skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have to disagree.
It doesn't introduce burden and complexity. They're already there whether you use Kubernetes or not.

The difference is that if you did build it all by hand as the author said, if it ever scales, you're going to have double the job to make it scale.

It's all a question of: do I think my software will succeed?

If it's a hobby project that will never get big, it's not worth the hassle.
If it actually has a chance of succeeding, the small added complexity of Kubernetes will pay dividends extremely quickly when the system needs to scale.

Even with as little as two machines, I'd argue k8s is already adding more value than managing those by hand. People can say otherwise because they're used to it, but being used to it is not the point of the discussion.

The author also talks about Ansible which is another piece of complexity that would be comparable with doing it in k8s. I'd argue you have less YAMLs with k8s than with Ansible for a small project.

The only argument I see for doing anything by hand today is if it's a play thing.
No, the controller runs it's own totally separate OS, has connections to most/all the buses and is able to emulate devices whether you have drivers installed or not.
Under the circumstances, I'd accept just slowly rolling to a stop with the hazard lights on. People behind the car will hate it, but probably no one will die.
Talent with little effort will get you close to anywhere.
MENSA?
LG V40 ThinQ Release Dates Specifications
There is no way that the intelligence community would allow that fraud case to go ahead.
Who am I to be taken seriously? The condescension is a part of the attitude of those who consider something "settled". You made the claim that we have observed matter falling into a "black hole". The evidence that you didn't present says we have some observations, but only supposition as to what it means.

In your eyes, that evidence may be "beyond a reasonable doubt", but from my perspective, that evidence barely scratches the surface of what we need.

Science is not about dogma, it is about investigating the universe about in a systematic way and looking at all sorts of models and theories that can provide a handle on understanding.

But none of those models or theories will ever be the "truth". They can be adequate for the purposes needed, but outside of those limited areas, other models will be required. These other models will give a better description and handle within their limits. For all the desire for a "theory of everything", it will not be achieved. There will always be anomalous observations.

Whether you agree or disagree, that is simply your choice and anything I say will be seen through your filters and biases. That is what happens to all of us.

You can believe that GR is the "bee's knees", I can believe differently. You can believe in little blue fairies living at the bottom of your garden, if you like. I put little blue fairies in the same basket as "black holes".

We have lots of very interesting observations of lots of very interesting things out there. I just have problems with the inconsistencies of the models used to describe these things.
Have you considered opening a cooperative Bank? You could out-innovate a lot of slow moving small banks. And I think the initial capital requirements are lower.
You are comparing 90s technologies to today's web standards. It's like saying that "open source isn't good for websites because look at php".
It's so good that they brought it back as a first-class thing, see the newer Razor Pages stuff. I'd definitely use that for any kind of quick little internal applications, there's so much less ceremony involved.
The device outer enclosure was tamper evident but the device itself was tamper proof HSM, basically. Any kind of intrusion (melting, dissolving, drilling, etc.) into a secure internal enclosure (separate processor, memory and battery) would cause internal battery to be disconnected from internal SRAM and basically the device would loose all cryptographic material and then self-destruct.

To give a bit of background, when you type your PIN on credit card terminal it is not the terminal application that is really getting the pin (well, except for special credit cards but that is really problem of the Bank that issued the card). The Visa/Mastercard mandate that the application don't have control over the PIN and that the PIN entry uses physically separate keyboard and display.

To achieve this, the keyboard and the display is galvanically separated for the duration of the PIN entry and the PIN is transferred directly to the HSM where it is being encrypted before it is transferred to the application processor for the rest of processing.
This is so stupid. The asshole companies had every opportunity to fix and modernize their crap they just chose to ride the investments beyond any reasonable timeframe. Let them go out of business.
What is Spiral Model?
And most important: Never consent to any searches of anything.

Too many people just consent because "They have nothing to hide/Don't want to look guilty" and many police officers take that as a challenge to actually find something, no matter how small.

Not consenting to the search puts the burden of proof on the police, they gotta have a cause/reason to search your car. Sure, they can also manufacture that, usually by calling in a K9 unit. These dogs are so well trained, they can give a signal when their handler orders it, the dogs signal is then used as a cause to search you and the car.

But that's a lot of time and effort, not every police officer wants to go through just for a little power trip.

That's why not consenting to the search is so important and can spare you a lot of trouble, there's absolutely nothing wrong with doing it.
Who are you to say what to charge, what is fair? What happened to charging what the market will bare, letting the market decide?

