skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If your requests come in hard and fast then you’ll have a big problem with tech debt, but if you can schedule it properly you can do it as a part of adding functionality and people tend to be happy, because once the functionality is in it can be enhanced much more quickly.
Seriously? You'd ignore someone's (we're assuming, for the sake of argument) otherwise insightful and well-reasoned technical presentation because you dislike them personally for unrelated (if justified) reasons? Because that is literally ad hominem[0].

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
Frankly, the people that “don’t see the issue” are the exact problem with this industry.
This guy made _three_ podcasts defending a previous podcast guest that was openly racist, misogynist, and publicly bullied folks that all of us know in the industry, with an emphasis on women from URGs. It is _still_ there for all to see.

I condemn that behavior and the enablement of it. I won’t be associated with it.

Y’all, this place is for everybody and, frankly, the days where your harmful ass views are tolerated are numbered.

Good for Linux Foundation. They’ll gain business from this.
IDK, it's meticulous work I'll give it that, but more impressive computers have been built component by component. Just take your time, test each piece as you go, and don't develop an ego and you'll be fine.
The XML bloat is on the processing side.
I can understand but disagree with folks who don't believe in creative rights, but don't really understand your argument.

If the entertainment industry has gotten gross and stagnant, it seems like the solution is to not consume it, not pirate it.

This just seems like a thin excuse to steal.
Id look into crypto space. Buy a unique blogging computer and connect to free wifi. These may not be the solutions, but possibly.

https://www.cryptovibes.com/blog/2019/01/02/iota-introduced-...

https://zeronet.io/
From that page:

"In some cases, tolling of the statute of limitations may take place. This means that the statute of limitations is temporarily suspended, similar to pausing a timer. This generally occurs when a person who has committed a crime attempts to go into hiding."
Its not about right vs left. Im talking about the specific example given. A person like that does not belong in our society much less should be given my time.
My one problem with Firefox is that it's just so damn slow on any laptop I use. I've tried every update since the beginning of 2019 and little appreciable change on this. My laptops tend towards the cheap and they don't have much kick but if Firefox is decent enough, it should be able to perform as well as Chrome on them, and with Chrome I rarely have this problem on any of the same machines. If anyone can give me some idea of how to address this, would be nice.
An up-scaled replica of the 6502 with a lot of LEDs to visualize the state of the processor while it works:

https://monster6502.com/
I think there are sections of Microsoft that are very, very good but crappier sections are bringing down company perception somewhat - the company vision is somewhat confused when they drop a cross-platform SQL server and then introduce telementry into Windows.

Microsoft Office, if anything, has gone completely backwards in regards to UX. On a fundamental level it 'just works' but when I started becoming more of a power user I found reproducible bugs, unexpected or inconsistent behaviors, and a complete lack of extensibility for creating / modifying docx documents programmatically in !C#.

By far my least favorite issue is the constant battle I have with locale - I'm not sure if the document creators local was set to EN-US or if my system config is not correct, but every time I try and force the document to EN-AU it seems to switch back seemingly on a per-section basis or something. The most amusing side effect of this is the 'Read aloud' voice changing gender mid sentence but the amusement is quickly offset by it deciding to auto-correct perfectly valid EN-AU spelling for its American localisation for the fifth time in a paragraph.
Scientist: A Ruby library for carefully refactoring critical paths
I do but in modern society as a party to an exchange with a faceless entity, I have very little opportunity to change terms in a way that I feel is more fair to my circumstances. If I believe in good faith that my detraction from the terms is not unfair, detrimental or damaging to the counterparties, considering the imbalance in power at play, then I feel that I'm well within the bounds of ethical behaviour.
If people don't believe in digital copyrights, why don't they just say that instead of going on about pricing and bundles.
You can’t judge a company only by its shiny new things; you also have to judge how they’re handling what’s already there.

And right now, there are some exceedingly-common things that are far too broken considering how many decades Microsoft has had to fix them. I’m sure we all have our lists but just off the top of my head...

- The complete inability of an OS named Windows to remember where any of its windows were a second ago, after you have the audacity to plug in a cable such as a dock or external monitor.

- An OS that drinks laptop energy from a giant straw, combined with an OS that is poor at restoring state when the machine inevitably runs out of battery in your bag and has to be rebooted unexpectedly when you open the lid.

- An OS and apps that cannot handle the extremely common scenario of a network outage or even a momentary blip. I will be spammed with a half-dozen login prompts from all over the place as punishment for the crime of briefly losing WiFi, as network disks and other apps all lose their minds. The OS also cannot auto-close any of these prompts when I reconnect.

- Core UI elements can become completely unusable. For example, I should be able to click the WiFi task bar icon at any time, yet at some point this menu will just stop working (its icon still highlights when clicked but no menu appears anymore!). Text is frequently cut off to the point where I am required to hover for a tooltip to even see what the rest of the text says...assuming that a tooltip has been implemented.

