
Louis Rossmann, Jessa Jones, these are all people I'm aware of at least on YouTube that are people who truly care about teaching the public how to do a lot of their own repairs.

I can tell you, I'm a software guy. And I was absolutely intimidated by circuit boards, until I found the world of electronics repairs on Youtube (EEVBlog too). Now I have fixed two power supplies and a pair of headphones. In all those cases, I was able to get parts easily from third parties (and for my headphones, I got cheap replacement parts from AudioTechnica themselves).

I am delighted to have rediscovered this part of my skills that I lost in my teens when I fell in love with software development.

Yet I still can't get a genuine apple battery to replace on my phone. I've successfully replaced batteries on about 5 iPhones now, but they were all shady battery replacements on Amazon. Frankly I'm just annoyed that Apple doesn't make these parts available.

Look at the backlog for battery replacements now. If you get it from Apple, there is now a monthslong wait-list at the genius bar because they've created their own bottleneck.
I'm not talking about funding cancer research by transferring smart people out of cancer research. I was actually referring to encouraging cancer research and other more beneficial endeavors by discouraging very smart people from working in adtech. This discouragement may come in the form of regulation, or not. As an example, many folks had to go into some other field when the global financial crisis and subsequent regulation caused a bunch of finance jobs to go away.
This highly contrasts Netflix, which barely has any leaks, although discloses almost all their information to employees.

Is it Apple's company size and culture that make leaks inevitable?
It's a style or a sensibility in other words. Gorgeous rawness—not just accidental rawness. Don't ever try to convince an architect of that, though.
Brutalism seems like the wrong comparison to make with this new wave of design. The way I see it, brutalist websites would be websites with little or no CSS (see: http://www.motherfuckingwebsite.com/). They expose the "concrete of the web".

The examples in the article seem more punk, if anything. Which, that's cool too, but different. They actually require a lot of images and really tricky CSS to create that look, even if it's intentionally chaotic.
I liked the end result much more than the original. It was handy to hear the thought process behind the design, and watch it happen, rather than just a before & after screenshot.
A Small Fix for the Housing Crunch Is in Your Backyard
I'm a little skeptical. The intelligence services would say something that would make you skeptical of the motivations of leakers. If they're selfishly motivated the public doesn't mind them being locked up and put into isolation and tortured in ways that don't leave a mark.

The leakers that come to mind immediately are Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning whom both suffered greatly for their leaks (Snowden had to leave his life behind and Manning was kept in isolation and had her medical needs neglected amongst other things). While they both may have wanted to be recognized as having done something good, they also clearly wanted to let the public know what the government was doing in their name.
> They want people who bought iPhone to have the best experience they prepared for them.

Since when is buying a deliberately un-maintainable device 'the best experience'?

I would call that anti-user.
It's not a "past performance isn't indicative of future performance" scenario in any reasonable sense. The loans you buy are already sold and it's fixed rate. You are calling the risk of the whole company defaulting "performance" and that's what I disagree with.

Their highest rated loans (11-13%) are guaranteed by them; that's quite explicit. The end-borrower default-rate is pretty low which is why they can do it.
I agree with everything you said. What rubs me the wrong way about the WHATWG is that they give the perception (and it may be just that) that they are trying not just to serve as that forum for browser makers, but also as the standard reference for web developers (which is the role the W3C HTML specs, save XHTML 2, have historically served), and doing a poor job of the latter.