skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is the key to the whole thing and I'm glad someone finally said it. Open-source projects aren't incapable of getting rid of contributors who cause problems to the detriment of project productivity without having a formalized Code of Conduct. Why add something to a project that causes more problems than it solves? CoC proponents have good intentions but fail to see the chilling effect potential, even as it plays itself out in real time, right on cue (Ts'o).
>If you're born with a chronic condition such as diabetes or your parents can't afford an education giving you the chance of a decently paying job, better go die.

This has always been the case. Most of these people just died before while today we have methods to keep them alive.
> I was unaware, but I guess that sorta makes sense. I have only done with USB A style, which is an Epoxied PCB which makes it fairly hard to break. USB C has a connector that cannot just be the PCB, and so it needs a housing and such.

The Yubikey 4C nano is hardier than the original Yubikey 4Cs were. I've had mine in for months, and it hasn't broken.

That said, I should note that my laptop (Macbook Pro) also decided to provide insane amounts of power to the USB-C ports on the left side, which fried the Yubikey - literally, there was smoke - and melted the plastic. (That's definitely Apple's fault, though, not Yubikey's fault).
Check out some hospital bills for major procedures and there is a good chance that you will find things like charges for services nobody remembers or a doctor who was in the room for 3 minutes charged $1200 or receiving an aspirin costs $80. Maybe my experiences are all anecdotal but when I put my own experiences together with what I hear from others and things I read I am pretty convinced that something is going very wrong.
You say that but there's a lot of people that are desperate for money or short term instant gratification.
It is surprising how many problems can be solved with common sense. Whta Toyota did was codifying it in a rather elegant way. They gained a considerable advantage by doing so.

Also surprising how hard the implementation of common sense can be. Also true that only a few companies really manage to implement lean / TPS methods correctly in the way Toyota did.
Same with Vanguard and Fidelity. I could steal someone's funds if I really wanted to.

Now that I think about it, Quicken and TurboTax too. People signed up for all kinds of important things using my email.
If the Germany trademark issue was relevant to the moving from gmail.com to google.com/whatever is the case, why were we all allowed to have @gmail.com email addresses?
Also privacy and security, since today's Mojave release.
The missing piece IMO is funding, but that may be something that the crypto-currency world could fill.

Not sure what the road to that world looks like, but we definitely need a contender because all of the major tech companies have become disturbingly anti-consumer.
This was taught to me in elementary school (among other things: https://enki.org/2018/07/30/things-i-learned-in-elementary-s...) as Genesis 22.
That seems hard to believe as it would imply that they have code specifically to cripple the Firefox experience. It's probably at worst that they intentionally don't optimize their sites for Firefox and not actively making it worse.
My biggest complaint is that I have to use Siri and can't change it to another AI assistant. I can't use a different launcher, etc. I will openly admit to being a Microsofty (just a user, not an employee) and want to use Microsoft based services like Cortana since all of my information is synced that way. Yes I can use Cortana on iOS, but Siri is always there as the default. With Android I can turn the Google assistant off entirely and make Cortana the default.

I'm fairly annoyed on Android that I can't uninstall some stock Google apps.
App based 2FA is still more vulnerable to phishing than a U2F key, because it relies on the user to check they are entering the code into the right website.

It's also faster and easier (no pulling out your phone, getting a code, typing it in, just touch the key).

Plus, the keys have other features (GPG keys, etc...) which can be useful.
It's not built into the protocol, sure, but the device can do whatever it wants before it decides to sign something. You need to unlock my phone and SEP before Krypton signs anything, for example. But you still raise a good point: I suppose it's a good thing that we can do that with cheaper devices and safe, browser-provided UX for PIN entry.

(I would suggest that a single physical device that takes a PIN before it does some signing is still 2FA even if there is only one _communicated_ credential, but I appreciate we need better terminology for this. Other versions of this to consider: if you username + password + Duo into your SSO portal and then sign into a service with SAML, is that not 2FA? If it isn't, does using a session cookie prevent something from being 2FA? For the latter, I'd say obviously not :-) I think the "who can impersonate you" is a good line in the sand, since in the former the SSO system holds full authority in most cases.)
New Female Messenger Bags Women's Handbag Sac the Main
I remember getting this every few months for a year or two.
> The third is something you are - a fingerprint.

A fingerprint isn't “something you are”, because it can be destroyed while you remain, and information about it can be captured and reproduced by attackers who are not you.

It's just a particularly hard to lose (but easy to discover, and impractical to replace if compromised, at least more times than you have fingers) “something you have.” In security factor terms, I'm not convinced the idea of a distinct “something you are” category is coherent, since most candidates seem similar to that.
fetch's Response.text also returns a Promise, so you'd have to await twice:

const lines = (await (await fetch(myUrl)).text()).split('\n');
Apparently this has been going on at least since 2016: http://www.unz.com/isteve/great-moments-in-google-american-i...
Another revelation with CLOS is methods are not namespaced to classes. Before I used CLOS it was not obvious that methods were serving two distinct purposes (specialization and namespaces) within other OO languages.

