skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It will be your problems when countries start removing themselves from the free and open internet, and your left with isolated bubbles that further radicalize people. These problems can be solved by making world wide platforms better so people can become educated, or we can break it up so people can have no communicate outside their country or ideology. America is also a lynch pin of defense for Europe, it spends astronomically large amounts of money on defense so other countries don't have to, so hopefully you recognize that if things go wrong here it will definitely impact the rest of the world's ability to defend themselves.
I believe they are sincere..
My apologies on the VerneMQ comment. I misread the sentence, not realizing it being a specific suggestion by you.

Regarding the topic of MQTT in general, to me it sounded as if you were not adding information but criticizing the choice of WebSocket instead of MQTT in this project. It was a misunderstanding.

To add to the discussion, maybe you could help me a bit with an issue I'm having. I'm currently working on a service which is starting to make use of MQTT for microservices communication. Initially I was using a WebSocket server for this, then moved over to RabbitMQ a couple of years ago, and now I have added a Mosquitto server which is working, but has not yet replaced RabbitMQ. This service also has one public NodeJS websocket server for web browser clients to connect to it, this WebSocket server receives the messages via RabbitMQ and dispatches it to the clients. I also want to replace that WebSocket server by another Mosquitto instance, so that MQTT will basically become the main way for communication between servers and also with clients.

I chose Mosquitto because it have been using it at home without any problems for a while now and have a custom authentication plug-in for it which I wanted to reuse.

VerneMQ is a candidate, but Mosquitto is working just fine, so I haven't looked into it again. I like how lean Mosquitto is and how it's configured inside a container. Plus I can understand the source code and eventually modify it.

Would you advise me against using Mosquitto in a production system? Which benefit would I have by using VerneMQ?

My apologies, again.
Because there's more information being communicated in "downsizing" or "re-restructuring."

All downsizing involves firing people, but not all "firing people" involves downsizing.

True, people can abuse those terms for a doublespeak effect, but they have legitimate uses.
Hundreds of luxury Vancouver mansions being rented for cheap
Hipster offended after mistaking himself for hipster
It seems from the comments that this article rubs people the wrong way. This article might be getting grouped into a speech police category that is undeserved.

I think the intention of "in my culture" is to allay a fear in the listener. The speaker is worried that there is a strong expectation of change in the listener by stating something as an axiom. The speaker's hope is that the listener will see a possibility instead of a demand.

Some people think it should be obvious that what a person states should never be seen as a demand to conform. Some believe this is a necessary life skill, especially in business.

Some people are interested in finding ways of speaking in a more sensitive way in an era that seems to be embracing sensitivity.

Its interesting to me that both sides can see each other's ways of communicating as an affront, when it is likely not the intent on either side.
Tip: Don't record laser tattoo removal
My current employer uses golang for the majority of their code base. Absolutely agree that Java would have been more concise. There’s almost nothing in golang that lends itself to writing shorter code. Error checking is verbose and dumb. Need to define interfaces just for the sake of mocking, even if they have a single implementor. No map/filter/takeWhile/etc. meaning a single or 2 line in Java ends up taking 5-10 lines and more, with helper functions littered throughout the code base, making code harder to follow and ending up with more code. Even a simple example like

final var a = foo() ? bar() : baz();

Is several lines in golang, which doesn’t even have an analogy to ‘final’

var a int
if foo() {
a = bar()
} else {
a = baz()
}
There already is a switch to disable auto trim. The pilots on the flight prior to 610 used it, as trained. The pilots on 610 did not.
Instead, currently, all packages become lint-unclean, all maintainers need to read up on what the new thing is, how it might break, whether/how it affects them, manually run some tests, and finally decide to opt in. This causes a lot of overhead and manually executed mechanical changes across packages.

I always wondered if Debian/Ubuntu could benefit from a "monorepo". It seems to work for other distributions, e.g. Alpine Linux and Homebrew.

https://github.com/alpinelinux/aports/tree/master/main

Right now every Debian package lives in a separate repo, or it doesn't even have to live in a repo at all AFAIK.

I think Debian has the most packages because their process is very loose and decoupled (as well as it being one of the oldest distros). But having tighter integration does help move things forward faster.
I don't see how any of that negates the idea of rational control in the sense that we commonly understand it. The series of physical events in the brain that lead to a decision are not subject to an out of band process that can override the final conclusion; it doesn't seem surprising that there is a delay between the unconscious processes that underpin our rational thoughts and the eventual culmination of a decision, IMO the opposite would actually be the surprising result (i.e. our conscious mind is not a supervenient product of our unconscious brain and supporting biological processes)
The other three replies offer only sympathy, while this one was down-voted. So please knock off the "never change hn" because this is no hivemind.
Sure. But the issue is professional gardeners -- including those who just have a pickup truck and and a few dozen clients. It's not just "handle a job on a full charge" since they need to work all day. The Stihl backpack batteries help a lot, but it's still going to be a lot of investment for a guy who just takes care of lawns for a living.
It is trivially true that the brain is not a digital electronic computer. You cannot, however, use that simple fact to show that the brain is not some sort of information-processing device, and as for the notion that brains do not store information, I wonder what he thinks memories are.

