skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ever read ToC on free services? They have the right to terminate the service at any time for any reason. It doesn't matter if you've connected 100s of services to your free Google login, or keep thousands of mails and contacts in your gmail, or made a great business grabing eyes on youtube so that Google can sell ads on your videos and share a bit of profits with you.

For example today we've seen Google terminate a service of distributing an app on AppStore because it disagreed with a developer having a donation link, despite that not being excluded in ToS (or so I heard). And it doesn't really matter, how you company refuses a service. ToS just makes reasons for refusal codified and ToS can change at any time.

This is already a world we live in, SV companies practice this daily, and I doubt tech companies want this to change.

Moral arbiter is society at any rate. Tech workers are part of society, and their companies can't really make rules like you suggested (no service for gays) at scale without getting a major backlash from the public, or internally. Or if they could, it would indicate a much wider societal acceptance for such rules.
Sorry, english isn't my first language
Yeah, it's pretty bizarre. I'm currently able to reproduce both icons being served (in Firefox on Windows) by doing a hard refresh (control+shift+R) twice in a row, then doing a normal refresh (control+R) twice in a row, repeating the sequence a few times. I'll consistently see different icons throughout this process.
Local fishermen caught coelacanth all the time, they had no idea that university-educated foreigners considered it to be extinct.
The root issue (pun not intended) is that DNS is not fully encrypted, not even point-to-point, DNSSEC only provides an integrity check, no encryption; DoT/DoH is only used between a resolver and a client as a last-mile solution. No robust security can be derived from the absence of full encryption - there is none, ultimately the traffic is sent in clear over the Internet backbone. You must make your own choice of trust for sending traffic in cleartext - your local network at home/school/hotel, your rented VPS provider, your ISP, or Google/CloudFlare.

Given that CloudFlare already has 13%+ market share, as an end-user, if my primary threat is eavesdropping in the middle, not eavesdropping by CloudFlare (or by NSA's subpoena or NSL), it's actually reasonable to trust the tech giants. Using CloudFlare's DoH server helps me to end-to-end encrypt my query of 13% of the domain names! Also, CloudFlare has business plan to adopt private encrypted DNS links to other authoritative servers, and they already have a private channel with Facebook, it's even better! Don't start sending hate replies, I know the bigger picture is that it allows CloudFlare to effectively monopolize DNS is extremely harmful in the long run, and I'm worried. But I simply don't see a perfect alternative solution that allows one to self-host a resolver at home with end-to-end encryption to communicate with authoritative servers.

You see, the end results that everyone should work towards is introducing encryption to the missing resolver-authoritative server link.

DNSCurve was developed in 2005 as a practical and high-performance protocol for deployment on authoritative servers, and fill the missing link, the protocol is great, DNSCrypt was its direct descendant for last-mile client-resolver encryption.

It was ultimately not adopted, partially because of many hate DJB's personal style of taking an aggressive position over technical issue, especially his attack on DNSSEC. But also, the final reason was that the ICANN has stated that, in the case of the DNS Root zone servers, DNSCurve will never ever be implemented. First because its threat model doesn't include the authoritative servers themselves, and it gives them the private key. This is fine for private use, but the DNS root servers are controlled by many political entities, and ICANN doesn't believe trusting them is acceptable. DNSSEC was designed in a way to avoid giving the ultimate key to root servers, but not DNSCurve. Also, DJB hated DNSSEC so much that DNSSEC cannot be used to sign the pubkey for DNSCurve resolver - oops!

In the future, we should work toward a solution for resolver-authoritative server encryption. In the article, the author mentioned DNS-over-TLS is a potential solution, if so, we should push to deploy DNS-over-TLS on major authoritative servers, or perhaps one day, on the root servers if a solution has been worked out.

Only then, it could allow us to say farewell to CloudFlare's DNS and Google's DoH resolvers.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNSCurve
My belief is that if someone is wronged, they deserve to be made whole. If they are systematically wronged, then the just thing to do is to change the system to make them whole. If you tilt the scales in one direction for generations, and then suddenly cry "everyone is equal, no more favoring anyone", you're not actually treating people equally. You're papering over real inequality and pretending it doesn't exist.

>I advocate carving out the cardboard boxes from the alley's jurisdiction... You want to simply promise to be a nicer alley owner as long as they stay in their boxes.

Not at all. I want to help them build a new house.
Do you think quad9[0] is a trustworthy organization?

[0]: https://www.quad9.net
Given the fact 10 years ago Y! Groups had over 4 Petabytes of data this might be a record for them
Seems like this could be an interesting service to try. The A/B testing market is pretty expensive in general, with most solutions being at least $200 a month, and usually much more.