Interestingly enough, most OO systems for lisp older that CLOS were much more smalltalk like in this sense, so there were several people that found the non-namespaced approach to methods to be superior.

I'm honestly not yet convinced they are superior, but they are clearly more generic, in that it is trivial to implement single-dispatch message-passing style methods in CLOS, but much harder to do the reverse (several patterns in the GoF book exist just to emulate multiple dispatch).
I've got Firefox in my Pocket, and it is just as bad as Chrome. I try to watch videos, but hardware acceleration has too high of an ohm. My CEO donated to Prop 8 and thinks JavaScript is great. I think I will just go paste about Firefox being the best, when really I am just a Mozilla fanboy that pretends to know better than the rest.
How sound can hack your memory while you sleep – DIY Neuroscience
Almost everything involves some subjectivity. Business decisions included. Delivering crap product with faster feature turnover is a subjective decision too, you're only guessing if it pans out or not compared to doing it better but a little slower. Someone will say, "I have A/B tests that show". But I'm willing to bet than it most cases, A/B tests will show you whatever you want to see in them, as most people don't have necessary statistical background to correctly run or interpret them (and page optimization companies sometimes actually exploit this against their own customers).
In general isn't it better to be given a choice instead of having a decision forced upon you? Because even if we consider from our view that one choice is worse, other people may value things differently and may be in different situations that apply different weights to the options.

If we really think that someone is too incompetent to make a choice and remove the choice from them, then don't we have some duty to help them out?

For example, I want a child to go to school, not a job, and think them too incompetent to make the decision of which is better for them. In removing the option to work, I then have a duty to support them if they were needing the job to live (which is done by specific welfare for children or their parents).
That's a great question... I don't know!

I have done the "founder" thing once (at #3), and at one point I had to lay off employees that I had just hired. That sucked. I think when I'm just the technical lead, I can work hard on that and let revenue be someone else's problem. Also, most of the companies I've worked for have been founded by people that I know who asked me to come on board and take a senior technical role. Ultimately that's led to relatively low pay and low ownership stakes and a couple of decades of wasted time. So... don't do what I did?
Tsuru PaaS 1.6.0 released with lots of features and improvements
I thought that was common sense but you're right. Some non-listed companies are like that by choice, to avoid all that encompasses being a public listed company.

The law requires that the executive board to provide value to shareholders (valuation or dividends). This usually translate in quarter reports with good numbers for greater valuations. It's known that this requirement and tradition skews boards to short term goals which can damage companies' future.

This is the good scenario, just a skew for short term goals.

The bad scenario is when the quarter reports look good my quasi-illegal number juggling and also legal practices which should be illegal like a company buying it's own stocks to please shareholders.

Currently this even worse because central banks interventions from low interest rates (it has been cheaper for a company to use debt buy it's own stocks than to invest) to central banks buying stocks and causing inflated valuations.
I have about 20k messages in my All Mail and around 5k in inbox, and it's pretty unwieldy. Usable, but definitely slow switching mailboxes, slow at searching, slow at sorting and filtering, slow to bring up message windows and so on. It's more UI lag than anything else.

It is a very fast mail client with near empty mailboxes.
Right, but the parent comment was claiming that Firefox is ungoogled after only one setting.
The problem I have with this perspective is that it ignores all the times software works correctly (which is easy to do, because it's usually invisible.) Consider the pile of software that has to go right for you to experience the world as you do on a given day. Did you buy something from the store? Software. Did your trash get taken from the curb? Software. Did you get to work safely in your car? Software.

I've often had a contrarian view on this in that I find it almost miraculous how robust software is despite all the flaws in the humans creating it and the insanity of what is actually happening physically to make it work. The fact I can type this out and send it and it will work at all is truly stunning. The fact we live in a world where we are surprised when complex, interconnected, global-scale software breaks and not surprised when it somehow works properly speaks volumes.

That's not to say that we can't do better, but the evolution of software to me has been one clearly of improvement, not stagnation or regression, all while taking on more responsibility, more scale, and more problem complexity. It's easy to point back at simpler times as "the good old days when software was well engineered" but it's easy to overlook the daily wonders that we take for granted today that were unconcievable just years ago.
Meanwhile in Australia, Tram drivers just read the newspaper while driving: https://www.instagram.com/p/Bn-DGXYjNOl/?taken-by=browncardi...
Which database? I'm interested to know what is used in commercial endeavors, since there are a lot of toy object stores littering the software graveyards.
Move over tech, it seems every week archaeology/paleontology is completely revolutionizing our understanding of the world on a weekly basis!
> Why reinvent the wheel?

