skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I worry they're going to come after us programmers next. Only "authorized" programmers will get the access code required to change anything. Microsoft, Apple, Dell, etc will control the access codes. "Programming is hard, and these untrained self-taught programmers can mess up your machine, they might install malware, or they might be hackers, or they might overclock your CPU and damage it, or they might use the system for terrorism. Really, they should only be allowed to access the machine if they were appropriately trained by us."
82% of People Don't Change Default Router Password
Do you mean the smallest possible leap, IE, Planck distance, or a leap by quantum tunneling into a state the barrier into which we have insufficient energy to cross?
Meh, I often saw people ignore FCPA or find ways around it when I worked in China. Really, having your 51% JV partner be someone well connected with the Party was pretty much a guarantee of success. Granted, this was a decade or so ago.
!FB :D
Brutalism is not about drabness, it's about the use of basic materials. Beyond that, I think a lot of what you ask appears to be an attempt to create a 1:1 relationship between the terms of an architecture (as defined by the article) and web design, which is a big ask.
> And yet people are perfectly OK with a greasy mechanic fixing their metal cage hurtling down the freeway at 65 miles per hour. Your attempt to demean skilled repair workers is rather telling of your own bias.

Woah I didn't know you could read my mind! For a matter of fact, I'm also very picky on who works or touches my car just for your information.

Drop the strawman it's unbecoming.

Second, there's an entire industry and certification to auto mechanics much like a trained repairman would be for phones. Third, since when is a "Joe-schmoe" a skilled repair worker? I fully do not expect the common citizen to even know how to do a basic soldier, let alone replace parts on a packed PCB. I didn't mention anything about skilled repair workers, nor is that demeaning to point out the abilities to repair small electronic devices like phones is not just a "walk in the park".

Drop the attacks and focus on the article, this is HN not reddit.
> that's called "breaking the law"

Right, which is why people are advocating getting the law changed, because they believe the practical outcome of law as it current exists is not just (nor economically efficient, for that matter).
The constution was written more then 200 years ago based on the world back then. Maybe it's time to adapt the rules to our world. I don't think the authors of the Constitution even remotely imagined the possibility that one institution could have perfect surveillance of the whole country. But that's where we are going if we don't change the rules.
In Canada the right to vote is inalienable, and so those citizens who are incarcerated can vote.

It's odd that the USA, which champions democracy, doesn't hold the right to vote as a universal and inalienable right of all citizens.
JSON Resume – Open source standard to create JSON-based resumes
Not to derail, but rather share: I have worked on a healthcare solution which did just that, every medical record had a guid, and by itself it didn't carry a direct relation to a patient; it was done via an additional table. This was done to ensure data security, ability to use the medical records for scientific purposes (records themselves were anonymous) and to manage access to these records (i.e. patient was the owner of his/her records by default, but could choose to delegate read and modification permissions to e.g. their spouse or physician, or emergency personnel). Come to think of it, it was a pretty awesome system, even though it ran on asp.net (it was some 7 years ago i think). This design was necessary because data privacy regulations for medical records have always been very strict in the EU; come to think of it, people worried about GDPR should take a look at the way medical systems handle data.
You'd think so but literally no one in my family was able to do this.

You're coming from a place of higher-than-average technical knowledge. Many who do not, especially folks who never learned how to think critically, have no idea how to verify a claim or to verify that something is what it says it is. Many, in fact, take what is said on TV as the "correct" thing and rely on that to help steer their knowledge.

People just see everyone getting stupid rich around them on TV by investing in "crypto" so they obviously would like to do the same thing. But crypto is hard. Even the hard core crypto fans have many blind spots.
> There is no free money in finance.

There can be free money in the sense that a strategy can beat the market at a similar or lower level of risk. The "cost" for this is in personnel and infrastructure capital.
What is the logic used for the 'Trending' section?
Instacart Closes $350M Series E Financing
> Annotations are used at run-time via reflections

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.

> well it won't blow up, it won't function as intended - much like a logical error

Aka "silently blow up", I could have used a better phrase, but I do indeed know what happens and that's what I meant.

> A linter, like the one that comes with VSCode will catch this error for you.

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.

> That's handy, but incompatible with Go 1

So? It is, but the point of the article is that go is badly designed; the fact that they can't change it makes that design all the worse since we must live with it.

Pointing out that go decided to freeze their language is totally irrelevant.

> Rust is more focused on power, while Go has more of a focus on simplicity.

