skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes, I guess my point was that in this case it's trivially avoidable. Enabling these features in the ESP32 is really easy and doesn't have any significant downsides AFAIK, I don't understand why LIFX didn't. It's far from unhackable but I think enabling flash encryption and locking the JTAG and flash read would be perfectly acceptable security-wise.
Right, this is probably techcrunch saving face because they really have no idea what they are talking about, so have to make it seem like whatever happened was in line with what they reported.
Or one was an accident and the other wasn't?
People could click the checkboxes and give away their privacy, as panelists in these Google and Facebook research programs did.

Some privacy advocates think that people shouldn’t have the freedom to do that, because they can make bad choices. They aren’t wrong that a locked down system like iOS is safer overall for users, as long as you’re ok with Apple controlling what content you can use.
Sorry, but why do you think this? The Facebook app was very clearly Onavo rebranded and signed with an enterprise certificate; I have a copy of the file if you'd like to check it yourself.
What's the line however? It's a bit blurry. If Google and Facebook starts paying their panelists using a 1099 that would be fine?
> they are fundamentally someone with power using that power to subjugate ( to varying degrees ) someone who they have power over.

That doesn't explain the Roseanne Barr / Valerie Jarrett situation.
> so because government agents werent the ones getting people to do what they wouldnt have otherwise done

If the recruiters were acting on the government agents' instructions, it still counts as entrapment.
Whatever happened to ipv9 in China? https://www.chinatechnews.com/2004/07/07/1352-chinas-new-gen...
I might only capture one or two key slides. Depending on the circumstances I sometimes paste the photo's in a document (word, Evernote, etc) along with other notes i've taken.

I do the same with whiteboards during meetings.
Soviets did improvise a lot of anti-tank weaponry, but that's because they didn't have anything decent in service for pretty much the entirety of the war. Their standard-issue anti-tank rifles were so underpowered, the crews were instructed to shoot at the observation slits, and if those weren't accessible, then at the antenna (to at least disable the radio).

These days, infantry taking on a tank would just use an RPG or an ATGM.
Because it's the job of the justice system to mete out punishment, not the modern day equivalent of a lynch mob.
That seems too small IMO. Encoded BD rips average about 20-30 GB; remuxes (no compression/encoding) begin around 50 GB.
one request - could you guys help out Teamviewer and Anydesk guys ? cos their products still dont work on Wayland. There's been zillions of threads and questions on stackoverflow on this. This would be a godsend
SBCGlobal Email Not Working
If you are getting trouble to login your sbcglobal email account or sbcglobal email not working then get the right solutions to contact authorized experts at toll-free 1-855-500-8462.
More aggressive malware than what? There has been very little malware, and almost all of it gets shutdown within hours by Apple blacklisting the malware. I don't use macOS, so maybe I'm missing something, but I haven't heard of malware ravaging the macOS landscape. Windows has gotten a lot better about malware, and macOS is still not even at the same level of risk as modern Windows.

I'm certain that Apple could do even better with iOS since they have the advantage of not needing to maintain compatibility with an existing ecosystem of software being distributed outside of the App Store.
They're not employees but 1099 workers sure sound like they're part of your 'Enterprise'. They could even be 'in house'.

Lots of 1099s actually work in the same building as employees. What makes you think they wouldn't be covered?
Not really, I still find lots of errors on recounts of past events. Aside from a few articles, that almost always come from rare good journalists, I don't really see any research on most news media, not for recent events, nor for historical accounts.
No, that's not the point. This is not about any famous person being entitled to anything. Her point is that "the arts consumer" is entitled to make their own decision about what to read and watch and think. We are hampered in this by posturing platforms and by the mob's simplistic "by association" mental model of evil.

I can hold entertainers to any standard I like, or none at all. I can judge them for the subset of crimes that are topical to judge them for, or some other arbitrary subset of my choosing. Or, I can take the words "gratia artis" literally.
They give you a remote with toggle buttons labeled with people's names so you can tell it who is watching or if multiple people are watching. They also have software for media pcs but you can hook up an intermediary box if you want. They also pay you per hooked up tv, and have stats on whether a tv is a bedroom / kitchen / family room tv.
Than iOS.
I'd be happy to pay. I don't because I object to the NYT privacy policy: "we gather ... a history of the pages you view ... We automatically combine this collected
log-information with other information we collect about you ... We have a legitimate interest in disclosing or transferring your personal information to a third party in the event of any reorganization, merger, sale, joint venture ...."

I'd pay double or triple their current price if they announced support for anonymous access backed by frictionless anonymous payment.
This article indicates 95% confidence for a cancer cluster

https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/06/erin-brockov...

