skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Funny ad hominem by assocation there on NBER. If I'm parsing that right, they claim the paper is wrong because the place it was published has funders that they don't like?

https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/22/understanding-t...

Even Krugman, hardly someone that can be accused of conservative bias, agrees that NBER is basically neutral.
> Those clues, they surmised, could have come from access to the OPM data, possibly shared by the Chinese, or some other way, say former officials.

Why would the Chinese do that? Here is this treasure trove of information why share it with anyone. But I do see the Chinese being hacked by the Russians scenario after they figured out the Chinese had that kind of info.
Lex Fridman Interview Donald Knuth: Algorithms, Complexity, Life, and Taocp
I can't even drag the letters, or for that matter zoom out to see the cut off text below them
> To me, the scariest part of the article is the last image showing the Tesla screen: "Schedule an appointment on your Tesla Mobile App".

>No ability to take it somewhere else, no ability to diagnose and attempt a fix yourself, you just have to hope that Tesla will fix it quickly for you

Why would a message on a screen prevent you from doing any of those things?
That’s disappointing. My math education so far has included the usual calculus and the basics of analysis up to and including multi-variable calculus as well as linear algebra on abstract vector spaces, inner product spaces, and complex vector spaces. Additionally, I’ve delved into combinatorics with enumeration, combinatorial proofs, and generating functions as well as graph theory, abstract algebra including group theory and ring theory, and mathematical logic.

I plan to take Euclidean geometry, real and complex analysis, fields and Galois theory, and eventually measure theory as well as differential geometry and maybe commutative algebra and representation theory.

The problems I’ve studied in all of these courses have been varied, interesting, and highly challenging. Far more entertaining than any problem I encountered in high school. But not all of the material was too complex for a high school student to understand. I could definitely teach a high school class in graph theory and I bet the students would have a lot of fun with it. Despite it being a beautiful and sometimes very abstract field, it can be applied to computer science as well as games and puzzles of all sorts. Yeah, it’s not useful to any of the hard engineering disciplines but it’s far more entertaining than grinding integrals all day.
When I decided to ditch google a while back I considered switching to proton mail. Their marketing resonated with what I was looking for. After some thought I realized that email is fairly insecure by design. Even if proton mail fixed all of the security issues associated w/ email it all goes out the door the moment I communicate with a non-proton-mail address. Almost all of my friends and family use gmail, and most of the volume of email I receive comes from businesses. For my usecases, proton mail is basically security theater.

What's worse, proton mail makes many dubious claims. They claim that "All emails are secured automatically with end-to-end encryption." This is clearly false. They state that "ProtonMail's infrastructure resides in Europe's most secure datacenter, underneath 1000 meters of solid rock." Ok, cool, but how does that benefit me? The emails are already end-to-end encrypted (but not really). Am I expecting commandos to raid a datacenter and steal my encrypted emails? They say that "Our story begins where the web was born, at CERN." Again, who cares?

End-to-end encrypted email is not on my list of must-haves (or even on my list of wants). When I need a secure communication channel, I use Signal. Proton mail overstates what they provide, and they spend a lot of effort on frankly useless security measures.
I didn't see that in the article, that would be pretty wild
My understanding is he looks for phrases people are increasingly searching for such as "BHP Free Sippy Cup" and then buys a domain such as bhp-free-sippy-cups.com. On the site, he just displays affiliate links to various vendor product pages for that product, e.g. Amazon, etc.

The trick is understanding the trends and having the SEO skills to efficiently build the traffic. He can't put too much individual time into any one property because it will on average only generate a few hundred dollars a month in revenue.

If the trend becomes popular enough someone comes in and buys the domain for their real sippy cup business.
> SHA-3 was finished in the aftermath of Snowden's revelations, and NIST's credibility was very low at the time, they needed to be extra conservative about security margins for this reason.