Simplicity and power aren't always opposites, and apply to many different conflicting pieces of a language. This is a massive over-simplification.

Go optimized for simplicity of the language spec and simplicity of the compiler at the expense of the simplicity of writing correct code.
Then again, the label 'brutalist' is fraught with conflated interpretations that to some followed logically, yet in other contexts they appear to be in conflict. From the very beginning, the term sprung out of linguistic confusion between French and English [1], where Le Corbusier's French descriptor for 'raw concrete' was lost in translation and reinterpreted by English commentators as brutal, then art imitated life as later works seized on this attitude and were intentionally designed to be provocative [2].

So no one knows whether brutalism is concrete-heavy minimalism, or concrete-heavy bizarro-showoffism, but the core of it is the use of a drab but versatile, non-organic material, so one could venture to guess that any website that features excessive use of color and vibrancy, and cloaking the existence of edges between disparate functional blocks would automatically be disqualified on aesthetics alone.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12685595#12689331
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12685595#12688364
Facebook knows about you even if you’re not registered on it
Somewhat ironic that this memo got leaked but I think in this case it actually serves their purpose for it to be read by everyone (including potential employees).

I think this part is key and is something I've always wondered about:

>While it may seem flattering to be approached, it’s important to remember that you’re getting played. The success of these outsiders is measured by obtaining Apple’s secrets from you and making them public. A scoop about an unreleased Apple product can generate massive traffic for a publication and financially benefit the blogger or reporter who broke it. But the Apple employee who leaks has everything to lose.

I completely understand what's in it for the reporter, but I've never understood what the employee gets out of it. I've been reading Mark Gurman's scoops about Apple for years so I'm definitely biased in wanting that to continue. It just seems like there's tons of upside for the reporter and only downside for the leaker.

Also I wonder what goes through a reporter's head when one of their sources get fired because they leaked to them. I'd feel extremely guilty if someone was fired or prosecuted because of me. Not sure how they do it.
"Apple does not ‘own’ the product after they have sold it"

I think this is the crux of the issue. The guy was importing refurbished parts with the logos covered even. They weren't counterfeits. How does a manufacturer have the right to sue for copyright infringement when it's just end users reselling authentic parts? The owner even states he in no way markets them as OEM parts.

Frankly I think it's pretty obvious apple is just trying to squeeze every cent out of these phones and it's a really bad hat to wear.
Just because common usage allows us to call two practices "growth hacks," doesn't mean they are the same in most or even many respects.

One is an automated, content stealing scheme for making easy money. The other involves techniques by which you can promote your brand through your own content.

Just because you can predicate something with the same term, doesn't mean they are not very different.
Employers go to Google to find this information because it is free, not because they are randomly searching or because Google is pushing this information to them. I believe many (maybe even most) will simply switch to other services that provide background checks. IANAL but I don’t see how this ruling anticipates this.
Now, you could argue that services like that will be less susceptible to false information. I don’t know why that would be the case and there seems to be some evidence against it on the recent “checkr” funding thread on hacker news[0]

This is a blunt technological tool to fix a delicate social issue. The information is still there, but behind a service. I believe deleting the information is already not in the public’s interests [1][2], and it looks like the law agrees to an extent[3], but the solution they came up with effective puts a tollbooth in front of it.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16822093

[1] http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-27423527

[2]
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3156779/More-280-000...

[3] see paragraph 3 http://www.privacy-regulation.eu/en/article-17-right-to-eras...
Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 Update v16.1 Crack for Mac OS X – Crack4Mac
So, I thought my port was wearing out as well, and got very upset. What I found, however, was just that pocket lint had gotten jammed in there and compacted down over and over through the years, such that the cable didn't fit snugly any more.

I fixed this just by using a plastic flosser to pick the lint out (you could use a paper clip, but I opted for the somewhat-softer plastic), then some canned air to get rid of the remaining bits.

Went from "oh god, I gotta go to the Apple store" to connecting with a SNAP again, with a seal tight enough to support the phone's entire weight.

I hope that this is just your issue, because it's very easy to fix, even if diagnosing it is a bit tricky.
These open protocols seem pretty cool, but I'm curious what sort of improvements for privacy people expect them to offer? Federating with other servers just means you're trusting each server operator with your (semi?)-public data. Additionally most people don't have the technical know-how to run their own servers, so users will most likely concentrate on a few large servers anyway, defeating the decentralized advantages...
The problem here that I see is one of "false advertising"
If you present yourself as "News", that has certain connotations. Publishing this forced run content without disclaiming that it is not independently sourced journalism IMO violates those connotations
>but more importantly because they're willing and able to become experts in the things you need to be an expert in in order to be an effective lawmaker.

