skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The trick the Bose Acoustimass system uses is a form of resonance. While it is proprietary, it is fairly easy to build for yourself. In the 1980s, Popular Science (or Mechanics, I forget which) had a review of these speakers, and they told the "secret":

Take your small bass or midrange speaker (something with large excursion of the speaker diaphragm) and place it between two "tubes" that are in a 3:1 ratio. The tube on the front-side of the speaker should be the longer of the two.

So - grab a cheap 4-5" woofer and a carpet tube. Cut the tube into a 3 foot length and a 1 foot length. Put the woofer between the tubes, sealing it up well, with the front of the woofer firing down the longer tube.

That's it. It actually works well. I built one myself using junk as a kid back the late 1980s, after reading the article. What Bose did was then "fold" the tube so it could easily fit into a box. There is probably a ratio also between the volume of the tubes and the width of the driver, among other things, but the basic idea described above will work rather well. You could even do the folding trick with an actual wood enclosure if you can calculate the lengths and such thru the curves properly.

It's similar to a bass reflex or other ported style speaker, and it scales up and down rather well (see the Bose Wave radio - IIRC, it used either a 2.5" or 3.0" single driver for the bass). The downside is that it doesn't work over a wide range of bass; the bandwidth is somewhat narrow (it is possible to offset this, though, with an EQ and amplifier, to boost those lower frequencies - plus midrange speakers in the "satellites").
It's not at all incumbent on journalists to moderate their reporting based on the ownership of their publication. I don't understand why it's relevant. FedEx is within their rights to criticize the NY Times as an institution, but it doesn't make their reporting any less accurate. And Smith didn't even try to refute any of the details of the story.
Queer Eye, Perfect Example of Design Thinking
No surprise more and more entities want that delicious browsing history data, it's extremely valuable and profitable.

These days you need to really understand your threat model when it comes to using the internet and who might be able to record every keystroke and website you visit.

We used to call them "keyloggers" but now GBoard and Windows 10 have "clipboard sync" features.

I think there's going to be some genuine business in having scripts make random web searches, copy/paste random things with the cloud sync feature enabled etc to trick algorithms and what data can be harvested from what they collect.

If you poison the data they have on you then what use is it collecting it? Maybe I just am a raging furry, and adore Adolf Hitler and buy Nazi related materials.
Some classical techniques for memory involve creating your own mental spaces for memorising things.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_of_memory
I assume you mean planet's orbiting the star?

It's a fascinating problem. I've been thinking about it for about ten minutes now and I honestly don't know what would happen in this situation.
Self promotion sure but pretty darn cool too.
Now they can own privacy advocacy groups... great!
Wake 90 minutes before work. Snooze the alarm repeatedly until an hour before work. Quick shower and dress. Leave the house 40 minutes before work. Either listen to a podcast or contemplate life as I walk my two mile commute. Get to work and drink a glass of water. First coffee of the day about half an hour after I get to work.
Unpopular opinion warning!

Getting people to save water is one of the simplest things in the world!

Water is the cheapest material that people have access to. It is so cheap it has been devalued to the extreme. Fill a backyard pool? That'll be less than $100...

Raise the price a little bit, all of a sudden people will use less water, they won't even notice any effect and have the same quality of life.

Framing a scientific breakthrough as "saving money on water" is ridiculous.
We already have a simple solution that works.
> Or, skip the tunnel building and just ban cars from major cities.

"Just". :)
Uh, I don't see any substance in the pushback. Is there any?

E.g., how does the fact that the NYTimes paid no federal income tax in 2017 address or refute anything in the article?

Likewise the other financial facts about the NYTimes doesn't seem related.

The times article is about how the tax cuts did not result in the capital investments promised, by FexEx and others.

