skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The whole thing feels like encroachment of some kind of bizarre secular theology into physics.

Yeah, people really really want to believe that they’re not just an accident, that hasn’t changed. “Simulation” is the new creation myth, and no more rigorous or convincing. It doesn’t even pretend to answer fundamental questions, it just puts them off by one level. It literally does nothing except make people rephrase the question slightly, a la “Ok then, how did the simulators’ universe come to exist?”

It’s as boring and inconclusive as religion, without the self-awareness in many of its adherents of it being explicitly religious. It has all of the characteristics of a religious belief, from the lack of falsifiability, to the existence of potentially interventionist powers beyond our reality, creators, a higher purpose, etc.
قضية منال المغتصبة تأخذ منحى جديد
For major major reports like this, reputed newspapers are rarely wrong. See WSJ John Crareyou of Theranos. Theranos vehemently denied it, MSM was with Theranos and at least they weren’t outright against them. Then they did more digging etc.

The Washpo digging on Roy Moore, the NYT digging on Clinton Foundation, etc. these are experienced reporters having 15-30 credible sources, evidence etc. every time this happens, everyone denies and slowly little by little the story finds more evidence and facts and it becomes true.

This is why a free press is soooo important

Why would Apple disclose that millions of their products could be hacked and you’ve lost all your privacy. Who would trust them? They’d lose billions, regulations would come etc. it’s in the best interest for every party to deny.
Sure it seems plausible, but from "plausible" to "scientifically" there is IMHO a huge leap.

It may make sense, and personally I hope/wish that it actually works as intended, but that's far from being OK with the font to be tagged as it is.

Even the paper mentioned in the article you linked to that should be this one (the original link in the article is to SAGE journals and I cannot access it):

https://linguistics.ucla.edu/people/hayes/Teaching/papers/Mu...

seems like proposing a theory that makes a lot of sense more than anything else.
A Branching and Releasing Strategy That Fits GitHub Flow (2016)
What? There's certainly debate around whether or not slavery was the cause of the Civil War, but slavery is absolutely universally viewed as a black mark in American history.
The impacts of climate change at 1.5C, 2C and beyond
You can use tokio with stable Rust. Async/await is in nightly, but won’t be stable until early next year. As part of that work, some of the APIs are changing, but there is/will be a compatibility layer to make upgrading from the stuff today to tomorrow’s stuff easier.

That said, to address the question directly, rust-the-language provides a stronger guarantee than Go: rust code is free of data races at compile time. However, the APIs are much harder. Async/await will make them much easier, but still not as easy as “everything is always async.” The tradeoff is speed and safety; rust will be faster and have more guarantees, but be slightly harder to use (though some people do think the explicitness of async/await is easier, but that’s personal opinion).
That's a logically false inversion, assuming you take 'no better than' to mean '<=' (as I think makes sense in context).

OSS <= CSS does not imply CSS <= OSS...

> why on earth would you ever choose closed source components

There are often no open source alternatives to closed source things that are meaningfully equivalent.
For example, the iPhone is a secure and closed source phone. There is no open source equivalent to that package. Android devices have critical closed source components with almost no exception, but also are not equivalent to an iphone in many meaningful ways.

I think a better take-away is the nuanced "evaluate things on a case-by-case basis, don't let a security system having closed source components needlessly bias you"
Ask a Native American.
What's more likely is someone on the inside of one of these companies was privy to the discovery, but not the follow up.

I've been in such a situation myself where I was in the room during what LOOKED like a DDOS by Akamai 10 minutes after we got off the phone with them to turn down their CDN services.

In much the same way as Apple is refuting this claim, after a few weeks of internal debate above our pay grade we decided we didn't see it and it didn't exist and therefore it didn't.
The problem with "you know it when you see it", even in tight-knit communities, is that it's used to shut down discussion: If you know it when you see it, then it's obvious, and if you're trying to argue the point, well, only a troll argues the obvious, innit? Nobody could disagree in good faith, so the only conclusion is that you're trying to make trouble and should be shut down.

