skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Vectors of trust: Simplify validation for secure transactions
I'd say the internet is better and more useful than it's ever been. Some parts can be improved, but if we look at the track record of regulations so far it definitely looks more 'cure is worse than the disease'.
Ask HN: Why does iOS accept GoogleCookies in Safari and doesn't sandbox it?
when i login in any Google iOS App like Google Maps, it logs me in systemwide in iPhone + my Safari Browser as well - why does apple not sandbox apps?
Yup. First thing that popped into my mind - with Duff's observation following shortly thereafter. Clever...too clever by half, IMNSHO.
Bitcoin accepted as fee in France business school
Twitter to remove ‘like’ tool in a bid to improve the quality of debate
Huh? It absolutely was in the broader sense of pushing back against an arguably-undemocratic technocracy.

This is a specific instance of a general class of problems that absolutely did inform the Brexit vote.
I suppose you can reduce the fact that some people don't like that international tech giants effectively don't pay the same amount of taxes as the homegrown competition as "jealousy" but it's not extremely constructive.

The big problem for the EU is that the internet is effectively a border-less global playing field which makes is very hard to enforce laws, taxes and regulations locally. I agree that their current approach is deeply flawed but at the same time it doesn't seem like we're nearing any kind of global governance for the internet so it seems that the alternative is either Chinese-style crass protectionism or just giving up and letting Google and Facebook eat the European web without giving anything back. Pick your poison.
Actually, the banks packed those loans and sold it. They got the money. They got the bonuses and money after contracts. More contract, more money. They were no longer interested if the client can pay or not...
In many European countries it mostly boils down to Java vs .NET, depending on the business sector.

And by Java I really mean Java, with alternative languages being done by clever consulting companies, which sometimes I get to rewrite back to Java.
Then the first should IMHO be called a front-end designer. Developer to me is someone who develops logic, not some interaction with JavaScript.

Think for example of developing a static website. I wouldn't ask a developer to do that, I would ask a web designer, which I expect to be versed both in "design for the web" (as opposed to, e.g., "design for print") and being able to translate it to the chosen medium (that is, HTML and CSS).

Anything more (business logic etc) are the domain of a developer. So as soon as the site is not static anymore and becomes an actual web application, that's where designers are out of their area of expertise and developers kick in.

This is how we are organized where I work, at least.
Great news.

Although given that gdc is already a thing I can install and use today, what practical difference does it make?
Redirect https://my.project.loc to any Docker container with zero config
Well, thank you for the uncalled-for insult!
Kasırgada Vurgun Türkçe Dublaj izle HD (2018)
Hope they also close Facebook for this https://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/21/us/facebook-live-gang-rap...
For developers with Software background, Xilinx provides Software Defined Flows of developement. It includes features of Xilinx Vivado HLS and goodies that help rookie dev to deploy their algorithm on machine.

You can write your algorithm in C/C++/OpenCL and let SDX tools do their job for creating RTL and creating system. SDX supports X86 flow for functional verification which saves great time over RTL verification. Then you can move to hardware emulation which can verify timing related issue with your algorithm. Finally you can have hardware flow from same tool. SDX supports eclipse based debug perspective in all flows.

As for Hardware, Amazon AWS instance F1 is easiest thing to start with. For people with GPU background, SDAccel will nice way to go.

Xilinx recently announced Versal product which is GPU like card that can be connected with machine having PCIE support.

Happy Programming Hardware!
Cheers
The Surprising Power of the Long Game
I'm curious. Anyone care to outline the legal ramifications of this action? What would happen if IBM tried to stop his side-project?

1. Would IBM be able to enforce the original contract as it was outlined when they sent it to him? Would he be liable to fraud or other similar charges (for instance if he altered the contract after IBM representative added their signature)?

