skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
we reached the depth limit of comments on the other answer. This will be my last reply, but you can still reply to this:

>> It is actually possible to create output with sed that results in executable bytecode similar to C.

> The executable bytecode for Word is a constant. cat can output that.

I didn't mean output in the sense of printing it to a screen. What I wanted to say is that you can write anything in sed that you can write in C and that you could create a compiler for sed like you can create a C compiler, to run arbitary sed programs on current hardware.

>> Word itself is turing complete

> Word on a physical computer doesn't have access to an infinite tape. It can only reach a finite number of states, so you can simulate Word as run on a physical machine using a finite state machine with perfect fidelity.

No, I'm pretty sure you can't. A finite-state machines can not even parse context-free (Chomsky type-2) languages, so it definitely can not execute a general purpose program written in Word, even with a finite amount of memory. And as we can write general purpose programs in Word (and in sed, because they are both turing complete), you could never create a finite-state machine that can do everything that Word can do.

But yes, we usually ignore that our computers don't have infinite tape, as even the possible permutations for input programs of just 1kb are for our purposes basically endless (2^1024).

The point with C, C++, Java, Python, Word and sed being turing complete is that you can write general purpose programs for them to execute. You can not write general purpose programs for finite-state machines, you can not even create finite-state machines for every program. That's the interesting part of identifying if something is turing complete, even though it has no practical use it's not, because there isn't the necessary envrionment and it's never as efficient as the general purpose programming languages we built.
One of the interesting aspects of quantum computing is that it upgrades these issues into actual bugs. Bit flips are errors in the Z basis, and phase flips (information leaks) are errors in the X basis. [1][2]

Trying to build large scale quantum computers could lead to styles of optimization that provably don't have side channel issues.

[1]: https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3327

[2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPw9nkJAwDY
I find the fact that this book encourages monopolies troubling at best and dishonest at worst. He seems to be in favor of authoritarianism and domination more than freedom. I find it disingenuous especially for a billionaire who preaches 'Faith' in the free market when one of his teachings is essentially eliminating competition.
I disagree with your assertion. It's simply time value of money. As an investor, you don't want to wait decades for a higher risk low return that may never materialize, or the bond defaults entirely because your nuclear plant is shuttered for safety or political reasons. Could government insure the bond? Yes! But then they're subsidizing nuclear when that money could go into renewables and storage.
As a UI person, I think shared UI libraries are bad for usability in many ways. They lead people to design UIs that happen to be made of the widgets that are available, rather than designing something truly suitable to the user task.

This is one of the reasons the web eclipsed native applications. The web only provided the most basic common widgets, so designers were forced to reimplement the UI toolkit, but also given the freedom to have their own take on it.

I personally would prefer to see a UNIX-like UI library made of many composeable parts. With idependant codebases.

In that world, having a single giant dynamically linked UI blob doesn’t help.

I’m not saying standardization is bad, just that forced standardization at the architectural level is bad.
i) Hidden and ii) Nothing I enter should be submitted anyway in an SSO flow.
My company blocks google dns.
They're not the only one. Don't shame other people for their preferences.
Both. It's basically an accessibility problem.

Should screen readers be able to handle some unusual pages? Yes. Should websites design for accessibility? Yes.
Something I've noticed, since I've been living for a few days with "my cell phone is my computer." When a login form appears, my on-screen keyboard pops up and covers half the form. Thus, anything at the bottom of the form is likely to be hidden unless I remember to look there. So a cell phone friendly login form should put the most vital info in the upper half.
Is this essentially a variant of the "tit for tat" strategy in an iterated prisoner's dilemma? It seems analogous
> it was about companies giving pretty much zero recognition to OSS groups at other companies upon use of their s/w - they shouldn't be surprised when, as a result, the infrastructure they depend on rots away

Why would they care? Businesses were happy to pay these hardware companies that you deride for their devices, they're more than happy to use your library as long as it is gratis, and they'd be perfectly happy to pay other companies for replacement software if your library stopped functioning or ceased to exist.

The broad adoption of FOSS has nothing to do with ideology or community and it never did. FOSS is widely used primarily because it is gratis and frees up money to be spent on something else.
1Password isn't the only password manager in the world.
I remember being in an Internet Cafe, being as always frustrated by not being able to find anything for my search on both Altavista and Yahoo. Back then Altavista was my primary search engine, but I hated it.

The I saw “Google” loaded on another computer and decided to try it out. The difference in quality was overwhelming, in that first session it made me smile and made an instant convert out of me.

Another difference is that Google did not have any ads initially, and when they finally added ads, they were clearly highlighting them as ads, instead of masking them as regular search results. And overall their interface was really clean compared with their competition.