Something that provides a free alternative to stuff like Optimizely, VWO, Adobe Target, etc could get a pretty large audience, and bring in a ton of users/companies who otherwise wouldn't be able to afford to do this sort of testing at all.

...

Though a decent open source, self hosted solution could work even better.
The (sometimes unannounced) murder drills make more sense if one assumes they have a different purpose.
There are at least three, actually, since Amazon also runs their own store which can be installed on any Android device. Samsung has another one specifically for Samsung devices, and there's also F-Droid though that might not count as a "store" since it doesn't handle payments. Anyone else can start their own the same way. Only the Apple devices are restricted to apps from their vendor-specific app store.
And other languages, such as Forth; don't need one.

list map filter odd sum
I believe it's a documented fact that breakthrough technologies involve breakthroughs.
One technique I have found to be helpful in solving a hard problem is to stuff my head full of as much information about the problem right before bed. Then I go to sleep. Many times, I wake up in the middle of the night, having figured out a solution.
Companies are not divorced from politics or reality no matter how much they want to be. Trying to be non-political is a political act and one that is usually means "I benefit from the status quo, please don't change anything". It's the corporate version of the white guying saying "I don't see color" when he means "I don't want to think about issues of race"
We're Google, we don't have to respect the spec.
Meteors gradually becoming spookily accurate would make interesting premise for a sci fi story.
Keith, this is Dylan, a co-founder. We've been very impressed with what y'all are building at Standard Library and I agree it's a great time to be working on developer integration tools! Thanks for the note.
This seems like a knee-jerk backtrack that is a step or two too far. "Gitlab Inc is full of wishy-washy dudes and I think old people always drive slow." I guess I'm banned from paying for Gitlab now if anyone chooses to "assess" me, since I made derogatory statements about your community and encouraged discrimination, however trivial, against the elderly.
The problem is getting hooked on politics that doesn't actually affect you personally, other people on your team, or how you do your job. Just like we do on Hacker News, you can have employees reading about stuff happening elsewhere in the world, commenting on it, and getting upset over it.

At large companies, this can include things going on in different parts of the company. You don't know them or how they work, but you start taking it personally because it affects the company's reputation.

I'm retired, but if I went back to work, I would want to pay more attention to helping my co-workers and accomplishing the team's mission (which of course involves some politics) and pay a lot less attention to other, less relevant politics.

You can say it's privileged to want to shut out the world and concentrate on improving one thing, but I prefer to think of this as an aspirational goal.
Observation: It seems like we have lost faith in the legal system in recent times based on everything from call-out/cancel culture to protests over contracts. My question to the world is, are we right to feel this way?

I certainly feel at least in the U.S. that the legal system has done a poor job of protecting humanities interests on many occasions, though I do not think pushing the responsibilities of policing morality to businesses and society is really a good thing over all. It has come with a lot of negative side effects.

I do not pick a side strongly here, though. I sure as hell wouldn’t feel good about helping an entity I feel is highly immoral. Is a mutual contract “helping?” You can really get into the weeds fast.
I thought the answer was more like "all our figures are quite rough currently and a lot of work needs to be done".

They mention that the current universe age fits "within the bars", for example but also mention arguments for universe being younger as well, which would again put the measurements at odds.

Basically, both of these values involve a string of assumptions and while getting every single one of them to high accuracy is a remarkable achievement, the chance of some glitch in either measurement is significant.
>>Gun control is the low hanging fruit of death prevention.

Given the recent millions who have died in genocides, it make sense to arm citizens in order to prevent death.
Just to chime in, I also unknowingly got myself labeled sexist when the topic came up during a random lunch with "friends" (company provided lunch so it had random people from HR and recruiting).

Somehow or another the topic of whether going for 50/50 will "lower the bar". So I started thinking about the problem mathematically like any engineer would, with statistical distributions and estimates of the existing pipeline and all. The more I said I am leaning towards that it will lower the bar, the more uncomfortable people around me looked.

I was too socially ignorant to realize we aren't talking about math problem here and that they don't want anything said that might weaken their cause, good faith argument or not.

After that I got no more women in my interview pipeline and a "talk" from my manager.
Go ahead and call me bigot, this is the most ludicrous conflict I've ever seen. The fact that someone can be fired for "misgendering" is just beyond belief. Look, people all over the world are living in poverty, starving, dying, there are wars, we're facing climate change and yet in the west we're wasting out time over imaginary issues rather than tackling the real problems.
Every voter (and non voter) is participating in a political system by choosing to vote (and not vote!). Those who got democracy also got all the responsibility with it.

