skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Telegram group: Helping professionals/students getting high-quality job
For serious guys only

The title says everything. I am looking forward to meeting guys who are really interested in improving their financial lives and to be highly resourceful to achieve their career dreams. In the private group, we are going to discuss methods, systems, everything business-related that would get us land on our desire jobs. I am currently a student at a top college and I would like to share some of the advice that I got from my mentors and senior classes which they are now involved in companies that are listed on Forbes 500. I would like to hear your advice too.

DM on telegram (@seanprofessional), if you are seriously interested or comment below!

Cheers,
Don't forget another marketing favorite: "Bank-level encryption"
Charles tells me that when I installed Zoom, my iPhone made four HTTPS connections to zoom.com.cn/69.174.108.252
Yeah you have to adapt the tactics to the modern times

The key lesson here issnt to use a ABABCBB arrangement but to research whatever the successful arrangement of your time is and to apply it
How do you persuade enough taxi drivers to use $generic-taxi-app in enough areas to make it worthwhile for someone to choose to use it instead of Uber?
Gallery view, you can see everyone at once - we have All Hands where you can flick through the whole company (~75 people) seeing 25 at a time.

Hangouts hides people in meetings with more than about 5, so psychologically you don't even realise they are there.
While this is the ideal theory I think we've all seen how it simply doesn't pan out in practice.

The numerous and regular terrifying security bugs that are being found in ancient tools (some 30+ years old) are a living testament that the philosophy you quoted just doesn't translate that well into the reality of humans programming the current breed of computers.

Hence the existence of languages like Rust and the recent general strive towards more correctness and more compile-time catching of potential problems (especially in light of GCC 10's new `-fanalyzer` flag).
I think that this is down to the Guardian's politics - cultural relativism means prioritising one piece of writing as "news" over another as "opinion" is invalid.

I've got to say, having watched the journalism sausage factory in action while running a newspaper, I'm not entirely opposed. Journalists routinely choose what sources to cite and which to ignore. News is often, if not always, manipulated to communicate a political point of view. Dropping the pretence and presenting all news as opinion (or all opinion as news) seems at least honest.
All the other low level stuff of C can be handled by a professional programmer in different ways, using tools like Valgrind, with careful coding, but especially with higher order libraries, so you don't have to write much low level code. Any language is dangerous and bug prone if the standard library has no dynamic strings and basic data structures. If you have the right tools, C becomes a lot more high level, a lot more safe, and has a long story of solving very important problems reliably and in a portable way.
HackerOne cuts ties with voting firm Voatz after it clashed with researchers
Yeah, without a single citation supporting the existence of this imaginary "older definition" of E2E encryption.
Thanks for clarifying, I had wrote it wrongly.
Thank you for the clear explanation but I understand that. I'm asking if the OS can read the contents of previously encrypted messages.
My Dad was once gifted a Silva compass which he gave to me to take on a Boy Scout expedition, everyone was baffled by the fact it had 400 "degrees" marked on it.

Maybe we need to go metric with our circles too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gradian
> This is like saying there's nothing dangerous about guns, because it takes a human to make them dangerous.

If you want to go with that analogy, UB is a kin of you intentionally pointing your gun to your foot, taking your time to aim it precisely on your foot, and in spite of all the possible warnings and error messages that are shouted at you... You still decide that yes, what you want to do is to shoot yourself in the foot because that is exactly what you want to achieve.

And then complain about the consequences.
"US court"
Would be nice if true.
Some motivations last a lifetime, I don't think our desire to feed ourselves is going away anytime soon..
A lot of current thinking on the subject is based on Abraham Maslow's 1947 paper "A Theory of Human Motivation". Your "hard discipline" seems based on the "esteem" part of his "hierarchy of needs" while this might be a sufficient motivator for some, for many it will likely be beneficial to look for other motivators.
I've also heard of one country counting unrelated heart attacks in people who happened to carry the Corona virus as Corona deaths, while another country (the US I think) often has no idea how to test Corona deaths and therefore doesn't count many deaths that may well have been caused by Corona.

Comparisons between countries are utterly meaningless.
Prospering and risk-aversion don't go well together. At best, diligent work will get you ordinary prosperity of a system which generally rises over time. Diligent work is not as rare as people often imagine, and diligent workers fare averagely well. Unfortunately, the variance from that average seems increasingly precarious, as a few do exceptionally well and many slip below it.

Doing better than average comes with risk. If you're even asking this question, you can afford risk. Few would even think to "build [multiple] businesses", much less start with the assumption of access to venture capital.

