skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There is a command you can run that will allow you to boot and do the restore from Apple. But you definitely need a fast internet connection. If you manage Mac’s you are going to have to sign up for DEP and something like JAMF.
Sounds like a cool idea for a free open-source project. Too bad your Patreon for it would be somewhat underfunded...
There's also the matter of limited warfare and not being able to use nukes for every defensive purpose. A nukes-only approach to national security means that you nuke over the slightest provocation, which will earn you short-term victory at the cost of international condemnation and likely intervention. No one likes a nuclear powder keg.

For a practical example, let's say we never bothered to invest in point defense for our destroyers and they were completely vulnerable to Chinese anti-ship missiles. One day China sinks a destroyer as a show of force. Should we nuke Beijing? Or would it be better to have a strong Navy/Air force in place to respond conventionally by taking out the missile launchers?
You mean the registry has the registrars do that? Do registries even have view on the popularity of different domains below their TLD? I didn't realize that they received requests from resolvers that included second-level domains. I thought it was only the registrars that received that, not the registries, but I guess misunderstood DNS if so, because it makes sense.
China currently has a relay satellite at the Earth-Moon L2 for exactly this reason, they're going to launch a mission to land on the back side of the moon.
Other reflections may be desirable as masking noise or to create a particular ambiance. Or not. That's part of the experiential difference between a lively bistro and a bordello style steak house.
Here's How Systems (and Nations) Fail
Music coding is conceptually challenging, which immediately limits the community of interest to people who like coding for its own sake, and not usually very rewarding musically, which limits the community further to academics, students who are forced to experiment with code (usually briefly), and the odd hobby experimentalist.

Given all the other tools available, from DAWS to trackers to VSTs to hardware synths, why would a musician - as opposed to a coder - want to climb the incredibly steep learning curve?
Working consistently on side projects is pretty tough
Writing a pretty redundant Spotify playlist manager in reactjs as exercise.
Thanks for these comments. I didn't realise alternative notations were planned and never took off. (Dylan in particular looks really interesting.)

I can see the value of homoiconicity / code as data from the perspective of someone writing a parser.

I've asked what writing code as s-expressions gets you as the end-user of a language before. People usually say, “macros” or “it's easier to manipulate code”. But macros exist in non-homoiconic languages, like Nim and Elixir. And in my short time using ClojureScript I'm not sure what manipulations Lisp syntax gave me that I don't already have with other languages in a modern text editor.

I'd love to see examples of accomplished Lisp users on YouTube or elsewhere, to see what those code manipulations look like.
I don't know why you are being downvoted: losing the ability to install what we want on our computers is clearly A Bad Thing.
They still only have a couple of data centers.

"Oracle Cloud" is vaporware.
I don't understand this fad that programmers should know only first principles, and shun checklists in favor of deriving everything from scratch every time.

I know how my car works but I still pull out the service manual when I need to change an air filter. Nothing under the hood is 'black magic' but seeing the procedure written out saves me a ton of time.

And: git commands are hard, even if you understand the underlying data model. (I've only been using it for 8 or 9 years. Maybe I'm just too dumb?) Understanding the data model won't help me remember that the "--amend" flag is how I edit the commit message (though I could probably build it myself from reset + commit, if I really wanted to), or what folder I should put global pre-commit hooks in.
This looks like it takes Vue.js's approach of creating a brand new language that you have to learn (in this case MVL which is similar to HTML). It's definitely a preference for a lot of people, but I prefer React.js style, which lets you use languages you already know (HTML and JavaScript) to do literally everything. It may be inconvenient at times, but you don't have to reference a new language's manual every time you want to do a for-loop to figure out whether the @for attribute should go on the li or the ul.
I've gone further with this when staging parts of the diff while viewing the output of git diff in vim. You can visually highlight the part of the diff along with the diff header lines and run

:'<,'>!git-apply --cached -

git apply is one of the git "plumbing" commands that can be used to apply patches to the working directory or the git index.
> In the US, general consensus is that this is exploitive. In China it seems quite normative.

We're not that great about it in the US either. It's still an issue that people are having to fight, repeatedly. The US is definitely getting better, but it's far from solved.
What I don't get is this: If Apple wants to introduce "Secure Boot" while also pitching their products to "creative professionals" (who most surely run to their IT departments to pick up their MacBooks fresh off a purchase order) would they really overlook an imaging solution? Surely being the kings of walled garden ecosystem could spin this up in their own solution.
As a lisp programmer at home, python programmer at work:

>I strongly believe python got so popular because of its very simple to read, almost pseudo-code like syntax that anyone could learn.

Agreed. And python programmers are asymptomatically approaching Lisp's features. I had previously thought that only Lisp dialects could do symbolic differentiation and integration on code written in the same language, but I was wrong.
http://www.sympy.org/en/index.html

> List had great ideas, everything is a list, but dealing with parens hell makes me think it could be a lot more elegant.

