skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
i have looked for this, and kind find any useful intersection of the terms 'archive.org' and 'DRM'...except for bemoaning its general existence.

you could elaborate?
> Small claims court is free.

It is not free in my jurisdiction. I would think it’s not free in most jurisdictions.
This is literally about a case before (OK, strictly a request to) the supreme court of the united states, having been through multiple previous courts already. How do you propose elevating such a case from... a small claims court?
PuTTY 0.72 is released – SEC update
> If they wanted to fix the problem then they'd tax capital gains at the same rate as income

That's again trying to limit supply because that's obviously reducing profitability.

We need to increase supply, or decrease demand, or both. Nothing is done on this.
> The purposes of imposing a criminal fine are to punish the offender, help compensate the state for the offense, and deter any future criminal acts.

looks like the source you cited supports both perspectives.
The oscillations of the light you see is on the tetrahertz scale, and goes nowhere close to being perceived as changing by your brain. Your rods and cones don't directly measure the electric or magnetic field vectors, they interact chemically with individual photons.
Have you tried reading it? Because PBRT is by far one of the best programming-oriented books I've read.

The literate programming style used works very well, making it easy to follow the code as the authors works it out and how it connects with the math or more abstract ideas.

Of course, it's not light reading so reading it in bed might indeed be sleep inducing. But that's hardly something you can hold against it.
Nice, I've subscribed to the RSS feed. A little weird to see such old software versions being used in an article with 'modern' in its title, but I suppose you have to pick a point that's 'modern enough' to have something the majority of people can follow along with when they're all running old software too.

I wish it covered error handling a bit more than just 'exit(EXIT_FAILURE)'. FreeType must have some sort of error code or error message function.

But that's all just minor nitpicking. I like the simple and direct walkthrough of the FreeType API (and promising to include friends from the ecosystem in the future). I hope the blog series will continue!
> How does Deutsch connect this view to experimental results?

MWI makes exactly the same predictions as regular QM, so it's connected to experimental results in the exact same way that regular QM is. The only difference is rhetoric. The canonical interpretation (Copenhagen) says, "The outcome is random, we don't know why, and we can't know why." MWI says, "The outcome is not random, all possible outcomes actually happen in point of physical fact. It appears random because when you make a quantum observation you split into multiple copies of yourself, and every one of those copies has the subjective sensation of seeing a random outcome even thought the actual outcomes were deterministic." So...

> Is the idea that all results are realized,

Yes.

> or is my choice of experiment itself predetermined?

No. This is yet another interpretation of QM called superdeterminism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdeterminism
Sometimes my day is wasted if I am working on a hard problem and I am at 75% mentally. Sometimes I am net negative (committing major bugs) and I would have been wiser to do something else entirely. If every day I am not at full capacity, there are entire problems I would therefore be wiser to leave alone. Productivity, at the detail level, is not a smooth curve.

I'll also point out that the folks advocating for "collaborative" offices generally make "bold claims" with little evidence (or even argument, at times) to substantiate.
If anyone is doing some detailed modeling of European cities to determine survival strategies for residents (based on traffic routes, proximity to forests, availability of cellars, etc.) I would be interested to learn more about that. An outcome of that could be a categorization of blocks or buildings to guide residents in their choices during a wildfire.
I believe their stance on DRM is something like:

• We (archive.org) can choose to either take in these DRMed works, archive them, and publish them online for public consumption (with their DRM intact); or we can refuse the DRMed works at the door, and thus have them unavailable for public consumption, also leaving them unpreserved; or we can archive the DRMed works, but just not publish them (again leaving them unavailable to the public.) The one thing we can't do, legally, is to just ignore the wishes of the rightsholders and put up a DRM-less version of the content for public consumption. The rights-holders are still out there to sue us. So we have to pick one of the other three options.

• One day, the rights will expire or the rights holder will disappear, and the work will enter the public domain.

• If we had earlier rejected even archiving the work because of its DRM (from some principled moral stance, as you seem to be suggesting), then at the time the work enters the public domain, we won't have a copy, and would have to then acquire one. It might be impossible to acquire a copy to preserve at that point.

• So, it’s better to acquire a copy now, under license; and then just crack the work out of its DRM later once the work becomes abandonware. (As the Archive.org staff have proven happy to do and/or support, with e.g. 4am’s work on the Apple II software archive.)

• Plus, even if we did wait to acquire the work after its rights lapsed, we would likely have to crack it anyway. Rightsholders that go to the trouble to re-release their own works without DRM are pretty rare. Some rightsholders are so lazy that, in “anniversary” re-releases of their products, they use the community’s cracked copy! So it’s not like we’re making more work for ourselves by choosing to take in DRMed works and then crack them eventually. It’s just how it has to go, to ever archive these works at all. The likelihood of ever just "coming across" a non-DRMed version of the work at some point in the future is practically nil. (It would be like hoping that if you left an aged painting on the market long enough, it would just de-varnish and repair itself.)

