skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As a consumer, just give me the full stack, and any step that involves something sketchy means I don't want to see it. I'd block anything from outside the US, anything from a network that obscures information, and maybe all VOIP numbers as well. Then at least I'd only be contactable by people subject to United States law.

I already keep my cell phone on silent unless I'm expecting a call, and my voicemail is disabled. It would just be nice to not have to be notified about other calls when I do need to be reachable by phone.
The only thing Windows 10 UI rises to is a paragon of lagginess - and I say that about the UI I generally like, and one that runs on 10-year-old equipment just fine.

There's no good reason for a lag after hitting the "Start" button.

There's no good reason for a lag in the right-mouse-button context menu in Explorer (this was a "feature" since Windows 95, however).

I could go on for a long time, but let's just say that Win+R notepad is still the fastest way to start that program, because at least Win+R menu wasn't made pretty and slow (but still has history of some sorts).

The search box behaves in truly mysterious ways. All I want it to do is bring up a list of programs whose name contains the substring that I just typed. It's not a task that should take more than a screen refresh, much more so in 2019. And yet, I still have no clue what it actually does - if it works at all[1].

[1]https://www.maketecheasier.com/fix-windows-10-start-menu-sea...
Not "calling for their ultimate demise", just projecting based on recent knowledge of how they do business. The "questionable design decision" is a symptom, not a cause.
You can't serve someone via email.
Based on this article in spanish[1] (translated in [2]) it says that will be the most modern multipurpose nuclear reactor and it is planned to be completed in the year 2022. They predict it will produce 20% of Molybdenum consumed in the world.

[1] https://www.lanacion.com.ar/ciencia/tecnologia-se-construye-...

[2] https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=es&tl=en&u=htt...
That really sucks. I moved and have spent some time working on my profiles, so I'll share my advice if you want it. I usually get 7 or 8 likes per week, usually 1-2 that I'm interested in talking to, and usually go on a date with a new person every couple of weeks.

First advice, pay for the premium service on the apps. I know it's not cheap, but being able to see who liked you is a huge gain. I've had very little success getting matches otherwise unless I was going to spend way too much time swiping. And it's still drastically cheaper than a match maker.

Secondly, when writing your profile and choosing pictures, you want to make choices based on the women looking at your profile's perspective. Does he look good? Does he seem interesting? Do we have things to talk about? Share some interesting bits about your life that women might find interesting and want to ask you about. Have you gone anywhere cool lately? Have you picked up any interesting hobbies? (But stay away from esoteric stuff. Database design is cool, but very few people will get it). Maybe you cooked something really cool and exotic for dinner the other day.

Don't try to be overly impressive. If you want to look fancy, have selfies of yourself before you went to an event in a suit, or maybe at the event. Make sure the focus is on you, instead of the event/car/house/whatever. But it can always be in the background. Trying to be overly impressive comes off one dimensional, like you aren't interesting other than puffing yourself up. Showing that you're doing well and are a well adjusted, successful person is good, you just have to make sure it's a facet of your profile instead of a focus.

Make sure you keep your standards reasonable. We would all love to date a neuroscientist who's a lingerie model in her spare time. Those women are exceedingly rare, and even rarer on dating apps. They probably don't need a dating app to keep a full dance card. Swiping really screws up your perspective of what the dating pool looks like. Your feed is always full of absurdly attractive women, but keep in mind that a lot of those are fake profiles.

Lastly, make sure you iterate. Take the dates you can get, even if they're not perfect to you. Maybe they're better than you thought; if not, use it as a learning experience. What did they like about you? What didn't they? You can use that feedback to adjust your profile and how you communicate to make yourself more appealing. Plus, going on dates is pretty much universally fun, so there isn't much to lose!
Kongō Gumi
The first HN thread I saw this morning (CET) about this was deleted, I think, but here's the second one:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21832934
> It's illegal for anyone else to deliver letters.

Tell that to FedEx[0].

[0]: http://www.fedex.com/gp_english/tools/package1.html
I'd love have a 1" slice of that cable on my desk for amuzement. Probably will be like a foot or more in diameter.
I was thinking about some carefully-sculpted "chrome mudflaps" or something on the back of my small car, up near the window. Obviously they wouldn't do much for mud, but if they're purely passive, I think they'd still be legal. If someone's following at an appropriate distance, no issue, but if they get close enough for their lights to point at my window, they'll be eating their own glare.
This is the tech that would allow the key management we described in section 3.4 of the MobileCoin whitepaper [0] to exist.

[0] https://www.mobilecoin.com/whitepaper-en.pdf
How Robert Cottrell of ‘The Browser’ finds the best writing on the web
> or sending their kids to private schools

I think this is the key, you're seeing mostly people with kids, and their behavior is different in general than people without kids.
DDG-1000 – Worse Than Even I Predicted... No, It's That Bad
“When Harry Met Sally” Revisited: Can Men and Women Truly Be Friends?
No, I'm not.

