skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes this is a common design in fact most current solution segregated the POS and POI completely anything that handles the actual credit card whether it's C&P, Track2 or NFC is a closed black box with the required PED/PTS/POI and P2PE certifications the merchant never sees what's going on they only can talk to the thing in bill the next card X and get a confirmation of the transaction that's it they don't see any of the card data they don't even see any card holder data unless they collect it in a side channel e.g. a loyalty program.

Now none of these certifications or standards is bullet proof but people have a very skewed vision of the PCI certification process likely due to bias of only having interacting with the PCI-DSS requirements for merchants and low levels to boot meaning they didn't had to do anything but to fill the SAQ themselves and be on their way.
> Boy, they sure didn't open with a case I could be sympathetic with. Lied to the state police, lied when applying to a city PD, but this time, oh, this time he's telling the truth!

You misunderstood the article. There's no evidence to suggest he lied ever.
> The only real difference for most code is that it pushes you very hard to use channels directly, as they're the only type-safe option.

It is, but it is also a super important difference: Go provides inbuilt libraries to make inter-thread synchronization more bearable for the average user, e.g. channels and waitgroups. These are lot harder to misuse than bare mutexes and condition variables. Since those are not available in other languages and are too complex for most users to implement them on their own (especially when select{} is required), the solutions there often end up more error-prone.
WeChat has a shake feature that pairs you with some one who supposedly is shaking as well. Who knows how well it really works. Seems like I always get paired with Saudi Arabia.
Correct, which is why I was agreeing with you, but questioning the premise of a couple comments above yours. I.e., how far up the infrastructure stack should have developer the expected to know intimately?
It seems, at least, the author should have put some of these on the record comments from Apple in the story if they were merely "misinformed by verified sources." It would take a little punch out of the story though.
Worth it just for the thoughts on keyset pagination alone:

https://simonwillison.net/2018/Oct/4/datasette-ideas/#Keyset...

https://use-the-index-luke.com/sql/partial-results/fetch-nex...

I've implemented this myself (poorly) for mutable data as I slowly began to lose my mind. For example a feed of users' posts (ordered uniquely for each user based on their personal preference) that can be individually created and deleted, and you don't have enough memory to cache all of the query results to be returned to each user immutably. As far as I can tell, this is an open problem.
They're probably referring to National Security Letters, which include a gag order that prevents even disclosing the existence of the order/letter, or the investigation it's a part of.

https://www.eff.org/issues/national-security-letters
These statistics are only possible in a nation that has over 240,000 water mains (or do some break more than once a year?)

A smaller nation can choose a solution that works better at smaller scales, but doesn't scare well - because they don't need it to scale much. A larger empire has fewer options.
I recently had a sales call with a potential vendor (they were a startup). They used the same number and meeting code for all of the meetings. I had accidentally called in about 10 minutes early and was dumped into another conversation, and heard the other potential customer talking. It was odd how insecure and weird it was. I think this is a potential issue for all meeting services.
Our experience has not been consistent with that. For example we use MapR-DB and have never had a single issue with HBase compatibility or bugs. My DS team loves the database especially it's quite good.
You could say the same thing about homeopathy - they are an effective placebo.

Do you support their use too?
Well, if you can figure out who's lying, be sure to buy some SMCI tomorrow morning. Or not, depending on what you come up with. That's where I'm at right now, anyway, using my "buy the beaten-down stock that got beaten too a little too hard" strategy (see also: Equifax, United Airlines). Wait until we all decide that it wasn't as bad as we thought it was going to be, profit.

Problem is the difference between SMCI and, say, United. With United, we knew the accusations were true, there were videos. But my strategy was to just hold until it all blew over, and it did. Profit. But with SMCI, I don't know if it's true or not, and if it IS true, then unlike United they truly are screwed and it will not be blowing over any time soon.

So I'll probably just go buy more AAPL.
7 Russian nationals charged with conspiracy for hacking anti-doping facilities
I found the jails ecosystem as old and creaky as FreeBSD itself; the technology is good, and everything makes sense, but after using Docker on Mac and Linux for a while, I've started to prefer the lighter-weight and more user-friendly abstractions.

