skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm saying that singling out urine as the thing to be grossed out about in a pool, while understandable in a vacuum, is in reality one of the least problematic things in a pool, or in your daily environment in general.

So you shouldn't let the thought of potential urine in a pool stop you from enjoying pools, because if that's your threshold, you're going to have to drastically modify your daily habits to avoid things that are more dangerous/gross you encounter during every day tasks.

Everyone has their "this grosses me out" quirks. I just find it beneficial to do a reality check on them, to make sure that there's actually a reason to be grossed out by it, instead of letting an unfounded fear affect my decision making. And the reason I find this important is because I have plenty of those quirks myself.

>Your comment appears to suggest you would find it not unpleasant to swim in a pool entirely filled with urine.

I really hope someday I don't have to explicitly say things like "Just because I'm capable of swimming in a pool that might have some urine in it, doesn't mean I'm OK with swimming in a pool comprised solely of urine."
Thanks for this - no idea that this was even remotely a possibility in law...
Can you rephrase the question, I'm not exactly sure what you are asking - why should, or shouldn't?
That's unfortunate
There has to be, since humans can't make it themselves. (Assuming that's true.)
Thank you! Are you personally familiar with it as well?
Proportional representation.

The MEPs don't represent the entire country, they represent the specific people who voted for them. The fundamental principle of who people represent under PR is very different from FPTP.

Under FTPT, the people living in a certain area vote for a "winner", who then represents the entire area. If 51% of the people vote for candidate A, and 49% vote for candidate B, then the wishes of 49% of the constituency go unheard in the parliament.

Under PR, the idea is not to pick a "winner" who takes all and then represents everyone in the parliament, the idea is to match everyone's vote to some candidate(s) according to their preferences, as best allowed by sizes of constituencies, so that as many people as possible have someone they voted for in the parliament. Then the people in the legislative body only represent the people who voted for them.
https://imgur.com/a/1plpnyg

for some reason shutterstock showed up at the bottom of the discord image preview XD
There's no such thing as a multiple SPOF; that's called a multiple point of failure, which is a good thing.

Security is a battle of convenience. If your threat model is state actors, then it may well be worth the inconvenience to have your data secured in several different locations, running Tails OS on everything, scrapping your smartphone, and so on.
"Do not unnecessarily use braces where a single statement will do."

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.10/process/coding-style.h...
Hey drcongo. Jarland from DigitalOcean here. Truthfully, we would have to talk about individual cases to provide a detailed answer. Being aware of who you are and knowing how the details of these cases compare in relation to you, I would say that you already do everything that you should to prevent being caught up in the kind of experience that has you concerned.

I realize that is vague, but it's a bit of a difficult thing to discuss without exposing private data. If I so much as say "Just don't do X" then I'm effectively saying Client A did X. Tough waters to navigate.

I hope that helps a bit at least.
In there over 8 years.
I second this. Finding apps became a lot easyer and faster with F-Droid/Yalp combo. I can look for a free app on F-Droid and if it does not exist I can find a alternative on Play Store, an all with no GSF installed on the phone.
We is you, me, and society at large. Yes, it really is the best we can do. If a very large majority of the people who study an area of science agree on a conclusion in that area then it’s more likely they are right than someone who has no expertise in that area. Clearly if a large majority of the experts in an area of science agree on something then it suggests that if a person were to educate themself in that area to the point of being an expert then they’d agree with the conclusion too.

Non experts deciding for themselves what is right/wrong is a recipe for disaster. Peoples’ intuition is usually wrong without a lot of experience to back it up. It’s why we don’t let just anyone practice medicine or structural engineering. Expertise matters and the opinions of experts matter much more than a nonexpert’s opinion.
It erodes the authority of the lawmaker.
Looking at the reproducer (in the kernel commit message for the fix), this is a PE. Unless some software allows a remote user to control the issuing of these calls (seems unlikely).
https://imgur.com/a/1plpnyg

for some reason shutterstock showed up on the bottom of the preview image when i posted it to my discord channel
You're the one arguing definitions. This author is trying to make an actual argument, and you've introduced a non-standard vocabulary, and are judging the argument _with your vocabulary instead of the definitions the author made quite clear_.

