skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> So, from your links, nobody was actually killed by terrorists

That is not a justification for no security checks. That's my only argument. If one is willing to go through security checks at malls, airports, movie theaters, sports game at a stadium, a music concert without any fuss I don't see why one would want to be treated differently at the workplace. You don't find anyone talking of "giving up personal liberties and freedoms out of unsubstantiated fears based on a few fringe cases is a slippery slope" when trying to enter any of these secured areas do they? I don't see people complaining about feeling insulted while being frisked trying to enter a stadium but the very same people feel insulted while being frisked entering their workplace!

> nor has a security guard actually stopped any terrorist.

Nope. I never claimed that a security guard actually stopped a terrorist. If you read my comment you would understand that I spoke of multi-layered security and that terror threats on those companies are real and not a figment of one's imagination. If those terror threats were not thwarted by agencies do you agree that having security at the gates of an IT enterprise would be a second line of defence? Or is your assertion that until there is a terror attack of significant magnitude one should not care about security?

> Meanwhile, you know who actually has killed Infosys employees? A security guard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VN9MenY2dEs

So you say just because of this one incident we remove all security from these companies and let anyone walk in and out?

Maybe better security here: http://time.com/5226892/youtube-headquarters-security-silico... could have prevented 3 employees from getting injured don't you think?
May be because Brotli was mainly for WOFF2 font format, so mission accomplished?
We've licensed the code with the MIT License.
You are completely glossing over the fact that Spotify's, radio's, and all of streaming's rates are utter crap: less than a tenth of a penny per play.
The 'hard problem' here is to explain how a set of physical processes give rise to consciousness or sensory experience at all.

Why is it hard? It's as if evolution had not provided us with the framework to do that. Primitive beings have very simple inputs and minds. As the behaviour needed for survival gets more complex, minds also need to join data from different senses in an integrated image. Also we need pain and pleasure to direct the behaviour. Quantitative changes result in qualitative ones and that's it.

Everybody acknowledges how the brain is such a complex machine and then got surprised that it's able to build perception. That's weird.
Sorry but seeing comments like this about topics I know about, make me question what other falsehoods and inaccuracies I am reading on HN.

The story about the Tesla took place at Four Winds Casino New Buffalo, which is in Michigan, not Las Vegas. Legally speaking, it is a sovereign nation so I would not put much trust in "local authorities" to protect consumers. Further, although Nevada does have a gaming commission, there are still plenty of "scams" and questionable promotional tactics used by companies both inside and outside of the casinos. Time-share sales, for example, are big business in Las Vegas.
I think artist will have to focus more on cultivating a strong fanbase globally and leverage it for merchandise and live performances. There is lots of money to be made being an idol.
It's not a belief. It's numbers. You're aggressive, dishonest and you change the subject without arguments. You understand something else that isn't in my words. It belongs to you. Not me. It's your problem.
Looks like 802.11s dates before that post.
I think browser support for Brotli is mostly a side effect of supporting WOFF2 font format (which uses Brotli).
How to Avoid Card Skimmers at the Pump
Polio virus treatment increased survival in patients with deadly brain tumors
> which is over 3 square miles, which is quite a bit bigger than the Carcross "Desert".

Carcross‘s notability is in being the smallest, not largest.

> or there's something else to it.

Anyway, yes—whether something is a desert is determined by amount of yearly precipitation.
Are other commenters here comparing uber to regular cabs in London or black cabs? I always heard that the difference between them all is substantial - especially regarding knowledge of local streets and motorways
As you mentioned Numberphile, what do you think of the YouTube channel PBS Space Time? It helped me finally grok quite a few bits of physics that never made sense to me before.
Why instead? Why not both?
5G antennas are getting close to AESA (active electronically scanned array) radars used in military (X-band is 8 to 12 GHz). Unlike radars in fighters, 5G array can't cost millions per unit.
Push notifications are more efficient, as iOS manages the persistent connection to receive push notifications versus your application long polling.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9901686 (HN thread where Rob @ FastMail dives in depth why push notifications are superior to IMAP IDLE)

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17262511/how-do-ios-push... (How do iOS Push Notifications work?)
> I am not in London

My understanding is that London cabs are held to an extremely high standard (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_the_United_Kingdom...), as a result they're also extremely expensive.
Yes, but the "seriousness" of a crime is not determined by its specific legal definition in the public consciousness, and nobody thinks that it is. For example, few people would argue a small-time weed dealer copping to a felony has committed a more serious crime than someone charged with misdemeanor domestic assault.
Official vgo proposal: https://github.com/golang/proposal/blob/master/design/24301-...
Github tracking issue: https://github.com/golang/go/issues/24301

Official wasm design doc: https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/131vjr4DH6JFnb-blm_uR...
It appears that since there are no "winners and losers" -- either everyone wins or every one loses an equivalent amount, these giveaways are not in scope for sweepstakes/contest laws.
It was CPM/86 not CPM I have actually used a IBM compatible pc to run it which probably make me one of a fairly small group I think it was a DEC rainbow.

