skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
American society != every society

This doesn't happen in Europe. Part of the social contract over here is that criminals who have served their sentence have the right to have their fundamental rights restored. That in fact is the justification for punishment in the first place.

A society that takes on the authority to punish individuals must integrate these individuals after they have payed their debt to society. If they wouldn't the punishment would be arbitrary, cruel and serve no purpose.
OK, so by lucideer's quirky definition of "XHTML", the vast majority of the web moved to XHTML. Based on the expansiveness of lucideer's definition, this appear to have encompassed web developers who probably weren't even aware they were writing "XHTML".

By the definition that most of us are using, which is that XHTML is complaint XHTML that could be rendered without error in browser's XHTML modes, to a first approximation nobody ever did it. Even today XHTML-levels of precision in HTML requires an awful lot of API support and very careful usage; doing it ten years ago was above almost everybody's skill level.
Unfortunately this meme will never die. The good news is I’ll be getting shit done while people who go on about this crap will just blog about Rust or monads or something.
Brave New World style, love it!!!

But seriously, that is not what art is. Art is not created automatically by a machine. We can program a 3d printer to spit out an exact copy of the veiled virgin, but will we find it as beautiful? Certainly not.

Part of the charm of the artistic process is that a human being's perspective becomes illuminated, in part, in the medium. The natural imperfections of that perception are made beautiful and become less like imperfections and more like variations. A machine, as of yet, cannot do this. A computer program cannot have this multiplicity of perspective which is at once flawed and beautiful. It cannot understand the human emotive experience beyond what is input-output-- and the human emotive experience, as we can all attest, is not composed of input-output events.

If we let the machines make our art for us, or to artificially induce the emotions in us, we have lost all understanding of what art is. Art is not utilitarian. We cannot have machines perform art.
Yes, flexbox was an old Mozilla XUL's feature (<vbox>/<hbox>) where flexes were defined by attributes. We all agreed at the moment that having presentation attributes in markup is nto that good idea. And that CSS flex was no-brainer port of that thing by replacing DOM attributes by bunch of CSS properties.

Problem is that flexbox ruins CSS box model that mandates that width CSS property is what defines the width of inner box of the element. Now they have flex-basis that if defined in galaxy far, far away overrides that width by something else.

That above already recognized as a mistake: https://wiki.csswg.org/ideas/mistakes

As of that 1D ...

grid-auto-flow: row | column;

makes flexbox obsolete at great extent.
The typical way to avoid this particular problem is only to load the content via JavaScript while copy/paste are presumed disabled.
The looming threat of nuclear war, disease, climate change or a rogue comet; in the descending order of (probability * intensity)
What We Learned Deploying Deep Learning for Radiology Images at Scale
Oh, so Gmail is finally moving away from email. Guess it was a question of time.
Kitsch Dallas: Why is the city of the future stuck in the past? (2014)
(Just for context, I am Icelandic, but have no other connection to this story.)

> They don't mention if the autopsy revealed when during the course of these events the girl died.

It does, she drowned after she was put in the water.

> It seems remarkable that despite a perceived lack of sufficient surveillance, they have an extremely likely killer convicted

The point is that without that tiny bit of surveillance, it would have been extremely hard to get on the track that led to discovery of incriminating evidence. Without linking the red KIA to Polar Nanooq, it is possible that nothing would have come of it. The perpetrator had left the country with almost all the available evidence, and such a large search would likely not have been launched so her body might have never been discovered.

It was by the skin of their teeth that the police managed to link the car in the first video to the boat. Had the first video been better (or more from the same area), they would have been able to identify the license plates right away.

A second thing to realize is in Iceland, the arguments against surveillance haven't been "we don't want to be watched" nor "it will get abused" -- but rather "we don't need it". It is obvious why this case changed that sentiment.
I’m working on a POC for Serverless event sourcing using graphql as the boundary (mutations are commands, queries are reads).

I recently read about event sourcing vs command sourcing and the perils of the latter.

Be careful my friends.

I think Redux serves as a great model for thinking about event sourcing.

State (the read model) is a pure function of the action history (event log). Side effects happen in action creators (commands) before they are committed to the store (log).
I think I seen a lot of asexuality in say, women in CS, or those who grow up under stricter Asian parenting in general, not having the time to ever "go out" or enjoy nightlife. This might be a minority of girls (most eventually try to put on makeup, be more sexually attractive, date around), but could still anecdotally constitute 10-20% of girls just based on what I've observed on university campuses. These are the kind of girls that totally don't sexually signal in a visual manner, have almost never dated, somewhat shy, sheepish around any sign of a sexual topic.
And if Google only had to remove links due to a court order, that would be a lot more fair then the current self-censorship regime.
It is odd that this is google's responsibility. Why isn't this directed at the original source?
Sure, you can find out that information about him, eventually. But you might not find out the information IMMEDIATELY.