If there was a Jailfile equivalent for FreeBSD and a command-line tool with the same interfaces as docker, namely `docker run --rm -it ...`, I might be staying on FreeBSD.
I wonder how much easier it is nowdays to get a game like this up and running with something like Unity. I only do hobbyist 2D game development, but every time I read articles regarding 80s 2D gamedev I come across things like harsh hardware limits and difficult optimization problems - it seems like developers were forced to deal with a lot more complexity back then.
Right when I saw the example text, I was immediately reminded of typographical rivers[0]. If you have a visual memory, I'm guessing rivers in paragraphs may also help you remember what you read, since the negative space creates branch-like structures in the paragraph, which adds an extra visual memory cue. After looking at a few examples of this font, it's clear that this font was designed to do that. You can see similar continuous structures in the text itself. Pretty neat. Looks like they also borrowed ideas from Daniel Kahneman, as well[1]. In his book, I believe one of the examples does a test on Princeton students to see how many riddles they can solve, and they did better when the font was harder to read.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_(typography)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow
this is a great
Rifts Break Open at Facebook Over Kavanaugh Hearing
I'm trying to find out what you mean by "switchto support". Do you have a link?
Deny, deny, deny until the evidence is undeniable... then it'll either be "we were cooperating with X government request" or "sorry, a recent investigation has shown that we were wrong". There's simply no advantage to them admitting that a large portion of their hardware is backdoored with no fix.
>The simulation has to be 'good enough' to make a thinking person (win the lottery); my mind has to be only smart enough to think of multiple universes but not perceive the obvious simulation artifacts; I have to be written (as a simulation myself) to be capable of accepting multiple universes.

But how could we possibly know what are simulation artifacts without knowledge of the rules of the outside universe? Paraphrasing an old SMBC comic, we live in a universe with a maximum speed, a minimum temperature, and a rule that position and momentum are only knowable to certain tolerances. If I were writing a universe simulator, heck yeah forced locality of side effects within the light cone makes the simulation and memory structures much more manageable.

Is that just the natural state of how things exist? Or are they constraints from simulation optimization within a parent universe where objects move infinite distances along 20 spatial dimensions as fast as they'd like? Depending on the rules outside, maybe our light speed limitations don't even help with simulation optimization and they just put that rule in here for fun to mess with us.

I just don't see how we have any grounds for talking about the odds of being a simulation based on absolutely no information. Best case we can say "If I make these assumptions about the parent universe I can draw X conclusions," but that doesn't mean much.
I understand it's tough to tier the features and I almost wouldn't have a problem with all the K8Ns stuff being in a higher tier. I'm not really the target market for it. I just want to learn about it because I think it could trickle down to smaller developers in a few years.

The environment specific variables are more frustrating for me because I would consider good environment isolation a necessity, rather than something that's subjectively better / worse depending on the size of an organization.

I think everyone driving deployment from CI should, at a minimum, start with two environments - 'dev' and 'prod'. The number of environments would have been a much better feature to tier IMO. I don't really need 'test' or 'staging'. To me, those extra environments seem more practical for a company that has a strategy for promoting deployments as a part of their QC policies.

CI in particular is an area where I think the the product tiers might be a mistake. The goal should be getting everyone into the mindset of "use GitLab and follow their opinion for CI and you can one-click deploy to and scale on X, Y, or Z". The promise of cheap, consistent deployment options with the ability to "throw money at it" to scale up is what makes sense for me. It's unlikely I'll ever have a product that gets popular enough that I need to use the scaling features, but that's what everyone dreams about so it's easy to capture the low end with the promise of low / no upfront costs and the ability to scale if you win the lotto.
I can tell you a similar anectode. My family used to live in a eastern Europe communist-at-the-time country. Computers were hard to come by and the only place you could get good hardware was in Germany.

My dad went to Germany and bought an Atari (I forget which one exactly), and realized it was all in German. Seeing that he didn't know any German, he learned it enough to navigate the UI.

In other words, the time cost of learning German was less than the cost of the computer + the trip to Germany. Basically necessity.
I'm not sure what you said refutes his point. It still doesn't require the entire universe to be simulated.

If you observe the Nile, then yes it becomes an input, so that then would need to be simulated. This could take however long is necessary to do.

It still does not necessitate simulating the entire universe down to the minutiae.

Perhaps if the people in the simulation purposefully set out to "observe" somehow their entire universe in one timestep, in such way that _necessitates_ the complete simulation of their universe (like, say, running an experiment that involves all atoms interacting with all other atoms in their universe), then maybe it will be a problem. Then again, maybe the parent universe just has more atoms & computing power to throw at it, or it will generate a simulation that is "close enough" to the real thing that the people in the simulation will not be able to distinguish.
I also mentioned it to the sales guy, but he was unfazed, which I think shows a lack of respect for customer privacy, even though he probably didn't realize it.
What evidence do you have to suggest that?
they made a few then had to install wheels after it was pointed out it was illegal in CA to drive without them- IE, lack of basic due diligence. And they've reverted to conventional cars as a platform because that makes more economic sense. Fine to have a goal but if you never get there and make basic bungles on the way, it's a joke.
The FANGS are furious
Ask the guys that made Descent. They just basically redid the entire thing from the ground up to make Overload in a modern engine. Pretty damned solid effort, too.
This article really hit home for me because this is exactly what my current career consists of. I am coverting old AS400s running RPG to QNX servers running C. And like the Cobol Cowboy's say the financial institutions will pay what ever you demand. I owe all this work to a college professor that encouraged me to thoroughly learn RPG for this very reason. Thank you Professor Her.
The demise of Rethink Robotics shows how hard it is to make machines truly smart
Apparently in 3 tries Mythbusters managed to fool the fMRI lie test once. They didn't experiment much with different techniques, I would fully expect success rates to get much worse than that as people get more time to find good techniques for beating the test.

