skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Consider this: the majority of the consumer demographic is largely ignorant to these issues. As such, Apple's largest customer demographic is in no place to make informed decisions. By restricting hardware and serviceability, Apple directly fosters mass consumerism by selling non-repairable, disposable gadgets. This undoubtedly contributes to climate change and non-renewable resource drain. Even if every Apple customer decided to make a change with their next purchase, you would still have a huge number of devices heading to the landfill, all simply because of Apple deciding to impose hardware restrictions for profit.

And note that, as mentioned in the article, Apple is actively lobbying against Right-to-repair, which will help other corporations get away with similar practices. So for how long is it "still possible" to have any choice whatsoever? Can you buy, for example, a mobile device with an open baseband? No - already the consumer can't vote with their wallet nor have choice in many, if not most, matters of consumer technology.
The ThinkPad Anniversary Edition 25 is an anomaly alas. Wish there were more like it. But, I have mine too :)
The parent obviously didn't mean that ALL TIMES UNDER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES DO YOU GET PERFECT SUPPORT. It's simply a data point in the overall calculus. Support vs internal maintainability vs cost vs ability to find supporting talent vs license provisions vs IP concerns vs regulatory requirements vs a million other reasons.
You always need unique identifiers for things, that's pretty much core to the whole Semantic Web idea. But what makes the Wikidata approach frustrating to me is that they use these identifiers that are totally opaque. I can sort of understand why they did it that way, but it does make for ugly queries.
I was actually at that session as well! It was a bit surprising for me to hear that they're taking such a strong stance with regards to shared movie watching, but generally it's always felt that Bigscreen has been tuned for gamers / entertainment type use cases.

Totally hear you with regards to being comfortable touch typing while in VR, but I think that this is a pretty big barrier for a lot of users that are not as comfortable in VR. In our early experiences demoing Dream to people, we noticed just how overwhelming going into VR is for a lot of people that have had either no exposure, or very little to it. We used to have computer keyboard pass-thru, and this could be something that we add back as we continue to iterate and make the experience better.

In terms of desktop sharing - we used to have this capability, and it's still in the build but disabled. We pulled it back due to some inherent usability issues that we're working on as well as performance limits on low-end machines.

Annotation (whiteboarding on shared content or a white screen) is next up on our road map, we just didn't have sufficient time to get it into the initial release - so excited to hear that's something you would be looking for. Similarly, 3D model import / review is something that we're about to tackle as well. One of the big things we're excited about exploring is actually using chromium to do this vs. forcing every client to download what could be a big file, or push performance limitations on a varied set of machines. Instead, we'd find a way to utilize WebRTC to stream the content in a way that provides a 3D review experience for all clients with no performance limit.

On environments, we agree as well - right now we have one environment, and have 2 others in the pipeline. In the future, it'd be great to allow for 360 stereo videos to be used as the environment or allow teams to customize their environments if they've got the in house capabilities to do so!

Thanks for the feedback, and hope you get a chance to try Dream out a bit and give us some hands on experience if you get a minute a well!
That's always such a depressing line of thought.
Kubernetes Horizontal Pod and Cluster Autoscaling: All You Need to Know
I find it very troubling how small/nonexistent the outcry is over such an invasive concept.

The PR teams are already hard at work making Facebookian claims of user privacy control that were found to be grossly untrue.

I personally will need to be diligent in avoiding the firms that adopt this service at all costs.

Furthermore, you have to wonder why seemingly “competitive” entities(as far as an oligopoly goes) would collude to provide such as service. Their motives have already been demonstrated to be bad in the past.

Further reading (if you haven’t already): https://krebsonsecurity.com/2018/09/u-s-mobile-giants-want-t...
(a) is not an objection because 'life form' is flexible. Any computing sub strait could directly compute say a neural network vs a simulation of a neural network. The simulation will always be slower, but the 'real' version running on "FPGA" or it's higher dimensional equivalent imposes direct mapping between what happens in the 'real' world and what is being computed. EX: If we use a FPGA that's hit by a cosmic ray that bit is flipped, on the other hand if you have an array of FPGA's and compare them then that's decouples the 1:1 mapping creating a simulation but adds overhead.

(b) a simulation must be perfect.

No, if you can get away with a less accurate simulation you can get also get intelligence from less computational power using the same approach in the 'real' world.
Looking at successful decentralized systems (the web, email, the internet itself) the common theme seems to be simple protocols that support multiple independent implementations.
I got 3,133.70 :)
Took awhile but finally left the Apple camp. They've been moving mac OS closer to iOS and it finally became untenable for me. I miss it somewhat, but it's clear their focus is not me or my needs so I left.
Which still lives on, after a fashion, in Chez Scheme: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2ee0/8029eebdbdaf80cd70d695...
Take a look at quasar for the JVM. In practice I’ve found it outperforms* golang in my workloads.