The author concludes by asking "Given this reality, why do so many scientists talk about our mental life as if we were computers?" He offers no support for the proposition that this view is common, and I suspect he is often taking, as literal, speech that was intended to be metaphorical.
All mails I've sent to maintainers of packages regarding issues with them have been ignored. I think they prefer you to use the bug tracker. (Which sucks, so I always end up doing nothing about it.)

In the end I switched all my servers to Ubuntu. It's been good and I love PPAs.
Jimmy vs. Dorough
I used to provide several options with background and rationale to my boss.

One day, he said, with a slightly frustrated tone, something along the lines of : "Andy: you're providing what appear to be good options and detail here - but someone in a "senior" position should recommend a path forward. Don't just give me 3 options that I need to then go and figure out for myself."

from that point on I've always tried to provide a hard recommendation - and rationale that includes a sort of decision tree approach. "We start with ______ [with good reasons to do so] then if X comes to pass we continue with it and if Y comes to pass we can pick a a different path with another option I have as backup."

The result seems to often be a discussion more about the upsides/downsides and decision tree relative to the business the organization is trying to support (a good thing) vs technical merits of the options which the technical team is trusted to be well versed in.
Absolutely false. DNS is still a huge leak of privacy, and it’s trivially easy for an ISP to rate limit traffic going to major content providers they directly peer with, which is most of their traffic.
Yea there are alternative Docker runtimes and Kubernetes won the orchestration war but Docker images are here to stay. As far as I know there aren’t better alternatives for Docker images and even Kubernetes uses Docker images. Docker as company currently has a Red Hat-like business model and that’s certainly hard to sustain so agree on that front.
>> By observing what cards people tend to pick together, you can infer that certain cards have certain properties, even if you never get see the card face.

You're assuming way too much capability that is not present. Just because a human can make this inference, it doesn't mean that a neural net can. Neural networks are notoriously incapable of inference, or anything that requires reasoning.

>> There is no proof that this network has done so, but I think word2vec shows that it's a feasible approach.

Word2vec (word embeddings in general) are actually a good example why this kind of thing doesn't work the way you think it does. A word embedding model represents information about the context in which tokens (words, sentences, etc) are found but it does not, in and of itself, represent the meaning of words. The only reason why we know that words it places in the general vicinity of each other have similar meaning is because we already understand meaning and we can interpret the results. But the model itself does not have anything like "understanding". It only models collocations.

Same thing here. You seem pretty certain that with more data (perhaps with a deeper model) you can represent something that the model doesn't have an internal representation for. But just because the behaviour of the model partially matches the behaviour of a system that does have an internal representation for such a thing, in other words, a human, that doesn't mean that the model also behaves the way it behaves because it models the world in the same way that the human does.

And you can see that very clearly if you try to use a model like the one in the article, or one trained on all the magic drafts ever, to draft a set of cards it hasn't seen before. It should be obvious that such a model would be entirely incapable of doing so. That's because it doesn't represent anything about the characteristics of cards it hasn't seen and so can't handle new cards. A human understands what the cards' characteristics means and so can just pick up and play a new card with little trouble.

As to what I mean by "internal representation"; machine learning models that are trained end-to-end and that are claimed to
learn constituent concepts in the process of learning a target concept
actually have concrete representations of those constituent concepts as part of their structure. For
example, CNNs have internal representations of each layer of features they
learn in the process of classifying an image. Without such an internal reprsentation all you have is some observed behaviour and some vague claims about understanding this or learning that, at which point you can claim anything you like.
Thanks!

I suspect with that I can probably find the repository, so that I can check whether the comment has already been fixed, then I can work out how to submit a patch or bug.
Special promotion for an online programming course for beginners
It would have been nice if the Flickr data dump kept correct timestamps on your photos. I've now got 5,000 all dated March 2019 :/
Bitcoin in 2019: The Definitive Guide [Stadivm]
Incident relationship. Two incidents for the same aircraft type in 5 months is a unicorn in the wild situation for aviation. Except like an evil unicorn. That's why it warrants mention.
0.6% of 737 MAX aircraft delivered have been lost in unsurvivable accidents... similar numbers to orbital rockets. yikes.
I first saw the suggestion at https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2012/07/09/software-inventory...