Those in a democratic system who do not engage in politics are bad citizens.
I don’t care where you have your Big Bang, Just as long as there’s no Big Bang, nuclear power, or homeless shelter in my back yard.
Stratechery is a rag.

What’s striking about the list of 7 announced shipments, they write, is 2 of them won’t ship until next year! Oh man terrible numbers.

Further complaining about boredom with Google.

Shock and awe we’re a bit meh at splashy tech events, that’s been the sentiment going around for a while.

Above all, the article lauds their vision even though they’re annoyed at 2 releases being off in the future and how meh the actual outcomes are.

So which is it, Stratechery? Are they nailing it with vision and failing with execution?

Confused by this entire write up except as blog spam.
The requirement for provable non-profit status is a legal requirement. A new federal law that passed last year makes it so any "online" content distribution network (including Google play) is legally responsible for any crimes committed by someone else listing a product or message on their platform.

Basically, if you include a donation link in your app without proving non-profit status you could be committing fraud, and Google could be held equally responsible to the crimes of the app being hosted. Google also has to report non-tax exempt profits made by any app/content they host in many locations, so only non-profit groups may link to a 3rd party payment system without violating legal statutes in some countries/states.
This is getting beat up but it's prescient.

There have already been calls for DRM inclusion on 3D printers and consumer CNC machines. The bans start with objects of violence, i.e. guns and knives. Next it will be to prevent copyright violations. No more printing your own warhammer figurines or Micky Mouse Novelty phone holders. Then we move on to objects of sexual deviance, gotta think of the kiddos. Eventually it leads to the day where you are buying 3D printers that only print from a pre-approved and monitored repository of models. But don't worry, you can upload your owns models to Google-CAD!
That shouldn't be the only concern.

I suspect nobody wants their name and address added to any of the relevant lists law enforcement could trivially maintain at little cost.

Also, laws change.
Depends on people, I suppose. I'm easily capable of disengaging and leaving people not upset so I have discussed politics (anarcho-capitalist views, full paternalism views, just-world views) safely and without rebuke everywhere I've worked.
In fairness, it's nocturnal and probably buggers off quickly when it spots you.

But I'm biased, I'm a moose believer (or as I like to call it, a moother) based on the circumstantial evidence, but a lot of people are skeptical a creature as large as a moose could keep a low profile that long.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/103196185/new-zealands-moos...
The shutdown of the ‘world’s largest’ child sex abuse website
This is the first I’ve heard this hypothesis. Do you have links to any data?
Consumers have every right not to do business with someone for any reason they please.

Generally where things go into lawsuit territory is when a business refuses to provide service to someone based on something that has protected status.
Gun ownership is not a "protected characteristic", because it's not something intrinsic to the person.

Your example discusses risks and statements about the future, but not questions of identity and personhood.
Opportunity cost of gun control is huge for marginalized groups which cannot count on timely police response, or in worse cases, police response may increase chances of lethality.

See recent news on Atatiana Jefferson.

https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/10/13/20912212/atatiana-...

Why do gun control advocates never discuss disarming the police?
The most likely answer is that either the measurement or the theory is wrong. Both are probably about as likely.
> When cars stop colliding with each other, safety standards can be relaxed. Get rid of heavy bumpers and structures added to withstand 50 mph offset crashes. The cars become very light weight which lets you decrease the size of the drivetrain and batteries. You end up with something closer to a fancy golf cart than a Camry and they will cost less than $10k.

A new Camry already most likely costs less than $10k to manufacture. Bumpers and frame aren’t expensive to manufacture, precision components are. The material and manufacturing savings you suggest would reduce the sticker price by $1-2k at best.
> I'm not sure what's new here except the fact that almost everyone now carries a camera yet we're still to get clear images ;)

Exactly this. The absence of clear photographs has much more negative predictive value now that almost everyone is carrying a cell phone with a camera almost all the time they are away from home.
> You only see the tweets of the people you personally choose to follow

If that was true, that would help a lot.
Others made good general and specific arguments for avoiding such discussions at a workplace, but I'd like to offer a thought experiment that can help understand it better.

Imagine yourself noticing that people around you start to reveal themselves as strongly religious - and not in your religion, if you subscribe to any - and very much into proselytizing. Not a day goes by without someone approaching you to convince you to believe in their god. Even when not explicitly preaching, they keep invalidating everything you worry about. "You fret about your 401k as if you were to use it. Armageddon is coming soon, and if you believe in God, you'll get the best 401k there is!". "I wonder how can you spend so much time on that hobby, when so many people still haven't heard the Good News." "Yes, this disease is a tragedy, but God's Kingdom will soon cure it, and all others too. These doctors are wasting their time." "You're depressed because of climate change? Don't be! God won't let anything happen to Earth!"

