skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You’re completely wrong.

First of all, many manufacturers market remote engine kill as a subscription service.

Second, many cars use CAN busses and connect the radio to it. That makes it very easy for the radio to interfere with crucial functions, like braking.

The CAN bus uses realtime time multiplexing for congestion control, so it is very easy to target traffic from a particular device subsystem, even accidentally.

Sources: search for “can bus vulnerabilities”. Also, a ~2012 GMC I used to own had a bug in the radio firmware that caused the ABS system to stay on when the engine was off, which ran down the battery overnight.

On my current Dodge, there is a recall where the head unit firmware leads to confusing semantics around “park” on the transmission, and a separate firmware update where it refuses to disengage cruise control.

On recent Ford mustangs, the radio can display all sorts of engine statistics, and tune the engine in real time.

European luxury cars are even more integrated on this front, and have sport modes where the radio changes the response curves for the engine, steering, transmission and suspension.

The first generation Prius had the engine control computer physically inside the radio.

That covers the major car manufacturers across three continents.
Hey, Tim here. I was the one talking about this on the podcast. As I mentioned in the podcast, the monitoring of APIs was a method that we quickly found out didn't really scale or help. It suffered from a few issues, mainly the vendors were updating their api's but not their docs. The way that we tackled it in the end was to let things fail. We have actually taken this approach with many things i.e. fail, but have a method which cleans up after the new changes have been deployed.

The way we handle it now is that our integration will start throwing serialisation errors. This will then have our platform send a probe to get a RAW response from the system and then we let the admin see side by side, the old data and the new data. This allows the developers to schedule a new deployment to make these fixes. The good thing is that when the new deployment is made, the orchestration around it will handle fixing the data that it couldn't resolve while the serialisation was failing.

We do get other benefits out of this, including the ability to better handle integrations where you have absolutely no idea what to expect from the API e.g. old Oracle, IBM products that don't have discovery endpoints like Dynamics, Salesforce etc does.

Our recommendation after managing so many integrations is "let things fail". Embrace a data integration pattern that allows things to fail.
No I don't think it's fine at all. I think Google, twatter, Facebook, et al don't care because 50 people and who they represent don't matter to them compared to the money they make.

When all rounded up it isn't even a single penny on the balance sheet. The owners of these businesses literally never even know from the their only view into the companies.

I have no idea why I'm being downvoted on this. Hackers can't do math or what?
The cryptography that apt (and other major distro package managers) use is much more safe and useful than TLS. Even if they switched to TLS on all transports, all of the package signing would still be absolutely required in order for package upgrades to be safe. In addition, the package manger should distrust the transport no matter what (in fact, it should be resilient to compromised repo servers).

Now, should apt use TLS by default? Ideally, yes. A secure transport is better than an insecure one regardless of what you're sending through it. But unfortunately it's not as simple as that. Most CDNs charge extra for TLS, and many existing free mirrors of packages don't provide TLS at all. Also, using HTTP allows for proxies to cache packages.

Unfortunately, as we discovered recently, apt had not been distrustful enough of HTTP metadata (which was a pretty big mistake since the entire design of package managers is that they must distrust the transport, especially if it's completely insecure like HTTP).
That's debatable. I can't stand hipchat but at least it doesn't fall over loading gifs.
Why do people use chat services? They want responses. Getting responses is what Slack and Discord are optimized for and why they've gained adoption.

The chat services enable responses, by making it low friction, by giving the feel of being informal and real-time in a way that email and forums don't. They also enable asynchronous responses by being persistent, that your message won't go lost and unseen by a moment without network connectivity, unlike IRC. They also enable responses by being cross-platform and device-independent, unlike SMS. They also enable responses by centralizing account control of who participates, so users can join a ready-made group organized by an administrator, unlike say Facebook messaging.

Users seek maximal interaction. The Slack/Discord model achieves this by supporting both synchronous and asynchronous responses. The former requires an informal real-time interface, the latter requires persistence. That's what came together on these services that hadn't before.
The wires are a "data bus", which connects multiple things. You could think of it as a street, which has multiple houses on it. Sure, I could use the street to store my stuff in, but then other people can't use the street to get to their houses. It's better that I store my stuff in my house. This leaves the street free so that multiple people can use it to get to and from multiple houses.
I always find it crazy that people are willing to put up with such nonsense to be a game developer. Is code really that much more interesting when it's moving some sprites on a screen?
SNO has some $300M worth of heavy water in its neutrino detector. They manage to get it on loan for one dollar[1].

I know DEAP uses argon[2], for example. IIRC the move to these more exotic fluids are due to the need to suppress the background noise.

[1]: Slide 10, https://indico.cern.ch/event/661324/attachments/1511564/2373...

[2]: http://deap3600.ca/
> If Google was so evil, why would we purposefully send traffic to sites where we only get a percentage cut of the revenue?