I also usued a grey import IBM Pc before it was sold in the UK we had out electronics shop build a custom 240-110 v power supply
How do you feel if you eat moderate protein, high fiber?
White Brits soon a minority in Britain’s second largest city
The discussion is not about making the term "advertising" so broad as to be useless. It's not "advertising" as in "any way that people notice a product or service". We're discussing "advertising" as in specific messages that third parties pay to have shown to people whose attention has been gotten by a second party.

In other words, the topic is the advertising where you give your attention to one party and that party participates (gets paid) to show you something else different from what you went there to see.

So, concretely: this is about paid ads on Facebook. This is NOT about products listed on Amazon that show up with compelling descriptions when you search for that type of product and clink on a link that wasn't higher in the list because someone paid for that.

When you go to Amazon and search, you are specifically choosing to put your attention toward products of a certain sort and asking for information. Amazon is delivering that information. There's marketing in how the products present themselves, but it's still something you are actively looking for, given to you second-party by the company from whom you are considering buying the thing.

When you go to Facebook to see how your friends are doing and your attention there gets sold to advertisers to show you unrelated products that may happen to fit your interests, that is the topic of discussion here.
I get a just fine sleep on the ground with nothing more than a 100$ air pad, and I've done better in the sand sometimes.

Not for everyone though, but I bet if I could get them sleeping similarly from a young age, it would be.

1.3billion Chinese sleep on essentially padded wood just fine, for example.

Sex is a big plus for a mattress, though. On a padded wood Chinese "bed" it's just fucking horrible for whoever's on top's knees/elbows/wrists/contact points.
Flight attendants have a higher risk of all types of cancers, finds study
That's....simply not true?

I've been using 1password for many years, and that's not how 1password works for me. There might be a setting to enable that behaviour somewhere, but by default, it doesn't autofill without prompting. That's true for every version, OS, browser plugin, desktop app, mobile, etc.

Edit: I just saw your comment that it was actually Dashlane that autofilled! Nevermind then. :)
Important to note about `vgo` for beta1 though:

> NOTE: This is not present in go1.11beta1 but will be available in future betas and subsequent releases.
What are the evolutionary advantages of extreme or chronic pain? Some pain is a message and an incentive to do something about it, but extreme pain and chronic, high levels of pain paralyze people without any apparent benefits.

Perhaps I assume too much, that humans are such evolutionarily fined tuned machines that every 'bug' must be a feature.
> If you simply stick a cat in a box and link its fate to the outcome of some quantum event, you’re not likely to put it in a superposition of alive and dead, because decoherence will almost instantly force it into one state or the other.

This is a non-sequitur. Decoherence will not force it into one state, but merely prevent us (in practice, but crucially not in principle) from detecting interference between the two states. It is still in a superposition.

When am I required to stop treating it as a superposition? When it entangles with me. From the MWI perspective, there are then two copies of me, and each must say that there is no superposition. In other words, from "my" perspective, the superposition ends precisely with me.

Which part of "me"? My toe? My nose? No, clearly it has something to do with my consciousness. A materialist might say that consciousness is a strictly physical process, and when the relevant components entangle with the system, that is when the superposition ends (from my perspective). An idealist might say that consciousness is the very fabric of reality, and so it's obvious that "becoming conscious of an outcome" and that outcome becoming real are one and the same event.

Nonetheless, once this happens, nobody in "my world" can demonstrate interference, even in principle. In this precise sense, you do occupy a unique role in what you call "your world."
But by what mechanism does the software community achieve moral consensus? Otherwise I wouldn't just assume agreement except on the most basic things, in which case, you could get anyone else to agree with you.
> I wanted to ask the community what to do.

You should comply and be grateful that we live in a world where you get a warning first before penalties are applied for miscomprehension of laws and of rights in general, not even just copyrights, because not everyone has been historically lucky enough to get a polite warning first.

> In summary, a trademark lawyer is sending me threatening emails

First, that's not threatening, and second, the message specifically discusses copyrights not trademarks.

> No one viewed these except me. Github's traffic stats show 2 viewers total.

That's just not relevant. The phrase you want to investigate here is "making available". Using the phrase in a sentence, one could say something like "I made naked photos of you available to your coworkers, which was incredibly disrespectful of me, even if only illegal on copyright grounds, because you want to be able to control when, where, and to whom those photos are shared, and you only shared them with me on the condition that I wouldn't then go and make them available to other people without your consent, consent which a respectful and respectable individual would get."

See also https://www.copyright.gov/docs/making_available/making-avail...

