skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The real reason of substandard education is the lack of better lawmakers IMO. And it's an especially hard problem to solve in India.

Its a vicious cycle where uneducated citizens select equally uneducated lawmakers (because susceptible to propaganda/lies easily). The uneducated lawmakers don't have much incentive to improve education, because that will affect their election results, next time around.

And turning to private institutions is of no use. They have neither the good will nor the cash flow to actually do something about this problem...
Isn't this solved by DKIM, which at least GMail sort-of supports?
I concur. I switched from law to programming out of fear of doing the boring paperwork part of every project all my life, and wasting it.
Fantastic! Is there a reason you are not using Raspberry Pi's though?

I've got a pop-up computer lab with 10 stations and the whole setup only cost a few hundred bucks.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/RfECe5S9eU2HZx627
https://photos.app.goo.gl/j9DnoPewVBrBuVcs5
With multi-stage Docker builds nowadays it’s easier to have an intermediate builder environment with all the build deps installed.
the problem with "AOL Chrome" is that it's based on advertising and internet company services where Mozilla has a chance to provide a service, even if it could be paid, without advertising and privacy friendly like their latest experiments.
I think even conceptually it's hard. Your email address is your proof. You have to use a password to access it so it must mean only you can send emails with it.
Yet this is exactly how SSL security is implemented.

Speaking of that, couldn’t companies use their existing domain certificate to sign emails?
Mail.app happily supports signing, and has done for like a decade - the problem is having some meaningful directory service. Basically, enterprises can often times set up internal key directories, but general publicly accessible directories are much more challenging (in a user friendly way).

[edit to add instructions:
1. If you already have a public signature you can import it into keychain, otherwise create a certificate via Keychain Access | Certificate Assistant | Create a certificate...

2. set the permissions to allow it to be trusted for signing + decrypting email (in an enterprise environment this is automated) by double clicking the certificate in keychain access, expand /trust/ and set secure mail to "always trust".

3. In the subject field of a new mail you should now see a couple of buttons, the default (I think) is for signing to be enabled -- the right button
]
Meh. Every day, thousands such things are posted.
Hardcoded behaviours that successfully allowed small clans to thrive are not necessarily the best use of resources in large scale societies.
Either this is true and the CA system for HTTPS is (as you say) a false sense of security.

Or it’s not true because we implicitly trust key signers; unless you’re talking about PGP only, which only has a web-of-trust model and a very poor usability track record. If that’s the case you should look at S/MIME which is very similar in its model to what we currently use for securing websites.
Quote from the Elastic response [1]:

"Our products were forked, redistributed and rebundled so many times I lost count. It is a sign of success and the reach our products have. From various vendors, to large Chinese entities, to now, Amazon. There was always a "reason", at times masked with fake altruism or benevolence. None of these have lasted. They were built to serve their own needs, drive confusion, and splinter the community."

They're saying Amazon "forked, redistributed and rebundled" just to "to serve their own needs, drive confusion, and splinter the community". That's all BS, except the "serve their own needs", which the license that Elastic has chosen (and benefited from) explicitly grants.

[1] https://www.elastic.co/blog/on-open-distros-open-source-and-...
Too bad many conversations are akin to UDP and not to TCP
If you know the ip adress of the peer and you can adress him directly. You dont need a signaling server in that case.
I will argue that something like the chrome untrusted certificate warning will scare away most of the users.

https://i.stack.imgur.com/r0iOf.png
Scientists Have Discovered a Shape That Blocks All Sound
This is a deeply ironic reply - is it intended to be? There's almost no words there that would gel into comprehension in any way for average Joe and Jill.

I don't want this to come across the wrong way - but are you a Linux engineer/admin? I think when someone has deeply understood deeply technical things for a very long time, they lose touch with just how arcane their knowledge is and how much of a real expert they are - skyscrapers above the ordinary level of knowledge. This state leads them to think that what is obvious to them can't be hard for others to understand.
More proof that the Nobel-prize can be a meaningless metric.
> If you contribute code to a project under Apache 2.0 terms

Apache 2.0 is applied per source file, not per the whole project. This is unlike copyleft licenses like the GPL, which have a demand for the whole project to be licensed under GPL-compatible terms. In other words, for a repository that mixes Apache 2.0 with proprietary code, your contribution isn't necessarily licensed under Apache 2.0, unless you're explicit about it (e.g. the source file has the license header).

That said, even if the license if liberal (like Apache 2.0 is), that doesn't mean anybody can change it without your approval. This is a common misconception with liberal licenses. Just because the license is very permissive, that doesn't mean you can copy / paste that code and re-license it in any way you want, without explicit permission from the author.

So you're correct in that regard.
I really hope that’s not the case - I can see the argument that this might not be a design fault and we need to wait and see - just like a330s weren’t grounded after AF447

China clearly grounded ge planes for political reasons, and maybe other countries did it due to the optics.