Can you explain this? Not sure if it's your phrasing or what, but I'm not getting what you mean.
More recent article from Cleveland news station indicates no serial killer caught yet, but I guess at least now they're actively looking for one (or three):

https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/cleveland-met...
Retailers Are Tracking Where You Shop and Where You Sleep
At least for a time, in the late 80's, in England some traffic fines were determined by the offender's income.
We're doing something like that in Germany where some fines are calculated by how much you're making in a day, so you'd get "30 days' worth".

Unfortunately, they aren't actually looking a your assets and income, but make a guess and if it's too high, you can provide proof that it's not accurate. It's usually far too low when you're in the top 5%.
The Truth About Neuromarketing (Is it Psuedo-Science?)
Leadership Lessons from Your Inner Child
https://github.com/42wim/matterircd for example
You can use your favorite irc client to connect with the ircd to talk to slack (of course it has almost the same limited irc issues)
Because if you show artificially irrelevant results too often (by biasing search results to prioritise AdSense pages), then users would stop using Google Search at some point.
Eventually you would loose the revenues coming from the SERP, which are 10 times higher than AdSense :)

Would you risk loosing 10, to get 1 ?
Floating-Point Reference Sheet for Intel Architecture
A lot of time will pass with actual self-driving cars, before AI reaches the point where such moral dilemmas are even taken into account.

And the first question is whether such moral considerations should be included into what is essentially tools or mechanisms, ie. we're not talking about GAI here.

So basically, Tesla's autopilot works by "dumb" machine learning where the artificial neural networks are built to recognize images from the cameras, and determine driving commands from them. This learning is based on a big quantity if examples, recorded from existing Tesla cars, driven manually or automatically.

The important point is the big number of examples needed to learn a classification of the situation and derive a driving command.

Already, self driving cars have less accidents than human drivers.

So let me ask: WHEN will we have a big enough number of morally questionable situation examples, before we can teach to those artificial neural network what choice to make (and clearly, this will be human programmers who will make the choice, by labeling the situations and indicating what choice must be made)?

This will never occur.

All those examples are theoretical. The rare cases where a human driver can find himself in such a situation where he can turn left to kill a kid or turn right to kill a old man, are situations in which a self-driving car would never find itself in, because it would have reacted differently before the situation occurs.

In practice, since there will be no learning, there will be a random bias, a determination that will be done considering other criteria, and over a thousand of years of self driving, when such a case where a moral choice could have been done, the choice will just happen to be random, and can very well be actually the right choice. But it should not matter.
I feel like search engine indexing is a feature that should be covered by mailing lists or a forum, not chat. I don’t think that finding a years-old chat log provides nearly as much useful context for solving an issue as longer-form communication.
I think both the approaches in your comment and the one above (Or any comment to that matter) are worthy of a lengthy discussion.

But my point was more directed towrds understanding how companies this big are starting to behave.

I do think antitrust is a way to look at it, but the anti trust laws in the US I think are difficult to point towards Google for instance (Probably the same about European laws)

> we aught to have a discussion about whether nation-state size companies are really a desirable feature

I think it goes a way longer than that. Obviously private companies are subjected to a lot less scrutiny than states, but states do miss behave and do not run into the risk of eternal intervention, unless they really fuck up, and even then.
I liked the idea of making them delete their data and start over under strict supervision. They've proven themselves incompetent at handling personal data, so they need to be supervised when they do. It will never happen, but one can dream...

More realistically, the board and executives should be personally liable for a fraction of their wealth. Fine Zuckerberg and Sandberg 10% of their hoards, and things will change.
Is it really debatable when Atlassian gave up on hitchat.
Dude needs to put this data in one of those wiggle worm graphs.
The thing I'm describing doesn't allow the steps to run in parallel. In fact it prevents it, because each of the three recursive calls require exclusive access to overlapping regions of the output.
Why stop there, and not go full nigerian scam, Argentinian style.
https://afkaristore.com/pages/referral-program
that's most modern programming languages too
>Like I said, I don’t use Facebook so I don’t care much about them. I don’t think they add a lot of value in the world, but their billion plus users must feel differently.

If billion+ users use/like FB, it means you are surrounded by them _everywhere_ you go! Its like saying Im fine living in a mental asylum b/c im not the crazy one there!

We all _are_ FB users whether we have an account or not!
Yep - same here. :( It changes it, but reports error...
>I've just used such a feature less than 2 hours ago, in Whatsapp. Published a secret in the wrong group, by mistake.

By this time, it's too late, anybody could have seen it, copied it, etc.

Deleting it after the fact is security theater.
I believe people are frowning upon what seems like an open confrontation.
"But I'm pretty sure about what happened. I was in a meeting with a customer, and we saw (yes, I've got witness) all my files (from my ftp area) were renamed to .lock and a message stating the area was attacked and encrypted."

