skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Keep in mind that "recycling centre" here refers to an intake channel at their own factories; and that the firmware side of the recycling process isn't done by a technician themselves, but by a specialized "sanitizer" unit that the tech plugs the phone into. (Picture a disk degausser, but with a slot for a phone rather than a hard disk. Something heavy enough that you can't simply walk away with one!)

Is it hard to believe that, if iOS devices had a mode "deeper than DFU" that enabled control over the SEP firmware, that such machines would be implemented in terms of that mode?

And I mean, it's not like I'm making this idea up. This sort of "secret hardware-level handshake between recycling/repair machines and production devices, to put said devices back into a lowest-level firmware flashing mode that bypasses all user protections" was discovered to exist on the Nintendo 3DS, and was turned into a permanent jailbreak method for those. It might be an industry-wide practice. (It's hard to tell, because even on a rooted device, you can't just "dump" the ASICs and scan them for a backdoor handshake.)
And events. I use Facebook Events extensively.

As a teen, I'd go to the movies with my friends maybe 4 times a year. Never went to any events. The extent of our fun was playing basketball or just sitting around.
Everyone I know (and know of) espouses obvious claptrap from time to time. If that is the sieve with which you denote undesirables to remove from your personal sphere, your circle either has a radius of 1 or you delude yourself about your detection abilities.
There's a lot more to centralization than where you can install apps from.
When my company was evaluating open source cms/hosting solutions, Github was quicky removed from the list of candidates for this very reason. Their criteria for removing software projects was deemed too unstable to depend upon, and the company is too small to garner the same respect from github as bigger companies.
I'm not sure I completely agree with the economic argument, particularly because birth rates and wealthiness tend to move in opposite directions and because a comparative analysis doesn't show that strong welfare states which protect a person's income, income stability and alleviate all the costs of being a parent, don't show strong birth rates either. It feels like getting children is still very much a choice, but that our cultural norms about what a 'proper life' means has changed. No longer as a young person do I feel as compelled to marry, get a home in a suburb with a yard and a dog not to be cast out or judged. It's not because it's more difficult for me to afford kids than my parents or their parents, who struggled financially more than I do and had to work more hours, had less leisure time, fewer luxuries etc. I think it's a bit too easy to say 'kids these days saw parent' savings disappear in the financial crisis' as if their parents' parents didn't see their parents in world war ii, and their grandparents in the great depression as a reason not to have kids. Again, wealth and birth rates move in opposite directions. Kids used to be a form of welfare system, too, you had no state or business to give you a pension or pay for your care, but your kids did. Now we're rich enough where kids aren't needed as an economic asset (working the land) or welfare asset (caring for you in retirement). But to say they're less affordable than before, I'm not so sure.

Most of the predictions about the welfare state are true, though. In that some of its effects mimic a ponzi scheme.

I'd urge everyone and anyone to look up an age pyramid for their country from 1950 and onwards. It's absolutely telling. Preferably an animation.

e.g. Japan here: https://www.populationpyramid.net/japan/1950/

You can click through every 5 years. It's like a snake with food passing through it's body, starting with a big blob of young people who gradually move into old age, without replacement. The proportion of young (suppose an arbitrary <40 or >=40) to old completely flips over. In Japan it was 75% in 1950, but just 44.5% in 2010. If you take 65+ as a threshold, it was just 5% in 1950, but 23% in 2010. That's 4x as many retirees to support on a dwindling young (mostly) working population. 5% 65+ and 95 <65 is a 1:19 retiree to young (often working) person. 23% vs 77% is less than 1:4.

And that matters a ton because there's a gigantic age asymmetry in terms of expenditure by age group in certain fields. Take healthcare expenses by age: https://jamanetwork.com/data/Journals/JAMA/935941/joi160128f...

