skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Since (as you say) it's impossible to know which ads correspond to child sex trafficking, and it's almost certain that some will be, what you are saying is that all marketplaces for prostitution must be banned.

Let's roll with that. Since it's impossible to know which pr0n on tube sites is underage, and it's almost certain that some will be, all porn tube sites must be banned.

Since it's impossible to know which email accounts are used for child sex trafficking, and it's almost certain that some will be, all email services must be banned. There's really no limit to how far you can go with this.

Why don't you start right now? Youporn, xhampster, xvideos, there are dozens - they all have "teen" sections. Send them a letter letting them know that their website is used by "child" pornographers (you're unsure which images, of course, it's really hard to tell with 17/18 year olds). That starts Claim #1 "defendant was notified that their site facilities child pornography". Better yet, get a law enforcement agency to do it, that looks better on the indictment. The fact that uploads ban/strip the word 'lolita' (they do, actually) - Claim #2!

The good news for the Backpage guys is that in court, every single one of those points in the indictment are going to have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. The bad news is it won't matter because what's really going on is that they're being prosecuted for facilitating adult prostitution, and our puritanical society has barely come to grips with the fact that sex toys are now legal (marijuana is still pending).

No matter what you think of Lacey and Larkin, the loss of backpage and craigslist adult is a huge step backwards for female autonomy.
Further down in the Scientific American piece, one of the researchers does respond to this:

>Serrà acknowledged in an email that a bias due to the “test of time” effect is possible but argued that its influence should be small. For instance, he noted, the long-term patterns and trends that he and his colleagues identified also hold over relatively short—and relatively recent—time periods (say, 1997 to 2007), where the “test of time” effect should be minimal. “The same happens with close and not-so-recent time periods (e.g., 1960 and 1968), where both years could partly incorporate such an effect,” he wrote. “Since the trend is consistent in short time spans where you assume the ‘test of time’ bias is minimal and, furthermore, the trend is also consistent for longer time spans, we can assume it is a general trend and, thus, that the ‘test of time’ effect is really small.”
I've found int overflow one of the most pernicious issues in C programming, and have been maintaining notes (which reference this article) at:

http://www.pixelbeat.org/programming/gcc/integer_overflow.ht...
Funnily enough, I heard both that and the road sign one from the same person in the early nineties.
I don’t think people are arguing that prisoners shouldn’t be allowed to work. They’re arguing that prisoners shouldn’t be forced.
This is really interesting. Would anyone have a link into more information as to how they are making this happen behind the scenes? How is this different from wine?
Guessing: a defense needs to establish reasonable doubt, not an airtight theory of the case.
Trying to understand the motivation here.

In principle, what's the difference between my company taking advantage of open source software (cost savings, huge advantage because I don't have to build everything in-house) and a company that offers a hosted version of said software?

In both cases, I am benefitting economically and not contributing upstream.
We aren't just a representative republic. We are a federal republic, with rural and urban states, with large and small states, and the EC helps balance these competing interests. What Californians "lose" in terms of representative power in presidential elections, they more than make up in the legislature (53 seats in the House vs. Iowa's 4), never mind their influence on national economic policy by virtue of being the most populous state.

That the Electoral College defies the spirit of "one person, one vote" is a feature, not a bug. The EC forces presidential candidates to have broad national appeal. It's the difference between the Superbowl, where you win if you score the most points in one game, and the World Series, where you win only if you win the most games. The Superbowl is biased toward outliers---teams that have inconsistent overall performance but one really good day can win, but that doesn't mean they're the best team that year. The World Series mitigates that bias by forcing teams to win consistently---a team can have one really good day but still lose the series because they can't perform well all the time. Likewise, because of the EC presidential candidates aren't competing in just one election but in fifty-one, and that means appealing to more than just coastal states or urban population centers (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_(United_Stat...).

Conversely, our direct representatives at the federal level are members of the House (by design) and the Senate (as of the 17th Amendment). All of this focus on the EC and the Presidency is misplaced. While we need a President with broad appeal, we also need Representatives (and to a lesser degree, Senators) who represent our interests, and here's where I think federal election reformers should focus: on alternate voting systems (like in Massachusetts), on better voter enrollment and balloting mechanisms (like in one of the PNW states, maybe it was Washington's that caught my eye), on non-partisan redistricting, and on publicly funding candidates. These reforms can and should start at the state level.

