skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The Implicit flow is designed specifically for mobile apps or client side Javascript apps where embedded credentials could be compromised. The mechanics are simple in that the application redirects the user to the Identity Provider to authenticate, the IdP passes back token(s), and the application uses it according to the scopes it has.

Do not use Implicit Grant in mobile apps unless interacting with an app provider (and even then, Implicit Grant still has some major footguns if you are using it for authn, which most people are). It was absolutely not "designed specifically for mobile apps." If you are talking to the browser you cannot ensure that the access token is delivered to the right place and access tokens are not bound to the relying party. If you are using the access token for authn like suggested here, you let malicious apps impersonate your users.

If you are using a mobile app and performing OAuth through the browser, use Authz Code flow with PKCE.
>I suspect knowing the fundamentals gets you pretty far,

Not much further than eighties, and you are not getting anything done with seventies era ICs.

I'd say. After seventies, most of academic research gets almost wholly separate from the fab floor, and of course fab owners and equipment makers keep to their valuable secrets.

At TSMC, the EUV workgroup, for example, is a very select cohort of people with 10+ years at the company, with posted security bonds, screened for loyalty, and signed an omerta style NDA.
Invasive, toxic caterpillars that can kill are about to invade parts of London
I think this is good.

In a world that moves too quick to have review/ratings companies for everything, you should come in skeptical and be proven wrong.

Its up to the merchant to make a great product, its up to you to compare and make good decisions.
That's great and I agree with him. We have to pay attention to the stale.
Just for the sake of not relying on google to do their work and not having to rely on someone who has huge conflict of interest with anything regarding user privacy. But regardless of that I would offer a consent pop up, for this site it is trivial, you are surprisingly clean :) Excuse me, I will refrain from further commenting about GDPR, I am sick of downvoting and quite frankly, people will figure it out on their own.
Exponential performance cliff compiling associated types with equality constraints[1]. It was first opened in 2015 and was only recently addressed. Rust certainly has the potential for exponential times when performing large inference.

[1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/22204
Whats interesting about the flat taxes is that it makes it hard to avoid at the highest levels, where complex tax structures end up having a very variant level of taxation. Much like corporate taxation is 35%, but google or facebook pay only 11%.

Milton Friedman used to say that a flat tax of 15% would be enough to replace the entire scheme of income tax. There is also one major boon: lots of capital is spent on taxes, from accountants to lawyers to gubernamental organizations, etc etc.

An effective 15% rate without exemptions would fly very well with the right (simple flat taxes) an the left (no exemptions) but as MF said, the political stances on this topic dont trust each other and they are both right: even if we moved to such a system, the right would still advocate for exemptions and the left for increases in taxation.

Its a noticeable deadlock.

I also want to mention that flat taxes are not regressive by definition. The progressiveness or regressiveness in that case requires to see where the taxes are spent.
I hate tmobile for this reason.

Totally crap, especially since tmobile runs ads that have pink background and 1 word on the screen:

UNLIMITED

No. Its not unlimited. I know because I paid 25 extra dollars for a month for their international plan. Truly unlimited.
So the fork is mostly needed for convenient fast iteration?
That is pretty heavy. One of my old band-mates has a benign brain tumor, though hers is inoperable. She lives with the specter of something someday changing with it, resulting in personality change or death. (So it is a silver lining that Simone's is operable, though the risk of bad outcomes still sucks.) Yes, gallows humor helps. Perhaps that's why my band-mate was partial to songs including death.
Anko: scriptable interpreter written in Go
Musk's statements, and Tesla in general, have gone to cultivating an impression that Tesla almost has self-driving. An impression that, okay, it's not perfect, but it's good enough that you can act like it is for most of the time. This impression is far enough from the truth that it's fundamentally dishonest, particularly when the response from Tesla after incidents amounts to "the driver is completely at fault here, we don't need to change anything" (in other words, their marketing says it's basically self-driving, their legal defense says self-driving is only at your own risk).

In the moralistic sense, yes, Tesla needs to be reprimanded for its actions. However, lying in this manner is often well-protected by law, if you manage to include enough legalese disclaimers somewhere, and I suspect Tesla has enough lawyers to make sure that legalese is sufficient to disclaim all liability.
Nvc, a vhdl simulator written in C.

I can't wait to spend some time with it, and dream of throwing Modelsim/Questasim in the trash.
> try really hard to avoid killing people

Yes, and both Elon Musk as an individual and Tesla Motors as an organization agree. How they approach that idea is somewhat different from what we're used to though.

