skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Facebook won't grant Influencer Marketing Companies access to their API even though the user (The Influencer) wants them to have the data so they can get paid based on the views, shares, comments, and likes of the posts they've been contracted for. User has a legit desire to share that data to the point where they will take screenshots, GDPR deletions, etc to fulfil the need for that data to be shared. Facebook's reason for not allowing them access is simple, they don't make any money out of the deal.

This seems so ludicrously backwards to me. How is my decision to upload my data to Facebook a meaningful claim that they should run their platform in a particular way for my convenience, even if there's no business justification?

Allow me a tortured metaphor :)

Imagine you own a very popular art museum and you let any artist display their work there for free. Visiting requires a free membership, but visitors must apply for it. Competing museums and galleries are always trying to get a membership so they can come through and scope out which artists are most popular and then woo them away. You reject those memberships.

How on earth is this unfair to anyone?

Now, letting those competing museums in is obviously better for the artist, but does that give them any right to demand it? You're providing this space for them for free! You're providing a huge audience to them, for free! What possible justification do they have for demanding that you let your competition come strolling through and hurt your business just so it'll make their life a little better? If you don't like it, you can pull your work from the museum at any time.

So many of the critiques of companies like Facebook and Apple come down to people wanting all the benefits that these platforms provide, but without any terms, inconvenience, restrictions, or tradeoffs. Ridiculous.
These links will give you everything you need to know about what to do with the money.

http://www.modernluxury.com/san-francisco/story/the-best-inv...

https://www.betterment.com/

https://www.adviceperiod.com/

http://www.amazon.com/Random-Walk-Down-Wall-Street-ebook/dp/...

http://www.transparentinvesting.com/uploads/wholestory.pdf
as mentioned somewhere else in this thread, here is the direct link: https://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/cultu...
Unfortunately, many countries have long histories of doing so. America has arguably the worst track record on this score. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_electoral_interventi...
From what I've heard of Stripe, this is a non-issue for them. Like Google/Facebook, their brand and compensation are strong enough that they have enough candidates at the top of the funnel. Plus they have specialized processes to explicitly reach groups of candidates that they're worried about missing (hiring through Triplebyte; posting on top universities' job boards; diversity programs like offering job interviews at Grace Hopper).
Seems like a reasonable requirement to have a certain number of parking spots for new construction. If anything it needed to be modified to apply pain for making the choice to build parking at street level (vs underground or multi level parking) by applying a penalty against the sq foot footprint of parking installations that feeds back into the cost equation for the buildings. IE, if the requirement is to have 200 spots for a specific building adding those spots by buying blocks of land for flat parking increase the requirement count by a ratio of the land used to supply the spots. Given a properly sized ratio the builders will have a choice of a cheaper underground/multilevel parking system or a much more "expensive" flat parking lot.
Why are you expressing such outrage in response to what seems like an earnest and valid question?
Because society hasn't wised up to the fact bloggers and news are doing to social media the equivalent of what parent- and religous groups did to box TV and movies into well-defined bounds for allowed content.
Put the kids up for adoption, buy a plane, and a shitload of cocaine.
It's not a nice way of saying that, the "pool of bait" logic is totally wrong. There's a lot of nonsense written about high frequency trading on the internet, but for example Matt Levine's explanations are completely readable, correct, and on point (see the other comment).
Didn't they try to push some rather questionable licensing terms on react or do I confuse it with a different open source library? If it was then its users almost became another victim of facebook trying out where it can get away with abusing its position.
Sure, but plagiarism detection software aimed specifically at the academic market has been around for most of that time.
PlayStation Classic review: the games are great but the emulation is really poor
I got another great tip for you if you are using Chrome Developer Tools: Click in the URL bar, type firefox.com enter and press the big Download Now button. You will feel less violated!
>So in regards to a "free will" discussion, the only difference between us and rocks is what? That we are living organisms and thus can move around? So is an amoeba.

No, it's that we perceive our time-line-uniqueness as will (consciously) whereas rocks don't.
My English is poor but I think I explain my point in a clear enough manner, in synthesis:

- big buildings demand more resources to being built, in terms of concrete, steel etc and require deeper foundation that destroy ground humus far more than correspondent single houses;

- big buildings are in medium older than single family houses simply because demolish and rebuild them cost big money and it's practically impossible for many reasons (reach agreements between all involved landlords, not enough space around for work, new norms hard to respect in the available space/site etc) so they consume in medium more energy than single houses;

- cities was a need for various reasons in the past but they are not anymore and modernize them as much as we can with improved public transportation etc cost far more than private transportation in a distributed area.

For all the above I consider a bad idea living in a city, I consider in more and more unsustainable. And recently many people around the world start to know that hard on their skin...