"Other problems in Morgan’s work are not so common. In his first analysis from 1988 to 1993, Morgan actually found the cancer rate in Hinkley was 25 percent higher than in the surrounding counties. But he dismisses this cluster as a statistical mirage, a mere fluke.

Other epidemiologists who looked at Morgan’s numbers at the Center’s request disagree. Statistically, there’s at least 95 percent certainty that the cluster is not a fluke"
> Things don't have "terms".

Sure they do. You want a gun? That comes with certain restrictions on what you can do with it. You want a car? There are certain restrictions on what you can do with it. Jet? Restrictions. Schedule 1 drugs? Restrictions. Knives? Restrictions. Fireworks? Restrictions. Cameras? Restrictions. Hell, even when it comes to a 2x4, there are rules about what you can and can't do with it -- you can't hit someone with it, or you'll suffer consequences.
I guess those lewd superbowl commercials paid off then.
This is something I’m terrified of.

I feel like I can never let a domain that I may want to use again in the future ever laps or someone will buy it and extort some exorbitant price from me to get it back.
Some already exist, for example repl.it with team mode.

https://repl.it/site/blog/multi
I’ve seen this “separate the artist from the art” line of reasoning. I personally feel icky knowing that my money is going towards someone who has a pattern of bad action. Art is about culture and culture is about shared stories. The fact is that call-outs work because they change the story. This is what silent spring and the jungle did during the muck-raking era and it had the objectively positive effect of punishing companies for externalising costs at the expense of public health.
Me too is just muck-raking for our modern era, focusing on interpersonal externalities.
Apply this logic (ill gotten gains is the term you used, but I interpret it as a coded way to say value created by immoral actors) to technology and it suddenly becomes a little more complicated.

The scary prospect, from my perspective, is that cultural erasure on moral grounds is not only possible, it could be inevitable and lead to a chain reaction. From the statue removal in the US (easily justifiable considering the circumstances of their placement) to the college course alteration and removal in certain South African universities (justifiable under Socially Just interpretations) to the discrediting and forced reinterpretation of scientific theory (IQ studies, intelligent design inclusion, inherent sex disparity, evolutionary genetics), it would appear there may in fact be a reduced friction gradient that isn't wholly fallacious. If some pernicious pedophile develops a cure for cancer, I'm not going to consider for even a second whether or not I am going to use it.
For the example picture, it would be nice to have it also compared to a fully raytraced image. I'd love to know how many rays it would take to be equivalent to the denoised version.
We're talking about the google one,not the facebook one.

The google one - there is no sourced evidence that apple banned them.

Apple has no reason to include friendly PR and did in the google case.

So did Google. These were coordinated messages clearly.

In the facebook case that did not happen
That suggests the are not the same.

I posited a working theory above.
Please remove this silly JS engine that's been implemented, poorly. It didn't attract mass developers, and it's ruined performance.
> Every motor vehicle when operated upon a highway

At least if OP follows through on running his car through his key, he'll be safe. (How about using a relay attached to something that's powered during key-on?)
Yeah but how much of that is because of the place in history his works hold. We're also not actually memory holing these people, their work still exists it's still part of the canon of culture. By and large they're still fantastically wealthy and likely will continue to be.

Ultimately what's happening is just a decision that the good parts of a persons outputs don't outweigh the bad parts any more. That the acceptance of shitty behavior and the damage it does to both the people it directly affected and the damage the culture that excuses that behavior does to unrelated people isn't worth it.

It's easy to see one side of the scale, everything a Spacey or Cosby has added to culture, but it's impossible to see the other side of the scale, the things we haven't gotten because of people driven away.

(And on a simpler level fame doesn't excuse crimes no matter how much we raise people up because of it.)
You can. Just give people the code, and they can load it on their device.
> Neither of those links says that US intelligence agencies passed information to US companies, either.

From the first link:
"But a report published by the European Parliament in February alleges that Echelon twice helped US companies gain a commercial advantage over European firms."

Echelon = US intelligence.

Some other quotes that support my comments.

"two alleged instances of US snooping in the 1990s, which he says followed the newly-elected Clinton administration's policy of "aggressive advocacy" for US firms bidding for foreign contracts."

Go and read Secret Power. After the conclusion of the cold war and before the war on terror US intelligence didn't have incredibly clear deliverables and the US had just come off a recession. Supporting the US in the global marketplace did become a priority for both the CIA and NSA, driven by Clinton.

And yes, exposing bribes is good. But exposing bribes for personal profit? That's more debatable.
Those who can, do.
Your Linux machine is neither a walled garden nor a gate; it's an unlocked house in the countryside. Its lack of privacy problems is because it's not a target.