Yep. There was discussion about this among NIST, the Keccak team, and the other cryptographers contributing to SHA-3. The consensus was that because NIST had been involved in the Dual_EC_DRBG backdoor, that their credibility was dangerously low and that they couldn’t standardize anything that ill-informed people could misconstrue as “weakening” SHA-3, even if the actual cryptographers involved thought it would still be secure. So in one sense, you can chalk up the unnecessary computational cost of SHA-3 as collateral damage from the Dual_EC_DRBG backdoor.
> Here this treasure trove of information why share it with anyone.

China could have viewed the potential damage to an adversary (the US) to be smaller than any disadvantage it incurred itself by sharing.

Or China could have seen a small cost to itself in sharing, and a large gain to Russia, offering the opportunity to bargain for other things.
> * Properly serialize your JSON strings. That's what we use: https://gist.github.com/eliseumds/6192135660267e2c64180a8a9c....

That doesn’t look like “properly”. The double escaping is overcomplicated and no safer compared to a direct

window.__productreview_data = ${escapedReduxStateJsonString};

(and forgets about \v, maybe others), the transformation doesn’t preserve “</_escaped_script”, and it doesn’t address a vulnerability involving <!-- that’s contrivable.

Closer to correct:

JSON.stringify(data)
.replace(/\u2028/g, '\\u2028')
.replace(/\u2029/g, '\\u2029')
.replace(/</g, '\\x3c')

Better, if you put the JSON in an inert <script> (type="application/json"), it’s only necessary to escape < (or /<[/!]/g). This is a good idea so you can use restrictive CSPs.
I only did 2 words. The first word I almost perfectly nailed it. Only got 80/100. Second word I was further off, got 88/100. I don't understand the scoring.
Hey thanks :)

I gotta say, though, that I was disappointed by it.

I much preferred the books. They censored too much stuff, such as the torture sequence, where he was a little Arab girl being tortured, and then back as himself went on an impressive rampage, killing most all of the medical staff.

And then they changed too many characters.
> If I defrauded a Chinese bank I would expect to be arrested if I traveled somewhere with extradition to China.

Yes, but if the charge was that you were engaged in trade with Taiwan (or recognising Taiwan as an independent state) that would be equally outrageous.

> What do you mean about the US banks having a legal say? The government is the one doing the prosecuting.

I must have misunderstood what you said. I thought the banks in the US being fined was relevant.

> Are you saying that they should have known that Huawei was lying, therefore it’s their own fault?

Pretty much. Joys of capitalism. If this sort of thing is legal in the place where Huawei is sourcing their management from then they should have expected it. If somebody enters into an unenforceable contract and the other party starts laughing and ignoring it, that is on the parties involved.

> Maybe that’s the case, but it doesn’t have any bearing on whether a crime was committed.

It totally does have a bearing. America doesn't get to decide what a crime is for Chinese companies. The US can choose to hinder business between US companies and Chinese companies, can choose to restrict Chinese corporate activity on US soil and can negotiate for whatever they like. But grabbing people on a connecting flight as the opening play is going to stir up the nationalists for good reasons.

> Edit: And that doesn’t change the fact that your original comment was highly misleading. I’m sure you can come up with some argument against the US position, but you should have done that in the first place instead of posting a strawman.

US law is not some natural law of the world, and a US judge making a ruling is something that only US citizens should have to knuckle under and accept. If someone from China gets unhappy that suddenly their business leaders are being messed with on the orders of a US judge then it is totally understandable.
But I think the sentiment is probably correct - it seems unlikely that one party could solve the problem unilaterally. It's likely going to take many people coming together and pushing an agenda to produce an outcome that resolves or partially resolves the issues. Of course the problem here is that opposition parties (NIMBYists, corporates, etc.) are usually better organized with deeper pockets than associations and groups advocating for homeless rights, whose members are usually pretty disenfranchised, not organized, and without much money to advocate for their positions.
That seems very nice, as long as you remember XXX FIXME comes first.
I like the work that Cortexyme is doing [1] here:

But in 2019, evidence pointed the finger elsewhere: at
Porphyromonas gingivalis, a type of bacteria involved
in gum disease. Research ... suggests that beta-amyloid
is a symptom, not a cause of the condition. Instead, it
may be the toxins released by P. gingivalis, called
gingipains, that result in the brain damage that brings
on the disease.