After the background check is completed, he may have already gone through your full interview loop, and impressed everyone, and you may just decide that you want to hire him anyway.

In a different world, you would have rejected him outright, without giving him a chance to prove himself.

I think this matters a lot.
I once got contacted by a female account manager from a well known job boards company in the Valley. I googled for her to find her linkedin so we could link up, since we were going to be doing business together, likely for a while.

What shocked me was that the first result that Google returned was a smear page against her from her ex boyfriend, something like janedoesisaslut.com or janedoecheats.com with a long essay about what she did, and a bunch of photos of her on it. It was about how, when they were together in college, allegedly the woman had slept with other guys, and the boyfriend got pretty upset about it.

It was mortifying for me to run into it, and I can't even imagine how she must feel when the n.1 Google result for her name is that, forever. This must have happened over 10 years ago, and yet it kept haunting her to that day.

I talked about this with a few lawyer friends and my understanding is that you can't actually be sued for it. Apparently, if you're not lying and just stating actual facts about what happened, you're not liable, and don't fall under defamation/libel category. You could start a JohnDoeWillGiveYouGonorrhea.com and that's totally legal. The person trying to take the site down would have to clearly prove that their lives were seriously impacted by its existence, and quantify the damages, which would be pretty hard to pull off.

Real odd legal corner case.
Is it possible for the user to add their own data? In other words, can I use my preferred front end (my desktop text editor) to create notes, but display them using this app? Browsers are the only sensible choice for displaying content with links, but they are a horrible way to create content.
If anything, you were probably feeling safer without being connected 24/7 to all the problems in the world. I'm really skeptical you were more afraid of strangers because you couldn't access public records about them.
> this reality dream

Plato would agree.

But he would also say the dream is in your head. The thing is how to wake up from it. Reality is out there, where the material stuff is. Just shifting from one dream to another dream seems like a failure to me. I hope we don't go that way.
In theory, I think right to be forgotten is the government shirking its own responsibilities and leaving the administration of justice to large mega-corps.

In practice, it’s a pointless regulation circumvented by changing the url that imposes huge enforcement costs on big and small companies alike.

But the real problem is that it is top down legislation that tries to fix a symptom, not the disease. What is the problem? Companies won’t give ex-convicts jobs. Why? Because people distrust them and they can afford not to hire them (plenty of unemployed people to choose from). My impression is that the vast majority of employers feel this way. Interestingly, right to be forgotten does nothing to incentivize people to change or punish people for their prejudice. It also does not address the lack of jobs.

It's like if you had a society where 80% of people drive over the speed limit but doing so is illegal. The problem isn't that you need more laws. The problem is that your society has a different set of values. You can't legislate that people have a different set of values. At best you can try to reform a small set of the population that falls out of line.

And you can't legislate prosperity either. Making it illegal to not have a home won't get rid of homeless people anymore than the right to be forgotten will decrease unemployment in the EU.
JavaScript Fail Pokes Holes in Bitcoin Wallets
> You can get 20% of return on yearly bonds in dollars

Argentina has basically turned defaulting into a sport [1].

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_debt_restructuring
All of these kinds of arguments at least with regards to medicine neglect to understand how drug discovery actually works. It's not like engineering where you can a-priori design your spec, then reliably build the product to meet that spec.

At best in medicine you have a well understood disease mechanism (sometimes you don't even have that), where all the biological culprits are known and easily handled in an experimental context (that's rather rare at the outset of a medical project). Then you try to influence those players, but the process of finding those drugs looks a lot more like throwing darts at a board in the dark than it does like a coherent engineering task.

When you aim for the bullseye cure you often fall short and end up with a maintenance med. If you don't initially shoot for something that's likely to massively affect the disease's course, you're likely to miss the board entirely.

And all this assumes that the disease itself CAN be cured, which is not at all guaranteed. Biology is a wily beast, with insane, complicatedly interacting systems. In many ways, it's amazing we have as many cures as we do.

In other words, when finding drugs you don't really have a choice between cure/chronic use/total failure.
> Much like the current Intel architecture is amd64

Wrong. For x86-64 there exist two implementations, which are called by their vendors AMD64 and Intel 64 (the latter was marketed by Intel under the name EM64T for a long time, but now Intel seems to use the name "Intel 64").

