skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hey, I just want to correct some misunderstandings here.

"Reservations" mean nothing. Google Domains is merely one of many registrars that have customers all vying for domains in the same namespace. A "reservation" just means that the registrar will make their best effort to attempt to get that domain for you at the specified price; it doesn't mean that some other registrar won't get it first, or that some other customer isn't willing to spend more and will get it on an earlier day of EAP.

Until the domain is actually created with you as the registrant, it isn't yours in any sense of the word. There are even registrars out there that will, upon acquiring a domain, auction it off amongst all of their customers who pre-registered it.
So, one of my side hobbies is saving the world, and my conclusion is that any fiat frb system requires regular debt jubilees (Hammurabi did it first), and part of why our system is so fucked is because people ignore this fact. Any conversation about usurious debt without talking about jubilees is missing the bigger picture.
And by the way, text-only alternatives should be mandatory, honestly; such as text.npr, lite.cnn, et al.
Mormons to allow missionaries to call home weekly, instead of twice yearly
You can get as many as you have money to pay for.
Can't they revoke the invitation whenever they feel like?
(author here) Well, those are all valid strategies. In fact, in the original work that introduced CryptoMiniSat, I used state saving (you called this copying) to quickly reset state to an old one. One could also say that polarity caching is in fact saving redo-information (at least to some extent -- to what extent, can debated). The thing is -- I am not a pro at these other strategies and I can't talk about them with the same clarity. At the end of the day, all of these are quite abstract in some way -- there are many design choices to be made and many different designs.

I just tried to highlight brute force vs. partial evaluation&backtrack. But of course there are many other comparisons to be made. I'm just conscious that I have neither the time nor the expertise to do these all unfortunately :( I let Knuth do the heavy lifting, doing all the comparisons in his books.
40,000 tons is added annually, not sure where they got the number from but there is an summary here >> https://gizmodo.com/did-you-know-that-earth-is-getting-light...
I think about this all the time. I spent 2008-2016 in several countries outside of the US. Before I left it was incredibly difficult to be a socially active and employed adult without a car unless you lived in a major metropolitan area with a good public transit system. Taxis were around but totally unaffordable for more than a few trips on the weekend while drinking.

When I moved back my drivers license had expired and since I live in a different state now I will have to take the driving test all over again. I've been here for almost three years now and I never bothered buying a car because I can get anywhere in town for less than $15 within a few minutes of requesting a ride. My monthly rideshare costs are about $450, which is comparable to the cost of owning a car. There are some inconveniences but it has totally changed how I get around and where I choose to live.
You talk about the protections ICANN gives your customers in case Google goes bankrupt, but what are the protections or recourse your registry or Google Domains created for your customers to ensure recoverable domains and unimpeded uptime if their Google account is banned?
I went to school in Oxford and that's what it came up with.
I would be interested to see this data scaled with the average price of attending college. That cost has 'surged' in recent years as well, most because colleges are so much better at teaching now!
Of stereo tracks L and R, you invert R and add it to L, effectively canceling anything centered. This usually removes voices. If you subtract (invert then add) the result from the original L and R tracks you get centered sounds only. Results range from perfect to not effective at all depending on the songs you apply it to.
Names in the DNS aren't personal property (and they certainly aren't real property). So "owns" is probably the wrong word.

But ICANN, which is responsible for the entire hierarchy, expected that eventually at least some of the new gTLD registry operators would fail, and so there is an escrow agreement for each one. If the gTLD is popular enough that somebody else will operate it, the last daily backup from escrow is given to the new operator and things continue from there. I guess your new registry operator may set fees or other conditions your current registrar doesn't like, but if you like the new you can move to a registrar that's OK with them. The list of names in the registry doesn't vanish unless both your registry AND the third party escrow company screw up.

If the gTLD is grossly unpopular, it may not be possible to find a new operator for that gTLD registry. I don't know what happens in that case, although whatever it is by definition won't happen to many names.

I also don't know what happens for the very stupid gTLDs that are essentially for private use by a single organisation, like .kerrylogistics. And I don't really care, so long as the fees roll in to pay for everything. Actually I'd have billed them for their original request, .kerrylogisitics [sic] as well, but I guess someone felt that was too mean.
Regardless of the accuracy of your claims regarding spectre v1, I'd like to see a source saying that spectre cannot defeat process isolation on AMD Zen. I've found a lot of sources that don't support that, and none that do. The closest thing I've read is a statement that Zen 2 will have some mitigations for spectre.
> I always like to refer to Ian Hickson's Requirements for Replacing the Web [0] when this topic comes up.

