skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Cost in developer time, yes. Cost in latency and performance? No! That's the whole point of async I/O: to improve latency, performance, and scalability.

It's much harder to rewrite software to use async I/O than it is to write it to use async I/O in the first place. It's also much harder to write software using async I/O than sync I/O. Therefore it's all about economics and forecasting. If you can forecast needing to scale soon enough, then start with async I/O, otherwise increase revenue and profits first then rewrite. For many companies developer time is a larger item on their budgets than the cost of extra servers and power and all that, which is why we have so much thread-per-client software -- it's a natural outcome.
We don't have 100, but definitely more than 20. A quick look at a random node from our cluster:

- 3x ingress pods (1 for an internal load balancer, 2 for an external load balancer)

- 1x cert-manager

- 2x production version of internal app01

- 2x staging version of internal app02

- 1x fluentd

- 1x elastalert

- 1x kubewatch

- 1x prometheus node exporter

- 1x redis for sentry

- 1x sentry web

- 2x sentry worker

- 4x sourcegraph language servers (there are 9 language servers running across the 4 nodes, this node seems to especially like them)

- 1x thelounge

- 1x staging version of app02

- 2x production version of app02

- 1x kube proxy

- 1x kubedns

- 1x couchdb (small footprint just for testing some things)

the node is just over half provisioned and we are due to add another node to the cluster soon.
And think of what someone who was Hitler-like could do with all of this data that we send these companies (and governments). Just take one example of "rounding up homosexuals"... it couldn't be easier to find out who they are in today's world. Someone knows the products they buy, the type of porn they watch (if they do), the "friends" they communicate with (and what was said), the places they visit or have visited in the past and a myriad of other things all time and date stamped. We just need to look at how China is integrating this type of data into the tech the gov't and police forces are using, ie "social credit system." The data already exists... it's just a matter of how it's used. Seriously, imagine what more Hitler could have/would have done if the Nazis had access to the type of data that is "freely" available today... This data doesn't go away. It can be used at anytime in the future, when "views" change. What's ok now, might not be at some point later on. Let your mind wander a little. Think. We are basically inputting every detail of our lives into "evidence." This isn't a right wing/left wing thing. Socialists would love to make sure you're "in-line" with the party as much as a Nazi would. Again, look at what China is currently doing. Times change, and with that so do the beliefs and morals. What I fear most is how our current data will be used by these future "regimes", however you want to label them. Soon, all of this data will be more about control than it currently is. We're debating stupid annoying ads. Think of the other more serious ramifications with this data in the "wrong hands."
Like target figuring out your daughter is pregnant:
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine/shopping-habits....
Maybe but I did "waste" countless hours with it.
Yea. This pattern is called BeyondCorp or Zero Trust. Google was the first company to pioneer it but adopting this architecture internally. Only now companies are slowly moving to this and vendors are creating products and services to support this architecture.

https://cloud.google.com/beyondcorp/
This is an article about the economist who coined 'meritocracy'. Not a fighting ace.
When people blame things on MBAs here, they tend to not elaborate with specifics either.

MBAs are used as straw man punching bags on HN. Anything that goes wrong with a company where there’s the perception that the “obvious technical solution” was ignored, is blamed on this nebulous cabal of MBAs, who are apparently hired in droves just to sabotage their employer. For some reason it’s totally ok to vaguely blame the business folks.
Terrafugia transitions to market
AI tool automatically reveals how to write apps that drain less battery
Death of Google is exaggerated. Patient is more likely alive than dead.
Sure if it had metrics VCs like it could easily be a Unicorn
I've reopened it for editing if you still want to do that.
Are your clothes wrecking the planet?
I'm not sure why you're downvoted, except the lack of citation. Your recollection is correct, it's from the Joe Fitzpatrick interview with Risky Business, which was quoted by Apple Insider. (Fitzpatrick was named as a source in the original Bloomberg article.)

Long story short, that photo does not show the device involved.

"Robertson was unable to produce photographic evidence of the chips in question, saying they were described to him by protected sources. Indeed, Robertson in September asked Fitzpatrick what a "signal amplifier or coupler" looks like, suggesting the publication narrowed the attack package down to that particular component. Fitzpatrick sent Robertson a link to a very small signal coupler sold by Mouser Electronics. "Turns out that's the exact coupler in all the images in the story," Fitzpatrick said.

https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/10/08/security-research...
Their products aren't compelling anymore -- they're living off the momentum of prior greatness. As soon as someone else has a compelling, exclusive phone feature, Apple's likely to collapse. A lot (LOT) of their product demand is from fickle customers that would leave them quite easily. There's no lock in, and there's no reason to be loyal -- it's a fashion brand.

