skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Anandtech has been at it since the 90s and hasn't changed their format at all. This is a serious decades-long stagnation of the web.

Aside from the quality of their content, their format is something I really like about Anandtech. Is it really stagnation when you have figured out a format which works and stick to it?
Show HN: Seeded.vc – Chat Roulette for Seed Funding
I think the highlight point, that is new information (AFAIK) in this article is that 150 Google employees are working on this project. So this isn't "Ascension is hosting their data in the cloud", it's "Google is working with health data".
Yeah I'm not a fan at all of react-router because it's too dependent on React. For redirecting, for example, they recommend you render a <Redirect> component. Which is just bananas to me.
Chartio (YC S10) Is Hiring Engineers and an Engineering Manager in SF
> Two simple questions kept hounding me: did patients know about the transfer of their data to the tech giant? Should they be informed and given a chance to opt in or out?

That's literally what HIPAA was created to address. The user doesn't have to opt-in to every single solitary business that touches their data, because there is a chain of business contracts that explicitly dictate what they can do, that originates with the care provider.

This is like "blowing the whistle" because your dentist sent your dental impression to a company to create a crown for you. You didn't "opt-in" to that dental company getting your impressions, because your dentist had a contract with them to cover what they would do with it in the first place.

Jesus christ.
> Native is still available apparently, but you won't find it from the homepage, unless they were persuaded to change recently.

I haven't verified this myself, but standalone licences seem to be available for purchase in the app itself: https://discussions.agilebits.com/discussion/92275/how-do-i-...
>How hard could it have been

For me, it's those movies with ancient Egyptian sets with obvious crap glyphs. They can't be bothered even to copy from reference.
> I think most users understand the concept of creating a file, putting stuff in it, and putting it on a file syncing service (or usb drive)

Many do, many don't.

Even for those that do, there is a significant hassle in getting a file sharing service (gdrive, icloud, dropbox) etc onto every possible device they have.

I mean, I'm with you in that I'm personally pretty skeptical of the cloud-based pw solution. But I can absolutely understand the story about a much simpler user-experience that it offers.
This needs to be an Onion article.
Vice Ventures is investing in taboo industries that other funds won’t touch
It's always amazing how adding a little money to the mix makes people lose their minds. NJS was working for free. KR raised some money from large businesses, then told NJS to keep working for free. NJS retroactively discovered that working for free is stupid, and tried demanding all the money NJS raised. This didn't happen, of course, since he had no leverage at all on NJS besides complaining online.

The takeaway here appears to be "never work for free". If NJS has worked on his own project, controlled by him alone, this wouldn't have happened. If you donate a bunch of work to an open source project, then... well... the source is open.
Yerevan, Armenia really loves this style of building too
Why explosives detectors still can’t beat a dog’s nose
I don’t see Apple supporting this if end-to-end encryption isn’t in place, they’ve been more and more positioning privacy as a competitive advantage for their services.
For comparison, cats kill between 1.4 billion and 3.7 billion birds a year (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/outdo...)
If a dev can do it on his own without assistance with minimal issues then having someone to "maintain" the install is just dumb.
It is not just because "everybody" is doing crazy shit, that it is OK to do it.
I've written up three different replies now and I don't like any of them. I'm not sure how to respond to this statement. Thank you for writing it.

I fundamentally disagree with the two assertions "it's the act of using your brain to simulate the computer that teaches your brain how the computer works so you can reason about it later" and "In most domains, I find it best to start with doing things yourself, and only move on to the tool-assisted version once you thoroughly understand what the tool is doing for you".

I agree entirely with the notion that ability to reason about the underlying system is incredibly important, but I disagree about the methods to get there.

I disagree with those two ideas because (and maybe we have different perspectives here) but the choice of whatever level is the "base level" or "bottom of the stack" seems entirely arbitrary every time. Is assembly the bottom? Or C? No it's machine code. No it's the physical wires.

I think I should come back to my original comment here and reiterate. I'll clarify what I mean about those "computing environments that do that thinking for us" because I expressed myself poorly.

There are computing environments and workflows that people have built which expose to the end user (the programmer) deep information about the state in which they are working. As a field, as a culture we have not embraced this thinking and rather stick to the simplistic notion of working alone to build understanding for ourselves alone.

Sharing is discouraged (outright banned at school under penalty of expulsion) and difficult requirements are kept in place primarily for hazing purposes rather than pedagogical(I have this from a one-on-one discussion with the course designer at my school). There's this thinking that "I had to go through it, and the system produced me, so it must be good" and to think otherwise would be a recognition of being failed by the system, of missing something. A recognition that you could be smarter now than you currently are.

