skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They struggle with it for the same reason people on the political left always struggle to understand why some people oppose new regulations: the question of whether and how to regulate commercial activities is always a proxy for deeper underlying differences in how people view the world. GDPR is just a proxy fight between the left and the right and is showing all the same characteristics.

Consider adventured's sibling post - it quite astutely points out that GDPR discussions are much more vitriolic than you'd expect for discussions of the minutiae of data handling. People who say that GDPR compliance is hard are being attacked on a personal level. He explains it as 'emotional investment' in GDPR but I don't think that's a good explanation; the people arguing most strongly for it are also those saying it's not much work, so that seems backwards. You'd expect people who put in the most effort to be most emotionally invested in it.

There's a much better explanation available: your view on GDPR is a direct consequence of your assumptions about human nature. If you believe in the existence of benign and enlightened technocrats then GDPR seems like excellent progress towards building a better world - it's extreme vagueness and severe penalties are exactly what's needed to foster obedience to technocratic elites. People who complain about this are just being unnecessarily awkward ... just be reasonable after all, and you'll be fine! The EU are reasonable so if you're reasonable too, you have nothing to fear! From this perspective, anyone who objects to GDPR or actually decides compliance is impossible must - almost by definition - be being unreasonable. What are they hiding? Why can't they just get on board; the only answer available is that they have flawed characters and any points they make about gray-area debatable things like cost:benefit ratios must be some sort of obfuscation.

If on the other hand you believe the whole idea of wise and beneficent bureaucrats is naive, then GDPR looks like a hell of a lot like a power grab by the very sort of people who shouldn't be able to grab power. Vagueness is of deep concern because it's in the shadows of vagueness that abuse can be found, and when a law is nothing but vagueness, it even makes sense to question to motives of those who created it - that's a problem because lots of self-styled Europeans have bought into the EU's utopian rhetoric and can't separate criticism of the EU from criticism of themselves and their desired future.

There's no real scientific way to prove whose assumptions about human nature are right. The USSR was a rare example of a real-life experiment in who was right and for a long time it proved the American style, conservative, small weak government is better mentality to have superior results. But that was decades ago and many have forgotten or weren't alive back then, so now rule by technocratic dictatorship seems attractive again.

As a consequence GDPR discussions will always have the same flavour as Clinton v Trump debates, or Brexit debates, or whether to restrict spending on political campaigning. They are ultimately about the same issues.
> the AI decided that shopping and washing were things that women do and linked coaching and shooting to men – intensifying the bias that is already there.

So when these biases are corrected by helpful government regulators, the AI will believe women enjoy ice hockey and men like to bathe all day?
And IP addresses per internet-connected person?
Cambridge Analytica Files for Chapter 7 Bankruptcy After Facebook Privacy Row
Collecting personal information and running a business based on that personal information is very different to knowing how to configure nginx. You're putting up a bit of a strawman.
You are very lucky like my girlfriend in that respect. She cleans her teeth twice a day and does minimal care and has one minor filling which was done a couple of years ago.

I have always spent a long time cleaning and flossing my teeth and have lots of minor repairs and fillings done over the years.
This is great because I can hear both very easily while in can only hear Laurel moooost of the time. Here it's much clearer that when primed for "storm", "nee" is at most interpreted as a low deformed echo of "-ain", and when primed for "needle", the low sounds of "-rm" just disappear at the end. Thanks for the link.
Attaching eyeballs to your hands sounds really fun actually, but we are already walking a pretty thin line just trying to not make people sick. Not sure experiments like this would be comfortable for most people, so this is why i think everyone usually sticks to skeuomorphic UIs.

But i agree that, VR-design wise, we are very primitive right now.
Its becoming MySpace....
I guess I am a fan of GDPR, certainly compliance to anything has a cost. I personally don't find the costs of GDPR compliance onerous unless you have already built up lots of non compliant systems that now need to be fixed, in which case the free ride is over. Anyway, this guy is pulling out of the EU but if he allows anyone from the EU to use his service from a non-EU location anyway he would be risking non-compliance.
Some people are jokingly exaggerating and some people are being serious. I've heard people have arguments that became fairly angry about which pizza in town is the best. I've heard rather than participated in those arguments because it's laughable (and sometimes scary) when people don't understand the difference between subjectivity and objectivity. Some really do think their way of seeing the world is correct and anybody who varies from that is wrong.
Quick fix: create new account that will check if tweets are visible to that user.
And Flatpak on Linux. IIRC the Signal Flatpak is sandboxed.
He does it:
http://freakonomics.com/2008/03/11/is-tooth-cleaning-a-scam/
Customer Survey Success Secrets
I guess you didn't read the part where there have been multiple sites discovered, with the same degree of 'co-incidence' (pun!) discovered..
To be honest I just like posting hard statements that I think are logical conclusions but would like to see proven false with even better arguments :)
Great! That captcha is bloody awful but I got in :)
Scandinavian Bookstore
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assurance_contract

> An assurance contract, also known as a provision point mechanism, or crowdaction[1], is a game theoretic mechanism and a financial technology that facilitates the voluntary creation of public goods and club goods in the face of collective action problems such as the free rider problem.