Cortexyme is currently conducting a clinical trial to test an experimental drug that block gingipains. Their hypothesis coincidentally also explains why Alzheimer prevalence differs among ApoE genotypes.

(I posted the story earlier today [2], but it didn't end up on the front page.)

[1] https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg24432613-800-im-testi...

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21917192
I don't think this paper makes that claim, you might be thinking of media interpretations of papers which is usually the one making bogus claims. It says that it outperforms 5 out of 5 people, but that is in this specific context. They aren't necessarily claims meant to be generalized that much.
The Lisaac Programming Language
well, with all the criticism we give them, journalists know how to come up with great story titles, don't they? :)
Huawei isn't being penalised though; this is a direct charge against Meng. The US doesn't need the CFO to be in the courtroom to press charges against Huawei. The focus is a little different; this is much more personal.

If it were just a charge against Huawei then yeah, a nationalistic response would be a little silly.
The goal of the Energiewende was not just to replace Nuclear power with renewable, but to enable a new decentralized energy landscape.

Is politically harder to replace coal in Germany, because it is a local form of energy - like fracked gas in the US or coal in the US. Germany does not have much oil, gas, hydro, ... resources compared to some other countries, Coal powered industry was what made the industrialization of Germany possible. In that sense the idea that coal kills people is seen in the context, where it actually ENABLED the industrialization and the big industrial areas (Ruhrgebiet, ...). In the same way nuclear before did not replace coal in Germany - instead the big four electricity giants monopolized both: nuclear and coal.

Prior to the Energiewende, there was practically no renewable energy in Germany. Electricity production was in the hands of a few (four) big companies, having divided the country in four areas. A big goal was to break up this system and introduce markets for energy, where almost everyone can participate.

Nuclear is a big state, top down, non-market industry. It works well with and creates those big authoritarian/centralized systems. It's also favorable in countries which either have nuclear weapons or want the option of nuclear weapons (like Japan, which has the technology, industry and could produce them within a few years, if they wanted -> Nuclear latency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_latency ).

That Japan is restarting nuclear, means that the country struggles to restart them in meaningful numbers in the same environment as before with the same old-design reactors...

Countries like France or Japan did very little for renewable energy - which is now fast growing and well suited for large regions of the world - Germany helped jump start it...
I don’t think you hit a glass ceiling so much as there is only one top spot. If it’s taken you are left with nowhere to go.
There are other drivers on the road though. Not all traffic deaths are single driver incidents. If someone blows through a red light as you're turning, your reaction time can be shockingly irrelevant.
> you could imagine a cipher with a computational/memory[0] intensity so high that the brute force attack could be practically infeasible even at lower key-sizes. I am not advocating using smaller keys, just pointing out that there is more to brute-force resistance that simply just the key-length number.

In general, this is a dumb trade to make, because more key bits are cheap and that computation costs every user.

Things like what you describe exist-- where initial key scheduling does key stretching, etc.

> Since memory intensity instead of pure computational intensity seems to be employed by some hashing alghorithms I wonder is that would be possible block ciphers as well. The way I understand this, it makes ASIC/FPGA brute-forcing a lot harder/expensive

Anything is possible, but this often does more to hurt low-resource users than brute force also.
> While the system (created by governments and corporations) rewards providing housing priced at however much people will pay

But that's not the system!

The 2019 system is that building housing is illegal without very costly and hard to get permits in most non Texas big cities.

If you could just put up housing on land you own and charge however much people will pay for it, this housing crisis would quickly be gone!

