skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
First, I wish to thank you for keeping this discussion alive, I really value the opinions of others on this idea (which is also the result of refining earlier formulations by the opinions of others)

"Sacrificing people's dignity for the supposed common good it very much not a road I am willing to go down."

I don't see how my system sacrifices a person's dignity?
Could you describe how my proposals would destroy dignity in your view?
Here are some definitions of dignity:

* The quality or state of being worthy of esteem or respect.

* Inherent nobility and worth: the dignity of honest labor.

* Poise and self-respect.

Or are you talking about the dignity of people previously working in centralized law enforcement systems who would then appear superfluous/ineffective/archaic/unproductive/dangerous to citizens in my system? Like we view say slave-holders today?

"Yeah, and then imagine I could strip you of your human rights because I value a common good higher than your human rights."

I don't see how you could do that to me in my system. Or rather, you could, but you couldn't get away with it. Either you let me go at some point and I report the time and place of the events, so you get caught and do prison time. Or you don't let me go or kill me and my friends and family report me as missing, at which point I get tracked down and they find us alive, or me dead, and then later you get caught and do prison time.

"Also, no matter what the law, you cannot completely prevent that people will try to put pressure on other people."

I am not trying to prevent pressure in general, i.e. price communication is pressure too, I am specifically trying to design a system such that illegal pressure can be provably adressed. Say you hold a knife to my throat and pressure me to give my wallet, I can then report and prove that.

"For one, the checks and balances we have today are a sort-of implementation of the same fundamental idea of decentralizing power"

I totally disagree, my goal is a provably law enforcing society, not a trusted law enforcing society.

This provable/verifiable decentralized mass surveillance I proposee stands to the current trusted law enforcement systems in an analogous way as the concept of provable/verifiable cryptocurrencies stand to the current trusted financial system.

I also saw you used the phrase "democratized mass surveillance": note I systematically used the word decentralized, not democratized, there is a difference there, for example we don't directly vote on a trial, nor on wheither or not to decrypt imagery when something is reported, democracy is for the legislative branch, this proposal describes a decentralized executive branch or law enforcement (treshold crypto + cameras + client software + properly trained citizens in occasional police role)
Bounds Check Elimination in Go
I disagree. It's not the frivolities that are causing people problems it's "lifestyle inflation". I know my family spends a lot on things that could be considered "frivolous", but I'm very careful about not increasing the fixed expenses - mortgage, car notes, random other debt - that you can't just cut back on at a moments notice.

I have a monthly budget and I have a "minimum budget". The minimum budget is how much it would take to survive a month if I lost my job.
> whereas driving straight into something the car fails to see is very unlikely with an attentive driver.

So then what is the point of Autopilot at all? I'm a big fan of Tesla, and I've wanted to try Autopilot for years, but after I saw that YouTube video of the driver needing to slam on the breaks to barely avoid hitting the divider, I thought "no thanks". If Autopilot dangerously lulls you into a false sense of security, I'd rather drive manually where I'm forced to be attentive.
You can't run a regular file system like ext4 or xfs but there are file systems designed for sharing a block device: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustered_file_system#SHARED-D...
"and gives them the option to "poke through" and notify you anyway"

Yeah...this is why I close down slack when I don't want disruptions. There's no point in a DND if others can do it anyway. It shouldn't be an option. If someone at work has an emergency and needs to get hold of me, they can give me a phone call. Non-verbal communications have a tendency to be abused, but the reality of actually having to have a conversation with the person you're disturbing means only serious calls seem to get made.
How much data do we have on civilizations going back that far? I imagine that "progress" was not monotonically up, so there might be peaks of development above the trendline that we don't know about because of missing data
It took a generation, but I think that a big chunk of society learned to be wary of big media's outsized influence enabled by television. Most people I knew as a young adult had basically completely eschewed television with decent notions of its effects and annoyances.

The internet, on the other hand was something new. Fresh, unfiltered and unmanipulated... Until recently, now it's just the same shit but exponentially more insidious.

Where's Sidney Lumet when we need him?

"I want you to go to your keyboards, throw open your windows and get MAD. I want you to scream goddamnit, I'M MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE!"
Screens have glare. When I read a book I want basically all the light I can get, eg. being outside is fine. When I'm on a screen, it needs to be dim around me so I can see.
I found this only to be a problem if the person who wrote the code being reviewed is slow at writing/changing code. It shouldn't be a big deal: Checkout, fix, re-run tests, commit, push, tick off task.

However, if the above process on the developer's side is not quick, then no matter if the comments are batched together, the whole thing will take a long time. This is usually a sign that the wrong person is doing this specific module, or that they need more mentoring/training/firing.
And if you get something along the lines of "of course I have considered X!" as a response, someone took that one as the loaded variant. It's tricky. "What am I missing?" or a variation on it, as the parent mentions as the intended meaning, probably isn't a bad thing to add, since it makes it clear that you aren't accusing.
Yes, but.