Did you not watch the latest Zuckerberg deposition? Most of our officials do not care about becoming experts in anything. They're old, tired, and ignorant and they are mostly concerned with maintaining power, not learning new material.
If I don't do it, the person who does should be less skilled than me, and working against my efforts to thwart them.
> very civilized nations, such as Persia and Greece

Eh, maybe back then, but today they would be seen as worse than ISIS. Pederasty and slavery are wholly intolerable. We've taken their good ideas and run with them, leaving the vast amount of horrible ones behind.

That said, you are totally correct. The modern corporation would be anathema to people from 150 years ago. Corporations were very tightly controlled by the state for a very long time due to the potential for vast profits to warp politics (also due to antisemitism, class-ism, and racism; the usual)
That's what 90% of data scientists do
WololoNet
You write chapter 1. This is math, you've laid out several definitions, theorems, propositions. You write chapters 2-5. You get to 5 and you realize your choice of terms was poor. Or that you only define some term in chapter 5.

You realize that definition should be before chapter 5, but in which chapter? 1, 2, 3, or 4?

You have to review each chapter (probably in reverse order) to determine the latest position it should be in.

Additionally, as you add that definition you find out that there's even more that needs to be shifted. Do you reorganize the whole thing, or leave it as is? You'll end up spending as much time reworking the text as you did writing the original.

===

Really, this is a philosophical thing. In the spiral approach you end up reviewing things early and realizing what's missing and where they should be moved. In your approach, you don't get to do the review until late. Is it wrong? No. But it can create a less flexible document that requires more effort (and not less) to correct.

This is very similar to the argument in lean software development of keeping batch sizes low (small number of changes at a time) but running them more frequently. Versus the waterfall approach which has large batch sizes and takes much longer to do it all, with a big review near the end.
I am opposed to punishing Sinclair. In my view it comes down to that we should discourage the creation of large companies in general. They just get too much power no matter what industry.
I've tossed money at a few smaller projects that solve a legitimate need. Projects like Nano, or Kyber, or Loopring. The difference, I think, is that I rarely get in on ICOs, I don't throw any money at it I can't lose, and I think of it less like an investment opportunity and more like an easy way to help tech startups I believe in without having to get directly involved.

That's why I "collect" them. :)
I used to think I was unlucky to have an extremely common name. (First and Last) Now I consider myself lucky.

I cannot be found on Google or Facebook simply due to the massive signal-to-noise ratio. The fact that a minor celebrity and a minor athlete share the name help as well.

I wouldn't be surprised if Legal Name changing becomes even more of a thing as people try to hide their pasts from Google et al.
https://mewe.com/

The landing page is a bit busy, but generally gets the message across.

Good to see some alternatives popping up to challenge the defacto surveillance capitalism model.
Really? It's working fine here...
Yeah, but I think the battle is lost. All users should always double-check why they need to enter credentials on any page from any website. I think that the simple act of logging into a site to use it has already "normalized" the need to re-enter credentials to a point beyond saving.
I'm arguing that end-to-end encryption in a centralized app doesn't actually do better with regards to any threat from its threat model as compared to client-to-server encryption. It's sort of a fallacy, centralization cancels out any benefits that end-to-end encryption is supposed to bring over client-to-server encryption. So "but they have" or "don't have end-to-end encryption" cannot be an argument.
> Yes, because it's a legal case we are discussing here and that's called "breaking the law".

It is an issue for society at large, fair use should include repair materials, and if you look at judgements from vehicles and farm equipment cases you'll see that the legal side isn't clear cut anyway.

Not least of all because you're conflating OWNING stolen materials and REDISTRIBUTING them. Copyright largely covers the latter and not the former. In this case they're simply owning a "stolen" document and using the knowledge from it, which isn't within itself a copyright infringement or illegal.

Unless you can explain how simply owning a stolen document is "breaking the law." Which law?

> Failing to understand that means I cannot discuss this article with you at all since a really important common understanding has been missed on your part.

