skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Differential fuzzing (and the closely related metamorphic testing) are amazing ideas, I've used them in three different ways:

1) Compare two programs

2) Generate two inputs for one program which should produce the same output

3) generate two inputs for one program where there is a simple relationship between the outputs.

In all cases, it has been a great way of testing, and has shuck out some incredibly subtle bugs I don't think we would have found any other way.
There are multiple issues with quoting the statistic out of context:

* Even the article cites it as only a single study

* The wording of the statement implicitly includes suicide, which while non-negligible, are often conflated by gun control advocates without context. 60% of all adult gun deaths are by suicide

* You don't have to kill an intruder for the gun to be used successfully for self defense. You don't even have to pull the trigger. The context of comparing deaths as if they are equivalently valid ends is misleading

* A gun's purpose is not solely to kill intruders. Many people carry weapons concealed, which also provides value to them that is not strictly tied to killing intruders

And I'm probably missing several other misleading context, but the paper itself that's linked is behind a paywall.
Kind of curious what the counterpart to this would be. What things are typically ascribed to Americans, that Americans are often unaware of?

American Sauce in the Netherlands comes to mind.
There are a couple that are cross platform and still native, such as Microsoft Office and the Affinity suite.
He should alternate between his first and last name for every new project. Middle name too if he has one.
Here is the scam version to make money out of math people who know the Monty-Hall problem.

You look at the 3 cards then put them on the table and propose a fair triple or nothing, if they can find the red queen.

You make them point toward the card they chose.

If they point a wrong card you go toward the card and reveal -> you won.

If they have pointed the right card, you return one of the card they didn't pick and ask them if they are sure or want to change. Because they think they are facing a Monty Hall problem they will switch.
-> you won again. :)
Thanks for this.

LP is cheaper depending on how many users you have. My current model allows for unlimited trusted users (people who can request access to your account) for the same price. LP charges per user.
All you need to know about KVM userspace – Red Hat blogs
That would be helpful. Go can compile to WASM natively, so if I could just compile it down to that, I wouldn't even have different Go binaries for different platforms.

That said, some things I use (like SQLite, gRPC) will probably forever remain a C dependency, so I'm not sure if WASM would help with that.
Alternatively, please _do_ take these comments seriously, since some of the people reading this post and following this discussion are the ones who help their organizations make purchasing decisions about on-prem VCS solutions. I'll certainly be making sure that the people at my organization who are evaluating which VCS to buy are aware of Gitlab's choices regarding telemetry.
So, I'm not sure exactly how Fiber works, but given the context and what I've read/watched, here's my guess:

Confusingly, there are multiple tiers of "updates" happening in a React app. One is when your render functions are called to recompute their React element trees. Work can be avoided here via shouldComponentUpdate(), etc.

Once React has this internal data structure, it uses it to do another level of updates to the actual DOM. This part is totally black-boxed from the application code, because React has all the information it needs internally to avoid unnecessary updates at this level.

I think, maybe, that Fiber is specifically focused on this latter stage. Concurrent Mode would then be the stage 1 equivalent of what Fiber does in stage 2. This would be why it has an effect on how application code can actually be written, where Fiber didn't really.
This will surely end well...
If it's in an app, then maybe they can rely on your phone already being in the VPN. However, if it's in a website, then you have to give them access to export the footage out of your network and into their third-party servers (you can't expect the customers to configure and host an HTTP server from their network). You lose the advantage of the VPN (in this scenario) then. From a typical customer's point of view, it's better to be able to access their stuff from a website than from an app, because they can access their stuff from more devices without prior configuration. For example, they can borrow a friend's laptop to see the footage without needing to get them to install or configure anything to get into the VPN.

I think that any solution that includes a VPN is going to lose out in convenience even slightly against a solution that doesn't, and in a market where convenience and ease of use goes above all else, it would just not work.
You also have to trust the host to behave fairly. For instance, a malicious host might decide to open a door with a goat only when your first choice was correct. If the rules of the game are such that the host must always open a door with a goat regardless of whether your first guess was right or wrong, then it makes sense to switch doors. If not, it might be a trap; probably the best strategy is just to flip a coin.
To add onto what dpeck said, another thing to keep in mind is how difficult it was to find information on how the world around you worked back then. So these curious kids whose smarts were, yeah, probably only eclipsed by their egos, were legitimately stifled.

There was no Google, no Wikipedia, no YouTube. Today, the world largely runs on top of TCP/IP, and anyone can read some docs or any number of books and understand how it works. Back then, the world ran over the phone network, and there wasn't any way to really understand it except through phreaking groups and getting yourself into places you weren't supposed to be.

