skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No it isn't.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/17/high-court-q...

And even when it was, you weren't allowed to break encryption to do so.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140328/07561926719/uk-fi...

Indeed, in some cases even importing (i.e downloading from a foreign server) software to do so is a criminal offence in the UK and carries a potential prison sentence.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/296ZB
In Fedora, Rust applications don't have bundled dependencies, but since Rust doesn't provide a stable ABI, we statically link the libraries into the application for now.
At first I just read bits of the TikZ manual, but then decided I'd understand things properly if I read from the beginning and got the foundations.

I don't have a single source for LaTeX. Most of the LaTeX I know (which is quite a bit by this point) comes from places like Stack Exchange, which I get to by doing a search to solve a specific problem. I tend to read lots of answers to get an understanding, rather than just using the first one that works; there are often multiple ways of doing things, some better, some worse, some obsolete, some leading to a whole new area of knowledge.

The main thing is just to do lots of LaTeX, and it helps to do similar things over and over, improving how you do it each time. E.g. I've written so many maths exams that I have things like mark positioning, mark totalling, the question table on the cover, spare blank pages, starting questions on even numbered pages etc. all completely automated - but it didn't start that way at all, I just make it a bit better each time. Improving the same lecture notes and tutorials every semester is another.

Working with and improving someone else's LaTeX code can help a lot, even (or especially) if your reaction is "Wow, that's awful! There must be a better way!".
If you have a patch, and others know how
to make it better, why would you forgo
that chance to learn something?

If I have patched the code to scratch an itch of mine, by the time I submit the patch my itch is scratched - no subsequent changes will contribute to scratching my itch, no matter how good they are.

At the same time, many open source projects are subject to constraints or requirements that are entirely reasonable from their perspective but that take time and don't much help or educate me as a one-off contributor.

For example:

* Paperwork like contributor license agreements

* Supporting obsolete (or nearly obsolete) platforms, and avoiding modern language features to maintain that support.

* Compatibility with project features I don't use, but other people do.

* Getting all the integration and test features of a finicky build pipeline to work, not just those needed to make a build.

* Correctly dividing up changes in multiple areas into multiple patches reflecting the fact different changes will need to be reviewed by different people.

* Requirements like code style and automated test coverage that contribute statistically to lower bug counts at the project level, but that don't reveal any bugs in my specific contribution.

* Code structure issues specific to the project, which as a one-shot contributor it isn't productive for the project to educate me about.

* Conflicts with planned future changes that aren't really documented very well anywhere - or that are documented only in places I didn't find, like the archives of a high-traffic mailing list.
The author of this article didn't bother to read even a summary of the GDPR law. It doesn't matter what the user consents to, you cannot use their personal data ad hoc. You need to justify its collection, storage and transfer to the regulator, not the user. This is in contrast to the ill thought out cookie law where websites could get away with it by irritating consent banners.

Sort of like, but not exactly the same as, those consent forms you sign when you go river rafting. They do not legally protect the rafting company from negligence. In fact, they're almost a waste of paper.
Crashing the economy has historically been the most efficient way of reducing CO2 production.
Any more of this nonsense and I'll get some Azure credits and start doing Youtube videos of the slowness and the crashes :)
Is this made as a cluster of independent programs or is this actually a monolith, where you can access all functionality from some python method or class?
Polar bears can swim all summer while they wait for the ice to return.
Hi t3rabytes, I think Basecamps values are pretty cool!

How would I go about applying for a job? I am a full stack web developer.
Growing food yourself is one thing. But that's not what we're talking about.

Eating food grown and prepared by other people in a community of 70+ people, in exchange for your labor in other areas, and paying no tax on any of it.... tax dodge.

How many people does it have to be, in your opinion, before it's a tax dodge?
Could we have prevented the extinction of the dinosaur with the knowledge we have now? If not, why worry?
I like the app but I can't help but think that teenagers already do a lot of stupid things these days, do we really need to encourage them more?
As an iOS developer I so hated getting into Objective-C code written by Java developers. They really don't get the principle of dynamic languages and they are too fond of making shitloads of classes for everything.
This was always going to be the case. Google benefits from having a direct relationship with the customer, meaning that consent is relatively trivial to get. None of these third party tracker companies have that relationship, so rely on securing opt ins on a piecemeal basis. This is why a large number of the third party tracker companies all shut up shop in Europe in the months before GDPR.
Since consumers have limited amounts of money, increasing the cost of everything will lead to less consumption, which will lead to less carbon being emitted. Furthermore, any company that can produce the same product with less carbon emissions will be at an economic advantage.
> Wouldn't it be better if the app only had permission to write to an actual user documents/data directory...

