skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I am simply referring to the result data from the study. I fail to see how that is disingenuous.

You say Scala and Haskell killed it in the study, and you are right, they were the third and second best language respectively with regards to low rates of bugs. Perhaps you also happened to notice (but failed to mention) what language did best of all: Clojure, a dynamically typed language.
>>The point is to raise the risk/cost of money laundering and to minimize its occurrence

Of course, that's the point. But the means is totalitarian.

>>otherwise financial fraud becomes culturally normalized

There are other ways to investigate and prosecute crime besides doing away with due process and protections against warrantless searches.

Fraud leaves a massive evidence trail. In many jurisdictions the problem is law enforcement simply not starting a criminal case against those involved in blatant fraud, or taking years to file charges, giving the fraudster time to victimize countless parties before they finally face consequences.

So there's no lack of information to use to prosecute those committing fraud without the total surveillance approach.

>>For that, anti-money laundering agencies must pay attention to large transfers between anonymized business entities.

Anything of significance about the operations of individuals and companies can be known by tracking transactions above $10,000.

Requiring that these transactions be reported totally circumvents the traditional limits on government searches, which required a warrant issued by a judge.

This is dragnet warrantless surveillance of trillions of dollars of transactions that creates information asymmetries the likes of which have never existed before.

>>That's very different than total-awareness of every individual's financial holdings and small transactions.

Most small transactions aggregate to larger ones. Having to explain the source of a large deposit to a bank requires providing evidence of the smaller transactions that formed the holding.

It amounts to AML agencies and the banks they've deputized having near total knowledge of the financial history of every individual.

An enormous amount of proprietary information can be gleened from this, which inevitably contributes to centralization of power, and I imagine, income inequality.

>>Reducing the fungibility (i.e. by increasing the reporting and oversight requirements) of large transfers of money doesn't undermine its usefulness for anything other than money laundering.

People have their money frozen for months at a time by banks, and have to comply with incredibly intrusive requests for private and hard to acquire information to get it unfrozen.

People have their bank accounts closed without explanation because the bank identifies some aspect of their financial profile, like affiliation with a legal marijuana dispensary, as too risky for their AML program. Or because the source of their money, while legal, is perceived as high-risk by the bank. So money is not fungible. Revenue from one legal source is treated differently than revenue from another.

And people can't just use cash. The AML drive has resulted in a situation where moving large amounts of cash is not safe, as billions of dollars in cash have been confiscated from individuals without even any charges being laid against them, through civil forfeiture and the principle that cash is "suspicious":

http://time.com/4878195/civil-asset-forfeiture-jeff-sessions...
Either you were excited about what you were doing or you got an 11pm page from chuckr and consequently had a lingering doubt about your expected lifespan...
Yes, and with the estimator API, too.
A bit offtopic: could you guys move the "please enable javascript"/captcha page to a separate, but cloudflare owned domain, so at least people who don't want to enable javascript for random websites behind cloudflare could enable it for your domain and pass all your browser checks?
May the Lord open.
Can you implement IPC with this system? It seems wrong to relate this to tuple spaces otherwise.
>I didn't pull that number out of my ass. It was actually a conservative number, based on what I saw some models as capable of

I read your earlier source. And I'm telling you that a list of drone maximum payloads pulled from the marketing websites of mostly small businesses isn't representative of the actual normal operating payloads of drones at those price points.

Most drones can technically take off with a much higher weight than is actually practical to fly with.

I'm not saying you can't find a gas powered drone with a 100 pound payload. What I am saying is that these drones aren’t remotely in the same category as consumer drones.

>Not just hobby drones, all drones. I expect there to to be a lot of commercial drone usage in the future. If they are all licensed, then the costs are limited to applying towards the small hobby usage, but overall U.S. drone usage, which I expect to be substantial compared to hobby use.

Then what is the point in regulating tiny drones with little capability to cause damage. Ultralight aircraft aren’t regulated like commercial jets.