> It feels wrong that a billion-dollar startup is threatening the very developers they're counting on to make them money, so I didn't necessarily want to encourage this behavior.

I'm going to give you the best and most difficult to follow advice that you will ever receive: You do not get to make that decision for them. You only get to make decisions for yourself.

> Ultimately, I think I'm willing to make a stand over this

What stand are we talking about here? The copyright case seems very clear cut in their favor. In at least the legal sense, you don't have a leg to stand on.

> but ideally I'd like to not be dragged into court over some 3 month old API docs

Good. That's exactly the right feeling.

> What are my options?

Stop illegally infringing their exclusive right to control how documents that they authored are made available to the public? Stop developing for proprietary platforms that wield copyright like this?

> The ideal outcome would be that Magic Leap changes its behavior

True fact: You don't get to decide for someone else how they exercise their legal rights. If you don't agree with copyright, don't support organizations that leverage it. But be prepared to either lose, comply, or not get caught in the first place whenever you break whatever punishable laws are in place wherever you happen to be.
Transferability depends on the way the models is set up, and moves on a scale.

Introspectable: given that you can ask unlimited "What if" questions models, we should be able to get a lot of insights into how the models work internally. And you can often design them to be introspectable as some performance or complexity cost. (if that's what you meant by introspectable).
FWIW, while Japanese doesn't distinguish L and R, "fire" is transliterated as ファイア faia while "file" is ファイル fairu. So the difference is reasonably clear.
My thoughts on university
If the algorithm has bugs (and they often do) using the same algorithm in different languages doesn't help.
Between zero or all, could be many or some.
Fair enough, I don't understand the technical details.

The posts were hidden from the frontpage, by moderators, through whatever mechanism. Why? Not as technical question, but why was decision made to hide it? What's the argument behind doing something like that?

If any users can explain why they are flagging this post, I'd be interested in knowing too. To what end, exactly?
That theory worked for me for everything

Motorcycle gear

Tires

Boots

Climbing gear

And then I got into hammocking, and nothing seems to beat my first, a Bear Butt I got for 50$. Seems the more expensive they get, they lose out on just being big nice expansive hammocks with silky smooth material. So not a hard rule I guess!
I sort of always believed, sort of, that if you can prove that you aren't mentally ill beyond a certain degree, that you're reasonably intelligent, informed, and can show that you make good choices, you should be allowed to do pretty much whatever you want, including suicide.

Note that this freedom I am describing does not include anything that impedes another's freedom in any way. No murder, robbery, all the normal stuff.

If you can't prove that you are sane, and emotionally healthy, then you don't get to buy guns, get married, earn more than $x per year and so on.

If a person is in this unhealthy or ignorant state they should be taken care of by the state and reintegrated in the way that suits them best.

I don't ever want this implemented for many, many reasons.
It's not a "planned conspiracy", but rather experienced DOM/CSS/JS technicians have no incentive to "fix" it because the arcane nature of it keeps them in demand, busy, and well-paid. A horse farmer is unlikely to invent a car or try to perfect one.
What do you actually think "primitive" means?
All of these things have been interpreted by the courts and their conclusion was not like yours

It is nice that you are interested in these things, but they simply cannot be read verbatim and then extrapolated to other things.

This isn't educational for anybody, this is a view that lacks all consensus and all avenues to ever garner consensus in this country.
During the dual-write phase, what happens if one request succeeds while the other doesn't?
Ain't this me?
Most of Okanogan County, WA also looks like that, where it isn't directly next to a river or irrigated. Directly south of Osoyoos.
Thanks for the open question. What I'm saying has at least these two elements (not counting tons of negative side-effects or the psychological harm that manipulative advertising causes):

1. Given capital being so unequally distributed, paid ads amount to amplification of the messages from those who happen to have money. In another framing: you see ads about mediocre products with a big marketing budget; you don't see ads about wonderful products that have little marketing budget.

2. The conflict of interest is where Facebook has an incentive not to highlight too much the non-paid posts from people that mention products that don't pay for advertising. If you were to consistently see non-paid posts that gave you all the info you need to get products and services you appreciate, then the advertisers wouldn't be seeing their ads pay off and might cut back on paying Facebook for ads.

Overall, attention is somewhat zero-sum. Your attention to one thing is not attention to something else. You never really know what you're missing. But in an ad-driven system, attention is biased toward (but not exclusively) whatever serves those things connected with ad money.
Former employee, but I was thinking the same thing when I saw the story.
I'm sorry for hijacking the thread, but why is it that air (LTE) can handle much higher bandwidth than copper (i.e. DSL or DOCSIS)? I can easily get 150 Mbps speed per device, but can barely get DSL that's 10 Mbps (and that's over VDSL2!). The distance from the DSLAM to the DSL modem by wire is less than the distance from the base station / cell tower and the LTE modem by air. Does air have more bandwidth even though there are many more signals and users/subscribers than with DSL? I don't know, can anyone explain this to me?
I think the problem is a misunderstanding of the purpose of the "mid tier university". The university is a research institution and not a vocational training institution. Students who wish to learn a trade (plumbing, computer programming, etc) can attend one of many fine (and possibly less expensive) public and private vocational training institutions that have relationships with local businesses that hire graduates.