These are not identical, though mostly compatible. If you want to have examples where they differ, look at

> http://sandpile.org/x86/opc_1.htm

> http://sandpile.org/x86/opc_2.htm

for instructions marked with "Df64" and "F64" (for the meaning of Df64 and F64 cf. http://sandpile.org/x86/opc_enc.htm). Another more subtle difference can be found at slide 141-142 (though better start at slide 133) of

> https://www.blackhat.com/docs/us-17/thursday/us-17-Domas-Bre...
Thanks for posting this, I didn't know about python-future.
Modifying Your Code for Unit Testing
Being slow to regulate something you don't yet understand is arguably a laudable thing.
There is no scrollbar, it's not possible to view the article on my machine with the latest Chrome.
Yep. I don’t agree with his opinion, but he probably doesn’t agree with mine about Rust: I’d rather gouge my eyes out than use that shit for anything other than a C/C++ replacement.
I don't think so either but there are quite a few degrees between "all the crime" and "zero crime".
But there is reason to do this. Not-yet voters inherit society and it’s infrastructure. There is value in what they’re inheriting.

We’re just arguing about the amount of the transfer at this point.
well, they also won it
It would be blocked. Just last month for example the administration blocked Singapore-based Broadcom from a takeover bid of Qualcomm on national security grounds.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/12/technology/trump-broadcom...

Not a fan of any of these folks, but if Trump is willing to do a USPS audit pony show just because he's in a kerfuffle with Amazon's WaPo, an international takeover of a large media conglomerate is highly unlikely.
You are just continung to show that you total ignorance of the space industry, NASA and SpaceX.

First of all, the argument that SpaceX would not exist without that contract is 100% wrong. When it was awarded they already had a successful comercial buissness with many people having order launches.

Second, you seem to be under the delusion that SpaceX was given this money. That is false, the money is conditional on reaching milestones and is only paid out if NASA is sadified. If NASA is not sadified the company has to pay for the delays out of their profit margin, unlike JWST for example. SpaceX has not jet recived the waste majority of that money.

Third, the 3 billion is by FAR the cheapest offer NASA had. You can see in your own link that SpaceX gets 2.6 billion while Boeing gets 4.2 billon for the operational phase. The DreamCheaser was around 3.6.

So what do you want? Do you want NASA to build everything themselfs? NASA itself admits that they could not develop something nearly as cheap. Their own evaluations have ahown this over and over again.

Are you just against spaceflight in general? Do you think the government should not be invovlved?

The document you yourself provided showes that SpaceX got the contract because they convinced NASA in a highly technical highy comptetive.

So whats your issue? Why this irrational hate?
The huge underlying assumption here is that people would use XHTML as a standard instead of using HTML4.01 with browser-specific extensions, which is what actually happened. XHTML didn't add any value to page authors. It added hugely indirect value to readers. The only people XHTML helped were tooling authors and browser vendors. It's very hard to market that as a value-add.
Not really. You at least have to build up your guanxi before the violations occur (or brought up as a problem), once it happens, it’s too late. At anyrate, the FCPA has to be followed by American citizens as well as companies (other western companies have similar acts), so it isn’t really an option.

My point is, unless you are Chinese working for a Chinese company, don’t try to be edgy in China, follow both written and unwritten rules. Foreigners are great chickens to kill to scare the monkeys, as the Chinese idiom goes.
FBI Refuses to Say Whether It Bought iPhone Unlocking Tech 'GrayKey'
That article has changed my behavior in some places as well. Sometimes it's indeed better to sit down and replace the entire old solution, instead of going incrementally. It's a bigger immediate pain, but less following pain.
Having a different point of view doesn't make it valid, you need a chain of reasoning with cause and effect.
Mostly agree with you here but small nit to pick. There's no such thing as a firearms license in the United States. Felons lose their right to own (or even possess?) guns.
You misunderstand, I'm saying there are fair and professional ways to find out if someone is trustworthy. Googling their name, and finding some 5 year old article is not one of these. It presents a incomplete picture that is biased towards attention grabbing material from for-profit media. Use proper background checks and references.

There are also fair ways to deal with criminals, and staff you may not trust. Using google results as the bases of randomly deducting pay, removing employment rights, and other discriminatory acts, is not one of these. It would be far too easy for employers to abuse and doesn't lend itself to the employee having stability. This would just increase the chances of the employee returning to crime.
Maybe can be changed to "Use your network to find..."

Hopefully referrals are a bit better than lottery
I think you have the cart before the horse here. WHATWG is just a codification of what is. If we didn't have WHATWG, you wouldn't be freed from the burden of supporting current webpages, you just wouldn't know what that burden entails. At any rate, refactoring Blink to meet W3C's spec has to be easier to write a renderer from scratch, even if you don't care about writing noncompliant webpages, or as they're usually known, webpages.
7 years. https://googlesystem.blogspot.de/2011/07/preview-gmails-new-...
Isn't this criticism a bit too harsh?

