skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That misses the point.

As long as there is an ISP that can be publicly pressured to block the source of content, and the source of that content can be easily differentiated (to avoid blocking other content), we're one Twitter mob away from "existing on the Internet" not being enough to avoid censorship.

And it doesn't even need to be their ISP. It could be yours or mine.
LOL I couldn’t make it past a minute without throwing up. So much gushing and hero worship, especially considering what we now know. Shades of Theranos there.
Having a discussion on surveillance and ethics here is nearly pointless and merely dilutes the discussion with denial, apologism and hand waving. Its just going through the motions of debate when reality already confirms the choices made.

Google, Facebook and others are SV darlings and large employers and they have no shortage of fawning prospects who barely stop to think about niceties like ethics unless they need to posture, or expect it of others as if we live in a magical world where we can sellout but others have to behave ethically.

Articles like this and endless debate is not going to work. Regulations may - personalized advertising especially social or political is unethical and destructive. But these debates will happen in other places where the focus is more on ethics and society and not startups and making money.
Would be interesting to see the same data for vaping.
Andrew Torba is obviously a neo-Nazi, so can we put this argument to rest.
When's the next 50% off sale?
Who gets to determine what is "hatred"? The natural upvote/downvote economy of the internet or a self-appointed anonymous class of bigtech mass-censors? When you go on the internet would you prefer to see reality or an artificial selection of on-canon content pre-approved by the priest-media class as in the age of television? In many ways it doesn't matter because infotech decentralization will slowly find a way, and forcible censorship will no longer be possible.
Hmmm. 2013? I beat them by a year.

http://rachelbythebay.com/w/2012/02/07/ping/
What are the current security issues with TunSafe?
It’s certainly possible the people working at Microsoft believe they have a moral duty to keep hate speech like that off their platform. I know that if I worked at a platform company and there were folks advocating physical harm to anyone on that platform I’d been pretty keen to remove them.

I don’t think free speech means a platform company has some imperative to offer a level playing field to racists.
I'm using TunSafe every day for a while now. It is great. Thanks!

Without any extra tuning I see much better speeds than OpenVPN - something like 20MB/s vs 5MB/s when transferring between EU and US locations.
Just to clarify:

* Julia has had tasks/co-routines basically forever and uses them for all blocking operations so that no explicit non-blocking I/O or callbacks are required.

* It also supports multithreading using the @threads macro.

* However, it does not yet map tasks to threads, but that is very close to ready: https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/22631.

We expect this work to be finished in a near-future 1.x release and then Julia will support M:N multiplexing.
The founders were genuinely good people and I was young enough to risk that we’d be made whole. Also the dot com bubble was just recently obliterated so I was lucky to have any job at all.
You're all good man, no rush - fully understand :) Let me know when you and Boaz get together. I have a feeling you'll hit it off.
Do you want to work for PlayStation Network team? We have plenty of open positions from DevOps to server or client side developers. And variety of work also there - commerce, social, video streaming, distributes databases, big data, ml.

You name it, we are doing it.
It's hard to be ready for it when its worse every year. Plus, we don't even know half of the secondary effects yet.

We are sleepwalking to oblivion.
> logical refutation doesn't work.

It can work, if-and-only-if if it is done after real communication has been established. Most people trying to refute "obviously wrong" ideas skip the first step and start with arguing in a language and framing that they understand. This is noise when the other person uses a fundamentally different framework for what counts as "facts", "evidence", "authority", etc.

One of the better explanations of what I'm talking about is this[1] essay. While it discusses the creationist "debate", the ideas about trying to educate people that are resistant to science and logic apply generally.

Yes, logical refutation rarely works. However, did you bother to learn their language so there is a foundation of actual communication to build upon? Or did you argue in a language they don't understand? Even worse, did your argument appear to contain a lot of phatic expression that is hostile from their point of view?

[1] http://scienceblogs.com/clock/2007/05/31/more-than-just-resi... (see the heading "Hierarchical View of the World" and "The Problem of Language" for the main argument)
Not in the US. So long as your changes don't cause damage your warranty can't be voided.
Not every security vulnerability is a backdoor. (The Intel ME isn't a backdoor either.)
From Robert Bolt's A Man For All Seasons (substitute "principle of free speech" for "law").

William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!

Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!

Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

-----------

People in positions of power generally assume that they will always be in power. Many of people during the Obama presidency, wished that the president was less susceptible to gridlock between the various branches of government. In January 2016, most people never even considered the possibility that in 1 year, Donald Trump would be sworn in as President.