2. Or would the altered contract stand up in court?
FYI
https://www.xilinx.com/products/design-tools/software-zone.h...
Perhaps if it's hard to get agreement that's a good thing? Then only things that are truly agreed to would happen at the EU level. That seems like a feature of the system, not a bug.
Yes, it's basically the idea in Duff's device. Protothreads (http://dunkels.com/adam/pt/) uses a pretty similar trick.
It's turtles all the way down.

You can host your own services, but better hope your colo doesn't decide you're more trouble than you're worth. Build out your own datacenter, but hope your ISP(s) don't decide you're more trouble than you're worth. Build out your own ISP, but hope anyone wants to peer with you.

And that's just on the transit side. We've a growing history of piracy sites having their access to the DNS infrastructure curtailed, and porn sites finding the only payment processors who'll touch them charge above and beyond for the 'privilege'.

It becomes difficult to ignore that members of society do depend on the rest of society.
Exchange has so-called "Public Folders" you could also access through IMAP, but it was more convenient to use and search with Outlook. Conceivably you could make a similar 'public' maibox on a different mail platform, a poor man's newsgroup.
Avira Phantom VPN Pro 2.16.3 Full Crack Free Download
Then again though - those tools actually worked. While those podcasts don't.
Any competent bad guy knows to create messages composed of cut out letters from various magazine headlines.
> We have been smeared by the mainstream media [...] for working with law enforcement to ensure that justice is served for the horrible atrocity committed in Pittsburgh

That's quite an interesting spin.
#3 sounds like a really good idea to get the reviewer to put their money where their mouth is, so to speak.

Conversely,I could see that requirement causing particularly poorly-skilled developers tying up a disproportionate amount of the more skilled developers' time
If you're mode dev oriented, then I would definitely recommend taking a lok at Eclipse Che, and Theia IDE.

These will allow you to use the remote machine very productively for dev work (and you'll have RDP for other things).

I have a hunch many tech sectors will move to this setup in the coming years.
My main point is that this is a tricky subject. One that we should be very careful in regards to our actions.

If the content was so terrible on this site, why only remove it now? Why was it tolerated for so long?

Acting against gab now, seems to be more of a show than reality. All these companies are attempting to show their disdain for this behavior. But they allowed it before. And I’m sure they allow many other sources of hate to persist on their services.
Indeed. But a new version of DMD gets released with every update of the front-end, those then get slowly merged into LDC, and even more slowly into GDC. Last time I checked a lot of my code and it's dependencies don't compile on anything except DMD.
my 2 cents: take a good look at x2go ( https://wiki.x2go.org/doku.php )
I know that sandboxing is desirable here, but it runs as SYSTEM. How do you sandbox something running as SYSTEM? They must have changed the identity of Defender. That's all I can come up with. Anyone else know how this works?
Could we leave this one-sided manichean rhetoric to Reddit and Twitter? Saving the industry is clearly a key motivation but the tinfoil hat theory makes no sense, in most European countries subventions cater to the entire spectrum of the press regardless of political opinion. If anything destroying the press would make it even easier to control the narrative.

It's not just the press either, it's the whole cultural industry that they try to save. I'm not a big fan of protectionism but if you look at the French cultural industry for instance (and contrast it with, say, Italy's) we've had some moderate success preserving it through protectionist regulations (quotas, fixed prices for books, regulations regarding advertising of movies etc...). I'm not very happy with that but pragmatically I can't completely dismiss these regulations since they appear to have had a positive effect on the local industry.

I'm not saying this is the right way to go but I'm always a bit frustrated that many on HN seem to lose all sense of measure and intellectual honesty every time government or regulations are mentioned.

I think this "link tax" is a bad thing but at the same time I also see the very real problem the regulators are trying to fix.
It's a bit of a pivot IMHO - most of the electric scooters around here are marked "Using Segway technology."
There is certainly a connection between Euler's formula and the matrix exponential, but I think you have confused some details about how e^x is defined. The connection is to consider C as a 2-dimensional real vector space with basis 1,i. Multiplication by i is a linear transformation of this vector space. In more detail:

The exponential of a matrix X is an infinite sum just like that of the normal exponential function except with operations being matrix multiplication, addition, and scalar multiplication (I is the identity matrix):

e^X = I + X + X^2/2 +X^3/6 +...

