skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm having trouble articulating this, so bear with me.

In general, having a Bug Bounty program is good. We can agree on that, right?

Most Bug Bounty programs have a scope, and staying inside the scope is important to the business for reasons. My guess is that most scopes are defined by a combination of confidence in the security of the code, resources to triage vulnerabilities in that part of the code, and the risk to the business from vulnerabilities found in different parts of the code.

That is to say, I suspect that either Valve doesn't have many developers well versed in that part of the code base, or they are not confident in the security of that code base, or they considered it a low priority (even if we disagree about the priority of this vulnerability).

Now, let's pretend that I'm right about those reasons. Even further, let's pretend that they did not include it in the scope because they don't want to pay a bunch of bounties on code they knew was insecure.

(Aside, I'd much rather have companies only include things in bug bounty programs once they're confident they are secure, relying on BB to do your security for you is begging for trouble because then the company isn't taking responsibility for, or even trying, to do things securely)

Given this train of thought, which is making more than a couple assumptions, I don't think their actions are extremely bad or pointless. They are trying to keep their bug bounty program in scope. Bug bounty programs involve a fair amount of trust. If that trust is broken and they don't want that researcher anymore, then that's fair.

There probably should have been better communication. It probably (definitely) shouldn't have been a WONTFIX. Overall, terrible outcome for everybody.

It's just one of those things where every decision looks reasonable in isolation and leads to a really bad outcome and the company looking terrible.
> SpaceX isn't tech, it is a defense contractor.

When you get to the point of saying space rockets are not technology, it's time to acknowledge that somewhere in the construction of your ontology, something has gone wrong.
if you're taking a quarter of a million from someone whose sex offenses are listed on their wikipedia page then you didn't just not know, you didn't want to know.

He's either lying or he was willfully ignorant, both of which amount to the same complete disregard of ethics.
As a case in point, I have a project that uses amethyst and nalgebra (and their 200 transitive dependencies).

On upgrading from an OC i5-4670k to a r9-3900x, my compile times for a clean release build went from 20 minutes to 2.
Technically, a checkbox may qualify as a digital signature; however, identification / authentication and storage integrity are fairly challengeable (just as a written signature on a piece of paper with a date written on it is challengeable)

Given that notarization is not required for parental consent forms, I'm not sure what sort of server security expense is justified or feasible.

How much does processing all of the paper forms cost each school? Per-student?

In terms of storing digital record of authorization, a private set of per-student OpenBadges with each OpenBadge issued by the school would be easy enough. W3C Verified Claims (and Linked Data Signatures) are the latest standards for this sort of thing.

We could evaluate our current standards for chain of custody in regards to the level of trust we place in commercial e-signature platforms.

The school could send home a sheet with a QR code and a shorturl, but that would be more expensive than running hundreds of copies of the same sheet of paper.

The school could require a parent or guardian's email address for each student in the SIS Student Information System and email unique links to prefilled forms requesting authorization(s).

Just as with e-Voting, assuring that the person who checks a checkbox or tries to scribble their signature with a mouse or touchscreen is the authorized individual may be more difficult than verifying that a given written signature is that of the parent or guardian authorized to authorize.

AFAIU, Google Forms for School can include the logged-in user's username; but parents don't have school domain accounts with Google Apps for Education or Google Classroom.

How would the solution integrate with schools' existing SIS (Student Information Systems)? Upload a CSV of (student, {student info}, {guardian email (s)})? This is private information that deserves security, which costs money.

Which users can log-in for the school and/or district to check the state of the permission / authorization requests and PII personally-identifiable information.

While cryptographic signatures may be overkill as a substitute for permission slips, FWIW, a timestamp within a cryptographically-signed document only indicates what the local clock was set to at the time. Blockchains have relatively indisputable timestamps ("certainly no later than the time that the tx made it into a block"), but blockchains don't solve for proving the key-person relation at a given point in time.

And also, my parent or guardian said you can take me on field trips if you want.
https://backpack.openbadges.org/
Hrm -- I'd love to be enlightened! I didn't word it very well, but my questions are primarily:

What oversight is there on the ratings agencies themselves?
How do we know the distribution of scores is the same today as 10 years ago (and proportionate to credit-worthiness)? Is there anything that prevents credit-ratings companies from under/over valuing the credit-worthiness for large swaths of the population?

Is there historic data available to correlate "consumer credit score" to distressed notes -- and can that be done in a forward-looking manner, to exclude credit score 'fudging' as a factor, and to better be able to know that it's apples-to-apples comparison historically speaking. Otherwise, could it not simply be that borrowers previously known as higher-quality borrowers are simply being rated more poorly/cautiously, for instance? I'm not saying that is the case, but I've always felt that the incentives seemed strange.