Have you built something from source by downloading a tarball and running `make install`? Did you look at the Makefile before you did so?
Correct me if I am wrong, but are you saying domain sqautters could spawn 1000s of holding to maneuver around my proposal? I guess there could be countries/states where you can register a company for a very low cost. What is the cheapest place one can start a company?
I'm pretty sure that a server, being a stupid piece of inanimate junk, is unable to enter any agreements or disagreements. In contrast, people, being endowed with free will supported by the ability to reason, need to apply said will and reason when directing actions of pieces of junk, so as to follow the same procedures of inter-party conduct as in direct interaction.

Since a web server, by its primary mode of operation, does indeed more or less indiscriminately send replies to whomever makes a request, it follows that the duty of choice lies with the client. The person operating the client has to apply their reason and follow the inter-party conduct.
Whose accident?
Facebook and Google engineers have weighed in on Hacker News confirming that their internal apps stopped working. Again, why do you think TechCrunch doesn't know what they're talking about here?
what if device is not connected to internet or that you have the apple certificate check IPs blocked in your corporate proxy?
Has anyone done any perf analysis between this and previous versions?
But again, if it's a non-issue on macOS (which it is, by all accounts of my Mac using friends and coworkers), then it would be even more of a non-issue on iOS, where they have a clean slate to design a security model "the right way" for apps distributed outside of the App Store.

If users willingly choose to give up their information in exchange for a $20 gift card, isn't that their choice? I wouldn't do it, and you wouldn't do it, but as long as they're adults, isn't that their choice, not yours? If apps are trying to steal information without informing the users, those could be blacklisted outside of the App Store just as well as they can be blacklisted inside it if Apple requires centrally managed signing certificates... but I would still favor an option of allowing unsigned software to be installed. The user's choice should be their choice.

Being outside of the App Store wouldn't necessarily be carte blanche, although it would hopefully enable developers to do more and better stuff, as well as make development more accessible to hobbyists who don't want to pay to distribute their stuff on the App Store.
Most cell providers will give you one for a deposit. I know tmobile does for something like $25.
Does anyone know whether they got unlucky with 3 simultaneous failures, didn’t notice earlier failures, or had some other issue that killed all the drives?
This seems reasonable as well.
It may be possible to passively detect what channel you are tuned to. I’ve read anecdotes of billboards scanning cars as they pass to determine what FM station they are tuned to, however I can not find a source.

Similarly, though, radar detector detectors definitely exist.[0]

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_detector_detector
Yup, it's your prerogative to feel icky. Personally, I'd feel icky artificially withholding money from these people's colleagues because they were unlucky enough to work on a movie set with someone who subsequently came under suspicion.

If the platforms didn't infantilize us, we'd be allowed to make up our own minds as to what's icky, because it turns out that not everyone has the same feelings.

Also: did anything in my comment follow the “separate the artist from the art” line of reasoning that you speak of? I'm pretty sure my comment wasn't about the naughty artists. I'm pretty sure it was about the actual victims.
Isn't it precisely their fault for choosing that name and branding? They are not blameless for the title they chose.
Here, let me posit a theory that fits all facts:

Apple banned Facebook. They said nothing in PR about it.

Apple did not in fact ban Google. Instead, one of (Apple, Google) fucked up removing the screenwise app and accidentally revoked the cert.

Techcrunch being techcrunch, they assumed Apple banned Google and published that with literally no supporting evidence.

If that was true, why would anyone publish friendly press so quickly?
and at literally the same time?

All data instead suggests if Apple banned Google, both would shut up about it.

Instead, here, both Apple and Google release press statements stating they are working to fix the issue as soon as possible in a coordinated manner.

Unfortunately, techcrunch/et al can't walk back their statements without looking like idiots, so they go with "Apple banned google and then google must have apologized or something" as their narrative, even though that narrative makes literally no sense given the difference in reactions from Apple.
Unjailbroken iOS users, yes - certificates are signed by Apple. That said it's pretty easy to get a developer certificate for yourself. You just have to a) own a Mac and b) agree to not use it externally (which is what both Facebook and Google failed to do), but nothing prevents there being e.g. a community of people running open-source apps that don't abide by the App Store restrictions, all compiling them on their own machines.
Agreed -- I appreciate the input. However, I feel that none have been widely adapted and most leave much to be desired in terms of user experience. What are your thoughts in respect to this?
All of the other posts are great for personal finance and savings. But at some point, if you have some money saved, look for opportunities where you can make no-risk decisions that earn you $XX or $XXX per hour spent implementing them. And value those decisions in terms of an hourly rate.

For instance, let's say you have some cash sitting in a brokerage sweep account paying 1.0% because you weren't paying attention. In <60 minutes over a few calendar days you can find an online savings account with high interest (say 2.2%), set up a transfer back and forth, and get a better rate. On 10K sweep, that's $120/hr gain annually. On $100K, it's $1200/hr annually. Although there, maybe you want to consider a bond at 2.5% and net $1500/hr.