Interesting. I assume it's managed Windows hosting? Wouldn't really be A2's problem if not.
I have long believed that the proliferation of phone-number-lookup sites was antisocial media: spammers and other bad actors creating these sites to prevent people from having a central place to talk about bad phone experiences, associated with specific numbers. Which one is the good one? You can't tell.
He literally called the Mueller investigation a coup the other day, which it was not.
Force a 1:3 stock split on all non-gov owned shares for all ownership classes with 1 out of 3 of the split shares going to the government every time a big publicly traded company ignores or breaks rules on a large scale.

Publicly traded companies are supposed to be responsive to shareholder concerns, and shareholders would be terrified of penalties denominated in stock. Pittance dollar bill fines are unlikely to ever work because finding a "just right" size is too difficult.
As far as I know, most of the devices kill the engine, but only when vehicle speed is near zero.
Thanks! The signal jamming issue is quite glaring.

> India is now trying to be part of Galileo project

"Now" would be a stretch, would it not? That article is from 2005.
Which Surgeon You Get Matters-–A Lot. But How Do We Know Who the Good Ones Are?
I had assumed it was being done in Python https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14167453
Why would you want to reach those people? Avoiding them sounds like a feature!
Just curious, what's the real advantage here of a manufactured Linux phone over just booting Ubuntu Touch on a compatible model, provided it were in a more mature state?
> i've heard the smalltalkers catch some flak about not actually writing an os because there was (apparently) the equivalent of exec(), no fork()

In the Smalltalk world, processes are just instances of the class `Process` and `Processor` is a singleton that manages all processes. You can create new processes several different ways, the most common being to send the message `fork` to a block closure.

Because everything is so late bound in a Smalltalk system, and because the objects are running and executing live all the time, it comes to resemble an OS in a lot of ways. I think the key lesson here is not just about which language is better or good for X or Y, but about how holistic computing environments are more important than languages alone. I go on a lot about Hypercard and how that was a real missed opportunity, as well as being an excellent environment. But it's Hypertalk language was only a part of that environment and cannot really be evaluated on its own, for example.
Probably Linux is the most pragmatic choice, because Android is based on Linux and vendors produce drivers specifically for Linux.
Yeah I would never suggest human failings somehow are unique to academics, unfortunately. I guess in life there's no perfect solutions sometimes; there's the constant tension of security and flexibility.
No questions right now, great work! However, one remark:

I suspect you might find the Turing Completeness & Recursive Types "off hand" result from the following paper of interest:

http://drops.dagstuhl.de/opus/volltexte/2017/7276/pdf/LIPIcs...

To quote:

"We further showed that certain variants of DOT’s recursive self types can be integrated successfully while keeping the calculus strongly normalizing. This result is surprising, as traditional recursive types are known to make a language Turing-complete."
Hypotheses:
1) prior to then, there were lots of people doing VB, but the supply was a bit larger than the demand, so employers didn't have to advertise on dice.com. Once supply dips ever so slightly below demand, you get a step function in how much you need to advertise
2) you need to advertise for VB devs once you have a VB dev make you a system, then your organization gets dependent on it, then that dev leaves. The comeback is due to the number of VB legacy systems whose original maintainer is now no longer available, and there's nobody else in the organization who knows VB.
3) Prior to '16, if you needed a VB dev you trained one in-house; it is/was a common self-taught language. Eventually, this stops providing enough candidates, or the idea of advertising on dice.com for a dev position becomes standard enough that you do it even for VB.

I have no idea which (if any) of these are correct, just throwing them out there as ideas. I have never worked with VB, so I make no assertions as to the accuracy of the general attitude towards it that these hypotheses demonstrate.
Yes, it will pop... but timing the market is impossible. We may have a good 4 to 5 more years of this.
I remember they said a lot of this when 4G was coming out. If it's anything like that we got nothing to worry about. Add some $1200 phones and slightly faster speeds when you're in the middle of the city and you've pretty much summarized it.
Hundreds of textbooks and academic work

versus

One lil blog post.
If Google was so evil, why would we purposefully send traffic to sites where we only get a percentage cut of the revenue?

I'm pretty sure you didn't mean to open this can of worms, did it have something else printed on its label?

Phone number lookup sites are almost certainly a) easily detectable; and b) low traffic. If Google only gets a percentage cut of this, why index them for fractions of pennies per year?
Dead fish wash up near $6.3M protective passageway. Why didn’t it work?
It's not quite as rare as the article makes it out to be. It's not like they by chance happened to detect a single event that only happens every few trillion years. They had a TON (actually three tons) of xenon. Decay events happened every few days, and they collected over 100 of them. Those events have a particular "signature" that allows them to be distinguished from other kinds of events. Even then, they needed to apply statistical methods to compute the odds that the data they were seeing was real and not from random chance, and the result was that the odds were not quite high enough to qualify as a discovery by the usual standards.