• And, of course, we can start on the DRM-cracking process as soon as we get the work, and keep the de-DRMed version as the canonical version to do preservation work against, as long as that’s not the version we make visible to the public (until the work becomes abandonware.) Museums and libraries have many works in “private archives”, and those archives still hold value to the public: academics can usually access them for studies, for example, as this explicitly falls under Fair Use. But more importantly, the private preservation of works that can't be preserved in public, ensures that they're preserved at all.

I hope that makes it clear why either the first or the third options (give the public the DRMed version; or preserve the DRMed version but don't publish it) are better than the "refuse DRMed content at the door" approach. Which of those other two options you favor is up to you. Personally I'd rather the public have some access to this rights-bound content rather than none.
Here's the corresponding papers:

CheckCell - https://people.cs.umass.edu/~emery/pubs/CheckCell-preprint-O...

ExceLint - https://arxiv.org/pdf/1901.11100.pdf
Poster might use preview versions, where Microsft does these things (not just Edge) if I recall correctly.
Nice, this also includes the infamous half-life 2 leak from 2007 as well as some other ones that definitely weren't officially released. Or like re-volt, which is now owned by a company still actively trying to take down mirrors of the code that pop up, hence any unofficial port of it only releases in binary form.

But then again a lot of the older leaked ones, nobody probably cares about too much. There's definitely some old, sometimes less popular games where I'd like to get hold of the code and take a stab at porting to something modern.

So if you were a game dev for some now defunct game studio in the 90s and still have some games' source floating around it would be a great coincidence if that would surface somewhere like archive.org... :-)
Hong Kong Police Fire Tear Gas, Rubber Bullets at Protestors
Right? I feel like you could build a million karma quoting the original poster and saying "Well, duh" on Reddit. Probably lots of bots doing it already.
Browsers are pretty good at loading pages
Disability discrimination laws have been in place longer than the average HN reader has been alive.

We tried asking nicely. We got told to fuck off.

Now we're using the courts, and we will win, because the law is on our side.
Americans don't seem to be particularly fond of eating unfamiliar animals. Convince the Chinese that a certain species is good for health or improves vigor, on the other hand, and the species in question will become virtually extinct in no time. See rhino horns and shark's fins.
A lovely tribute - and please take this as constructive criticism nitpick - but it would be even better if the Readme was in markdown so that GitHub would render it correctly on mobile.
The biggest issue are screen readers which often work awfully with modern web standards.

On top of most web designers being unable to test with them just to high cost.
They can still work for less as a contractor, if they want, right?
Out of the box bloom filters let you set only false not-in-set probability to zero. The probability for false in-set probability varies, though it can be low if you choose parameters wisely.

What CRLite does achieves zero for both false positives BUT at quite a price. You need to know absolutely all the things that might ever be in the set before you start.

For CRLite they can almost wave that away by declaring that the set of things that might ever be in the CRL set is the set of logged certificates, so we can get that set from the log servers within 24 hours (the "Maximum Merge Delay" in public certificate transparency logs).

But you can't do that for URLs. The set of possible future phishing URLs has infinite size.
You can’t just say something completely false, wait until someone corrects you, and then go off about how you’ve made websites that they’ve used in the last 5 years so you know more than them.

That’s called appeal to authority. It’s a logical fallacy. Your statement was false, regardless of how “authoritative” you are on the subject. If you meant something else by your statement, you should have expressed it better.
I like this one.

OperationCode.org/pageoops
Jackson-bind Block yet another gadget type (CVE-2019-12814)
Isn’t it in the government’s best interests to have a non-adversarial relationship with a community?

The government does have plenty of tools for writing correct code. OpenSSH was written with available tools, if available tools to write correct code weren’t used, there’d be very little burden for anyone to make an accusation.

>Currently, most Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) software contains about one to five bugs per thousand lines of code.

>DARPA created the Crowd Sourced Formal Verification (CSFV) program to overcome these challenges.

(The above was a project that led to formal verifications that wasn’t open sourced)
Of course it will affect air pressure, but in theory it should be literally cancelling the sound waves. All the literature I can find at a cursory glance suggests ANC headphones are better for your hearing.
Yes, that is almost exactly right. The only issue is that what distinguishes one universe from another is not actually well-defined, so you can't actually "count universes". You have to base the calculation of what proportion of universes experience one outcome versus another on something else. That something else turns out to be "branch weight", which, it turns out, is where the quantum randomness hides in MWI because branch weights can't be measured, not even in principle.
As a Canadian living in Markham, I am also deeply concerned about the growing inequality (or at least its growing visibility) and the damage it can do to our social fabric.