* there is a small fixed overhead increase in memory.
To initiate a transaction an arbitrageur, though, needs a counter-party that's also engaged in arbitraging, but has an opposite opinion.

Thought experiment - let's say there's an imaginary country that has 100 companies listed publicly, each floating 1,000 shares. Most citizens prefer indexing so 99,000 shares are owned by a bunch of Country 100 index funds. Those index funds will only trade on inflow/outflow into their own fund, never on corporate earnings, board changes, product announcements or other external event.

What opportunities are there for arbitrageurs?
This narrative is such a joke, and such a profound misunderstanding of economics i'm surprised Bloomberg would publish it. Simple rule: if your argument implies that there is or will be free money to be made in the stock market, your argument is probably wrong.
> This makes me think that smart pricing errs on the side of giving guest a better value and not on the side of maximizing profits for the host.

It's very similar to the economic relationship between a realtor and a home seller. The home seller wants top dollar, the realtor doesn't care; they want deal flow, and a few thousands or tens of thousands of dollars in price difference impacts their commission little.

Airbnb would rather have a property available to be booked, and booked, then not booked with a host attempting to get top dollar. "For The Good Of The Platform"
Sad to see them go. I spent just under a year there ~2 years ago doing embedded systems, right before some big layoffs, and I really had a great time there.

It's a great group of people, and I wish them all the best. Judging by the amount of recruiter calls and emails I got today after the news broke (apparently working off my old resume!), I think these folks will land on their feet!
Try singing/whistling the melody while playing it at the same time.
> No one should ever be putting your biometrics in the cloud.

They are likely already there. Ever had to provide fingerprints for an employment background check or security clearance? They have likely been leaked, along with all your other personal history.
Someone has to sell to them when they get inflow and buy from them when they get outflow. Who do you think that will be?
>It is a self-balancing situation. A scenario of "oh my god, everyone is just putting their money on index funds" would never happen.

Such a situation is not stable if the speed of information is not fast enough. If the market is unable to produce information quickly enough, or market actors don't act fast enough, basic differential equations dictate that you will get oscillations. See e.g., the business cycle.
Qual o melhor banco de imagem pago? Melhor Custo X Benefício
If you carefully read the article, it is very much not about the "What if 100% of assets were indexed" argument you often see. It's about what happens as more and more assets are robotically allocated via algorithms. Matt Levine is not a clickbait writer, and he deals seriously with the arbitrage-seeking nature of capital markets including robots which will seek to dominate by predicting what the winners will be.

I think the article deserves a fuller and fairer reading than your comment indicates you've given it.
Here is one motivation for false information. Financial gain. Someone could have made a lot of money with put options.
I, for one, refuse to buy their products and would really like it if they went out of business.

How do I get other people to agree with me without talking about why I despise them?
Ahh, looking down below at the first response there's a link to a '95 comp.lang.logo post with a great looong item by Leigh Klotz on the history of that. His claim was that it was legal wrangling between NSF and MIT on the licensing that caused the delay. This seems highly believable.
Kavanaugh Hearing Transcript Analysis Using IBM Watson
> However, when it comes to actually achieving adoption, it’s the platform that developers flock to that tend to succeed, all else being equal.

Perhaps, but I struggle to think of two comparable platforms with similar user adoption and significantly different developer interest, outside of there being different sets of developers that hate/love each (c.f. iOS and Android). I'm definitely not aware of any examples indicating a platform can be saved or damned by developers loving/hating it: e.g. most developers hated developing for the PS3 initially but it didn't fare badly in the console wars. Xbox One however did do much worse than the PS4 because fewer users wanted it.
The "index funds" thing is throwing people off the track of the article, which is more about robots than index funds proper. Perhaps "when human analysts are replaced with algorithmic robots, capital markets will feature less activity but what about efficiency?".
This is equivalent to worrying that all the animals in the entire world might eventually become helpless herbivores.

Relevant past topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12368136
Practice practice practice. It feels like speaking another language. You hear phrases and you play phrases. Practice practice practice. The more you practice, the bigger your phrases become.
idea: markets will never be rational. at best the balance of arbitragers against mass psychology will stencil the shape of the irrationality.
You all recognize the irony, right?
Have a look at the macs that followed.
No free lunch. Hashlife takes more memory and only works well in low entropy environments.

But, consider if you want to run a simulation 100 times using the same data you can speed that output up by just copying the output of the first simulation 100 times. But that's not simulating the same mind 100 times it's simulating the mind only once. Hash life and similar approaches don't increase your ability to compute unique mind states.
teach them one international language from the start of their life
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKQDSgBHPfY

DEF CON 25 - John Sotos - Genetic Diseases to Guide Digital Hacks of the Human Genome

The Chief Medical Officer of Intel says genetic testing in general seems like a terrible security risk one should avoid incurring at all cost.