If Verizon continues to pay $10,000 to use a city owned utility pole, then I'm pretty sure the price is right.
DI/IoC gets complicated, fast.

hand rolling DI, yep brilliant, generally quite easy to work your way through because it's easy to see where classes are being used.

Hand rolling can get complicated when your applications get BIG and you want to do fancy things like having modular code (whether you ever use the module somewhere else or not) or lazy loading or multiple scopes.

Then you use a framework and you find your dependencies take dependencies, your wireup code is auto-magical, you inject dependencies into private properties, you want multiple implementations of particular interfaces but want to ensure only the right one gets used in each circumstance.

Then multiple people start getting their fingers into the pie and the DI/IoC explodes into config files throughout the application, and the only way to understand what's being wired up without a map, is to "find usages", pin files, and cry

(I'm not bitter or anything ;) DI/IoC can work wonders for handling complexity, it can also increase your complexity if you aren't very careful)
The Chinese operation would simply shut down and reopen under a different name. And the credit card companies are always very worried about their brand image, so they are not interested in any negative publicity.
Maybe your country is different, but I've only met one, and he initially studied graphic design. The other day at work I overheard a dev talking about his personal website, saying "people expect it to look good -- they don't understand that I'm a developer, not a designer." So I don't think we're quite there yet.
I don't think we need a new word for this -- this is just regular proprietary software. Renaming it only confuses matters, and does not eliminate any of the downsides.
> About complexity, what you're saying is true, but I think "once your cluster is running" is making a lot of assumptions about what is actually running in the cluster in terms of infra and what workloads you can run there.

Already answered in a way:

> Can this be automated? Sure, but I'd rather automate my cluster provisioning.

If I need more computational power or a specific 3rd-party service that I don't have available at this point, I simply tear down my current cluster and deploy it elsewhere.
Why Blockchain Technology Is the Solution to the World’s Banking System Problems
Dominant attribute? Or simply the one they want people to believe about themselves. The dominant for at least some seems to be being able to tolerate their own excessively vile behaviour.
It would be foolish to show your hand for few pennies.
That's all sorts of insane. I have a few really fun photos of police officers in London during Pride this year — rainbows painted on their arms and/or faces, posing for photos with visitors, etc. That's very much my expectation for how police should act.
They work mostly with children in my country.
> using it for anything less than dozens of machines is overkill

The question isn't really whether you need dozens of machines, it's whether you can foresee eventually maybe needing dozens of machines.

Remember the bad old days when people said that relational databases were worthless because they "don't scale", that using Mongo and other NoSQL databases were practically a necessity for doing anything modern and "web-scale" because otherwise after you got your big break and you got popular you would need to keep up with all the new traffic and not crash? A lot of engineers have this tendency to worry about scalability long before it's ever a problem. Something about the delusions of grandeur incurred by people who got into engineering because they were inspired by great people building big things.

Starting out by running Kubernetes on a three-node cluster is actually the correct call for a small project if you can reasonably foresee needing to elastically scale your cluster in the future, and don't want to waste days or weeks porting to Kubernetes down the line to deal with your scalability problems that you foresaw having in the first place.

Again, that doesn't mean that Kubernetes is right for every hobbyist project. But there is definitely a (small) subset of hobbyist projects for which it is not overkill.
Plenty of not-handsome actors out there, even historically.
Humans have a bias to root out and punish 'cheaters.'

Some cognitive tasks become magically easier if we reframe them in terms of cheating. We seem to be hard wired for this.[1]

It's not a question of logic at all, but of human nature.

This is why it seems unfair to us when people 'use robots' to do their work.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wason_selection_task#Policing_...
I actually laughed when I read that this morning.
One of Bloomberg's more eloquent moments.
Did they name this mutation/condition? Something I could google to find out what kind of genetics test should I do.
hard to tease out when people have very different motivations.

rationally, i understand the importance of education, but emotionally, i found it a bit odd that i was paying to do work. so i always did the minimum required to get a B or low A, except on programming assignments where i wanted to prove to myself that i was the best. i usually had the highest project average in the class.

once i got myself into a position where i actually get paid to work, i didn't have much trouble getting motivated.
I agree with the premise of all what you and others are saying, but for the sake of fairness we should not eliminate the size of the population from the equation
I'm pretty sure it already started and was shutdown by iOS 12.1(beta) where it's fixed by Apple.
> Look at what was Yahoo for an example -- for a while the stock was worth less than just the value of their Alibaba shares, meaning the stock market attributed a negative value to what was left of Yahoo.

That is not what the situation meant.