At some point you would really start to prefer people to stop talking any and all religion at workplace.

This isn't an arbitrary example. As a teenager, I've been that preacher. People who do that believe strongly in what they talk about - it's literally the most important issue in their lives. The conflict stems from failure to understand that just because they care about an issue, doesn't mean everyone else does too. Failing to recognize that, doubling down on efforts to make others pay attention, breeds contempt, resentment, and otherwise achieves the exact opposite of what's intended.

I've seen both sides of this, and the way the topics you mention are approached today very much reminds me of such religious groups. There's a time and place for all discussions, but they need to happen in contexts where all parties are at least a little receptive, and not by performing DDOS on someone's attention, or invalidating everything they care about that's not related to the important issue.
>If it was easy to spot and precisely track small objects at 10m,

That's not the claim I'm making.
I agree that this chip won't do the gesture recognition at 10m, but I'm quite convinced that it can pick up human movement signal if they try to do so.

>I've been involved in the design of mmwave radars

I don't have this level of expertise. But I'll be really surprised if we couldn't reach the same levels of amplification. Gaining 12 dB will double the range. We can extend the antenna array or use more expensive low noise amplifiers. For cars there are 30Ghz Doppler radar, and the distance can go at least 50m.

From the referenced paper ( A Highly Integrated 60 GHz 6-Channel Transceiver With Antenna in Package for Smart Sensing and Short-Range Communications https://sci-hub.tw/https://doi.org/10.1109/JSSC.2016.2585621 ) :
"In this work a 60 GHz 4-channel receiver 2-channel transmitter packaged chip targeting high resolution sensing systems and capable of supporting large bandwidth communication channels is presented. The SiGe technology used offers a low 1/f noise which is essential to the functionality of the chip in frequency modulated continues wave systems (FMCW)and Doppler radar with a sensing range below 10 m."

"While we have not explored this in-depth we would like to highlight the similarities to re-cent work exploiting FMCW RF technology to coarsely ‘image’ users through a wall [1]"
> I totally disagree

Nothing you wrote is in disagreement with anything I wrote, except for the inaccurate assumptions about my past experience and your misunderstanding the main thrust of my comment.

I have used several different space mice, and also taken a couple of them completely apart. I understand reasonably well how they work. They have a fixed internal part which is attached to the (slightly movable) outside shell by several springs, with little position sensors used to measure a proxy for the force and torque exerted on their outside shell. I believe the early versions used strain gauges instead of position sensors, but the result was more or less the same.

> A space mouse isn’t a trackpoint.

You completely missed my point. The part that is similar between a space space mouse and a trackpoint or joystick is that all of these essentially measure force on them, with that input converted by software to velocity (or angular velocity). If you let go they move back to a neutral position instead of staying where you put them. They do not measure the direct displacement or rotation of some physical component or body part. This is different than the input of a mouse or a touchscreen or a knob or a slider or a trackball or a scroll wheel or a dial or a stylus, but similar to the input of an analog trigger or pedal or steering wheel.

> Trackball: 2 axis device

A trackball with the appropriate sensor(s) can be a 3-axis input device (i.e. if the sensor fully characterizes the rotation). There have been several such devices made as research prototypes in various universities and corporate labs, and empirically they are much more efficient to use than space mouse for inputting rotations. However, they have never (as far as I know) been commercially produced.

This is a shame, because I would love to have one, and building hardware for myself is a lot more effort than buying something off the shelf.

> try flipping through pages on iPad for 1 hour straight vs. using PageUp and PageDown keys on a keyboard. See it for yourself which one is more tiring.

This is a non sequitur. But to answer you, I am perfectly happy to flip physical pages on a book for 5 hours straight, without my fingers ever getting tired.
I'd do the same, but this is just describing the choice of every worker in a free labor market. And almost nobody in the US has more labor market power than tech workers. Some people leave their jobs because their leadership is too Christian, or their boss is an adulterer, or whatever reason.
And the “but for” argument should have clearly applied here. They would not be denied a cake but for the gender (protected class) of who they were marrying. This was a clear case of judicial reinterpretation to meet an agenda.
Dang would just delete this submission if he actually felt that way.
I mean this really nicely: it is 100% out of the question for entire buildings or even just materials to be dropped into a construction site with drones. Also, how are you going to get large digging equipment in? Or things like wrecking balls?
Can everyone in the world appeal to the FBI?
It would be an interesting legal case... you would have to demonstrate that the other participants in the mixing should have reasonably knew that the other participants were laundering money.