Their basic assertions are (in my words):
1. Vision and radar based technology, along with current generation GPUs and related hardware, along with sufficiently developed software, will be able to make cars 10x safer.
2. How quickly total deaths are reduced is tied directly to how quickly and widely such technology is rolled out and used.
3. Running in 'shadow' mode is a good source of data collection to inform improvements in the software.
4. Having the software/hardware actually control cars is an even better source of data collection to accelerate development.
5. There is additional, incremental risk created when the software/hardware is used in an early state.
6. This is key: the total risk over time is lessened with fast, aggressive rollouts of incomplete software and hardware, because it will allow a larger group of people to have access to more robust, safer software sooner than otherwise would be possible.

That last point is the balance: is the small additional risk Tesla is subjecting early participants to outweighed by how much more quickly the collected data will allow Tesla to produce a more complete safety solution?

We don't know for sure yet, but I think the odds are pretty good that pushing hard now will produce more total safety over time.

> life is sacred

This is my background as well, and its an opinion I personally hold.

At the same time, larger decisions, made by society, by individuals, and by companies, must put some sort of value on life. And different values on different lives. Talking about how much a life is worth is a taboo topic, but it's something that is considered, consciously or otherwise, all day, every day, by many people, myself included.

Most every big company, Tesla Motors included,make decisions based on these calculations all the time. Being a 'different kind of company' in many ways, Tesla makes these calculations somewhat differently.
It's not about giving up on the legal system, it's about taking responsibility and not sharing data with people you don't trust, or don't trust to keep secret.

You keep writing as if everyone has a meaningful choice about who gets data about them, but clearly that is not always the case. Someone may obtain data about someone else from a third party, and you can't avoid sharing a certain amount of data and still function as a normal member of society.

The idea of absolute, black-and-white privacy, where either you share personal information or you keep something completely to yourself, isn't very useful in the modern world. Our conventions must be more nuanced than that, and in practice that means what really matters is who gets access to data about you and what they're using it for.
Total noob question here, but how does the hardware you're using affect compilation speed? What's the baseline hardware being used in this benchmark he runs? There's no way to recreate the benchmark environment unless we know this.

When someone like ajross says rustc is really slow, how slow are we talking?
I have a Comcast cable box sitting in my cupboard in the original packaging. I had to get it as part of a deal to get 300mbps internet for $95/mo (1 year contract). It's going to sit there in the original packaging until I cancel my service and return it, I guess.
It's funny that we are willing to disqualify an AI as an I simply because it comes to some startlingly nonsensical result, yet history is full of humans doing the same thing (from placing a plastic cup on a hot stovetop through to gas chambers).
Why Canada Has Emerged as a Leading Blockchain and Crypto Nation
Not necessarily untrue. TV+Internet is cheaper for me with my status as a current customer with Verizon FiOS.
We have a number of accounting firms which we work with that we refer Atlas customers to. This lets us explain the Atlas concept once, prepare the firms for "You're going to have a high volume of companies who will often have the same set of issues so let's research and brief those in advance", build out tools to assist with information gathering, etc.

It also lets us help refer companies to accountancies whose sweet spot most closely corresponds to the facts of the company.
Unless they're uploading videos to YouTube on a regular basis (Or some other type of large file somewhere), no they won't. They already have enough bandwidth to stream to Twitch, so I really don't think the average user (or even a gamer) will notice.
Not really. Spiciness isn't at all at the same level as cut brake lines, and it wasn't done in anticipation of anything

It's more like you have a manual transmission, and your thief crashed because they only know an automatic.
Sorry, but lean and cheap aren't synonyms.

As an example, a pal once worked for some medium-sized company where if you wanted a new pencil, you go down to the basement and through a long hallway to a window. At the window you had to confront the Dragon of the Office Supply Horde, and to prove your worthiness, you had to bring a sufficiently used existing pencil. That company was definitely cheap, but was very much not lean.

Toyota, on the other hand, is the classic lean company. When they don't need to build cars, they don't lay people off or send them home, which would be the cheap thing to do. Instead, they have them clean, polish, train, and generally improve the plants and themselves. They spent extraordinary sums building the first Prius prototype, which could barely get around a track. But they kept on improving it, eventually making one of the world's best-selling cars and making them a leader in a new market.