Lisp is already the most elegant. In John McCarthy's 1958 paper, he wrote a Lisp interpreter in Lisp, and the interpreter was only a page or two. That is elegance.
Can your tell me why it isn't a big deal without framing it wrt to "trump supporters".Surely its possible to look at this without partisan lens.

As a regular citizen I think its a big deal because

1. It eroded publics confidence in MSM giving rise to alternative/fake news sites.

2. What about Donna Brazile's collaborators. Surely she didn't pull this off all by herself.

3. What were the motivations of collaborators at CNN, why did they do it.
":=" assignments are not in POSIX either.
Chicken v Egg! Haha, did not think of that :D Actually I think a Kickstarter would be more appropriate for this, but even then it seems unlikely to get any funding. I think going straight to a VC would be my best bet.
Then I stumbled upon Budweiser in Prague and had a brew from here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budweiser_Budvar_Brewery. We were desperate for a real Czech beer and some food, saw that Budweiser logo in the window and were dismayed. Yet the food menu looked good, so we went in, read about the 800+ yr old Budweiser so ordered one. It was a wonderful, dark, malty brew. Loved it! My expectation of Budweiser in Europe is much higher now.
Inside the US military’s secret doomsday defense
> 18 y/o infantryman a security clearance just b/c he asks.

Not true at all. Most enlisted infantry don’t have a security clearance. An standard infantry platoon officer typically has only a Secret clearance — only getting Top Secret in special cases and with special units. An 18 year old enlisted Ranger would have a clearance, but some grunt in the 3th Infantry Division almost never has a clearance unless there is a specific mission need.

The standard for clearances is based on the need to access classified information. An industry or professional partner working in those areas has a higher risk profile because they are typically accessing or building classified systems — which is a far greater risk than the access afforded to a typical infantry enlisted soldier.

clearances for non-military working on DoD projects were, until 2018 handled by OPM which has a significant backlog. So that made OPM clearances much slower. However in 2018, the law was changed to allow DoD to bypass OPM for clearances.

As far as ex-military with little or no professional skills, that’s a bit insulting and heavily generalizing. It really depends on their role. If they are physical security, then “professional” skills (as you might define it) aren’t relevant. Their job is physical security. As far as other ex-military with no professional skills, that’s ridiculous. Many ex military have highly developed professional and technical skills.

But nobody gets a clearance “because he asks.” An 18 year old kid in the infantry doesn’t get to ask for anything, let alone a clearance.

Also, an 18 year old has considerably less background to check than a 35 year old software engineer. I had a clearance from State that took 18 months to process because I had lived in 5 different countries, including countries that weren’t considered “friendly.” But an 18 year old who lived his whole life in the same town — those clearances are issued very quickly.

And you should have a 100% need to get a clearance. I am not sure why that would even be worthy of debate.
In most Secure Boot-enabled PCs you can manage keys and certificates on the firmware KEK/DB variables by using utilities such as KeyTool, so that you can safely boot any EFI-compliant OS with a custom certificate.

I'm not sure how this would work on Apple devices. It seems to me they have reinvented the whole security infrastructure of their services, which it's not a bad thing, but also requires some serious hacking if you don't want your device locked down with Apple-only software. Is there any way you could possibly manage the trust chain of secure boot on devices with the T2?
This is not that - you can still turn it off and boot whatever OS you want.
Are you sure that wasn't Switch in Las Vegas? They've had armed guards for over a decade. My colleagues would comment positively about this fact, "they even have armed guards" as if that's a good thing.

No service that I've ever run has ever required armed guards and certainly don't ever want to have my services colocated with other services that require armed guards.
I don't know if this crosses the line into scary for me simply due to the fact that it can be turned off. Based on what I just read nothing would stop me from switching to the "No Security" mode and installing whatever I want.
The motivation to prevent imaging is that an attacker can modify the device before it gets to the end user. With MDM, the IT department can audit all of the changes that have been applied post-Apple. And the IT department can use it to apply whatever changes they want to. So the gist of it is it’s “more secure than imaging”. My understanding is that the community hasn’t figured out how to do everything they need to with just MDM/DEP, so some imaging use cases still exist, and the community hasn’t figured out how to apply the MDM/DEP workflows to as many machines as quickly as the imaging workflow.
I'll be diving into emulator101.com from yesterdays post.
Architecture is the art of creating buildings that are functional and pleasant. If some architect places a higher value on "truthiness" than on people's reaction he is just plain incompetent.
And it's a short journey from copying someone else's vote because you trust they are smarter than you and have your values, to questing for that person to be a monarch and appoint subsidiary positions. Millenials seem in my experience more likely to be or to be open to monarchists than any previous generations, seemingly from disillusionment with the practicalities of politicians/demogagues.
Startups Serving the Enterprise: Navigating the Quest for Successful Innovation
How true is this really? So many times we hear "people are stupid now they don't want to do science or read fact." I'm sure that sentiment has always been said throughout history.