You basically spend a ton at birth and as an old person. With low birth rates and massive improvements to healthcare increasing life expectancy, we're heading for a disaster. The tax base is rapidly depleting and the tax burden is rapidly increasing.
An idea dissected in detail since even the 1950s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Light_of_Other_Days#Simila...
I used to opt out until feeling pretty violated from the enhanced pat-down a year or so ago. I've been patted down for weapons in many countries across the world and it wasn't necessary for those folks, or anyone in the previous 15-16 years, to wipe the back of their hand across my genitals in every way possible.

Maybe we should think of getting rid of ineffective state-sanctioned sexual assault instead of more lists.
The sites aside, I also appreciated the comparison of device, though I really wish they had split that up further by device. At the very least separate Desktop and Laptop. I'd be curious to see what % of people still have a desktop computer at home.
The beautiful thing is you know you’re in a truly free society because we can react to this stuff publicly and have absolutely no fear of reprisal.
Right, DNSSEC is about validating the authenticity of the DNS Record in a DNS Message, whereas DNS-over-TLS/HTTPS is about establishing authenticity and privacy with the upstream resolver.

In theory if the upstream resolver is using DNSSEC to validate all the Records, then the client over the TLS session can be fairly confident in the Records it receives.
It probably won't directly escalate to military action, but the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 did make it a lot easier for the Nazis to take power in 1932.

Edit: I'd be grateful for an explanation for why this might be getting downvoted.
Ooh, I just figured that out. Insidious!

What would be even better is if the HN referrer would create a temporary blacklist for that IP.

Then when you paste a jwz URL into a new tab, he could send a response, "And don't try using a different browser, either!"
May I ask what constitutes and important or cherished message?

I switch devices (phones / computers) every couple of years, and I like "starting fresh". I backup photos and videos but that's it. I tend to consider messages as ephemeral. a text message about the birth of a child or the death of a relative matters in the moment, but the real keepsakes are the experiences and memories in meatspace.

I've had bosses that wanted their text messages restored to their new phone because there was great joke someone texted them three years ago. FFS. Business reasons / legal requirements OK, but these weren't.

(Not saying you're wrong - I tend to work differently to my peers - just looking for context)
That sounds a whole lot more like a national security issue than the tariffs.

Could also use tariffs to try and hit the states that voted for Trump the hardest.
I don't think I've advocated shunning everyone who says something stupid once in a while.
Ok, so you're describing (IMO) exactly what's in the text of the GDPR.

Here is a "plain english" translation of the GDPR that makes much of this more evident:

https://blog.varonis.com/gdpr-requirements-list-in-plain-eng...

If you dig into it, I think you'll find it lines up nicely with what you are suggesting.
Probably also an effect of an overly-curated feed ruled by a needlessly opaque algorithm. I see some form of pattern where the old desire traditional news curation and authority while the young want to see more of what average people are saying in real-time.
If NAFTA talks don't work out, folks like you and me with our TNs are actually going to start worrying about how we're going to keep our jobs.

And here I thought Canada wasn't one of Trump's "shithole countries".
Seems to be working for china.
I'm sure they'd like their investors to believe it is plausible and obvious. Working in a related space, I strongly disagree.
Is this true? Do you have an example?
> Not only that, but the US government is neither as aggressive nor as forward-looking about such partnerships, preferring to let market forces have their way

I have not seen this in practice. Wall Street had Glass-Steagall repealed in 1999 which led to the TARP $420 billion bailout in 2008, and Trump just rolled back almost all of Dodd-Frank, so the next taxpayer bank bailout is probably not far off (US taxpayers bailed out S&Ls in the 1980s too). I have not seen much of market forces having their way in the US other than lip service.

Also, look at the 1970s history of Lockheed to see a "never let fail - heed the diktats" company. From the 1971 billion dollar government bailout to the 1976 bribery scandal. Probably one of the most government blessed companies in a country full of such-blessed companies.
His stated goal seems to be related to “bringing back American jobs” but it’s really all marketing for himself as usual since while this action will cause more American job loses than it creates, that doesn’t actually matter because it’s just about optics.