The default state of most people is that any criticism is a painful insult. I deliberately try to accept and learn from criticism, and have been told I take criticism unusually well. This pleases me.

That doesn’t mean I accept assholes. I used to accept them, but I learned to rid myself of them at the same time I learned to accept valid criticism.

Unfortunately I don’t know how to reliably give feedback that others find easy to accept. I wish to do better.
Regarding your distinction between real and cyber crimes, digital evidence can certainly be relevant in a murder case, e.g. iMessages, location history, search history. Also, the read-only bricking chip tries to allow search but exclude ongoing surveillance, though I don't think it's technically feasible.
Thank you! Quality info.
I don't think it's harmful. You just need to know what you're doing. PHP gets a bad rep round here unfairly. It's actually a very useful language which has proven itself over and over again in the wild. I wonder what you think of JavaScript?
You make it outdoors detention, where they sit and watch other kids play.

I don't know whats more cruel.
But that cup of coffee may bring her a little joy every morning. That vacation is maybe a weeks worth of pleasure? I'm not saying either is right, but it is about priorities.

Because of...reasons...I am having to choose between enjoying time with my wife now and saving more for retirement and retiring a little bit earlier. We have only being married 5 years and now have the flexibility to enjoy our selves more. I'm purposefully making the choice to live for the now. I'm turning down side contracts that people keep trying to throw at me because I really enjoy the now.

We all make choices.
The control flow issues mentioned there have been addressed many times. Coroutines and their discontents are well known. But the author has some good points about cancellation.

Cancellation isn't well-studied. It has two main cases - canceling a wait, and interrupting actual computation. The first case comes up more often.

If anything that can wait can be aborted, then things unwind better. Language support for this needs to be block-structured, as in Python's

Lock lok;
with lok :
(do something)

Python uses exceptions, so the appropriate mechanism there would be to indicate lock failure with an exception, and not execute the "with" block. In error code languages, the locking block should return an error code.

Once a thread/coroutine/whatever is in cancellation, all waits should abort. So you rapidly fall through the code until the concurrent construct reaches its exit point. Unwinding still takes place. Non-blocking concurrency primitives should be allowed in this mode, so you can add things to a list, but can't wait on I/O. RAII things like file-closing on block exit have to be done that way, because the canceled construct can't wait for them.

QNX real-time messaging works something like this. QNX's basic interprocess communication primitive is MsgSend, which sends a message and waits for a reply. MsgSend can be canceled, or can time out; an error code is returned. All I/O requests are MsgSend operations and thus can be canceled. In QNX, everything that can block can be timed out or canceled. This is used to place upper bounds on how long things can take.

Canceling a compute loop is harder. If the compute loop is operating only on local data, it's not so bad. You need some data flow analysis to determine that the function being forced to error out doesn't have non-local side effects. If, say, you're inverting a matrix, and that needs to be aborted, you need to be sure that the matrix is never looked at again. This is probably easier in functional languages.

Once wait cancellation under control, so the thing you're canceling can't block, having to wait for the other thread/coroutine/whatever to reach its join point isn't so bad. You don't need to kill it; you can wait for it to unwind. So solving cancellation moots the problem of how to handle thread joins for failed threads.
For those interested in various approaches in this space that are very interesting, may I recommend:

* Haskell and in particular Marlow's async library.

* The Erlang language's Actor system along with the OTP framework as a different way of thinking about orphaned processes (via supervision trees).

* The Pony language, which can safely pass ownership of objects (and thusly coroutines) around.
I ask because it would be nice to run a traditional database this way for HA. I suppose nearly as good is being able to instantly mount and unmount across multiple machines if you could also use FoundationDB to fence writes to the device if the old writer comes back as a zombie.
Is this what you're referring to: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/1/9/the-real-reason... ?
"All of the programs and incentives put in place by the federal and state governments to induce higher levels of growth by building more infrastructure has made the city of Lafayette functionally insolvent. Lafayette has collectively made more promises than it can keep and it's not even close. If they operated on accrual accounting -- where you account for your long term liabilities -- instead of a cash basis -- where you don't -- they would have been bankrupt decades ago."
A "Have you considered..." question asks for a "yes" or "no".

A "Why[...]" question asks for why.

Assuming that "Why didn't you just do X?" isn't really just a disingenuous way to say, "you're an idiot; do it this way instead", then you should ask for what you want and ask the why question, not the yes-or-no question. In the case that it is a disingenuous question, then that's something that's covered adequately by #5. Suggesting the avoidance of sarcasm is already broadly applicable enough to cover using questions when you really mean to make a statement. (Which is not specific to code reviews—it's as obnoxious in real life.)
> I'm sure you're not doing that intentionally

And I'm sure that you know that is not true. You can't possibly believe that someone who says "but what can i expect from a german" does not know exactly the effect he will provoke on the other person.
Could you please not do programming language flamewars here?