Yet a large deal of my millennial colleagues are the most progressively scientific, rejecting religion, embracing global warming legislation, very strongly against anti-vax movements. How many people really read the newspaper back in the day? Every period piece shows the adult male reading the paper. No one else. Do you think 26 year olds back then just read the news all the time and now it's different and no one does?

> So reporters have responded with tweets and instant feedback on anything that's happening.

It has more to do with managers and companies pushing reporters and journalists to feed page views. That's it. It's not reporters responding to the end user. It's reporters responding to the fact they don't have good jobs anymore and have to generate ad revenue.
No, situations like described are almost exclusively a result of a governmental request.
Gomez Leads Bipartisan Letter to Amazon Concerns Amazon Rekognition Technology
I don't understand what either of your comments have to do with the article. You seem to be assuming some counterfactual implementation of the feature, but the article is quite explicit that these fears are unfounded. There is no loss of the ability to install what you want.
CNBC gave a reporter $1000 to start a side business. Here are the results
And so can anyone with physical access to the device. I know there's no way to fully prevent evil maid attacks, but Secure Boot helps in that no one can simply plug e.g. a Linux Live USB and wipe my disks in less than 3 minutes
It’s not up to the companies, who (in my experience) largely hate having their hands tied. Legally, saying something like this can be construed as giving information to the target of the investigation, and doing so can result in fines and even jail time.

It’s dumb, and of course a guilty person will know exactly what happened, and of course hearing a response that their account has been closed and they cannot appeal or get any information as to why is going to make it even more blindingly obvious.
Unless the war is between the cloud supplier and the gov't, I don't see this being an issue. The standard redundant physical location policies already in place should protect against a facility suddenly becoming catastrophically offline.
No seriously, consider git branches. It's gotten 100x easier to create, manage, and merge branch pull requests. Most projects I join these days in fact "lock" master and you are forced to develop in branches.
Paradoxes, from Your Coffee to Calculus
With a similar experience as you, I agree. An absolute minimum bar is to have it compile, and tests will help in ascertaining correctness beyond that. Those which pass all tests only need a quick glance at the code to determine if it is reasonable.
Vulnerability in Hangouts Chat aka how Electron makes open redirect great again
Another thing to consider is how Oracle structures it’s ULA (unlimited license agreements).

Oracle explicitly does not allow companies to cerify their software on AWS.

So just think about how much Oracle software the pentagon runs.

It’s hugely compelling to not go with AWS because Oracle won’t cerify nor grant you a license if your certify your ULA on AWS.

Financially alone might dictate going with Oracle Cloud over AWS. Regardless of which cloud service is technically better.

https://www.itassetmanagement.net/2018/06/12/are-you-sure-yo...
> Yes we did. Look at phone rules. We 100% decided that.

We decided, in the 1930s, to bring phone service everywhere. That has been done and the expenses have been incurred. We never decided to take on new expenses to extend that concept to broadband. We certainly never decided that the way we should achieve that outcome is through wired communications, rather than cheaper wireless communications. The FCC's attempts to do so have been achieved by unelected bureaucrats through regulatory fiat.

> You don't need trains and airlines to serve every house.

But you do need trains and airlines to serve every region above a given size, and that raises the same considerations about duplicated infrastructure.

> I'd say. Do you think "no merger, no rules applied" would have been better?

The merger is a red herring, since TWC and Charter did not previously compete with each other. What I think would've been better would have been to abandon build-out requirements, so that they (or other companies) could come in and compete in areas that will support competition. Then, if there are areas that we feel like aren't being sufficiently served, we can use tax dollars to close those gaps. That allows you to serve the people who need it (and subjects those efforts to cost-benefit analysis in terms of whether cheaper or more expensive technology is used to achieve the result). And it prevents you from distorting competition in areas that could reasonably support 2-3 ISPs.

> ...I think that directly contradicts "The idea that you can rig the merger so that it comes out of corporate profits with no consumer impact is nonsense."

In what way? The government can't control what the company does with the savings it achieves from the merger.
When I was in my early 20s, I picked up a confidential clearance in a very short period of time. IIRC it only took a couple of days.

The need was very well defined. I required escorted access into a missile lab to service their network equipment. My background was also quite limited. I'd never traveled much at the time, lived in a couple of states.
That was the first phase.

But ultimately Lisp taught me not to overvalue technical superiority, so I eventually stopped using it.
You should send an email to the author given that many people read feeds on mobile devices.
Based on what I just read nothing would stop me from switching to the "No Security" mode and installing whatever I want.

