skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes. A reasonable rate of real return plus inflation is 7%.

1.07^144 is 17,000.

So, if the album costs $10 in 2018 dollars, it should cost $170,000 at expiration.

Figuring in inflation and conservative returns give 5% per year, so 1125x markup. The album would only be $11,250 in 2018 dollars at term expiration.
upvoted thanks
My biggest mistake: ActiveInbox Blog
Apple's Steve Wozniak Dumps Facebook and Thinks Ethereum Could Be the New Apple
I have 3 theaters within a 20 minute drive. I might choose one over the other because of movie availability and showtimes.
I agree that it's not helpful. I do think the verbal abuse and anger comes from the helplessness people feel since they know that these senators are greedy sociopaths that already know bills like this are bad and won't take your voice into consideration.
This is super cool - and the premium themes are very nice.

Just wanted to request for more react templates ... say an ecommerce site, etc. There's a burning need for this that is unserviced elsewhere.
It's not that it's annoying, it's that I literally cannot answer "are we GDPR compliant?". If you search for GDPR IP address, you get a ton of different opinions. Do I need to sanitize logs? How does that fit in with the requirements for security compliance we are also subject to?

At the end of the day, I am the one person who has to answer that question/is responsible for being GDPR compliant. I've spent hours doing research, figuring out what we need to do and implementing it -- and it's a hollow victory because even though I've said yes and have 100s of articles/white papers/opinions that back up the decisions I've made, the real answer is still "I don't know".

And I absolutely know I'm not alone in this. I got GDPR compliance dropped on my lap because I did security compliance -- if you contrast NIST 800-53/800-171 against GDPR you'll see why people are pissed off. One has clear guidelines with enough room for evolving best practices written by obviously competent/experienced professionals, the other is written as basically "we'll know it when we see it".
The focus of the act is actually on modernizing licensing for streaming: https://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/congress-is-giving-m....
Yes, that’s a real effect, but that’s not the meaning of the word parallax.

“Parallax is a displacement or difference in the apparent position of an object viewed along two different lines of sight, and is measured by the angle or semi-angle of inclination between those two lines”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax
The sophistication of a piece of code is not merely an attribute of its complexity.

Else a program with tons of accidental complexity (a badly written program by an intern) would be equally good with a program with huge essential complexity (a 10 line program that takes tons of domain and/or programming knowledge to write)...
Maybe they're only useful when you're a high power company with $200k+ total comp and more applicants than you know what to do with.
Job of the future: Embalming your online persona
From the PDF you linked to:

"This e-mail was sent to those individuals on the database where no “opt in” or “opt out” information was held"

Sounds like they were basically on a fishing expedition - if the individuals hadn't explicitly opted in, Honda shouldn't be sending them emails.
I think UK is a special case here. In other EU countries it is not uncommon for corrupt civil servants to drown companies in fines to the point of bankruptcy.
MariaDB and PostgreSQL. Amazing software that is open source for us to dive in and play with. FoundationDB was a recent treat.
Except maybe in his testimony, I don't remember that from reading about Bill Gates.
> Of course that's annoying from a business perspective, but from an individuals privacy perspective, it's fantastic.

So many people are pro-privacy until it affects their bottom line.
> On complexity vs sophistication: During the cold war, a US company noticed the USSR had stolen the plans for a natural gas pipeline system, but not the software.

I think this account might be a bit wrong. The one I read said that the CIA acquired a "shopping list" of Western technology that the USSR wanted to acquire. It included the pipeline control software, so they arranged for a trojaned version to become available to the Soviet shoppers.

Apparently this was a pretty common Soviet activity. Their electronics technology was behind the West's, in general. IIRC, many US semiconductor designs has little cartoons on the dies to taunt the Soviet reverse engineers.
Generally you imagine that future money decreases in value (in real terms). For example, you need to at least beat inflation-protected bonds! So in order to get constant real terms over the life of a piece of art, the actual price to consume has to increase exponentially over time. But in fact we get the sense that most art drops in consumer value over time (how many times have you listened to Gangnam Style in the last month?) so exponentially increasing price would not bring linear return.
I will admit, maybe I am reading too much into the convictions or intentions of the job boards -- but we all are human, so I can only assume this was created by someone who was tired of having to do whiteboards, and rather than confront the problem head on and potentially drive industry-wide change (channeling "one person can change the world"), goes behind the scenes. The job board further fragments and confuses things for everyone. The better option, of course in my opinion, is make things better for everyone by fighting the battle where the companies are.