You can help: https://yimbyaction.org/give/
I’m curious what other folks on HN find appealing, if anything, about becoming CEO. Personally it seems like a queen honey bee role, which sounds awesome at first but once you get a closer look you see its more like slavery to production, whithering externalities and merciless judgement.
So you believe OJ and Ulbricht were innocent, and the respective civil and criminal court cases finding the opposite were mistaken?
You rarely drive across a whole continent, so I don't think that comparing passenger miles is the best measure. Perhaps deadly accidents per passenger-trip would be better?
In retrospect that may be true. But had MCAS not just had one really stupid flaw, they might have come our way ahead. The plane may have other flaws, even big ones, but could easily have gotten away with them if not for the crashes.
Assuming that the average adult citizen is nowadays using social networks for more than a decade you could cross-reference the persons photo with many snapshots of your scraped data expecting the person to show in most of them, not just one. With such approach, the fake profiles would have to be created with many years advance to succeed. Now given that using cryptography it is relatively easy to verify if our reference data was not tampered with this insertion of fake profiles would be kind of hard. Hacking such systems in one way or another could be a "solution" depending on how such systems operate (and if they actually exist or are just a theoretical possibility imagined by hn community)
Injecting the flu vaccine into a tumor gets the immune system to attack it
> what happens if iot LTE connections get cheap enough

Hey, look what I found under your kitchen cabinet...

https://en.battlestarwikiclone.org/wiki/Cylon_transponder
> the game to win isn't software licensing. That's just a play in bigger games like end-user rights and developer autonomy and dominating a market niche. Means, not the end.

End-user rights and developer autonomy are intertwined with software licensing. If we start using licenses compromising those rights and that autonomy, we lose what we're trying to win. Let's not burn down the progress we have. It's not acceptable to give up freedom zero, the freedom to use the software for any purpose.

> But a license matters because of its rules, not how they work. Legal implementation details are just that.

The limits of copyright's reach are a useful Schelling point as well. To a first approximation, they're a good limit on license reach.

> What I have read boils down to fear or deprecation of copyleft itself

On the contrary, I very much like the idea of strong copyleft. But there's a limit. Would you favor a license that claims everything on the same disk must be open and compatible with it? Or a license that says if you ever distribute proprietary software you can't use it? Or a license that does the same but defines "proprietary software" as "everything incompatible with the XYZ license"? How about a license that prohibits developing permissively licensed software, or software you don't share? (See Parity's clause saying "You don’t develop, operate, or analyze other software with it for anyone outside the team developing it.") The "Parity" license goes much too far, throwing away freedom zero, and worse, it claims to be open source.

Also, I find it interesting that Parity, while claiming to favor strong copyleft, specifically references an organization and license that's pro-permissive-licensing and anti-copyleft.

> As for toolchain and developer software, Parity intentionally sets out to do for those what the GPLs tried to do for libraries, frameworks, and applications.

Again, freedom zero: the freedom to use the software for any purpose.

The GPL keeps libraries, frameworks, applications, toolchains, and developer software FOSS; it doesn't prevent using (as opposed to building upon) that software to develop software under incompatible licenses. If it had, people couldn't use Emacs to write software under the Parity license. ;)
So both you and the AI would know that.
Covert spying can be beneficial in some ways. Knowing that other actors may be spying on your plans tends to keep you honest. To the point that it may even make sense to encourage others to possibly spy on you, as a signal of trustworthiness. Of course, this works well when these capabilities are balanced and widespread (as in so-called sousveillance) and not-so-well otherwise.
In USA the patriotism is a choice, in China it's a requirement
Well yes, the example uses a C backend and everything.

repiet wc.png -o wc.c --backend c --codel_size 10 -O 2
gcc wc.c -o wc -O3

I hacked it together in response to a "brainfuck is faster than C" HN post and stale jokes don't die on my watch.
> You may purchase this paper on-line in .pdf format from SSRN.com ($5) for electronic delivery.