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Naive question: Could one summarise this case as trafficking a "counterfeit" free download in CD format, or, alternatively, as trafficking a "counterfeit" free CD, where the reason the download or CD is "free" is because it contains software that cannot be run without an individual, nontransferable "activation code".

For example, software company distributes free CDs that contain copy of software, however software cannot be run without a non-transferable activation code. Unauthorised copying of printed label or contents of CD could be copyright infringement. Assuming it is, what are the damages? What is value of CD without activation code? (e.g. cost of the optical media) What is value of CD with activation code? (e.g. cost of the software license) Which measure is appropriate?
I was initially extremely skeptical of sites using Pwned Passwords' API until I learned how this worked/realized this.

I was super skeptical of "send Troy your whole SHA1 hash", because many many SHA1 hashes have been reversed. Then when I was looking at V2, I was considering the fact that in a given set of 381 passwords, there were probably only a couple you might be meaning to check (if you look at a range set, each one generally has a couple of repeatedly used password hashes).

But if my passwords fall outside of that set, someone might think I am maybe checking against one of the more commonly leaked passwords, when mine isn't even in that range set at all.

Partially for my own comfort, and for fun, I ended up writing my own short checker in a .NET console app: https://github.com/ocdtrekkie/PwnPsswords
Seattle vacates hundreds of marijuana charges going back 30 years
The War of the Closes
> You have been one of the worst offenders in this thread

I obviously disagree with the characterisation of what I said as "nationalistic poison", but I will no longer talk politics on HN to be on the safe side.
Caesar Lives by Iggy Pop (2013/1995)
Are those the only communities that define what is 'currently fashionable'?
Go read Step 2. and 3. yourself

They used the key later to show that the activation never appeared on Microsoft's servers even when using a genuine key which clearly shows the disks were tampered.
Maybe it's the repetition during memorization that allowed me to understand what the poets were doing with meter and enjambment.

I'm mostly interested in iambic pentameter and heptameter: Shakespeare, Spenser, Arthur Golding, George Chapman, Milton, Tennyson, etc. I can't say that I understand a lot of modern, unstructured poetry yet.

The use of language is usually more interesting than the meanings of the poems for me (with the exception of a few, like Wilfred Owen). Memorizing a lot of poems creates mental structures of rhythms and sounds that are kind of like templates that your thoughts can fill, and they echo in my head for a long time afterwards.

I have to sometimes force myself not to pick up a poetry book, because it's so interesting that it can distract me from other things. Before that, poetry didn't interest me or make much sense.
Apps could potentially work in read-only mode. Plus it's pretty easy to design a tool to pretty print iMessages given raw data, and that alone would be very useful for law enforcement.
what exactly is great about UWS? i dated a woman who lived in morningside heights. it's just generic nyc things (like everywhere else). only difference between my neighborhood in brooklyn and morningside heights was the average skintone.
HyperTools: A Python toolbox for gaining insights into high-dimensional data
Unfortunately I have to (mostly) agree with you. It feels exactly that way.

The "email spamming crypto" part you were referring to has never worked in a good way (in fact you call it spam for a reason). For several months I observed Earn.com and guessed that it was not going to end well.
The quadratic formula and low-precision arithmetic
basically everything south of williamsburgh and east of parkslope is like 1/4-1/3 of manhattan costs. as i wrote in response to the person living in UWS: the only difference is the average skin tone.
The Toba eruption leans heavily toward the 'interesting thought experiment' category as well at this point though.

I'm in a paleoclimatology class right now and we spent a couple weeks on it. The John Hawks post[0] cited under #Criticism on Wikipedia is a pretty good summary of the current research as I understand it.

The short argument against it is that the genetic signature corresponds to either an extremely tight short bottleneck, ie all living humans are descended from a group of <1000 which lived through Toba, or a looser bottleneck (tens of thousands of humans) which lasted centuries. The tight bottleneck version requires almost all of Earth to have become briefly uninhabitable which strains belief since we've found several sites which were a-ok throughout, and the loose version is unworkable because Toba didn't have centuries long effects.

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/climate/toba-bottleneck-...
...a lot of text but it is obviously not true: the author claims:

"the reaction at the time was "WTF? Which heresy are you talking about here?"

But the exact heresy was explicitly and very clearly stated both in the sentence by the Inquisition:

"the above-mentioned Galileo, because of the things deduced in the trial and confessed by you as above, have rendered yourself according to this Holy Office vehemently suspected of heresy, namely of having held and believed a doctrine which is false and contrary to the divine and Holy Scripture: that the sun is the center of the world and does not move from east to west, and the earth moves and is not the center of the world, and that one may hold and defend as probable an opinion after it has been declared and defined contrary to Holy Scripture."