I don’t know if it was my search patterns, maybe other people had a different experience, but the difference was night and day.

Even today, I may whine and moan about Google, but their Search is still the best and I’m saying this as a DuckDuckGo user.
>I find the theory compelling but I also think the way is expressed strange. Maybe I'm missing something.

There's an odd usage of alpha male. An alpha male is the one in charge and with high status not the guy with a propensity towards reactive violence. I hate the phrase, but "toxic masculinity" is a better way of phrasing what he describes. You can see how it's useful for the Alpha male(s) and a group at large. They can send them to war against neighbors and reap the spoils. It's also convenient that their aggression drops off a cliff as they get older. This ensures enough old men to control the younger ones and direct their violence towards appropriate targets.

>In my view, the killing of the "alpha males" is actually the killing of the people unable to cooperate. The moment organized collaboration is possible, the individuals that can cooperate will be stronger than the individual that is unable to cooperate.

I'm not so sure about this. Basically every human group throughout history has one single person in charge. Whether that be the Holy Roman Empire, a ship at sea, a hunter-gather tribe, or a old ladies knitting group. The trait selected for is the ability to seize power when you can, cooperate when you can't, and the wisdom to know if you can.
Any Rene Girard readers want to weigh in here? I see some similarities to the themes in his work but am not well versed enough to comment.
I think the article misses a larger point - why is everyone re-inventing the wheel?

We really don't need 'how to create a wheel' tips and tricks - it's a solved problem. We can move on. Can't wait for a sane registration/login cross platform widget to end this madness.
It's 2019 and we're still doing email based signups, by default. What's wrong with this industry? OpenId was a pretty neat idea twelve years ago. And given the amount of password databases getting compromised, quite many websites would have been better off federating identity with a competent provider. But no, world plus dog still outsources security to email providers like hotmail, gmail, or worse. Basically compromise somebody's inbox and you gain access to most of what they ever signed up for. Single point of failure, and even if you protect it properly you are still at the mercy of their support not falling for some social engineering attempts.

It would be nice if Mozilla followed through with their repeated attempts to integrate authentication in the browser (they've been experimenting with this for most of this decade) and deliver something that 1) works, 2) is stupidly easy to start using for websites, 3) is bleedingly obvious to use for end users. The current implementation of webauthn fails all 3 tests. I've not seen it work once. I rarely encounter websites that support it and it does not work with mainstream hardware like the nano ledger or now very common finger print readers on many laptops.

I've had finger print readers on my laptop for ages. I've yet to encounter a website or browser capable of doing anything productive with that. I thought webauthn was supposed to be it but it seems to be out of scope and instead require USB dongles. Even Apple, who apparently love dongles, are not bothering to support that with a dongle or other people's dongles. The first browser to do the bleedingly obvious thing to support built in fingerprint readers in combination with webauthn would instantly incentivize hordes of website developers to start relying on that. So much easier than messing with passwords. Also, MS seems to perpetually get stuck doing proprietary whatever instead of fixing security properly. Apple has been shipping touchid for a few years now. Lenovos came with fingerprint readers last decade already.
Realnames almost achieved that, by being added to IE:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RealNames
Sidewalk Toronto Project Update
I'm guessing that was implemented to neuter keyloggers, but I do wonder how easy it would be to circumvent.
I currently use BitWarden (LastPass previously) and neither have had a problem logging into Citi's website though it's been quite some time since I tried to add a new entry from their site.
That's why they're 'mulling'.

Company A 'mulls' something, company B and C follows, X gets done.

If company A mulled something and no one else piped up, they could still of course go it alone, or they could decide that they want to help save their customers even more money, and not raise prices.
Hey man, I appreciate the intellectual curiosity and desire to challenge commonly held beliefs.

This is clearly a topic with extreme potential for heated, off-topic debate. I don’t think Hacker News is the right forum for this discussion.

If “you have something genuinely new to say” [1] by all means, feel free to share it.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I think the points are fully paid by avg 21% APR, $37 late fees, interchange fees, foreign transaction fees(2%) and ATM fees on credit cards. Its just greed.
I wonder if that's a way for spammers to harvest known good e-mail addresses.
>Password managers can't deal with this, unsurprisingly

Maybe I'm overly paranoid but I choose to manually copy my passwords out of my manager into the login form.

Then again I also use a PW manager that doesn't support cloud storage. (Though you could always throw your DB into Dropbox if you desired)
They could keep routing it and modify it's results. Comcast already does this with http, injecting datacap warnings into HTML pages.
They're referring to a conversation in 1994. In 1994 that was definitively not the case.
Show HN: A Django extension that supports PostgreSQL native table partitioning
> They're primes which are separated by exactly six non-prime numbers.

