skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Similarly, I've been with GEICO for over a decade now for my car and homeowner's insurance. GEICO is just a homeowner's broker in New York, Liberty Mutual actually insures my house. I shop every year or two and I've never been able to find a better deal than I already have for comparable coverage, even directly quoting through Liberty Mutual. Regardless, my GIECO rates have been consistently going up these past few years, but it seems every other insurer is also raising rates for people like me (location, history, etc) every time I check.

I've never had to file a claim for my homeowner's insurance and I've never been at fault in a car crash, but I've heard some not so great stories about GEICO so hopefully I'll never have to find out.
> Note that here, Paypal paid a substantial bounty a year ago.

$4400 is not a substantial bounty for a bug of this severity, compared to the value on the black market. Like, the article even cites that attackers have extracted over $1000 from some individuals, multiply by thousands of users.

The black market value of this exploit is certainly into the hundreds of thousands.
Well, if all these Go stores popping up are any indication, Seattle does indeed allow non-cash stores.
> My approach would be the opposite - start with the logic, using built-in types, and maybe refactor to use custom classes later.

That's how you discover what abstract logic you need. And then you implement that logic types first, because it's abstract, so the types are both enough to describe the functionality and much easier to reason about. And you go and refactor your old code by following the types (or the type errors, if you are more in the let the computer do the work mood).

But I have no idea how to do that in dynamically typed languages. AFAIK, they hinder refactoring as much as they can.
While it is unlikely to kill you, it can cause permanent damage to the respiratory system: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/02/here-is-w...
Hello everyone, a quick Google search returns many articles that answer this question. But a closer look reveals that most of them have not provided verifiable sources for their data. We did a fresh analysis and collected data points that could be tracked down to their original publishers.

edit - Grammar
In most supermarkets you can pick better tasting "branded" tomatoes, but they usually cost several times as much, and mostly only "cherry" or "cocktail" variety.

Larger, tasty and ripe tomatoes are soft, perishable and incompatible with supermarket supply chain. Just go to street market.
Meijer already does this, it is just a normal terminal, that knows your order based on your phone or some other scan, which then accepts cash like every coin return machine. It just dispenses change.
I currently pay approx. $28 per 1,000 gallons of water from my municipality.
Some caveats to think about for that particular book in this blog post: https://guzey.com/books/why-we-sleep/ (I'm not a researcher in the area, so not sure how valid either side of this is!)
I'm guessing any group of humanity will naturally form hierarchies. Seems like part of human nature.
The statement does not suggest that Romanians are gangsters, just that there were Romanian gangsters in that prison. I think I would have found "black gangsters" acceptable in that context too. "Jewish gangsters" would have surprised me because it doesn't fit the stereotype I have of Jews. But I don't think I would have found it racist.

Don't be angry at the messenger. He's explaining how the separation happens. Not talking about it doesn't make it better.
> But the idea that AWS is firmly everyone, that it's less expensive for everyone when you factor in the TCO, simply isnt correct.

Correct. I specifically said it’s perfect if your labor cost is higher than your AWS cost

Another good case is indie hackers whose project likely won’t ever make it out of the free tier
I love this concept. I've been thinking about ways of "traversing skill trees" and identifying meta-games for some time. Collecting ideas here: https://garybasin.com/thinking-toys/

I think this can be done systematically...
Yes! I started with a Philips sunrise alarm clock, an older model than that. It was good, but I really wanted more light and coverage in more rooms than the bedroom, so I got a bunch of Hue bulbs and wrote my own daemon [1]. I added the dim-in-the-evening thing more as a lark, but it ended up making a big difference for me.

[1] https://github.com/wpietri/sunrise
How does DoH allow marketers to do anything they couldn't have done before by just hardcoding their own DNS server?

It might make it harder to block queries by deep packet inspection, but do you actually do that on your network right now?
Many songs have A and B parts. If we allow combining many different "melodies" to create the larger whole that covers some music in that now you only need to find 8 note, single octave combinations. I don't see why we should allow that, but if you allow it.

8 notes in a single octave pretty much limits you to melodies of someone who has been studying music only a few months. Even my penny whistles are capable of more than that after a couple months of study. (a few days if you already know music or are interested in one specific song)
If you’re in the US, First Republic rebates you all the atm fees and supports high ATM withdrawal limits ($K) per transaction/per day if you have high balances (both of these features worldwide BTW). Some countries (cough USA) don’t have machines with limits that high but places like Germany, Dubai, Japan do
That rationale works for motorcycles, general aviation planes have both a dismal safety record and can destroy an entire home or crash into a sky-scraper, etc.
Yeah, but back then, I didn't think I had a weak memory. The intervening decades proved to me that my memory is in fact weak.
Blocking wasn't the point in the post above.
What's your point? Most people cook their meat before eating whether it's camels, bats, or civet cats. The serious cross-species disease transmission risk is from unsanitary practices in handling live animals and raw meat before cooking.
With cashiers, lol: https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-pay-cash-amazon-go-sa...
Ask HN: How to entice HS/College students to try app?
I have created version 1.0 of a group chat app which provides value for high school and college students. It’s a better mouse trap (yes yet another group chat app). But as we all know distribution is key.