>Your counter of "it's off by a few orders of magnitude" is in my opinion not sufficiently explained by personnel and countermeasures, since a few order of magnitude is at a minimum 100x off

This depends on what you’re trying to do. If your goal is just to make sure that commercial drones are licensed, then sure you could build a relatively cheap system. If your goal is just:

Hey we keep seeing an unlicensed drone delivering pizzas. Alert the police to go out with direction finding equipment when they get the time, and see if they can find the operator, so that we can fine him.

Then sure a few billion is doable. Red light cameras don’t deter terrorist from using truck bombs though. If we removed the requirement to have license plates tomorrow, we wouldn’t see a huge upswing in truck bombings. Stealing a license plate isn’t the bottleneck in the terrorists plan.

So if your goal is to meaningfully deter determined attackers, you’ll need a system that’s much more robust. You’ll need enough extra trained personnel to rapidly respond to a relatively large percentage of every unauthorized drone alarm. You’ll need a very dense network of anti drone countermeasures (birds, guns whatever) in order to have a chance of responding in time. You’ll need vastly expanded radar coverage to detect drones flying too high to be detected by camera. And a camera network that is dense enough so that just flying behind building and trees isn’t an easy option. All of this will need to coordinated.

>In 2018 the U.S. spent over $90 billion on transportation in the federal budget.

That's in one year, and the DOT doesn’t operate anything close to the scale of the system we’re talking about.
I have what backwards?

Also..I read the book of Job, supposed to be super-impressive. OMG. God comes over as such a twat, is dicking around with Satan, makes a stupid bet just because Satan wants to, to torture the apparently faithful Job.

Well, Marxism has a lot of similarities with Christianity, as has been pointed out by a lot of people. So maybe 'that' kind of atheist mostly comes from replacing one's christianity with another religion. Ohh sure, "becoming an atheist" means you used to be religious, I guess. But there are other religions. Thousands and thousands.
That was 11 years ago. All other big tech firms are doing business in China, by China's rules. Google used to be better than that. It's very sad that that's changing, but again it doesn't seem like something that's relevant for the House.
Hmm. I haven't perceived any slow down. Especially not like others here are saying. Gmail still seems pretty quick to me.
This was a very well-written and interesting piece. I disagree with the general premise that this is generally related to thermodynamics, even at the nanoscale. Accumulated errors can be corrected with additional energy input---that's the premise of error-correcting codes used in DNA. Were it not for error-correction, DNA mutation rates would be much higher than we observe. In principle, couldn't living things develop similar machinery for correcting other accumulated errors (albeit at the expense of requiring additional energy).
The whole course is freely available online: http://course.fast.ai/ml
Did they take away the ability to use the old UI? I still have a menu item under settings that says "Go back to classic Gmail"
Some of my favorite and most ethical friends work everyday at FB to protect against these kinds of attacks and others. You're making an incredibly global statement about an organization where a more tailored statement would carry your water a lot better.
I abhor the phrase "morally bankrupt". Who are you to judge the entirety of someone's moral compass?
My experience looks like yours - in-house frameworks (e.g. typically in banks) are a mess when it comes to upgrading.
Lesson 1 is a decision tree, isn't a little too advanced?

Shouldn't we start we something like linear regression?
How neat! Among its properties not the least interesting is that it has finally convinced me that the initial condition f(0) = f(1) = 1 is not arbitrary but perfectly natural.
Test && commit || revert
Imagine having a state of the art IDE and a succinct language! Something like Smalltalk.
A Letter From Winston Churchill’s Disappointed Mother
Here's what wikipedia says:

'Sovereignty is the full right and power of a governing body over itself, without any interference from outside sources or bodies.'

Sounds to me like a pretty conclusive definition.
> Working for Facebook is a morally bankrupt position. [It's] a wholly malignant organization

Can you go into your argument for that?
As someone who works specifically on user authentication stuff...

