skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Facebook and many others established themselves with a giant bait and switch. Get the users, then put the pinch on them by selling every bit of info and using dark patterns to a point just shy of them quitting.

Can you elaborate on why you think Facebook was a bait and switch? "They trust me, the dumb fucks" was during Facebook's infancy, and came to public attention years and years ago. More concretely, Facebook has consistently been amoral and user-hostile, and anyone paying even a little bit of attention knew that by, say, 2012. Hell, there were complaints about its addictive (+stalkery) potential when the news feed launched, in 2006! I'm what way is this a bait and switch, instead of clearly signaling the company they were the entire time?
Is there a name for a general protein deficiency?
> It starts with a version of John’s first papers about Lisp, and develops the ideas in a few pages of examples to culminate on page 13 with Lisp eval and apply defined in itself. There are many other thought provoking ideas and examples throughout the rest of the book.

Sounds like the MIT SICP course from the 1980s using scheme!
You can't paint the entire pharmaceutical market as non-competitive. It really depends on the drug.

Most of the egregious examples of raising prices happens in specific markets - ones where there are significant barriers to competition even in the absence of patent protection. These markets also tend to be on the smaller side - big enough to make a good profit, but not so big that it attracts a ton of competitors.

There are examples of drug prices coming down because of competition. Hepatitis C drugs are a great example. Launched at almost $90K, they now hover around $40K because there are multiple companies competing on price (the drugs are all very effective).

The other thing driving prices down are the insurance companies. Amgen dropped the price of their cholesterol drug Repatha by 60% because insurance companies said "yeah, we're not going to pay for that at that price".[1]

[1]https://www.biopharmadive.com/news/amgen-cuts-us-repatha-pri...
A lot of these kind of coordinates have no right answer anyway. They are just an abstract approximation of something else, like a parcel, address, or place to eat. And the lat/long will be completely useless for the vast majority of people.

In any serious application you should have known error values and probably be using a more appropriate projection. If you need to accurately locate something you need someone trained to do that with the right equipment.
> This sounds like one of the risks of doing international business. If you can't follow the laws then don't play.

Sure, but while technically correct, this comment doesn't add anything to the conversation. The question isn't whether or not GP should need to follow laws -- it's "what laws should we be passing, and what are the effects of those laws?"

It's in Europe's best interest to protect their citizens, given that it currently looks like ~40% of the market is more frightened of refusing a GDPR request then they are of leaking PII.

There are lots of ways the EU could address that problem -- harsher penalties, revising how IDs work across member states, releasing more resources for smaller businesses, clarifying more broadly that refusing a GDPR request because of lack of identification is OK. All of these directions have pros and cons.
Transcript: Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi Speaks with CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street”
Maybe the issue is not really about allowing animals to fly as service animals, but allowing animals to fly simply as passengers. Why can't I pay for a seat for my pet?

I also understand people's frustrations with unruly pets on planes, but frankly I don't remember ever seeing this. I've only ever seen well-behaved pets on planes. I do remember numerous unruly children on planes, though.
I don’t think the parent is talking about the heroin free-for-all experiment in the Landesmuseum park but rather the supervised injection clinics which continue to be a component of Swiss drug treatment policy. Compared to other cities of similar size, it’s rare to see actual junkies in Swiss cities.
LinkedIn is the most utilitarian of the social networks because it’s purpose is to be so. However, LinkedIn has squandered some of its advantages if you ask me, believe it or not I find LinkedIn to be the most promotional of the social networks I frequent, and among the most curated.

It still has great value, I’ve been able to lean on my shallow LI network for job opportunities and interviews, and it’s a great research tool when scoping out new careers. But I’ll never go on LI to “waste time”, all in all, maybe that’s the best part of it.
Anyone see the notional amount of the total write down?

Couldn't find it in the article anywhere.
To me it sounds a bit dubious that you can both have a valid reason for keeping personal information about someone and not have a valid way of verifying that you are actually communicating with them.