Well, would it? If the app went rogue, it could still encrypt all your documents.

Either way, dealing with that is not the job of package management or software installers. They can not solve the fundamental design issues of software that has been written without a finer permissions model in mind.
From what I've heard from people with Google and FB accounts, both basically ignored the law and presented their users with take it or leave it pop-ups on their online properties. That's why they're getting sued...
The moment you call sbrk or mmap, you're outside of standard C, so no. Treating a pointer as an integer in order to mess with the bits is also a violation.

Aside from that, the style used here is probably OK. It is hard to say what exactly would trigger the gcc bugs, but I'm pretty sure that a recent gcc would be OK for this code.
If we had detected the asteroid sufficiently early we probably could have diverted it.
Modern Infotainment systems is cars, where you can replicate your entire phone screen on front console or may be Heads-Up display can cause severe driver distraction.
Ask HN: What material can be used as carving board?
For Stamp carving. Better if they are available easily.
Not terribly surprising.

The purpose of GDPR wasn't to hurt large companies, but to protect citizens.
>> The first scam was Prolog: The language is not really declarative.

The language is not fully declarative. It's something like 90% declarative, but that is not enough to satisfy the purists, who demand 100% purity, or else!

... or else they will stick to their C++'s and their Javas and SQLs, that are, oh, about 0.01% declarative. Because that makes sense, right? If you can't have a perfectly, purely declarative language, throw out the baby with the bathwater and go back to your purely imperative languages.

That kind of criticism has never made any sense and it doesn't make sense now.

>> But the scam is that if you want to do anything serious beyond your stupid positive first-order queries, you need more.

You can't do anything serious with Datalog? Sure you can- you can do machine learning with Datalog:

https://github.com/metagol/metagol
Market share is only part of the picture. What happened to the size of the market in the EU after GDPR?
In some ways and some ways not. Making a global change is much harder in a dynamic language. However static languages by their very nature tie the code together more tightly.

It is much easier to decouple something in a dynamic language. The re-factoring needs in a dynamic language is thus entirely different.
I totally agree about talking to co-workers. Another tip in the same direction which helps me:

I try to create collaboration setting so that I don't work alone on a task I don't like. For example, I tell my work mate "I need to finish this document, do you have time tomorrow afternoon to read it and give me feedback?". That creates a social obligation to get the task done.
IMO that's a well made question, I think it's good to ask to.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18182657 is an example ITT WRT computer game writing.
> Fundamentally this also seems like a "betting with the Mayans" type scenario too. Either the doomsayers are right and we're screwed. If so, you'll be right but who cares? We're still screwed. You're probably better off just hoping things will work out because, honestly, I think there's a pretty decent chance they will.

I think you are fundamentally missing the point of the question. The question is what we can do to prevent climate change, not how we should align our beliefs not to worry about it.

> So it's kind of sad that a lot of the larger fauna is doomed but you're not going to change people's appetites for rhino horns, fish bladders, tiger oil or pangolin dishes. Then again, maybe future genetics can restore some or all of those species.

This perfectly exemplifies my problem with this attitude.

You call this "levelheaded optimism", but you're basically throwing your hands up hoping for someone to apply some sort of sci-fi solution to the problem at some point in the future. Calling for Jurassic Park to restore extinct species is the opposite of levelheaded. To say that there's nothing we can do about it now is really just thinly veiled defeatism and not at all optimistic.

Meanwhile, for example, the demand and supply of rhino horns is decreasing overall, not because people are content with speculating about how someone else in a future generation will solve the problem, but because deliberate action is being taken to change the attitudes towards rhino horns, campaigning to educate people about the medicinal myths surrounding them, to destroy smuggled horns and to protect the animals from poachers.

If the people engaging in these actions had just laid back, convinced that someone will be able to beam rhinos from a parallel universe by 2100AD anyway, they'd probably have been extinct by now.
It's worth noting that

realloc(ptr, 0)

behavior is undefined. The vast majority of modern C libraries will implement it as

return free(ptr), NULL;

and it will be documented on man pages as such, but there are systems where this will be equivalent to

return free(ptr), malloc(0);

Furthermore, in theory, this is also permitted:

return NULL;

so as tempting as realloc() might be as a single override for implementing custom allocators, there are some worms.
I'm going to stay a on the meta-discussions level for a bit (all other points in this debate have already been made anyway). Hanlon's Razor is about assuming intent, about railroading others into perceived roles. You bring up interesting points, but they were not part of the article we are responding to. The conclusion was supposed to follow from the earlier arguments given. Within that context there is a big assumption being made.