Now take X to be the matrix

X = [0 -1; 1 0].

This is the matrix of the linear transformation of corresponding to multiplication by i if you consider C as a real vector space with basis 1,i (thus x+iy is identified with the vector [x; y]).

Now you can compute that the matrix exponential

e^(tX)

is the rotation matrix

[cos(t) -sin(t); sin(t) cos(t)].

The connection is now this: we can describe multiplication of a complex number z = x+iy by e^(ti) equivalently as the vector resulting from the linear transformation

[cos(t) -sin(t); sin(t) cos(t)]*[x;y] = [x*cos(t) - y* sin(t); x*sin(t) + y*cos(t)]

In particular, if you take z = 1 you recover Euler's formula.

To say briefly how this is a special case of the exponential map in Lie theory: the 1-d vector space spanned by X is the Lie algebra of the unit circle (which is a group) and the exponential map sends an element tX to e^(tX).
Show HN: Watch your daily paycheck accrue in real time
Dumb little thing I made after work. Thought some of you might appreciate it. I think the checkboxes are broken on iPhones, sorry.
Top Most Powerful Navies in the World 2018
So basically we are getting the consolidation of companies that bother to spend money on FOSS.

This is what happens when everyone expects to use the work of others for free without paying a dime.

Eventually the companies go looking for buyers with deep enough pockets to support them.

Apple, Google, IBM, Oracle, Microsoft, Facebook,..., take your pick.
I don't get this. A code review is a purely technical process. If he says your code is bad / wrong etc then that is a purely technical discussion that has to be had if you feel they are wrong.

Why are you looking for empathy in code reviews?

Why are you getting feelings involved at all?
>the news sites will be forced to give Google (and others) a free license to link to their content.

The insidious thing - a free license can't even be offered under the law. I presume it's meant to preclude both the repeat of the case you mention, and prevent "race to the bottom", i.e., news providers competing with each other on price on resource that has near-zero marginal cost (an article being linked to/snippeted from).

From TFA:
>Recital 32 suggests that (1) anyone who wants to link to the news has to have a separate, commercial license;

>and (2) news companies can't waive this right, (...)
There must be a non-paywalled version of this announcement on some other site.
Why Are Robotics Companies Dying?
How can debate on Twitter be good when they limit the length of the arguments that you can make to two or three sentences?
So this would mean we can write D in GCC implementation? But would this increase the user base of D?
Top Most Powerful Missiles in the World 2018
Well the cup is essentially a point, and the handle... is essentially a torus (AKA doughnut).
Investors invest in both good and bad times. It's not like they are just sitting on money when it rains, but of course risk adjusted returns are lower in a pessimistic economic climate, and a lot of project gets put back into the drawer, the economy ('s growth rate) contracts.

That 700B was essential to stagger that contraction, and it was too small, because Congress is retarded, so the Fed tried its best with QE and other ZIRP compatible tools.

It's of course not a secret that there are possible things to do on the federal level that would generate more ROI than what Congress currently spends on. (For example health care reform, criminal justice reform, public transport and urban planning reform.)

The rate rise is to keep inflation at the 2.0 mark, which is the Fed's target. Like it or not, they are doing what they have to do to meet that target. Investors might be negatively affected by this, but the general population very much favors this.

Also, (both long and short term) investors have options to hedge interest rate changes, if they want.