That being said, modulo some extreme reconfiguration of Canadian society, workers need someone to pay them. I think we should be _very_ cautious about unduly alienating capitalists in an indiscriminant manner.
jackson-databind 2.9.9.1 (03-Jul-2019)

https://medium.com/@cowtowncoder/on-jackson-cves-dont-panic-...
Seems that bootstrapping and outlier detection is the way to go independent of what language of “editor”(Eg notebook use) you are using.

The really cool thing here is that they parse the excel formula in order to automatically “figure out” how they can perform the bootstrapping.
>the same way a company of 22 year old females will have other tendencies that will prevail.

... Such as?

Btw, the issue isn't really "the tendencies 22 year old men" so much as it is people hiring for friends and drinking buddies instead of hiring for employees and colleagues
Landlords will often perform a credit/background check on potential renters, so it seems like this exists to fix an existing information asymmetry.
Thanks for the comments.

> Add a premium service where the user can request who will answer the question

I have considered that. However, since the support burden alone is maybe 5x of normal questions, I might have to raise prices by 2-3x at least. I might have to also add features to the site that don't exist right now. A premium service is certainly the best option going forward.

> Are you paying the experts? Can you pay them more for answering premium questions?

Yes they are paid. I already pay more if users ask for specific experts. But I still find it difficult to guarantee if a specific expert will bother turning up.

> Do all the experts have the same level? (obviously no)

I suppose that is subjective. But there are objective metrics that allow users to choose better.

> How much difference is there in the quality of the answers?

Experts with same rating / peer-rating are of similar quality.

---

Thanks for the detailed comments.
I don't know that the problem lies with modern web standards so much as modern web practices. I don't think there's anything in the HTML5 standard that makes screen readers shit the bed, but pervasive Javascript certainly can.
Mindfulness meditation training may help people unlearn fearful responses
I agree that it would be less-ambulance-chase-y if there was a compliance agency (such as the FTC or some other bureau) where websites could be "neutrally audited" for ADA compliance and then presented with a list of priority action items to fix. I believe it would be possible to mostly automate audit-report generation as well, since there are already ADA-checker browser extensions and tools.

A "one-strike, warning-first" system is less punitive-focused than the current system, and less likely to be abused by law firms for the goal of a quick cash grab. Personally, I would prefer to be informed and given a chance to fix something before being punished and branded as someone who hates the disabled by a law firm. How many of their websites are 100% ADA-compliant?

Obviously, it's important to be considerate about providing usable online experiences for the disabled. That should be a common goal. However, I've seen ADA lawsuit letters as ridiculous as the DCMA Youtube ones. There's an entire shitty industry centered around mailing out thousands of these letters per week hoping to collect back enough bribes to not go to court. These law firms are just like other corporations looking for a revenue stream to pad their bottomline. Contrary to their ads, they are not fighting for others or pursuing justice for society, they are trying to get rich.
You can see how well they understand the theory by how funny the joke is. The marxist one is the least funny.
I find the views in the about section to be interesting. Seems this collection has gotten a massive spike of views in the last month of ~9,000 people, which is ~30x that of the last few months. I wonder if this comes down to hacker news, because at ~70 votes this post would have a view / vote ratio of about 125x, which seems in the ballpark but maybe a little high?

As you would guess California is the most common origin for views but surprisingly Alberta comes in second with 1/2 the views of California! Are there lots of fellow Albertan devs here?
I just helped someone borrow a DRM-encumbered copy of a book from them. It wasn't pretty, but I wouldn't say it was worse than not having the book available at all, which is the only realistic alternative given that it isn't in the public domain.
Of course, she got that advice from a book and documentary. Should the government have the power to ban the sale of unapproved books and documentaries containing medical advice - maybe even the description of unsafe health and nutritional practices full stop?
- Regarding your first point, I'm pretty sure this is untrue without further qualifications (which I understand that you don't mention because this a forum and not a scientific setting). In any case any such mapping would most likely be NP hard (assuming your quantum computer has q-bits that can only interact according to some graph, I would expect this to reduce to a graph isomorphism problem).

- You would deal with that by writing down a path integral (see for example Feynman's PhD thesis) (btw. particle creation is not possible in non-relativistic QM). The tricky thing is that of course "closing the slit" is a very tricky thing to model in a path integral, but the situations "slit closed" and "slit open" are rather straightforward. In any case even without any computation what is clear from the path integral perspective is that nothing mysterious is going on: You are supposed to sum over all possible histories of the particle passing through the slit and hitting the screen, weighted by e^iS. If there is some temporal variability in the position of the slit, this just results in a huge complication in the integral to be carried out (if you model closing the slit by a time dependent potential let's say). The path integral is fundamentally a very good way of thinking about this, because it generalises to much more complicated settings (gauge theory etc.), whereas there really is nothing fundamental about measuring, you just happen to drastically and in a temporally complicated way change the background your quantum fields are propagating in.