I am frustrated at times just as much as any other engineer by playing "monkey-see-monkey-do" in front of an audience in order to receive employment and I have indeed passed up job offers because I was turned off by the interview process (but again, that was my choice) but if you take a step back, look at the overall job market, and what other workers have to go through to get a job, we really do have it made, and this seems like a minor nuisance at best.
I don't accept that for a moment. Monopoly over land predates humans, as any observation of territorial creatures will let you know.
Film is inappropriate for most modern movies because they're no longer filmed, they're digitally recorded and distributed. When there's no actual film stock used in the production of a movie, you shouldn't call it a film.

In the case of a Marvel movie, it's almost more accurate to call it an animation, but movie covers all production methods.
Could you define "got anything out of it" for me? And what is a universal item that literally everyone will use in their life? We could probably stop general education after grade 3 if that was the goal of education.
One is a monopoly on a physical object, the other is a monopoly on an idea.

Ideas are far more abstract.
Without a doubt the article is fascinating but without defining what we mean by sophisticated how can we debate this?
It's not that the name doesn't make sense, it's just that it collides with a very common TLD for LANs. It shouldn't be squatting on a name humans want to use. Computers are unlikely to do the correct thing when you ping a .local on a network that uses that suffix, because they have to decide how to handle the potential name collision (which is still somewhat frequent, more than 15 years later).
The waiver is only one aspect of it. Waiver only applies when consent is required. Article 6 of GDPR also allows for the use of personal information when "processing is necessary for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is party..." Consent is not required when it is a necessary part of performance under a contract. GitLab's updated terms state that as part of the agreement to voluntarily contribute to GitLab projects, contributors acknowledge and agree that their personal information will become part of the repository as part of the Git functionality. Therefore, their personal information will not be deleted and will remain in the repository so as not to impact the code base. This only applies to those who contribute to GitLab projects. This does not apply to general use of the software. There is still much that is unclear regarding GDPR but we are doing our best to comply and protect individuals' privacy. An important function of this waiver and acknowledgement is to provide transparency to our contributors. If an individual does not want their information to be maintained, they have the option not to contribute.
Material is slowly moving more in the "flat 2.0" direction that the article points out as fixing flat UI's usability problems. It's not fully there yet, but you can see aspects of it in say Google's floating add buttons in Calendar, Inbox, YouTube's search box, etc.
I googled her images after reading your comment and it is so funny to notice the impersonation.

Also, every C level guy(also middle management wannabes) impersonates Jobs.
If you are already compliant with your great privacy policy, what are some specific things that you find too expensive to be worth it? All I read from GDPR detractors are vague hand wavey claims of “compliance stuff” being expensive. I’m obv not a professional compliance expert so ELI5.
Only if demand is relatively constant.

Nothing is less constant than the demand for entertainment, and that's reflected in current pricing.

A new blockbuster movie costs $15 in 3D, $12 in 2D.

A month later it costs $6 at the second-run theater.

Three months later it costs $20 on Blu-Ray for as many times as you want to watch it.

A year later it's included in your HBO subscription.

A year after that you can buy the disc for $10.

Ten years later you can buy the whole series for $30.

Forty years later it gets shown as 3AM filler on a cable network you don't pay for separately.

144 years later there are film scholars who have heard of it.
Interestingly the biggest difference I see are in the board itself (less flat, wider) and the addition of dedicated environments enabling new styles and tricks. That said I wouldn't be surprised if a skateboarder today could take one of those old boards and ride it very differently today.
I would add, that you can extend syslog to use queuing [0], RELP [1] and TLS [2] to protect your data in transit.

[0] - https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterp...

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliable_Event_Logging_Protoco...

[2] - https://www.rsyslog.com/doc/v8-stable/tutorials/tls.html
They are a family, as in, all of them were almost certainly created by the same group.

Symantec said that Duqu is "near identical" to Stuxnet. As for Flame, Kaspersky[0] initially said that it contains no resemblance to Stuxnet, and then later on discovered that they've even shared a zero day in their early versions.

From my understanding, I don't necessarily consider them as different software, more as a single software + forks by the same group for different purposes and with different zero days.

Stuxnet just happened to be the one that got to be the most popular one, for a number of reasons (most destructive, attacking the most sensitive targets, the one that got out of control and spread outside of Iran uncontrollably, first to be discovered...), so I refer to Stuxnet as the original one and Flame and Duqu as more of forks than completely different pieces of software.

Which one is more sophisticated between the three would be the same as if we tried figuring out which Linux-based OS is the most sophisticated, except that in this scenario, we only have 3 Linux distros (maybe four with Gauss) and they've all been created by the same group. There's really no point in trying to compare their sophistication.