How do you pronounce "Utopia"? How does it differ from "Eutopia"? Your definitions are fine, internally consistent, and quite clear for serious in-depth discussion... But they align badly with the common set of definitions (In which Utopia is your Eutopia), and so reading vernacular writing is probably unclear or poorly argued when using such - But that doesn't mean that their argument is bad, only that you're misreading it.
They try, but then each stops, waits a random interval, then speaks again.
All I'm saying is that the USA relies too heavily on case law, tradition, and precedent, allowing corrupt practice to become entrenched and resistant to extirpation far too easily -- not that these things should be eliminated.
Automatic Self-Stopping Circular Saw
Drupal 8 Core RESTful Web Services Remote Code Execution (SA-Core-2019-003)
The text you're quoting has to do with how we distribute volume, NOT how we enable spammers. High volume campaigns does not equate to spamming. You can send a 10-email campaign that IS spam and a 10,000-email campaign that is NOT spam.
If not commercial Lisp, what you think about using Racket for both the IDE and so they can pre-scale by giving HtDP to good developers who want to learn Scheme?
too late. everyone is already switching over to Bitcoin. can't touch our money no more you Al Qaeda funding sons of bitches.
>There are cases where disposable plates are more or less required.

I completely disagree, although there are cases where non-disposable plates are too expensive to have due to various reasons, but if that's the case you probably shouldn't be doing what you're doing.
> Which is that your CR comments being used as a proof to downrank them in the stack

Then you have a management problem, not a cr problem. Don't miss the forest for the trees... It's on management to communicate that cr is constructive, doesn't contribute to reviews, and isn't a game.
More people are fuzzing the kernel publicly, and with better tools.

syzkaller.appspot.com should give you an idea how many THOUSANDS of these types of bugs exist in the current ToT kernel
If the executive believes it to be unconstitutional then it's not an abdication of their assigned role.
I've played a minor support role in numerous fraud and antitrust lawsuits. Although experts and counsel said a great deal about economic and social welfare, the key evidence involved what people intended and planned (based on documents, email, etc) and what they did (based on business records).

Determining which firms "contribute the most total value to the system" is just too hard to be a useful strategy.

Translating that back to the workplace, I'm more inclined to agree with TFA.
I'm reasonably certain that the starting point for public valuations is not the most recent private valuations. These deals are typically centered around public valuation comps (i.e. other similar companies) based off of revenues/EBITDA/etc.
Can someone please explain how exactly this is ACE?
And now it's on spee.ch! https://spee.ch/4/blockchain-flow
Keepass + Dropbox is what I use.
Does that mean then, that every privilege escalation be arbitrary code execution?
Building a Minimum Viable Product Is Crucial
The Constitution is really quite bad at making things clear. Arbitrary rhetorical flourishes became the turning points of precendential cases, because quill and parchment made it hard to express ideas clearly.

The average ruling in a single minor case today is longer than the entire Constitution.
> On the hardware token side, security keys are still quite expensive

I don't know Elie, a lot of valuable users have iPhones with a great biometric secure enclave implementation. I know you've heard of it--it's like CAPTCHA, except the end user is real (not some tasker) and generates 1,000x more value for the security integrator. It's not the end user's fault Android sucks in this regard.

If Google wanted to, it could extend the IMAP protocol, work with Apple, and make it happen--two factor for everyone. It could also provide Exchange and push too, for free, like it used to, for everyone, but I don't know what happened with that either.

Along with a bunch of other people, Google contributed to Let's Encrypt, a product of the ISRG, by giving ISRG a bunch of money and basically saying, in a determination made by a business person (not a security analyst) in an afternoon, "Okay, the world can have free certificates now, Chrome will be okay with this." That determination, which may have literally taken minutes by some executive to make, has done more for HTTPS adoption than any study or Chrome feature. I'd use that as a model for what you could do to improve security of the end user.

If Gmail isn't interested in improving practical security--if its product managers are narrowly focused on adoption of the iOS app, for tracking purposes, and the delivery of as much content to it as possible for analysis, people will obviously change the way they deliver e-mail. Services already notify you of important messages and require you to login to their websites to read them. It's not zero sum, but given its moat, Google has a lot more to lose.

The end user's experience is frustrated here. But it's not really "thought leadership" to come out and say, "More of whatever Google does, as long as it doesn't interfere with its complex priorities in the reality the end user actually inhabits."
First off, thank you for taking the time to share your concerns. I'm from the founding team and work on compliance a lot.

In all fairness, starting off with 'crypto and p2p are used by criminals' as the context was a bit unfair. There are many more people doing good things with both technologies vs bad things. We are the good guys. We are basically software engineers.