That's actually a pretty reasonable price compared to the usual publisher rent seeking (NBER is a fully private organization, so no tax payer money spent here afaik).
Nissan Chairman Carlos Ghosn Reportedly Flees House Arrest in Tokyo for Lebanon
What's worse, your car won't move or your car gives you a 400V shock when you touch it? It's obvious what the better solution is so that's how it was designed. Things happen sometimes and its always better to fail safe.

Now if the failure mode had been the opposite this would be an entirely different story, even possibly brand ruining.
>could you switch from the subprogram back to the main program without exiting the subprogram?

There were TSR task-switcher programs to do that, effectively allowing you to turn normal programs into TSRs. I had a single floppy-drive PC with no hard drive, but I had 640K of RAM. So I would run the task switcher from its floppy, allocate task 1 some RAM and load that program from its floppy, then allocate task 2 some RAM and load that from its floppy, then switch to task 3 and use the rest of the RAM for whatever. Whenever needed, I could switch back to task 1 or task 2, without having to switch floppies or exit the current task. I think it was DOS 3.30 when I used that. It was handy to keep small utilities (like a text editor and unarchiver) loaded and ready to look at the contents of any disk.

The list from Ralf Brown's Interrupt List gives an idea of what some of the task switchers were: http://www.ctyme.com/intr/cat-011.htm

[Topview](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_TopView) appears to have had an interesting story. And of course DESQview followed. I never used either of those.

You could do a lot in DOS with ASM and interrupts, as long as the code was small. But with the hardware limitations, and the way people usually used PCs during DOS's prime years, it didn't really make sense to put too much effort into multitasking. Towards the end we were often rebooting with distinct boot disks, each with a different AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS customized to get the most out of the hardware for each specific program. Multitasking would be pointless in that case.
Summary of the Price We Pay – What Broke American Healthcare – and How to Fix It
> Meanwhile japan which is restarting nuclear along with expanding renewables gets blocked at the climate change summits because they are not making meaningless promises

Japan's energy mix went from 81% fossil fuel in 2011 to 89% in 2016, with most of that coal and LNG [1].

Germany is at 40% of energy from renewables [2]. I'm not saying it's an easy problem for them to solve, but they are far from an example of renewable energy deployment.

1. https://www.enecho.meti.go.jp/en/category/brochures/pdf/japa...

2. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-04/renewable...
https://github.com/prettydiff/share-file-systems/

I would love to get some feedback.

Some notes:

* Currently it uses IP addresses for connection, which is less than ideal.

* Currently every device is treated as a separate user.

Road map:

* I am working on a web service that will issue named accounts and digital certificates. The named accounts will identify their current IPv6 address to the account service so users need only to connect to an account which can be any IPv6 address for portability.

* Once accounts are a thing I will need to change several things on the client application. My goal in this step is to separate users from devices so that a single user can connect and manage multiple devices. That extra layer of abstraction will allow options for management, security, and convenience that are not currently available.

* I also want to enable end to end encryption for all users/devices. That is just a simple matter of public key exchange built into the already designed invitation model.

* Then I want to create a text client that supports markdown.
> Instead germany is treading water, shutting one carbon free source as it brings online another carbon free source.

That's wrong. German coal use has been reduced by 20% in 2019. The CO2 output of the energy sector was reduced by 7%. Yes, it would have been more had nuclear stayed online, but your claim that Germany is treading water is wrong.

Source: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/drop-coal-use-pushes-ge...
For that to go through politically you'd probably need support from the existing NIMBY house owners. This could be possible if they allowed fairly free construction in some non central area in return for some vagrancy laws so the homeless were kind of made to go there rather than pooping on the streets where the NIMBYs are. Both groups could win that way.
Excellent results with good generalization. The study appears to be well designed and executed. This was a significant effort. Clearly, there are commercial intentions.