[0] Before people bash on me for using Kaspersky as a source, Kaspersky, Iranian CERT and a university in Bucharest were the ones that initially discovered Flame, and Kaspersky's the group that published the first detailed analysis on Flame.
I'm with you on this. I just don't find Material to be visually appealing.
Thanks! I am glad that folks here found it engaging :-). Plus, I have learned a lot reading the comments. Thank you all for your contributions.
That is the usual stated justification, and may actually be the motivation where it's become accepted as conventional wsdfom, but it's implausible on its face as a real justified concern, because it's just as easy for a rejected subject to infer ill intent from a refusal to explain as from an innocuous explanation.

The real reasons for such policies send to be a combination of:

(1) Regardless of organizational policies, hiring managers will still sometimes use directly prohibited criteria, and some of them will clumsily reveal this (perhaps in ignorance of the prohibition) if they provide explanations. A clear blanket corporate no-explanation policy doesn't prevent the bad acts, but prevents the bad acts that slip through other corporate policies from being announced to victims, and

(2) Hiring criteria that aren't directly prohibited may be prohibited indirectly due to disparate impact. Providing honest explanations for negative decisions makes it possible for people who gain access to the explanations given to multiple candidates to discover disparate impacts, and take action against them, and

(3) People attempting to give honest explanations will sometimes explain things poorly in a way which indicates a prohibited (directly or indirectly) criteria was used, either positively (which might be evidence in other cases)) or negatively.
You throw away an $80 mouse?
This style of interview works in plenty of other professions that are much more rigorous than software development. You'll be hard pressed to find an aerospace engineering company that is going to ask candidates to evaluate integrals on the whiteboard that they'd normally look up in the CRC or implement a numerical solution for (probably using a prepackaged library), for example. Yet you're proposing an analog of this very thing here.
>How will I be able to operate my small company website in the future in a legally compliant manner?

Maybe you shouldn't operate your company if you can't comply, then. The entire point of the GDPR is elevating privacy as a priority. If that means companies that can't or won't compy can't operate, so be it. People always claim to be pro-privacy, and that means putting privacy above commerce, in the same way that a restaurant that can't or won't meet safety and sanitation regulations shouldn't operate.
That's a very unconventional view. I'd argue that as presented it is based on an over-simplification of copyright. Specifically, "something that didn't exist before the person who created it" and "everyone can have as much of it as they want so long as they're willing to create their own" do not seem to accurately describe copyright law to me.
We're talking about assistants here (you may replace 'assistant' with 'AI'). There are many-many-many teams working on different aspects of it but it's a single product at the end. It's not the same as spawning yet another chat app by another team. You may have different teams working on implementing similar feature but it still would be sitting on shoulders of/powered by the same assistant/product. And I have a general idea of what it's capable of at the moment (see above original comment).

Everyone who thinks that there are multiple distinct assistants worked on at Google (not the separate features powered by THE ONE) - Apple would like to have a word with you. Yes, it just like chat apps - another team just need to start thinking of promotions.
Smarter Brains Run on Sparsely Connected Neurons
agreed. upvoted.
Sadly this is from a paper I read when I was somewhere between 8 and 13 so it is entirely possible I formed the wrong conclusions at the time.

Edit: Needless to say, I don't remember the title. Perhaps I should re-investigate it.
Most of the comments here are completely missing the point of the article.

The article is not about whether the ideas espoused by old philosophers are worth learning about, or about whether old philosophers are worth reading. The article asks the question of why philosophers prefer to read the original works of old philosophers, instead of reading descriptions of these ideas by authors who have demonstrated competence is explaining philosophical ideas. Which is the way that education is handled in most (all?) scientific fields.
I work in the field at Red Hat, specifically with the banks (where you are, it seems). We get OpenShift, OpenStack, and more running in prod in both air-gapped, and ssl-proxied environments with full re-encrypt. Reach out if you need help!
> This in no way should be read as you, the small business operator will face a fine of 20 million for each and every infraction that could be found.

Thank you, random stranger on the Internet! However, that is not the law. And even if you are right? As I posted yesterday, half of the employers in the USA has 1-4 employees and make $387,200 on average yearly. Even if they get fined to 1% of the maximum, they are completely wiped out. So no, it's not hysteria, it's plain business sense for them to slap an IP ban on it and move on.
Territorial creatures have possession, not property, which is completely different. Bashing someone's head in and taking their property is natural right. Having the State send men with guns in response to that action is a highly artificial deprivation of that natural right.
That is a fine analysis but I'm not sure what your question is. All laws exist in a legal context and analyzing them while being ignorant of that context is futile. That's all I was saying. I think almost all the people armchair-analyzing the GDPR in a hyperbolic manner would be equally useless at analyzing their own laws, in their own countries, for what it's worth. (someone in another comment said something contrasting the EU with places where laws are "not open to interpretation." Dear lord...)