In response to your specific concerns, I'd like to reassure you that LBRY works closely with our legal counsel Perkins Coie on several fronts. One of those is illegal content, of which CP would be categorized. Section 230 of the
Communications Decency Act provides fairly well established guidance for operators of networks such as ours. https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230

That being said, of course we dont want nor will tolerate this type of content and report each and every instance to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
- including IP and/or any data we have in the specific situation. We would not hesitate to report to local or state law enforcment if we had information that was relevant. Fortunately at this time we have had very few things to report.

With regard to your financial concerns - LBRY maintains the stance that we are a pure play utility token. We never had an ICO, have never made statements about future prospects or returns from our tokens, and do not encourage purchase of tokens except for use on the platform. We have put in a considerable amount of legal work in this regard too, and have had extensive discussions with many parties. While every single crypto company currently has regulatory uncertainty, we believe we have possibly the best
facts of any utility token and stand behind them.
Faster Capital Latest Funding Round for IT Startups Ends in 23 Days
For .NET, there is SecureString class [1] which provides reasonable protection against stealing secrets from memory. Not many password managers (if any) use .NET, though.

[1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-gb/dotnet/api/system.security....
The source is a long human interest piece; it's tough to figure out what actual statistics they are citing or making claims based on. Here's what I've teased out:

> That report also noted that SUVs and trucks were involved in a third of pedestrian injuries but 40 percent of deaths.

(I.e., slightly disproportionately more likely to kill in a given collision.)

That said, the number of deaths is about 4% of the total number of traffic-pedestrian crashes that go to emergency rooms. The number does not include anyone who went to urgent care, nor people who walked away.[0]

If 100% of SUV/truck drivers could switch to car-class automobiles, we'd expect to reduce pedestrian deaths about 359 (of 5376). It's something, but (1) difficult to imagine how we get there, and (2) definitely a minority fraction of 5376. I'm not sure that supports the idea that "increased prevalence of SUVS and trucks is one of the biggest factors."

In contrast, (!)34% of pedestrians killed were drunk when they died, and (!)15% of drivers were drunk when they killed a pedestrian[ibid]. These are huge numbers! 1828 and 806 lives, respectively. We can't (and don't want) to prevent people from drinking, but maybe we can improve safety for drunk pedestrians, and figure out new ways to take drivers who have been drinking off the road.

[0]: https://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/pedestrian_safety/ind...
thanks for the feedback! Shoot us your LBC address at hello@lbry.io and we'll get some extra credits over to you for testing :)
What you're saying makes sense.

What is unfortunate is that making moral decisions has a price. If you are trying to give the best life possible to your children, the price of honesty may be too high.

Instead, you may try to give your children a good enough life so they will be able to be the person you wish you could be. Children, here, can mean literal children, nieces, or close family friends who you want to be better than yourself.
Show HN: XFiles – FOSS File Manager and Archiver with Root Support for Android
Well maybe this "face" is real but it isn't a "person". I hope, or maybe I'm getting too old :)

http://www.whichfaceisreal.com/results.php?r=0&p=0&i1=fakeim...
Fish is not the only source of DHA. Walnuts, acai berry and flaxseeds are also good sources.
why? It solved all the probles the previous implementations had and was even easier to implement.
Good point - I'll filter those out.
>Southern states seems especially tolerant of driver irresponsibility

If you're white, perhaps. As a matter of public policy, this form of institutional racism is a way more effective way of producing a desired outcome: coming down hard on people of color while letting white people off easy. The incidence of fatal escalation of routine traffic stops is way higher with people of color.
The nature of open protocols and standards is that they can be used to do illegal things. HTTP is regularly used for illegal activity. This does not make HTTP bad.

I agree that what we're doing is at a legal frontier. Existing laws like CDA and DMCA are not set up to handle blockchain. That's why we've worked closely with lawyers from the very beginning. While we don't publicly share the advice we've received from our retained council (Perkins Coie), you're welcome to look at this memo drafted by the pro bono Cardozo law clinic on our behalf:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2oudj04lCTJOFZ5V1g5dG9tR2N...

Finally, LBRY is both a protocol and a corporation, just like BitTorrent is. We try to say LBRY Inc. when referring to the corporation and when simply saying LBRY is ambiguous.
"(Gmail or SendGrid) have pretty sophisticated systems to detect spammers"

Yes, but, the evil genius of the idea is that the email will be from a gmail domain. Emails from gmail to gmail with your own 5 year old account will have a ridiculous conversion rate. In my tests with email, if the email is from the actual gmail domain other carriers TRUST it more. Spam systems rely heavily on DNS/IPaddresses -- and this bypasses all that.