https://mythresults.com/episode93
There's tooling like Cryptol and SPARK to make this a lot easier than it was in the past. Cryptol can generate software or hardware that implements the high-level spec of the algorithm. Far as practical use, certainly not just one even though still extremely rare. Here's some more:

Altran/Praxis Correct-by-Construction for a cert authority

http://www.sis.pitt.edu/jjoshi/Devsec/CorrectnessByConstruct...

Same company ports Skein from C to SPARK, finds trouble

http://www.skein-hash.info/sites/default/files/SPARKSkein.pd...

SPARK Ada is available under GPL and commercial licenses. The book below is quite easy to read compared to most stuff with formal methods. The companies building stuff like this usually also have tools to generate tests (property-based testing) from contracts/specs and can automatically turn anything you can't prove into runtime checks. Shocked it's not used more often in areas like smart contracts or cryptocurrency protocols.

https://www.amazon.com/Building-High-Integrity-Applications-...

Galois built Cryptol for NSA but open sourced it.

https://www.cryptol.net/

Rockwell Collins built SHADE and some other tools for high-assurance crypto. They build stuff for the defense sector mainly funded by NSA. They even have a separation-preserving, verified CPU.

http://www.csl.sri.com/users/shankar/VGC05/Hardin.pdf
If there is a gag order, how can Apple then write such a statement? AFAIK you can't legally force someone to lie. (At least not yet)
And if you deploy with docker then your build server slaps your java Jar and JRE in a docker image and you deploy one thing. No functional difference.
There's a massive advantage for Apple to be upfront about security breaches.

They are using privacy as a major product differentiator. If people stop trusting Apple it's going to cause direct impact to their bottom line.
Of course. Apple/Amazon can be coerced into denying this (via government requests or otherwise). Bloomberg can't, nor is there any advantage for them to publish false information.
I am sort of a kubernetes person at work, and I just wasted 3 hours trying to get a cluster up with Rancher. Everything worked fine, except somehow the network started isolating namespaces and the nginx ingress couldn't reach my service.

So I'm calling it quits for now. Just running the cluster requires a small ops team.
My apologies, I was hoping from the context here that my "how would it play out" question would have implied "how would it play out in court" since the comment that originally got my curiosity pumping spoke directly to hypothetical discrimination lawsuits.
See the bottom of the post you’re replying to.
As something I heard: In China, business a fight for survival that is brutal to the extreme. You will be cut down, cheated, extorted, and broken with zero hesitation.

Doing business in the West is comparatively like a walk in the park.
Having to worry about redundancy and scaling out on a one-man personal project is a very enviable problem to have. Personally, I'm just going to stick with some kind of paas that gives me a managed IIS or Apache type webserver that I don't have to frig with, and focus my energies on actually building the project.
This is used heavily in USG/DOD where everyone has a certificate thanks to HSPD-12
Depends. I would argue that e.g. Go's CSP approach is not implementable on top of Akka, since actors there are not allowed to block on reception of single message. They will always get messages pushed, so the blocking Go concurrency constructs can not be built on top of it. It's obviously slightly different with Erlang, where Actors can block.

I think the basic Actor definition does only say that Actors need to send messages to others, but not whether they can block on reception of selected responses. So it might be a bit undefined.
It'd be against the terms of the Descent source code license, but not the GPL.
http://integral.me is highly recommended!
This is neat, but going up to the org: https://github.com/videogamepreservation -- super-cool. There's so much there!
It doesn't bode well for either of them. This is a pure contraction of the markets they are trying to serve.
I think more languages should have typed channels, but untyped channels are readily available via OS primitives. Unix has had pipe() since 1973.
But they are saying that Canada would cut us off from their steel production in a time of need, which is a pretty absurd assessment of the situation.
Right, it's amazing how blind people can be to reality. In Berkeley, the crunchiest of all possible american cities, the electric vehicle fleet is only 2% of cars on the road, and much less than 2% of all the vehicle-miles. Cars last for 20 years and in the last decade the median age of cars on the road has dramatically increased. For half the fleet to turn over you'd basically need for electrics to have 100% market share for many years.
I once was gassing up at a station, and for whatever reason the card reader on the pump wasn't charging, but would let me pump gas anyways. So me, and everyone else who'd used that pump that day, received a phone call from the police telling me to go pay for the gas. I figured it was just an honest mistake and didn't think anything of it.