It's logically indefensible, in that there isn't enough to it to make a logical case to defend it, which means the people proposing ideas like these must believe that either their ideas are so widely shared that nobody would ever try to attack it, or that they'll be able to destroy anyone who does attack it through means other than calm, logical argumentation. That second possibility frightens me.
We should consider the possibility that Dr. Lederman's financial problems happened by design.

After all, why should ordinary people be allowed to slowly amass modest fortunes to pass onto their heirs?

If you want to know who is truly elite in America, see whose debts cannot be discharged through bankruptcy.
How much of this has actually been written? Can't seem to find any information on current progress beyond the releases section (which notes 4 additional chapters in the last couple months, but little about existing chapters), and googling doesn't immediately turn up any kind progress-blog. I'm not assuming in-order writing, since I've seen other `beta` e-books not follow it (and it often makes sense not to)
Any advice on how to buy that in the US?
As I said in my earlier post, those denials are accurate according to Snowden's documents. They integrated with the FBI to process court ordered user data requests. They obviously would have no knowledge of a downstream NSA data processing system or its code name.

Your article itself says that the initial reporting was incorrect and links to https://www.cnet.com/news/no-evidence-of-nsas-direct-access-... which correctly explains how PRISM is an NSA system that processes court ordered electronic wiretaps obtained by the FBI.
No they don't in the UK.
Very true. Go has proven big success outside Google.

So many people here argue here that Go is not good enough else why Google keep using other languages even now. But same people argue in Apple/Swift case "of course Apple need not rewrite all perfectly working applications in Swift". But somehow Google has to do to prove language is fine.
Thanks. Do you know of other self-hosted Mozilla products with ready-made containers?
AFAIK that wouldn't work against Amazon as IIRC hardware doesn't leave their datacenters without being shredded first.
That’s nonsensical. Could a character in a computer game do that, even if they realized they were a character in a game? Their existence would be completely dependent on the hardware and software they ran on, and their existence would be unsupportable in the “real world” beyond. This is taking an already empty sci-if/religious speculation to a ridiculous conclusion.
I honestly think enterprise IT folks are just not as good. I've been in and out of a lot of enterprises as an employee or (more commonly) part of a consulting crew asked to come in and work fast. Big companies reward tribal knowledge, relationships and politics much more than lean organizations. There are people who play the game well enough that they don't need to know what they're doing. People who have run systems for 10+ years become indispensable regardless of their ability.

I can sum up 90% of enterprise fails in one word and it's "silos". Every system and every discipline is a fiefdom that must be protected. I have actually witnessed fast enterprises where you wouldn't expect because they successfully broke their silos and put everyone working on the same product on the same floor answering to the same bosses regardless of what layer was theirs.
Except for the detail that COBOL programmers are outrageously hard to find, thusly expensive, and are only continuing to get harder to find and more expensive.
Where are Vcc and ground for the chip? These leads would show up on a simple micrograph of the board. How does this chip make connections that enable spying on data in the server?

Something is fishy.
Stories like this take many, many months of research -- particularly a story as detailed as the Bloomberg. I don't think it's fair to the journalists to simply explain the story away as a government-led conspiracy to mislead voters in the midterm elections.
Which books? I've read through a fair number of history books published in the US, and they have tended to have a strong focus on the problems caused by colonization while criticizing the idea of 'saving' the locals.
The source code is 213 KB of ASCII, assembled on 1980-8-6.

A souped-up Apple II at that time would have had 64 KB of RAM, and 140 KB of storage per floppy disk.

I guess you needed a PDP-11 to do any real work in those days.
No. He's comparing it to closed source software he has also audited.

CSS doesn't mean no one can see the code or that there aren't third-party audits.
> The basic idea is that vulnerabilities in cryptography require a different set of skills to find than "regular" security vulnerabilities do

That may be true for traditional low-level hand-optimized implementations. 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.