The problem is often that there are multiple sources of truth for who the user is. And if you have an impersonation feature, you by definition have two sources of truth: who the user actually is, and who the user is impersonating. It would just be a matter of a single mistake of using the wrong one.

Considering that "view as" requires your page view to render every control as the impersonated user but only when it comes to your profile, but renders all controls outside of your profile as the original user, I could see any engineering team dealing with some very carefully drawn and potentially confusing boundary cases.

Edit: just to elaborate, it's not just obvious impersonation contexts where this gets interesting. For example, linking your Humble Bundle account to your Steam account, or on Netflix which user you are vs. which email address is being billed. Many apps have a function to share some document using a one-time expiring token. If you're also logged in, then do you read permissions from the shared token or from your account? If you mix them, do you make sure anything that writes to this shared view can't touch your account itself on accident? We don't think about it much but I think you can see how these subtle distinctions are important when you are thinking about access control, and that makes it a breeding ground for subtle mistakes.
Synquid: Synthesize Programs from Refinement Types
The compiler has determined that the second call `fib(n - 2)` is "almost" tail-recursive (there is probably a better term for this), and so was able to convert that call into the loop you see at 10081 to 10095. This loop repeatedly calls the `fib(n - 1)` part.

In other words, the function was transformed from:

uint64_t fib(uint64_t n) {
if (n <= 1) return 1;
return fib(n - 1) + fib(n - 2);
}

into the equivalent of:

uint64_t fib2(uint64_t n) {
if (n <= 1) return 1;
uint64_t sum = 1;
for (; n > 1; n -= 2) {
sum += fib2(n - 1);
}
return sum;
}

Unfortunately, the result isn't too great as the initial part of the function is pretty heavy, and this bottlenecks computation. It would be better to inline some copies of fib into itself which might even allow some small amount of CSE, but importantly would reduce the number of calls.

The alignment you show is "special" (fast) because it's the point at which the top of the main loop (10081) is near the start of a 32-byte region, which allows multiple uops to be efficiently dispatched after jumping there.
I just finished building my first BuildRoot image and here are my thoughts.

The Yocto build system is sneaky because when it is running it shows the total number of tasks and the number of tasks that have executed, so it feels a bit more comfortable in that way than BuildRoot.

In this respect, BuildRoot vs Yocto feels a bit like running a big compilation of ports on FreeBSD using make directly vs running the compilation with poudriere. The latter has a web user interface that lets you track the progress a little bit. The web interface of poudriere looks like so: https://blog.shatow.net/static/poudriere-31.png

However, like I said, Yocto is sneaky. Because while the above mentioned aspect might seem like a big plus, the end result of using BuildRoot was very impressive.

I based my BuildRoot config on https://jumpnowtek.com/rpi/Raspberry-Pi-Systems-with-Buildro... with some additions and removing some things I didn't need.

I noticed also that there was an option "remount root filesystem read-write during boot" that could be disabled. Having a read-only image is something I was planning on doing already, so I gave it a shot. And it works!

Thanks to BuildRoot, I have a lean 251 MB (lean in the context of what I am doing, I am aware that some Linux images for some routers etc are just a handful of megabytes) that can run with a read-only rootfs and which does everything that Yocto image I had did, and it took much less time to compile because like you said, it was easy to customize it to only have what I needed basically.

My workstation has 32 GB of RAM and an 8 core, 16 threads AMD Ryzen 7 1700 Prosessor. Building the Yocto image took in excess of 3 hours, close to 4 hours I think. Building the BuildRoot image to 80 minutes, because the BuildRoot image, unlike the Yocto image did not have a lot of extra cruft, exactly because like you said, with BuildRoot it is easy to remove what you don't need.

Now one thing I did notice because I had overlooked some of the configuration options for one of the packages was that changing the options of a package does not cause BuildRoot to regard it as necessary to rebuild the package. Apparently this is by design [1]. I think that is a tiny bit disappointing, but whatever. Rebuilding individual packages is quite fast anyway. And hopefully if I need to do full rebuilds of the whole thing then ccache, which I made sure to enable before running the first build, will shave some time off the build. But I don't even think full rebuilds will be necessary all that often.