Now, if the times had lobbied for the tax cut and likewise claimed capital gains investments would increase but then they didn't, that would be relevant.
Original author of serde here. I call it sir-dee, but the current maintainer, dtolnay, calls it sear-day. But we really don't care how people pronounce it. It's really more of a neither / potato thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K75g7eRhH9M
It's completely clear. "Germany" gets dropped as there are overwhelmingly more recent stories about the "US ambassador" testifying at the impeachment hearings.
You have to use a filter on just about anything that you read, but the point by so many others remain: Not a single person in this thread or from Fedex has actually rebutted the journalist's claims in the original article.
In my opinion, debates are all about spin. They're too short to allow proper analysis of the responses, and mostly concern the personalities of the people.

Two examples: T.H. Huxley and Samuel Wilberforce, and a round-table I once attended with Dijkstra and Larry Loucks of IBM, along with a couple of other professors who were completely outclassed by those two. EWD was slow and very precise, it was clear that he was thinking deeply about the topics, but he didn't actually say much in the time alloted; Larry was fast, facile, and rather shallow, he was of the IBM style (he who talks loudest is in charge).
“Every time you make a purchase, a temporary card number is generated and used”

This is a common misconception. Every device receives a unique DAN, but when multiple transactions happen across time using the same device, the merchant will receive the same DAN.

This allows individual devices to easily be invalidated by the issuer, but it doesn’t really provide much privacy benefit from, say, merchants aggregating personal information based on your purchasing patterns.
From what I understand, the problem is that they won't be hosting the files anymore which means someone in need of them won't be able to access them.
The problem with this theory is that it doesn't align with facts.

Google and most of the other major tech companies don't actually sell user data. They collect it to use internally. The biggest companies who actually do that are the ISPs, but that doesn't really fit the same narrative, and I doubt they donate a lot to privacy groups.

The reason a lot of privacy groups don't try to restrict selling user data is a combination of a potentially legitimate first amendment problem with restricting it and a finite amount of political capital. Sometimes political capital has to be spent making sure that e.g. the FBI director doesn't push through a law against strong encryption. Sometimes it's better to have a bill that improves privacy a little and actually passes than a bill that improves privacy a lot but never makes it into law, or start with one that isn't as easy for Comcast to have struck down by the courts and in so doing create a problematic legal precedent.

Meanwhile you ask why Google and Facebook donate to privacy groups, but their goals are actually aligned on a lot of things, like promoting the use of HTTPS over HTTP and opposition to draconian copyright laws.

This is gotcha journalism, and it's problematic because what are you proposing as a solution? That privacy groups stop accepting money from tech companies? What that would do is cause them to have less money for privacy advocacy. Ask yourself who benefits from that.
How do you feel about the difference in income tax rates from the mid twentieth century to now for the upper wealth brackets?
There is https://tosback.org/ or https://www.docracy.com/tos/changes for most popular services

Or

You can build your own https://github.com/pde/tosback2-data
Doesn't respond to any of the claims in the story. The story is about 1) how FedEx lobbied for the Trump tax cuts, 2) what they claimed they would do with that money if the tax cuts were passed, 3) what they actually did with that money and 4) what the implications are for the efficacy of the Trump tax cuts in general.
If the New York Times corporation followed exactly the same playbook as FedEx with regard to lobbying, how would that change any of the four points above? And what would Arthur Sulzbergers opinions about tax cuts have to do with the reporting of the story?

It's an extremely blatant and I thought transparent attempt to change the subject, but, if the first fifteen comments here are any indication, a surprisingly effective one.
On a second playthrough, I wish Fallout 4 would've let you _actually_ lead the Minutemen (given that they were most closely aligned with the settlement mechanics) in rebuilding the wasteland, and let you manage the internal politics of a large organization (eg: you could let the synths in and merge with the Railroad, but you'd lose some subset of followers in the process).
The written rules and algorithms are only half the story. The other half is how seriously and with what integrity the criteria applied. The Soviet Union had a more liberal Constitution than the US, but it was interpreted by the Communist Party to allow the Gulags and controlled news and academic writings.
I see, not exactly a well informed opinion from what I can see, but each to their own :)
Maybe then they can buy a PC and seat an employee that will spend all the day browsing the web. Instead of spying on everyone.
Nope. If you need high-throughput transportation in high-density areas, then cars are not the technically best solution since they need a lot of space to move only a few people each, and that's both when in use (space on the road) and when not in use (parking space).

