skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Creative works take a substantial investment of time and/or money to create.

That's the labor which is scarce. Not copies of the copyrighted work. I already said people who create things should be paid for that labor—or more to the point, have to be paid if you want them to continue to create things. That does not imply that they deserve to control what others do with the work after it's been produced and published. That was just an expedient method chosen to encourage "the sciences" (though in practice it's been applied more to entertainment). There are better ways.

> If copyrights didn't exist, licenses that require source to be shared, like GPL, couldn't exist.

The GPL was created as a counterbalance to copyright. In a world without copyright there never would have been any need for it. Moreover, permissive licenses like MIT and BSD have had their share of success even without a requirement to share source code for modifications.

> The idea that creators shouldn't have the right to control their works is wildly radical -- even more than the FSF's view.

It's not really all that radical. Copyright itself is a relatively recent invention and was originally designed as a means of censorship and protectionism for publishers. Before that there was no practical means for an author to control distribution of their work, or any expectation that they should be able to do so. The manual duplication of notable works was routine, and you wouldn't find those scribes begging the author's permission.

In more modern terms, the popularity of file sharing certainly suggests that a very large fraction of the population doesn't act like they believe authors should be able to control the distribution of their works once they're published. Copyright is mainly popular among those who directly benefit from it, much like any other subsidy.
For those proposing solutions to problems that may not actually exist, here's an idealized paper ballot chain of custody, in story form...

A ballot is printed. It is then packaged, along with many of its siblings, in a stack. That stack of ballots is placed in a sealed package, and that package is given a serial number.

The state election officials receive this sealed package from the printer and record its serial number. It is then put in locked storage.

At election time, the package is taken from the warehouse and delivered to a polling place. At the polling place, at least two election judges, from different political parties, accept the package and sign for it.

The package is taken to a table staffed by at least two election judges, along with folders, pens, and "I voted" stickers. It is opened, the contents validated, and custody signed off by those judges.

Another table has printed rolls of all registered voters for the precinct, and at least two judges. When a voter arrives, they give their name (no id needed), and the judges look them up. They sign their name next to their registration, and go to the ballot table. Meanwhile, the judges increment the count of how many voters have signed in.

At the ballot table, our ballot (remember our individual ballot?) is handed to the voter in a folder, along with a pen and a sticker. The ballot is now in the custody of the voter, who signed for it in the registration book.

The voter goes to a booth, fills in their ballot, and inserts it in a ballot box. (This may be a Scantron-type machine that also reads the ballot.) Assuming automation, the box reads the ballot, tallies the results, and drops the ballot itself in a locked internal box.

At the end of the day, the judges write down the total number of ballots in the machines. They compare this to the number of voters who signed the registration. If these numbers do not match, these results are hand-counted again.

Assuming everything matches, the judges report the preliminary results from the machines (or if they are not machines, the judges count the results of the ballots). The locked ballot boxes are removed from the machines by at least two judges, and signed off.

Unused blank ballots, both opened and sealed, are also counted.

The locked ballot boxes are then delivered to state election officials, who sign off on receipt.

In case of an audit or a recount, each box can be traced to the individual machine and compared to the machine count.

So... what security problems do you see with this model? And what solution do you propose for the problem you see?
Agreed.

The only other semi-substantive point is that this company was "heavily criticized" for using a lot patient data (presumably for training?) without proper authorization in the UK.

But I'm not really sure what makes that "heavy criticism" or why I should care.

It really seems like a non-article that only serves to give a nebulous negative haze without providing any information of value.
If the government secretly forces Network Solutions to provide all their certificates can they read all encrypted traffic (that is secured by them)?
You seem to be discounting the seriousness of this issue. If it weren't for Snowden, we would all blindly be thinking there _may_ be mass surveillance, but instead we _know_ there is and it's way worse than we imagined.

With ballot stuffing and voter manipulation you maybe able to _possibly_ affect votes, but with hacking, you can practically just pick the outcome you want and be done.

We shouldn't be so easily duped anymore, we've seen to much come to light to pretend this isn't completely real, and most likely much, much worse than we know.
Things to Know About the Biggest Chip Ever Built
Benevolence is performing kind, charitable acts, from a desire to do good. It implies that you do not ask or expect payment in return. And it would intrinsically apply to people, not countries. A fireman might help you regardless of being paid or anything other than the desire to do good. But international diplomacy and politics leave no room for benevolence.

You're saying all the US leadership chain (the people with the authority so decide strategy) agreed to spend billions extra just as a charitable act for another continent. The only way I can take the best interpretation of this is to assume you're joking.
>The opposing party (in the US) will make the offices where identification is offered difficult to get to. Times when the DMV or RMV is open will shrink, some states will require an extreme amount of paperwork in order to get identification. We might see some states close some DMV or RMV offices.