Students who wish to explore topics and solve problems at the limits of current human knowledge generally enroll at the University. At these institutions, undergraduates have an opportunity to work in research laboratories and graduate students, postdocs and faculty have the responsibility to obtain grant funding to keep their labs operating. As a courtesy, occasional classes are taught (to get students up to speed on basic theory) but there is an expectation that students are self-driven and can figure things out on their own (hence its ok if the TA is not a native English speaker, etc).

TLDR: If you want to learn a trade, go to vocational school. If you want an education, go to University.
First time I've heard of them, so I dunno. I'll add them to the list though. :)
Part of getting through an education program is learning the differences between the right answer and the expected answer. If the book says it is so, then it is so, even if you know it isn’t. Remember both “facts”. Keep one for the test and the other for reality.
>No conscious being can know, with 100% certainty, that a particular entity is NOT conscious.

You might be interested in a very short 2011 paper of mine, "A paradox related to the Turing Test", on page 90 here:

https://www.kent.ac.uk/secl/researchcentres/reasoning/TheRea...

I'll paraphrase the paradox here. Suppose you can magically detect conscious entities. I begin speaking to you, and you are obliged to periodically guess whether or not I'm conscious.

Here's what I'll do. Whenever you are guessing that I'm conscious, my entire dialog will consist of nothing but "Uhhhh..." over and over, until you change your mind and start thinking I'm non-conscious. Whenever you are guessing that I'm non-conscious, then I'll speak normally.

Since I AM conscious, and you have your magic conscious-detecting ability, you should eventually reach a state where you're certain I'm conscious, and you don't need to change your mind any more thereafter. But once we've reached that state, which only takes finitely much time (so for all you know my whole dialogue could've been a tape recording), thereafter I only ever say "Uhhhh..." A non-conscious machine could do that, so do you change your mind? If you do, contradiction, if you don't, contradiction.
EDIT: Ignore me I've confused terminology.

> Doubt it. DHE does not offer protection against MITM attacks, which an active attacker can certainly do with a powerful enough antenna.

Huh? That's precisely what Diffie-Hellman is for. It's a protocol for establishing a shared secret over an insecure channel. Have you got an antenna big enough to read the private key? Sure, you can argue that pure DH is weak compared to ECDH or PKCS, but this is exactly what the system does.

No, DH doesn't stop impersonation or spoofing attacks. It doesn't do authentication. That much I agree with you on. You need something like ECDSA for that. But those types of attacks aren't MITM.
When visiting New Zealand I was driving through Rangipo "Desert" and it gets 1500-2500mm of rain a year. Just bad soils and volcanic desolation. I live in an area where people grow crops on around 250mm of rain a year. Though a bit of bad land management and drought can turn land to sand dunes pretty fast. We probably have hundreds of smaller deserts throughout the region if semi-arid conditions and sand dunes are the membership requirements. Sorry Canada.
To distribute docs to yourself, you download them or store them on "cloud" resources available to yourself. You are distributing the docs to any and all. The fact that nobody has taken you up on your offer is irrelevant.
WPA2 isn't that bad as long as you use a password that isn't going to be pwned by a dictionary attack in 2 seconds so does this prevent against that if frames are captured? IDK.
Oh my god. NWT/Yukon, Dawson City, and Nahanni National Park have been on my list for years!

Did you drink the toe?
That is a matter of reliability, not security. I can also flood the air with white noise. That doesnt mean radio isnt secure.
Users flagging affects the ranking quite drastically on its own (even before it's displayed as [flagged]), without any further moderator action. The system trusts users to do "the right thing" for this.
I'm not arguing that it's a completely perfect language. But broken is an incredibly strong word for something that works when used as described in the documentation.

I think the API designer was trying to be parsimonious and not assume too much about what you want to do with the data in your destination buffer. The requirement was to provide buffer overrun protection when the source string is too large, and this function provides that. Beyond that, the requirement that the character array be null-terminated is your decision.

In fact, if you determine that it isn't null-terminated you can do other things besides null terminate it yourself. You might want to provide a helpful error message to consumers of your API rather than truncating their input data silently. Or you may try reallocating your buffer until the string fits. There's actual error handling that you can do with this function. In contrast, automatically null terminating the string makes that more difficult.

The other issues that you have with C seem like preferences. There's nothing wrong with not breaking by default in a switch statement as long as you know that that's what happens.