As for privacy, I think you'd have to show that those customers don't have facebook accounts to take that seriously.
Netcraft confirms it?
> When they see you don't have AppleCare (or AppleCare+, or AppleCare++, whatever they want to call it) on a device they will deliberately cause that device to malfunction using a device-specific OTA update that causes things like dead pixels, and other visible obstructions that make the device slightly less usable than it was before.

Citation? I haven't seen any indication that this has happened to any of the Apple devices I've used, over quite a number of years.
Or just being a passive viewer of what the system is managing
How to Make a Raspberry Pi Torrent Box
Depends on what you want out of it. My biggest loss with G+ sunsetting is that there were some decent technical groups. I've not yet managed to get addicted to Reddit, but I'm guessing that's going to be as good as I'll get.
I'm starting to see more domain-specific Discord and Slack instances being spun up. While great for discussion, they're not so good for long-form informational posts...

In the end, I'll go wherever the rest of the folks who share my interests go. It (hopefully) wont be Facebook, but there appears to be no other far-and-away frontrunner at this time.
"In operational testing, DOD routinely found mission-critical cyber vulnerabilities in
systems that were under development, yet program officials GAO met with
believed their systems were secure and discounted some test results as
unrealistic. "
It was a bug that exposed data but no evidence a breach. The right wing has it our for Google and why we get the garbage articles.
I've tried brown noise a while ago and it certainly didn't work for me. Being stressed out by a constant background noise is not the same as silence.
Traveling across interstellar distances is not sci fi, at least not the act itself. What is sci-fi is an engine capable of accelerating for a sufficiently long period of time. Something people often mistake is that the speed of light is a hard cap on travel rates. It's more complex. More educated individuals tend to think that as objects approach the speed of light, their mass approaches infinity - that is correct from the perspective of an observer. But from the perspective of something continually approaching the speed of light, there is no effect on your mass. This is where time dilation and space contraction come into the picture.

Anyhow, setting aside all of that stuff the important thing is that if we can manage to generate engines capable of creating fairly modest acceleration (e.g. 1g) then interstellar travel is completely possible within a single human lifetime. There is a calculator here [1]. The relativistic effects are exponential but to give some examples:

- 100 light years of travel = 9 years of 1g acceleration

- 1000 light years of travel = 13 years of 1g acceleration

- 1 million light years of travel = 26 years of 1g acceleration

- 15 billion light years of travel = 45 years of 1g acceleration

To be clear this gets into the fun time games of relativity though. Though you may be able to travel 15 billion light years in one human lifetime, from the perspective of an at rest observer (such as everybody back on Earth) - 45 billion years of time will indeed pass during your 45 year journey. So, for instance, the sun will have long since turned into a red giant by the time you arrive. This leads to really interesting 'paradoxes'. You could leave Earth on your relativistic starship towards some system billions of light years away. And when you get there you find that the system is completely colonized and hyper modern. Earthlings that left a million years after you got there first and colonized the system millions of years ago. They traveled at 2g acceleration... Reality is much stranger than any sort of fiction.

But anyhow of course the issue is just discovering a technology to enable years of 1g acceleration. And while that may be far away, I think few would argue it's something that will ultimately prove to be impossible.

[1] - http://convertalot.com/relativistic_star_ship_calculator.htm...
Microsoft Has a Software Quality Problem
Ironically, the site is down.
The catch is that on DOD systems, encryption is very difficult to add. That is, to be certified by the NSA and compatible with the military key infrastructure. So its better to avoid mentioning it unless its forced on you. Better is a relative term here. I mean, in terms of cost and effort to add. Not security.
> How is this any different than namespace_init(); functions from C?

It's not; presumably that's the point. C isn't exactly famous for its support for data hiding and enforcing invariants.
Potentially. What's it doing and what's its value to the world and the corporation it exists within?

What if you have a product that brings a great deal of value to many people, but for various reasons you can't collect much revenue on it. You could be operating at a loss, but still producing great value. In that case, if there were a way to cover that $20MM/year gap (corporation sinks profits from other divisions into it, for instance) it could be worthwhile.

Or perhaps that business that's losing money brings in customers who go to the other divisions and make them profitable. That is, its return is indirect and hard to measure (though not necessarily hard to verify).
The funny thing about macroeconomics is that everybody is a critic of it for different reasons. Non-economists might hate it because it tells them things that they find paradoxical or hard to swallow. Microeconomists might criticize it because it lacks empirical rigor and the economy as a whole is intractably complex to model simplistically.