Are credit rating agencies paid (by lenders) based upon their prediction accuracy?
Weighting "resources" is not a good thing. In the past it's been used to justify some of the most horrific policies in the U.S.

The U.S. constitution counted slaves at 60% of a person. Some of the arguments for the three fifths compromise were that slaveholders didn't want people who weren't "knowledgable" about slaveholding to be meddling in slaveholder's business. This is essentially one of the causes that sparked the Civil War.

I don't understand why Americans are so against becoming a full democracy. It's not like the current system benefits anyone. Congress, presidents and our courts are dysfunctional. The government is becoming the laughingstock of the world. At least in a democracy there's more chances of unified rule instead of 6 years of gridlock followed by 2-years of whiplash changes.
Why are women writing standard rated higher than men?

For every concrete data point that record a difference between men and women we could argue sexism as the cause. The idea that a higher graduation rate for women in education is caused by a biased education system against men is far from new.

When people talk about sexism as the cause for gender segregation I always look at studies and employment statistics from Sweden. The employment rate between women and men is practically identical, as is the ratio of women and men who work in gender segregated professions. A staggering 85% of women and 85% of men is in a profession that is classified as gender segregated. At the extreme end with higher than 99% gender segregation there is a slight higher number of women, and last year there was one university program where every student was of a single gender (female), but in general it look very similar for both men and women. The small 15% of both genders that work in gender equal professions is quite a small minority.

Arguing sexism as the primary factor for gender segregation is also the claim that both men and women face an identical amount of sexism. The Swedish numbers also support this. Yearly studies on harassment and sexual harassment in the work place show that both men and women face identical harassment when being a minority (down to a few percent variance). The report for 2018 actually marked nursing as the singular worst profession to be a gender minority in, where men reported highest rate of gender based bullying and sexual harassment. If I recall right, construction (women) was the highest the year before that.

But let me introduce an alternative theory to the idea that 85% of the population in Sweden is sexists. An old, about 50 years old study in human behavior that occasionally still get cited in psychology papers claim that most humans who perceive themselves as belonging to the majority group has an increased feeling of safety and confidence, while being in a minority has the opposite effect. This provides for a simple explanation to the gender equality paradox. There more equality and choices there is in choosing a profession, the more likely that the only difference between several professions is which group holds the position of dominance.
I think a lot of people who were born in the west don't understand that, when you're very poor, economic circumstances matter more than political freedom. After all, having money (or not) affects what you can or cannot do far more than whoever's in charge.

Chinese people today have lived through an economic miracle. If I lived there I doubt I'd criticize their system, especially considering people still can remember worse times. For young Hong Kongers however, they didn't live during British rule. They were born into wealth, and now their own career prospects (like many millenials around the world) aren't great. So they protest.

The unfortunate thing is that they'll fail. The finance industry is already planning to exit HK (too volatile), and China can kill the rest of their economy. Rich HKers will leave. In the end, the protests will only hurt HK.

Occupy Wall Street didn't do anything, successive Ukrainian revolutions never lasted either. Ukraine is often cited: after the Orange Revolution, Yanukovych eventually came back to power. Poroshenko had his time, but lost in the biggest landslide in Ukraine's short history. Now Ukraine is the poorest country in Europe, they're not in the EU, they're not in Nato, they lost Crimea, Donbass is at war, and while Zelensky can't possibly be any worse, there's no clear sign things will get better.
My issue with the electoral college is that winner take all - rather than each electoral vote being counted and rolled up, only the winner is. There are a couple states that do this, I’d like to see the others adopt this.
A few ideas:
1) Remove the ability to unpublish / yank crates. A published crate should be immutable, but the crate's metadata should always be updateable by the maintainer.

2) Improve the metadata that describes a crate so that it is easy to tell if a crate should be used. For example, is the crate beta quality? Was a serious error found in the crate and it needs to be marked as "not safe"? Is it a Long-Term Support release? Etc.

3) As a culture, disallow trivial crates. No "is-odd" or similarly low effort crates. These just add bloat since the have so little functionality compared to their overhead. If your crate's toml is larger than the crate's code, you are doing it wrong.
Your first post acted like people were calling the ban unexpected.

Your second post acted like people were calling the ban not-allowed.

Neither is accurate, so your surprise is misplaced.

Even though it was clear that this might happen, it's such a blatant bad decision, for both ethics and customer security, that people are fighting back loudly.