How would you go about getting groups of 20+ or more students at the same high school to download and try? Ideally for free but would be willing to pay a few hundred for first couple batches. Problem is I work full time so can’t go to campus during the day and not in that age range any more (insert Steve Buscemi meme). How have people approached this problem?
Agreed, I dislike the paternalism and wish competition in the browser space was much more robust. I'm Google averse and hooked on Tree Style Tabs so Firefox it is for the time being
> you have to trust someone at some point.

Give me a non-profit infra provider than I can donate to, similar to Let's Encrypt. Let's call it "Let's Resolve", give it a non-profit charter and org style, with transparency, governance, and strong privacy protections. Mozilla could even be one of the sponsors of such an org, thereby ensuring the values it supports are adhered to.

Open Street Map runs on a budget of ~$100k a year. The costs for such an org would be similar; DNS->DoH VMs, orchestration, labor, admin. I've warmed to Cloudflare, but you know how things usually go with for profit benevolence. The love always runs out. Always. And that's okay! Nothing lasts forever, but we need to start putting effort into orgs that are designed to last while protecting user citizens. Build trust, not companies.
+1 for the one line install
I think having a "complicated" type system like Haskell's is a good thing, because it lets you model data in your program accurately, and more importantly, lets you offload work from your brain to the compiler.

One question: How well do languages like Haskell work for code with side effects, though? Say I want to write a CRUD web API. How easy is it to work with network requests and database operations, for example, in Haskell?
Show HN: Looking for name ideas for your App?
Yes, generally any source to byte-code translator is a compiler. The byte-code then can either be interpreted or compiled, too. Since the default CPython implementation interpreted the byte code, it was said it's an interpreter - but strictly speaking it is not.

Originally interpreters were implementations which execute source code - which in Lisp is widely available. For example SBCL for a long time only had a native code AOT compiler, but now also includes s-expressions.

Famous is also the Lisp interpreter in Lisp from McCarthy, where he defined the core language in itself. See the paper from Paul Graham about that: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/myl/llog/jmc.pdf
That's a very primitive Lisp interpreter - many real ones are implemented in C, Assembler...

Just be aware, that in the Lisp world 'Interpreter' means something very specific: an interpreter of the source language.
> I really have come to the conclusion that privacy is just a marketing feature for Mozilla. They e.gg. also do nothing against data exfiltration by popular extensions although they have known that issue for years.

I thought about this recently, and the move to HTTPS-Everywhere is the biggest issue here. In the old days, you could have something like the @guard firewall on Windows, which could examine all outgoing HTTP connections, and block ads and malware by examining not just the hostname, but also the URI of each request. This meant it was separate from the browser, worked with all browsers, and didn't break every time your browser is updated. It's pretty easy to write a similar tool on UNIX to act as a proxy, too, and make it network-wide through your OSS router.

Nowdays, because it's all encrypted with certificate authorities and all, it's much more problematic to block ads and malware, because then you'd also have to intercept HTTPS, and manage certificate authorities and such. I guess it's still doable in principle, just more involved, with a considerably worse UI? Has anyone tried anything like that in the HTTPS world, do any solutions exist as FLOSS at all?
Thats an interesting idea. Have you tried talking with Directors/Executive/VPs?

My thinking is to target sales orgs that are going through restructuring or are focusing on major improvements/goals. Execs would push their managers to setup 1:1s for development in the company and career
The Cube: A Short Story Co-Generated by AI
This is a terribly misleading headline.

The actual story is: they developed a radically different risk model that assigned new rates to everyone, but, in an effort to retain customers, decided to spread increases over multiple years to decrease sticker-shock cancellations.

Folks with cheap policies (which are the biggest flight risk, because are good insurance risks and every company wants them) got the increases more slowly, and high-risk folks (who were already paying more) got their increase in fewer, larger steps.

This whole article is trying to make simple business into some sort of evil scam.
For my "standard" language response: In general, I don't actually like using mathematics for this sort of discussion, because on the one hand it all seems so reasonable, and yet, on the other hand, almost nothing we do involves working in spaces as complicated as numbers. You see something similar in "operator overloading"... makes great sense for numbers, but everywhere else it turns into a pain, because we don't really work in numerical spaces.