Spending $500 to incorporate a startup may not be cheap, but it certainly can be lean if you determine that the investment in learning how to correctly do the legal and financial dance will not have as much ROI as paying for it to happen and focusing instead on building the actual business.
DocRaptor is great. We used it for generating invoices for several years until our volume justified buying Prince and running it locally.
It's like going to lunch with a group of people. If it's just you, you can go wherever you like. Once it's with your partner, you have to take their interested into account. Have you tried planning a lunch for 5 or more people, taking into account dietary restrictions, location, time, etc.. ? And imagine when it's 400 people - now you need to make sure the restaurant can hold that amount of people, and if it's available during times that you like. The more people that are involved, the more variables are introduced that influence decision making.
Per the sibling thread - User Agent strings.
The people in the trenches most likely prefer that (I know I did). The problem is convincing the people higher up to spend part of a tight budget (money and manhours) every year without an easily-defined return.
Two NSA Algorithms Rejected by the ISO
I've been moving away from web apps and using native macOS replacements where possible, so I was happy to find Evergreen, an open source feed reader which is in active development

https://github.com/brentsimmons/Evergreen
Coordination tax.
Interesting to think of the parallels of this and network architecture and/or distributed computing (though very different in terms of how work actually happens).
>A point of view helps too. What is Watson’s view on ISIS for example?

>Dumb question? Actual thinking entities have a point of view about ISIS. Dogs don’t but Watson isn't as smart as a dog either. (The dog knows how to get my attention for example.)

Ouch. But at the same time, for something that didn't grab his attention he sure had a lot of words to say about it.
This may be a wrong mental model, but I view it as overall cost to maintain a structure. For example, the number of nodes (volume / support) to build a pyramid of height H scales non-linearly with H.

Height is not the same as output (and H / V is not the same as efficiency), but this model has some similarity to the real world engineering output. Just my 2c.
Speaking more pragmatically, larger companies are much more family friendly - people guard their personal lives fiercely at large companies. At least, this is my experience at an 80,000+ employee company.

You're basically a huge asshole if you book a meeting at 3pm because you'll make all the moms and dads late for picking up their kids. And you can't book any meetings before 10am because more often than not, it's tough to get everyone in earlier because they have to drop their kids off.

Aside from that, new parents are often glued to their phones waiting for updates from whoever is taking care of their children. They are not fully engaged in meetings and I often watch their attention drift to the daycare nanny cam. I have a coworker who receives hourly updates from her mother who is taking care of her young child. Sure enough, every hour there is something that needs to be corrected and thus, a 15 min phone call ensues.

So here I am, a single software developer, who has to wait a week for our sprint planning meeting because everyone else on the team has put up roadblocks that prevent it from happening. I literally will sit here this week doing nothing because of this. This is a regular occurrence.

This isn't a complaint really, I will want these same luxuries when I am a parent, but I can't help but notice that 90% of my team would really rather be elsewhere.
No you don't. You get the opportunity to sort things out first. This is not about prosecuting business. It is about protecting users. Completely different.

It is really not such a big deal.
Very nice to integrate static analysis with code review tools. Did anybody here successfully integrate Java static analysis (e.g. FindBugs) with GitLab merge requests?

How would someone integrate static analysis to the workflow if there's no code review?

My experience with bug dashboards is the same of Google. It is outside the developers workflow.
> It's dishonest and sleazy

It's comcast™
Ask HN: Why do we have asymmetric views about work life balance in professions?
Correct me here and this is a genuine question.

We (software professionals) expect to go home at a reasonable time, still be paid the best salary among all verticals and we often complain about work life balance. But we have a different set of expectations when it comes to doctors, day care professionals, military etc. We don’t expect a doctor to discontinue his operation if he worked for 9 hours a day or infantryman to stop shooting. Heck, I will be furious if the daycare professional chose not to keep a watch on my child even beyond the designated time if I fail to show up.

Is this because we lack empathy or are we living in our own bubbles?
Yes, but...

You have to have at least two independent compiler stack development processes occurring in separate light-cones. If one happens far enough within the cone of the other you cannot trust it.

(Not actually speed-of-light-cone of course. You have the lead-time required to develop general "nanites" and then their travel time to reach the opposite side of the Earth (assuming no one is working on this off-planet. The first thing a paranoid nanotech-haver would does is detect and suborn all other nanotech labs. I call this the "Matter-Lock".)
Depends on where you are. Even with all of the fees included, I still come out cheaper with the TV+Internet bundle.
While the code is 60 years old, the hardware is modern. According to this article, the component that failed is about 18 months old. When they talk about the software and hardware "no longer being supported", I think they really mean that the original target platforms are only present in the form of emulated software. IBM still supports execution of System/360 software on the System z. [1]

"Overall IRS maintains over 20 million lines of assembly code. These millions of lines of archaic software, and hardware, that is no longer supported become more difficult and costly to maintain each year, and poses significant cybersecurity risks. To IRS’ credit it keeps these old systems running during filing season, but relying on these antiquated systems for our nation’s primary source of revenue is highly risky, meaning that the chance of having a failure during the filing season is continually increasing." - David Powner, director of IT management issues for the Government Accountability Office [0]

"[IRS Chief Information Officer Gina Garza] explained the code for the IMF was written in the 1960s, but the hardware it runs on is modern." [0]

[0] https://federalnewsradio.com/technology-main/2017/10/a-sense...