With current and mid-term-future tech, high-frequency bus- and smalltrain/metro-lines are much more efficient for city-plus-suburbia-scale mass-transportation. Depending on topography and climate, add (electric) bicycles and similar to the mix.

The problem is with bootstrapping: A high-frequency public transportation network is expensive, especially if the demand is low since everybody (who can afford it) is driving by car because the current public transport is bad because setting up a good high-frequency public transportation network is expensive, especially if the demand is low since...
To break this circle, we have politics and law - but of course only few cities want to outlaw cars.

My personal opinion: While I really like driving my nice, expensive car, I would actually prefer taking the bus; as long as (1.) it's not more expensive [easy] and (2.) doesn't affect my travel time significantly [difficult] and (3.) is as reliable as going by car. Right now getting to the office by bus takes 40m instead of max. 10m by car, is unreliable (missed connections add 15m and leave me waiting in 2 to 5 degC) and god forbid there is a chance of snow, then I'm stranded. I'm leaving out recent strikes, which shut down public transportation in my city for 2 weeks, because I think as much as people should have a good public transportation, the people WORKING in public transportation deserve a proper payment.
Bolsonaro never fails to surprise...
Thank you for the input. I guess I was looking for the qualities that would apply to all those areas you mentioned. In the same way that systems theory is an abstraction that hovers above many different areas of human knowledge. However, I didn't make that explicit.

Your point for compromises is very important. It's important, because you have to compromise on your way to this ideal that I wrote about.
Petey Vid: privacy focused video search
Or just say, "Nuh-uh! You did it, too!"

That seems to work.
I've been using mermaid for almost 2 years now, great software and still improving. It's nice too that I can keep the code in a note and change in in meetings.
That’s a very poor excuse for mass collection of personal data. They can easily figure that out from commercial datasets, or even a small-scale research effort.
I literally got in trouble for knowing this verse in elementary school. Dad came down with a tape cassette to show the principal what was up. :eyeroll:

Funny how Guthrie's communist, anti-borders, anthem got co-opted by nationalists so far that they don't even understand the meaning... this verse couldn't make that cut, though.
Google et al often stand to benefit from privacy regulations (e.g. GDPR), because they can bear the cost of compliance, while smaller competitors copying their business model can't. Increased costs in return for a stronger monopoly.

It seems that's partly the case here: they want more legislation, but also want to make sure it won't hurt them.
Interview with Brooklyn Based Hip Hop Artist the Samhain Hot
OmniGraffle is freaking amazing. If you're on a mac then RUN (don't walk) to grab a copy and try it out.

it's also SO much more than just UML. I have found SO many uses for it.
> The researchers also predict the coating could last for about 500 flushes in a conventional toilet before a reapplication of the lubricant layer is needed.

It's a neat idea - especially the fact the bowl remains white, unlike a coating of PTFE or similar.

I wonder if it's an idea they can develop further into a permanent coating?
Data that needs to be shared should be signed by sender at every port of exit and by receiver at every port of entry. All significant transformations should also be signed in a manner that allows one to follow data to it's real world source.

If applying complete attribution to our data was the norm, for at least some markets places, entities empowered by our data would be much less likely to just "share" it willy nilly.

Dark markets will always exist, but I think attribution of data would incentives certain corporations (health, banking, etc) to act in their users better interests, at least compared to what we have now.
To be fair, isn't this the case with most credit cards as well? Any record of purchases you create is a privacy risk because somewhere there's at least one entity involved in authorizing and processing transactions.