The vast majority of the time, we're really working with types like

User -> Permissions -> PermissionType -> Maybe BillingHistory

and a type-based refactoring of "Permissions -> PermissionType" into "PermissionsWithType" isn't going to go wrong, even in looser languages. (Those aren't very Haskell-y types, but I'll keep the notation here for now.) As long as you can assume your code isn't entirely insane, and the permissions code isn't going to spontaneously guess permissions into existence when you go to check something with them, you're going to be generally OK with this sort of type-directed refactoring.

To the extent that you can't actually depend on your code to not do things like magic permissions into existence... well... this is precisely why that's always a bad idea. Don't write code that does that.

For my Haskell response: In Haskell, when you know how to read the type system, you don't have to use a heuristic to guess whether you should slow down.. the type itself is telling you that you need to be more careful. As a reasonably skilled Haskell programmer using type-directed reasoning, you can immediately read off from "Int -> Int -> Int" that you have a more complicated function than "a -> a -> a". The latter is so "simple" there's only two reasonable implementations, whereas that's only the beginning of what your Int function may do. However, when you have "Applicative f => f (a -> b) -> f a -> f b", you actually can know what that is not doing. The polymorphism tells you you don't have to sit there and study it. It can't magic an "a" into existence, or suddenly decide to use "division" on the resulting "b", because it can't. It doesn't know how. You don't need to worry about it doing those things anymore, because it can't.

For my harmonization of the two: In principle, imperative code can almost always magic values into existence, use globals, etc. One of the reasons I can stand writing in looser langauges like Go is that I just don't do those things. In general, when I write code, if you've got a "Permission" and "PermissionCheckable", I do my best to keep it so there's only one sensible way to combine the two. So, when I'm refactoring my code, even in looser strictly-typed languages, I can still pretty much get away with the type-directed approach. (Backstopped by the unit tests I have anyhow.) It is certainly true that you can write, or be forced to deal with, code that is conceptually mismashed where this is more dangerous, but I'd suggest as you get experienced over the years that you learn to stop doing that.
Agreed. Unless that contract includes heavy penalties for selling and/or losing that data, its toothless nonsense. The fact that the contract hasn't been published is also problematic. If everything is above board, why hide?
Yup. This can be fixed by enabling ESNI (network.security.esni.enabled in about:config), I don't see why they aren't pushing that change at the same time.

Edit: ESNI is still a draft, definitely not a safe default.
This seems unnecessarily alarmist. DNS over HTTP doesn't protect against state-level legally-mandated surveillance because it's not designed to protect against state-level legally-mandated surveillance. There are no solutions to the problem you posit that don't involve SOME kind of trusted name authority somewhere that is, effectively by argumentative fiat (i.e. not really) "out of the reach" of whatever government it is that you don't trust. That's not something you're going to find a technical solution for.

The real problem addressed by DoH is the routine surveillance and hijacking of "presumptively public" names by local network operators. And it works comparatively well for that.
You're using 'meta' as a synonym for popular.

Metagame is the 'game outside the game' ie in rock paper scissors the game is trivial the metagame involves guessing what the opponent will pick.

Meta-software-engineering would be things outside of your software stack that affect the overall process. People, sleep patterns, office layouts, commute time, corporate culture etc.
It is the existence of it.
Parent post already covered this in the original comment: the ISP can already see all IPs and often SNI. Basically they still see the host names. DoH is just adding an extra party to that chain.

I’m not taking sides here but the argument was made, and valid.
Sorry, didn't mean to imply that my reaction was any kind of truth about the situation. I'm just recalling the thoughts I can remember from that time, hoping that they have some relevance.
Well, honestly, I don't use my ISP's DNS, either, but that just highlights another way this is annoying: Firefox is overriding my decision with their own.

And like I said, I trust my ISP more than I trust Firefox and CloudFlare, so their spying on my DNS (if they even are) is less of a concern to me than CloudFlare or Firefox spying on the requests.
Sure if ML/DL is your core business than yeah it doesn't make sense.

If ML/DL is an add-on to help augment your business (separate from the core value) then yes transfer learning and free GPU's will get you good returns.
> This seems curiously confident given that just about every single one of your many comments on the other story was inaccurate or a misinterpretation.

So you don’t think that sending a bug bounty reward a year ago to a security researcher who exposed a flaw, that is still being exploited to take money from people, is a critical flaw in the program?
It's refreshing to have a space that is welcoming of all sorts of circadian schedules instead of subtle shaming. But it's not just software engineers who decry the early risers - writers, artists, and PhD students constantly speak up about their need to stay up late in deep focus mode on a creative project. Maybe that's the common denominator - the need to be able to focus for hours without the disruption of emails or meetings.
Interesting! Do people using cash have a separate checkout flow / exit than everyone else? It seems like it'd be difficult for human security to differentiate between someone that entered the store with their phone (so they can come and go as they please) versus someone who needs to pay at the end before they can leave.
You shouldn't get downvotes, that's certainly a very common impression to get after writing small programs.

