skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Catawiki | Engineers | Amsterdam, Assen (Netherlands) | Full Time | ONSITE | VISA | www.catawiki.com

Hello Party People! As one of the fastest growing online companies in Europe we offer a great opportunity for you to grow as a developer working with an amazing team of 70+ engineers inside a diverse company with 40 nationalities and counting!

We have vacancies for back-end, front-end and android developers. On a daily basis you'll work with Ruby, JS, Swift, Java and Python. If you're into lower level technologies we have challenges for you helping us scale Nginx, MySQL, Redis and ElasticSearch, all running in a multi-tenant environment (metal, AWS, GCP).

Our challenges today include migrating our old Rails platform, create a seamless integration between our hosting providers and establishing sane abstractions across all of our applications/services. As well as this we’re building out our microservice architecture (40 services and counting) and building out new features for our millions of users.

You can work from two locations in the Netherlands (Amsterdam and Assen) and we've gotten pretty good at the whole relocation business, so even if you're outside the country feel free to drop me a line at j.lesner@catawiki.nl with your resumé (Github/Gitlab will suffice if you don’t have a CV handy)

You can also apply direct on our careers page: https://www.catawiki.com/jobs and you can read more about our recruitment process here: https://github.com/catawiki/join-us.
Your post sparked curiosity in me, and I googled it... but according to Wikipedia, the Portuguese dictatorship expanded literacy to cover most of the population, and also made a:

> strong investment in secondary and university education, which experienced in this period one of the fastest growth rates of Portuguese education history to date. [1]

So, it seems like Wikipedia contradicts your statement...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estado_Novo_(Portugal)#Educati...
"These are all friend links — because I love you — so you will be able to read them whether you’re a member of Medium or not."

Promptly got told off by Medium for not having an account and that I'd hit my quota of "Member Previews"
A lot of this sounds like great work, and the GNU project is doing great work. However, I assume I'll have to prepare for more software breaking? When 2.28 rolled around, Electron and a bunch of GNU software (which relied on glibc specific stuff which changed) broke.
Many people use "lay" where "lie" should be used.

Words mean things.
In fact this isn’t the reason I have privacy concerns, it is actually the least concerning point.

My points are:

- while I might be an uninteresting target, this doesn’t mean others are not. Lawyers, Doctors, Jiurnalists, Activists and so on certainly are targets that are and will be spied on if it is easily possible for adverseries to get the data (e.g. without a real.court ruling etc). I profit from a society where these groups and their communications are protected. The chance that this can be used against these groups in form of kompromat for example is enough for privacy rules to exist.

- Privacy rules also try to counteract a inbalance of power. In the age of complexity those with more and better information have more and better power. “We are the good ones” or “But we would never do such a thing” are cute arguments, but ultimatively I want to live in a state where the accumulation of power by unelected forces is limited by design. When a company knoes all about you while they themselves tell you only the marketing version, there is a extreme inbalance in power that benefits them against you. In practice it would look a bit like the cambridge analytica thing where every individual saw only (fake) things that nudged them into one or the other direction by using facebooks targeted adverticement, but on a bigger scale it was targeted manipulation by false imformation. This is not only unethical, but potentially dangerous to the instable societies we live in.

- privacy is about marketing. The big californian giants are so good to make things simple for all of us. But when it comes to the question how much data they collect when, they cannot give a straight simple answer, but a wall of legalese that doesn’t tell anybody what’s going on. If you actively decept people by downplaying the potential impact of the privacy violations you profit from, that is unethical for sure.

That beeing said you can have the standpoint that making money is more important than a functioning society with trust between citizen and the companies they are customers of — but don’t be surprised when the accumulation of power and the erosion of democratic principles show devastating results. Tech companies do shape our future if they wan’t or not. The question is, if they do it by critically following up onto their good intentions, or by blindly giving in to their incentives?

Right now it looks like the latter.
Making sense of React's render props
> When this story broke, I dipped into Apple’s terms of service myself and, though there are mentions of quality control for Siri and data being shared, I found that it did fall short of explicitly and plainly making it clear that live recordings, even short ones, are used in the process and may be transmitted and listened to.

The implications of what they agree to are impossible to understand, by design. They're crafted by lawyers to be as vague and all-encompassing as possible.

I actually read more than one story last year by some tech site claiming that no Siri data left your iphone at all. Even journalists who would love to stir up controversy have no idea what is going on.

Its impossible to understand what is happening on our locked-down mobile devices
Alternatively, the pet cat is in eternal semi-kittenhood and human(s) play the role of its mother cat.
Discovered: The Miniature Cousin of the T-Rex
That depends on your definition of efficiency.
> If your use was really, trully unobjectionable you'd be fine with getting clear and explicit consent.