All else being equal, better randomness means better crypto.
The point here is not to stop malicious recipients from saving the data. The point is to stop sensitive stuff from showing up in discovery in a lawsuit 3 years from now because a recipient didn't know to delete it.
We can and have, in America at least. Companies used to think all black people were untrustworthy and women couldn't handle the responsibility of leadership. We didn't let them continue to discriminate like that
Criminals always follow the path of least resistance.

Like how they steal bicycles because they know police don't have resources to bother with that.

Or how the steal phones from your hand in London for the same reason.

Now imagine if an AI would trace their path through thousands of CCTV cameras. It could even automatically dispatch a squad to arrest them from home. Surely that would deter many of them, since now crime would send you to jail instead of giving you a free phone.
Maybe Chappelle could google for “Kyokushin” one of these days...
Is google publishing articles about this? Or are they simply a card catalog? Want to be forgotten? Why not address the publisher of information and not merely the index of it?
That's how my kids eat brown bread (whole wheat bread). I don't know whether they know about white bread, but they certainly don't have access to it at home.

They either eat whole wheat bread or they don't eat bread, and I don't care either way. I make really good sandwiches. If they want one, then they can have one. :)
Reminds me of the Adbusters Magazine I used to read as a kid. Philosophically and aesthetically brutalist and uncomfortable.
Doubt it. At least in the US, cctv sucks and doesn't have a whole lot of coverage.
I don't see how letting something I don't control gives better maintainability.
"Flexbox can do things Grid can't do"

For example?
Haskell has a great runtime and green threads.
I've always thought the water tower in Belgium that was converted to a house is interesting (they've added a necessary elevator!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfBk-IYCW14
None of these failures have been due to a computer's inability to generate sufficiently random numbers so this particular thing is not solving any kind of practical cryptographic problem.
> Is it truly "censorship" though, if one is so aggressively distasteful and difficult to deal with that nobody wants to do business with them?

That's the definition of censorship. What do you think gets censored? Tasteful content?

Free speech exists to protect distasteful content. It's what separates us from china or russia or europe. We had and used to believe in free speech.

> There is absolutely nothing wrong with what Cloudflare did.

There is absolutely everything wrong with what cloudfare did. It's why their CEO apologized for it and promised to never do it again.

It's amazing that someone on "hacker" news doesn't even appreciate the basics of free speech. Have education standards declined this much?
I've seen this approach appear without a name very often in highly concurrent Haskell, Erlang and Elixir code. Often a "safe" race combinator appears in good libraries that handles graceful termination. So much so that you can often find local libraries that look like this Haskell code:

speculatively :: Int -> IO a -> IO (Either a a)
speculatively ms action = race action (threadDelay ms >> action)
How could you make such a confident and strong recommendation given the vague nature of keithnz's comment?
My right to be safe from a rapist is greater than their right to not be on a registry. If they want to avoid being on a registry, then avoid raping people!
When antibiotics fail, could phage therapy succeed?
Practical Functional Go (Ramda.js in Go)
"nothing useful that has benefited humanity"

This is just a list of benefits that humans have gotten from space travel. Space travel in general is, in fact, beneficial to humanity and science.
Speaking of magic, json tags are weird stringy magic only used at runtime via reflection.

If I have a struct with the tag `josn:"foo"` instead of "json", I won't get an error, it'll just silently blow up.

If I add a new field, I have to manually add the tag too.

You know what's both less magic and less fragile? The rust equivalent.

In rust, I write '#[serde(rename_all = "camelCase")]' above a struct. If I typo, it won't compile. If I add new members to the struct, they'll work without me having to remember some boilerplate.

If I have one that needs an exception, I can put '#[serde(rename = "foo")]' above just that one. It also won't compile if I typo.

This is the alternative to what go has; compile-time safety, language-features that let a library provide such naming strategies, etc. It's less magic since it doesn't rely on these weird conventionally named tag things that are only sorta part of the language.

I suspect what the author meant by naming strategy was something like that. Your argument that the author is adverse to being explicit is a strawman; the author appears to be asking for a struct-wide way to be explicit.
I agree about phishers. My bank does this for their "secure email". The first time I got one of their "secure emails", I first assumed it was a phishing attempt for my bank credentials.
Show HN: Quantum Computing Notes, with focus on IBM Q [pdf]
Measurement of the fine-structure constant casts doubt on dark photon theories