The genius of western liberal democracy isn't just the allocation of political power to the people but also the careful balancing of competing interests: No one bloc should have too much political power. Eliminating the Electoral College would be a move away from this balance. The right place to drive nationwide political change is in the House of Representatives, not the White House.
Agreed, we already have far too much advertising around us.
Oh no! I wouldn't want under allocation of goods to happen, better let people die instead.
(the FAQ was added after I posted)

That's worse because Heather would have certainly warned them of these issues, and it means they did it anyway.
> However, today’s cloud providers have repeatedly violated this ethos by taking advantage of successful open source projects and repackaging them into competitive, proprietary service offerings. Cloud providers contribute very little (if anything) to those open source projects. Instead, they use their monopolistic nature to derive hundreds of millions dollars in revenues from them. Already, this behavior has damaged open source communities and put some of the companies that support them out of business.

The issue is that large companies can free-load off open source projects and make millions while contributing nothing back to the developers. The OSI has certainly known of this problem since its founding in the late 90s, and as far as I can tell has no intention of helping solve it. For example, most recently Kyle Mitchel developed License Zero [0] as a way for open source developers to make money from their work, and presented it to the OSI for approval. It was rejected. Here is one of the comments from Bruce Perens [1].

> > What does an economically viable open source look like?

> My usual answer for this is that if you have to ask how you're going to
make money, you're the wrong person to make Open Source. Nowhere in the
mission of OSI is any mandate to provide authors with a viable business
method.

[0] https://licensezero.com/

[1] http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.o...
Rust decided for overflows to cause panics in debug mode, but continue normally in release mode. They have special function calls for the few times that you actually WANT overflow. This seemed to he the only good option. It allows the programmer to express intent. In the future, if hardware allows for cheap hardware traps in the case of unintentionally overflow, they reserve the right to use them in release mode. C seems pretty hopeless since there is no way to know whether or not the coder intended on overflow or not.
There are lots of videos on youtube about creationism. I like watching them. I find the reasoning actually pretty good. Too lazy to dig up good videos right now. But don't knock it till you try it.
Here are the details from Valve's announcement post [0]:

[begin quote]

Q: What is Proton exactly? How does it differ from normal Wine? Who worked on it?

Proton is a tool distribution based on a modified version of Wine. The included improvements to Wine have been designed and funded by Valve, in a joint development effort with CodeWeavers. Here are some examples of what we've been working on together since 2016:

- vkd3d[source.winehq.org], the Direct3D 12 implementation based on Vulkan

- The OpenVR and Steamworks native API bridges

- Many wined3d performance and functionality fixes for Direct3D 9 and Direct3D 11

- Overhauled fullscreen and gamepad support

- The "esync[github.com]" patchset, for multi-threaded performance improvements

Modifications to Wine are submitted upstream if they're compatible with the goals and requirements of the larger Wine project; as a result, Wine users have been benefiting from parts of this work for over a year now. The rest is available as part of our source code repository for Proton and its modules.

In addition to that, we've been supporting the development of DXVK[github.com], the Direct3D 11 implementation based on Vulkan; the nature of this support includes:

- Employing the DXVK developer in our open-source graphics group since February 2018

- Providing direct support from our open-source graphics group to fix Mesa driver issues affecting DXVK, and provide prototype implementations of brand new Vulkan features to improve DXVK functionality

- Working with our partners over at Khronos, NVIDIA, Intel and AMD to coordinate Vulkan feature and driver support

[end quote]

[0] https://steamcommunity.com/games/221410/announcements/detail...
How is this different from a startup using open source software (cost savings) instead of building everything in-house?

In both cases, the startup benefits and the project doesn't receive upstream contributions.
I'm curious when we will reach 'peak GPU' much like we've pretty much reached 'peak CPU' for average users. Perhaps we're already there.

Something I expect from future GPUs will be GAN generated scenery. Much like we saw the demo with the city driving and swapping out buildings and trees etc, I expect that we'll see the game scripted into a much simpler "no textures" sort of system and then have the computer generate appropriate scenery. It would make it possible for games like Far Cry or Tomb Raider to have some randomization in their game play for replayability.
I need to learn about this. Does shared source actually allow one to arbitrarily use the source? I thought the only distinction was that it didn't allow contributions.
I was clearly replying to the claim made that this doesn't make redis proprietary.
As I said, they just made up a new word for their version of proprietary.

Also, the FAQ was added after I posted. Look at GitHub commits :)
>Today, most cloud providers offer Redis as a managed service over their infrastructure and enjoy huge income from software that was not developed by them. Redis’ permissive BSD open source license allows them to do so legally, but this must be changed.

Then it seems the solution is simple: use GPL rather than BSD. In other words, say "Do you want to use this free software for your benefit? Fine, but in turn give back your improvements to the community for our benefit.". Without this safeguard, progress and shared good is not achieved.
If you want to try SciFi that draws you into a world like fantasy, strong recommend for the Ringworld series!
“why shouldn't they be forced to take on some of their own upkeep?”

Because slavery is wrong.
I agree that their approach to restricting consulting is...unconventional, but I support their legal right to do so. Their code, their rules.
That’s not how inequality works.