Right now, the progressive, center left is in a very strong position with regards to the tech industry. All the major players are sensitive to their causes, and against the alt-right. A lot of people are unhappy that the current norms of free speech are causing the social media companies to be slow in taking down alt-right, hate content.

People forget, that things change. What if Zuckerberg decides that as a rich, white, male who is accused of indirectly helping Trump get elected, his future political prospects are better if he goes all in and casts his full support behind Trump? What if Twitter continues to have monetization problems and get bought out by a group of wealthy GOP donors?

How easy would it be to call any discussion of European colonialism and imperialism or of slavery in the United States, hate speech against whites? How easy would it be to label any discussion of increasing taxes because the 0.1% are not paying their fare share as hate speech against the rich. How about labeling any post advocating protest against ICE as targeted harassment?

If you knew that in 5 years, it would be the right that was running Facebook, Twitter, the ISPs, etc, what mores concerning free speech would you want to preserve, even when it involves a private entity.

I think a successful democracy in a polarized country involves both sides realizing that there will come a time when they will be out of power and encouraging cultural mores and norms that make sure they are able to communicate freely and have employment even when the other side is in power - either in government or in the private sector.
Perhaps you misunderstand. Scientists should study important _topics_ (virology, human genetics, materials science etc.), but within that, research direction should set by scientists not bureaucrats.

Many people share your view, though, and it's a shame. We have all of private industry to focus on short term benefits. Grad school is one place where the grinding expectation of immediate return-on-investment can be suspended. PhD students take low compensation hoping they can use curiosity and passion to direct their research. Increasingly, that's not the case.

>> appreciate the fact that the public is giving you grants and funding because the alternative is you get nothing.

This is cutting off the hand to spite the face. Taxpayers get an _unbelievable bargain_ for the work of PhD students and postdocs. Gutting research funding won't hurt them for long, they'll easily move on to much higher paying work, it's future society that will suffer.

I'd argue you get the best and most significant contributions to society in the long run with stable government funding of basic research. Don't believe me? Ask Steven Chu, Nobel Prize winner and energy secretary:

https://www.amacad.org/multimedia/pdfs/wsjoped.pdf
Alright, but they're designed for you to read through config.h (note that these settings aren't inlined) and adjust them for your system before building a binary. They're very explicitly not designed for a "grab your vendor binary and you'll be fine" model. It's a different paradigm.

EDIT: The programs themselves are intended to be written in a programmer-modifiable way (they host a list of common "plugins" in patch format). I think the last thing you can say about systemd is that it encourages you to jump in and modify its behaviour to suit your needs. That's not a Supported Configuration(tm).
Bad workplaces are so common though that it’s a perfectly good heuristic to guess that if a place asks you to do whiteboard questions it’s a bad engineering workplace. You’re not missing much by passing, and the heuristic probably won’t be wrong much.
It's my home network, there are devices you can count on your finger.
Also DHCP lease times by default are in multiple hours on home routers so IPs don't often change.
also the web Interface shows hostnames
And what is it measuring exactly? In real life you don’t get the score. You either did it or not. Nobody cares about how you did it, only answer matters.

And interviews are not pressuring, they are simple. No hard desisions, no anxiety whether it is going to work. You in and 5 hours later you out.
Lame.
It’s unfortunate that we’ve let things get this bad. Maybe now that people are seeing some real effects that they can point to more action will be taken.
Stockholm terrorist heavily beaten in Swedish prison cell
Is it that amazing? I don't think I've had use 3 until this year and I still have to flip-flop.

AND I say this as someone who was reading peps going into 3's release.

Do Ubuntu or Fedora default to python 3 yet? Arch? My RHEL experience isn't as representative.
IF the government happens to choose the right technology to subsidize, then a subsidy is efficient. Suppose they pump a lot of money into wind, and then someone discovers a solar solution that's cheaper. That giant investment will have been wasted. By contrast, a tax lets researchers competing on a level playing field find the right substitute.
> Rust will eventually solve its crisis by creating something equivalent to "do" notation.

This is... not at all true? Rust already has the `?` operator, and there's no indication of this being replaced with do notation or anything like it.
We used find the longest palindrome in a string as an interview question at Amazon back in 2004
Firebog.net has curated lists
Also, a subsidy does nothing to reduce consumption before the subsidized substitute takes effect, which could be decades.
If they didn’t have work for all the employees for all the hours, couldn’t they have reduced the employee count? And only bring full time contractors that had full cycles in the past? And work with a mix of full timers and contractors to take care of variable load?