...

> Dominant assurance contracts, created by Alex Tabarrok, involve an extra component, an entrepreneur who profits when the quorum is reached and pays the signors extra if it is not. If the quorum is not formed, the signors do not pay their share and indeed actively profit from having participated since they keep the money the entrepreneur paid them.
In which case you are doing business with (say) France, which has its own alcohol customs laws that you have to follow.

I never said that you have to follow the laws of the country of nationality of your clients. That'd be a ridiculous thing to say, and I'm not sure why you're arguing against that particular strawman (the GDPR only talks about EU residents and doesn't mention EU citizenship at all).
Not that's irrelevant in this case. The question is whether you're processing sentive PII on a large scale. DPO is only necessary when processing sensitive PII. Sensitive is very clearly defined in the law as race, religion, medical records or biometric data. And IP addresses certainly do not qualify as sensitive PII (they are PII though) so I don't understand the entire discussion here. Seems to be just a political kneejerk
Netplan – The network configuration abstraction renderer
Right, that could have been more clear. It referred to money one often has to pay to make a work available as open access when it's in one of the traditional "prestigious" journals, i.e. the non-subscription ones.

However, in that case, too, the money is not the researcher's. That said, they are the ones that spend it.

In the case of subscription journals, the argument is similar, except that in this case, it's academic libraries who will have to pay whatever amount of public money a publisher asks of them just to be able to access that research. If the researcher could obtain their credentials elsewhere, they would be able to make their work available somewhere where the libraries and the general public would not have to pay to access it.
You don't seem to know much about GDPR.

Firstly, no, your national regulators cannot give you binding answers about GDPR. This is one thing the EU Commission has been clear on. They can advise, but their advice has no more weight than this Hacker News thread does - the EU is not required to care about what national regulators said and they have no special powers to interpret the law. Only the EU gets to decide what GDPR means, and they have said explicitly they will not answer questions about it. The only time answers finally come is during legal actions.

Secondly, no, people do not "love drama" in the business context, far from it. Maybe you should consider that your own interpretation of the problem is the issue rather than other people just causing drama for the sake of it.
Thanks, will take care of that.
Yah this one seems much more interesting, because you're actually able to hear either or both at will. For example you can hear "Brain Needle" or "Green Storm" just by thinking it
Yes! :D
Absolutely, but you're describing what the world ideally should be rather than what it actually is, I presume? :)
The money comes from the subscriptions.

The need to pay "whatever amount of public money a publisher asks" exists because the important researchers choose to publish in those journals instead of other journals where their articles would be freely available.

If researchers are evaluated on the quality of their research instead of the journal it was published in, then one could simply require that they publish somewhere where it's freely available, but it's a bit of a problem since they need to publish in exactly those journals, which happen to be very expensive.
It can also be used for cognitive science research, for example to collect reading times, reaction times, vocabulary learning trajectories, etc. Published work suggests that it is provides data of similar quality to in-lab studies, once you do some due diligence (browser fingerprinting, etc.).
Top of the line Arria-10 FPGAs have about 1500 floating point MACs [1]. Using such a device, Intel claims ~1 TFLOP sustained for GEMM, the standard matrix multiply operation [2].

[1] https://www.altera.com/content/dam/altera-www/global/en_US/p...

[2] https://www.altera.com/content/dam/altera-www/global/en_US/p...
If your marketing strategy involves throwaway Twitter accounts (or spamming strangers via Twitter), you’re doing it - for any definition of “it” - wrong. Come up with something better; it’s not hard.
HACCP has nice 7 points, are you comfortable with implementing it on your own? Each country has its own regulator making rules. Restaurants are fined on violations all the time. (20M fine for GDPR violation is upper bound, if you have 10K/month revenue, you are not going to be fined with millions)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazard_analysis_and_critical_c...
Perhaps "dren" would be a better term?
> No. It is quite definitely not true that you must comply with the laws of countries you are not in.

Unless you wish to do business with that country, in which case you need permission from that country in order to do business with its residents. If you break their laws they can place sanctions against you, and if you find a way to break those you can theoretically be punished legally through extradition.

If you don't do business with those countries then you're off the hook. Obviously.