So that's a big fat no.
Compromise on stiffness and rigidity in a servo system means the thing jitters about like a squirrel on speed. Robots need to be smooth, and there's precious little you can do in your controls to compensate for system instability. Precision comes along almost for free once you have that rigidity.

They didn't get the basics right. Special sauce on top needs to have a solid foundation.

And that's why I have an Aubo robot in my conference room today, and why I was able to tune in a 250kg payload 1995-vintage ABB on Tuesday, while these guys are shutting down.
> But if we consider the trend is clearly toward the high-level proof-based code[1], which is way easier to audit, then open source is obviously better.

You disprove your own assertion. Cryptography is very specialized. All specializations in this world require specialized knowledge and niche experience, cryptography included. Assumptions about the obviousness of a specialization is almost itself the definition of an error.
We self repair macs at our university. We have staff in our dept that are authorized repair techs. I'm sure many larger organizations have a similar setup.
My company buys Macs on warranty and just ships them back if there are problems.
Not the main issue with a hobby. It's as much because it's a satisfying Saturday afternoon as saving $$ on hourly rates.

In 30 years of vehicle ownership, all main and authorised dealers do a shoddy job. Frequently fraudulent by charging for parts they did not fit. I'll prefer the independent who's probably struggling to survive.
On the contrary, when the reports concern China, almost none of these media is trustworthy. I’ve been reading those articles in the past, and checking their original source of information or comparing reports/announcements from multipe sources, only to find that those reports are very often full of information from unreliable sources, misunderstanding or plain lies. Even when they report some truths, they can be very selective on the truths to report to reinforce their existing opinions. Reading those reports about China is very like reading Foxnews. I basically stopped reading those now.

Free media is nice, but articles are written by normal people. It’d be silly to trust whatever you can read
I wonder if that observation depends on how fungible the output is. I also have a point of contention in that 50% of the work is not necessarily the same as 50% of the created value.

Wikipedia also fixes the definition of Price's Law to be specifically around authors and their publications [0]. I can see the relationship that author is trying to make, but I'm uncomfortable to how the article conflates the generalization with original definition. The original definition is also related to Lotka's Law, which is also about publications [1].

I also just watched the Jordan B Peterson lecture linked in the article, and it sounded to me that he chose to make the same generalization [2]. He correctly calls it out as being restricted to creative work, but then goes on to make connections to goals scored in team sports like hockey and basketball. I think part of the problem in all of this is the attribution of effort with the overall outcome.

Taking Peterson's example with hockey, you can try to have an all-star team of just goal-scorers be on your hockey team including your extra players, but good luck trying to qualify for a championship. "Alright fine", you say and you get two-or-three bespoke goalies on your team. You more likely to qualify now, but given the typical builds of goal-scorers and how often they get injured, and comparing that to players who play defense, now your problem becomes having a team that more injuries than average, and suffering performance-wise as a result.

Certain kinds of success can be acquired through iterative attempts at amassing fractional results into one pot. Other kinds hinge binary do-or-die outcomes. Resilience and longevity comes from striking the correct balance between the two in any situation.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_J._de_Solla_Price#Scient...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotka%27s_law

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=16&v=UmUdcWk6Vfw
> With node, any IO is moved to a new thread

Not quite (or somewhat): the IO is done asynchronously. You tell the kernel to notify you when any of a set of FDs are ready for reading/writing, and it resumes you when that is so.
Because your three thousand dollar laptop has shat the bed, and you couldn't shell out for Apple Care or they failed to help in proper corporate fashion.

If they weren't actively shitting on repair companies, I'd say there'd be more of a market.
You make some interesting points, but it's worth adding a little extra context. For example, you mention a period of "almost 3 decades" for DNSSEC, but the first RFC for it was published barely two decades ago in 1997: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2065

As a comparison, the RFC for IPv6 was first published two years earlier, in 1995: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1883 and you could say that "nothing depends on" this too, in that no big commercial sites are served IPv6 only.

The fact that no sites would be taken down if the root private keys were published isn't too surprising either. What would happen if the Let's Encrypt (IdenTrust) private keys were published? Perhaps browsers would do the principled thing and brick ~50% of secure websites: https://w3techs.com/technologies/history_overview/ssl_certif... but I suspect that some pragmatic solution would be found. (In such a situation, though, it would be nice if sites could use TLSA as a defence in depth).