Also the authority he invokes is specifically for national security so increasing jobs or any other non national security reason shouldn’t even be a factor. His comments that it’s a negotiating tactic also prove there’s no actual national security rationale.

“...the Trump administration promised its voters more big action on trade. Further WTO challenges could take years, so to make policy more quickly, Trump invoked section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which grants the US the ability to impose trade restrictions in the name of national security.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/qz.com/1221853/donald-trumps-ta...
One difference is that YouTube vloggers are kinda the new celebrity. A lot of kids would rather be vloggers than Hollywood celebrities.
As some some anti-virus tools.
Norton AV used to "clean up" my build folders of exes because it was classifying the newly built exe as viruses because they were not on a whitelist.
Facebook the website doesn't have much to offer, however 'everyone' has one, so its separate messenger app is still very widely used (at least in the U.K.) I'd be interested to know if this is the case in the U.S. as well.
Thanks. Yeah I had a feeling it was an old term from the fall of the Soviet Union. I really still don't understand why the term is still in use, though. It's not the eighties anymore.
Indeed! That's a good one.
anyone who can't or definitely won't vote for him is likely part of the shithole
Well, not so much states that voted for Trump, but small-population states that rack up lots of Senate votes. Put punitive tariffs on corn, soybean, and pork exports, and you'll have a dozen senators imploring Trump to back off.
A large portion of US inventions were made by people of different nationals, I don't see the irony here but only narrow-mindedness.
As a 29 year old, I’ve just found YouTube much more interesting and actionable recently. Almost every topic is covered and the best content rises to the top.

The recommendation engine is really good now. I’ve added more to my watch later list in the last 6 months than I have in the last 6 years combined.

As an SEO I’m surprised to admit, but I find it better to search directly in YouTube than actual Google search for certain searches.

Google was playing the loooong game on YouTube and it seems to be paying off.
Seems feasible with some tweaking. Or confirms that this approach of using TCP is not worth the effort.
There was an episode on planet money about precisely this with sugar tarrifs and how it had unintended consequences on the candy industy which had to move overseas. Very complicated topic.
I'm in the same situation, and I agree. On some level it could be good for Canada to have all the TN folks back. Maybe bad for us in the short term, but the effects could ripple.
A lot of the algorithms center around enabling the training of more data (e.g. one bit DAC for distributes GPU training).
replaced the link, but anonym.to is also sketchy...
Is that what's at issue here? I think very few people -- nearly none -- are actually open to being rationally persuaded to completely flip their political beliefs. People with completely different political commitments usually start from different axioms.
There is a theory that the root cause of these problems is the continued dismantling of traditional gender roles.

If women had not entered the workforce in massive numbers things could have continued based on old trajectories. The male breadwinner/housewife lifestyle was a formula that made it ideal for raising children cheaply, even if it didn’t seem like the most equitable.

If I had a good job and settled with a wife straight out of college I’m sure I’d be a father to two children by now. My income could easily support a non-working spouse and some kids.

But many of the women around me were not the type to settle so early, so I chased the money and ever more ambitious women. And with no family to support, I had dangerous amounts of money to spend on ever increasing prices and property.

And if I should marry a woman with equal earning power as me, we will be able to spend even more on whatever inflated prices are set before us. If you’ve ever been in a gay household with two men earning typical male salaries and no children, one thing you notice is that they always have tons of purchasing power. What do you think that does to the economy when it scales out?
Separate per engineer is a new one for me ... we've been running separate per product/project and have something like 40. Gets hard to manage.
> There's no such thing as a blanket license, in the sense that you get to use any and all copyrighted footage you'd like for a TV broadcast.