It seems like the actual reason they had to go down was because they didn’t have enough customers as opposed to the 20% extra employee costs. Plus every where in the industry the hourly rate of contractors is higher than the the employees because of the benefits. Was the CEO a high schooler?
I haven't really used it for anything other than super simple things with a very tightly bound max input. Stack overflow and honestly many recursive algorithms are quite hard to parse in your head especially once you add some edge cases and some other entropy.
2018 SDN+NFV+IPv6 Fest Testing Event Just Around the Corner
Okay, so sticking with that analogy, can your phone company cut off your service if you're making racist comments or discussing unpopular political ideas with your friends over the phone? Or, perhaps more importantly, _should_ they be able to?
The "bug" being systemd making all sorts of undocumented assumptions about the environment it's running it?
There's already a bunch on Twitter, where I've had an account for a while.

So it's too late for me, but save yourself...!
>people value a larger paycheck but no benefits over a pay package with benefits but a smaller cash component

How did you arrive at this conclusion?
I don't recover from panics in production Go and none of the code I depend on panics to handle errors.

Errors are handled the long and boring way inline and I like it that way. (I would like better tools for making better errors, but not for pretending errors don't exist.) When I work in C, I do the same.

Your charactization of Go as I know it is wrong.
It also requires there to not be a hardware sidechannel exploit on the device running SGX... such as the variants of Spectre that have ben trickling out every few weeks now all year... so yeah: Moxie's trust of SGX is pretty damning.
She did after-school work during her last 3 years to artificially raise her salary. Not only is the pension free of state tax, it is also free of payroll tax.

So, at 55 she retired with an after tax pension that was quite literally equal to her after tax salary. When you factor in commuting costs, she was paid to retire early.

The whole point here for me is the guaranteed nature of this employment. It's incredibly hard to be fired. If teaching children is such a valuable societal tool, we shouldn't be restricting the number of teachers to x and their salary to y.

We should encourage 1000x people to be teachers and pay them 0.03y
> Whereas exceptions (in the C++/Java style) are free when they don’t fire, but very expensive when they do -- hundreds or thousands of cycles to parse exception tables and unwind the stack.

This isn't the whole story. The unwind control flow edges inhibit optimizations and increase code size. This is part of why C++ added `noexcept`.

On the implementation freedom side of things, I am inclined to agree. For example, C++ is considering reimplementing exceptions as return values under the hood: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2018/p070... (Though also note that an Either/Maybe/etc-style syntax could also be implemented as unwinding if you wanted to...)
A couple of comments have mentioned LeetCode. While reading those comments I had an odd idea on a different way to use LeetCode when interviewing. The usual way would be to get problems from them and spring those on the candidate to solve on a whiteboard or on a computer. Numerous people have raised objections to that kind of interview.

Instead, how about sitting down in front of a computer with the candidate, going to an interesting problem on the LeetCode site, and reading the problem statement with the candidate. Make sure you both agree on what the problem is asking for.

Then, instead of having the candidate solve the problem, go to the discussion page for the problem, and start reading the posts with the candidate. These will include posts from people who are asking for help understanding the question, and from people who are showing off their solutions.

Pick a few where the poster is asking for help understanding, and ask the candidate how they would clarify things for the confused poster.

Pick a few where the poster is posting their solution, and ask the candidate to do in informal oral code review along with you. Let the candidate take the lead, just providing nudges if necessary. For ones where the review finds serious bugs, talk about how to make test cases to demonstrate the bugs.

From what I've seen on LeetCode problem discussions there will be a lot of posted solutions that have edge cases that fail, or fail to meet time or space requirements that were given, or leave out major cases, or make implicit assumptions about the input that if violated invalidate their sultion. There should be no problem finding plenty of posts with plenty of things to bring up in review to discuss with the candidate.

This seems to me that it would not be overly stressful on the candidate (way less stressful than writing code under a short deadline), it is exercising skills that working programmers actually use, and it would let you do some work with the candidate to get some idea of how they get along with others when working.
> protection rackets

Didn't know what that was until you said it and still not sure how it applies.

> Assuming (correctly) that web sites are untrustworthy data collection bandits, why should they behave well only because a user proved their submission (and their gullibility) by paying them?

I think you are misunderstanding me. I love everything about GDPR except 1 thing and that thing is not allowing companies to tie providing their service in exchange for data so that they can make money because it denies people the CHOICE (key word here) of using said option.