However if the decision in the US has been pushed simply for political reasons that’s a terrible indightment on the industry.
That's not the point. The point is that the comparison between people's lives and money is invalid.

Because scarce resources are a real thing, there necessarily should be a value to life, otherwise you are just ignoring reality.
Let it be clear that even if Boeing is not at fault grounding the plane is the best course of action in front of the limited evidence. Insight is 20/20, but we don’t have it. There are 2 planes whose altitude was erratic before their crash and a plausible common scenario to explain them.
Swift: Value Types vs. Reference Types, and When to Use Each
Nonsense. This plane right now has two out of about four hundred that crashed, which for a new plane is more than enough reason to hit the 'pause' button for a bit until we know or least think we know what went wrong.

Thinking like that does not result in 'suspending any beneficial activity with any possible risk', it just suspends this activity with a roughly 0.5% risk of incidence until the causes are clear.

There are plenty of other aircraft in the world, also many non-Max 737's.
I do PGP sign my emails but not the mails that my little web app sends out. I should try that and see how users do react.

How's the state at the receiving side? I mean what percentage of users would be displayed a message about the PGP signature being valid despite them neither using nor knowing about PGP?
I think you mean the Ethiopian airlines case, not Egyptian.
Find Best Magento 2 Extensions
I find the nuance in the reporting to be quite fascinating depending on who the perpetrators are.

When it was rich Chinese international students doing the cheating, most articles would almost always allude to how it was cultural and how it reflects on the general population.

Now that's it's rich American students, the reporting focuses on wealth and class and how it's an isolated incident.
Boeing’s share price is currently 375

In December it was 316.

It’s lost 2 months of gains.
Lol, Queensland University of Technology and The University of Queensland are two different universities.
Could be! It’s an emotional moment and not a particularly nice place to wake up. But there’s definitely something at the back of your mind telling you something fairly awful happened. Of course your mind knows this anyway - you know you had surgery and have the scars - so it could all be an illusion.
It’s interesting that most of these would have been avoided by using a safer language than C++.
I can write your name as the sender on a physical letter and send it, and I can do the same thing with an email.

There, conceptually it's explained, to anyone who has any concept of what "writing" is.
Awesome! Things like that are the reason we can't stop reading HN. There are way too many interesting pieces popping up. I just need to be careful not to spend the entire day here.
https://xkcd.com/1181/
OK, I'll expand my comment to say that "more code for the same functionality is a liability".
You are begging the question by assuming that a signature on an email message proves anything useful to the recipient when the facts on the ground show this not to be the case.

It is not harder to conduct phishing with email signatures, and the fact that such phishing campaigns have no problem putting TLS certs on their phishing sites is a simple existence proof of this fact.

Email signatures does not impact spam in any significant manner beyond existing measures to prevent domain name forgery in the header. Spam email signed by joe@cheap-ray-bans.com does not stop being spam because it is signed and the signature provides no useful signal to spam filtering tools.

The difference between an email signature and a TLS cert on a web site is that in the latter case the user is making an effort to connect to a specific site and the certificate ensures that they are in fact connecting to paypaaaaal.com even if other means were used to misdirect them to this site. With email there are two problems to be addressed, transport privacy/security (a sender problem) and unsolicited email (a recipient problem) and signatures are only useful in ensuring integrity of the former and do nothing for the latter.
I have inside information from very reliable sources that Apple will maybe release a newer faster iPhone this year, but definitely by the end of 2020. I also have inside information that Donald Trump will definitely no longer be president of the United States in 2025. My sources also tell me that a crime will happen a few minutes from now, somewhere in the world.
An intro to dynamic programming for coding interviews
Weird, the email says Queensland University of Technology but the author talks about The University of Queensland. Two different universities but they are close (physically) to each other.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_accidents_a...

Oh cool 5 events in the last 23 years. That sounds like a stellar safety record to me.
The FBI must be extremely bored to waste their time with that trivial day-to-day bribery that everyone takes for granted. The cultural shock to those poor rich parents must be debilitating. How is the country supposed to work if you can't grease the wheels? On the plus side, any actual crime must obviously have been extinguished.
It's true that initally, Hacker Noon was just picking articles that were already published. My point still stands though that this added a lot of value for me as a content producer because those same articles didn't get much attention before they were included in Hacker Noon.

Then I started publishing straight to Hacker Noon because I knew that my article would for sure at least get a couple of thousand reads no matter what; and the most useful articles ended up getting almost 100K reads (highly trageted too; almost all software developers). I don't think it could have happened without Hacker Noon.