So what am I being naive about, exactly? Note that I have merely called out the assumptions made by others.
I have not stated anything about Red Hat's intentions myself, so if I'm being perceived as naive about that, it would be making another assumption. EDIT: I suppose the "mistake" wording does imply good faith behavior. But there too: bad faith should be looked out for, tested for, but not presumed about others.
In my previous job, which was security-related, we had to deal with people forgetting their 2FA credentials (and many, many people forgot their credentials, even staff members). The way we did it was thus:

If you had enabled 2FA, it could be disabled/reset by calling support and adequately proving you were the owner of the account. This had to be this way, because, as I said, everyone forgot their 2FA credentials ("my phone fell in the sea and the backup codes were on it").

We also had another checkbox that said "Never, under any circumstances, reset my account. I have stored my backup codes somewhere secure that is not my phone. I understand that, if I lose access, I lose the account."

If the user checked that, then the password/2FA reset system for the admins got disabled for their account. If they lost their 2FA, nobody short of DBAs could reset their account (and DBAs knew not to).

Additionally, we had a screen where you could print a long, random, one-use key that would reset your account. It would come with a nice QR code so you could physically print it on a piece of paper and store it somewhere, and scan it if you ever forgot your 2FA/password, and it would let you access your account.

I should probably write an article about this...
A couple nights ago I tried to force myself to get some coding done ("just a little a day adds up over time"), and woke up to a line of "ssssssssssss" on my screen. I erased it and went straight to bed.
Just do a symbolic execution of the code and prove that your intended behavior holds.

A multisig contract is an utterly trivial program. It is easy to prove correct.
New Phishing Campaign Drops Ursnif into Conversation Threads
Is there any evidence of GDPR having the desired effect for which it was put in place? Is citizens' data being protected more than before?

The second-order effects that everyone predicted are already happening (big tech companies change nothing significant, many small companies shutting down).

The long-term and unforseen second-order effects have yet to bear fruit, as far as I know (please let me know if you've seen anything).
If I go to a random website and they serve third party google ads, I don't have a direct relationship with Google in that scenario. It's not enough to say that because I have a gmail account I consent to being tracked all over the web on every website.
Just a minor thing, but I’m pretty certain Plex are performing all sorts of analysis on your usage.
Ask HN: One cannot disable auto-fill in Chrome?
I think I'm going crazy... I'm using LastPass and Chrome autofill mal-functions on the LastPass site. So I've been trying to disable autofill, but all the locations pointed by help sites on the net are not appearing in my Chrome 69.0.3497.100.

So I cannot disable auto-fill at all! Is this intentional, and coupled with the forceful Chrome sign-in deployed with Chrome 69, as a method to make sure Chrome-as-a-Google-service controls all your web logins? Or am I just paranoid ?
Nitpick, but shouldn't you set the ddof of np.std at 1 when you estimate the variance in your plot_confidence_interval?
If I recall correctly, the default is 0, which makes it a biased estimator. Weird default by the way!

Great article though, definitely learned some useful things!

Edit: Seems like it is, https://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/reference/generated/numpy.s...
Excercise is great but it does matter a little if i would be sticky and smelly.
> that have numerous frameworks built upon

Python has Django though, which is light-years ahead of anything I've seen in the Node ecosystem for backend development.
I bet rafting consent forms are still useful in the sense that they discourage most people with trivial-to-moderate injuries from thinking about holding the company liable.
Heathrow Airport fined £120K for serious failings in data protection practices
1. What if the exchange is down? What if the price is volatile?

2. You can meet up and resolve ANY contract yourselves. That doesn't save escrow fees.
You don’t have a GMail account, though, as there’s no such thing as a GMail account. You have a Google account, and GMail is bundled in as a service.

FWIW - ‘tracked all over the world on every website’ also comes with some significant caveats.
Tell that to the folks over at Etherium Classic.
Anyone surprised? It was clear since the beginning that that’s going to happen...
Hayek : 294

Keynes : 86

Adam Smith : 106
> Worried about how we'll produce all that power? When getting stuff into orbit is sufficiently cheap it'll become economic to put solar collectors in orbit and beam energy back to Earth.

I used to be a big believer in this. But, from a pure waste heat standpoint, if we ever have to worry about having enough area in Earth's surface for solar panels, we have much bigger problems.

We are nowhere near that point now, but given a small but steady exponential growth in the energy supply, we'll get there in a couple hundred years.

However, space based solar power could help with intermittently of solar/wind if battery tech doesn't outpace enonomic orbital launches.
The realistic conclusion is that it's already to late to save the world. There is no way we can keep warming below 1.5 degrees now. Twenty years ago we might have had a chance. In another twenty years of business as usual we're probably looking at 3+ degrees of inevitable change.
Thanks for this. I've been giving it a go for a couple of hours now and it's quite useful.
> Why would I ever agree to let software ALONE enforce a contract? And if there is a human process to override the outcome of the contract, what advantage does it have over a "dumb contract".