If anything, wouldn't being able to use an app specific to your bank remove one more middleman (Apple, Google, whoever) from the process?
Is this due to a "management" style leadership pushed on companies typically by Private Equity? I am beginning to see PE as an agent of eroding quality in after sales support and many other areas.
Looks like 3D inside a tv. It ain’t holographic unless it projects enough for you to touch thru it.
How do you know EPIC isn’t for sale? They don’t disclose who their donors are.
I'd say it's because the process of updating probabilities in light of new evidence involves multiplication, which yields you nothing new for 0 and 1. It's not resetting values of variables.

> Does Cromwell's Rule mean that I have to believe that Hillary Clinton is the PotUS at least a little, because otherwise I will never be able to believe it if she ever gets elected president?

Yes. And the justification for that is that there's tiny but non-zero possibility that she may really be the president, and it's your senses that deceive you. Perhaps you're the protagonist of your own's Truman Show. Or perhaps it's some peculiarity in your brain that prevents you from accepting who the real president is. Integrating other evidence around you, you can assign ridiculously low probabilities to these scenarios, but you can't assume zero probability. After all, there exist people with such problems, and they tend to end up in treatment when someone realizes what's going on with them.

And the nice thing about it, that not using 0 and 1 makes the whole thing add up to reality in an elegant fashion. Adding 0 and 1 breaks that.
I work for a publicly-traded company and we use it quite heavily, though it's not the only thing we use. I've heard secondhand that there's a lot of AngularJS (aka Angular v1) out there too. Far more Angular 2+, however.
The US Census famously used differential privacy in their most recent surveys. They have a quite extensive analysis of the tradeoffs they had to make to ensure everyone's privacy, and there is a fairly large body of academic work that analyzes (e.g.) the economic impact of this privacy preservation. The general consensus AFAIK is that they did a great job.

See https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.02201 for the main paper from the Census.
I bet the more populated the US gets the more desire will be there for right to roam. Or at least I hope so. The same with billionaires cutting off access to public beaches.
Even if the security is not significantly enhanced over a content blocker, tracking using JS will be much harder (assuming the cloud device is randomized in some way).
I'm sure that they already do, but how the entire world uses the internet isn't easily testable by any sane number of testers.

Not saying this is a remotely sane way to do the study, just that's probably the rationale
There will always be people in the good and bad camps but for the price I think they offer the best mix of design, durability and NC capabilities. I would definitely always go for the wireless version because the moment you have a wire again, you notice how clumsy and annoying it is.
This is fantastic. Another step in the right direction!
Corporate taxes shouldn't exist, especially in their current form. Corporate taxes are just reflected to consumers as higher prices or to workers as lower wages. In the current structure, corporate taxes benefit large businesses more with large legal departments because they can afford to take advantage of deductions etc.

Corporate taxes should be replaced by an increase in capital gains tax.
Sure except that's like trying to ban alcohol, and we all know how that worked out. It's far too easy to get your hands on, especially for criminals who are sufficiently motivated.
Lets look at the facts as reported by the NYT:
1. Fedex owed 1.5 Billion in taxes in 2017.
2. They owe 0 in taxes after the bill.
3. As for capital investments, the company spent less in the 2018 fiscal year than it had projected in December 2017, before the tax law passed. It spent even less in 2019. Much of its savings have gone to reward shareholders: FedEx spent more than $2 billion on stock buybacks and dividend increases in the 2019 fiscal year, up from $1.6 billion in 2018, and more than double the amount the company spent on buybacks and dividends in fiscal year 2017.

They are not disputing those numbers at all.

What they want to do is "The focus of the debate should be federal tax policy and the relative societal benefits of business investments and the enormous intended benefits to the United States economy, especially lower and middle class wage earners."