Because if we never did we'd all be stuck with mozilla 1.
Some tweaks I'd make:

Corporate structure: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation

Electoral system:

What we have now - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo

Range voting - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=e3GFG0sXIig

Alternative vote - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE

Single transferrable vote - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l8XOZJkozfI

Marx wrote about the theory of societal evolution; That there are certain phases civilization must pass through. The communism he wrote about would have to be very far down the road, 100+ years (IMO). This does not mean people sit back and do nothing, we still would have to work towards it. (Most) Capitalists profit from the status quo, and work to keep in place systems to maintain their spot in the hierarchy. Thus the antiquated electoral system in the USA, and the top heavy power/pay structures of business.

TL;DR: give the average person more of a say/choice in the world they live in (politics/workplace), and they will find their way forward. (IMO)
I was very close to jumping ship with Mailmate 2 or 3 times. But the only reason that kept me from doing so is that it does not offer an option for local backups.
Platform versioning, team tokens, event webhooks, kubernetes improvements/reliability, OpenAPI specification and much more!
Proprietary? By that standard, Firefox is proprietaty because they roll their own browser. Just because it's custom doesn't make it proprietary.

And I also got burned by the very badly managed WebExtensions thing. I can totally see where GP is coming from.
MIT spinout could clean up steel, one of the globe’s biggest climate polluters
The way in which the term is used in the manufacturing industry is a different from "foolproofing" in practice. Generally, a Poka-Yoke is a step added to a process that requires an operator to stop and think about what is going on and whether everything is within spec before proceeding with the next step.

One example I can think of would be a torque tool used in a critical step of the assembly process. Since modern factories allow different models of roughly similar product types to be assembled on the same production line, it is important that the torque tool is run using the correct settings for each model. In this example, the operator has to scan a barcode on the vehicle and the corresponding barcode on the computerized torque tool before the tool will work. This not only sets the tool to the correct setting, it forces the operator to stop and think for a second when the tool doesn't work. By doing this as the first step, it also ingrains the knowledge of which model number the operator is working on as they consciously have to scan the right barcode on the tool as there's a unique barcode for each variant they'll see coming down the line. That way they are more likely to catch any incorrect/mismatched parts tied to later stages of assembly carried out at their station (i.e. they know they are working on Model X Sport but the parts bin shadowing this chassis has a cosmetic piece that is only for the Model X Limited).

Also, I;ve always found it funny that the phrase sounds like poke-a-yoke (yoke, as in yokel) given how it's used in the industry to describe a way of prodding someone to pay attention.
more like "should we be creating employment law for microtask work?" which is more of an open question, especially if you consider what such legislation might look like and what effects it may have on the workers and clients alike.
Wow, I don't know how I missed that. Thank you.

(Side note sort of related from another related article - apparently you can opt-out of the unified login, but the flag that lets you opt-out is broken as of chrome canary 71)
I haven't work with it but you might want to take a look at Spreedly, they work as a buffer between you and payment processors. So if you are shutdown by a payment processor it should be really easy to change, without you having to make any changes to your code.

The drawback is that it's kind of expensive.
I don’t mean to undersell it. If anything, I’ve been growing increasingly impressed at how many of life’s secrets also turn out to be things that everyone knows.

Edit: Plus, Wikipedia does a very inconsistent job of explaining conceptual things in non-superficial ways; probably because most extended discussions of “poka-yoke” wouldn’t be “neutral” or “verifiable” or would “favor one particular source”. I haven’t checked it lately, but Wikipedia’s article on method acting used to do almost nothing to explain what the hell it was; it just had a lot of verbiage about who does it and who learned it from whom. Maybe there needs to be a separate concept explanation wiki that has different requirements.
We do this thing we call Discovery & Framing at the kickoff of a new project. It usually lasts 3-6 weeks and involves design, product, engineering and someone with the power to make decisions on the spot. We call this role a product owner.

It’s a good way to get stuff out of folks heads, validate the problem and solution with users, and end up with some stuff for everyone to execute on by the end of the process. You can google the term for more detailed descriptions.

As for tools, we’ve been having success with real time board, and pivotal tracker (maybe gives away where I work) and of course a ton of sticky notes.
I completely agree. The rapid flux in these huge browser projects makes personal security audits impossible even if you are one of the top 10 super-rigorous C++ devs in the world. Would be nice if some project forked the browser of their choice and then got some very careful well-respected teams/rockstars to audit it, and from then on, applied only security fixes and outright-rejected dubious stuff like WebUSB, google auto-login, etc. With Chrome and Chromium, sure, you get a very good security team working on it for you at Google, but you also get changes which are not in your best interests and/or undermine security directly or indirectly like, well, WebUSB. This is not ideal.
Most email providers have some sort of ability to seeing raw data. That's the problem with email protocols, not the company. When necessary it's largely used for legal purposes (i.e. think subpoenas or court evidence in general), virus tracking (finding who got the first one or first to open "that email"), technical issues, etc.