The cost of enforcing and collecting on a smart contract is much cheaper. Depending on the dollar amount and use case I can see the advantage.
Sennheiser Momentum Wireless are absolutely with active noise canceling, and that's the model I was talking about when comparing to Bose of course. I wouldn't compare non-anc headphones with anc ones, even though I own non-anc Momentum's too and they're so great that they've even survived being sucked into airport x-ray machine rolls, something I couldn't say about Bose or Sony, that are falling apart on their own.
I had similar happen with my XBox Live account seven years ago: the attacker bought $125 in Microsoft Points using the associated credit card and then immediately transferred the account to Russia under a new email address.

At the time, Microsoft's customer service told me it was impossible for them to return accounts that had been moved internationally. They claimed that they literally didn't have the technical ability to do so, but that they'd file a ticket with engineering.

I figured the account was gone.

To my great surprise, three months later I got CC'd on an email from an engineer closing the ticket, followed by an email from Microsoft customer support with temporary account credentials to reclaim the username. And... that was that. No further follow-up, just "we fixed the system, and now we can transfer your account back to you."
That’s correct. It has the reputation of being one of the worst commuter systems in existence. http://www.bostonherald.com/news/local_coverage/2017/10/data...
We currently provide a full complement of Linux package manager repositories, along with tarballs: https://www.sublimetext.com/docs/3/linux_repositories.html.
> It doesn't matter what the user consents to, you cannot use their personal data ad hoc. You need to justify its collection, storage and transfer to the regulator, not the user.

I think one of the points is that there are very few companies that have the financial resources to do that, one of those companies that can afford it being Google. The next retort is "but then those companies should stop using trackers all-together" which leaves most of those companies that don't have Google's financial resources without ad money, meaning they're most likely to go out of business, practically creating an oligopoly where a handful of companies control most of what's published on the Internet. Granted, we would have gotten there regardless, only that legislation like GDPR is accelerating this process.
Not sure why you are downvoted, but this is a toy allocator.
How is it constructive to say that there's nothing we can do about people's appetites for rhino horns when there's 70 years of evidence of that not being the case? It's not positive, it's an overall defeatist attitude thinly veiled in sci-fi speculation.
Google don't kill inbox (petition)
10 European startups fostering social change
I don't know what people you know, but the folks I know in the US aren't particularly happy about banks.

Occupy Wallstreet had a huge, lasting impact on the way much of the population views the banking and finance industry.

> government gave the rich a massive tax cut and slowly started to loosen banking restrictions.

The tax cuts are not specifically for the banking or finance industry.
I can function on 3 hours a day -- if the only thing I have to do is talking and reacting to incoming stimuli. Which is precisely what high-flying politicians and execs do: talk, talk, talk, with some occasional reasoning thrown in. They don't have to break down complex problems or create complex artefacts, there are aides doing it for them. They just go through briefing after briefing and react to what is thrown at them.

Actual creative workers and engineers require a different set of brain functionality, which requires deeper concentration, and hence need more sleep.
From Silicon Valley Copycat to CEO of Meituan-Dianping: How Wang Xing Did It
Okay, now do emacs! Depending on build-time options, that can open text files, images, pdfs, archives (zip et al).

In fact I'm struggling to think of a single file type that truly won't have a use in emacs.

(It might actually make more sense to forbid editting executable files than going via type)

-----

>There's a lot more nuance in existing systems (SELinux) and potential future systems than just "allow everything or nothing".

The problem isn't that there isn't a lot of "nuance" in these systems, the problem is that there is!

Sure, SELinux will work if you have a static system or an SELinux expert under the desk.

Creating a system that works and remains understandable is much harder.
The escrow used to be a trusted third party though. Blockchain moves the "quantity of trust previously assigned to the escrow agent" to the two parties. If one party disputes for some reason the algorithm this can't be settled automatically. With a trusted human escrow agent, an abnormal situation would probably end with him sharing part of the blame , which help resolve the conflict in a way that is not fair, but surely blame-able. There is nobody to blame with a machine though.
> Just do a symbolic execution of the code and prove that your intended behavior holds.

So... Introduce a human to the process? This is the exact issue we're talking about.

> A multisig contract is an utterly trivial program. It is easy to prove correct.

Even if it is, we're not just talking about multisigs. This process should scale up to more advanced smart contracts or this whole "innovation" is just replacing escrows, which is a greatly diminished innovation from the actual claim of smart contracts.
Amazon scrapped 'sexist AI' tool