- On the contrary, basically QFT is the only way to deal with mixed states in a principled way. For scattering you typically start out with the assumption that things are in pure states at t=-infty and t=+infty, but in between the whole point of introducing quantum fields is to keep track of how things are spatially (plus gauge degrees of freedom etc.) "mixed". To be more specific QM is just a D=1,0 QFT, with 1 time dimension and (zero-dimensional) points as spatial dimensions. A mixed state rho is nothing more than a general quantum field on these discrete points.
I did not like this article. I think the author incorrectly has some idea that many worlds asserts the multiverse undertakes a real “splitting” activity when observing the outcome of an experiment.

It does not. Rather all the different branches have always already existed all the time, and you merely observe what branch “you” are on.

When you see the outcome of an experiment, it doesn’t mean “you branched” as if the branches wouldn’t have existed if you hadn’t done the experiment.

It only means your brain got knowledge about which subset of all possible universes you happen to be in.

The probabilities in quantum outcomes, like all probabilities, are about subjective degrees of belief, as in they are about the state of a mind and not objective attributes of nature.
I see your point, although I don't think I would recommend this strategy to a good friend. there's also an emotional side to it. even if you made the "optimal" economic decision at the time, it would still feel pretty bad to pay off your loans in full over the first 5-10 years of your careeronly to see your peers' debt get wiped out at the end.
They did prevent him from using online/app-only discounts.
Actors or directors are a decent indicator of quality.

Recently I’ve found that old actors in mid-budget productions have the best overall quality.
That depends on what you mean by "this". If by "this" you mean MWI (the Multiple Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics) then:

> Is this stating that the many possibilities are all coexisting

Yes.

> and that our brain is acting as a filter to provide a view of possibilities that we define as ourselves?

No, your brain is not "acting as a filter". There are multiple "your brains" all "coexisting" in multiple universes (which MWI-ers call "the multiverse"), none of which can ever communicate with each other.
Wearing earplugs over long periods of time can give you nasty ear infections that are near-impossible to get rid of. Note: they are suggested not because of necessity, a noisy plant for example, they are suggested because of a management fad. Open offices are a choice, the noise level in a steelworking plant is not.
A New Motherboard for Amiga, the Platform That Refuses to Die
> I like doctors to be licensed.

I think this is a category error. People want doctors to be licensed because they perform medical services. A surgeon or anesthesiologist who screws up can easily kill you. Doctors have the authority to prescribe certain controlled substances that are addictive or fatal in the wrong dosages.

The damage "doctors who merely give advice" can do is coterminous with the damage random bloggers can do.
That is also an option for Chrome.
Here’s one example of DRM:
https://archive.org/details/inlibrary?sort=-publicdate

They have collections they don’t let you download, they should just refuse those collections to force the platform to be free to download like the Gutenberg Project for example.
> Over-justifying myself

That one resonated a lot. It looks to me like in a lot of micromanaged places people need to over-explain why they need to Work From Home or leave early or take a sick day. I have struggled with that also but for the last couple of months I have decided to state the fact without any justification. For example "I will leave at 2PM today" or "I'm taking a sick day today".

If you (over)justify yourself it sounds like you don't have a good enough reason to start with. And on top of that I'm an adult and don't need to justify myself for those type of things.
Society Is Built on Abstraction
Not physically fit OR disabled OR actually dressed for an office environment, not a gym (last one is especially relevant for females).
Unlike the situation in Marx's time, many workers have their retirement savings in "capitalist" equity devices like home ownership and the stock market. 2008 was terrible for them in America. The divide between workers who can only access linear growth and capitalists who can access exponential growth no longer exists.
It must have been very impressive in 2014, but nowadays DIY keyboards are a big thing. Of course most people just build a kit but designing and building isn't that hard with 3d printers, the QMK firmware and all.

Disclaimer: I'm in the middle of my first keyboard build, modified from an existing 3d-printable design. The left half works already. I'll probably blog about it when it's finished.
> Obviously disadvantages people who aren’t physically fit as they literally don’t get to contribute as much!

If I am quiet in a meeting when I have a contribution to make--and make no mistake, I'm not speaking up regardless of my fitness level--my employer suffers, not me. He suffers again when his messed up culture inevitably causes me to find another employer.
Hands on Bayesian Statistics with Python, PyMC3 and ArviZ
Accessible design improves the experience for everyone.

eg It's not just visually impaired people who hate fucking tiny fonts in light grey on a bright white background.
“You did such a good job paying off your own loans, we’re sure you’ll enjoy paying off everyone else’s loans as well...!”