But the ethos of the language is not "doing things the right way", it's "do it first, make it right while it grows". The biggest point of the language is on refactoring.
Every self-checkout I've ever used accepts cash. It's just a normal bill acceptor.

Taking money out/providing change to the machines could be done on a scheduled basis by employees that just do that.
I forced a reaload of all my tabs (dozens), while sniffing my traffic. Not a single one used encrypted sni.
Yes, Actor is used in the technical sense axiomatized up to a unique isomorphism in the linked article and not in the common usage of a thespian ;-)

Erlang not being able to directly express Actor behavior change means that Erlang programs are more obscure and convoluted.

For example, consider the following program:

ProcessorController[pk:PublicKey] *implements* controller
// initialize processor controller with a public key pk
currrentVersion ≔ 1 // processor current version number is initially 1
running ← Crowd [1] // running is a crowd of at most 1 running activities
boot[*itemIs* i *whichIs* Package[*imageIS* code, *versionIs* packageVersion],
signedIs s] ↦ // received boot request with item i and signed s
*IsEmpty* running *cases* // Check if the processor is running
True ⇾ // If not running, then
SigningChecker.[*itemIs* i, *signedIs* s, *publicKeyIs* pk] *cases*
// check that i was signed by s with private key for pk
True ⇾ // If signing check succeeds, then
currentVersion⩽packageVersion *cases*
// check processor current version is
// less or equal than package version
True ⇾ // If version check succeeds, then
(currentVersion ≔ packageVersion; // first update current version number,
code.run thru running)
// afterward run code in a hole of mutual exclusion passing
// thru running then returning a termination report
False ⇾ // If version check fails,
*Throw* BadVersionException[] // throw bad version exception
False ⇾ *Throw* BadSignatureException[] // If signature check fails,
False ⇾ // If already running, then
*Throw* AlreadyRunningException[] // throw already running exception
shutDown ↦ // received shut down request
*IsEmpty* running *cases* // Check if the processor is running
True ⇾ // If not running, then
*Throw* NotRunningException[] //throw not running exception
False ⇾ // If already running, then
*Cancel* running // cancel running returning Void

The challenge in Erlang is to implement the hole in the region of mutual exclusion in the above implementation.
My question is how does DoH contributes to that in practice/theory. If a malicious/incompetent app/device wants to access random servers with DoH they would need to include a DoH implementation and then DoH offer nothing more than VPNs. In this context I do not understand if you are worried to have wireguard installed on your connected devices.

If you are talking about Firefox itself, then disable it.

I sympathize with wanting more control, but I do not understand how DoH changes things in a household settings.

(I am assuming your is not a corporate point of view, in that case I agree that DoH might cause significant headaches)
Oh, maybe? Sort of ambiguous, given the context is writing advice. If so, then there's an obvious rebuttal: the point isn't to keep you riveted, it's to communicate an idea. The uncle example is inapplicable because the problem with the uncle is that he is telling you an idea you don't care about, not that he's delivering true useful information in a boring way. EDIT: Also, Wikipedia links to some damning reviews of the David Foster Wallace book, including this one (yikes): http://www.rudyrucker.com/oldhomepage/wallace_review.pdf
We use FIDL on host (Linux & macos) platforms via the overnet project. As far as language ecosystems go, as swetland rightly points out below, being runtime agnostic is important to us. FIDL being easy to implement generators for new runtimes is part of that. There is some nascent documentation on porting runtimes here: https://fuchsia.dev/fuchsia-src/development/languages/new?hl...
Please elaborate. As it is, this flew over my head.
JavaScript Tagged Template Literals
The process of building things is embedded in various contexts. As is the process of being paid to build things. And those contexts are themselves embedded in other contexts. There are first-, second-, third-, nth-order "smart" moves in a given situation given the specific contexts in play.

In terms of creating web apps or other software, there are organizational, hiring, funding, exit, marketing, and many other meta-games going on — and they're all in constant flux.
Not all who wander are lost is a reference to Aragorn who as a Ranger wandered all over in his duties. The poem is about Aragorn ushering in the 4th age. So I'm not sure there are deep lessons here.
> I know Brave is supposed to be a privacy-centric browser, but their plan for advertising seems at odds with that.

I know "Have I Been Pwned" is supposed to be a security tool for white hats, but the fact that they collected hundreds of millions of users passwords seems at odds with that.

Additionally, there's a service called 1password that leverages this data. It claims to be a tool to help users know if their password has been compromised. But a service that has the ability to check a user's current password against a database seems at odds with that.

On a completely unrelated note-- do you know how Brave actually implements advertising in their browser?
Meta is an aspect of strategy, but the terms aren't interchangeable.