No argument with you there. My point was that there do exist some types of blanket licenses (for specific purposes, of a limited body of works).
Much appreciated man. Yeah, I have been doing the digital nomad lifestyle and lived abroad for a few weeks at a time for the past five years. I do see the trap that befalls most expats and am aware of risks. The months that I spend abroad are the happiest time of my life, when I come back to the states and can't get a date, am told I am toxic and a potential rapist and have to live in a city where homelessness is spiraling out of control and cost of living constantly rising beyond wage inflation, then I start to question everything that society tells me.

I appreciate the advice for self actualization. That is what constantly working on. In my free time, I am finishing my B.S. in Comp Sci/EE, travel internationally, work on certs, hang with my bros, hone my craft, enjoy new hobbies, write creatively, and try to stay sane and physically fit. The problems is that the more I walk down this path, the less tolerance I have for those who deter me from achieving these goals and those who don't impact my life in any positive way. As a 5'll light skinned multi-racial young man, when I try to date online or approach the opposite sex for any sort of intimacy or potential relationship, I get rejected and told I am too short, ethnic looking and am not rich enough by women who earn less than me and made bad life choices. Sigh, I suppose that makes me the asshole for not wanting to deal with this, trying to understand these trends and looking for a way out.
That doesn't explain why YouTube is still gaining momentum, after all these years.
So does the US. The vast majority of dairy farmers receive subsidies or they would not be "profitable", averaging $280 million per year over the past 20 years (some year it's $10M, while another its $1B). Everyday we dump over 250,000 gallons of milk. There is a reason why milk is cheaper in the US than Canada.
Canada has been arguing with the US about dairy for a while. Protecting that industry, you could argue, actually is a national security issue and tariffs are needed because of the massive production of the US.

IIRC haiti allowed tariff free dairy and now pretty much don't have that industry anymore.
I don't think this kind of exercise is that difficult, and I get plenty of practice on HN talking to people who have very right-wing ideas about the economy. But come on; it's not a way of working miracles. You might persuade your uncle who loves Donald Trump to moderate a couple of positions; you aren't going to turn him away from the Republican Party.

This is the main reason that election campaigns have moved on and focus much more heavily on turning out their own supporters than persuading "undecided" voters, who are a statistical nullity.
This is why I post comments on hackernews. Love it! I'm going to have to read all of the posts on your website now. Thank you pdfernhout.

I am absolutely certain Doug was a fantastic human being, and completely agree that is probably why he didn't get an acute sense that most of our work--as fun as it is--often ends up like the passing of handguns to toddlers.
> There is most definitely a relationship between candidate skills, job requirements, and interview result/job performance.

This is actually not at all an obvious fact. It's continuously offered as a ground truth, but many people dispute it and a lot of successful organizations do not recruit weighing these factors as heavily as you're suggesting.

> The answer is simple: they likely weren't good enough. But no one likes hearing that.

Possibly, or possibly they were plenty good but so obnoxious or outrageous that they wouldn't be welcome. I've certainly done that more than once in my time building tech organizations. I still remember the guy who effusively praised the beauty of all the women he saw and congratulated me on "the haul". Even touched a woman's hair to compliment it. Too bad he was such a sleazebag, he seemed smart. But even from a cold economic standpoint the cost to the company for an inevitable sexual harassment lawsuit would always eclipse any value he could provide.
There is a strange lock-in with facebook for me here. I use other apps for talking to close friends or anyone in the know. For talking to my partner or family who aren't very tech savvy Facebook is still the best choice. They are all reliably there and will respond.

I used to vent about politics on there, but I've begun to shy away from that to twitter.
There are (many) more Chinese nobel prize winners who won them for work in the USA than in China. It doesn’t sound like irony.
How would you separate desktops and laptops? (Honest question, I'm not sure how you would do that)

I assume the stats are based on usage not a survey.
> Of the 11 countries with GDP per capita no more than 10% below the US's

I like how you casually discard the vast swath of data that doesn't agree with you.
Hi :-) I'm not sure what philosophy "it doesn't seem possible to apply universally".. Maybe "Killing any animal is wrong" (By any animal/person, for any reason, etc)? I don't think that. Also, I don't see this as an "argument in favor of eating less meat", or a "moral requirement".. Is it hard for you to not hunt, kill and eat people? Do you need arguments in favor of having less slaves. No.. Those things seem morally repugnant to most of us now, while they were normal in other times and places.