So to give a concrete example, as my sibling comment talks about "being the packet". Why is the 'network', and 'understanding the network' not realized as exactly the same idea? Why should I ever have the simulate the network in my head? The network is an man-created artifact, my understanding of the network should come from the network, the literal code defining it, not from text file RFCs however well they are written and whatever brilliant ascii art they have (because they ARE well written, and well explained by their diagrams). Programmers should have inspection tools that are borne out of the definition of the artifact they are inspecting.

This is of course being done in other disciplines first. An architect working in Revit is orders of magnitude more powerful than an architect working on pen in paper. In every case where an architect prefers pen on paper it is due to a failure of technology to realize practical or targeted workflow affordances, not due to the superiority of paper.
> The 1password employees must be down voting me. It's ridiculous that I get down voted for a specific opinion about the topic.

I was going to just disagree with you without downvoting, because I specifically was looking for cross device sync and mobile support (and specifically looked for a mobile app that supported using FIDO as a second factor to protect the vault.

However, attributing downvotes to employees/shills shows an inability to consider that there may be a good counter argument.
I 100% echo this. My biggest gripe about my biology degree was that there wasn’t much research I could do without either access to a lab or being Bruce Wayne. The single best thing that can happen to biology research would be to figure out a way to reduce these barriers tremendously, either via more access or by more affordable technology. So I’m excited about recent developments in synthetic biology.
Wine Not Build a Bot?
Wikipedia has plenty of other citations, if you have issues with Harvard:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_combining#Criticism

Summary: Yes, eating solely one food may eventually cause an issue. For instance, eating only rice would eventually cause a lysine deficiency -- on the order of ~88% of required amounts. Eating pretty much any other food that is not lysine-limited would likely be enough to make up the ~12% gap.
I think you are largely correct about this being a liquidity event vs series A funding; They are likely not looking at massive employee growth or marketing campaign as much as a way to unlock equity without going public.

This is good for users as it likely mean not huge changes to appease corporate overlords, but continues the sad story of limited young, profitable, small-cap Canadian tech companies available for outsider, passive investment. There are quite a few in the category of 10-15 years old, solid revenues/profit and founders that are ready to step back; most choose private equity or sovereign wealth funds investments in the 100M - 1B range over going public because of the hassle and reporting requirements. The average individual investor doesn't have access to these deals which is a shame because they tend to be established, profitable return generators. I don't blame the founders; I'd likely do the same route.
> I've only got a cursory understanding of RCS

Try `man rcs`. Heh.

I hate name collisions.
Is this the same concepts behind Vue as well? As someone that hasn't yet dabbled in the 'new' frameworks I love how this bridges the gap of understanding. Thank You!
Facebook deleted pro-vaccination adverts on political grounds, study finds
I haven't read the book so I don't know who's right. But this sounds a little too much like "how dare he question authority?"

The reviewer is a doctor and doctors are supposed to be able to understand genetics and read the scientific literature. Maybe not at the same level as a specialist, being able to follow along and tell good science from bad is useful.

As a programmer, I wouldn't be so foolish as to write my own cryptography code, but I understand the basic principles, I do try to keep up, and I expect a researcher writing a book to discuss security issues without dumbing it down too much. If I were reviewing a book saying something about cryptography that seems wrong I would definitely point it out. (Though, not being an expert, it might be in the form of asking questions.)

We can't get anywhere without trusting experts, but that doesn't mean we can't read critically.
Great idea! Wishing you a lot of luck!
Depends on whether or not the control the company.
Paywall for irony?
> Bad idea to use that because if the worker crash the event is lost

The only case where this would be problematic is if the worker crashed after doing some side effect external to the queue server that rendered the job non-idempotent, but before committing an acknowledgement. But that's not really a “what you use as a queue server” issue as a “are you also using a distributed transaction system to coordinate all side effects including queue updates” issue. (If the same Postres DB is the operational DB and the queue server, you may be able to avoid distributed transactions by having all the side effects in the DB, though that creates its own issues.)
You're correct that these changes all happened contiguously. The "multiple times" argument isn't very accurate.
Having re-watched it last week I was reminded again of some bad choices for corporate logos. Coca-cola we still have. Pan Am and Atari, not so much. Related:

https://typesetinthefuture.com/2016/06/19/bladerunner/
Did you actually read the book? You say things that seem odd for someone who read the book cover to cover. I know a lot of people read a few pages or the intro... but not the whole thing.

Your painting a false dichotomy and mischaracterizing my arguments to do so.

I never said:
"Yeah, of course those people are irrational and biased. But smart people are different."

I never said smart people are above biases. And of course smart people can justify bias more. These aren't facts that contradict ANYTHING I said. You are working with black and white. I'm working in greys.

The fact that you are painting my position as a scare crow makes me feel this is not dialectics but debate, you want to 'beat me'. I will post what I actually did say to so that your mischaracterization can stand out for what it is:

"Sort of.
We have system one and system two thinking.

We all have system one. Some people have system two to a greater or lesser extent.