All in all I am glad that you suggested I try BuildRoot, and I am glad that I listened. I will be sticking with BuildRoot. Thank you :)

[1]: https://github.com/buildroot/buildroot/blob/master/docs/manu...
The same reason Facebook didn’t develop them before they did.
A16z data: How much startup executives make in salary and equity
From an educational point of view, I think it's best not to do a survey of models; rather, it's best to pick one and learn all of the stuff surrounding the model first (training, testing, preparing data etc...)
Yeah, +1 to all of that.

I spent maybe ~15 years writing C++ over hobby + career timespan. Was a huge proponent of the language but spent the last 2-3 years over in Java land while doing all my greenfield work in Rust.

Came back to another lower level project written in C++/0x14 lately and it's a bit of a shock how my things I 'forgot' even on a modern codebase. Things like implicit constructor conversions, the fact that the type inference is pretty weak still(why can't I just construct unique_ptr w/out the type when I pass it direct[1]). Headers and package management is a total mess.

At this point unless I've got a hard constraint(like QNX or other yet supported platforms) I'm going to reach for Rust just about every time.

[1] Yes I know make_unique() is a thing but it's a C++/0x17 and just patches one part of type inference issues.
Ad blocking doesn't eliminate ads, it just forces advertisers to astroturf rather than labelling their ads explicitly.
So $150,000 is enough runway for what: 0.6 man-years? Sounds legit.
Hence the importance of pro-active policy measures. It'll be interesting to see this play out in the next few years as protecting truck driver jobs with regulations should (hopefully?) receive bipartisan support.
You know they just lost their highly revered head of security and said there would be no replacement, right?

https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/1/17640852/facebook-cso-alex...
Most things that are Good in the world of computing can be boiled down to:

Loose Coupling and High Cohesion

At all levels, macro and micro. It applies at the function level and to global distributed systems.

For example, each of the letters in the "SOLID" Object Oriented patterns boils down to one or both of these principles.

Whenever I'm looking for ways to improve something, I start by thinking of it in these terms.
Porn has always had a problem with credit card payments. They are forced to use special credit card processors that take a much larger percentage as fees.
Linear regression is a tricky algorithm to use effectively. Many courses have started with this algorithm, but we think it's a mistake. We cover it later in the course.

Decision trees are much easier to use correctly, and can be easily implemented from scratch without relying on any external libraries (as we do in a later lesson).
Why would it be remarkable that a few popular technologies come out of a big, rich technology company? People who create such technologies work at places like that. But there’s nothing about React or GraphQL that makes them only possible at Facebook.
Facebook Discloses Data Breach, 50M User Accounts Affected
I fully support the US government regulating every US company that is willfully aiding in the violation of human rights for profit.
But we won't "exist" so it's not "critical".
That's friends and family size money. Why get a VC at that scale?
I'm not sure if you can compare upgrading a VM/platform that is usually designed for backwards compatibility to upgrading a framework.
They are a trash rag, not a surprise.
I'm a "today's founder" (although I will admit I'm pretty old) but the history of PG, YC & the people that were in those first few batches I find incredibly interesting. In fact I find the whole evolution of this industry as a whole in Silicon Valley interesting & this is just the next evolution of that.

Sure, our focus is all about how to grow faster & I didn't mean to imply that today's YC is worse than it was when it started as it relates to achieving a founders actual goals, I didn't mean that at all.

My question to Michael was just based on this aspect of his post:
"For me, there were two amazing things in the early days of YC that are different today. First, in 2007, batches were much smaller so it was easier to meet all of your batchmates. Today, you have to work harder to meet and become friends with all the talented people in your batch. We put companies into groups of about 30-40 in order to replicate the feeling of the past. Second, getting to work directly with PG was special."