That doesn't match what the article says: "prime numbers that differ from each other by six". So they're separated by five other numbers (which are not necessarily all non-primes).
Which is kinda ironic given Google was born on the back of a DARPA contract :- https://qz.com/1145669/googles-true-origin-partly-lies-in-ci...
What's hypothetically supposed to happen is the payment vendors compete with eachother for traffic, and businesses negotiate deals and use the ones that give a good deal.

Whether it's actually working that way in practice, of course, is a valid question.
How is it less efficient?
Capitalism has failed in a way. The free market was supposed to facilitate competition. But what we've seen is increasing consolidation, not competition. Most industries are dominated by a handful of players who gobble up smaller rivals, who, after raising millions in funding, are too happy for the exit.

All data shows the same: competition is being trumped by consolidation and its eventual end, cartelization
Typhus is spread by rats and other animals, it is transferred to humans through parasite bites. Rats infestation is an infrastructure issue, at least for me. It could be a policy issue for native Californians though. Should we clear garbage off the streets? Outside California this is not a political question.
Then they'd need to announce that to all of the users of their DNS service.

You tell me how to do that.
> I'm wondering why all the blame is directed at Amazon

The first step is recognizing that there's a problem.

> If the problem people have is with tax subsidies in general then isn't the government the real issue here?

Maybe the problem people have isn't with tax subsidies. Maybe their problem is who the subsidies are being given to? People are realizing that Amazon isn't a good corporate citizen, and I don't think anybody thinks Amazon needs these subsidies.
> with Apple, Facebook, and Google all buying campuses similar in scale to Amazon's proposed one, and without demanding bribes from the state before doing so.

All of those companies are orders of magnitude smaller than Amazon.

Also for the record Amazon has a pretty big presence in SFBA (Sunnyvale, Palo Alto, SF proper).
I use Don't Fuck With Paste. Unfortunately you don't have this level of control with apps. I've seen more than one app where I can't paste in my password. I see absolutely no reason for this.
What Is There to Learn from Finland’s Basic Income Experiment? Did It Succeed?
Most of these patterns are fine if implemented correctly. It's not hard to trigger a modal with a URL for example.

Password managers work fine with multi-page forms, you just have to label the inputs correctly and the user might have to press a button twice.

Magic links are fine, and can even be good if it's you include a log-in link in the email that does the work for you. Certainly better than a weak password (most people don't use password managers).

I'd suggest that implementing a magic link for log-in would be superior to all of these recommendations because it's a better layer of security than the _literal nothing_ most people use to secure their accounts.
Delphi community edition includes Windows, Android, iOS, macOS, with FireDAC database access and full access to the source for the VCL, FMX & RTL.
https://www.embarcadero.com/products/delphi/starter

Basically everything in Professional, but free for hobbyists.
Higher latency connections will certainly have longer delays, but it's quite fast on a reasonable connection thanks to the persistent WebSocket, even if you're sending each letter that's being typed. We're using Purview in production at the company I work at, and we haven't had issues with input-related delays.

If you don't need to send each letter, it's recommended to not do so; the submit event object includes all form data, so you can do one final validation at the end, similar to what you'd do with a normal web server.
As someone who has had to block and redirect DNS traffic, there are reasons we do this and if you have a problem with it then you should contact the admins about it. If you're unwilling to do that, maybe you shouldn't be doing what you're trying to do at work.
Thank you for these references.
None of which is at all the same as what you stated - that New York "was making it clear they won't uphold the terms of deals they make."
5,11 pair runs counter to this definition. .
The "8400" part almost seems arbitrary to the rest of the name
It's not entirely academic, though, because surprise turing machines often lead to weird bugs or failures in assumptions about security.
Fiverr plans to go public
Some other ones:

1. Don't disable paste on the password box. Pasting usually means a long, complex password and that's a good thing.

2. Don't limit allowable characters or have an artificially low max-length. It's okay to cap it for DoS purposes, but anything shorter than 64 characters (which maxes out to 256 bytes, given unicode) means you're doing something wrong on the backend.

3. SMS is not MFA. I'm terrified by the number of banks accounts that could be accessed by hijacking my SIM. It is inexcusable.
5. Don't force password rotations.

6. Don't force me to use certain character classes if my password is long enough and therefore entropic enough without them. Special characters suck and are inconsistently supported.
What happened here? The self-promotion comment gets to stay while a sincere response from the author is [dead]?
It doesn't take any time. I open a card, pay my rent with the card to get the bonus, pay off the card (no interest), and then put it away and cancel a year later.