You don't wish to discuss it because it challenges your whole viewpoint. Which is in essence that Apple's rights extend into a device they sold to a user, and that a user shouldn't be legally allowed to "tamper" with their own property.
Bootstrappers: SaaS startups finding their own route to $1M+ ARR
The fairness doctrine may not have been invoked or enforced, but stations still did things, to remain in compliance, that they stopped doing afterwards. In particular, right-wing talk radio exploded almost immediately after the repeal of the fairness doctrine.
Of course not. The point is billionaires get into pissing contests by attacking whatever flank or asset is the easiest target.
The overwhelming majority of the crew Dragon money was awarded in the CCtCap contract, in 2017 -- by which time Cargo Dragon and Falcon 9 had both been flying for years. And crewed Dragon development is still in progress; oddly enough, one reason they're not flying yet is NASA is still trying to finalize the certification criteria for actually flying crew.

As others have noted, you really don't know what you're talking about.

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/04/spacex-progress-comm...
That's what the W3C has historically done, with HTML 2.0, 3.2, and 4.0. "Document, clean up, and nudge" is maybe a better description. The WHATWG today seems to take more of a "document, don't clean up, and add our wishlist" approach. (The "don't clean up" mentality is embodied in their "don't break the web" ethos; the "add our wishlist" mentality is a consequence of the "living standard" ethos… the "standard" never becomes reality because it is constantly changing.)
DNS Over TLS Support in Android P Developer Preview
This article sounds like it was written by Apple. “everything to lose”? Really?
In this specific case, EFF was actually ahead of the curve: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/facebooks-new-privacy-... (2009, predicted that something like the CA leak would happen)
If your backend is Redis, how is starting more speculative hits to Redis going to help, since it's single threaded?

I mean if this is indeed helping it seems that it's not Redis that's the long pole, but maybe the request routing mesh or something.
AI Weekly 13 April 2018
That still doesn't get rid of the popularity contest aspect. You are making an assumption that humans can make perfectly rational decisions most of the time, much less all of the time. The unfortunate reality is that we all influenced by non rational factors as a result of how our brains evolved
Isn't this exactly how iOS works currently? You literally cannot develop for it without signing an Apple contract (even non-App store apps require a user account/agreement).
Have not read the "Built to Sell", yet the "E-Myth" is spot on. At least the first half of it.
> Obviously this would destroy most "free" online services over night - but I'm completely fine with that.

How old are you?

I'm a 90's kid, people my ages discovered the potential to learn over the internet at a pretty young age because of access to free learning material paid by ads. I still remember reading about PHP over Le Site Du Zéro (now called OpenClassrooms).You know the most amazing, Mathieu Nebra the founder, made a living out of my views. He was able to come from nothing and profit from my learning as a small kid unable to afford this kind of resource (believe me, I tried).

Now that I'm way past the age of majority, I have no trouble paying 20$ over udemy or any other online resource, but that 10 years old that I was... well he couldn't and that's a pretty big issue.

That's a pretty big loss for a non-issue. Every issues he mentions still exist without targeted ads. People already forgotten Hitler didn't needed Facebook to fulfill his genocide.
Let's not forget the middle ground, a "pizza box" that sits on the roof

Aww, hell! Make it a small pizza box sized device I can put on a bracket I can hang out the window! Include a wireless hotspot and you'd sell those things like crazy!
That first video is not a demonstration of the current autopilot feature. It is a demonstration of a future full self-driving feature. Those two features are purchased separately from Tesla and have their own multi-thousand dollar price tags. I think it is reasonable to expect an owner of the car to know the difference between the two while a general public wouldn't have any clue about the differences. It is also reasonable to expect Tesla to do make the difference clearer. Their responses to this accident are certainly doing that by making it clear that the driver should be attentive.

Both videos also show attentive drivers who are able to jump in at a moments notice. The first video is a promo video and the second is from a Tesla fan. I wouldn't be surprised if they were specifically edited to showcase the car's features. I can certainly understand how someone might view these videos and think that autopilot is flawless, but I don't think Tesla is doing anything unethical in those videos.
It seems like it would be worth all the effort if there were a fork that solved every authentication and encryption problem, and also addressed some less important things like: hey, maybe don’t use the Microsoft Word rendering engine for html.

But that would require all the transfer agents, delivery agents, and user agents to agree on the new spec, implement it in some standard/predictable backwards compatible way, and then support a legacy mode for the next 5-10 years.
Your comment entirely and completely ignores the express intent and purpose of the objects you compare, which makes the comparison invalid.
I don't think you're crazy; I just think there's an entire constitutional amendment in the way of what you're proposing, and it's one that I would prefer not to repeal or amend.
Your face is not a secret.