Just look at the recent Project Gutenberg copyright lawsuit for an example of how breaking the law of a country you are not in can cause you legal troubles.
Because you "vet" sellers. Somehow. Infinitely easily. For the rest of us mere mortals, the consumer protections offered by cards are an essential foundation of Internet commerce.
Could you contact me at sudhir.j@moviebuff.com - would like a consult.
In case people wonder why .home was not picked. One of the many issues here is that the current policy for the root DNS zone is that all new delegations from the root zone have to support DNSSEC. So they have to have DS records.

Given that the IETF specifically needed to "home" zone to be unsigned, that would result in lengthy process to change the policy for the root zone. The root zone is managed by ICANN who implement the IANA function. And then operationally managed by Verisign.

In the end using something under .arpa, solved a lot of issues.

It is quite possible that the IETF could have allocated .home because it is currently unused. But that would still require solving the technical issues.

At the same time, as long as there is wide spread use of .home, ICANN cannot really allocate that as a new gTLD.

So it should be sort of safe to continue to use that. But "homenet" compliant routers should come with home.arpa preconfigured.
As a Python guy, where we have __setattr__, __setitem__, etc., I was at first wondering why you would use a proxy for such a thing. Better make it part of the language.

But the more I think about it, the more I can see that it's handy to have an official proxy interface for this, for the case of an external code needing to wrap your object.

Also, I've seen so many reinvented wheels for proxies, and usually bad ones, as it seems an easy problem to solve, but there are plenty of edge cases. Proxies avoid the recursive problem altogether.

Besides, __dundermethods__ tend to make the language hard to optimize.

Still, it's really overkill for simple cases like the ones addressed by Object.defineProperty (or @property for Python), as you create a huge layer of indirection for the entire wrapped object. So if you use such a Proxy, you better have a damn good reason.
Well, it's not so much about the readers of the research (especially in some disciplines, most of them access articles through arXiv), but about the academics on tenure track of grant application committees. They're not actually going to read the research of the hundreds of applicants they have to judge, but will rather rely on proxy measures such as the journals they have published in.

See e.g. https://theconversation.com/why-i-disagree-with-nobel-laurea...
See also this short talk by Louis Poinsignon from a few days ago:

Internet Noise (Announcing 1.1.1.0/24) https://ripe76.ripe.net/archives/video/31/
Only the DPA of your country will handle complaints against you.
Smartest, most paid profession in the world and now bunch of those people are incapable of running DELETE SQL queries?
> "conversations that only happen because your desk is next to mine" problem

I think part of a solution to that problem is more deliberate communication. Water cooler talk, informal office conversations, whatever you want to call those, while occasionally helpful they can also lead to the creation of information silos between the people participating in these conversations.

The constraint of not having the opportunity to engage in this kind of conversations might actually be beneficial. Distributed teams force you to communicate more efficiently and more purposefully.
I guess that all depends on -what you look forward to doing- in that virtual reality. And how many (and what kind of stimulating) sensor options are available.
It's possible: https://www.nic.ru/en/catalog/domains/su/
If research grant funding calls would require the results to be published in open access journals, the field would switch pretty much overnight.
This may be legal but it certainly isn't ethical. Companies that use your service will likely suffer brand damage as a consequence.
> Any journal submission I write requires having several publications open in front of me at any given time, and that is a lot easier with paper journals instead of PDFs.

I strongly disagree I’ve writtrn two published articles and two dissertations, and PDF versions have made my life so much easier (mendeley in particular)
JSFiddle should just have a tick box with "intercept console.log" and a tab with the output .
Get off my lawn kid, I've been programming professionally since 1989, and using computers before that. I even worked at the time for a company that was almost wiped out by Microsoft's anti-competitive practices. I was tangentially there when Microsoft kept pissing into the ISO stnadards process pool (from the diving board, if I might add) with OOXML, and that was only 2009 (Not even 10 years ago). I know exactly how bad it has been.

I see the same data you do, but my interpretation is different: Microsoft is the same bully it always was, except the world doesn't let them bully as much. They still bully as much as they can get away with, though -- with the Win10 being a recent egregious example.

That's all I'm saying: Color me skeptical about the "new" kind, ethical Microsoft.
Well, all those who tried succeeded.
I disagree; the issue is Electron.

Sure, you can write secure apps in Electron, just like you can do risky stuff in real-life and be fine most of the time. But why take the risk?

Had the app been written with a native language and SDK, they wouldn’t need to worry about escaping or anything. I have yet to hear about getting remote code execution for dumping text into an UILabel or similar, while XSS happens almost every day.
Wait. So, I've had a site where there was only a single checkbox to create an account.

Now, if there was someone from Italy (I don't know, the site's gone for years now, highly unlikely but theoretically possible) does this means I'm a possible law offender and should avoid visiting Italy?

Oh, it also had no cookie banners, too...