Getting a photo ID is a infrequent event. That makes gaming the ID acquisition process a means of disenfranchising voters ineffective.
CNCF Archives the Rkt Project
maybe illnesses and medical bills should not be something that drives people into bankruptcy in the first place?
You might be able to find lists of offices for major tech companies via google maps. Off the top of my head:

Google, Facebook, Apple are all expanding to Seattle, some in multiple locations

Amazon is building an office in NoVa

Apple is building in Austin. Looks like Amazon, Apple, and Google are too

Google, Amazon, and Netflix are building in LA

I'm sure there are many more expansions occurring too, anyone may feel free to list more or correct me
So why not paper AND everything else you talk about above? I just don't understand why people are arguing against any paper trail at all. Is there some NEGATIVE reason why having paper backup is more harmful to have in addition to everything else you listed above than not having any at all?
> He wasn't the military genius he portrayed himself to be

Useful corollary would be to stop taking any self-celebration so naively. It is not like his autobiography was the only one where a person celebrates himselfs and ads himself a credit.
The Xbox case is notably more important because of the disproportionate number of children using the service and the associated COPPA implications.

But can you provide a source for any of these companies "selling/giving the recording to just about anyone"? The only stories I have seen involve contractors working for the company on QA/labelling. It seems like a pretty gross misrepresentation to imply they're somehow selling or trading voice recordings.
Holding cash usually means putting it in a bank account. The banks are going to put a significant portion in their country's central bank; the European central bank and member central banks are currently charging banks to store money; at large balances, those banks will charge customers.

Now, you could put cash into a USD account at a US bank, where interest is still currently positive, but if you were storing Euros, you now have currency risk and jurisdiction risk. Negative rate German bonds have less risk than that.
Where can I put my money to take advantage of this? Gold? or just US treasuries?
Backdoor Found in Utility for Linux, Unix Servers
CERN Open Data Portal: Explore more than 2 PB of open data from particle physics
Trump is a really good distraction for tptb. There is certainly a lot of circus and also a lot of bread (fast food).

So when people argue over Trump they can loot everybody's money in peace.

One trillion in new debt next year [1] to be paid by the US tax payers. Glad I'm not one of them.

[1] https://edition.cnn.com/2019/08/21/politics/cbo-us-deficit-o...
Good point. A little out of my element here. :)

Real-time might help in another way: mitigating covert channels. Gotta know the timing of secret-handling code. Then, make the observed timing fixed-length or random. Don't always need the timing to do that, though. For instance, the separation kernels just need timing for the partitions with whole thing stopping regardless of where code is at.

One last benefit might be easier performance monitoring and diagnostics. If it's predictable, one might be able to assign a range or profile to it. Then, raise alarm if anything goes out of profile. Just speculating here: never built one.
Needs [2010] in the title.

Hopefully the advent of ADS-B transmission will allow the public to track planes even if the aggregation sites won't. The only problem is that N-number registration information for planes can be hidden behind shell corporations and other legal gymnastics. Once that's sorted, the rest is easy.
> These companies held us back because of their size

I don't see how, for example, Explorer being free held anyone back.
With your Russian example there is a paper trail. There is a timestamp when that occured and if the machines that receive the ballots timestamp the receipt of the ballot and the location with scanner #, it's pretty easy to pinpoint the infringements.

As for throwing away ballots, again, in the USA there should be video evidence of such possibilities.

I was helping out in Denver for one of the elections, might've actually been 2012 or 2016. They had cameras everywhere and they should.

Paper > paperless. Seriously, there are reports/studies about this. It's common sense. You don't contrast how paper is better than paperless. Are both flawed? Yes but one is a dumpster fire of issues where the other can be fully audited and accounted for.
I'm not looking to persuade those, who think that buying power is good for society, they pretty much support corruption by design. This is addressed to those who oppose corruption, but didn't realize, Citizens United enables it on huge scale.
This is definitely a point which needs more exploring. Seems to me most damage from smoking is all the crap in smoking. The chemical nicotine - by itself - transiently raises BP, feels nice, and that's about it.