Two people each having $5 is a low—inequality situation. One person having $10 and another having $100 is a high inequality situation, even though minimum and average wealth are both higher.
(2016) SF Teachers priced out
YES, this study finding these effects from Facebook are extremely interesting.

"Their reams of data converged on a breathtaking statistic: Wherever per-person Facebook use rose to one standard deviation above the national average, attacks on refugees increased by about 50 percent."

"[the FB] algorithm is built around a core mission: promote content that will maximize user engagement. Posts that tap into negative, primal emotions like anger or fear, studies have found, perform best and so proliferate."

This selfish (to FB, Google, YouTube, etc) emphasis on engagement over truth has always disturbed me, but without any sound data. Now that some emerges, it much more rapidly than I expected approaches truly frightening levels.

I'm normally start from libertarian, but this seems to be actively damaging society (albeit unwittingly) for their own profit, a true tragedy of the commons.
Especially if the FCC points to things like the provably false public comments they collected as their reasoning. When they say use evidence like https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/1051157755251 it's not hard to prove that they didn't actually have reasoning for their decisions beyond "me and my lobbyists wanted it"
You might want to start here: https://www.softwarefreedom.org/
What if you have a bad day and end up performing miserably in this test? Even if you're really good, this one hour can hijack 60 separate chances that you have to prove yourself. This will definitely increase the pressure on the people getting evaluated.

What about the fairness of this evaluation? Over a period of time, questions may be published in the public domain and then the scores of candidates are rendered meaningless. How do you assess whether the person truly solved a problem or merely recalled a solution they had read before?

Over a period of time, the score will be given too much weightage and we will not be able to get a wholistic picture of the candidate.

Ultimately, this is going to end up to be as damaging as automatic resume scanners. Used as a tool to filter good candidates but mainly to reduce the workload of hiring candidates.

People find a way to work around these scanners by dumping keywords even if they are not very familiar with certain skills. Similarly, people will find a way to game the new system as well.

Whiteboarding sessions, despite being more time consuming, seems to be more effective at what it has been designed to gauge.
I prefer https://github.com/hwdsl2/setup-ipsec-vpn. Shamless blog post on setting it up on a Raspberry Pi 3 - https://blog.elasticbyte.net/setting-up-a-native-cisco-ipsec...
The difference is that Redis Labs competes with one type and doesn’t compete with the other. That’s the only difference.

I’d love to hear Salvatore Sanfilippo’s take…
>At it's core, this is fundamentally about property rights. The owners of the Redis copyright are well within their right to license their property in any way they see fit.

They absolutely are. And I'm free to say that their license is ridiculous and do my best to warn others about the potential pitfalls of their license.

>You could go build your own infrastructure software, of course, that is a valid path forward. But will it be of the same quality at the same (or similar) cost?

Maybe, maybe not. But it doesn't matter. If Redis continues down this path, then enough developers are going to stop using Redis that any free alternative, even though it might start off weaker, will quickly become the superior option. Look at MySQL vs. MariaDB. Or OpenOffice vs. LibreOffice. In both cases, Oracle (no coincidence that it's Oracle in both cases) took over a very popular, well established open source project and engaged in license shenanigans. In both cases, the community rebelled, forked the project, and the fork quickly superseded its parent.

>Will someone provide an alternative to Redis out of disdain for this? Probably. But it will take years, if not longer, to reach feature, stability, and therefore market parity.

Not true. You have to remember that the new license only applies to Redis going forward. I'm free to take my copy of the old Redis codebase, fork it into something, say, NuCache, and hack on that to try to keep up with and surpass Redis. That's exactly what happened with the OpenOffice/LibreOffice fork. That's exactly what happened with MySQL/MariaDB fork. And if redis continues with its ill-advised policy, that's what will happen here.
A collaboration between the very cloud providers this seems to be a rant against?
Do the cloud providers make significant in-house modifications to Redis?
Sorry, what is your point?
The core issue in interviewing is exactly this: asking a good efficient question! It doesn't matter if you use whiteboarding or homework or take a long walk together (Steve Jobs style). Most companies cannot expose their internal code base and expect someone to fix bugs in an hour of time. Ultimately you have to simplify the problem, chip away the unnecessary stuff and still it be good enough to evaluate candidate effectively. So if you think about this more deeply, you might realize that whiteboarding or IDEs or just talking is merely a medium to deliver the question and consume the answer. A vast majority of effectiveness of your interview doesn't depend on the medium but actual content of the question.
I’m interested in this subject. Hoping you’ll connect with me through my HN profile.
Actually that's not what the study implies. They found "rejection of science and animism" to be a stronger predictor of conspiracism. Although "finalism" was found to be second best so it is certainly part of the mix but going off this study you could not say it is the fundamental cause. In fact the researchers are careful to point out that they have established correlation and not cause.
Software Emgineer V on Salary.com represents the tippy top outlier of the elite senior engineer totem pole. It’s a stretch to call that an average anything. For a more realistic median salary range, just look at the figures for plain Software Engineer.
Not enough people have heard of Outline.
https://getoutline.org/