Could be, the reason no one was hurt is that those laws weren't actually enforced any much? If so, I believe GDPR's promised to be different.
Thanks, this is something real quick the team did in a day for our internal use. This is more like Ask HN, I am open to ideas and thoughts to do it better :)
Your passwords, creditcards,  are at risk SSL is not enough and how to solve it
Except that Google, Microsoft, Facebook and Amazon have been at the table when GDPR was written and will be compliant with it. So it's a completely bogus argument.
The past, present and future of the Binding of Isaac
just so you'll know, similar web gets it data, mainly by spying on users via browser extensions. this is far from being legal. or at least a dark gray area.

I have personally complained about that, once found private URLs I sent to clients, and were not published elsewhere ever, were listed in their stats under that specific sub domain, but never got a satisfying response, if at all.
Extensions in Firefox 61
HSBC: the first deal on the blockchain processed
The developer has decided to spread misleading information and FUD about legislation protecting people. We shouldn't be "nice" to people deliberately spreading lies.
I made this point elsewhere as well, but:

> Unfortunately, funders don't want to restrict where researchers can publish the work (in order to prevent themselves from being able to silence results they might not like, i.e. hinder "academic freedom"). This means that this demand is implemented by simply paying hugely disproportionate publishing fees ("article processing charges") to the same old journals to make the individual articles they funded available as open access.
I'm not seeing any interpretation being done here, but judge for yourself. Here is what the GDPR actually says (Art. 37 Designation of the data protection officer):

> (1) The controller and the processor shall designate a data protection officer in any case where:

> a) the processing is carried out by a public authority or body, except for courts acting in their judicial capacity;

> b) the core activities of the controller or the processor consist of processing operations which, by virtue of their nature, their scope and/or their purposes, require regular and systematic monitoring of data subjects on a large scale; or

> c) the core activities of the controller or the processor consist of processing on a large scale of special categories of data pursuant to Article 9 or personal data relating to criminal convictions and offences referred to in Article 10.
You outsourced personal data to mechanical turk ? Can I have the name of your company ?
I have the same feeling and I believe that the initial L of Laurel really strongly shapes the rest of the word. When I move the slider towards Yanny I can still always hear Laurel but I can distinguish the "yaew" that makes Yanny; it's very distinct from the L. I assume that people who naturally hear Yanny first have the same understanding with the weird "yaew" hiding the L. If I'm just expecting Larry I can only sense the deformation as a weird vibration in the sound.

Also I checked on a couple of videos to test my hearing range because I expected it to be quite damaged and assumed that was the main factor and even though it's not a very good form of testing I'm now more convinced that it's the brain treating slight variations differently, with priming playing a strong influencing factor.
Please provide references for your own claims.
I'm unable to sign up, it keeps telling me to try again later..
> Still do not get how you leverage these billions of devices as workers for a distributed workload

Happy to alleviate some of your ignorance by typing more slowly.

I buy ads.

I can get access to devices anywhere in the world, do network testing, and on the last mile which is cost prohibitive for any other distribution channel.

> Please do not label other’s different of interpretation as interpretation mistakes

Then don't be wrong.
I'm struggling to understand what exactly you are trying to say. I am not denying that whatever is doing is working for them -- though undoubtly, they have been beaten into submission, and they know it. Their more aggressive bullying and anti competitive behavior has worked for them in the past as well. It is not run by stupid people; just ones whose ethics I have problems with.

What I was trying to say, in case it wasn't clear is: "I believe Microsoft is inherently the same bully it was; It's just that the world is no longer cooperating with being bullied as much. I don't believe there is a "new" Microsoft".
Why "strongly disagree"? If PDFs have helped you, then that speaks for the value that I suggested of having both paper and PDF.
As far as I know they can only see to which tower your phone is connected, so it's not too accurate.

I'm not an expert in this field though.
Fake ICO, made by SEC
tor2web has been around for a decade now.
Published as in make available on the web.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsgBtOVzHKI
GDPR: Don't Panic
Regarding the subject at hand, then, why did Christians invent science rather than pagans, Muslims, or Buddhists? We don't know for sure but we could argue that pagans did not have a notion of progress; Muslims were obsessed with their in-group versus various out-groups and believed violence was the solution; and Buddhists, while perhaps spiritually closest to the mark, decided the way to end suffering was to renounce desire altogether, rather than, like the Christians, transmute their desire into an aspiration for a God's-eye view of the universe.
But for those outside the EU, any of the 28 DPAs can fine their company.

Also, i think the DPAs can fine any company in the EU, not just the companies of the country the DPA is in.
Have you ever checked r/politics its basically just a Trump hate subreddit. There is no objectivity in it.
What do you mean by shutdown? I'm using torrents almost every day.
It's mind boggling why messaging app has 181 MB.