It's not that hard. Just iterate on any idea old that's even slightly more appealing to hack on than a full-blown browser. That includes... let's see... nearly anything!

Then just be smart and dedicated about specifying the behavior of the new thing and figuring out workarounds for the awful parts.

Ian Hickson did it[0].

[0] https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:8zGGJQ...
Once again, an internet user decides that in order to solve a social problem, we must move people to an ancient internet protocol for serving web pages rather than actually address the social problem by dealing with the real world entities performing the tracking.
I'd rather have a conservative version of our current web standards, strip things back to a sensible subset of what we have now, possibly consider putting some kind of heavy rate-limiting or quotas on any client-side code that's ran.

The web is no longer open if you need the funds and backing of a megacorp in order to implement a renderer that covers the whole standard.
> That when freedom is threatened,we should cower, run away and hide?

How about that when freedom is threatened, we should not be telling the enemy all our secrets?

> Because that sure isn't what stopped fascism the last time.

Except that is exactly what is stopping fascism all the time. What you are doing is that you are looking at only the cases where fascism happened, and then concluding that--surprise--fascism wasn't prevented. That's exactly the same logic as saying that "vaccines haven't stopped the disease last time", pointing to the exceptional cases where vaccination didn't lead to immunity, and using that as an argument against the effectiveness of vaccination.

> Bullies need to be fought, not capitulated to

So, which bullies are you fighting right now?
> Is it practical to create a software-controlled model rocket?

No, but that is what people will tell you about every idea from Facebook to a pet rock.

If you want to do it, good luck. It will not be easy.

If you want a simple project- Add your arduino, get GPS, accelerometer and a noise maker. (Edit: if you are really ambitious, get it to communicate live)

See if you can optimize anything. I would guess your goal is to play in embedded C++ anyway.
Summary: World Models
I'm 10 years in with the same company and I still get a 15%, +/- 5%, raise every year. I don't believe this is normal, though. It's a smaller company, and I'm the lead developer.
Not really. The Lord of the Flies is the rather different premise of children being abandoned and things basically going to hell. There's no contest/game or outside influence generally.
Ah whoops you're right! At 8:39 I saw a mention of a scanning electron microscope and thought they were saying they used it in the analysis. They are actually saying one would be needed for that particular sample.
Because, checked boxes don’t mean much. CIS level 2 = a lot of checked boxes. Using cyber security frameworks is great, but some of the most compliant and “advanced” organizations have the worst legacy cruft you can imagine. We work with orgs all the time and organizations that use these frameworks with expert guidance can easily secure their most critical assets while only implementing the right parts of a framework. And the best frameworks have risk based targeting for maturity levels (NIST Cybersecurity) of various activities. These frameworks can end up being a bit of security theatre if you are just implementing it for the sake of “having security”. Guess I am just jaded after breaking software and networks for over a decade. Some of the most secure organizations have very adaptive security practices that focus on application security. Some of the worst are ISO, CIS, STIG policy template hardened blah blah blah. Just don’t put these frameworks and policies on a pedastal. The real security work happens in the margins.
> Actually, I don't have a degree. That's sort of my point.

Apologies, you didn't state that and I assumed.

> It's very possible to just enter the labor market and make money if you work hard and smart. I'm a developer but I know plenty of people I grew up with who went on to be: military people, plumbers, cops...

Then again, it's also not. Some fields absolutely require credentials and long-term education and we, as a society, need those jobs to be filled: social work, doctoring, teaching, plant management, accounting, licensed engineering etc. Some of these jobs have high potential -- medicine, if you choose the right sub-field -- and others not so much. In fact, the reason why we have a shortage of GPs in the US is a result of medical students looking at their debt burden and deciding they need to move into cosmetics or other high-paid fields. This strikes me as bass ackwards.

> I don't think it's ever the right decision to take out a massive amount of debt. Even to study something you love. You can't fight against the real world economics of that decision.

Well, the consequence of this stance is that only the rich will ever be credentialed, or the rich and the fortunate. Societies in which this is the rule haven't tended to fare well over the long-term.

> I saw the option to get what I considered to be a lifetime's worth of debt and looked for alternatives. Lots of people who come from lower class backgrounds do the same.

Well, good on you; that's quite an accomplishment. It used to be the case that people from lower class backgrounds, in the US, could go get an education without taking on debt loads, gambling that they'd be able to pay it off once their salaries kicked in. We, as a nation, used to subsidize schools and apprentice programs. My argument, essentially, is that 40 years ago we chose to make schools subject to market forces and this has been one of the main movers of rising inequality in the population and we have proof that it doesn't have to be this way from prior experience. We should consider this a failed policy experiment and reverse course in the most direct manner possible.