I think that the biggest differences, in terms of adoption rate, are that there isn't a limited supply of non-DNSSEC domain names (unlike the pressure to upgrade from IPv4 to IPv6), and sites don't get a Google search ranking boost (or a shiny padlock in the browser UI) by implementing DNSSEC. Remember that until quite recently even HTTPS was the exception rather than the norm for popular websites.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKQDSgBHPfY

DEF CON 25 - John Sotos - Genetic Diseases to Guide Digital Hacks of the Human Genome

idk the Chief Medical Officer of Intel considers genetic testing in general a pretty damn huge security risk and you completely neglect the whole bio weapons aspect.
You have a point, I wasn’t expecting a bounty at all. I believe they valued the additional proposed attack vectors, the detailed report and highliting a number of issues that could be fixed to hardening the service. I found that Google values researches and reports beyonf RCEs
So a great video on some of the HW emulation projects around this (datasette for 80s 8-bits) from the Nostalgia Nerd.

https://youtu.be/DoMxl_RqQlQ

Pretty cool stuff.
We all absolutely believe this is their logic. Truly, utterly.

It has nothing to do with ensuring product turnover whatsoever.
I understand the concept of liquidity and the reward mechanism you describe but it doesn't ultimately answer my question, which why is the process of buying an existing share called "capital allocation"? Let's say I buy a GOOG share from Larry Page. Is it the idea that I "allocated capital" to Larry Page's bank account? It seems to me like the correct thing to say would be that I provided liquidity to Larry, not that I allocated capital. Or is it the idea that I allocated some of my own capital to the stock market?
To My Immigrant Parents, Entrepreneurship Wasn't a Real Job
Yeah, I think the thing with 3D printing is it's a powerful industrial technology, but the idea that every home would want a low cost 3D printer was badly wrong.
Its not about the results and that lets the person running the test interpret things anyway they want. We have seen time, and time again that this leads to all sorts of discrimination that is both against our society's morals and not actually useful as filtering people as well the person doing the discriminating thinks.
> Every decade it bolts on support for the new technology craze

You mean they got better? I've been using Postgres, MySQL, and SQL Server professionally for over 20 years (Postgres for only 15), but they've only become better & faster over time. I don't see this "technology craze" you mention, but I have seen things like parallel processing, bitmap indexes, selective indexes, query plans that use multiple indexes, online index creation (no locking), support for complex data types like JSON or XML, partitioning, vastly improved resource usage (CPU+memory+disk) just to name a few.

This doesn't even include some of the cool vendor-specific features like foreign data wrappers (FDW) in Postgres, embedded language runtime support (SQL Server can do .NET, Python, R) and so on.

> so vendors add their own features

Of course they do, RDBMS' are products.
"Sent from my iPhone" - nice!

I bought my last ever Apple product, an IPad v1 and was dismayed when less than 2.5 years later it stopped receiving OS updates. Its battery still lasts 20 hours and yet bugs in the browser makes it crash on so many modern web pages. I can get an Android tablet every year for $70 if I just want something I'm going to throw away.
s/legal/extralegal/

"Secret law" is an oxymoron.
On the flip side, none of those parts (the SSD, the iPhone screen, or the MacBook speaker) are the same parts as Apple uses.

Third party iPhone screen replacement is generally not worth it due to shoddy warranty by the shop and noticeably worse screen quality. Where it is worth it is when you are already out of warranty and trying to extend the life of your phone.

The SSD is probably closest, although Apple does have custom part #s with custom firmware.
Authorized Service Facilities have access to the required tool.
I completely agree with this. Learning music theory helped me play by ear because it helped me associate a feeling with a progression or chord. This made learning by trial and error much easier, since it stuck more (I tried it without much success when I was younger).

- Also Jazz Pianist
Is this the tiny chip bloomberg is refering to? Maybe they shorted a bunch of aapl and amzn, I'd suggest SEC to investigate the editor who wrote up this crap

https://www.digikey.jp/product-detail/en/tdk-corporation/HHM...
Drexel's Spray-On Antennas Could Be the Tech Connector of the Future
When people criticize post-structuralist academic studies in good faith, one of the most common counter-criticism is that they simply don't have sufficiently deep understanding of the subject, of its terminology, history and so on. At the very least these kinds of pranks demonstrate that no one has "sufficiently deep understanding" of this buzzword soup. People who think they have some secret knowledge or intellectual superpowers to parse the unparseable simply delude themselves.
I use zoom for interviews and run into the same issue using my personal room for back-to-back interviews. My solution is to enable the waiting room feature. This makes it so that people can call in, but need to be admitted to the actual room. This works well for the interviews. The problem is that it's a account wide setting and cannot be disabled for specific meetings. So now the is a problem of I set up the room for a recurring meeting and am out sick and forgot to disable the waiting room.
DNSSEC precedes its first RFC by several years; before that RFC, it was a DoD-funded project run by Trusted Information Systems. It's different today in a variety of ways, but the fundamental design decisions --- offline signers, authenticated denial --- date back to TIS and the USG.

If LetsEncrypt broke, there would be absolute chaos across the Internet.
Even though IBM Watson incorrectly picked up some sentiments. It does a pretty decent job overall. Pretty satisfied with the results from this experiment.