He makes a reasonable case that not keeping the bug queue manageable leads to increased cost. I've definitely been in bug triage mtgs where we spend more time discussing a bug than the code change would take.
Top Tips for New Moms
I'm sensing a bait-and-switch here.

He starts by addressing Patrick's article, which is specifically about the "90% of programming jobs ... creating Line of Business software". Then he turns around and quotes from the NASA Apollo project, and Donald Knuth. Are these examples of this type of software? Are they relevant? TeX took decades to write, and not only does he have no customers, no requirements, and no unit tests, but the author pays people out of pocket when they find a bug. It took him over a decade to make a stable release, and he's barely made any changes to the software since then. Oh, and it's all free. I'm struggling to think of how a person could be any worse at business!

Once you admit that there are radically different types of 'programming' in the world, you shouldn't be quoting from the opposite kind to support your cause. This reads like the McDonald's operations manual quoting Julia Child. They both work with food but words like "quality" or "efficiency" will have completely different meanings in these two contexts.

Knuth has many useful things to say about software, but his oft-quoted aphorism was not telling you how to make your business succeed. Are you also going to rewrite your software from scratch after 5 years once you've learned what the hard parts are?
Those things don't really count as languages, they appear to be a mix of development environments, software packages and architectures. Learning these things is critical and hard but there is a key mitigating factor. That factor is that really what needs to be learned is 'how we do things around here' which is typically company specific and needs to be learned by a new hire anyway.

Not necessarily, except for maybe Go, those are industry standard technologies that you could find someone who knew and could add value almost immediately.

We are very heavily invested in the AWS ecosystem. The difference between hiring someone who has the same amount of useful development experience but no AWS experience and someone who does and how fast they can hit the ground running is stark.
If you're writing Go, using the DNS challenge is really easy with CertMagic (disclosure: my library). And if you're running a web server, believe me when I say that the best solution is one that is integrated directly: use Caddy. It will spare you some grief and frustration.

Both Caddy and CertMagic support nearly 3 dozen DNS providers, and adding your own is relatively easy as well.

CertMagic: https://github.com/mholt/certmagic

Caddy: https://caddyserver.com
Building a Userspace Csprng on Top of Monocypher
So do you think you could pick up and become a useful iOS Dev in two weeks?
I have no expertise in the area, but I doubt it's the same cause. Every 737 Max pilot will certainly be aware of the Lion Air crash and the ways to mitigate that particular behavior of the aircraft.

We need to wait for the investigation before we jump to conclusions.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19353059
If there's a severe security issue, Debian will quickly push an update containing a backported version of the fix, assuming you have the debian-security repository enabled (which you should). Just because the version number on the package is old doesn't mean it's insecure.

https://www.debian.org/security/faq#oldversion
The article answers that. You can cast your vote as often as you want; only the last vote cast counts. So someone could coerce you to vote A (often a spouse), but afterwards you just go and vote again for B.

Of course that requires having the opportunity to vote again, so the solution won't deter anyone determined enough.

With paper ballots that problem exists too when you can authorize another citizen to vote on your behalf (this tends to be limited to one or two extra votes per person).
The article mentions he's made attempts to fix some of those issues and the problems he's encountered.
How so? Some percentage of everything on the planet is infertile and cannot reproduce, thats just the nature of genetics - why should humans get a very expensive special exception? its not as if we have a shortage of people having babies, or a shortage of kids needing a home either. I don't think you have a fundamental right propagate your genetic material.
I wouldn’t be excited at all hiring someone whose skillset is ten years out of date. It tells me a lot about their lack of willingness to keep up with technology.
That is amazing, and ai totally relate to it being unexpected.

Live well. You seem to have high strength of character.

Thanks for sharing this.
Melting Jelly Mama's Boy
You can have large code bases in assembly and C and python. Just because you can it doesn’t mean you should. Golang does not have any useful features for defining and navigating large code based. The way imports are handled is dumb and verbose. Seriously you can’t import a specific struct or function?

Also other things like you have to import “strings” to use features like split and substring, instead of them being defined on the string struct itself, which makes code awkward. No string interpolation which is quite ridiculous. The list goes on.
“Paying taxes” is a common theme used to support argument in favor of letting temporary immigrants vote in their host country. I am still searching for a country that lets it’s temporary immigrants vote before they are naturalized. There is an argument to made to tax the working immigrants. They use the public benefits of the host country - free public education, law enforcement, judiciary, libraries, roads and various other benefits. And finally they are not obligated to pay taxes if they don’t like to, they can simply return to their country.
Depending on what was obtained, very serious and with potential for ongoing problems.