That doesn't mean Jacques' analysis is not worthwhile, by the way. He is not ignorant of the legal context. Judging by the reaction to the article, this is going to be one of those situations where you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.
Another must read is jl's interview of Wozniak for Founders at Work.

http://www.foundersatwork.com/steve-wozniak.html
What's Up with All These Viral Illusions?
So say you are at a job. fairly happy. Maybe not your dream job, but you decide to look around and interview with me.

I could present you two options:

1) I just hire you after a 30 minute chat. 50% you don't work out, and we fire you after 30 days.

2) We have a longer interview. We whiteboard. We take home test. We whiteboard some more. 90% chance that you don't get fired after 30 days.

Which would you prefer? As a business owner, I am happy to just try people I don't know well - IFF they are willing to accept that there is a very good chance they are fired within the first 30 days.

There is such a huge range in developers. The haves vs the have-nots can be a 100x different productivity difference. I really want to try to tease that difference out. It is really really hard.
Typically, different words refer to different things. Most often, words considered synonyms actually refer to slightly different things.
So glad I live in Canada. American corporatist evil seems boundless.
The site that I was referring to was literally hackernews.com, and was very popular among the tech crowd from the late 90s onward. (long before YC was conceived)

ALmost 20 years ago, I used to rotate between hacker news, fark, and slashdot to get my daily dose of internet.

https://web.archive.org/web/*/hackernews.com

One would be perfectly justified in also trying to claim that the name here was stolen from the original.

.. but sometimes, just because things share a common name, does not necessarily mean they are related.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc
That's more candid and balanced, and consequently more moving, than maybe anything else I've read about him.
Germany's Attempt to Fix Facebook Is Backfiring
Instakush Feminized Cannabis Seeds
It's kind of a combination of things — IP cameras definitely don't have the greatest software... and combined with shitty entry-level routers port-forwarding is definitely frustrating to the average person... then you get into dynamic IPs from ISPs, etc...

It's just annoying that there's no middle ground between "hold my hand with a cloud service" and "I want to spend a little effort to not be 100% reliant on external services"

Google could decide to fold Nest service entirely (luckily there aren't signs of that) and at this point you'd have thousands of thousands of devices in a landfill. It's so irresponsible. Historically you could have a CCTV setup running for 10-20 years without huge issues.

>I suspect there are now modern, IP cameras that aren't cloud reliant

It's surprisingly limited and still a bit expensive. Foscam/Hikvision have been getting better, but it still feels a few years behind when it comes to firmware... and the notification and advanced "human detection" are obviously better with a cloud service.
> What we just saw was a public alpha. There will be a beta and a final version of this system. The rewards are too great for every state-level actor to ignore and fail to develop election manipulation tools using any new technology they can get their hands on. Big data may have doomed democratic process in an irreversible way. The next couple of decades will be telling.

What we saw was the first export version for the West. Authoritarian regimes have been honing many of the same propaganda techniques on their own populations for some time.

See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Research_Agency (they were involved in the 2016 election interference, but they've long been doing similar in Russia and Eastern Europe).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party (Chinese equivalent)

I think it's important for Westerns to study the details of these propaganda programs, so we can recognize and respond to the export versions.

More links:

https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html

https://gking.harvard.edu/50c

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/20/business/international/ch...

https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2011/06/future-banned-on-sina-...

https://www.buzzfeed.com/maxseddon/documents-show-how-russia... (from 2014!)
When we split the world into the "us" vs "them" then it causes issues like this.

Your comment doesn't specify the us or them so it can apply to virtually any group.
Making a working Qt/X11 program work on Windows, on the other hand -- that could be painful.

I maintain a Qt application for Linux/macOS/Windows, with in total ~70kloc the last time I looked. It started as a Linux application, but porting to Windows was not a lot of effort and the amount of platform specific code is very small. The painful part on Windows are some non-Qt dependencies, such as libxml2, libxslt, DB XML, etc.

The port to macOS required much more platform-specific code to implement macOS-specific behavior (such as keeping the application running when the last window closes), building working, signed application bundles, etc.
As said below, this can be automated. If you can't or won't comply, then your website shouldn't exist.
Yea I should have qualified that I was mostly talking about games companies. Games should be among the easiest software to release on multiple platforms for to not needing platform specific UI controls. Actually I struggle to think of a single major component to a game that must be platform-specific. Yet, of all the software I use, games tend to be the ones stubbornly stuck on Windows.