Before Linux, you'd hear about this wonderful, powerful OS called Unix. But you'd be tinkering around at home in MS-DOS unless you went to college or had a really progressive high school. The only way to experience Unix would be to hack or social engineer your way into getting access.

That doesn't justify the entitlement, no, or the ego. And it certainly didn't justify computer crimes. But this manifesto is from a very different age, where those smart kids were understandably frustrated because the world was yet to produce the tools and information we take for granted today.
I mean, sure. If estimates were used to build timelines, rather than managers trying to negotiate estimates smaller to fit preexisting timelines. And if estimates were used according to their definition, rather than as deadlines passed down from God Himself to beat developers with for failing to be "productive enough". And if management honored scope and didn't try to creep more features into an existing scope with a reasonable estimate. And if estimates were treated as an expert opinion, rather than an option that was up for discussion. And if...

Then sure, they would be a good thing that we all would like. But this is the real world and things go wrong. And as such, until management allows estimates to be as flexible as they expect their developers to be, estimates will continue to be a hellish experience that never work and leaves everyone more miserable than before.
Didn't notice (now too late to edit) that parent and grandparent are the same - Duncan. So guess I fell for the ruse here.
Anyway: above statement still stands no matter who objected to the original post. Still feel stupidly manipulated ;-)
That's the perennial HN question.
The part about hackers all being alike really resonates with me. I've felt this way for years, but have not heard others talk much about it. I've had the opportunity to work with young people from all over the world (many nationalities and cultures) who have very different backgrounds than I do and it's so neat to watch them write code and listen to them talk through issues. They think about problems just as I do. I sort of think there is a hacking gene and you are either born with it or not. It's really great to be part of this band of brothers and sisters.
Have you thought about secret sharing cryptographic schemes? Nobody gets access to your data until most everyone that has a share of the key agrees that something bad has happened to you.
> outside of the Executive Office of the President's oversight

> The president is probably still in control

What you're saying is directly contrasting the quote you responded to
No, guns do not make you violent. Being predisposed to violence and/or killing someone might make you decide to buy a gun, though.

What you quoted is that NPR-affiliate news blog's incorrect summary of a 1986 study of gunshot deaths in King County, WA from 1978-83. The paper abstract says:

"For every case of self-protection homicide involving a firearm, there were 1.3 accidental deaths, 4.6 criminal homicides, and 37 suicides."

Sample size was 50 homicides, 9 self-protection homicides, and only 2 of those by a resident against an intruder.

If you state it like that and consider that most thwarted home invasions do not end in death for the intruder, the narrative of the site you linked starts to fall apart. Studies like that tend to fall apart further when you look at exactly who was shooting who under what circumstances. How many "non-intruders" were really drugged out "family" members? Is it not okay to defend yourself if you know your attacker? "Family members" could be relatives living elsewhere and known to be dangerous, but who stop by uninvited. When studies cite "children", that can include older teen gang bangers (and gang bangers can be younger, too). The rhetorical tricks are legion.

Trying to impute homicidal impulses to people because they own a gun is simply ridiculous. You wonder why gun rights advocates get pissed off whenever any anti-gun stats or articles are tossed around? It's because they're almost always exaggerated, designed to mislead, and mis-attribute whether gun ownership or possession was the proximate cause of violence.

That the author of that WBUR blog post is still peddling an "assault weapon bad!" narrative indicates that they are not to be trusted. What those people really want is to ban all semi-autos with detachable magazines. If you could enforce it and not grandfather old guns, that might reduce mass shootings (or the number of deaths per). I can agree with that 100%. I only disagree that you could pass that law and that it could be enforced (without suspending the rest of the bill of rights). It would affect not just guns used in the Las Vegas mass shooting, but every single ordinary (non-revolver) semi-auto handgun owned commonly for self defense. They too use detachable mags of arbitrary size.

Any people using the emotional phrase "assault weapon", rather than talking honestly about banning functional characteristics like guns that accept detachable, potentially large magazines (you can't regulate magazines very well, you can 3d print ones that are good enough to be used for one mass shooting), are either not aware enough of the policy landscape to be offering an opinion, or they're intentionally writing misleading propaganda.
Know About This Awesome Feature on Your iPhone That Could Save Your Life One Day
I think his BosonSampling method comes very close to Shor's algorithm, and I don't think "leagues" really exist in academic output - but he's not doing good work - he's doing great work.
> " we are talking prices around $20k+"

It really depends on the machine gun in question. Transferable Mac 10s are sufficiently common and lame that they're still under $10k. (That hardly invalidates your overall point, even 'cheap' transferable machine guns are still expensive.)
Someone could have burned down your house. Data could have been corrupted for any unrelated reason. Any physical storage could be confiscated by law enforcement for any reason (maybe there is incriminating evidence against them).