If this impacted their software development, it could include source for current and older but still in use products, which could potentially be analyzed looking for potential exploits. It may include internal bug trackers that may include information on unpatched exploits or on exploits quietly patched only as part of updates and so potentially still in the wild. Heck, it may include some of their internal product security testing information and whatever might be in that.

An awful lot of large companies and healthcare systems now have Citrix portals available to the world rather than having annoying-to-manage-and-support VPN connections - are there undisclosed vulnerabilities in any of those?

Even going outside the technical side, if there's sensitive HR information they may have materials that can be leveraged for blackmail purposes to attempt to maintain long-term access.

And all of that is just talking about the Citrix remote access piece that I still think of when I hear the name. There's also XenApp/XenDesktop for virtualization, the ShareFile sharing site that others have mentioned, their endpoint management product, etc. There might even be holdover stuff - what would a copy of out-of-date source code to GoToMyPC be worth?

A lot will depend on the ability of whoever got it to capitalize on it, but assuming this was indeed a nation expect that they'll be able to spend at least some resources.
Write.as 2018 Transparency Report
KMail → https://kontact.kde.org/components/kmail.html
The article doesn't discuss this; what are the advantages to using Let's Encrypt for internal services over deploying internally signed certificates? Are there any disadvantages to using Let's Encrypt?

The rate limits alone seem to be a potential danger if they need to reissue new certificates for their 65,000 servers.
The author smugly assumes we all lack imagination in how the human mind might work, when in reality, it is he who lacks imagination in how computers or algorithms might someday work.
Rome is dead, long live Rome – Draft response to Michael Gibson
The header of the wikipedia article mentions that because the resulting particles are usually unstable, the exotic atoms typically have short lifetimes.

If someone has the time to point to the research, the article would be massively improved by mentioning the typical lifetimes of each of the listed exotic atoms.

A "short lifetime" could be nanoseconds or could be years when you compare it to the traditional lifetime of the non-exotic version of the atom and knowing what is typical for each exotic atom would be good information to have at a glance.
I’m not sure I totally buy that it is difficult to produce athletic clothing (shoes are different I think) without developing advanced fabrics and manufacturing. In particular I think many (most?) of these specialised fabrics are produced by fabric companies not fashion/clothing companies and that it is possible to buy these fabrics to manufacture your own clothes with some caveats:

1. You might not have the IP to make high quality athletic clothing because maybe it is difficult to find the right combination of materials.

2. Fabric companies probably don’t want to sell small quantities of fabrics produced in large volumes.

3. Some fabrics may be limited to specific companies by contracts.

I also claim manufacturing at scale is not necessary to start a company making athletic clothing.

I think it probably is possible to find a niche as a small company selling (expensive) athletic clothing. I think it’s also possible that the fabrics used by mainstream athletics companies are not necessarily the best around as products made from these fabrics typically need to be made in large volumes reasonably cheaply and I would expect newer better/experimental fabrics to be neither available in very large quantities nor reasonably cheap.

I would certainly expect such a company to exist even though I don’t know of one.
> I honestly can't wrap my head around nonexistence, a brief 0-100 year existence, and then nonexistence again

Death might not be non-existence. Many religions, philosophies, spiritual teachings, say that it isn't. Of course, maybe they are all baloney–and a lot of them have to be mostly that–but there is at least a chance there is some truth in one or more of them.

Maybe quantum immortality is true, and all of us live forever, but it is a lonely existence, cut off seemingly forever from family and friends. (I hope that isn't true, it sounds rather hellish.)

Could we be living in a computer simulation? If we have no idea, shouldn't we assign a 50% probability? But, if we are in a computer simulation, our simulators might decide to provide an afterlife for us. And if we have no idea whether they would or not, shouldn't we assign a 50% probability to that? Which gives us 25% chance of a simulated afterlife – not the best odds, but far from the worst either.

We could be physically resurrected into some paradise by various random processes (quantum tunnelling, quantum fluctuations, thermal fluctuations). The probability of that happening is immensely small but non-zero. No matter how small it is, if the future is infinite, then almost surely it will happen eventually.

Most people who think death is non-existence accept a materialist position in the philosophy of mind, but often without giving any great thought to the alternative positions. If idealism is true–and we have no hard evidence it isn't–then death being the cessation of existence is far less likely. If idealism is true, then quite possibly minds are inherently immortal, in which case an afterlife would be metaphysically necessary.
I have rebuilt tons of engines. Reboring requires torque fixtures. Period.
I’m sorry you got that impression from the article. I’m not leaving over less free time, I’m leaving because of the issues I describe. Reduced free time amplified some issues, though.