Likewise, put expenses in terms of an annual rate. One less $5 coffee per week is $260/week annually. Then reframe in terms of your overall expenses. Over 10 years, that might get you 30 days closer to an early retirement.

The point is that you probably are overlooking very trivial opportunities to improve your lot. Convert the metrics into savings or earnings over time, and turn that into whatever future goal you have (early retirement, size of yacht, months of rent/mortgage, etc.) and you realize that with a very small amount of effort, you can have a huge compounding effect on your goal.
A bad experience does the job.
https://www.rs-online.com/designspark/hands-on-with-a-144-co...
Sure, fair point. But Facebook paid as well. If Facebook starts paying them via 1099, would that be fair?
The enforcing of privacy was done at a political level, not at a technical level. Linux (as a group? vague hand-wavy term) focuses hard on the technical merits of its own product, but ignores the ecosystem.
Didn't you want to become famous like this guy?

https://globalnews.ca/news/3612580/syracuse-teen-loses-car-t...
> Underlying all of the points in this article is the idea that people are somehow entitled to success.

No, underlying all of the points in this article is that works are separate from the person who produced them, and it does us no good to erase all reference to their works for actions that are sometimes no more criminal than a stupid tweet. It turns out that, when you suppress a work that many people have collaborated on because of something one member did, a lot of innocent people lose out.

> Meanwhile, zero sympathy for the people who experienced professional repercussions after being harassed or assaulted. Before you're successful, people can harm your career or discriminate against you all they want. It's okay!

Please Google "straw man argument". You have no idea what amount of sympathy the author has for the victims; it simply isn't the focus of her article. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
The amount of information that can be found using your ip address https://clearbit.com/attributes (refer only the reveal api)
Again, i don't disagree both certs were revoked, and it's been actually confirmed that apple banned facebook .

That doesn't mean apple intentionally banned Google. This has neither been confirmed (and is completely and totally unsourced), nor would it make any sense for them to ban google and then issue friendly press about it.

So I'm suggesting the different reactions from apple and coordinated messaging differences imply there is something different about this case.
Careful with that hashtag, that kind of hate speech will get you banned from Twitter.
>Ah, but you say: I must have signed a contract to use the app store... Except, no, I didn't do that either.

Do you have an Apple ID? You need an Apple ID to download apps from the App Store, and when you create the Apple ID, you accept their ToS. So, yeah, I think you did.

Though that ToS has absolutely nothing to do with anything we're discussing -- the ToS that matters here is the one between Apple and Google/Facebook.

> ...and that must constrain me to honor the terms of the app that I downloaded...

I don't think Apple's ToS with you constrains you to honors the terms of the app you downloaded. That seems strangely indirect. I think the app may or may not have their own ToS that they make you agree to at some point before permitting you to use their services.
neither of these suggest they passed information to US companies
> if it's a non-issue on macOS (which it is, by all accounts of my Mac using friends and coworkers)

It's not quite a non-issue, but it's a small one, mostly due to the small userbase and Apple's efforts to quickly blacklist malware.

> they have a clean slate to design a security model "the right way" for apps distributed outside of the App Store

Apple's solution is very clearly "don't distribute outside the App Store".

> If users willingly choose to give up their information in exchange for a $20 gift card, isn't that their choice? I wouldn't do it, and you wouldn't do it, but as long as they're adults, isn't that kind of their choice?

One argument that I have heard (and am presenting without attaching my views on its validity) is that if anything goes wrong with someone's iPhone, they will blame Apple for their messed-up device rather than themselves. So it's in Apple's best interest to prevent people from being able to do stupid things.
Also all 3 of their posts are pushing the same website.
Just like that, aside from the 'being actually killed', as opposed to spending a year in the naughty chair and getting to make a comeback. I mean, seriously?

No getting to edit NYRB or have HBO specials anymore is not analogous to being thrown in prison, ostracized or (literally) disappeared.
Google and facebook are the scum of corporate society
While the move seems to be towards NewSQL databases (Spanner/CockroachDB), the answer to relations in NoSQL is to model the data differently. This can generally resolve a lot of the problems inherent in the need for relations.

This might not be useful advice for everyone, but I can highly recommend this youtube video on DynamoDB data modelling: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaEPXoXVf2k
This looks great.

One of the best books I learnt React when I was starting out was from https://www.fullstackreact.com

I loved the way they broke down concepts and build one on top of the other.
Maybe the author of Socket.io and Zeit.co just happens to work on integration problems?
Not even close to what was written. The article couldn't have been more clear.
It's 2019 and we still discriminate, legally and as a species collectively against people, because of where they were born.

We don't choose that anymore than we do our gender or our skin color.

But yet, we deny rights. Food. Safety. Life, because of it. And it's fine. Because they were born in that country.