Details are in the original paper, which is pretty accessible:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1904.11002.pdf
Although everything is better than Google Chat.
While their permission system takes some getting used to, once you understand how it works it's very easy and you really only need to setup up once. I also don't see it an issue not being able to click a user to go to DM. Not much more work right-clicking and selecting message, or any of the other options.
One Font Took over the World
You don't get the log history of what happened while you were offline, though. This is probably the killer feature of Slack over IRC, especially for professional use, together with more seamless attachment integration.

Don't get me wrong, I love IRC. I have been using it for over 20 years (wow, I'm old). I have met there very important people in my life. But I coordinate a team at work, we use Slack and I wouldn't even consider using IRC instead.
The network certainly has something to do with it. EFNet seems to be full of trolls and is hard to have a legitimate conversation in, while much of Freenode is so focused that it’s hard to have a natural conversation without being berated for being off-topic. Snoonet seems to strike a reasonable medium and has the nicest people I’ve met out of any IRC network.
> The SGA [Student Government Association] also demanded “recurrent bias training to be provided to all hired staff, faculty, administrators, as well as all students,” with “the names of any faculty, staff, or administration members who do not participate in bias training to be made publicly available to all students.”

Also known as 'doxing'.
Bridging the Gap in 3D Object Detection for Autonomous Driving
Have you tried Discord? I seems like it would meet all these desires. We switched to it a year ago and it's been great.
Yep! https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/gjs/6.945/

I'm in his group at MIT.
Why are you assuming that parent commenter has a spouse that doesn't watch sci fi?

I'm sure you have a point, I wish you wrote about it in a clear way instead of implying unhelpful things about other authors.
I disagree - the ribbon was a massive improvement for feature discoverability and usability.

1. Lots of options visible up front. Instead of reading tons of text, or guessing at hieroglyphics, you could find the tool to accomplish your desired task visually - if you want to change text color, look for the color picker.

1. Big improvement to mouse navigation. Navigating nested menus is a bit like playing Operation - you position your cursor on the item you want, then slide it horizontally to the next menu that expanded. But if you drift too far vertically, which was easy to do of you had a disability or a crappy trackpad, you have to start again. With the ribbon, there was no destructive effect to moving the mouse around without clicking. You could always take the shortest path to whatever you wanted to click on.

1. Big improvement to keyboard navigation. Tap the alt key, and every affordance in the ribbon displays its keyboard shortcut. This allowed the same exploratory navigation as the mouse, but in a way that built muscle memory and avoided RSI.

Of course it was a large change, but the ribbon was an amazing improvement.
Try this app: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/id1397172520
You could say that about everything Mozilla has done in the last 10 years. They continue on because it's as much about changing people's priorities as enabling them.

If they then choose out of pragmatism to behave in ways contrary to their stated principles, people will justifiably call them out for hypocrisy.
Congratulations, very few people can say the same.
This is a NoWIN battle, unfortunately. Marketing folks name and rename things all the time without bothering to see if it might be misleading or needlessly confusing.

Take the term 'crypto' which until recently referred to anything cryptographic. Now that it has been commandeered by the cryptocoin folk, we're heading into the same name clashing mess when they start referring to the debit cards as 'cryptocards,' trading algorithms as 'cryptologic,' pictures of gold Bitcoins as a 'cryptographic' and their personal smugness as crypto-cocky.

Look at TDD, which now has several meanings, sometimes even within the same community.

Likewise, I remember when KVM was a device to share keyboard/video/mouse among several computers.

The TLA and xTLA thing blended with insistence that everything has a cute derivative name (iPod, iPad, Phablet...) means eventually it'll require AI just to figure out what anyone is talking about.

The infosec community does this all the time - take an old exploit technique newly implemented, then slap on a new name that confounds for no other reason than marketing...

And really, isn't 'the cloud' just what Unix has always been?
Please Mozilla! Use an open alternative like Matrix/Riot or even better - BUILD one of your own if you think Matrix doesn't cut it. A foundational OSS company depending on a closed source product and closed protocol for such a fundamental need such as communication is simply wrong.
At one time in a past life, I was running SSH on port 80, then using a SOCKS proxy to escape the madness of the network I was on.
AI in Medical Imaging: Global Market Outlook
First time I've heard of Librem 5 looks really exciting.

I can see my dream of being able to use my phone as a dockable computer coming true where I just use the phone to remote desktop to my more powerful development PC.

Anyone recommend a linux remote desktop client that you can connect to windows with?
> Python 3 is a complete disaster. It's not a newer version of the language, it's an entirely different language.

Be news to me. Are you sure you aren't talking about Perl 6?