[1] "Simple High-Level Code For Cryptographic Arithmetic - With Proofs, Without Compromises" https://deepspec.org/entry/Paper/Simple+High.2DLevel+Code+Fo...
If its a simulation, it should have safe-guards against recursions- meaning, limiting computation complexity, to prevent the inhabitants attempting to solve there problems with simulations tailored to there problems.

So, build a simulating supercomputer, using quantum physics and NOT watch us all get deprecated.
Yep, I fully agree. Would be real fun to dig into SpaceX numbers. I'll just for the IPO then.

And it is impressive what they achieved.
Wow that's amazing
Regarding Apple's denial, there are other publications that corroborate the Bloomberg story. Previously, Apple has denied security incidents even when multiple outlets report it. For example, last year, The Information reported Apple discovered malware on Super Micro servers in their development and production environments [1]. As a result, the Information claimed that Apple ended up terminating its relationship with Super Micro.

In response to the report, an Apple spokesperson denied there was a security incident, stating: "We’re not aware of any data being transmitted to an unauthorized party nor was any infected firmware found on the servers purchased from this vendor."

However, based on sources from within Apple, Ars Technica claimed Apple employees did find compromised firmware in Apple's design lab. Super Micro SVP of Technology also reported Apple terminated its relationship with them.

I believe we are seeing the same situation here.

[1] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/02/apple...
Go concurrency is just threads. It's a particularly idiosyncratic userland implementation of them.

There are two claims here I'd like to unpack further:

1. "I've measured goroutine switching time to be ~170 ns on my machine, 10x faster than thread switching time." This is because of the lack of switchto support in the Linux kernel, not because of any fundamental difference between threads and goroutines. A Google engineer had a patch [1] that unfortunately never landed to add this support in 2013. Windows already has this functionality, via UMS. I would like to see Linux push further on this, because kernel support seems like the right way to improve context switching performance.

2. "Goroutines also have small stacks that can grow at run-time (something thread stacks cannot do)." This is a frequent myth. Thread stacks can do this too, with appropriate runtime support: after all, if they couldn't, then Go couldn't implement stack growth, since Go's runtime is built in userland on top of kernel threads. Stack growth is a feature of the garbage collection infrastructure, not of the concurrency support. You could have stack growth in a 1:1 thread system as well, as long as that system kept the information needed to relocate pointers into the stack.

Goroutines are threads. So the idea the "Go has eliminated the distinction between synchronous and asynchronous code" is only vacuously true, because in Go, everything is synchronous.

Finally, Go doesn't do anything to prevent data races, which are the biggest problem facing concurrent code. It actually makes data races easier than in languages like C++, because it has no concept of const, even as a lint. Race detectors have long existed in C++ as well, at least as far back as Helgrind.

[1]: https://blog.linuxplumbersconf.org/2013/ocw/system/presentat...
Slavery

Annihilation of local tribes by colonisers

forced opium enslavement of China

dividing up China between France/Britain/Japan

pestilence from European cattle annihilating 2/3 of inland african people via starvation

the policy of the Holy Roman Emperor and The Pope to keep german states at war with italian states

emperor Chin executing the whole village where any crime at all occurred

The Spanish Inquisition

The Khmer Rouge

The Long March under Mao

Stalins purges and gulags

the list goes on
People that do not benefit society at all, like celebrities that are known from that they are known, can buy a diamond ring for 1.5+ mil dollars. And the people awarded with highest, most prestigious award that human can receive for pushing humankind further and further can't afford to pay for medical bills. There is something really wrong with the world in which we live.
So does Ericsson still use Erlang in their recent network hardware etc?
Elemental servers sold for as much as $100,000 each, at profit margins of as high as 70 percent, according to a former adviser to the company. "Two of Elemental’s biggest early clients were the Mormon church, which used the technology to beam sermons to congregations around the world, and the adult film industry, which did not."