You haven't given a single reason people shouldn't be upset by it.
The financial press has gone very easy on Tesla & Musk. They will routinely write "Elon Musk says" articles which are little more than stenographic regurgitation of some statement by Musk or Tesla. Longs and Tesla touts like Ron Baron, Cathie Wood, Gene Munster, and even the utterly inexperienced Galileo Russell are routinely given long CNBC segments to hold forth with their bullish theses. And even if it can temporarily push the stock price one direction or another, press coverage has little to nothing to do with their audited financial results.

Netflix attracted a ton of short interest back when the stock was around $100. Somehow that didn't, in and of itself, hold back the company at all.

> It is curious that since 2013 Tesla sales have jumped from approx 20,000 per year to approx 30,000 per month and yet the stock price hasn't shown an equivalent increase.

Yes, it's almost as though the company has a complete lack of operating leverage and is losing more money the more cars it sells.
> That's because the QE program only stopped increasing the ECB's assets. When bonds that are held by the ECB mature, the equivalent amount in new bonds is still being re-bought.

Reinvesting maturing proceeds does not produce the same effect as net purchases. One, maturities are lumpy vs regularly scheduled net purchases. There have been rate shocks where idiosyncratic country events happened outside of maturities. Two, while the ECB can basically do whatever it wants, no new net purchases restricts its ability to act in an emergency. Three, size is much smaller.

>I don't think negative deposit rates are really needed to have negative bond yields. You only need a bond buyer (e.g. the QE program) who drives up bond prices beyond the face value + all coupons. Negative interest rates were just a natural step in the progression of lower rates, zero rates, negative rates, and QE. The next thing will be some form of helicopter money.

Note how I didn't mention anything about negative rates in particular; just low rates and that the deposit rate anchors things. Whether rates are negative or not really doesn't matter in isolation. What matters is the spread vs other less risky assets for the goals of the central bank. If a central bank indiscriminately purchases bonds without regard for existing yields or the deposit rate, they will quickly lose control over the market.
I had a similar experience meeting a friend of a coworker at a social function. Someone brought up the Dalai Lama and Tibet, and she seemed completely unable or unwilling to accept that Tibet had even ever _not_ fully and totally willingly been an administrative division of China, or that China had acted in any way inappropriately.

As far as she was concerned, Tibetans were Chinese, not a distinct group.

It was eye opening.
Mexican court allows 2 people to use cocaine recreationally in historic ruling
Does anybody know if employees will end up actually making any money from this massive acquisition, or if yet again board and investors found a way through some shenanigans to distribute all the wealth just to themselves?

EDIT: I'm being downvoted, but I've been increasingly hearing a shady Silicon Valley practice where, upon successful acquisition, the board will vote to emit a large number of new shares (think 5-10X the total pool), which will be redistributed just among execs and investors. So, if you are an employee who held on to your 0.1% (which, on 1B, might be worth 1M), you might find out that after the acquisition you are going to be diluted maybe to 0.01%. And this is after all the other "healthy" dilutions that have happened to the company over the years, as part of their financing rounds.
I noticed ArsTechnica is providing a free Yubikey with subscription to their "Pro++" yearly subscription ($50/year). This also provides a 20% discount on additional dongles.

https://arstechnica.com/store/product/subscriptions/

This may not be the "deal" you were looking for. But if you were considering a subscription anyways you could already be a winner.
Yes, I do, I've even written ActiveX code. If you could be specific about your claims, I'm interested.
Always use a relational database. Make sure to use one that supports recursive queries, and that doesn't suck.

If you need to shard your database, do that.

For example, say you're building a ridesharing app. You'll have databases of users and drivers, but you can totally shard the driver DB by city, and even the user DB can be sharded this way (copying into a shard an entry from a main truth db). The DB of available cars and rides can be in-memory only -- if you lose it you can let the client-side apps drive recovery. You can use things like FDW to get a view that looks like a single DB, and then you can write queries purely in SQL. Look ma', no hand-coded joins and such.
Where goes the money for the subsidy come from
> independence for a long time even under UK rule?

From my understanding, most protesters do not seek independence from China. Do you have evidence to back your sentence up?

It's a common misunderstanding in mainland and rest of the world outside of Hong Kong to assume that the (majority of) people of Hong Kong wants independence when they are protecting about a very specific extradition bill.

Disclaimer: I'm mainland Chinese.
There are different cultures with slightly different modalities, but decency is universal. Murder for cannibalism is unacceptable always. Kafkaesque totalitarianism is unacceptable. Shouting-down opponent speakers is unacceptable. Child rape isn't acceptable because it's "their culture."
It would be funny to attach the ring to a mobile hotspot and drive around with it on your dash cam.
Also, I just launched a kickstarter:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/poly-wants-a-cracker/po...
Quest Nutrition, maker of protein bars, to be acquired for $1B in cash
I have seen the effects of crack also from nearby but the effects usually lasts from 5–10 minutes. Snorting quality cocaine last an hour.