- The OS still completely disrespects its users. Completely unimportant windows will appear right in the middle of the screen, blocking everything behind them, with no apparent way to close them or even move them.
Stellar Sonata
I couldn't agree more. It's a rare sight to see a secure communication tool be completely open about the complex threat model of modern world.

When I started working on TFC (a messaging system that utilizes high assurance architecture like hardware-enforced TCB splitting and isolation), I wanted to be completely transparent about the threat model:

https://github.com/maqp/tfc/wiki/Threat-model

I knew not everyone would read it but not including it could do more damage to the user. I could've just reasoned "well, it's the most secure alternative out there, so why bother", but I assumed the system would be surpassed at some point, so I wanted people to know when that would happen.

Perhaps, in a way I realized in order to distinguish the project from others, and to help people see the benefits, I would have to teach people about the threat model.

In a way even completely unencrypted apps like Palringo could be safe if they would communicate the threat model 100% transparently, i.e. they would teach about the different attacks, and with every step, they would tell you that the app does not protect from such or such an attacker.
One problem here is of course, people don't really use the app for its security features, but to ease their lives. It's not that they don't care about security, they just don't evaluate it proactively, but switch to something else, reactively. So I no longer think transparent threat model is enough: the application should do what it can to protect its users.

A reasonable limitation isn't "group chats can't have end-to-end encryption" or "multi-device app can't have end-to-end encryption", like Telegram shills/fanboys tout, this is just lack of good design.

A reasonable limitation is "networked TCB can use E2EE for everything, but can't protect from remote key exfiltration with zero days".

One responsible thing to do, would be to include recommendations to alternative products with security-convenience trade-offs that can't be solved with intelligent design. A kind of "If you're concerned with repeated code delivery problem our Protonmail web client suffers from, please consider using the native mobile apps we have. If OTOH you're concerned with endpoint security, look into traditional PGP with airgapped computer. Refer e.g. to what hak5 did with QR-code based ciphertext transfer".

This alone would set protonmail among the best applications, but instead they choose to lie by omission that the JS web-client has equivalent security to their native clients. The threat model between the two apps is large enough to necessitate some kind of notification, but unfortunately they not only haven't addressed the issue, they refused to address the issue when it was pointed out to them. IMO we should consider such companies selfish and greedy.
Are you assuming "consciousness" does not involve neural activity? How does that work?
Kudos for commenting here. I'm just an anonymous internet person but I'll share some advice anyway.

There are concrete things you can do to improve.

1) When someone reports a security issue to you, always always always thank them, even if you think that they're wrong, and are about to tell them. They're taking time that they don't need to take, with the goal to help you deal with a problem that is so much more yours than theirs. In other words they are demonstrating generosity, so thank them for that. If it turns out that they were wrong and that there is indeed no issue, well, no skin off your back; if it turns out that they are right, you'll be glad to still have them on your side rather than writing posts.

2) Be more curious. Instead of declaring "This is not a vulnerability or a security issue", as if the issue was closed, you can simply ask: "I'm not understanding why this is a vulnerability or a security issue. Can you explain and demonstrate a proof-of-concept attack?"

3) Consider getting advice from a security-minded person on such issues. It doesn't really take credentials. It just takes a certain kind of mindset that, in my experience, is not held by the majority of even very talented software developers.

I have to say, reading your response paragraph that starts with "if a human opens up his browser console to remove the subform parameter...", I recognized a very common feeling in me. Oh no, this person is just not getting security. Same facepalm reaction as the author. Having an API parameter that lets an (untrusted) client override a security measure isn't an "oversight", and more like a big design flaw. Kind of like if someone had a login API with a parameter called "pretend_password_is_correct" that let you sign in as anyone when set to true. If you're not seeing the issue when pointed out to you so clearly, it is really in your best interest to not make security decisions by yourself.

You shouldn't feel alone in this. Most developers that I've worked with, even top talent, cannot manage to put themselves in an attacker's shoes. Usually it's hard enough to put yourself in the normal user's shoes and get the thing to work for them. Following advice from people who have the skill of thinking like an attacker is the most valuable thing you can do to protect yourself.
People wouldn't stop producing content because regional restrictions became something that customers don't want to pay for anymore. Any entity that refuses to change those restrictions would leave the market open for another entity who's willing to do business without imposing these terms.

The demand for the fundamental content would remain and if some suppliers are unwilling to provide for the demand, other suppliers would arise.
I hate to distract from the content of the article, but I have a request from those without good vision: the text color on this blog is just a shade over 50% grey. I know people are opposed to the starkness of #000-on-#FFF text, but going approximately #888-on-#FFF seems extreme.
The technicalities behind Swift's work on ABI stability are very interesting but I remain unconvinced developers care about ABI stability nowadays; outside security updates and the very basic layers (syscalls, WinAPI...).