As an open source developer who spent thousands of hours working on a project without making profit from it, I can attest that in the current system, it does not matter who does the actual work. It's who can capitalize on that work who takes the profit. I'm pretty sure that Medium has profited from hundreds of open source projects as well. There is no point to try to moralize this.
not for the purposes of responding to a comment making many wild claims about industrial scale farming
Did the E.U. ground the A320 when the Germanwings suicide pilot crashed the plane in the Alps, killing 150? Investigators didn’t know what brought that plane down for several days. Wouldn’t the prudent thing to do be to ground all Airbus A320s until the cause was confirmed? Did they ground the A320 after the Egyptair crash? They still aren’t sure what brought that plane down. But they didn’t ground the fleet. How about the Metrojet flight that crashed just a year earlier? At least 3 A320 crashes in as many years, but they don’t ground Airbus.

If it were a Boeing airplane, you can bet the EU would have grounded them. Given the E.U. has provided about $22 billion in subsidies to Airbus, it makes perfect business sense for the E.U. to ground Boeing 737s, but not ground Airbus when there are Airbus crashes.

In 2012, Australian safety engineers called for the grounding of the A380 due to significant structural cracks, in Qantas and Singapore airplanes, yet Airbus refused. Is it fair to say that the E.U. and Airbus cared more about profits than safety back in 2012? Has the E.U. ever grounded an Airbus plane ever?

Let’s not make the mistake of assuming benevolence that which is better explained by profit or politics.
Nobody said anything about monitoring or restarting processes, and containers aren't vms.
Note that 15 vs 10 incidents per year is also not accurate since there are far fewer 737 MAXs out there.
Almost no one comprehends https either. Yet it seems to work well enough to protect people.

The user-visible part of this is very limited. Remember, no one is expected to sign their own emails: just verify that the signature is correct (which the software will do). It's not that different from verifying a handwritten signature.
Sorry, but that's nonsense. The Received headers in an e-mail can already guarantee that your company is the source.
> are you a Linux engineer/admin?

Reminds me of yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19357573
You keep saying millions of dollars will have been wasted. However consider an other option where it turns out to be a problem with more airplanes and hundreds of of lives 'will be wasted'.

Some countries take a more precautionary approach to risk than others where there is uncertainty, and I, personally, am happy to live somewhere that is willing to take the decision to prevent possible harm to human life instead of possible harm to (a relatively small section of) the economy, where there is uncertainty.
Celebrities and CEOs charged in exam cheating scheme
But how would it help to not grounding the plane in the US if it is grounded pretty much elsewhere? I am pretty sure orders will get canceled or at least postponed over this. And Boeing pretty sure cannot risk another incident.
Af447 immediately suspected the pitot tubes, as it was an ongoing effort to change them for a different model when the crash happened. A bit like in the Boeing case, it was hoped that the pilot would manually handle the issue if the freezing happened.
Optimum adaptive array stochastic resonance in noisy grayscale image restoration
It's not a petition. It is a popular initiative that will add an amendment to our constitution if 100'000 people sign it and it passes a public vote.
In my experience, "slim" Debian images (like `python:slim`) aren't significantly larger than Alpine-based ones, but save lots of time and headache when something assumes glibc and breaks (or, worse - subtly breaks) with musl (or doesn't have a binary distribution for musl so every time image's built you have to build from source).

Also, I'm not sure what are the benefits going `FROM alpine` and installing nginx, than just starting `FROM nginx:alpine`. The latter has benefit of a more straightforward update logic when a new nginx version is released - `docker build` will "just" detect this. It won't notice that Alpine repos have an upgrade, though, and will reuse cached layers for `RUN apk install nginx`.

Just saying.
> not wanting your bank account emptied by a criminal?

So are you saying that Cliqz, Pocket and Mr. Robot led to emptying even one person's bank account?

I don't know why you keep bring up the session manager. If you don't like Firefox's features, fine, go ahead and use another browser and ignore Mozilla's role in protecting the open web. But it has nothing to do with security or whatever.
Yamaha OP* Web Gateway
FWIW Facebook will not only sign but encrypt its emails sent to you using your PGP key.
How to Get Pregnant Fast with Irregular Periods?
Initially my reaction was "is this really a crime as opposed to a unethical act" then i read ...

The head women's football coach at Yale University was allegedly paid $400,000 to accept a student who did not even play the sport - and those parents gave Mr Singer $1.2m for arranging the bribe
Author does not mention dkim in article which makes me think he might not "read all the relevant RFCs" as he claims.
Majority of important emails are signed and are not easy to spoof
I think the difference is people can envision how someone can write a fake sender on snail mail but they can't envision how it's done on email -- they need to log in first, after all.

(Also I wonder if using the word "signature" only makes it harder to explain. Like, trying to explain to someone how an analog signature proves your identity. Because, well, it doesn't.)
I think square acres might work as the article could be referring to the area moment of inertia of the floating vegetation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_moment_of_area). I suspect this is not the intended meaning though. :)
The site works fine in Firefox incognito mode and Javascript disabled (uMatrix).
The US doesn’t have many MAX planes either.