There are LOTS of reasons why you'd want redundant off-site backup.
I don't think it's that simple because the problem is on the backend / logistics, not the UI for the user.

There's not really a half-measure solution here. They either have to completely redo their supply chain management (not co-mingle) or it won't work. What pool of goods do they pull from to fulfill your order? Where do they store these goods?

Well, that separate pool of goods now has to be maintained.

How man separate piles from how many "trusted" suppliers do they create?

The probably should start doing something like this, but I don't think it's simple.
It creates an overall brand awareness though. As soon as you say “Wolfram x” I immediately know what and who you’re talking about opposed to if you were to say a random product name
Url changed from https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/10/white..., which points to this.
Colab maybe?
Also an administration that has been wiretapped (maybe illegally? Let’s see what Durham finds), leaked against, and the recipient of other unprecedented behavior (such as anonymous Nytimes op-eds).

Does everybody here know the #2 at the FBI counter intel was texting his lover and asking if there’s anybody in the White House who could spy for them?[1]

They’d be foolish if they don’t try and dramatically shake things up. If I were them I wouldn’t trust any previous admin holdovers.

1. https://www.google.com/amp/s/pjmedia.com/trending/strzok-pag...
I do agree that new features were needed for new functionalities, such as games or actual apps, but the irony makes it that we are discussing this on a site used by millions, a site which doesn't use all those fancy frameworks and features. I was mostly referring to the average site created today, be it either by devs or directly by clients using some CMS like WordPress.

Don't get me wrong, I actually used and love(d) React, but it feels like in the majority of cases the library is misued and people just create normal sites (that could have existed 15 years ago, but a loat bloatier) instead of creating the apps you were referring to.
...what?

>Monthly can actually make perfect sense for this kind of service as a signal that the user's still alive

...and so when they stop paying for the service...?
I'd be curious to hear from downvoters on this comment. Do you believe it to be factual incorrect?
Product Design Development Lead
Our team at Auxilium Automation strives to create innovative automation solutions to more effectively and efficiently accomplish roofing construction. The current product we are developing is designed to take off roof shingles quickly and easily. From extensive market researchers we have the product parameters set, key elements designed and testing, and the capabilities to continue forward.

We are looking to higher a professional likely in the product development/engineering realm with great ability and experience in creating power tools and/or machinery. We are at a critical time in the life of our company as we move from prototype and design testing to customer ready product creation. We are looking for a true expert, a true leader and innovator. The candidate we are looking for is an R&D type person with a background in machinery, automation, and tooling. Mechanical and electrical engineering based, as that is the essence of our product components. The product has similarities to lawn mowers, snow blowers, asphalt rollers, sod cutting machines, dump grinders, etc. anyone with experience with R&D with similar products would be ideal.

We have developed the relationships, team, business model, and capital to successfully launch this product. We have laid the groundwork to build the product, and we have the team to assist in doing the work to have this product ready, now we are looking for the innovator and leader to power this product to creation.

Salary type and equity options negotiable.

Contact Todd Paskett at toddpaskett@auxmation.com for applications, questions, inquiries, etc.
In https://observablehq.com/ the platform itself is not open source but the core code that evaluates notebooks is open source, the various libraries used by notebooks are typically open source, and the content of those notebooks is all publicly visible (with license determined by each author).

Aside: Personally I have found that the spreadsheet-like Observable model of tracking a dependency graph between cells and re-rendering dependents whenever a cell changes is much more pleasant than the Mathematica/Jupyter/etc. model where evaluation of cells initially happens from top to bottom at load time and then is afterward haphazard depending on the deliberate action of the viewer (which means it can easily get into inconsistent states).

The resulting notebooks are (at their best) also IMO substantially better as written documents for readers, based on better text layout and richer tools for creating diagrams.

Being JavaScript that runs in the viewer’s browser makes it much easier to build compute-heavy notebooks that rely on reader interaction, and easier for readers to participate as equals with authors.
An amusing coda to the M-notation story is that many extant examples of it closely resemble or are valid K/Q syntax.
That's a different claim.

Blue light can interfere with Circadian signalling. Nothing new there, though the issue is under-recognized.

What is being claimed is that blue light is good for staying alert, presumably during the working day. That's more tricky, and would argue that blue-light is reinforcing some aspect of the cycle or has a unique physiological effect.

This is, however, unlikely; blue light serves primarily to entrain the clock, i.e. to keep it in period and phase with the daily cycle. Without this light signaling, your clock will 'free run' which is a cycle that is slightly longer than the 24 hour cycle. Crucially, it's important to note that the clock functions just fine, it just no longer adheres to a strict 24 hour cycle.