Fast forward a bit, to where I am undergoing a polygraph examination for the NSA. The exam made me uncomfortable and nervous, but I thought everything was going well. Except for when my interviewer came back and told me I was showing sensitivity towards the hiding crimes question. WTF? And when they do this, they're just giving you enough rope to see if you hang yourself with it. But I had no idea why (or even if) I was showing sensitivity to this question.

They called me in for a 2nd polygraph, this time I didn't show sensitivity to hiding crimes, and I figured I was good to go.

No. I get called into a 3rd exam (each exam was separated by a couple months, mind you). This time the interviewer told me "You did better at the hiding crimes question than I thought you would" W.T.F.?!?! The interviewer then left the room and came back with a manilla folder, from which he procures a piece paper which he reads that I had a suspected larceny charge back at home. I honestly had no idea what he was talking about until I remembered the gas station incident. But after I try telling him about it, he tells me that he doesn't believe me and that he thinks I stole that gas. This leaves me extremely flustered and the rest of the polygraph was a train wreck.

3 strikes and I'm out, my conditional employment with them was terminated.

What irks me the most though, is that when I got back home I retrieved the larceny report from the court house, and in that document the whole story was laid out and my account of the situation was corroborated. So what the hell? Why throw me through such a ringer?

Fuck the polygraph.
Zume Inc. | Senior Software Engineer - Fullstack | Mountain View, San Francisco, Seattle | Full-time | ONSITE | https://zumepizza.com

Zume is on a quest to be the most powerful source of health and well-being on the planet. We started by partnering people with technology to create a more thoughtful and efficient way to source, make, bake and deliver pizza. In the process, we are delivering an artisan pizza that takes care of the people who eat it and make it, and even takes better care of the planet we all love—a planet 9 billion people will inhabit by mid-century.

We are looking for experienced technology leaders with great communication skills to help build, improve, and scale our products - leaders who will own delivery of major features that enable a complex logistics machine to run smoothly and flawlessly, to the delight of Zume’s customers.

Stack: Node.js, Express, Vue.js, Redis, RabbitMQ, and Postgres on Heroku

Apply:

- Mountain View: https://grnh.se/c57de04a2

- San Francisco: https://grnh.se/95876db52

- Seattle: https://grnh.se/9f5263662

Questions:

- Dan <daniel.bankhead@zumepizza.com> (Software Engineer)
Getting boxed is always about who gives the test, which also includes what and how questions are asked. That's why you would always prefer some old salty crusty bastard who can see through bullshit vs some young FNG who thinks he's saving the world one box at a time, which is where stories of fully qualified people getting dropped mostly come from.
It's the convention
I don't support the use of homeopathy, but I don't think that's a great analogy. Polygraphs are used as an interrogation technique, where psychological tricks and deception on the part of law enforcement are "fair game" (we could enter a long discussion as to whether or not deception during interrogations/interviews should be permitted, but regardless, that's the status quo right now).

Trickery and deception when it comes to medicine and personal health are never fair game. I think there's definitely a difference between police telling a suspect "we know you did it" (when they don't actually know) and a doctor telling a patient "take this and you'll feel better" (when the drug actually does nothing).

Also, polygraphs are a little bit more functional than homeopathic medicine: a polygraph can not only induce nervousness, but can also notice it in some cases (even if the nervousness may not be concerned around a particular question and may not necessarily indicate deception and even if there are false positives). This helps create a feedback loop which makes it more powerful than a pure placebo (e.g. a "lie detector machine" you hook someone up to which isn't powered on at all and does literally nothing).
I feel like my workflow address that exactly: by making a separate branch per reviewable change from the base of the problem branch.
Do not care much for design because I use a case anyway. There are better reasons to consider this phone.
Are you using GKE for your production environment? Kubernetes has lots of great features, and definitely imposes some good operational patterns, but it's no panacea, and for those of us who can't put their applications in the cloud (or don't want to) Kubernetes can be a complex beast to integrate.

Are you running databases in Kubernetes? Do you have any existing on-prem infrastructure that you want to utilize (or are required to, because sunk costs) to integrate with Kubernetes?

Is you company a startup with no existing legacy application that you need to figure out how to containerize before you can even think about getting it into Kubernetes? We've seen benefits from running it, for sure, but I'm honestly not sure if the amount of work it took (and still takes) to make it work for us was worth the ROI.

Sometimes I feel like Kubernetes is a play by Google to get everyone using their methodology, but only they can provide the seamless experience of GKE.