...for now. The frog boils very slowly.
I was thinking about this recently—given how difficult it is to explain "why" an artificial neural network behaves a certain way, it's probably similarly difficult for our conscious minds to explain our unconscious behavior, the best they can do is pattern match and tell stories.

From the article: "If we could understand the processes by which billions of neurons cooperate to help us recognize a face or interpret a fragment of speech, we would find these as unrelated to the stream of consciousness as the operation of the liver."
IMO, the question leaking is interesting because it highlights the information asymmetry in the DNC leaks.

Donna Brazile was able to get a copy of the debate questions not because someone hacked in and got them for her, but because CNN just... gave them to her. Because she was a contributor to the network that was going to be talking about the debate. There were Republican contributors in the same role who presumably also received a copy of the questions (we would have heard if they didn't, I'm sure), so I personally work on the basis that both candidates have known the questions for (at least) CNN debates for quite some time. The only reason we know the DNC did is because of the e-mail leaks, we certainly don't know that the RNC didn't. I don't say this to excuse anyone involved, just that it's often sold as a left vs right scandal and I really don't think it is. I think it shows how little CNN cares about the integrity of things like this.

On a broader level, it isn't talked about that much because IMO it just didn't have that big of an effect. The topic of the debate was known in advance (economy, foreign policy, etc) and it wouldn't have taken a rocket scientist to prepare a list of very likely questions. Certainly, it could have fueled distrust in the mainstream media, but that's something people do talk about at great length, so in a way it's just become one evidence point in a much larger debate.
It's definitely based on preference, but I designed MVL to be as simple and consistent as possible. For example, there are two ways to create a for loop (one on the ul and one on the li).

<For={item in items}>
<!-- multiple elements -->
</For>

<p For={item in items}><!-- single element --></p>

This syntax works for every component ("For" is just another component).
Ah, there's also hetzner.com which I've had a good experience with.
Perhaps there are fewer conditionals in the build than there would be in the code.
More than a couple. Not as many as amazon.

Source: I work for Oracle Cloud Infrastructure
Want to Become a Super Thinker? Read These Thought-Provoking Books
One telescope, one camera, one night, 9 images
If someone is putting >90% of funding for project, it is just common sense they will veto things they do not like. I wonder if some people believe that online cliche about open source is all there to it.
Don't most bios have a password protect option? That alone makes evil maid attacks significantly harder.
> $(shell sh -c 'uname -s 2>/dev/null || echo not')

Is there a reason they don't use simpler:

$(shell uname -s 2>/dev/null || echo not)

?
I don't understand this fad that programmers should know only first principles, and shun checklists in favor of deriving everything from scratch every time.
I know how my car works but I still pull out the service manual when I need to change an air filter. Nothing under the hood is 'black magic' but seeing the procedure written out saves me a ton of time.

The problem is that the explanations of the commands are wrong.

Reset does not undo a commit. It moves HEAD and updates the work tree. I have no problem with cheat sheets and quick references. Memorizing the commandline interface is not important. Use a cheat sheet. Handwaving over what the commands you are running actually do is asking for trouble.

Edit:

I was witness to a similar debate on IRC the other day. Someone insisted but you can't learn Python without understanding the underlying data model of strings in C. IMO that is ridiculous because the abstraction in Python is close to airtight; you just about never need to think about the implementation of strings when using strings.

Git, on the other hand, frequently exposes implementation details to the user. Casual users are likely to run into edge cases that don't understand. You basically can't resolve rebase conflicts effectively if you don't know what "ours" and "theirs" means. The man pages are indecipherable if you don't know what blobs and trees are. You don't need to teach people that stuff on day one, when they first learn about pull, add, commit, etc. But you had better teach them soon. I see no reason why a discussion of rebase couldn't at least casually explain how it's implemented: "check out base branch, cherry-pick commits from rebased branch", is that so hard? If they don't understand what a common ancestor is, how are they expected to know when to use --onto?
Alas, intention doesn't much influence this. If you bring in a generic flamebait trope, we're likely to get a generic flamewar thread.

One way to counteract this is to make comments that are much more specific. Your second comment is a step in that direction.
interesting that you come forward with music resulting from this approach as not being very rewarding. but why is that so? I'm not a musician, so maybe I'm naive - but shouldn't music programming be able to produce anything and beyond?
Mods: Title could be amended to mention that this is about imaging solutions for new Macs with Secure boot.
Depends if you define WebAssembly as "JavaScript" or not.

Have the days of hand-writing raw JS peaked? More than likely. Between TypeScript and other transcompilers, and the impending threat of WebAssembly being able to consume other languages and output browser executable code.

A project like Microsoft's Blazor[0] might ultimately fail, but that type of compiled from language to WebAssembly likely is the future. But if you define WebAssembly as "JavaScript" then I guess we haven't hit peak JS.

[0] https://github.com/aspnet/Blazor