From strictly an experience aspect since Michael is uniquely qualified to give a perspective on being a part of both then and now there had to be a certain magic in that 2007 batch that would be pretty tough to recreate today, or maybe not I guess, I don't know, it's why I asked.
That being said, this one [0] gives correct results and runs slightly faster :)

[0] https://gist.github.com/codr4life/59f2c02403b27d551e706f673b...
#Facebook hacked – 50M Users’ Data exposed in the security breach
I leave it to future readers to decide who's missing the point between the two of us.
Great that YC is simplifying their deal and making it more standard and easier for founders to understand. Also great that they're switching the standard SAFE to be a post-money SAFE, as this will eliminate a lot of confusion around dilution that resulted from the complicated math of the old standard SAFE.

Interestingly, unless I'm understanding this incorrectly, this change might mean a worse deal for founders going through YC. As the post mentions, when calculating the dilution taken from a post-money SAFE, all other money raised on convertible instruments before an equity raise are excluded.

Functionally, what this means is that while investors on standard SAFEs are diluted by other SAFE investors before an equity round (as are all common holders), investors on post-money SAFEs are not diluted by other investors on SAFEs before an equity round.

So unless I'm misunderstanding this, I believe this means that YC (which was previously a common holder like the founders) will no longer be diluted by the money founders raise on convertible notes or SAFEs before an equity round, whereas before they were diluted by that money.

To demonstrate this, I modeled out a scenario where a company goes through YC, raises $2m on a $10m cap pre-money SAFE after demo day, and then raises a $10m Series A equity round at a $30m pre-money valuation. Scenario A shows the old YC deal where YC has 7% common, and Scenario B shows the new YC deal where YC invests on a post-money SAFE

Scenario A: http://angelcalc.com/model?mod=802&dispShare=0e55666a4ad822e...

Scenario B: http://angelcalc.com/model?mod=803&dispShare=8a50bae297807da...

Note: click "Model" to see the results. In Scenario A, YC is listed as "YC" and in Scenario B YC is listed as "Post SAFE-0 (2.1mm)". As you can see YC ends up with 1.575% more equity in Scenario B.

The simplicity of this change is great but it's important that founders understand the downside as well. Team YC, if I'm misunderstanding this, please let me know.
This does not reflect my experience working here at all
>>trying to preserve our democracy from attacks

Hahaha, thanks, that was a good one.
Why Canadian cities didnt suffer as Detroit did
I use the old html version, amazingly it's not even possible to bulk delete emails! Which is the one thing you'd want to do with email.
Pervasive biometric security may be the next step. I know it's scary and could actually be abused but it also can generally increase the level of security for everyone.
This is the equivalent of saying "technical debt isn't a problem, the business priorities are a problem." Yes, the business priorities caused the technical debt, but you have to pay down the technical debt as well. Throwing out 15 years of the results of a bad culture is meaningful to hundreds, if not thousands of people whose sentences were lifted. So, too, is changing the culture. They are not mutually exclusive.
The topic at hand is "fuck China specifically" in this subthread.

I point out similar behavior among other world powers, raise the question of what's so specific, and you call it whataboutism. You stop it. I was arguing to the topic in good faith.
Trading anecdotes, I have a number of friends at Facebook (both at Menlo Park and the NYC office), and they complain about the opposite: lots of people just coasting and doing the minimum needed to get by, really hard to fire people, etc.
>>in Europe going to work for Facebook/Google/Amazon is a enormous bump (we're speaking 2-4x) of salary for many people, which in some cases means you can buy an house after 3-4 years even with the crazy rents back in your home country - and that's HUGE.

So this is how we justify it now? “But it will allow me to buy a house in 3-4 years”?
YC just announced YC China[1]. What will you say when they ask you to call it the "June Fourth Incident" instead of "Tienanmen Square Massacre"? You're not naive, you must see that moment in the future, or have some idea to dodge it somehow? Will you kowtow?

What's your attitude towards the Republic of China (Taiwan)?

[1] https://blog.ycombinator.com/yc-china-qi-lu/