It's a lot more complicated than 'decisions originate in our emotional centers... only justified... by our rational mind'

Yes, to a degree that happens, but it's more than that or people wouldn't think or deliberate points in highly analytical manners."

In his book he says we all have system 1. He says it's the star. He says he can't overcome his own biases. But NONE of that argues against my point:

"We all lie. We are all hypocritical.
There seems to be a threshold upon which someone is deemed a lier, hypocrite or simple minded.

That we all do something doesn't mean that we all do it to the same degree.

For some reason when talking about intelligence, people are uncomfortable with some being better endowed than others. I've noted that the people who are most uncomfortable with this reality are many times hyper aware of the difference in physical endowment between different individuals."
I'd hate to try to pan and zoom on a map to try to navigate using an e-ink kindle with the refresh rate and flashing it's just barely usable as an ebook reader with page flips but anything interactive like scrolling on a page is pretty bad the few times I've tried.
Let me see if I understand the strategic landscape around RCS correctly...

* To the extent RCS:

a) makes it easier for users to switch between mobile providers and keep advanced features that used to be offered for lock-in or more $$, or

b) makes it easier for users to switch between the old SMS network and wifi - then, it's not good for mobile telco provider's business models.

* To the extent RCS increases privacy for users (E2E encryption, etc) - then, it's not good for Google's business models.

* To the extent it allows feature-rich messaging to work across ALL major platforms (Android, Web & iOS)- then, it's not good for Apple's platform lock-in.

While I agree that an open, extensible, feature-rich, privacy-aware, cross-platform, cross-network messaging standard is highly desirable - is it correct that RCS (as currently formulated) is a non-starter and, from a strategic perspective, always was?
Most of the time they do tbf, but these are mostly very bad examples.
We did; but I think it came around after we started. It was faster at that time, we looked at also it's well written - we'd probably have used it if it was out, but we didn't really mind about the speed - we're not latency sensitive for what we're doing. Fast forward a little, and we now maintain QueueClassic, and it's now comparable / slightly faster.
I actually find this aspect of the whole thing exciting, perhaps paradoxically. Now that Python 2 is static the runtime can become asymptotically bug-free. Meaning that, if you only change it to fix bugs (as opposed to introducing new syntax|semantics) it's going to approach perfection.
Don't Be Evil. Rana Foroohar on Big Tech. [video]
Browser-based interface for the new Deezer’s audio separation engine
"Tan: The fact that users would “own” songs was the deal-breaker for a lot of the dinosaur record labels. I remember one meeting with a music label I won’t name, where the exec in the room basically told us, “If you listen to a Madonna song, I want you to pay us for that privilege. You never own music, you simply buy a license to consume that music at that moment. Next year, when you want to listen to that same song, I want you to pay us again. Thirty years from now, when your grandchildren want to listen to that Madonna song, I want them to pay us. You will never own this music, you only buy a temporary right to listen to that music at that moment, nothing more.” "

This just encapsulates everything about the modern digital content landscape.
I'm not so sure I would want to associate a modern, $1500 phone with an old razr. I can sense the nostalgia marketing tactic they are playing at but honestly I remember those phones for feeling cheap and breaking easily (and often).

Also, $1500 for a flip phone (that admittedly has a cool foldable screen that), this feels like a joke to me.
Beside clean builds is Git branch checkouts. I hit this at least twice a week.

Finish a feature branch and push it. Check out master. Pull master. Make new feature branch. Get an urgent bug fix request, switch to release branch, make a bugfix branch. Now go back to the new feature.

During this I may end up doing large rebuilds because Git changes modification times even if you end up back with the same header file you started with.

On a Thinkpad T540 the rebuild can take 30 minutes. It's less than 5 on a 3900X.
Running a Small Website Without Commercial Software or Hosting Services: Lessons
Localstack: A fully functional local AWS cloud stack
I would love to learn more about how you go about running your own lab! How can I follow?
> The taste of orange juice after brushing your teeth

I'm always wondering how so many people know of this first-hand.

Why are you drinking OJ, something extremely high in sugar, so soon after brushing your teeth?
There’s also still the WiFi sync method which you can use to sync between devices without that information ever leaving your local network.
Quarks Fuse to Release Energy[2017]
There's plenty of facades on busy roads that could use a deep clean in a few decades when all the diesel soot is finally gone from the air.
The trend I see is that an enormous amount of effort is made to make "centralisation" easy, while a relatively minute effort goes toward making "decentralisation" easy. Another name for decentralisaton in this context (computers and the internet) is "DIY".

Perhaps we could agree that centralisation in this context is inherently easier than decentralisation to begin with. If true, then what I see is enormous effort to make it even easier. "Frictionless".

Recent history has shown that centralisation in this context is a proven path toward making money, directly or indirectly, at users' expense. As such, decentralisation (DIY) is the path toward helping users save money or avoiding sacraficing other things of value (privacy, control, etc.).