I can personally say I know how sift through probably 5 or 6 different email systems or providers for this kind of data. It may seem "creepy", it did to me at first, but after awhile you realize, in business at least, there's really nothing of interest. Probably only like 99.999% of emails exchanged will have nothing incriminating, embarrassing, or even worth reading. It's kind of like being the key holder for a safe. Someone's gotta be the keyholder and be able to access the data for when necessary. Sometimes there's an inherent level of trust required and usually they just dgaf what's there.

It's kind of like a virtual manifestation of the "IT Closet" that almost all companies have. A bunch of places I've worked there's a office or closet where all the old PCs, laptops, and hard drives get stashed away. All the IT staff get access, and yes the could go rummaging around looking for personal pics, old tax records, etc, most of the time it's just not a valid concern worth anyone's time to steal or protect.
You install extensions the same way with Chromium. I don't understand how this could be hard to figure out.
Just want to share some stories:

One of my professors (I am an Industrial engineer) used the example of a SIM card. I imagine people can still get it wrong when putting it in, but much less so (ehem USB) because of that slight cut in the rectangle. It also helps a lot when manufacturing those things to get the orientation right.

Another mistake proofing anecdote I've heard was about one of his students interning at a company that packages soap. Somehow there were empty boxes going through the conveyors after some process change. Some of the mechanical engineers were already thinking about some modification to the conveyors that detect weight, etc. The IE student apparently simply went in one of the back offices and got a spare electric fan and pointed it at the conveyor so the empty boxes fly out. Troubleshooting doesn't have to be expensive.
The purpose of the open source requirement is not so I can figure out what is going on and exert control.

The purpose of the open source requirement is so that many other people -- some much smarter than I am, and others only a little smarter than I am -- can figure out what is going on, and then post warnings to me about why I should avoid it.
This strikes me as a kind of herd-immunity argument but for privacy.
The Value of Values with Rich Hickey [video]
Nope, my objection is to the mindset of making more changes than are necessary to release it. If their opinion had been restricted to “for removing Google” rather than also “and some other stuff”, it’d inspire a lot more trust in their long-term intentions. Being able to see diffs does not improve my trust in their judgement or reasoning.
TCP on planes and highspeed trains
How about Internet splitting up based on large companies?

Facebook already tried it with free basics. Google with its hold on Android devices is going to go down the same path sooner or later.
Apple has already it's own closed garden. Netflix is doing that to entertainment.

It won't be a surprise if a few years later you have to buy a package web services from your ISPs and you only see what you pay for. Not like the free internet we imagined for sure.
I heard Firefox OS is awesome.
Yup; it's fine to use booking.com to search and compare hotels, but it's often better to deal with the hotel you picked directly.

Some of them will refer you right back to booking.com though if you want to book online, in which case it's probably fine and the hotel uses booking.com directly. Or booking.com sends them a fax or email.
"the cost of doing this for all at-risk Americans would be eye-watering. Estimates range from $200,000 to $1m per person to undertake a relocation. If 13 million people do have to move, it seems fantastical to imagine $13tn, or even a significant fraction of this amount, being spent by governments to ease the way.
“As a country we aren’t set up to deal with slow-moving disasters like this, so people around the country are on their own,” said Joel Clement, a former Department of the Interior official who worked on the relocation of Alaskan towns."
100% agree with you. This is one of the main reasons why I switched to Chrome. I can understand that some people value their privacy, but for those cases why don't just use a browser like Firefox.
That's how a lot of computer systems started, except that instead of paper, it's an excel sheet emailed back and forth.
Eliminating IP Spoofing
I once worked on a project where we were forced (over the entire engineering team's objections) to use Oracle Spatial (geospatial add-on for Oracle) instead of Postgres+PostGIS :( Not nearly as good. Really, expensive as hell and it doesn't even come close to PostGIS in performance and capability.

Ah, government contracting.
As creepy as the Mozilla Maintenance Service.
> china is a totalitarian state. and soon, with google's help and the complicity of google employees, they will continue to do so with greater efficiency than before. mao imagined a country where the state was the not merely the highest power in the land, but the only power. they're getting there.

This isn't Google's problem. They're just a company out to make some money for the shareholders. If the people of China want Democracy and freedom they need to fight for it. So far, the Chinese have not done that and do not seem to care that much about western-style freedom. It is entirely possible that not all cultures and societies desire the same thing.
IEA Brexit report based on dubious maths