If you do not want to understand I can't help, my mind works well and I was capable and lucky enough to switch from a big city to a wonderful mountain area without loosing anything I really consider valuable.
I had an easy and well paying job working on an IT project at DHS. I left after the child separation thing started, even though I wasn't working on anything related to that. It just disgusted me to go to work every day.

Thank you!
Yeah, but the alternative bet is that they want the "safety driver" part to be the part that eventually goes away. If they want public acceptance, it will make sense to keep safety drivers.

Eventually they will go the way of the elevator operator.
At 22 years old, Postgres might just be the most advanced database yet
> You seem to define free will in a very strange way.

Rather, you are coming into this debate with certain assumptions about what "free will" means or what properties it must have. Most such assumptions have been invalidated over the past few centuries. The whole debate over free will is about defining what it means and what properties it has.

My position is that of Compatibilism, which is the same as that held by most philosophers on this question. It's "strange" only in the sense that people sometimes find it surprising that free will can be compatible with determinism.

> If I predict what you will ask and record the responses on a tape perfectly timed to your future questions, and then press play and leave it playing as you are asking questions - does this tape player have a free will? It seems to learn because it answers as if it learnt.

"Seems to" is not the same as "did". Also pointing out a bizarre outcome by assuming an impossible precondition, ie. predicting everything I will ask, is not a compelling argument.
> For the avoidance of doubt, ICANN's Preliminary Determination shall not prohibit ICANN from delegating the gTLD pursuant to a future application process for the delegation of top-level-domains, subject to any processes and objection procedures instituted by ICANN in connection with such application process intended to protect the rights of third parties.

So not really a graveyard. They can be registered again under the normal conditions that apply.

With Google's mission to remove the URL from the browser and these TLD's often being considered fishy (in terms of spam detection etc). I can understand there is little value for companies to obtain/keep these other than prevent squatting.
Here's some security camera footage of a car in the UK being stolen using a relay attack:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odG2GX4_cUQ
I assume we're talking about city driving. I'm not sure about the USA, but being in Europe, the average speed my car says I go is 28.5 km/h. Do you think we could not solve traffic for 10 years if we slowed cars down to 30 km/h? With assumption being that a city-wide driverless system would easily 'swim' through the city without encountering red lights or slowdowns due to unpredictiveness of other drivers. We could even tolerate a little bit more errors because accidents would not be harmful too much.
I’m pretty sure Facebook has made a substantial investment in structuring their data flow & server locations with the specific intention of avoiding the reach/responsibilities of GDPR.
Facebook and other companies are more like bacteria that infect the wound of digital illiteracy. I think it's time we start seeing that as a wound, not as an unavoidable or even desirable state of things. An information age requires digital literacy, otherwise you will have a priest caste, and that will abuse its power. I see no way around it, and criticizing priests for being bad priests to me enforces the idea that there even should be a priest caste.

I can't quite tell you what digital literacy is, but I know that responses along the line of "do you know how a modern microprocessor works in detail?" are silly, because many people can read and write without being historians or etymologists. And even people who can't read or write often can speak and understand a whole lot. Contrast that with some priests mumbling in Latin, with people being subject to things they aren't allowed to understand.

So maybe knowing what files are, what memory is, what a program is, having their own webspace and email, stuff like that would be a great start. And the start to that is to stop pretending that's unattainable, or that "people don't want that". If they knew what it entails in the long run, most of them would want that. And people do much more complicated things than running a website. People raise children, they drive cars, they raise and train dogs, they work in the garden, they remember all sorts of stuff about sports, and so on. Most jobs require a lot of complicated edge-case knowledge, too. So knowing what an URL or a file is, and maybe some HTML, is trivial compared to that.

If people could get 20% off on all T-Shirts for the rest of their life if they had their own website, most people on this planet would have a website before the end of the year. I exaggerate, but by how much I'm really not sure.
Yah, the title is technically not accurate since 2*(INT_MAX -1) overflows, is not negative and cannot run arbitrary systemctl commands (I have not tested though). The title would have been clear if it had read:

> unprivileged users with negative UID can successfully execute any systemctl command
just to be clear, p0nce is referring to rust's compile time. D is known to have very fast compile times (unless you are doing very template heavy meta programming..)
Seeking Work - Remote

I'm a full stack web developer working Remotely with over 2+ year experience. I love developing websites and web applications.

My Skills

* HTML, CSS with Pre-Processors (SASS, Stylus)
* JavaScript with ES6 proficiency
* UI Frameworks - Bootstrap, Materialize CSS, Bulma, Semantic UI
* Front End Development - React with Redux
* Back End Development - Node with Express.
* Database - MongoDB, MySQL

Some of my recent works.