It's also only a part of the addictiveness of smoking. Probably a small part, as everyone I know who has consumed nicotine in any form has no trouble without it if they vape, but often shows discomfort/restlessness if they smoke. Amazingly, this holds true for those who consume far more nicotine through vaping compared to others that get it through smoking.
If one could maintain an index of a single reference point for human settlements, as geodetic latitude and longitude, addresses could relatively reference from a specific center, and include relative waypoints.

us;il;chi = {41.88206,-87.62781} The Chicago base reference point, positive x-axis points to 0 degrees N, positive y-axis points to 90 degrees east.

us;il;chi;0,0 = Madison and State, street level

us;il;chi;-278,+305 = 111 S. Michigan, street level. This is between the lions of the Art Institute. Horizontal offsets are in meters.

us;il;chi;-278,+305>90:165 = east 165m into the museum, over the bridge, into Greek, Roman, and Byzantine art.

us;il;chi;-278,+305>90:165>180:32,+1 = south 32m into the Modern American Art wing, up the stairs one level, in the top level of the 2-level sculpture court. Vertical offset is in building stories.

us;il;chi;-278,+305>90:165>180:32,+1>270:13 = west 13m into gallery 262, home of Nighthawks.

A geohash can tell you where Nighthawks is, in terms of a geodetic location to a certain precision, but it doesn't tell you that it's on the second floor of a building whose second floors don't all connect, or how to get there to see it. If doesn't matter how many extra characters of precision you add when the place you want to be is separated from the locations of the public access points. Addressing sometimes has to include routing information. Complexity is sometimes needed.

The base reference point for Manhattan (us;ny;nyc) could have its reference grid rotated to 29 degrees NNE, but cities without a grid system needn't bother.
Poll taxes are expressly forbidden by the 24th Amendment. I'm sure people will try and make arguments based on the 2nd Amendment, but they're really not comparable.
- Maybe DeepMind and he just needed time for a loving exploration...

I agree tho wild speculation defaulting to a sex scandal is just weird.
My question is, who is to say that X "FICO Score" correlates to anything too meaningful -- or that the score itself has not become harder or easier to obtain?

Perhaps the data exists on this, but to my unresearched mind there's a lot of "fudging" potential within it all by itself. For instance, maybe the current 'borrower state' that gets you a 690 previously would have given you a 725; or maybe it's the opposite.

I understand how averages work, but is there any oversight or auditing done on the rating agencies and the ratings themselves? It just seems ripe for 'gaming' at that level IMO; if banks need to sell financial products and they buy the ratings from the agencies, surely they can lean on an agency to 'fudge' numbers one direction or the other (I'm speaking in aggregates here)?

Anecdotally, every time I look at my credit score I cringe -- I've never carried much debt, have always paid it off on time or early, and yet my credit score stays somewhat low, seemingly because I largely don't participate in "the system". Furthermore, every time I've ever applied for credit I end up with scores (and offers of credit) far in excess of the numbers I see when I either get my 'free credit report' from the 3 agencies, and they're similarly different than the numbers I see if I pay to see my reports from the 3 agencies.

I don't know, it just seems like a "chicken-egg" problem to me, and one where the rating agencies are perhaps incentivized in a way that does not align with the "economy" as a whole -- and is instead much more closely with their high-value customers (lenders). I also feel like there's so much "missing data", which could probably tell quite the tale, for instance, if someone such as Google was to begin a 'ratings agency'. Half of my finds that to be a scary thought, the other half of me thinks that we'd probably end up with objectively better outcomes, both economically and probably, in many cases, even individually too.
Yeah, sorry, didn’t want to mess up the quote. But I should have mentioned it, you are of course right!
New Cross-Industry Effort to Advance Computational Trust and Security
There's a scaling difference between the US and Europe. In the US, you might live a 4 hour drive from the nearest city large enough for a DMV. If you don't own a car, getting there and back can be a major obstacle.
You can self-host the pre-AWS Cloud9 IDE on a VPS: https://hub.docker.com/r/sapk/cloud9/
I miss the really old lever machines - they were incredibly satisfying to use.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/rip-lever-voting-machines
Right. Reductio at perpetuum mobile proves this idea doesn't work.
Intel, Google, Microsoft, and Others Launch Confidential Computing Consortium
Assuming you're using proper paper chain of custody, seals, etc on your paper ballots, then how do you propose that ballots would be "destroyed, lost, or conveniently found"? These things are all extremely easy to audit.

Humans have been doing paper document chains of custody since the ancient Chinese and the Romans. It's not rocket surgery.
This type of system should be able to be challenged by the citizen. If I voted without my prior knowledge, then I want my record because I never voted.

This is pretty scary and I didn't know this occurred in other states.
She probably just thinks that those risks are acceptable, not that she doesn't understand them.

Quite a few doctors I know drink alcohol, but it doesn't mean they don't know the health risks of that activity.
There are lots of apps that do database introspection. Some also generate forms on the fly, but eventually it's necessary to: specify a forms widget for a particular field because SQL schema only describes the data and not the UI; and specify security authorization restrictions on who can create, read, update, or delete data.