And in Galileo's Abjuration:

"after having been judicially instructed with injunction by the Holy Office to abandon completely the false opinion that the sun is the center of the world and does not move and the earth is not the center of the world and moves, and not to hold defend, or teach this false doctrine in any way whatever, orally or in writing; and after having been notified that this doctrine is contrary to Holy Scripture; I wrote and published a book in which I treat of this already condemned doctrine and adduce very effective reasons in its favor, without refuting them in any way"

The premise of the whole series by that author is also wrong, approximately, that because the parallax wasn't observed until around 1750 Galileo couldn't prove in 1633 that the Earth is not standing still, therefore the Church was right and it wasn't a matter of faith but a personal thing. It's obviously a completely invalid argument.
I’m not aware of the specific type features the commenter was mentioning, but that doesn’t sound too different than a tree or graph data structure.
Pig brains kept alive outside bodies for first time
I don't want this scheme. I don't want key escrow. But, a critique in the document is a 'if lost, lost forever' moment. If the escrow DB is compromised, the article says all phone are now pwned. For that point in time, true.

But phones are online devices. why does the escrow key have to be a constant, which if the central store is compromised means all phones prior to that date are compromised forever?

eg, re=spin the per-phone keygen on some cycle, and you define a window of risk, but it passes. re-spin clearly has to pass through some protocol, but we've been doing ephemeral re-key forever with websites.
Glad to be of any service, if I gave you ideas or something to ponder, I did my job. ;)

Oh, one more question: It's a .co.uk address. Are you able to do this for UK customers only, or is it a global service? If you're just putting people in contact with others, I'd think that there'd be no reason people in other countries couldn't use it, but I don't know.
The problem is also around people artificially liking and commenting on your own posts (if they are public). I had encountered this last year when I was running a photography project and I would have to deal with fake accounts posting on every image. Each would post one of the following messages: 'Nice! Check out my page!', 'Wow! Cool pic. Want to increase your followers, click the link in my profile.", "Very nice. Follow back".

I don't want that spam in my image comments (considering there would only be 1 or 2 comments from real people and 10+ of these). I had to go through and manually delete them, block the users (achieving nothing because there are so many of these spammers).

This is a serious UX problem that has turned me away from Instagram (which was the "best social media" platform before they destroyed the chronologic timeline). I don't care if people are using an API to post legitimate content (I would have loved the ability to post content to multiple sites at once (twitter, IG, ...)). I care when the API enables annoying spammers.
Any article about myopia which doesn't mention anything about nutrition is "shortsighted" (pun intended).

One of the most interesting discussions around causes for myopia is centered on nutrition, and how growing faster than our ancestors can negatively effect our vision.

I looked for a specific reference to share here (something I've read years ago), but I didn't find it.
The "scientific and philosophical" communities are, it turns out, embedded in academia. Therefore, they cannot escape the trends that are born in those circles whether they are based on facts or emotions and thus pseudoscience.
Inside the secret U.S. stockpile meant to save us all in a bioterror attack
suppose Apple owns the building:

* there is no advantage in having cops come over: either a secret is revealed or it is not. Any information to convince Apple concerning a specific case or phone could just as well be sent over the internet. Allowing them to enter looks like a serious threat vector to me, they could plant things, smuggle things out...

* Either Apple is faithfully reporting each count of the cops unlocking a phone, or it isnt. In the case of requesting over the internet the cops can't bring in devices to look through closed boxes or whatever.

* Is your fear rooted in a perceived sense of insecurity because of the small passcode (4 decimal digits) and the effect that would have on the security of the encrypted(passcode+nonce)? because that is exactly why the random nonce is there, in theory the user could select his own nonce and have it burned in efuse memory, but he would only be able to change the nonce a limited number of times. Then the user can roll as many dice as he wants and xor bits to smithereens ;)

but it all stays crap key escrow, its just a big "Eureka!"-show trial balloon to gauge public acceptance, no?
1,000x this. A simple refactor commit, with a comment stating "reformat to match current coding standards. No functional changes".
That's kinda hilarious but altogether probably unsurprising. With Android and Chrome using Google as the default search, I suspect the number of people who test against Bing Image Search is a small quantity. :/
It doesn't, it has Lenovo's SLIC in the BIOS. More than enough to activate Windows. Device manager would no doubt show it's a mess of not installed drivers though.

Big OEMs including Dell and Lenovo use an activation baked into the BIOS and a SLIC (system licence internal code) that's also in the BIOS. No activation required after restore from legitimate or otherwise CD or restore partition. It won't match the code on the machine's sticker, even if it's 100% legit just bought new from maker.

Search will turn up plenty on how SLIC works.