There are many, many problems with regulations (SEC, CFTC, FinCEN are not proactive, the CFPB is currently being dismantled, and the market is at the same time too oligopolistic and too heterogeneous, too many layers of laws, only the big players can afford to navigate the legal maze), with banks (only the ruthless remains, the sane ones were long priced out of the market), and with the Fed policies of the past (Greenspan et al.'s handling of early 2000s), and even the financial news media is to blame (as they are very biased, either for or against the establishment, detached rational analysis is simply not bringing in the clicks).
This depends on your definition of "open marriage", but to be clear, polyamory is _not_ about open relationships (which I think "open marriage" suggests). Polyamory typically means closed/committed relationships, but with multiple people. That they are made out to be sleeping around or in less serious relationships is incorrect, at least as far as the terminology goes. I would not say that a married poly person is necessarily a liar or in an open marriage.
That's a radical departure from their 2015 stance[0]: “The heart is more expressive, enabling you to convey a range of emotions and easily connect with people. And in our tests, we found that people loved it.”

I wonder when they're going to start testing this and what the results are. I hope they share what they learn, this could be an interesting experiment given how core a part of Twitter the like/favorite button has always been!

[0]: https://blog.twitter.com/official/en_us/a/2015/hearts-on-twi...
It took longer than originally planned, but it finally happened!

Congratulations to everyone involved.
Human society is full of problems. Now most of human society uses the internet and not only the more educated, privileged ones. So obviously all the ordinary problems came to the internet.

But I don't see how regulation would have prevented that, nor any improvement of any regulation so far.
> meaningfully slower

really ? there's a difference but unless you keep allocating in a hot-loop this should hardly ever have observable costs : https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/SN9Ois
It's not this specific decision, but this category of decisions. The EU seems to constantly legislate on "small" things that piss off some subset of the population in a country. Eventually there's a large enough number of annoyances that a majority of individuals are bothered by.

To take an arbitrary example - increasing the age required to obtain an unrestricted motorcycle license.

On the face of it it's not that significant. No-one really cares about this apart from in the abstract. It reduces death rates, and from that perspective it's a good thing.

But there's some small bit of the population that is now pissed off by this, you've told them "wait until you're older", and they don't like that and vote against you.

(It certainly annoyed me at the time despite already having a full licence and already being above the new cut off. No, not enough to vote Leave. I like my citizenship.).

Now multiply that by lots of issues which affect different people.
So I guess I'll have to retweet things now to bookmark them.

It'd be nice if Twitter could reconcile it's shitty RSS replacement and crazy-drunken-uncle-shouting-into-the-void halves into something coherent.
Or if they can offload the risk. As they did.
I'm with EFF on many things, but "link tax" is a non-starter for any serious discussion. There is no "tax" at all here, and the copyright reform isn't about "links". It's about clarifying the legal situation of search engines and news aggregators previewing large parts of other site's content, which has always been copyright infringement. "Link tax" FUD doesn't contribute.
Sounds like a smart way to replace emails with no replies and avoid useless overhead in having your employees using/learning a new product.
Related: Gab had also posted a public statement [0] on Medium after the shooting in Pittsburgh.

However, Medium has now suspended Gab from their platform, so that the only way to read the statement is to use an archive link [1].

Hopefully the tech community learns from this about the dangers of using centralized external services for your public presence. If you find yourself under distributed political attack your voice will not make its way out there without being filtered by intermediary media outlets unless you own the full stack of your system from top to bottom.

[0] https://medium.com/@getongab/gab-com-statement-on-the-tree-o...

[1] http://archive.is/vysbL
Agreed. Discussion and debate should be more than hot takes..

That said, most people won't read a wall-of-text from a stranger - HN being the exception ;-)
Could you please share some sources about this?
I agree with everything in the article.

My biggest problems with code review are:

1. The reviewer usually lacks the context to truly review the solution and all its implications, and instead gives only a cursory review focused on style and trivialities. Sometimes they're familiar enough with the code to give an insightful review, and there's benefit to commenting on even the small things, but I've seen countless major architectural problems pass review because the reviewer lacked the time and familiarity to notice them. This isn't helped by reviews typically being done on GitHub code diffs; you're seeing a couple out of context lines and it's hard to understand how it all fits together.