I feel for the smaller email providers. Gmail wont be able to patch this anytime soon, thus, the smaller ESPs without resources will have to change their rules to make the gmail domain less trusted.
the benefit is outsourcing operations. If he used dedicated instances he'd need to manage his SQL server, disks, deal with hardware failures...etc.

7k$/month is cheaper than hiring an additional head.
Agreed. We had to rush this page out for a Google-driven deadline. I've just fixed the formatting like you suggested.
You really need all three. A product and market fit (cost/market). The product could be nothing but the marketing never is.
Note also that corporations are 'people' but not 'citizens' and would likewise be disenfranchised from the protections provided by the bill of rights and the constitution when it came to state law.

edit: there seems to be some lawyering about the difference between the meaning of 'people' and 'persons' that I do not understand at this time.
Show HN: Graphical JSON Editor
Hello everyone, I've been working on this Json editor with graph/nodes UI.
Let me know what you think, thanks!

http://www.quite-funny.com
Agreed, that's kinda my point. The evolutionary theory behind why we have feelings of grossness is just that "this thing is potentially dangerous to me," so we developed this sense of "gross" so we'd avoid the potentially harmful thing (although a quick google search doesn't bring back the study i'm thinking of that demonstrated this). But obviously that reinforced/learned feeling might not always be accurate.

I get grossed out by plenty of things, so I have to consciously evaluate whether it's just gross, vs actually a problem. If it's just gross, I can consciously then decide to just get over it and have a nice swim (or whatever) regardless.

EDIT: Here's a couple links about what I'm trying to get at:

Study on disgust and the spread of disease: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rstb.201...

Article on digust wrt the spread of disease: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/24/science/disgusts-evolutio...
I listened to your IH podcast interview last week - great job on filling a niche market need!
> we extend the rights

The constitutional basis for that is not secure.

It's not obvious that your right to free speech extends to secretly paying someone else to speak.

If I leave an iPod in a public park playing a speech, the authorities can remove or disable the iPod, not a violation of my speech rights.
>Otherwise, pick any damn password manager and focus on something else.

Absolutely! For me, choices narrowed down to needing something cloud portable, 2FA, not needed another service like Dropbox just to access it, IOS integration, easy to share passwords with auto-update and revocation. But yea... just use something!
> ideological conflict (competition between optimizations)

This is an important idea. Optimality shifts when the environment shifts, and some ideas which work well in one environment may end up working badly when the world changes.

Because the world is inevitably complex and stochastic, we need enough dynamism in society in order to continually adapt, and for that we need a system that permits competing ideas, as well mechanisms to limit the amplification of the effects of bad ideas (good democratic institutions do a decent job at the latter).
I feel like Amplitude's schema management tools are best-in-class right now but still missing a lot. I've been frustrated at the absence of any integration with my eng teams build/CI systems or really any automated way to catch problems at the PR or code review stage. Is this something on your radar?

> no one that really wanted to maintain this

I feel strongly that the data organization needs to own this outright, and the only thing holding them back was the right tooling. This seems like the perfect tool to enable it. Very excited to give it a spin.
I've been using lastpass for 8+ years and had a previous employer move their password management to lastpass as well (they are still using it from what I hear). I've been nothing but supportive of them from the get go.
But I have to say I'm starting to get a little disappointed.
While security/functionality are the number one priority, I feel like once you get those figured out you can at least try to work on the UI a little bit. I don't think that aspect has changed since I started using it and if anything it's been getting worse. I now have multiple pet peeves with it:
1. Firefox now sometimes complains about the lastpass addon slowing pages down (sounds like they don't care much to maintain their FF addon)
2. I can't turn off the login field icons while lastpass is logged out so those are always present in login forms (until I login and it reads my addon settings to turn them off) - this is probably an addon bug but see above.
3. I think the default security settings when you install the plugin are too permissive, probably in an attempt to increase uptake (which is a big no-no to me)
4. Lately it's taken multiple back and forths when emailing support because they just can't be bothered to read the initial request. I end up repeating myself a number of times before they stop responding with some canned response that doesn't apply to my support request.

I'm probably done renewing. I've been using keepassx for things like banking and trying out bitwarden for the less consequential stuff.
Sorry - this turned into a rant.