An individual can only swim so hard against the tide. Even if some do happen to make it to shore that doesn't mean there's no tide.

> I think it's going to be very hard to get those people on board with paying off other people's student debt.

Which people, sorry?
Like you mention it'd simply create an equilibrium. People would declare bankruptcy when the discomfort of repaying the loans exceeded the discomfort of declaring bankruptcy. If I lend you an unsecured $10 which you then expend on something personal and materially intangible (such as an education) you're not going to declare bankruptcy to get rid of that $10 debt. If I lend you an unsecured $1,000,000, you almost certainly would declare bankruptcy to get rid of that debt. So we can say that my risk (as a lender) in lending you $10 would be 0%, while my risk in lending you $1,000,000 would be 100%. There's some curve there where I maximize my profit:risk in the middle that depends on the specifics. Like any loan it now becomes the job of the lender to assess that risk, determine eligibility, and profit off sound financial decisions - or, themselves, go bankrupt with poor financial decisions.

I think this would be a vastly better scenario simply because all interests would be aligned. Universities would have an incentive to keep prices reasonable because lenders would want to keep the total amount lent per individual relatively low. Universities would also have an incentive to ensure students would be likely to be able to comfortably provide for themselves after graduation because, once again, lenders would have an incentive to ensure that the people they're lending to will be able to comfortably pay back their loan once they graduate. And so forth and so on. In the end, we'd likely reach a scenario where it'd be relatively easy to obtain loans for majors likely to improve your ability to comfortably provide for yourself, and relatively difficult to obtain loans for majors likely to leave you with difficulties providing for yourself.

A world where anyone could pursue education, on public dollar, on any topic they'd like, is an interesting idea. I look forward to seeing the outcomes now that such systems are truly starting to be put to the test. Many nations are facing substantial pressures on their social systems such as aging populations, increasing costs of medical care, reduced fertility rates, immigration of lower earning individuals, etc. At the same time, the face of the job market is constantly changing such that an ever larger share of all desirable careers require some degree of educational specialization to even get your foot in the door. These are relatively new problems and I'm not entirely convinced that utopic ideas of decades past will remain viable in the decades to come - though I certainly hope to be proven wrong!
Let's be honest author of the video has a lot of tools and you omitted some of them.

A lathe (how many people have that one in their toolbox?)
An angle grinder
A metal nibbler
I don't think the video mentioned anything about an electron microscope.

It's not emphasized, and not present at all in the audio, but there is "mention" within the video. At 8:40 in the video (https://youtu.be/9q3uNcJh4pc?t=516), when showing the response from Larsen, the sentence after the highlighting reads "a scanning electron microscope (SEM) examination ... would be necessary". So you are right that it wasn't done, but it apparently would have been the next step for a confirmation.
Student debt is unsecured debt hedging against future earnings of the debtor. If you look at it through purely financial return then the degree earnings potential absolutely has to be means tested to reduce risk of default. The only way to make this happen is to have the federal government get out of the student loan business.
If I register a domain, can google boot me off it at a later year if they don't like my politics? Or do I own the domain with the continuing option to re-register it or transfer to another domain registrar? Does google ultimately own the domains and simply lease them to me with no guaranteed option to continue?
I think their 8.8.8.8 DNS server has a pretty impressive track record for I think over 10 years. I know many people who changed their dns to 8.8.8.8 when they thought their DNS was shitty.

Back in highschool (15yrs ago) pinging a DNS server was something I sometimes did when fixing people's internet, always used 212.142.28.66. No idea why it's still in my head so much later, 8.8.8.8 sure is a lot easier to remember.
Is quantized inertia still a movement? Last I saw it accounted for the galactic spin without dark matter, which I thought was an ugly plug for an obviously incomplete model.
Just experienced the same thing. I had a split-second of content before it turned into a cover image with no scroll or content anymore.
It's likely to be difficult. I heard a good analogy once: imagine balancing a broom, handle pointed straight down, on one fingertip. It's not that hard. Now imagine balancing a toothpick. Impossible.

Scale matters. Bigger things are more stable.
The trend across the gTLD industry has been one of decreasing prices, not increasing prices. I'm not sure what you're referring to?
But people will compare prices, and alert the media/friends when they find discrepancies.

I've seen the narrative change in the last few years, Fast food was deemed low cost, but a Calorie Per Dollar comparison showed that eating fast food is significant more expensive.

If a single company doesn't play by the rules, the world will be aware of the price difference.
Well said. The article conflates a content / rendering problem with a protocol solution.

A lightweight HTTP/TLS subset that severely limits client-side execution expectations would seem to accomplish the same goals.