What sort of agreement can you enter with someone if you don't know who they are?
I generally agree that HN is too ready to jump in with Engineer's Disease, but:

> I mean nevermind that adorno is socially validated - ie his peers, those that are actually qualified to assess the value of his work, respect him and his arguments right?

These days I think we have realised that that counts a mild negative - there are plenty of closed-set groups of people who agree with each other while looking completely incomprehensible to outsiders. Especially in the political arena.

> machine learning

This is a particularly good example because it's so upsetting to any kind of formalist, not just philosophers but the earlier ontology-wielding formal-reasoning AI developers and even those with a statistical training. Machine learning is very short on theoretical soundness. But it works. You throw images at it and it tells you how many of them contain cats or lamp-posts or whatever, and it agrees with a human often enough, despite the fact that neither human nor machine has really grasped "cat-ness".

The line of convincing needs to run the other way. It is no longer enough to market knowledge of Adorno as entrance to a social clique. You need an argument for "what can we do with Adorno that we could not do without Adorno?"
Yeah, that's like "Facebook keeping all the good friends for itself." It's kinda hard to "hide a tree" when they live multiple decades and people can keep independent databases. Not really something worth trying to hide imo. Perhaps technologically feasible on a day-to-day level, but if it were ever discovered, the scandal that would ensue would be disastrous to the whole project. And the whole point is to connect more mouths to more fruits, hoarding is actually counterproductive. That's wild about the Food Bank -- similar things probably happen in general for the "people who keep score for the game tend to have a higher score" thing. I wonder sometimes about the creators of those dating apps, and if they are also skimming top applicants.
The idea that it is meaningless to speak of "before the Big Bang" is not a universal, mathematically-proved truth, but a contingent result of particular theories of the Big Bang that include it being a singularity at a particular time 0.000000..., at which point there is no meaningful "before" or any spatial directions either. Just as physicists discuss how the singularities in black holes may be removed via a theory of quantum gravity, further theories about the Big Bang may or may not remove the singularity and may or may not result in a meaningful "before" to speak about.

In fact there are a number of such theories, it's just that AFAIK none of them have predicted something better than the standard model well enough for the singularity model to be definitively replaced, though I think if you polled physicists and asked them about whether they think there was "really" a singularity there or if it's just an artifact of our current poor theories, the vast bulk would say it's the latter. But in the absence of quantum gravity, General Relativity is the best established tool we have for investigating this sort of thing, and that tool says it was a singularity. We have lots of other tools that say other things, but none of them are established like GR is.
Yeah, I'm with you. I can believe parents being upset and irrational, but it seems odd that the landlord sided with them. There is information missing from this recounting of events.
Aren't those the trees steaks grow on?
Hundreds of experts. And yet none of them know what they re doing.
Thanks! I guess formulating that question, I was halfway to apt-cache search. I had envisioned a tool that would find an entire equivalent dir tree (two unpacked source tarballs -> one match), and at first glance I don't know if fdupes will do that. But it might make sense to use an off the shelf tool with a little more manual labor.
> And you surely can understand that code is trying to read a port or use a default one.

In programming languages which use paradigms I'm more familiar with, yes. In Haskell, not so much, which is the entire point of this thread.
This is irresponsible advice because nutrition is not a solved problem.

As long as we fail to solve it, as in, correctly predict the short, medium, and long term effects on heath and well being for people across all variations of genome and microbiome, not to mention activity level and medical conditions, people need to evaluate their food intake individually.

Guilting people away from “taking care” of themselves based on a subset of the medical and nutritional literature to achieve some global carbon emissions target is not a reasonable strategy, in my opinion.
SICP also requires a fair bit of Mathematical maturity which threw me off when I tried to go through it.
You can click at arbitrary positions on those maps and get 6+ sig-fig values for those positions. And since the map displays a satellite representation of the property, is it really that extraordinary that people might consider it to be sufficiently precise enough to put in a fence?