I proposed an option (just pay for the lost revenue the company no longer makes) so that everyone still gets the option to use current revenue models, pro privacy people can pay their fare share for the service, and companies don't blacklist all of the EU for what a portion of the people want. What does not sound fair about that?
I'm not convinced this is a true example of censorship. Historically, censorship relates to an institution's ability to prevent information before it becomes public, or to manipulate information to serve its own means. It assumes an almost complete control over the means of information production, whereby a populace barely even sees a glimpse of the censored information. Since Little's neo-nazi propaganda is public and is being openly discussed, he cannot truly be censored. It's more a publicity stunt by Microsoft. There is certainly censorship in the U.S., but this doesn't seem like a true example of it to me. I also think it's a slippery slope fallacy to say that removing a forum about torturing Jews (and other hate speech) will inevitably lead to totalitarian censorship of all provocative ideas. Please show me an example where a government or a private institution withdrew its support of speech like this, which then led to the wholesale censorship of free speech in a country.
If I were interviewing that would absolutely be an important part of the interview. It never ceases to amaze me how bad some people are at searching.
Those are indirect costs, but on the cash side, don't forget the $5 trillion/yr in global fossil subsidies. US pays around $10-50 billion of that.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97...

http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/
This would be an example:

https://www.agiliq.com/blog/2018/01/understanding-python-mag...
They didn't need an "expert", just someone who can do basic grade school arithmetic.
I'm really happy they got phone support working at all, this is the biggest stumbling blocks with alternative phones. Everyone can get a tablet working but few have got the phone/4g functionality.

At the moment I'm wishing I'd bought the dev kit, I'd be happy with it slapped into a 3D printed case as my phone.
I’ve always thought it was just a fad (one that I like though) I never thought about it in terms of a response to increased screen time but that is very possible.
I agree. I interviewed people who optimized for white boarding interviewed and, as such, could knock up CS algorithms which you can trivially import from libraries all I wanted. But when asking them a problem they did not encounter before and Google, they got very stuck. While, every time, there was a way of writing the query to Google that had the answer in the top 3 (usually #1). People waste crazy time on reinventing the wheel.

Anecdotal: we had some problem to solve which required qua a lot of code to solve and only old sites with broken links came up in Google for the guy solving it so he decided to implement it himself. When I asked why that task was taking so long he showed me what he was implementing. The code he was writing had an implementation on an old site which had a broken link to the code; when I copied the name of the zip file that was linked in github; there was the code. It had no description or comments; someone just checked it in. It was not perfect code, but it shaved off a few days of writing it from scratch anyway.

I care about being able to code, which can be assessed from past code and a pair programming session and then efficient problem solving using your brain and internet. The latter is somehow less common.

So my favorite way now is; I ask them to 'solve' a problem they have never encountered and that cannot physically be done during the interview time (I am interviewing for software development and in our field you get asked for things that cannot be done in the time you are asked to do it all the time, so I need to see how you handle that); give them time to Google possible ways to do it and present a little plan. Then they need to pick, out of the plan, something they think they can do inside the interview time (see how confident they are and if they have any sense about low hanging fruit or estimations; I might suggest something else if the task they pick is only installing libraries for an hour ;) and we'll sit together behind a monitor and do it together. I'll usually tell them to stop after 15-30 minutes as I have seen enough at that time.
Orbit isn't just one thing. The plane changes (some of the most expensive types of burns) involved to get to the same orbit as a tanker and then to the target orbit would vastly outway any potential benefits.
In the comp submission form [1] we highlight the fact that the comp figures should be what your are earning total (ex. what shows up on your W2). Some companies actually factor in the stock appreciation during compensation adjustments (Amazon does this). Although it's not perfect, we think it answers best the question most people are after: Where can I earn the most amount of money?

[1] https://www.levels.fyi/addcomp.html
What we're seeing now is, in some ways, worse than predictions from 20 years ago. And even now, the Trump administration is in full denial. But hey, given the lagging effects of CO2 and CH4 emissions, we're already locked into far more extreme changes. It's sad, but so it goes.
> the fact that ranges include both endpoints - rather than being half-open as in Python - is another such indication

No, it's the same indication, twice. Once you've decided on 1-based, you almost definitely want to include both endpoints. Else you end up saying things like a[1:n+1] to indicate "the whole array please", which is annoying.
$12/hr is about $24k/yr, which appears to be double the poverty level for one person: https://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty-guidelines

Not saying $24k is a lot of money, just pointing out how low the poverty line actually is in government regulations.
The next generation of ICO investing
I just tested 100mm at f/32 against 50mm at f/16, which have the same entrance pupil size, and when cropped to the same part of the subject, the longer focal length simply wipes the floor with the shorter focal length.

https://i.imgur.com/GtljNmg.png top is 50mm, bottom is 100mm

Why? The antialiasing filter and demosaicing destroy detail at a fixed scale relative to the captured image.