1. Furniture Company Website | https://deccanplast.com - HTML+ CSS + JS Static Website with Materialize Design

2. Jewellery Company Landing Page | https://ramdasandbrothers.com - HTML + CSS + JS

3. Local Retail Shop | https://ganapathibhandarkar.com - Wordpress Website

4. React Ecommerce App | https://shreya-sweets-store.firebaseapp.com - React + Redux + Firestore

5. Simple Project Management App | https://jasmine-plan.firebaseapp.com - React + Redux

6. Yelcamp - Campsite review website | https://obscure-headland-84886.herokuapp.com - Node + Express + MongoDB

7. Reddit Search App | http://condescending-kare-443d1b.netlify.com - Vanilla JS + Reddit API

8. Book Library App | https://immense-badlands-58371.herokuapp.com/catalog - Node + Express + MongoDB

9. Resort HTML Theme | https://chethanbhat.github.io/resort-vibs - HTML+ CSS + JS Static Website

10. Pet Shelter | https://saveindiancows.org - Wordpress Website

Email: devchethan90@gmail.com

github: https://github.com/chethanbhat
Or so says a paper. Assuming no methodological errors and replication, in which Psychology (this being posted in "Philosophical Psychology" is a very bad culprit, and stats/polls even more so).
Show HN: Obtrusive In-Browser Live Testing Framework
They previously implemented a flag feature that users could use to mark NSFW content. That was in 2017. I doubt there’s any ML, it’s probably just people flagging everything for the fun of it.
A contrived example to clarify further: Let's say that there is a link, foo.gov/taxes_in_retirement. Locations with a high concentration of retirees might click on the link more frequently compared to other locations. In privacy mode, from this location, a search for "taxes" might rank that link higher in results based on this activity (even though the search didn't contain the word "retirement"). This shows how a link might be ranked differently depending on search location even if the link itself is not inherently location-specific (as oppressed to, say, a local-news link).

Also, search engines can play with inconsistent ranking of results to see how click-throughs might be affected. For example, if moving a link from first to third in the result list has no effect (people continue clicking on the same link even though it's now third instead of first), then it's a pretty strong signal that the link should continue to be ranked first in future results. This experimentation of search results is even more important the more uncommon a search is because there is less confidence in the current ranking until there is more activity to base the ranking on.

Just as stores shift around product placement (front of the store, back of the store, etc), a search engine is free to shift around search results. Keep in mind that product producers might pay for better in-store product placement too, just as customers pay search engines for ad placement in search results.
A parking garage in sandpoint sounds a bit excessive. It isn’t Spokane.
Youtube in particular is terrible for filter bubbles.

In the name of optimizing for 'engagement', my youtube recs are full of politically polarized clickbait. They're not merely reinforcing my existing beliefs, they're actively trying to push me into a bubble.

At least facebook has the excuse of actual people pushing this stuff.
Because if I'm Safeway and I can get elderly people to come to my business (for shopping, prescriptions, etc.) they won't be shopping somewhere else. The business gains/retains the clientele by providing the driving service.
Agreed. Facebook purchased third-party data to guide their acquisition strategy. Any other company could hire this firm and made the same decisions.

The selective access to competing apps, based solely on this information, is antitrust though. If the apps violate rules that apply to everyone, that's different, but that doesn't appear to be the case?

Edit: turns out Onovo had access to specific, proprietary data, acquired through it's own shitty apps, which facebook acquired. This is pretty shady.
I suspect that in the long run they will have a combination of driver assisted and driverless car. If you set a pickup and destination point, Waymo (and other competitors) can calculate the difficulty of the drive. If it's an easy route...send a driverless car. Difficult? Driver assisted.

The driveless car will average out with a lower cost. As a consumer you're guaranteed a ride somewhere and know it will be cheaper than Uber.

I'm optimistic in driveless car, but we need to be realistic that it wont be solved 100% in the near term...and it doesn't need to be for the taxi service to be profitable.
This just pushes back the point of non-determinism. Instead of the measurement, or wave function collapse, or decoherence or whatever you want to call it being not deterministic, the "world" you end up in is.

If even that point is to be considered deterministic then there has to be some previous state of something to lead to it, and we're back to non-local hidden variables.

This is one of the many reasons I dislike the many-worlds theory, and it's seeming popularity of late. It does not actually solve non-determinism, it just shuffles the deck a little, while also tacking on an ever expanding number of alternate universes, all the while remaining as non-falsifiable as any other QM interpretation.

If I had to choose between two non-local hidden variable theories, I'd choose the one without the constant branching alternate worlds.

Non-local hidden variables are almost by definition unknowable to us, so I'm not sure what we gain by pretending all this meta-physical philosophizing is actual science. It did make for a good TNG episode though.
The obvious difference being state sponsored actors from a foreign entity weaponized this “feature.”

Not sure how you’re equating the two, but it’s disingenous.
This must have been tried in animals… Maybe another case of negative results that didn't make it to publication.