I'm not a chemist so you good be spot on in the information you provide. I'm just sharing my positive experience with freebase and hope more people can quit smoking.

Taste is such a personal thing, I don't like sweets either and this flavor was delivered by accident because the store made a mistake.
Isn't it at least partly explained by wanting to allow implementations of this functionality to evolve more rapidly than they could if they were in the stdlib and thus reach good solutions more rapidly? getopt in particular seems like something that programmers haven't reached a consensus on despite 40 years of experimentation.
This. Much of the media consumed is shaped more by the biases of their viewers, less the other way around.
I was disappointed to see that Adaptive Chunking is deprecated[1]. Are there future plans to ~replace this functionality?

[1] https://docs.timescale.com/latest/api#set_adaptive_chunking
It doesn't though. Do you really believe voting is the most powerful way to influence lawmakers? There generally is far more wealth, power, and influence in population centers. How can you feel like some of the most powerful cities in the world are getting an unfair shake?
Those aren't static numbers though. California used to have 4 electoral votes in 1850s (edit) and now they have 55 (Wyoming has always had 3, New York has 29 today down from a peak of 47 in the 1940s).

The ratio of votes per capita is relatively consistent - assuming a baseline level of votes so individual states aren't totally excluded - and is more a sign of a potential problem with the distribution not the system itself. But there's plenty of arguments which favour both ways.

Much like gerrymandering, which both sides have a long legal record of accusing the other of taking advantage of as the last two Supreme Court cases on the matter clearly demonstrates - each by the other, this seems to be a who's on the "winning" side motivation which misses the bigger picture.

In this case it's the smaller states who have been basically given a guaranteed entrance ticket to play the game, which is different than simply giving the state extra votes relative to their size. It functions almost as a social safety net which gives you a shot, not a good shot at that, but only if you'd otherwise have no other shot. If it was only per capita (even with balancing for size) the numbers would look a lot different.
We've been giving up control to the federal government because more often than not, the local and state governments have failed [1]. Political corruption, corporate interests etc somehow don't just vanish and go away when you give power to the states.

There's a balance to be made between federal and state government powers. And ultimately the electoral college is one of the things that needs to go, because it unfairly tips the system in favor of extremely rural areas whom influence policy that then directly harm those living in more urban environments.

[1] https://www.insider.com/what-us-cities-looked-like-before-ep...
I've done plenty of online dating in my day, and I guess I have no complaints about my relative success at it (most of which was done in ultra competitive Bay Area), but I've always found that winning at it is sort of like winning an argument on the internet or a race in the special olympics.

You can tell almost precisely zero about the person on the other end of the internet machine, so it becomes a ridiculous numbers game. Beats nightclubs if you're new to a city I guess, but otherwise "make more friends."
Gulf of Mexico disasters. Erosion. Pollution. Hurricanes.
GWB won the popular vote in 2004.
The OC was being sarcastic. The USA is the most entitled country! USA citizens even call the country America or ‘Merica’ as if they aren’t part of one of two continents called America (if you’re in the USA then the two continents are North and South). Which means every person trying to cross the USA border is AMERICAN!!!
At least it's doing better than my kickstarter:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/poly-wants-a-cracker/po...
> Most Bug Bounty programs have a scope, and staying inside the scope is important to the business for reasons.

Scopes are fine.

But if it wasn't in scope, then clearly none of the program's rules apply to the bug, right? That bug isn't part of the program.
I think I overfit this thought once on online dating. I was thinking a particular person had no left arm because their profile just happened to exclude this side.

Turned out to be false.
Tied to the engine is orthogonal to tied to the language. You can compile C, C++, and Rust to WebAssembly. But you still can't compile JS to WebAssembly.

Given the large amount of code in JS and the number of JS developers, not being able to support a major general purpose language rules out WASM as a cross platform target in my book.
In this context I take "tech" to mean software, as in arbitrarily scalable with an exponential growth curve. (Not that that can last forever in software, either, but it is growth potential that drives valuations.)
I'm aware, lifting restrictions doesn't mean increasingly urbanized population will have 2+ children. Chinese women are marrying and starting families late, if at all. Or that new generations will want to work in factories vs air conditioned offices as China pivots towards service driven growth and internal consumption. And as wages grow it becomes infeasible to compete on labour with less developed countries. Automation means most manufacturing doesn't have to leave China for the same reasons why manufacturing never left the US. It just won't be done by people anymore.