Even macroeconomists criticize it. Why? Because it's a field that is legitimately hard to research and understand due to its complex nature and chaotic feedback loops. It gets manipulated by politicians seeking authority for their half-baked ideas. And people discredit the entire profession because they focus way too much on controversial political hotbuttons like business cycle theory, and subsequently use that criticism as a justification for ignoring research that is sound and has broad consensus even among academics of wildly differing ideologies. Their job sucks, and they know it.
I don't understand why you are confused. It's the difference in intent that you mention in your last paragraph that Apple is referring to when they say 'purposefully planted'. That's they key allegation by Bloomberg, that these are demonstrably purposeful malicious hardware features.
> the new focus on privacy is going to win them even more loyalty.

This seems to be a common talking point, but I'm not convinced it is a real driver outside of a small niche of within the niche of software people. Privacy is not something regular people really are aware of or give a damn about.

The biggest driver towards getting an iPhone that I see is shutting up friends who whine because you're a "green person" in their iMessage.
Maybe some time will come where they go from fashion-only-brand to consumer and/or budget brand?
Sure it could hurt their image, but if they keep going into that privacy direction it could possibly give them A LOT more customers, who just can't (or don't want to) afford apple right now.
They'd probably helicopter the IT guy in to reset it but still I'm going to posit that they have a procedure for this that may not require physical access and may have remote-access via a secure line.
A blog that is 100% free, can serve any traffic and is unhackable
Missing some T-Mobile LTE Bands. (edit, the linked website had the incorrect lte band information)

No IP68 so I have to worry about spills and rain again.

MicroSD and 3.5mm holes to fill with dust/water.

It looks good, but not quite what I want.
I actually adopted GOPATH for everything. I use https://github.com/motemen/ghq to quickly clone non-Go projects into the ~/src/github.com/user/project style paths.

But… I don't like Go itself (anymore).

It's not just the 'if err != nil', it's more the general attitude/philosophy from which it comes. Go is anti-intellectual, the designers basically don't respect the user. "You're too stupid to use generics/Result<A,B>/monads/whatever" is what it feels like they think of you.

Go internals are more infuriating than Go language though…

Especially the Plan9-based custom assembler. It truly is a horrific atrocity. I've had to deal with it two times:

1. That assembler does not support all instructions and even addressing modes (!) of amd64, so people have had to create hacks like https://github.com/minio/c2goasm to run asm functions without the overhead of cgo. Please actually read that project's README, but tl;dr it assembles your code using a normal assembler and STICKS THE BINARY CODE INTO A GO ASSEMBLY FILE AS HEX CONSTANTS. This hack actually didn't work for me when I tried to use some SIMD code, so I had to resort to cgo with its call overhead.

2. I also tried (and failed) to port the Go runtime to FreeBSD/aarch64. This was the last straw, this is what made me actually hate Go.
I'm sorry but I can't take someone seriously who is talking about the "evil Google haters", it's just silly. There are good reasons to have issues with some of the things Google does.
Google + Facebook both grew out of singular products that kept making lots of money without requiring further deep investment -- just scaling, maintenence, and filling in feature gaps. They grew to keep investors happy about them having only one cash cow. They don't know how to do that.

I'd prefer Google stay its old self and they make Alphabet the primary growth vehicle. But people need to show impact to get promoted, so you can't very well leave a good product alone. So now they have the mess of an organization they have now.

The management angle from the article is interesting. Google originally didn't want management and there has always been a "necessary evil" attitude towards it there. So management was given an unexpected free pass on being evil. They weren't required to Googley and got hired from other places that were distinctly not so (e.g., IBM).
Yes, but how to do error handling correctly with Go? My Go code crashes.
Yeah, no kidding. I had the same reaction.
Not sure why you're getting down voted, deliberately exploiting corporate status by defaulting on loans in various contexts is or certainly should be, a well known exploit of the financial system. There´s several papers written in the 90´s and early 00´s that are quite depressing in terms of how they nail failures in both economic understanding and regulation, that will be major contributors to the subsequent crashes.
US military strategy and tactics are much more reliant on high-tech advantages than other countries though. If everyone’s tech all goes down, we’re going to be hit a lot harder.
The smallest plans could send the picture as a postcard. Should be cheaper than a letter even.

Maybe even good for a first version because it you just have to print double-sided, but no envelope mess.
I thought DevOps folks are people who take an engineering mindset to operations, i.e. with both skills of software engineering and system administration? What you're describing sounds like someone with neither skillset.
> What dependency management system doesn't allow you to do this if you insist?

Dependency management systems that require you to hunt for where they stashed whatever they sucked down based on the versions you listed in some file might, in some cases, make this particular task more complex than it strictly needs to be.
Its a little bit of a stretch to call it ATT or T-mobile compatible. It only supports 2 of the 6 LTE bands T-mobile uses, and ATT is similar.
Free is never free... the phrase is "at no cost to you" ;)
My guess is that the story was pushed by those that compete against Supermicro. Possibly due to their own security issues that have not yet been disclosed.
>Let's assume it's true: Does Apple have a choice other than cover-up?