The idea that more blue light throughout the day, beyond the morning zeitgeber, would have an effect on performance is very different idea. To my knowledge, there is not any evidence that this would be the case, and it is contrary to my understanding of Human Circadian Rhythms.
>The security team had seen incentive pay revoked, scope of duties cut, and access to systems and facilities reduced, Vastakis noted. Staffers' "positions with strategic and tactical decision making authorities" had also been revoked

You consider this a re-org?
it seems pretty clear they intend to add it to EE eventually. Every single time they talk about it, they say, "we're not considering changing EE at this time".
Think of how many layers of both the fulfillment logistics, supply chain, and actual tech stack have to be modified/re-imagined to achieve this. They should move this way, but it is extremely complicated & expensive.

The difference between 1 fungible pile of a good spread out everywhere, and multiple distinct piles is enormous.
This. I'm pretty annoyed with these Medium articles that keep popping up on this site.
Yes, the irony of my comment did not escape me :) I guess I was just seeking confirmation. Cheers.
Check out some more of the thought process:
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/telemetry/issues/34

The original title was "Remove the ability to toggle sending telemetry data back to GitLab", then "Remove the ability for on-prem users to toggle sending telemetry data back to GitLab"
Just having a well-chosen and fast set of primitives goes a long way. If you write a three-primitive combination and the interpreter doesn't recognise it but all three primitives are fast, how bad is it, really? You're losing a factor of three at worst (which is still in faster-than-C territory much of the time), and probably more like 1.5 or 2 since the special combination would be more complicated. Sometimes you actually gain by splitting an algorithm into multiple passes: I remember an instance where I hand-wrote some nice branchless AVX2 code to find the index of the minimum of a numeric vector (it's (⊃⍋) but don't expect that to be fast yet). Then I wrote a better vectorised minimum and tried out (x⍳⌊/x), which just gets the overall minimum and searches the vector for it. Worst case that algorithm was 25% slower. In the best case, when the minimum was near the end and it could stop early, it was twice as fast!

That said, we still do a lot of work on recognising patterns. The list of idioms from my presentations are patterns that are recognised as a sequence of tokens in parsing, but we can also recognise particular derived functions (the results of operators, or function trains). An obvious example is the sum +/ and there are some pretty complicated ones involving Rank or Key. There are probably about a hundred cases like this in total although many of these cases handle several different combinations. Much of what I do is not to try to identify more special cases to handle with a custom algorithm but to make the algorithms more general and to use them in more places. I tend to develop engines (say, a column permuter using vector shuffles) and then write a bunch of code to recognise when I can use the engines for particular cases within a primitive or combination (indexing, reverse, rotate, take/drop, and transpose on trailing axes).

The most important work is on short patterns because the longer ones just don't show up often enough, or they show up in too many different permutations. Thunks are a way to recognise short patterns flexibly: it doesn't depend on the way the pattern is written, just the functions used. They also offer flexibility in that different operations can sometimes emit the same thunk with a parameter, allowing other functions to just handle that type of thunk as a whole. We've run into some trouble with our internal architecture that's holding thunks up (should be cleared up by the 18.0 release so we can start implementing them for 19.0), but I think recognising special combinations will be very different, and much easier, once they're working. And I can finally get the aforementioned (⊃⍋) running fast. And 1↑⍋. And ⊣/⍋...
This seems kind of pointless, most people already are the best in the world at some specific combination of skills - knowledge of local geography, ability to cook a certain set of meals, etc.

Anyway, a related thought that I find interesting: Becoming a "polymath" i.e. learning a wide range of topics to reasonable depth requires less effort than most people expect. For example, let's say you want to learn mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology and economics. I think that achieving 80% of undergrad knowledge would take much less than 80% of the time that people need to complete an undergrad degree. So let's say it could take a year to acquire a good foundation in each of these topics if you try to optimize the process by focusing on fundamentals and core principles, choosing the best books, etc.
As well as being remarkably small, it's remarkably effective - they weren't exaggerating in those videos where they talk about how well it distinguishes movements. I was prepared for a slightly disconnected interaction with false positives but it's very accurate distinguishing unintentional moves from distinct swipes. It's also able to deal with the screen in both orientations. There's also a very subtle UI hint in the form of a glow along the top of the screen when the radar has seen your hand, which zips off to the right when it senses a proper swipe.

Whether they get enough engagement to take it out of gimmick territory is what interests me. They need to keep pushing it. Alarm snoozing is a particularly handy use but that, track skipping and face unlock need to be the start rather than the zenith.