This ignores human nature: requiring people to make a decision, any decision, is a friction point that will lose users. Something like "we'd like to increment a counter when our app crashes, we won't log anything else than that single bit".

So first of all, you'll have people who will claim that you could be lying, and they'll opt out, or not install your app, or whatever. Fine. But now all the people who truly didn't and don't actually care will have to make a decision. And making choices takes effort. So some people will just refuse to make a choice, and you'll lose users.

Consider the other side of this: I'm from the US but currently in Europe. GDPR requires explicit consent for the various trackers, it has defaults. I don't change them. I don't want to think about them. I don't care enough. And it's just effort I have to expend before I actually get to the stuff I'm interested in. Like a government mandated paywall (think the "we use cookies..." but more extreme, with checkboxes to decide which cookies they can store).

Even as someone who truly actually doesn't care, and is happy to, in the abstract, give explicit consent to all the tracking these sites do, I don't want to have to explicitly consent, because its work to do something I don't care about.

I expect, though I'm by no means certain, that most people who aren't on HN are in that bucket. And that means that requiring explicit consent for otherwise innocuous things is just bad for business with little gain, and it numbs people for explicit consent on actually important things.
You my not care about me, but I care that you (company/developer) are abusing private data. That makes it your problem, because I (and cohorts) are your customers. My privacy is your problem and your obligation as a developer or company. It's on you to be ethical.
It's certainly possible to do it in FPGA, I was involved in this project a few years ago: http://www.argondesign.com/news/2014/jun/23/ultra-low-latenc...

Although it limits the complexity of the model and makes it harder to iterate on the development of the model.
Datamining Bandersnatch
Global labor flow network reveals the dynamics of geo-industrial clusters
I always keep my ad-blocker off by default, because in general I want to support websites that show ads, except when they get in my way. I had my ad-blocker deactivated when I visited this link, and this is what I saw:

https://ibb.co/BTkP6TL

(huge pop-up telling me to deactivate my ad-blocker in order to read the article, even if it was already deactivated).

Ironically, I then activated my ad-blocker for that website and the popup went away. Such idiotic practices.
The Haskell Phrasebook
Show HN: Node.js Client for CommonCrawl Archive
One Canadian student engineering team recently won an engineering competition by creating a cell phone tracking system for an airport. The ethics are pretend, the engineering association only cares about punishing people for mistakes (at least, as I'm told by the seniors I've spoken to).
Saying "call X" where X doesn't have an English name(and Siri is set to English) is just bound to fail. It's like the most basic functionality that all voice assistants fail at miserably - google assistant is equally garbage at it.
Elaborating slightly, this works because some types of solar panels can be overloaded by several orders of magnitude so long as the panel temperature is kept low enough.
Mysterious radiation leak traced to Russian facility
Fair. I considered explaining that exception, but decided it was simpler not to. Of course someone is going to call me on it.

Arguably server_name isn't part of making sure who is who - the protocol doesn't care what you put in there, it's just that you can reasonably expect that if you say you wanted to talk to Charlie then you shouldn't be surprised if you get Charlie instead of Bob.

Eventually in eSNI the server_name will only be a bluff, since it's in plaintext and we'd rather not tell eavesdroppers who we're talking to, it will just have some generic masking name e.g. it might say some.cloudflare-server.example and then an encrypted record would reveal which actual Cloudflare server you wanted only to Cloudflare who are answering the connection.
>If we assume Hask, the universe of Haskell types and functions operating, is a category (which is hotly debated with some regularity, as there is no formal definition of Hask).

Isn't the consensus that "Hask is a category as long as you wave your hands profusely and pretend that exceptions and non-terminating functions never happen"?
And if you zoom out and watch the impact of privacy violations on a state level?

Privacy violation is power. And all power that isn‘t elected should be limited by those who are, so we can shape our future. The way things are now companies like facebook or google could easily threaten any elected leader with annihilation simply by using the gathered data and sending the right messages to the right people. They wouldn’t even have to use fake news for that.

Privacy never really was a individual problem, it is a systemic one.
SEEKING FREELANCER | Berlin | Onsite | Senior Android & Senior Backend (Python) Engineers

xbird is a medical AI company developing ways to use smartphones and wearable devices to predict and prevent health risks. Our technology captures data streams from the built-in sensors of smartphones and wearables, and analyzes these to detect critical health events before they occur.

We are looking for strong senior Android & senior backend engineers who can hit the ground running and help us deliver on upcoming client projects.

We are an early-stage startup and prefer the whole team work onsite (most of the time) in our Berlin office.