There is a massive difference between discriminating based on who the customers are, and discriminating based on "all customers doing this one specifically completely illegal thing".
You don’t fine the phone company. You fine the Broadband.com and the Twilio.com of the world who enable robocalling.

Twilio has a market cap of ~$20B, which is largely fueled by them enabling robocallers to text/call people.
No not quite. I’ve just seen an awful lot of quotes from a few of his books and poems used almost like strange personal affirmations in dating profiles.
Risk mitigation. Your CEO is probably juggling several issues from budget, hiring, sales, real estate etc. Some of these are probably high risk decisions that could sink the company. So the decision to go with AWS and not care about marginal cost savings are about eliminating a potential source of risk.
List of Oldest Companies
"Fully homomorphic encryption" and "Brainfuck" in one sentence. I guess now I've seen everything :P but nice idea (obviously the language doesn't matter that much if it's a VM). Did some fully homomorphic $stuff for my bsc thesis,... Was this for a thesis as well, or just for fun? I guess next step is to use BF instead of Python? ;)
> can't comment about 4

Having a real mode operating system (DOS) means that an errant pointer in your program could (and often did) crash the operating system requiring a reboot. Worse, it would scramble your hard disk.

My usual practice was to immediately reboot on a system crash. This, of course, made for slow development.

With the advent of protected mode (DOS extenders, OS/2), this ceased being a problem. It greatly speeded up development, and protected mode found many more bugs more quickly than overt crashes did - and with a protected mode debugger it even told you where the bug was!

I shifted all development to protected mode systems, and only as the last step would port the program to DOS.
I spent a week making sure I could reliably tear it down and build it up again within minutes, this was by far the hardest part. I ended up hacking around kubespray, but in the future I’ll move to a IPMI-based MAAS setup.

After the initial work to get everything set up it’s been working absolutely trouble free.
Awesome-safety-critical: resources for writing safety-critical software
There's one escape hatch that Rust doesn't have: a hatch to escape its complexity. These days I do most of my programming in C++, and my first requirement from the language that will replace it for me is that it be simple rather than a shrine to accidental complexity. So I'm looking at Zig and liking what I see so far. I also think its approach to correctness is ultimately less disappointing than Rust's (as it is now) but that's a whole other discussion. Of course, these are personal preferences rather than some universal claims, although when I bet on a programming language I also care about future popularity, and complex languages tend to never gain more than small niche adoption. Anyway, Rust and Zig have such diametrically opposed design philosophies for low-level (AKA systems) programming, that it will be interesting to see their respective adoption dynamics. If, despite my prediction, Rust ends up being more popular, I'll probably prefer it to C++ and use it.
Revised North American Trade Pact Passes House
I don't see how satellites in very low orbit will contribute to the space junk problem. After a few years they fall down and burn up in the atmosphere. Even if they didn't burn up, it wouldn't stay in orbit, they aren't high enough to get stuck.

I for one am excited to see the day where the entire globe is connected finally. There's only so many places wires and towers will reach, lets fill that final (massive) gap.
I'm specifically referring to the Google Maps mobile app - it doesn't have a search bar, but has buttons that come and go depending on your current context. If a button is visible in your context, you can bet it works in that context. As an example, the layer, compass and search buttons are present when you're not navigating, but once you start, the layer and compass buttons are replaced by the audio chatiness button. The search button is still present, and the implication is that its usable in my current context: that's great discoverability in my book.
Exactly the kind of thing I'm complaining about.

We need to update laws for the fact that we now live in 2020 and not 1820.

I understand that for most healthy, housed, able-bodied, privileged people, mail is a decent way to get in touch with people. For the rest of us email/web is safer, faster, more secure, less burdensome, easier to verify, better for the environment, easier to store, etc.
IBM Research Created a New Battery That Outperforms Lithium-Ion
Are the post times modifiable?

I'm using a Dell E7440 and it's pretty quick to boot from powered off. I have a bunch of stuff turned off in the bios. It's my machine on my home network, it's not a corporate machine with all the corporate stuff.

But maybe that's the lever we need to get change: 30 seconds extra for 1000 people over 250 working days a year is over 2000 person hours being spent waiting for machines to boot.

And that wait time for the corporate stuff is something that real people talk about. Here are a few twitter threads about people in different NHS organisations.