While repurposing all the amazing tech we've built since the 1990s.

Essentially, "just pass me the bare minimum of response to make Firefox Reader View work."

... but then we wouldn't be able to serve high-value targeted ads, would we?
That would be the end of poor people going to college in this country, at least under the current legislative regime. The only reason anyone loans money to poor people to go to college right now is because they know the recipients can't get out from under the loans. A no-collateral loan to someone with few assets or prospects just wouldn't happen if that provision in the law didn't exist. Or the interest rate would be enormous. But if the interest rate were high then defaults would be high. So you'd probably have some sort of death spiral. No, I doubt such lending would happen any more.

Now, the legislative regime could change. But it would have to change quite a bit to get significant increases in funding for college. Or maybe it's better if poor people just don't go to college? That's questionable at best.

I think this problem is a lot harder than people on this thread are making it out to be. Making student loan debt bankruptcy proof is within the Overton window in this country. I guess not making it bankruptcy-proof with no other changes is also within that window. Free or reduced price college tuition for the vast swathes of people who need it to attend is just outside, so it's definitely a foreseeable outcome, but if we don't get there in the next two decades that wouldn't surprise me either.
Python Basics – Operators
Being vegan is great for your consciousness and nothing else. If you truly believed what you are claiming you wouldn't be using your computer to discuss with strangers and a host of other things I am sure you are doing.

If the politicians truly believed in catastrophic climate change they wouldn't have any problem changing things.

But they don't, they just play lip service because it's a political debate more than anything else and that can be used to mobilize voters.

The scientific consensus you are talking about isn't what you think it is. Do you know what they actually asked about?

They asked primarily about two things.

1) Is the climate changing
2) Do humans affect the climate?

Everyone even the so-called skeptics answers yes to that. That's your consensus. All the other stuff the catastrophy claims that's not science and there is no scientific consensus about that.

I don't even know where to start on your claims about climate models but it just goes to show what I said before. You are not actually conducting in a scientific discussion but an ideological one.

Better safe than sorry is not an argument because you don't have infinite money and you don't just have one threat to humanity. Again how far are you ready to go? Are you ready to go to war with china to hinder them burning coal?

No you are not and thus nothing is going to change, there is no better safe than sorry here.

We are safe, we can deal with these problems and again you haven't shown a single, not even a single example of something that is scientifically demonstrated to happen that we can't deal with.

Despite that you still believe in some mediacreated hysteria very few scientists actually subscribe to.

That's why environmentalism is modern religion like Scientology. Mixing half-truth with the made up interpretation of reality.

But don't just listen to Lindzen and Epstein. There are plenty of other scientists out there like Lindzen look them up if you are truly interested in understanding the arguments.
Notes from a 1984 Tech Talk about Programming Languages
> The idea is that it is cheaper to cover all the defaulted loans than it would be to pay for everyone's education upfront.

European here as well, but best I'm aware what you're saying is not how it works.

The US government is the student loan lender at the end of the day when you work through the insurance chain. And in contrast with mortgages, car loans, credit cards, etc. where you can declare bankruptcy to make the debt go away and start anew, you can't default on the US government.

The real story here is that an increasingly large number of US citizens are having or stand to have their wages garnished by the US government. Debt bondage comes to mind...
You can still pick up a brush. 3 years in prison is nothing to sneeze at. It's a matter of ethics, after all, if all you want to look at is the eventual outcome we could all be bank robbers but most people prefer another life.
Why Are Companies So Bad at Deploying Capital for Software?
Along those lines, if Google decides I’m a bot or nefarious developer as seems to mistakenly happen on occasion judging from recent hacker news posts, will I then lose my domain name? Or at least access to it? At this point tying any major asset solely to a Google account feels risky.
Securing ssh, 2FA for ssh, using key authentication...

Yes but first and foremost you don't expose ssh to all internet, it should be allowed only from known IP addresses and you should VPN to have connect to that known addresses. Section about firewall config just tells to open ssh...
Travis Kalanick is building CloudKitchens
Not just you, a lot of Dgraph users appreciate the intuitive model of GraphQL+- (modification on GraphQL), and how it fits naturally with JSON and apps. When I started in 2015, I didn't imagine that our decision to use GraphQL would become such a major "feature." GraphQL has taken off like a wildfire, which was hard to imagine back in 2015 when it just launched in July 2015.

In fact this year, we plan to align GraphQL+- even more with the official GraphQL spec. Stay tuned!

re: write perf, it just got a whole lot better with 3 changes I made recently, and there're still a lot of room for optimization: https://github.com/dgraph-io/dgraph/commit/b7189935e6ec93aec...
Got a link about that theft?