Southwest have 35/755 planes

American 22/956

Norwegian by comparison have 18/163 - a far higher proportion (of course Norwegian isn’t an EU airlin but they have EU subsidiaries included in that total)
> In actual buisness dealings Redhat has always led the way in enterprise

Not going to rephrase what others have said but wanted to add a funny piece of anecdote: Long time ago when I worked for telcos many customers required a RedHat professional license for any piece of infrastructure running Linux. We therefore used to license one RedHat server for each of the deployed server running Debian :-p
> However, as the blog rightly points out, having companies sign their emails would be a massive step in the right direction.

Isn't this what DKIM was supposed to be?
Their cheapest instance is actually just 0.5EUR/month if you don't need a public IP.
> For the US, something like Lambda school seems to be a great alternative. For Europeans, it’s way too expensive at $30k max.

You should tell that to our rapidly growing number of German and European students :)
there s also rocket chat
> When you are born into privilege (kid of a celebrity), you are afforded the best private tutors and academic resources that money can buy

The most expensive, sure, but the best? Celebrities are often no more qualified to select quality outside of their field—and education is rarely the field of any celebrity in our society—than any random person picked off be street, and they are a lot higher value target for charlatans. Sure, they may have staff who nominally assist them, but even if the staff are skilled and would be useful if they were vigorously loyal, they, in some cases, can be corruptly influenced just like university staff can.
Out of interest how is diversions different from the alternatives command
I get what signing is — but to the ordinary person it solves a problem they didn’t even knew they had. When you explain it like you did my first question would be why emails are not signed automatically if it is just about the press of a button?

With things like signal or whatsapp you get encryption and signing automatically and everybody uses it.

Why don’t people use signing with email then? Because it is not the default, not built in and not the standard everywhere. Blaming those people for it is wrong. Blame those who didn’t manage to implement the standards and stand in the way of making it the default
> They posed for picture of sports they didn't even play, and must have referenced it on their application

What makes you think they wrote their own application?
The World Pulls the Andon Cord on the 737 Max
uh, "cloud" isn't a magical thing that has specialized hardware for voice recognition. It is just a computer. Just like the device you have locally.
So if the device locally can run the NN then there is no need to have a "cloud" do it. You only add latency.
Eh... rarely is a pretty harsh outlook. We forget that these companies tend to have their employees supplying patches and features to many open source projects that matter (like the Linux kernel), working on standards, etc.
What other airlines are you comparing it to?
To some extent this is happening, although not on the level of individual email addresses, rather it's the domains that are now checked (where possible), and services like Gmail warn when an email seems to come from a different origin.
Only by 18+.

We helped a 45-year-old get hired recently!
Such a solution is of the sort where you can't make up your own opinion if the two (hopefully) experts that looked at it disagree. And if they happen to agree you still have to trust them because you'd have to train for several years to be able to follow their argument.
Nobody knows why this plane crashed. The flight recorders have just been recovered and so far there has been nothing in the news about what was on them.

Yes. And the recorders have angle of attack data. We'll know within days if it's another AOA sensor problem.

Southwest, the biggest US operator of 737 MAX aircraft, bought the "AOA Disagree" option on their aircraft, and recently added an AOA indicator.
Many operators didn't get that option; Lion Air didn't have it. If you have that, you get a warning that the flight control system is seeing bogus AOA data.
It is somewhat less of a safety issue if you have the backup systems.

Why this aircraft was ever offered without "AOA Disagree" sensing is unclear. The single active AOA sensor can force the nose down. The pilots can switch to the other flight control computer and use the other AOA sensor, but at that point they're losing control of the aircraft.
Ask HN: Why do websites have small fonts?
I haven't done any scientific measurements, but my experience with the sites which I visit and which are usually shared here is something like this:

* 80% have painfully small font-size: I need to view the site at 120%-140% zoom to be easily readable

* 15% have ok font-size: I can read it at 100% zoom, unless I'm tired (then 120% zoom will usually do the trick)

* 5% have large enough font-size which I can read regardless of my tiredness

Ok, some sites haven't changed their design in 10+ years, but I see the same when people here share posts from their personal sites, written recently. You would expect those people to "keep up with the technology" and care about readability.

How come the small font-sizes are so prevalent? Is there some reason I'm not aware of why people don't use larger font-sizes?
How do I give access to contributors to my Rad projects?
No reason why it cannot work like https. It’s uo to email clients to build user-facing support and they simply do not.
> They had a 200 hour pilot flying in the right seat of the crashed airplane. Star Alliance or not, who in the hell defends a low-time student pilot flying right seat in an airliner?

So do European airlines and they have great safety records.
And that has zero relevance here as the FAA is Department of Transportation.