[1] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/04/50-ye...
It depends how you do it.
For me dealing with PCI DSS compliance was mainly to get rid of unwanted traces in the logs and anything permanent (backed up), and separating services dealing with sensible information.

While doing these changes, there will usualy be a rethinking of how user data is handled at its core. For instance I worked in the past on dissociating user account with it’s profile and private info, so we could get rid of personal info and only keep behaviors.

With GDPR you get similar leeway for keeping most of your data as long as you get rid of identifying info in a reasonable manner. If I’m not mistaken backups are also safe up to a point, but I don’t have the details at hand.

My main point was that if someone had the occasion to think thoroughly about user data policy and cleaning unwanted traces at leadt once in the past, GDPR was a lot easier than one might think at first.
But why would you "get judgment" if you are not in violation?
Agree. They also call him a 'dick', repeatedly, and insinuate that he possibly has plans to monetize the gathered data. It escalates quickly and sadly I think all of that speculation and name-calling merely detracts from the strength and importance of the argument.
Watson's marketing is obnoxious, but it's not just Watson. There is plenty of bullshit, ignorance, and pseudo-intellectualism to go around. Mind you, many of the technical fruits of AI itself, properly understood, are not bullshit (the name "AI" is misleading IMO; I wouldn't be able to tell you what distinguishes AI from non-AI because it seems largely a matter of convention rather than a substantive difference). The field offers plenty of useful techniques for mechanizing things people have had to do preiously. However, the very idea of a "thinking computer" is unjustifiable and superstitious. There's too much sloppy, superficial thinking.

The author of the article mentions concepts and indicates a distinction between them and word counting. Certainly, there is a difference between word counting and conceptualization, and it is patently obvious computers don't do the latter. But it's worse than that. Technically, computers aren't even counting words. They aren't even counting, nor do they have any concept of a word (we count words by first knowing what it is that we should be counting, i.e., words). What we call word counting when a computer does it is a process which produces, only incidentally, a final machine configuation that, if read by a human being, corresponds to a number. The algorithm is a proxy for actual counting. It is a process produced by thinking humans to produce an effect that can consistently be interpreted as the number of words (tokens) in a string. That's not thinking. There is zero semantic content and zero comprehension in that process, and no number of tortured metaphors or twisted definitions can change that. AI, as it becomes more sophisticated, is at best a composition of processes of the same essential nature. No degree of composition -- no matter how sophisticated or complex -- magically produces thought anymore than taking sums of ever more composed and expansive sequences of integers ever gets you the square root of two. It's not a mystery.
Differential privacy seems like a pretty good approach to this problem.
https://machinelearning.apple.com/2017/12/06/learning-with-p...
You're assuming they are trying to make the service the best they can. They've obviously done the math and it's cheaper to charge people a flat fee. They don't really care how good their service is, or how fair it could be, just that they maximize profit.
> Why don’t cable companies charge by megabyte used, instead of by speed?

Because they can and do charge you for both and laugh all the way to the bank.
The IRS is working on modernizing the system. The first attempt was abandoned in 2009 and the latest project is years behind schedule. This is at least partly because the budget keeps getting cut. https://www.nextgov.com/it-modernization/2018/04/irs-60-year...
Sure you can. You can lock up anyone who isn't willing to obey the law and continues to cause harm to your ex by sharing the photos, for example. In fact, since revenge porn is now a criminal offence in many civilised countries, that is very likely what will happen.

If anything, the anomaly here is that inappropriately using or sharing personal data about someone is in most cases still only a regulatory or at most civil matter and not a criminal offence. Obviously such an act can potentially cause far more harm to that individual than many physical acts of violence that do carry jail time.
You can keep both. You probably have not told your tax consultant that Paddle acts as the merchant of record. That means you don’t actually have any relationship to your customers when it comes to taxes. That’s Paddle’s role. Instead, your single “customer” is Paddle, whom you will probably get a single transaction from per month.
No, I'm talking about a normal incremental build (which usually touch many things—I don't usually get to only recompile a single unit). If the planets align, I can get an incremental build to take just 30 seconds or so, but that's rare enough that I might mark such an event in my calendar. And that's on a beast of a server.

With Go, on my laptop, 30 seconds is the time it takes to perform a complete, optimized build of a medium-sized application, all dependencies and the standard library from source.

It's always so... frustrating whenever I go from a Go project back to our large C/C++ mixed codebase...
Would love to hear any feedback
Here! Buy this hat from my reputable friend here. You will see productivity increase by hundreds of millions! Each hat is only $1000! A very fine hat! One for every citizen!
tl;dr preimage resistance is only as strong as sizeof(input domain), which is probably small if you're trying to anonymize something.