I wonder about the placenta and umbilical cord though.
Let's be fair, it's more than one paper. That's just the latest in a whole series of papers empirically testing lay people's intuitions on this question (see the citations).
Brad has written a bunch about robocar economics. Here's one piece.

https://ideas.4brad.com/robotaxi-economics
Apropos of D and Phobos, two posts from my blog:

Simple parallel processing in D with std.parallelism (it really did speed things up, ~3x (CPU, not I/O), by my unscientific and small test at least):

https://jugad2.blogspot.com/2016/12/simple-parallel-processi...

D language front-end merged with GCC 9; some sample D programs:

https://jugad2.blogspot.com/2018/10/d-language-front-end-mer...

Excerpt from the link above, that says what the post is about:

"Here are a handful of D programs that use various features of the language and some of its libraries, on my blog. Most of them are simple command-line utilities to do various things. Readers may find them of use to get a flavor of the language and to know some of the kinds of things it can be used for."
Why aren't streaming APIs more popular?
Why are duplexed and SSE based protocols relatively ignored by the dev community?

Postman, the application typically used for API development, doesn't have any support for Server-Sent Events (SSE), HTTP2, or Websockets. Additionally, there aren't a lot of streaming APIs to work with despite plenty of real-time apps.

Because there's such a dearth of tools, I worked these past few weeks with some friends to create a Streaming API development tool called Swell. If you're interested in contributing to that project the repo is here: https://github.com/getswell/getswell.

I'm also interested in general thoughts as to why these protocols aren't used more often.
Everyone notices the pay parking in the US because everyone drives.
You're not a "fundamentalist" because you mention the fundamentals of a field of study. It's impossible to have a discussion about anything if some things are not taken as axiomatic.

And given that the person you're responding to is stating something that most economists would agree with, I think the impetus is on you to tear it down with "the scientific method" if you think the prevailing wisdom is wrong.

TLDR: don't provide proof for flat-earthers.
HA! And yet 'Do Not Track' was proposed in 2009 and actually put into practice. Guess they didn't get the joke either :)

What I'm proposing isn't either of those things though. It doesn't rely on just promises of other people. I can see the code I'm compiling and running on my machine and, as long as I don't let anyone else modify it arbitrarily, I can be sure it's doing what the code said. Yes, mistakes happen and sneaky code happens but, for a vendor that actually wants to play nice, too many mistakes or even a single attempt at sneaky code will ruin their reputation.

And, again, I know this won't fix closed source code or malware.
I generally enjoy articles like this but this one was a hard read. Something about the way the author jumps back and forth from people, events, ideas, internal monologues, to random facts about chairs.
What is the easiest barrier to entry as a self-taught programmer?
I'm currently studying computer science at university (2 years left), to say the least, I'm not enjoying it, but I do find programming interesting when I explore interests on my own.

Right now I'm really into C and want to dive deep and learn the language well. That being said I also want to make a comfortable living that can allow me to afford my other hobbies.

How can I start transitioning away from school so that I can start working full time as a developer as soon as possible?

The reasonable answer seems to be to just suck it up and finish school, anyone have any other ideas? Is it worth dropping out?

I'm okay with not being a ninja rockstar 10x programmer, I just want to be "average", decent enough to maintain a stable career as a developer, while allowing me to pursue my other interests.
> Any other company could hire this firm and made the same decisions

Facebook bought Onavo in 2013 [1].

[1] https://techcrunch.com/2013/10/13/facebook-buys-mobile-analy...
> Oath is desperate to put more ads on Tumblr, because they massively overpaid for it ($1 billion) and have been throwing money at it ever since (100s of millions).

OK, but where is the problem with NSFW content (which is quite different from porn) for this?

I know, I am German, where there is quite a different mentality with this respect (in my hometown I have even seen openly posted bills for a big porn exhibition in Berlin in the past and nobody (except for the churches) was upset).

I can understand that many brands do not want their ads placed next to porn. But where is the problem with other NSFW content?
<rant>

Some time ago I went to the Dublin open house because they were opening news teams here and one of the positions was backed api engineer. Considering that I've been doing the same for almost 10 years and that I got personally invited to the event I decided to apply to the role.

They rejected me even before having a personal interview. I wonder what is happening behind the scenes but it was very demoralizing. Was anything wrong about my CV? About me? Am I too old? Right now, I prefer to stick with smaller companies, they have clearer intentions when contacting you and they are much more easier to approach.

</rant>
>so the null hypothesis still holds true

And who said the existence of free-will is the null hypothesis?
Similarly, a polymorphic function may want to put values of an unknown type in a Map or MVar. From the outside it may be completely reasonable to call that function on Maybe Foo, which would mean a Maybe (Maybe Foo) somewhere internally and I would struggle to call that bad design.