Church would certainly be more interesting if they did, though.
I find the lack of real technical information quite surprising, not just on bloomberg, but here as well. The previous big thread that you can scroll endlessly has anecdotes and chit-chat but nothing on the actual technical details.
It remind me another security risk "Google's new hardware security key was made by a Chinese company"

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/30/google-titan-made-by-chinese...
This is this is similar to all the backdoored Cisco devices the FBI found all over the government. If they are doing it at all they would have a complex plan and this would be one of the many approaches. Even scarier IMHO are the CPU fabrication hacks that add in an imperceptible backdoor directly in the chip logic. A recent report showed how CPUs can be backdoored at critical points in the fabrication process by a single operator that would be incredibly hard to detect. We are talking instruction patterns that charge capacitor buffers that allow privileged access once a threshold is reached. Amazing really.
> Gorilla Glass 3, 3060mAh battery, not waterproof

I'm glad it at least it has the headphone jack, but I'd like my phone to last a while too.
Basic internet and computer hygiene makes it incredibly easy, even inherent, in avoidng spyware/adware/malware and crappy software. Now some people who don’t do that might find nuking it all to be easier than trying to uninstall everything, that’s valid, but Unless you corrupted something on a system wide scale, clean installs are a relic from when they were a blanket solution way back in the day when all software was a lot more unstable, many years ago. I’ve been running the same install of Windows, upgraded numerous times, with nary and issue nowadays just thanks the the above best practices. Same with MacOS.

This tends to be the general sentiment in both communities (outside of people who recommend that cause it’s all they know, but I wouldn’t listen to them regardless) if you keep good computer/internet hygiene practices and barring any widespread corruption/systemic malware/other external factors.

Aside from that, I’m always a huge advocate for the polished UX. As long as the options aren’t removed, the users who need them will be able to use them perfectly fine, everyone else won’t be offput by them, especially when the need for clean installs is only necessary for specific use cases as I mentioned before and doesn’t come up often at all.
Thanks. So presumably these backdoor chips are attached to either the I2C or SMBus. That's the part I was missing. Cheers.
I always buy a case for my phone since I consider it a kind of physical insurance.
"If you can’t measure it, you can’t improve it."

I would suggest starting by gathering data to show you CEO where you think you can make improvements. Sometimes just applying a standard processes is not enough to convince management of the benefits if they are not yet bought in.
This is completely untrue, snowden documents showed full cooperation from many companies with the NSA (not FBI) PRISM program.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)#C...
> History books in US and UK still teach that the colonizers saved the savages and brought them to the modern age.

My history books (1980s public school, New York, US) most definitely taught nothing of the sort.
I so agree with this.
It goes beyond that. If this story were in fact true, what we're witnessing is large companies whose entire business is built upon user trust setting fire to themselves. Who'd ever trust AWS again with anything of consequence if it turns out the denial is false?

I don't buy it as written. There's something else here.
They probably weren't even aware of his situation when this happened.
Can we please stop the guesswork in this thread, comparing gaming laptops to 10 year old MacBooks, and look at the data? Just shy of that 10 years, in 2009/2010, mobile Nehalem processors were introduced, and more importantly, early 2011, mobile Sandy Bridge arrived. Sandy Bridge was super powerful. How much powerful?

2 years, 2 generations before to Sandy Bridge:
Core 2 Quad Q9000 (Q1 2009) -> i7 2820QM (Q1 2011) = +100%

Sandy Bridge to 6 generations later, 6.5 years later:
i7 2820QM (Q1 2011) -> i7 8550U (Q3 2017) = +37%

Yes, I'm mixing tick-tock cycles or low voltage with "standard versions". So let's see a more appropriate competitor:

Sandy Bridge to 5 generations later, 6 years later:
i7 2820QM (Q1 2011) -> i7 7820HQ (Q1 2017) = +50 %

So we had processors that doubled the performance in 2 years (and more than double if we disregard not-so-common Core Quads and take often only two-core mobile processors). Yet, 6 years later, there was only a 50 % increase. Until Ryzen came recently and made Intel to quickly come with Skylake-X, i9s and FINALLY, OH FINALLY, 6 (powerful) cores in laptops, there was no real performance reasons to upgrade, only for heat or thickness, those went down, performance didn't went up so much.