To learn more, visit http://www.xbird.io/ . If you are interested, contact me at markus@xbird.io
...actually it doesn't sound to me like this article is about HFT-based prop trading at all (prop trading would mean Goldman Sachs taking positions onto their own books), but about the business unit called GSAT (Goldman Sachs algorithmic trading) who execute trades on behalf of clients, so never taking any positions onto their own books.

The traditional market model used to be that at every point in time, a market maker would offer a price to buy/sell at. The bid would, of course, be lower than the ask, the difference being called the spread. When a pension fund wanted to execute a trade, they would have had to cross the spread, and, statistically speaking, half the spread would immediately accrue to the market maker as profit. ..so this is money that YOU, the holder of a pension, are losing, and that THEY, the rich folks acting as market makers that the public likes to get mad at, are taking away from you.

The business model of GSAT is that a pension fund can ask Goldman Sachs to use algorithms to do things on their behalf that are less naive than what I just described above and end up giving less money to the market maker. For example, GSAT can become a market maker on your behalf, but make a market on only one side, i.e. only offer a price to buy at or only offer a price to sell at, with the resulting trades being executed on your behalf, so it is now you who makes money off those trades, in the same way as it would traditionally be a market maker's privilege to do.

The public loves to get mad at Wall Street. But they should please get their facts straight about who the good guys are and who the bad guys are.
Markets around the world are determining prices on a massive variety of instruments that derive value from the current and future value of products such as currencies, interest rates, equities, grains, livestock, metals, oil, gasoline, natural gas, and electricity. These prices allow us to prioritize resources, make fair transactions, and manage risk (i.e. buy insurance on the value of critical products so that we can plan and invest more effectively). The value of all these instruments are related to one another, as well as to realtime world events, in complex ways that no one entity has a perfect view of. Consequently, markets work by polling the expertise of many different parties who all understand a piece of how things should be valued. This results in millions, if not billions, of interconnected price-discovery feedback loops. The markets are kind of like a massive, distributed, realtime, ensemble, recursive predictor that performs much better than any one of its individual component algorithms could. The reason why shaving a few milliseconds (or even microseconds) can be beneficial is because the price discovery feedback loops get faster, which allows the system to determine a giant pricing vector that is more self-consistent, stable, and beneficial to the economy. It's similar to how increasing the sample rate of a feedback control system improves performance and stability. Providers of such benefits to the markets get rewarded through profit.
> Voice recognition isn't really possible without someone listening to train the system.

IBM ViaVoice was released in 1997, and did standalone voice recognition to an acceptable degree from my recollection (after a couple of hours training).
Especially if its hidden 5 layers deep in some settings and you don't know it exists, and is opt-out
The problem seems to me is hanging on long enough to reach the future.
Produce traceability and marketing, redefined through user experience
UI/UX Design clients include Jivabhumi from Agriculture Industry. We reconstructed their website which resulted in increased user traffic and consumer interactions.
So much transparency is that, in Norway, you can look up the yearly income of anyone online on the government's website :)
I'm always happy to see L-Systems! I find them really awesome, the base principle is very simple: string rewriting. But the results can really be impressive for such a simple concept.

I can't help but do a shameless self-plug: I'm developing an interactive L-System generator : https://github.com/epholys/procgen.

Here is a little demo: https://www.reddit.com/r/proceduralgeneration/comments/b4kpa...

And here are the L-System I've produced: https://imgur.com/a/0Rx7uln
Int addition never takes constant time unless your ints are bounded by a constant. Which is why serious people use bit complexity, or otherwise take into account the word size of their machines. Very serious people also take into account the number of memory accesses and the amount of memory used, as you can't address arbitrarily large amounts of memory in constant time either.
Why no fuss initially? Here's a few options to explore:

- People and by consequence journalists want new thing and incumbent to succeed (potentially underdog and novelty effect)

- Some journalists were well paid to tout it

- Lobbyists and think tanks were well paid to quell any potential political and legal concerns

- The matter was indeed not obvious to either users or journalists

- Experts in privacy were being discounted and undermined

- Legal landscape has changed (see GDPR)
BTW, this is what most feminists[0] mean when they talk of "rape culture". It's not about women being dragged into the bushes and sexually violated. It's about a widespread lack of understanding of consent.

If I allow you to touch my shoulder, that means you're allowed to touch my shoulder, not my groin. It also doesn't mean I allow you to touch me any time you want or that it was okay when you touched me before without asking.

Likewise if I allow you to process my e-mail address to send me an invoice, that doesn't mean I allow you to track how many times (and when) I opened the e-mail or to send me marketing e-mails or to give my e-mail address to someone else or that it was okay when you previously stored my e-mail address without telling me.

In tech we like to say "it's easier to ask for forgiveness than for permission" and on HN we praise disruption, but remember that these things are meant to be about technology and established business practices, not people. Technology can't give consent and corporations aren't people (no matter how much certain politicians in the US try to convince you) but people are people and you should respect their consent above all else[1].