Edit: Also, I consider it a hobby. It's fun to try to beat the system. And the reward for "beating it" is incredible experiences (i.e. Singapore Suites) that would be far out of reach if I didn't play. Would you ask the same question of someone who cooks or plays video games what their ROI is?
>and it's just as likely that their diminishing was due to there being less costly ways to kill people

Land mines are by far the cheapest modern method for area denial unless we're considering dirty bombs.
NIST simply recommends a minimum length for passwords, all other requirements don't really provide worthwhile security.
The South Koreans only build reactors that fast when building in South Korea.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-pro...

Barakah 1, built in the UAE by South Korea, was originally supposed to take 5 years, operating in 2017. It has been delayed a couple of times. Bad news from December 2018:

"Cracks found in containment building of UAE nuclear power plant built by S. Korean companies"

http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_internation...

It may still start in 2019. We'll see. But we're already at nearly 7 years.

Also, "countries like South Korea" is a club consisting of South Korea and nobody else. Other countries touted for their continued embrace of nuclear power, like Russia, China, and France, don't build reactors that quickly. If you want information right from the source, use the IAEA's Power Reactor Information System and look at the time between construction start and first grid connection for commercially operating reactors.

Here's France:

https://pris.iaea.org/PRIS/CountryStatistics/CountryDetails....

Their newest commercially operating reactor Civaux 2 took 8 years between construction start and grid connection. They have another, Flamanville 3, that will be newer when/if completed, but it has been under construction for 11 years.

Russia:

https://pris.iaea.org/PRIS/CountryStatistics/CountryDetails....

Latest commercially operating reactor Leningrad 2-1 took 9 years.

China:

https://pris.iaea.org/PRIS/CountryStatistics/CountryDetails....

Newest commercial reactor Hayiang-2 took 8 years.
We could go with a language with just if statements, while statements, function calls and "return" and be extremely easy to jump into. :)

While a bit snarky I do think it is one of the fundamental problems with programming language innovation. No matter how smart we are, learning is effortful. And we frequently judge languages not by how productive it is, but by how quickly we can start feeling productive in it. Which often preferences familiar concepts over more powerful concepts.

There is a very long feedback loop in properly evaluating a language. At least 1-2 years. You need not just figure out how to do what you already know in the language, you need to learn the new way to think in the language. And that takes time and solving lots of problems. This is only sped up if the language's concepts are kept very similar to a language you already know.

We are the bottleneck that slows down language improvement. There is no way anyone can convince me that the hodgepodge of Algol derived languages is one of the best ways out there of writing code. But most new languages will be similar because the hurdles of trying to teach people anything else alongside the actual new interesting concepts of your language are too much of a blocker for any reasonable adoption.
Why harpoon these things? I think webbing them in is a better idea. Also - I assume its impossible to create "suction" in space - like - you cant slurp something into a tube, in space, can you?

Also - how do we know what is space junk, and whose it is? How are we sure that a small satellite by india or china isnt operating but maybe disguised as space junk?
How To: Absurd Scientific Advice for Common Real-World problems
Seems like game theory? If everyone else is playing, then it's better to play than abstain.

Also I'm not sure about "higher prices", in my town there's two convenience stores across from each other, one with CC fee and one with no fee, same prices otherwise, so I just go to the no fee one. Maybe it gets worked in somewhere but it's not as fair/efficient as it could be.
There is sure one. People also lined up behind leaders like Gandhi and Martin Luther Jr. Populists come in all forms.

It would greatly help if we don't use Goodwin's law everywhere and use terms like Nazism, Fascism, Hitler etc. where they are actually due.
> A few years ago there was a glutton of articles telling us that we cannot do authentication correction, and to just offer single-sign-on via Facebook/Google instead.

A few years ago, there was much less understanding of the privacy implications of centralized authentication, and much more trust of big tech companies like Facebook and Google.
A good idea is just to follow NIST SP 800-63B rules and recommendations for passwords (“memorized secrets”) unless you have a really compelling reason to deviate from it. And to be extremely skeptical if you think you have such a reason.

This actually includes all of your rules and others, such as excluding use of password hints and server-specified “security questions” (which are just a kind of weak password used to protect a stronger password), and accepting Unicode.
I am though, since everyone who doesn't play this game is subsidizing my free flights
Or god forbid you try and use a non-English password... Unicode exists for a reason.
This is not rare at all, I use it almost every time I link to a wikipedia article, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_method#Examples

That said, it seems easy to make this backwards compatible: if the existing #blah syntax is a valid link, that should take precedence.

FWIW, I think there's way too much cynicism in this thread. My first reaction on seeing the title was "cool! I would use that!".

edit: Hmm, I may have misunderstood the compatibility issue.
I suspect it was management, after all search engines was unprofitable and borderline charity work. It was not until the vision of capitalising thru advertising that the whole market changed and by then, Google had outlasted and innovated the other `charity` offerings of the time.