FWIW, the error margin for 6 significant digits is around 11 cm. Accurate enough to point at a computer mouse.
Using data like this to inform your hiring decision might be a good idea, but only if you acknowledge that the data you are comparing against might be a local maxima. If everyone you already hired is mediocre and then you only hire people who have the same personality, you're potentially throwing away the people who will make everyone better.

Not to mention diversity of experience is one of the best ways to improve both the workplace and the products that come out of it.
There are companies whose sole expertise is moving animals long distances domestically and internationally. I imagine it's not cheap, but it is an alternative. Weird that the airline wouldn't suggest that.

On the other hand, I see some fun & adventure in the three week drive from Canada to Panama.
Tracking change in high-frequency, highly-available distributed systems
Right. Absolute guarantees can only apply to an algorithm, i.e. the abstract program, under certain assumptions about hardware and OS behavior. The correctness of software, a program running in the real world, is always probabilistic. There was an interesting case of a bug in the Java and Python sorting routines (TimSort) whose probability of manifestation in practice was about the same as a failure due to some hardware malfunction (bit-flip etc.). So you could think about it as if the algorithm was completely incorrect, but the program was about as correct as when running a totally correct algorithm.
Ouch. That function is actually written in a pretty convoluted and redundant way.

getSocketAPIPort :: Int -> IO Int
getSocketAPIPort defaultPort = do
maybeEnvPort <- lookupEnv "socketPort"
return . fromMaybe defaultPort $ maybeEnvPort >>= readMaybe

That's starting to border on over-terse, so you could expand the bind operator into do notation if you wanted to spread it out a bit further. On the other hand, it's also starting to feel over-verbose, using do notation for only a single IO action. Maybe...

getSocketAPIPort :: Int -> IO Int
getSocketAPIPort defaultPort = fromMaybe defaultPort . (readMaybe =<<) <$> lookupEnv "socketPort"

That might be going too far. But maybe it's what I'd write. Just depends on how much I expect to make this more complicated in the future. This form has the simplest flow to read. I mean... it's dense. Really dense. But it has the fewest total things going on, and it neatly divides into three interesting parts, easily understood in isolation, plumbed together with two common combinators. But it's also pretty rigid in structure. If you ever want to add other sources for finding the port or change the priorities of them, that form would need to be totally rewritten, and probably would end up back in do notation.

But in every case, all the various return calls should be combined into one (or none, if you use fmap or <$>), and the fallback to the default should only be written once.
Twitter is testing a new feature that hides replies
Don, this very thread is one of the reasons why some of us Flickr members feel there is a very real communication problem between Flickr and its membership. This discussion should be happening ON Flickr, where members are asking about what is going on with Camera Roll. If there's time to respond here, there's time to respond there. Please.
> "Huawei claims that Harmony OS' IPC performance is five times that of Google's Fuchsia, and three times that of QNX."

Is this with the spyware kernel running or without? If it's without, what is the real life performance?

/s
Can you evict them? Can they claim protection under ADA?
I'll let you in on a secret. For government institutions which in general have huge amounts of information about you and are notoriously bad at security. They don't even get fined with the GDPR. The worst that can happen to them is bad press.

So the institution that has all the healthcare data of all German citizens can not get fined under the GDPR. Same with any other KdöR

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%B6rperschaft_des_%C3%B6ff...

EDIT: weird, any explanation for the downvotes?
Is there some size-threshold where the service/therapy animal must have its own seat? Larger than will fit in a duffel bag at your feet? Encroaching on neighboring passenger's legroom?