Yes, they can state that they detected a hardware based security intrusion and have mitigated it.

Bear in mind according to the Bloomberg article the government and several other companies know all about this already as well. If the Bloomberg article is true there are thousands of these compromised motherboards out in the wild at multiple companies. There is no way on earth Apple could ever get away with a denial, so why do it?
Thanks, the reference went right over my head. Was the movie any good?
Isn't consensus that Google's phone sales volume is pretty low? I don't think that they are well-known in non-tech circles; although I would agree that's not about new features / presentation.
Why are we putting all of this storage into phones? Are you looking to keep all of your photos on your phone so when you break it/get it stolen you lose all your photos?

It just doesn't make sense. I download more movies than I can watch more music than I can listen to for flights, more apps than I use, take more videos and photos than I will ever use. The google photos app auto-deletes my old backed up videos/photos as needed unlike on Apple devices where you have to delete the folder yourself. I never run out at 64GB.
I know this might be surprising to people who grew up in certain areas where scumbag business practices are the norm but the total number of people who run their small businesses like scumbags is very low compared to those that don't. It costs society more to make everyone play to the lowest common denominator than it does to clean up after the scumbags.
Are there any calls that check the UID before performing a privileged operation? It seems to me like this would be exploitable, since modifying a kernel data structure like this is surely not intended.
Yeah, caught that bit of gatekeeping: "I, Poobah of Tech, am here to say that Google might suck. However, all of the people who have said before me that Google might suck, well, they suck."

As for Google, considering everything that's come out in the last year, they've gone from a company I always wanted to work at to a company I cannot imagine working at.
It's just the converse: the probability of not picking the given number was (and still is) 100%, but you did pick it, so what "had to" happen with 100% probability, didn't.

(Maybe that's the meaning of the perceived difference between the real world and statistics. Playing a lottery doesn't make sense, but people do win!)
> The Exile never tried to hide their ideological bent or claim any sort of objectivity. You can read their work, disagree with their point of view, but still respect the reporting.

Not sure why I should ever respect reporting that doesn't even attempt to be objective. If you are not aware of your biases, they have a tendency to irreparably color your "facts".
That Python is fundamentally more readable is a myth. Unless by "readable" you mean that any Python program is superficially more visually similar to other Python programs than are programs in other languages. Syntactic white space will do that.

In comparing Python, Ruby and Perl, each relies to a certain extent on symbols in the code to express meaning. Python uses symbols very sparingly, and those it does use are either very much like other languages or established patterns from mathematics, even going so far as to ban braces for indicating structure--nothing is exotic. Perl is the opposite extreme, with to sigils encode variable context (which is a concept foreign to other language) and complex regular expression and quoting schemes built into to language. Ruby sits very much in the middle between these languages.

The use of all non-word symbols to densely encode meaning helps reduce code size at the cost of apparent readability. That's why you think Ruby is "more eloquent". Perl can be even more expressive than Ruby, but it's compactness can intimidate people, leading to defensive "humor".

Real readability comes from good structure and explicit code, whatever the language. It is especially important for developers using dynamic languages to document the contents of their data-structures.

If Python tends to be readable, it comes from a culture that values readability and focuses heavily on choosing a single, consistent style. Not from any inherent technical factor.

This is a nice piece on code readability in real life terms: http://www.pgbovine.net/python-unreadable.htm
(TLDR: code may be readable in over small sections, but what really matters is whether you can understand the whole program. If you get lazy, you will make a mess. Be explicit.)
Geez, Nvidia could call them, "so we hear you're interested in realistic rendering"?

I guess it doesn't need to be real time, so no super graphic cards are needed... or can it be real time? If a website (e.g. a hotel booking site) uses an ad network with "remarketing" (for this example let's say Google), it can tell Google you just looked for a hotel in Venice, and the next site you visit that has Google's banner ads will advertise "Hotel rooms in Venice!". Imagine looking up sweaters on a clothing site, flipping to Netflix, and an extra walks by that looks like you wearing a sweater that you looked at a minute ago...
Someday we’ll have our own tech forward vegan commune! This is a big dream of mine!!
Well, in cities, a house might get destroyed to make room for a new building, and it is often easiest just to tear it down and build on top of it than to cart away all the old building materials. Not to say valuable building stones and other things aren't simply reused in other structures. Or, a lot can happen in 1,000 years like floods (depositing silt), earthquakes (making lots of rubble), wars, and fires, that would wreck a building. Not sure what your CO2 angle is though.

This is the jist of it:

https://www.sciencefocus.com/planet-earth/why-do-we-have-to-...