Yahoo was trading at less than their book value per share. The vast majority of their book value was the share of Alibaba the company owned. This asset was not generating revenue for Yahoo, nor was it a liquid investment that Yahoo could convert into cash whenever it wanted to. There may have also been other conditions on sale of the stake that meant, in at last some circumstances, the liquidation value of the stake was significantly less than the paper value on the books.

Therefore, it gets discounted by the market. Since it comprised such a large portion of Yahoo's book value, the size of the discount was greater than the value of Yahoo's operations, leading to a price/book ratio less than 1. Yahoo's other operations still had positive value.
Your kids hate your smartphone addiction
What was the point of this? To rant?

Anyway, I ran into this issue where I have hundreds of people visiting my website daily, but any web dev complains about my UI-

"Fascinating concept, but site looks like its from 2000"

Does it matter what the trendy look is? I believe as long as its useful, it should be fine? Idk if I should care.
I’m not sure who’s downvoting you, but it sure isn’t managers who’s paid for people getting re-educated in asp, then mvc and razor, then web-api, then xamarin, then core 1, then core 2 and that’s just to name a few.

Hell, it’s still not easy for people to deploy a .net core web api and run it in an IIS installed with basic settings. You can laugh at it, but that’s 80% of the damn workforce who doesn’t know how to do that.

I mean, the JS environment changes, but I haven’t had to pay for anyone getting reschooled since we swapped to JS.
WhatsApp Blog – Why we don't sell ads
Right. My boys all achieved tests in grade school that varied from 100% to 3%. My wife worried that something was 'wrong' with them. I assured her by noting, its easy to not care about a test and get 3%. Its essentially impossible to accidentally get the 100% score
Capability: the ReaderT pattern without boilerplate
NSLs require secrecy not lying.
Those VISA/MasterCard rules can't be universal because there's at least one bank issuing merchant terminals that run Android and take the PIN on the touchscreen:

https://www.commbank.com.au/business/merchant-services/eftpo...
Its important of course - Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Michael Dell were all the same guy - family situation, education, opportunity.

Yet there were thousands just like them, that didn't succeed. The difference? Persistence, I think.
This is interesting in how vehemently all the companies are denying everything. I am pretty clueless about how the feds work so I'll ask: is it possible they would be violating secrecy laws or leaking classified info if they acknowledge this really happened? Could they already be under NDAs or whatever the equivalent is in the national security world?

Or is it simply a matter of their shareholders having lofty expectations about tapping the biggest market in the world (China) and saying anything that angers China is the worst thing you could possibly do from a PR perspective?
> They get wiped, X-rayed, disassembled and checked, including any accessory (chargers, mice, etc.).

Given how sophisticated these attacks can be, I'd think they'd issue disposable equipment to be destroyed on return, like a cheap netbook or something. I don't see how you could trust an individual viewing a simple X-ray scan to detect some extra microchip the size of a signal conditioning coupler.
Path is shutting down
> Instead their revenues are maintained via tickets, fines, and property seizures.

How can this be anything but a case of extreme moral hazard? They sound indistinguishable from the mob.
> They attacked the Base Management Controller.

Do you know this, or are you speculating?
It sounds different from that: she worked at all. It didn't take particular persistence after all - you can get a degree by simply showing up.
I think one issue is that, like VR, one bad actor sours the consumer appetite for the entire concept. I think a safer road for GM is to become the de facto A+ supplier of tech that works well than for 2/3 of the legacy industry to have janky half-working sorta-dangerous solutions in 2025.
Well, this explains why all those chipmaker acquisitions failed/were rejected on National Security Grounds.

It would be whole lot harder to find these modifications if this was on the silicon itself.
That's quite the achievement.

They also reached this amount of views faster than the others nearing 3B views.

As a 'fun' side-note, it was actually banned in Malaysia: https://money.cnn.com/2017/07/20/media/malaysia-ban-despacit...
There seems to be a total lack, from our regulators/politicians about even establishing a floor on self-driving car.
That certainly will go well.
One community blindly following, and the other following blindly.
Great summary. I was really surprised when I went to the NACL conference in 2016 and most of the NLP papers were deep learning papers. I don’t believe that deep learning models will get us anywhere near to AGI but on the other hand, I think we are just getting started to explore how far deep learning will get us. If I told myself in 2016 what I would be doing at work in 2018 using RNNs and GANs, I would not have believed it. It seems like surprising breakthroughs occur on at least a weekly basis now.
The results are combined with a polygraph test to improve the randomness...
Reading the comments on that site: don't they have even the most basic spam filtering/moderation in place?
> Easier than ssh’ing in and running ps?