And then you want to write arbitrary queries to filter on columns that aren't indexed; but it's really dangerous to allow clients to run arbitrary SQL queries because there basically are no row/object-level database permissions (the application must enforce row-level permissions).

Datasette is a great tool for read-only database introspection and queries of SQLite databases. https://github.com/simonw/datasette

Sandman2 generates a REST API for an arbitrary database. https://github.com/jeffknupp/sandman2

You can generate Django models and then write admin.py files for each model/table that you want to expose in the django.contrib.admin interface.

There are a number of apps for providing a GraphQL API given introspection of a database that occurs at every startup or at runtime; but that doesn't solve for row-level permissions (or web forms)

If you have an OpenAPI spec for the REST API that runs atop The database, you can generate forms ("scaffolding") from the OpenAPI spec and then customize those with form widgets; optionally with something like json-schema.

It's not safe to allow introspected CRUD like e.g. phpMyAdmin for anything but development. If there are no e.g. foreign-key constraints specified in the SQL schema,a blindly-introspected UI very easily results in database corruption due to invalid foreign key references (because the SQL schema doesn't specify what table.column a foreign key references).

Django models, for example, unify SQL schema and forms UI in models.py; admin.py is optional but really useful for scaffolding (such as when you're doing manual testing because you haven't yet written automated tests)
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/2.2/ref/contrib/admin/#mod...
Thing is, as a result of the ban the next disclosure was immediately public. This left more people vulnerable than the responsible disclosure method would have.

Hence, this practice by steam makes all users of steam less secure (doubly so as they actually don't want to fix these issues). This is something the public deserves to know, so they can act accordingly.
> But knowledge and intelligence should be incentivised.

They already are, though that can be improved by decreasing the role of heritable wealth and the disadvantages of poverty through better taxation and social support policies.

Voting is the wrong place to incentivize it, even if you could without first having improved the degree to which it is incentivized in the rest of society.

> The fact that most people voting don't read politicians programs should show how autistic our system is.

Using autistic as an insult here is inappropriate on multiple levels; also, I'd argue that it's perhaps jist rational, since politicians actions are only rarely usefully related to their written programs, and there are much more accessible ways of getting information that is much better at predicting their behavior in office.
True, but time in market with educated and not naive timing beats "time in market". Edit: "naive", and that I simply mean to time ETF payments with awareness and possibly technical indicators.
Side comment: a Thumbs-up for Lin Clark and her usual Mozilla blog posts including this one.

It is easy to understand, very informative and the hand-drawn infographies makes it pleasant to read.
...we have paper ballots in CO. Yes there are potential problems with paper ballots, particularly when you don't allow the public to view the entire process, but non paper systems are much worse.
Glad the UK is getting out, this fate will come to the no nations no borders globalists.
>I've grown very leery of anything before the 90s

I know you're speaking about sci-fi here, but what makes it different than the vast majority of literature that exists? The majority of anything written before our current times will likely not be politically correct as far as todays standards go, in regards to stereotypes and such. That seems like an awful lot of literature to exclude based on the portrayal of fictional characters created in a society fairly different to our own.

I find the attitude worrisome. Funnily enough, it reminds me of Farenheit 451 and the oppressive censorship towards anything that made people feel uncomfortable.

As a kid, in the 90's, in grade 4 or 5 or something we had to read Huckleberry Finn, it's full of fairly extreme example of some fairly negative stereotypes. Before we read the story, our teacher explained to us about historical context, how the language used in the book was inappropriate and hateful to use. Then we read the book. There were no problems, nobody got upset, nobody started using racist words after, no parents complained and the sky didn't fall.

Sometimes literature should make you uncomfortable, it should remind you of the way things used to be, how we've progressed and why the way it was didn't work. If this is ignored or forgotten, we risk going back to this as a society.
That's not exactly correct.

ID is required in some places like Northern Ireland. Iirc, the UK poll card isn't 'typically' or ID required in England, Whales, Scottland)

But as of 2018 that's changing when some districts required ID for the first time. Although last I heard, laws suits on that were still going on.
and this is exactly why there is a market for negative yield bonds.

The true decision point isn't 0%. It's the rate for the risk/cost of holding cash.

BTW has there been any research toward what this rate actually is?
In the 1950s & 60s, there were dual dreams of human settlement both of space, and of the continental shelf. One dream continues to have a hold on popular imagination, one not so much.

You don't have oil industry divers looking around the seafloor and thinking, "yeah, this is where I want to raise my kids someday". And yet, Mars is a planet-sized perchlorate superfund site, and the Moon is worse. So might it have gone the other way?

One argument for pushing rapidly to human settlement is we're in a window now where it both seems at the edge of technological plausibility, and it has some popular appeal. And it's possible to imagine the latter going the way of ocean settlement.