Perhaps time spent on making DIY easier is worth the investment.
If you prefer code over text:

float
bayes(float prior, BAYES_TEST * test, int result) {
if (result) {
return prior* test->tp / (prior * test->tp + (1-prior) * test->fp);
}
return (prior * (1-test->tp)) / ( (prior * (1-test->tp)) + (1-prior) * (1-test->fp));
}

This is basically the core of anything that uses 'Naive Bayes', that's really all there is to it. Note that Naive Bayes tends to 'clamp' to 0 or 1 after enough evidence has been processed, you're not going to end up with a value somewhere in the middle in the vast majority of cases. Also, when it doesn't work there won't be any hint that you are mis-classifying, because of the above mentioned property the posterior returned is not going to help much in terms of determining your confidence level. Note that if you evaluate a lot of evidence sequentially and the criteria are not 'independent' then you won't get good results. Independent criteria can vary independently from each other, so for instance if you base three of your criteria on someone's IP address you won't get much mileage out of the second and third and you're going to over-represent that factor in the weighing of the evidence.

Still, it is super easy to get up and running, will work with remarkably little data to train with (determine those false positive and true positive ratios) and runs very fast during classification, it also requires very little in terms of hardware (no GPU or anything like that).

Yes, you can improve on this, but it isn't always worth the effort or the resources, I've built more than one revenue generating tool with this.
As a non-user of 1password, what's the value of the vault on it's own? don't you need a master password to unlock it?
California is becoming a nightmare. Here's why the state is getting unlivable
I didn’t read that Accel had acquired a controlling stake. Can you point me to the source that makes that claim?
Py2 is the new Fortran, I like to say.
How Video Works (From Mux.com)
Sometimes it's on purpose: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2015/oct/15/homelan...
No E2EE is a dealbreaker for me, no reason for me to use that or old-fashioned SMS.
According to a Bloomberg survey of 5,000 model 3 owners, 98% say they would buy it again and the vehicle had surpassed their expectations.

I don't doubt those numbers at all, but here's the trick: I'll bet you could find similar numbers for just about any electric vehicle. And here's why: the odds are extremely good that if you own an electric vehicle, it's your first electric vehicle. The market just isn't that old. I bought one of the first Nissan Leafs, and it's only eight years old.

Okay, so if we can agree that most EV owners are on their first EV, then of course 98% of them are going to buy another one because regardless of make or model, EVs are just that good. Yeah, yeah, you drive from SF to LA every day, but we're not talking about you, we're talking about people that already decided to buy an EV. I'd venture that many are like me, and after a bit feel that ICEs are downright primitive. So their next car is going to be an EV, and why not buy the one I'm already happy with?
I really like the UI of this blog. On mobile it's a bit annoying to have the top half of the screen be filled by a black block of code, but on desktop it look definitely awesome.
If I understand correctly, I now must subscribe to Anthos ($$$) in order to run my Cloud Run containers in my own GKE cluster.

Without Anthos, I can only use the fully-managed edition of Cloud Run. Or, presumably, I can set up self-managed Knative in my non-Anthos GKE cluster...
It's a phone based messaging medium. If you have a phone number, you can send a message. That's not nothing. I know the phone numbers of far more people than I know the name of their apple account, or google account, or facebook account, or whatever.

The general answer to that is to exchange account information, but the easiest way to do that is through SMS... and here we are. Upgrading SMS so it's better. It's not perfect, but I'm happy for any advances they can make to it.

And as for why it's not encrypted end-to-end, the spec started back in 2008. That wasn't even on most people's radar back then. It's possible once we see some actual uptake of the protocol, we might see some more movement towards adding features (continuously adding features before something is in use is just a good way to make sure it never actually makes it into use).
Indonesia earthquake: 7.4 quake strikes as urgent tsunami warning issued
AWS Data Exchange product manager here. The auto-renew here only applies to the free trial product that you're subscribing to, and would therefore auto-renew at $0. You can view and subscribe to the full product separately (it's technically a separate product), which will show its price. Hope this helps.
I must admit to some confusion. I am closely rereading my original comment, and I am failing to find where I suggested that buying a skyscraper is the same as buying a ring.
“Blood” to Fake Virginity on the First Night of Marriage Being Sold on Amazon
But calling BAT a "token", and running it as a blockchain, would seem to imply that it has some kind of value... If I can just receive it by running a headless patched version of Brave that pretends to show ads, then how could one expect it to have any value?

Note that, with the current ad system, there is some fraud detection in place for fake clicks. But if users receive tokens when the browser "shows" an ad, which kind of abuse detection could there be if the browser or OS or whatever just filters out the ad?
Yeah, that's what... 10kb of RAM per core?
A country the size of all of Europe is not representative of the vehicle market? Not sure I buy that.