The article does say "airlines are still allowed to reject certain approved animals if they're deemed too large, too dirty, or too dangerous"
Herbivore poop doesn't stink anywhere near as bad as omnivore/carnivore poop - yes horse/cow poop stinks, but so little compared to cat/dog poop it doesn't even register on a scale.
The Army biowar lab that tests pathogens like Ebola failed a safety inspection
That’s okay. So if he serves as a bad example for me and inspires three others for me to behave well then I can expect to be forgiven too. Overall his effect is still positive and I’m not responsible for my actions. Al Gore is. Or does only his positive contribution get counted?
Pfizer’s Best-Selling Drug Is Actually a Vaccine

https://fortune.com/2019/02/05/pfizer-pneumonia-vaccine-trea...
Ask HN: What are open source alternatives to Google analytics?
As a pharmaceutical product, heroin is called diamorphine, which should turn up more information. This article from The Scotsman newspaper mentions the theft of diamorphine from the MacFarlan Smith factory.

https://www.scotsman.com/news-2-15012/drug-menace-off-the-st...
You can install it on your PC or Mac instead if you want, and it is not the only e-ID in Sweden (alas the others aren't so widely adopted, but that should change if/when the new government ID happens).

Access delegation not being part of BankID itself is a feature not a deficiency, it would undermine the concept of secure digital ID if someone else could digitally impersonate you with it. Instead, services can choose whether they let you allow someone to log in for you.
> this doesn't sound like a decision based on national security concerns, right?

Do you also think that most of the troubling places that the US had to invade had, by coincidence, lots of oil in them?
In contrast to his 4-digits-are-fine notions, let me offer a counterexample: http://scissor.com/transient/destination_heatmap/

I am working on a Twitter bot called @sfships, which monitors the comings and goings of large ships in the San Francisco Bay: https://twitter.com/sfships

As part of that, I generated the above map from AIS data. [1] It's basically where ships stop. If you zoom in on the San Francisco waterfront, you will see a grid of dots. That's because the AIS protocol stores lat/lon as minutes/10000 [2], throwing away more detailed information.

This is adequate for its initial intended purpose, which is putting ships on radaresque displays so that ships don't hit one another, etc. But it produces all sorts of artifacts and issues when one tries to use the data more broadly.

And in case anybody is interested in playing with this, I have written a python parser for AIS data with a bunch of Unixy command line tools, including one that just turns the weird 90s protocol into more modern JSON: https://github.com/wpietri/simpleais

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_identification_syste...

[2] https://gpsd.gitlab.io/gpsd/AIVDM.html#_types_1_2_and_3_posi...
Which i agree should become a new habit. Yet the mandatory right to access doesnt help
Not a book, but I encourage people to read Douglas Engelbart's paper on Augmenting Human Intellect: http://dougengelbart.org/content/view/138

Alan kay is a big of Engelbart and I'm surprised it wasn't listed in his answer. Also, for anyone that's interested, a windows clone of NLS is available here for windows: http://www.ndma.com/resources/ndm8543.htm

Minus the "journal", many of the multi-user capabilities, and the "compiler compiler" programming system of NLS. still, it's interesting to play with.
Give the service animal a "license plate" that can be verified on a government website? I guess they could be copied or falsified fairly easily.
This does nothing to discourage keeping data around. A company does not care if they, while following best-effort GDPR practice, release data to a hacker that causes harm to a user. They can simply hide behind the GDPR legislation to say “we did nothing wrong, the law is broken, we were trying our best, we accept no liability”
I'm not really sure LinkedIn is regulated.

I really do think the users also want it the way it is.
Amazing! Definitely, we think WireGuard is something that needs to happen, and we're happy to support it.

We are absolutely interested in joining in the implementation effort and likely have a lot of research/code to bring forth. I agree, that security theater is a joke xD

Looking forward to hearing from you,
Andrew
Good find. I like that ;-)
This doesn't seem as unreasonable as your incredulity makes it sound. Alcohol is uncontroversially wayyy more dangerous than a handful of illegal drugs, and it's in incredibly wide usage. Same for cigarettes in the past: it took a sui generis effort to dramatically shift culture to lower cigarette's popularity (in the US), and it was fragile enough that a rebranding to "Juul" is starting to undo a lot of that work.