Some people are waiting 3 to 10 minutes, a few are waiting even longer(!!) https://twitter.com/griffglen/status/1066043840497360897?s=2...

https://twitter.com/bengoldacre/status/1038329028623716358?s...

https://twitter.com/dannyjpalmer/status/1123604293251158016?...
Oh boy, that canard. In my experience, cloud management is nothing like as simple as people make out; and you're not going to be magically making those ifrastructure man-power costs just go away. You need to configure all that stuff non-the-less, and that's where the time goes. Even compared to bare-metal, the difference isn't all it's chalked up to be - the actual rusty box doesn't need a lot of TLC, and you can hire companies for that too, and they just don't break all that often for this to matter much. I mean; who wants the hassle; and it's still sane to outsource stuff you're not good at and don't (want to) care about - but it's not a huge source of savings.

And HA is - for most usages - best avoided. It's a complexity source like nothing you've seen before. Better to make sure you can replace anything that's broken really fast (because it's all scripted), and if you have enough scale to have at least few machines - just accept that you'll have some very small downtime when lightning strikes, and that many machines can be temporarily missed without much impact anyhow. By the way - you'll have that in HA cloud datacenters too, but the cause there will be human error due to the excessive complexity. If you dive into uptime claims by cloud providers it's typically for obtuse stuff like "can bare VM ping another VM over http in same datacenter". Actually use any of all of those complex services they provide, and weird stuff like "the outside internet connectivity" and the uptime of the overall system starts shedding those precious 9's. Uptime is almost certainly excellent compared to any trivial alternative, but the real-world difference isn't as large as the misleading uptime claims lead you to believe. I've had outages cloud providers several times while their uptime ticker claimed everything was just peachy.

If you really need HA, my condolences - but it's overrated vs. simply being able to spin up a new copy in a few minutes, especially since stuff just doesn't die or crash all that often; typically only once every few years, if that. Almost all actual downtime is not because your physical infrastructure went down in ways that most HA could have prevented.
Per person? It's not. Cars are.
You could simulate your own data that disagrees with their simulated data and thus draw attention to the absurdity of the whole situation.
Of course. But I'd must rather a company do the right thing for the wrong reasons than just do the wrong thing.

Besides, corporate "values" are flimsy and change at the drop of a hat. Profit is the only incentive that remains constant. I find it much easier to trust a company who does a good thing because it benefits their bottom line than one who does something just because the current leadership decides to do it out of the goodness of their heart.
Look again please.

"Here's how the GDPR options of an European website looks like: https://imgur.com/a/ckOivi7 "

False, the EU website has an ugly cookie bar with a button called "I accept" that everyone has been trained to click yes on.

"That "Analytics Advertising Feature" MUST be unchecked by default. Only users that actually want to be tracked are tracked."

False, users can be presented with an accept / reject button on a standard cookie bar, clicking accept can opt them into tracking - please LOOK at the EU website example I provided.

"Every "tracking feature" (cookies, fingerprinting, IP tracking, whatever) must be hard opt-in."

This can be done though an accept button on a website that users have been trained to click yes on. My earlier suggestion that folks do a study on how many users navigate into these policies for every website they visit to make fine grained selections if such options are even available stands as well.

"If a website only use functional cookies (colours, session, login, cart, language) they don't need consent, just disclosure (and it doesn't have to be an ugly cookie bar)."

I gave you an example of an ugly cookie bar on an EU website subject to GPDR - I can find many more.

This is the problem with these folks messing the net up. Everyone should do this / shouldn't do that, but no attention to what is actually happening.

I want to be clear, billion of pages are showing I accept buttons, some without reject buttons if they are disclosure only, some with reject buttons that kick you off the site, and some with reject buttons that opt you out of tracking, and users are being / have been trained by the EU alert notices / disclosure only notices (which generally DO have an I accept button) etc to waste their time clicking I accept everywhere.

This is bad for actual user choice, actual privacy.
Related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21838234
Oh I'm sorry I didn't think I needed to make long ass explination and give a history lesson on why the NSA is more than probably able decrypt whatever they want.
I've read my share of SW papers: the fact that after a year more than half of links in such works are dead is more telling than the papers themselves.
It's certainly a poorly worded line but I think it'd be fair to read it as "... countries with petroleum industries". The other reading is quite in bad faith.
> Approval voting does way better, and it finally has been put into practice in local elections (in Fargo ND), and is being considered for a big city (St. Louis MO).

That looks a lot more understandable and straightforward than ranked-choice voting, which is a big plus to me. Vote counting systems should be so straightforward that even a simpleton can understand them, as the more complicated they are the less I think they'll be trusted.

Even with such a system, I think I'd still like there to be a final runoff election for important offices. It gives an opportunity for correction if a crazy somehow unexpectedly comes out ahead, and it will give a majority endorsement to someone.
Here in Adelaide, South Australia, we could have had a record high minimum temperature (Actually we kind of did, West Terrace vs Kent Town), however a short burst of slightly cooler air at about 10:30pm of around 33C has masked the fact that the morning low temperature was 35C. This is probably more typical of the desert, but we're on the coast.
For the record, this is exactly what the bill defines. https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/151...