In the past, ABI stability was way more important for many companies because there were many more closed source dependencies, way less access to online updates, way less emphasis on CI/CD, etc.

The argument for size by avoiding several std runtimes is strange in 2019, specially considering Apple's policy of deprecating things and forcing devs to update apps constantly.
I thought people hire consultants so that they can sell unpopular changes as recommendations from an external authority instead of letting the blame hit management directly.
I had a database with no RI and it was a nightmare, filled with bugs.

So we added RI and it was awesome, and the bugs did go away with time.

But then we became dogmatic and had to have RI for everything, including things like maintaining local RI lookup tables for non local data. This just bogged us down so much that we couldn’t move.

Today, we use RI strictly within a single database. For foreign keys to remote databases, we assume the remote database knows what it’s talking about and that the incoming data has already been checked.

This works really well for us and in particular sharding is not a problem (sharding being a design decision not an implementation decision IMO)

Someone said elsewhere that Rails does the RI so the DB doesn’t need to. I don’t use Rails, and I don’t bet, but I’d wager that it’s faster to do RI inside Postgres than inside Rails.

The idea that we should throw out ALL RI is just dogmatic nonsense. I should know :)
No, the indexer used a custom HTML parser that was ancient (IIRC, when I was there it wasn't even fully HTML5-compliant - it doesn't have to be, because if you're tokenizing pages for indexing the only really important parts are text, anchors, meta tags, formatting, and headers, and as long as you basically get those right it's not important that you have the exact parse tree that a browser would.) It was very tightly optimized for speed, eg. it was SAX-style, with callbacks instead of heap allocations; the data that it returned to the caller was indexes into the original source data rather than case-normalizing and copying buffers; and the liberties it took with the HTML spec were largely so that it could minimize branching and state during the parse.

Headless Chrome existed within the indexing system while I was there but it was turned on for only a very small section of the index for CPU reasons. Their public statements since have indicated it's used for everything now.

Gumbo grew out of a templating language that I was working on with a larger team within Search Infrastructure and Maps. AFAIU the templating language is still being used, though I think Gumbo isn't being used for it anymore (its syntax diverged from pure HTML5 at some point). It was really intended for tools like refactoring & static analysis: that's why it's slower than the indexing HTML parser; why it was done in C rather than C++ (easier binding to scripting languages); why the API is intended to be round-trippable, with access to the original text that data structures refer to; and why it put a premium on generating accurate parses over speed.
I have had the opposite experience: Firefox runs just fine on a T420i (2nd gen i3,4GB RAM, Ubuntu 18.04) a T450 (5th gen i5, 8GB RAM, Windows 10) and a 2011 Macbook Air (2nd gen i5, 4GB RAM, OSX Sierra).
And if the "self-model" is "the brain" that makes the decision?
Every event organizer is the arbiter of morality within their own events. How else could it be?
We've been around since 1994. :)
“Hearing the words” is an oversimplification. By attending that talk you are giving this person legitimacy. You are implicitly saying that this person belongs in our society. You are contributing, in a small way, to our society being open to wildly dangerous people. I personally don’t want to live in a society where people who wish death on minorities are accepted. This is not hard!
> Remember when people had a conniption about Chrome auto updating and now literally all software does that?

Sure. And is that a good thing? From a developer's perspective maybe, from a user's not so much.

> Remember when using tabs was kind of a chore and not really worth the effort?

No, I dont. Tabs have not fundamentally changed since they were introduced in NetCaptor some twenty years ago. Yes, you can drag and drop them now, but thats basically it.

If anything, tabs have de-evolved. Chrome never allowed any customisation and Firefox stopped supporting it (e.g. vertical tabs) when they switched to "Quantum".

> Remember when the chrome of a browser would take up 10% of the screen? Remember when browsers had an address bar and a search bar?

If that was Google's only achievement ;)

> Remember when installing extensions was a huge, painful process?