Have you ever been thrown into an unknown environment? SSH'ing where exactly? Oh but this runs at hosting partner X? That runs at hosting partner Y? Oh but this service is actually behind a reverse proxy running on box Z. Oh you need to RDP to a jump-server to SSH to those machines? Documentation? You mean these outdated Word documents and Excel sheets? And down the rabbit-hole you go. Fun!

And don't say that doesn't happen, I'm a freelance sysadmin - and am exactly in an environment like that right now, it's not the first, and won't be the last. To get a complete picture here, I needed 2 whole months for everything outside the Openshift clusters.

The stuff running on openshift was pretty simple, there is the master, here are your credentials - and that's it. The rest is pretty easy to figure out if you've worked with k8s/openshift. The biggest problem was knowing if the app in question ran on Openshift or somewhere else.
That sentence is not in this article. Perhaps you meant to post it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18138328
The article is from 2017. Views seem to be at ~5.5B now.
> I understand it gets expensive quickly, but I really want to see the cost difference of Heroku vs the time spent for the engineering team to manage all the complexities of devops, automated deploys, scaling, and I'm not even mentioning all the data/logging/monitoring things that Heroku allows to add with 1 click.

Well, if you use a k8s cluster on GKE for example, you will have literally all those things by default. Not even a click needed.

IMO running your own Kubernetes cluster for a company is insanity unless you have a very good reason to do so.
Imagine you want to simplify the code, and you hate passing values around, so you write a framework that allows you to write something like:

@GetMeALogger(andCallIt=loggy)
void foo() {
loggy.logError("no cheese");
}

Where @GetMeALogger does some magic at compile time to pipe in some kind of logger class based on various config options. Then to unit test it, you use different config than production.
That assumes that 1) the intelligence community has the power to stop it and 2) that Apple believes this to be the case and 3) that Apple is confident that the intel community would use that power to protect them. That seems like a reach to me.
"Apple has never found malicious chips, “hardware manipulations” or vulnerabilities purposely planted in any server. Apple never had any contact with the FBI or any other agency about such an incident. We are not aware of any investigation by the FBI, nor are our contacts in law enforcement."

Bloomberg's article and Apple's statement can't both be right.
> Clearly, using the gas pedal to turn off auto-pilot is not good enough.

It's a trade-off: if the auto-pilot is doing something unsafe, it is better to have the human intervene immediately (this might mean stepping hard on the gas-pedal, or braking, or turning, depending on the scenario, which is impossible to know in advance). The assumption is that the software/data are not perfect (yet) and the human knows what's best. I don't think "don't trust the human test-driver" is one of the current parameters, especially since that is their literal job.
Thanks for all the feedback. Will have a look through them all
A.I. Might Have Met Its Ethical Match in California Senate Bill 1001
Online learning falls under the same umbrella as doing a degree part-time, but provide even more flexibility.
> Exactly. I've read a story about a US police officer (a former marine) who managed to defuse an armed situation, and got reprimanded or fired for it.

Citation needed. I can't think of any peaceful fix that would get a reprimand unless other stuff fucked up badly behind the scenes.
I was going to reflexively downvote this but it doesn't quite rise to the level of bad faith that I look for before I downvote.

But, I'd ask you to recheck your impressions every couple of years, especially if a technology seems to be gaining popularity as opposed to dying. Stubborn and irrational corporate loyalty and manufactured hype are not the only reasons a technology stays alive, quality does play a role sometimes.

.NET these days, especially with core, has a focus on power, performance, portability, and a sleek user experience. C# is a widely loved language that has a plethora of good stable tooling around it, and an intelligently evolving featureset that enables terse, expressive, functional-if-you-want-it coding. I think, like Kotlin, it's very well suited to writing "functional core, imperative shell" apps. You can also use it to write bloated J2EE-style lasagna-code, but no one's forcing you to do that.

As for Blazor itself, it's similar to React/Vue/etc., but in C#. Writing complex frontend apps is hard even with TS and the big frameworks, and I can't think of why a new entrant with a statically typed language (with types at runtime!) that's still web-native would be a bad thing. As for startup time, hopefully they'll improve that, but you wouldn't use Blazor for a simple app anyway.
> We could not measure all possible angular momentums but it was possible to measure one or two that would not be known to the attacker.

You only need to measure three angular momentums, all other can be calculated. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_of_inertia#Motion_in_sp...

"This shows that the inertia matrix can be used to calculate the moment of inertia of a body around any specified rotation axis in the body."

On the attacker side, they only need to make sure three angular momentums match.
Not to mention that these back doors can be easily disabled, e.g intels high assurance mode, but normal "owners" are specifically not allowed to disable them.

The whole thing is a fucking mess.