So, around that 2011, those were that crazy times, when you could have:

45 W or 55 W CPU (i7 2820QM or 2920XM)

55 W GPU (Quadro 2000m)

two SATA drives

four DIMM modules

In a non-gaming, back then "standard" size laptop (ThinkPad W520). And under heavy load, anything under Tjunction (say, 95 °C) was good enough. Some laptops with only a single 55 W dissipating fan (such as the ThinkPad W520) often throttled under full CPU and GPU load and couldn't run Turbo with full GPU load, others (such as Dell Precision M6600) had two separate fans and some even came with Quadro 4000m GPU with a TDP of... 100 watts!

So, back then, those laptops ordinarily came with 170+ W power supplies (even over 200 W) and just a CPU+GPU could draw well over 100 W (add the rest of the systems, hard drive here, hard drive there, all four DIMM slots populated, charging the battery) and it would easily go over the twice of that 10 year old laptop with 85 W charger.

And these are workstation models. If you mention gaming laptops, those sometimes had desktop CPUs in them and required 300 W PSUs. Nowadays they also use desktop GPUs and require TWO 300 W PSUs...

Please, don't base observations on 10-year old Tick (probably Penryn?) with 85 W chargers, when 7-8 years ago, a Tock (Sandy Bridge) came with literal concrete bricks as power supplies and really pulled 200 watts. Thankfully, things got dialed back after that, but at the cost of performance until now and current mobile 6-core i9s and Xeons.

And to the lap comments - you really didn't want to have those laptops in your lap when they were plugged in and turbo-ing...
Ask HN: How to not forget your own code?
I'll jump right in. I'm a developer with 5+ years' experience with programming. One of the biggest challenges I face is I forget my code very quickly. This sometimes even applies to the logic used in the code. In the heat of moment while coding, I sort of enter a trance and come up with great logic/algorithms. However, I will forget about it after 2 weeks. After developing huge modules, I forget details about the libraries used. I try documenting/writing comments for other developers.
I also don't perform quite well in technical interviews when I'm asked about my prior work experience and side projects. It's quite embarrassing to forgetting stuff in which I have put heart and soul while developing.
The best way to state my problem is that I am more of a RAM than a Hard Drive.
Any of you face this problem? Or any idea how to overcome this problem?
True, but Go and Erlang don't occupy the same niche.

Go is imperative, while Erlang is mostly functional.

Go is AOT (ahead-of-time) compiled, while Erlang runs on a VM.

Go is statically typed, while Erlang is dynamically typed (I know about Dializer).

Go concurrency primitives are designed to coordinate goroutines living in the same process, while Erlang concurrency primitives are designed to coordinate Erlang "processes" living in the Erlang VM or even in multiple Erlang VMs forming a cluster.
It depends. These chips were specifically connected to the BMC/IPMI:

>The illicit chips could do all this because they were connected to the baseboard management controller, a kind of superchip that administrators use to remotely log in to problematic servers, giving them access to the most sensitive code even on machines that have crashed or are turned off.

Is your OOB-management VLAN/network firewalled off from outgoing access to the internet? If not, this chip can make requests out to another host, who gives it code to run. This code can then either collect data and send it back out, or do other nefarious things.
> How can you get around a firewall by using a compromised machine that's part of the internal network?

Reverse shell depending on how you have the firewall set up. Most firewalls don't block outbound packets, and even if they do you can tunnel over an open port.

> If it's true, it makes absolutely no sense for Apple and Amazon to attack Bloomberg.

If you are a major company, are you going to use AWS if you believe their hardware is pwned?
well, from that document:

> My problems with Node are almost entirely around

> how it manages user code.

> In contrast to the focus on evented I/O early on,

> the module system was essentially an afterthought

> With this in mind, I have long thought about how it

> could be done better....
This is a good point - and something ignored by some advocates of universal healthcare (I'm partial to the idea of universal healthcare, but would like to see more honest debate of the issue).