I dont. Installing extensions was never any of that. It was always fairly straightforward in Firefox and has not really changed since the first versions, again some twenty years ago :)
If your mother in law is on the account and everyone on your account gets the family plan, it would make sense that each household has access.
I'm kind of puzzled by this fanboism about "a new MS happening now". The new propaganda is along: "Hey! reset everything you know about MS. The new MS is shiny!". Why would anybody support MS without being a shareholder or without having any financial interest. Given their proven track record it would be pretty obvious to be cautious about MS. IMHO MS have all the reasons to be doomed. They are way behind technically in key CS areas: HPC, Mobile, embedded, etc. Their flagship OS is FUBAR due to 2 decades of accumulated bloat. Anyway we might envision a future for MS as a profitable business: Embrace 21st century standards, port their SW on *nix(es) and make profit on their core competencies: that is developing boring non innovative SW for big companies.
Most modern typed languages support encoding this information in the type of the variable, so that the compiler catches it, instead of in the variable name. Alexis King wrote a blog post about it that reached the front page a few days ago.
https://lexi-lambda.github.io/blog/2019/11/05/parse-don-t-va...
The neat thing about layered systems is that they don't really exist. The sin of the "layering violation" is everywhere.
ABI (and module) stability is a big thing for people shipping iOS frameworks.
First intercontinental bomb attack in history
This is still true to this day. I have spent some time playing around with MVS (precursor to z/OS, IBM's mainframe operating system) on an emulator, and it's been a very educational experience.

The first thing you notice is how everything is different. While the rest of the world was standardising on what a "file" was (a sequence of (not necessarily 8-bit) bytes) as early as the 60's, the IBM world has "datasets" which are rigidly formatted sequences of records.

The differences doesn't end there, and extends as far as terminology, referring to booting as IPL and disk drives as DASD.

When reading documents abd tutorials written by people who seemingly has worked with IBM systems for a long time, it also seems that while they know everything about how to operate z/OS, they are very ignorant of even basic features of "traditional" operating systems (which these days means Unix and Windows).

I was reading a discussion about Revedit, which is an editor that is popular on MVS, and it was praised for being incredibly advanced. I've used it, and compared to the other one I have access to (whose name escapes me) it sure is better.

But, the editor lacks a lot of functionality even the simplest of editors on Unix had (regexp, for example) and the fact that no one in the mainframe world seems to miss it suggests to me that people who work in the mainframe world simply don't think about computing in the same way as people who were raised on Unix.

I'm not suggesting that one approach is better than the other. I think there are things that each side could learn from the other. But right now I only see the mainframe side learning from Unix, and very little going the other way. I probably will never work with mainframes for real, but learning how they work had been very helpful. It would probably help the industry if more people tried that.
I wonder if “these private APIs are about to change in the next release” is part of why they decided to stop giving Electron apps a pass on this.
But there is no option in iOS. Why are Apple afraid of the competition?
Punishing him for "tone policing" is like nailing Al Capone for tax evasion. Charles Max Wood's actual crime was being associated with John Sonmez, some brogrammer with a propensity to mouth off. In Scientology terms, he had an SP in his vicinity making him a PTS, and refusing to disconnect from the SP despite a direct order from his E/O meant he had an SP declare issued against him.

(Understanding Scientology will give you major clues into how social justice operates.)

Note that associating with John Sonmez is an unforgivable crime, but saying "white men in tech ain't shit" or "all whiteness is racist by design", as Kim Crayton has done, is not. This is because an often unstated assumption of codes of conduct is "we prefer the safety of marginalized groups over the comfort of privileged groups". (The GNOME Code of Conduct explicitly states this, almost verbatim.) That is to say, racism, sexism, and harassment are CoC violations if they are seen to "punch down", but not if they are seen to "punch up" by the CoC commissars who deliberate in secret.
This is why Uncle Bob's letter will go unheeded. If action is taken by the Linux Foundation because of his letter, it will be against Uncle Bob himself for posting it. He suggested that legitimate actions taken against one who punches down are harassment, which is itself punching down, therefore harassment and a CoC violation.
> BASIC was not much of a deal. The interpreter is just a REPL. Very basic at it, hence the name.

The language is named after its goal of being something easy to learn. It is a fairly contrived acronym, Beginner's All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code.
Even before the war, Lincoln played a role in the settlement of the west. Southern interests wanted access to the west to be through the south, guaranteeing that slave-owners would be more numerous.

Northern railroad interests decided to build a railroad bridge across the Mississippi River from Illinois to Iowa at Rock Island. Jefferson Davis, as Secretary of War, tried to stop it by claiming that Rock Island was an Army installation. He issued an order saying that the bridge could not be built, but it was ignored. He sent US Marshals to stop construction, but they didn't. He sued, but lost.

Two weeks after the bridge opened, a riverboat crashed into it and burned it down. The riverboat owners (which supposedly included Davis) sued to prevent a replacement bridge; the railroad hired Lincoln to defend them, which he successfully did all the way to the Supreme Court. Newspaper coverage of Lincoln in court made him well-known to northern Republicans.

Southern riverboats going up and down the river couldn't keep up with the northern trains bringing settlers.
New Instagram Search Tool for users, posts, images, hashtags
It's unauthorized distribution.

You don't get in trouble for copying a licensed work, you get in trouble for making it available to others without permission from the current rights holder (or more likely, their hired thugs or your ISP).

How would Fair Use and libraries work if copying alone were illegal?