It is a shadowsocks client and even non-technical users can provision VPNs on cloud hosting providers.
I was promised Moon bases, farms and hotels by now and all we got is the information that there’s ice at the poles?!
Not to say it can't happen, but I dislike the meme that early engineers for startups are working on "hard problems". From a business and social sense, for sure, having to develop quickly, pivot even more so, and pound dirt to carve out a fit is an experience in itself. But, from a technology side, most startups are positively mindnumbing for engineer one. Think your Ubers, your Instagrams, your Facebooks, your Dropbox, the problems don't get technologically interesting until you start doing them at scale. Until then you've got a bog standard php/phython/whatever web/mobile app. Compare that to the opportunity to work with the cutting edge in machine learning, or deployment at scale, or bleeding edge hardware that you'd get at your Facebooks, your Googles, your Microsoft. To me working at a startup I expect hefty comp to be giving up getting to work on interesting problems for the chance of having more agency and winning the lottery if we get huge. YMMV of course, but for me and I think a lot of tech people I'd rather do interesting work for a soul crushing application than soul crushing work to #changeTheWorld (especially if the former pays upwards of 5x more and the latter only pays out to the founder(s)).
> why don't more developers say "f. you" and walk away from homework assignments, 5-round interviews, cubicle farms instead of offices, etc

Some of us do and some of us don't find it all that terrible. I've declined interviews with homework and told the company I didn't think their interview process was reasonable. Companies are looking for leaders in addition to code monkeys - having a stance on what's reasonable that you can support and explain in a professional manner might lose you a few job opportunities, but it might also win you some respect and serve as a signal that you're mature enough to evaluate the landscape and make judgement calls about what actually is reasonable, which is something managers (people leaders) and architects (technical leaders) do on a day to day basis.

On the other hand, I find whiteboarding to be fairly reasonable for most candidates. I recognize that are a few candidates with social anxiety problems who might only be able to perform ubder an alternate process but in these cases, I think it's reasonable for the candidate to ask and then for the company to accommodate.
One of my favorite instances of this is non-stick cooking spray. From the can in my kitchen:

Serving size: 1/4 second spray

Servings per container: about 565

Calories: 0

When you can make the serving size small enough, you can say there's no calories!

They actually fixed this with the new labeling requirements the FDA enacted a few years ago, so at least that's one step towards transparency.
Google Data Collection [pdf]
This attitude is how you get silliness like the idea that I can be prevented from reverse engineering software by an impersonal EULA. It's blanket permission to erode the rights of people who are in practice forced to comply with toxic aspects of an ecosystem. "You have the right to create your own operating system" is not a take that would be supported by any serious analysis seeking fairness for both parties.
For more context, CodeWeavers is a company behind CrossOver, a proprietary software based on Wine. It is also a major contributor of Wine Project too.
> Not true. You have to remember that the new license only applies to Redis going forward. I'm free to take my copy of the old Redis codebase, fork it into something, say, NuCache, and hack on that to try to keep up with and surpass Redis.

True! But that means today's Redis is in maintenance mode, with all new commercially-relevant features covered under the new license.
I second this. How could a software license prevent me from learning about how a piece of software works and selling my own knowledge and experience to a third party.

IANAL but I couldn’t possibly need a license to install/redistribute Redis to talk to someone about how Redis works.
Yes, in exactly the same sense that "building a bridge is simple because I can say 'use a truss' to a smart person" is wrong. Things having names doesn't automatically make them simple.

There are – like I said – entire textbooks on the subject – and why it is complex – if you are genuinely interested. I mean, heck, there's two textbooks alone about one particular system I randomly found on Wikipedia [1].

However to directly address your misconception, Kalman filters are not control systems. They are related to control theory, and are used to provide inputs to control systems. But control theory is its own thing, and there is no "general" solution to correctly control any given system.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furuta_pendulum
I would fully expect rent-a-coder style service from Asia popping up to take on your homework question by an experienced programmer for a modest fee.
Not an answer to your question, but there are other examples of this sort of thing. Lycaenid butterflies secrete nectar as caterpillars in exchange for protection by ants [1]. Indeed, ants have symbiotic relationships with a bunch of organisms, including fungus [2], aphids [3], and over 100 species of plants [4].

[1] https://australianmuseum.net.au/lycaenid-butterflies-and-ant...

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ant%E2%80%93fungus_mutualism

[3] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aphid#Ant_mutualism

[4] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myrmecophyte