FWIW, from a selfish perspective, I wish most drugs were legal:
; I used marijuana responsibly before it was legal and continue to use psychedelics responsibly, and the reason I don't do meth or cocaine isn't because it's difficult to get, but because I'm aware of how dangerous they are. But I'm genuinely curious as to what could make you think that, for the average person, legality doesn't drive a substantial amount of their attitudes towards usage of a given drug.
Transmissibility depends on strain, based on the book Hot Zone. Ebola Zaire was transmitted only through fluids, while Ebola Reston was airborne.

Though maybe the differences are by-products of the poor models mentioned in another comment.
They aren't approximations; you can verify this yourself. Pull up Google Maps, pick an arbitrary spot with no businesses, and click. You will get at least 6 significant digit coordinates.
> I appreciate your honesty and taking responsibility.

It is a fatal character flaw I have. When people want to know about something I try to help them.

> You mention that everyone is doing it with no citations of academic sources. I'd be interested in reading any recent research you believe is high quality

There was one by RAND which is good.

https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/...

> represents the current market.

There is nothing that I am aware of that discusses the current market. The RAND paper is closest.

> acting in good faith.

I should not have used a blanket statement. My point is that there are people in IC who are legitimately going after terrorists and child abusers. They have a legitimate need for capabilities that enable them to do that.

I am not saying that the IC is a benign and wonderful government organ. I am saying that within IC there are people who are actually hunting terrorists and pedophiles. I didn't want to explain all of that because it is obvious that it is true. Hence, "lets take it for granted". Rather than discussing the history of the IC, I wanted to explain that there are legitimate uses for 0day and that is the issue being discussed.

The rest is not relevant to explaining how the vulnerability market operates. (Well, how it did in 2011.) When someone asks "how do shares work?" you don't start off by talking about boom and bust markets and macroeconomics. Same thing here. "How does the market work?" is not a question about the IC. It is about how the market works. If you're talking about the vulnerability market you talk about the vulnerability market. You have to assume that there are legitimate players who are acting in good faith.

This entire post is why I abridged it to "lets assume good faith."
Here's a picture showing context.

https://media.defense.gov/2017/Jun/19/2001764865/-1/-1/0/170...
https://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/extern/storytelling/needletraum...
A non-swap comment:

> For everyone else, you'd probably cry too. I sure did.

I remember a colleague (employee) crying because a third party vendor screwed up and tried to blame us which would have sent a multimillion dollar project down the tubes. What saddened me was she felt the need to apologize. It was a pure expression of frustration, anger, sadness, and exhaustion on a project we were all deeply committed to, produced by the brazen unfairness of this contract house.

It's not good to live in a culture that denigrates human expression. I'm glad rachelbythebay was able to express this.

* We were able to apportion blame properly, get a proper result from someone else, and make the regulators happy with no funny business.
I was directed to a live oak tree. Tasty!
What's more, by targeting the effects, not the cause, you're helping create a better, free-er world, where governments aren't dictating how people live their lives. If the desired effect is "less global warming" (and you implement that via a fair CO2 / CH4 tax), then people can choose how they're going to reduce their CO2 impact. Maybe I prefer to eat 1 steak per week and cycle to work, whereas my neighbor eats soybeans whole year round and drives around in a car.

Finally, by taxing (not banning) undesirable externalities governments spur technological development - people/companies can invest money into figuring out how to get the same result ("eat steak") with less of a climate impact (e.g. by feeding seaweed to cows), resulting in a win-win.
Show HN: KMSVaultSecrets Operator
Lying to investors is a serious crime. What you're saying is that Exxon actually committed a much more serious set of bad acts -- acts that may be constitutionally protected -- and that "lying to investors" doesn't seem as serious when compared with Exxon's real bad acts. But that's insane. It's like saying that I shouldn't be prosecuted for arson if setting someone's house on fire also kills them.