Bet seeing those numbers (2017 Tax bill: $1,500,000,000, 2018 tax bill: $0) must have stung and Fedex is frantically trying to change the topic of conversation.
Tivitiko – Easy way to read tweets thread
> The information collected includes categorized web browsing history that shows how long and how often you visited specific categories of sites (i.e. social media, personal finance, or news). All site visits are classified into one of 30 categories. We do not collect URLs, web pages titles, or user-specific content without explicit permission from you.

From a technical perspective, how does this work? I can only think of two ways:

(1) Intel downloads a big "map" file containing a huge list of pre-defined domains and categories. This means either the categories are pretty slim or you have a GB's big file

(2) Each URL is sent to Intel (aka "collected"). Maybe they don't "store" it ("We promise") but as soon as it leaves your system you have no control on this
If it is past the expiration date they don't have to recall it at all. Saves a lot of money when nearly every car seat ever made was recalled at some point (or so it seems - as a parent every carseat I've ever bought has been recalled at some time within 5 years).
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21558863
> While it is great for getting started and MongoDB has made great strides at improving safety, it is still a suboptimal choice for handling financial transactions (logs or otherwise).

Would you mind clarifying this last bit? The default settings are not ideal and you need to do some configuration, but if you know what you're doing MongoDB has been capable of safe data storage since 3.6? What else would make it suboptimal?

Admittedly I'd probably choose postgres on a new project, given the many features. But in my dayjob I use MongoDB because of Org/Historical reasons and am not really aware of any problems that can't be mitigated. Is it just because you have to waste time mitigating common problems?
This is just an advert with very little substance.
T-Mobile CEO John Legere to Be Replaced by COO Mike Sievert in May
Show HN: Storry – Group media sharing network. No influencers and scroll fatigue
Golang – Level 7 Load Balancer and Cache
I tend to agree with you. Though when Intel starts selling your data to the government you might want to limit those Nazi searches, could impact your ability to cross the border without a hassle.
A Philosophy of Software Design: My Take (and a Book Review)
Juno is shutting down today
Tumult has been around for a while. Its not web based but an Apple application.
How to build a user authentication system, from scratch
Looking to get some feedback and suggestions for further development.
But based on the this statement, I'm inclined to believe that everything the NYT published was, in fact, true. No where in the statement does it call into question any of the facts, just calling it an "outrageous distortion" of the truth. Which implies it is true, though he certainly takes issue with the characterization of the truth.

So if expected behavior of the NYT is factual reporting, I'd say they're on the money!
> They aren't disputing the facts.

> The New York Times published a distorted and factually incorrect story [...] this outrageous distortion of the truth [...]
>They aren't disputing the facts.

I'm not sure how you reached that conclusion. The first sentence says the story is "distorted and factually incorrect" and they later call it an "outrageous distortion of the truth". This statement is screaming "fake news" and "debate me" like some Twitter troll. It is crazy to see this as an official statement from a Fortune 100 company.
Projection is entirely impossible. The photon's path has to back-track through the device; this is true regardless of the type of device you're using to make it.
And an absolute steal (for what is it) at the standard sale price.
.. from its competitors, apparently.
In their defense -- those links get up-voted. That indicates that many people missed the earlier postings, and find them valuable.

(I am not associated with Floyd hub, but I have used their product once.)
I love monodraw, but i don't know if it counts as "modern looking" Yes, the rendered versions of the output look reasonably good, but there are still some rough edges, like trying to create a "diamond" shape to put text in (typical decision point in flow chart) ends up with a HUGE diamond.

also, i see it as primarily useful for generating ASCII diagrams for inserting into source code or docs. If you don't care about that tools like OmniGraffle do a much better job.
Indeed. Or rather: as an user, the animations only an issue when they're broken (or performance-intensive). Which immediately suggests a way for correctly doing such expandable paragraphs: just don't animate them if you can't make it work perfectly everywhere.
They have this question in the page:

> If I participate in the program, is there any personal information in the data collected?

..then they proceed to tell you what they don't collect. You can read between the lines that yes, they do collect PII.
yEd with custom palettes, anyone?