2. By the time code is ready for review, it's too late. Sure, you can stop the presses if you notice an egregious problem (not that anyone usually does; see #1). My team tries to keep its reviews small and frequent, but they still often contain one or more full days of effort. If the solution has major problems, catching them after the fact means a lot of wasted effort on rewrites. Often there's no time to fix it right, so someone hacks around the faults and ships a "good enough" product. The tech debt piles up quickly.

As a result of both of these, code reviews are often little more than a rubber stamp.

This isn't to say that I don't think code reviews have any merit. I think that code reviews on every single change are a waste of time. Periodic detailed reviews of architecture are valuable, and periodic team reviews of code can help spread good patterns.

Many of these problems are obviated by pair programming. It's real-time code review before it's too late. It's the single biggest benefit to pairing, although there are plenty of others (like sharing knowledge and building team bonds). Pairs are also subject to the same pitfalls, but at a far lower rate than solo developers.
It's funny how those who cry hardest about being censored, when given a completely free space to express themselves, fill it to the brim with xenophobia, racism and anti-Semitism.

As much as free speech advocates may decry this, it works. Alex Jones audience has suffered since popular private companies have terminated their relationship with him.
Fundamentally it's about the commitment to individual liberty as the highest good. Something that's fallen by the wayside in recent years.
There’s actually a “bookmark this tweet” option under the more options menu for the tweet.
Is there a large enough presence of "non deplorables" on these sites to worry about unnecessary and unintended polarization due to these purges?
It's exactly the same today.

Here is a blog post from Candy Japan from 2 days ago, about experimenting with youtube giveaways:
http://www.candyjapan.com/youtube-marketing-horror-story

0 sales.
Reddit can be quite good for that too.
I mean they put up the definition from article 11 right there. Seems like a legit link tax to me.
SmartCheck – the First Vyper Security Tool
Billiard equipment's proposed movement
Thanks, I hate it. I'm a bit bemused about this bizarro case_N.h trickery. I'm also almost positive __COUNTER__ would be adequate and entirely remove the need for __LINE__ as suggested in the addendum which is likely to be quite large in any non-trivial source unit. I mean, something gcc this way comes I guess...
Side Effects Management with Redux-Saga
is that all twitter is now? a debate site? Starring items has been a stample of both bookmarking content, as well as showing appreciation for anything on the platform.

But as well as when they started merging liked posts into the content feed on the main apps, it did remove the critical thing if it being an option for feedback to a post, without sharing the content to your own timeline (a retweet).

I don't understand any logic behind this change at all, and if there is, there's a paywall. But twitter is for everything, not just politics. If you're using politics to drive your platform, it's a shitshow for anyone else that uses the platform for more recreational purposes
Thankfully! VLAs were a very dumb idea to start with, given C's sematics.
So, the phase of a wavefunction in QM makes it a gauge theory, then?

There are two kinds of symmetries, global symmetries and local symmetries. In case of a global symmetry the same transformation is applied everywhere, for example moving all particles of a system to the right by one meter. In case of a local symmetry the transformation can vary over space and time, so you could move different particles by different distances, for example double the x coordinate.

Classical mechanics is invariant under global translations, it does not matter where the system is, here or one meter to the left, what matters are just differences between positions, the distances between particles. On the other hand classical mechanics is not invariant under local translations because it will alter the distances between particles. Local symmetries are a much stronger constraints than global symmetries which are essentially just a special case of local symmetries where the transformation parameters are fixed across space and time.

The wave function has a global symmetry, you can rotate the phase, but phase differences are important and you can therefore not apply different phase rotations to different parts of the wave function. On the other hand the relevant symmetries in gauge theories are local symmetries, so the global symmetry of the wave function is not what makes a theory of quantum physics a gauge theory. In case of electrodynamics it is for example the electromagnetic four-potential that has a gauge freedom, i.e. there are many different electromagnetic four-potentials that give rise to identical physically observable magnetic and electric fields.