It enforces the carriers to implement the authention/blocking/reporting system. It also talks about misclassification and fail-safes too. FCC should create rules:

> establishing a safe harbor for a provider of voice service from liability for unintended or inadvertent blocking of calls or for the unintended or inadvertent misidentification of the level of trust for individual calls based, in whole or in part, on information provided by the call authentication frameworks under subsection
In some ways you just can't compare, i.e., Cloud Formation and software defined infrastructure is a completely new way of architecting services, but if you're doing more than serving web pages, anything data heavy, the storage and egress costs are incredibly high.

Consider the costs of a rack of Supermicro thumpers (90 bays https://www.supermicro.com/en/products/chassis/4U/946/SC946E...) for long term large online storage vs AWS. Even using Glacier (which is cached tape) is expensive in comparison, especially when read/egress costs are included. Even if you use more enterprisey gear from Dell it is MUCH cheaper to DIY or pay an independent integrator than to use AWS.

AWS itself it doing this for even cheaper than what white box gear sells to retail, because of their huge scale and integration efficiencies. There is a reason AWS makes so much money.
Realtek's Entry-Level 1TB NVMe SSD Reviewed
They absolutely cannot crack all encryption schemes. It's ridiculous to even suggest it, even if they would have fully functioning quantum computers.
You would never want to build a B line that doesn't have any ridership. The move here would not be to make it free, but to reconsider the project and re-align it with a route that would actually attract riders.
Wireless links could absolutely be faster than fiber links in latency. Unlikely they'll be faster in bandwidth though that's also possible if they are able to convince regulatory agencies that their beam-forming is good enough to allow them to use large swaths of bandwidth.
Generic collections in C implemented with macros are so heinous, I think this comparison may actually be fairer to C. I say that as an abuser of C macros, and someone who genuinely likes C.
Apple, Google, and Amazon create “CHIP,” a new smart home standard [Updated]
Mozilla will no doubt use their own domain name, and would have the option to go self hosted if they wish to.

Moving synapse databases around isn't too difficult, and certainly Modular.im would be able to provide the data on request.
Possibly Typescript. Try finding documentation for the bundled "Record" type. It seems you're supposed to just know how to use it already.
Yes, the ability to create your own client certainly is. Everyone can implement their client as they see fit, as long as they stay compatible with the API. Naturally, you get many clients with different features.

Besides that, there is a reference implementation (Riot).
> Don't like oil? Stop benefiting from it while simultaneously hating it.

As someone who doesn't drive and has opposed oil and natural gas based energy solutions thank you, I will.
> There's no way that wireless links will ever be faster than backbone fiber - the whole notion makes very little sense.

Why? Wireless signals propagate faster linearly than fiber signals, no?

I don't have time to do napkin math, but if 2x orbital height + curvature path multiple < linear speed difference, wireless comes out ahead.

From memory, I think this held true for transoceanic distances.
My hope was this was somehow related to the "Magic Eye" book series and finally those who'd spent years "Magic Eye"-challenged could experience the joy of hidden 3D objects!
Mounting a disk and getting two way sync was insanely easier for me at least, I was struggling with Unison version matching with Vagrant.
SpinUp Cloud – $50 Free Credit
Why We’re Investing in Snackpass – Andreessen Horowitz
Before web tracking webpages would load instantly.
Yes. I almost set up a "phone center" with the OSS asterisk package on a raspberry-pi. Basically the raspberry takes the call and waits for a few second silently, before forwarding the call to your phone (and only then it starts ringing). This way, robocallers hang up and your phone never rings.

Instead of waiting, you can also send control sounds to make the robocall believe the call has ended.
I'm glad you commented because this is what I wanted to say, but couldn't think of a good way to lead into it.

IIRC while Rust does allow you to switch up allocators, it doesn't let you mix and match your runtime with multiple allocators. (Each artifact can be linked with at most one allocator at a time.) There are applications where you want to have multiple allocation strategies for performance reasons.

Uniqueness is really useful for most applications, but there are times that you want data structures that allow multiple pointers to the same data. Having to do this in Rust is going to be a bigger chore than doing it in a language that doesn't support uniqueness.

It will be possible for Rust to still participate in these areas (especially because you can use Rust for only part of your project, so you can use it where you don't have allocation or nonuniqueness constraints in your problem space). However, other options are going to offer a better programmer experience.
The picture is hilarious. It just needs the Benny Hill theme.
Probably a weird coincidence?

My best guess:

a) The up and coming dictator Erdogan flexes his muscles for no particular reason. He has now probably demonstrated that he can cut two fibers at the same time using his all mighty turkish subs.

b) The Fed botches a software upgrade in the US

And this happens to happen at approximately the same time.