Two points from the many that bear on this:

1. The line between "humans and uh cats and dogs" and everything else seems arbitrary, human-centric etc. "Those in my group have value, those outside are nothing" comes naturally to humans, but there's nothing reasonable about it. For me, I don't like pain. I think inflicting pain/suffering is bad--not to mention painless killing, which seems worse than inflicting suffering. I would prefer someone inflicted pain on me than killed me painlessly! (How strange that I felt the need to explicitly make that point.)

There is a range of life-forms on this planet, from simple to complex, some of which, like single-cell bacteria, viruses, probably don't feel pain. (Neither do trees, it seems--they can't run away so it didn't evolve. But I respect them for other reasons. I hate seeing heavily graffitied trees, I wonder who could do that desecration.) There seems no obvious line to draw between animals whose pain/suffering, and lives, are worthy of ethical consideration, and those whose aren't. (And conveniently, we put humans at the top of that range, presumably other animals might see things differently) Doctors/vets kill lower-life forms to save higher ones. Personally, I put it fairly low (Oysters?..).. but to save worrying about the exact place to draw the line, I've found it simpler (and painless, I've never missed 'it') to avoid animal products altogether.

2. The matter of need. If it's a matter of killing animals for food or dying, I would do the same. (or even eating people, see the movie Alive.) If it's a matter of, for you and I, wanting a steak, when there's no need whatsoever, it's an entirely different thing. I stopped dairy products when I learnt about what people do to cows and their babies in that industry. And learn about factory farming of chickens, pigs, cows, go on a tour of an abattoir--the gruesome realities are hidden from us.

Also, I'm just talking about ethical considerations for humans, how we treat other life-forms. Because we realize other people than ourselves matter, other species than ourselves. (Not really sure what to say about the lions in your example.)
> Most men will actually marry down economically, but women generally marry up economically.

If the first phrase is true, then the second must also be.

Of course we're conflating income with wealth (or 'economical value'), which may be fraught.

> Perhaps when this is finally noticed, men will only marry their equals.

I think asking all men to think the way you think is going to be disappointing.

I also think that proposing the evaluation of people based on income and/or economic potential is breathtakingly depressing.
In the dark prehistory of the Linux desktop, Qt/KDE was GPL so Gtk/GNOME went with the "more free" LGPL to support proprietary apps. I guess that strain of pragmatism hasn't gone away.
Does anyone actually care about that? If anything, a filtering mechanism would backfire because kids & teens would be exclusively seeking out that content because that’s where the “good stuff” would be.
I just realized I only think about security vulnerabilities for code I deploy, not software I use. So what are some examples of RCE vulnerabilities that were actively exploited in consumer software in the past?

Just curious how it would've played out if a blackhat had discovered this instead.
Behind the Consulting Firm Raking in Millions from D.C. Charter Schools
and its much more expensive
> but it also keeps Can/Mex standard of living lower in many ways.

I'm curious what ways you would argue Canada has a significantly lower standard of living.
People care about their data when it can tangibly affect them. Teens know that their parents or other parents can see their data on Facebook. They are pushed to use their real names and in general the context creep is what drives them away. They may not care about the abstract notion of data in terms of data mining etc but they do care about having what they share being seen by people they don't want it to be seen by.
I think lower earning person can make up by doing extra chores and house work. That's what I do now. Not sure how fair that is but I think it's fair.
1.1.1.1 outage explanation
It was not functionally equivalent. Pc floppies had a fixed motor speed but the mac floppy had a variable motor speed.
I've been at a new company for a few months, and still find the codebase confusing/frustrating. At my previous job, I was a tech lead/architect. Here I feel like a dummy. Talent can't necessarily overcome poor documentation.