[0]: No, I'm not talking about Buzzfeed and its ilk. Mainstream journalism cares more about clickbait stories than about academic discourse, so don't base your opinion on feminist issues on the yellow press.

[1]: Obvious caveat that there is a whole separate discussion to be had about respecting consent when people present a threat to themselves or others.
Chinese livestreamers transform themselves for fame and money
Ask HN: Do you have specific industries that you would never work for?
Do you have any fields, industries or even specific entities that would you never consider working for?

If so what are your objections?
I did a Knuth research binge just last week, carried along by a wave of awe and admiration, so it was good to read your comment. I knew he stuck with TeX but would have missed that .dvi filetype you mentioned.
> requiring people to make a decision, any decision, is a friction point that will lose users

One could argue that's a good thing.

> you'll have people who will claim that you could be lying

That's not a claim, that's a fact. You could very well be lying and I wouldn't know as I don't have access to the internals of your company.

> But now all the people who truly didn't and don't actually care will have to make a decision. And making choices takes effort.

The horror!

> So some people will just refuse to make a choice, and you'll lose users.

Good, people shouldn't blindly sign up to services they don't understand just because it's a new shiny thing.

> I don't change them. I don't want to think about them. I don't care enough.

Good for you. I'm also in Europe and I think GDPR is fine and I do change the cookie settings instead of just clicking through.

> And it's just effort I have to expend before I actually get to the stuff I'm interested in. Like a government mandated paywall

Music to my ears.

> requiring explicit consent for otherwise innocuous things is just bad for business with little gain

I couldn't care less about what's good or bad for a data collecting business, I care about the people whose data will inevitably be leaked by said business in a future breach.
These assistants are really not working well in multi-lingual settings but I suspect that the stuff Apple was doing wouldn't improve it. Some functions are disabled if you have Siri in one language and your device in another.
Tangentially related: The Technical University of Berlin is considered to have one of Germany's best departments of philosophy.

The reason: after World War 2, the university was located in the British-controlled sector, and their administration made philosophy mandatory for all students.

Because never again should young people be given the power of an engineering/science education without any regard to the ethical implications of the possibilities.
I'd wager "low wage, low education" workers are more likely to be simply acting immorally in different ways.

The "high education well paid" team is more likely to do something with far reaching harmful impact whereas the "low wage, low education" worker doesn't have the power to do anything at that scale.
I would have definitely dropped my details into a "Who wants to be hired to save the planet" thread.
Amazon says French clients to bear cost of new French digital tax
I guess if the user accepts this risk they can opt to do it or go for unencrypted otherwise.

Saving on Dropbox etc (can be done from client) might be a middle road if one trusts them more.
> I’m kinda surprised about the outcry about all of this. I guess it’s relatively common knowledge for hacker news readers that all of these systems need to have human intervention to improve

There are plausible ways of doing this ethically and maybe many people thought it was being done that way.

(Eg prompting a subset of users for opt-in to a paid or volunteered time limited study )
Developers have no power other than quit, which is not always financially possible. And as we are well paid, there are enough replacements. But not necessarily always good job offers. (And word gets out. You can get informally blacklisted.)

The only other option, still risking the job, is whistleblowing. That potentially also breaks NDA and employment contracts.

We have no power over deadlines (cutting privacy features), budget, priorities or vetoing unethical ideas of product owners or marketing.
Too little, too late. Siri was already disabled on my Macs, I now disabled it on all my iOS devices.
What's the alternative if you want to be able to handle DDoS attacks? Something like OVH's VAC?
Even if immortality were to become reality, what incentive could there be to cure the ill?

Perhaps I'm just unimaginative, however I can't really fathom a world in which it would make economical sense to cure the ill rather than simply prevent people getting sick. Economically those with illnesses and/or genetic conditions (myself included) unfortunately seem like a bit of a lost cause.
RISC vs. CISC(John R. Mashey)
Your definition of 'waste' is awfully narrow. I'm not sure anything but destruction of the cash is waste in that view - except that its not even then a total waste because you are helping the money burning industry and furnace industry to thrive.
Profiting from unsustainable farming is "right"? It sounds like they can afford not to destroy the soil.
> Generics are a tail abstraction. Its the last abstraction that you are able to make to your code to reduce boilerplate. This usually means that is the least useful and in generics specific case the boiler place it reduces is minimal.

This is absolute and utter delusional nonsense.
I really love the YouTube channel Coding Train [0] - he also made some videos about L-Systems which he also explains in his free book The Nature of Code [1].

My username for HN was inspired by the creator of L-Systems, hehe.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1B4UoSQMFw

[1] https://natureofcode.com/book/chapter-8-fractals/