So if you want risk aversion, you can do the same thing you've always done: put your money in a broad index fund and trust that the markets will recover well before you retire. The fact that they've always done so eventually is not proof that they will this time, but nobody can give you advice for the black swan event of markets failing perfectly. In that case you'll have worse things to worry about than your 401k.

If you want to take a risk from the Fed giving out free money... well, those negative interest rates aren't available to consumers. For example, mortgage rates are actually going up because so many see this as a signal to refinance. That money is mostly going to the bond market, because it's the last line of defense for the government. From there it goes to the stock market, where it's going to sustain an unsustainable boom. (Despite what I said earlier, the market as a whole is almost certainly overpriced, and even the earlier fall didn't fully correct it.)

Basically, the Fed free money isn't for you. It's about the government and a few financial firms, and your 401k's tiny piece of that. All you can do is muddle along the same way you always did. Go ahead and start a business or buy somebody else's, if you've got the free cash -- and it sounds like you do. You'll probably lose it, because most fail. But that's how one does better than average.
From the article, apparently the purpose of the whole program is to immunize FAA of funky startup planes.

With a NASA prior art as baseline, FAA people could judge what document is required, which part is novel and which one of “chief” is just a functional addict.
Mastering the Git rebase workflow (2018) (video)
Well, at least he (presumably) bought the rights to the pictures of the monkey stealing the camera.
Of course I have, but that's not exactly what I was aiming for... ;)
National lockdown effect on European electricity consumption and system planning
> While there is an abstract machine of sorts defined in the standard, a lot is left out of the standard in UB...

This is exactly why, on modern C compilers, you have to start thinking of C as an abstract machine -- because that's what the compiler writers think they're doing.

But unlike abstract machines for older languages designed to be mathematically pure, or new abstract machines for newer languages designed to keep you from making stupid mistakes, the C abstract machine is full of bear-traps, such that if you ignore the "C is an abstract machine" warning, nearly any simple-but-obvious program is probably vulnerable to a dozen UB vulnerabilities.
This was awesome. Thanks for sharing it.
Amazing how much has come from the Fertile Crescent.
I also note that History Today, as an English company, is no longer GDPR compliant. "Take this tracking or get out. Honey badger don't care"
I don't believe in the maybes and ifs, if you have the research and can provide documentation to prove your point, what is the case for appealing to emotions? I want to be challenged, but with facts, not with emotions. Oh you're being aggressive! No, I've done the research, and I want you to do the same in order to get a logical conclusion
This really begs the question: what is?
Wouldnt it make as much sense to buy bitpay.com then? Buy something thats already deployed to many customers, and prevent competition from buying it.
I don't think it's something that could really be done in the US. We have a constitutional right to move freely between and among the states.
He already is, bezos reinvested much of amazon profit back to amazon.
That defeats the purpose of this being a single United nation. Do you really think it would be healthy to artificially accelerate the rapid fracture of our collective unity?

E pluribus unum. We stand together, or we fall apart. At least, figuratively...it's probably not a good idea to stand too close together at the moment.
GPU languages have some cache aware constraints, especially if you're working with the graphics pipeline vs compute where you have more constrained inputs and outputs. Shared memory is also often used as a user managed cache.

Cell SPUs had explicit user managed cache and host DMA, and Intel ISPC and Unity Burst compiler/ECS (variants of C and C#) are good examples of programming environments that try to more explicitly encourage parallelism and/or optimal cache utilization.
Indeed, that's an advantage. If you use tau=2pi, you'd then you'd see how the area = 1/2 τr^2 is actually conceptually similar to KE = 1/2 mv^2 (and similar for PE, distance fallen in gravity, etc. That 1/2 is actually important.)
Your wording only works for "implementation defined", not "undefined". Both exist in the standard, and the former is quite sane to use. E.g., on any normal architecture, specifying signed integer overflow to be implementation defined would have been great, though on e.g. the JS-style machine that abuses IEEE floats in limited range as integers, addition get's weird once the point floats to the left of where you'd normally write it by hand (in non-scientific notation).

y = x;
x += 1;
x -= 1;
true == (x != y);

But I don't know of any actual integer machine that would want integer overflow to actually be UB.
“Face it once you make it”
That behavior goes all the way back to Classic Mac OS. If the above is working as designed, then Zoom automating the copy-app-to-/Applications process doesn't really seem that hinky to me.
Do people still remember Telegram don't have E2E encryption on by default? and does not work across multiple platforms when E2E is on? I am annoyed because those are my favorite apps and they don't have what's important.
Or simplest solution: don't broadcast to them at all. Which was the point I was making as to the likely reason they don't do it.

Broadcasting over a larger area reduces the ability of an adversary to infer location from the signal, but increases the likelihood of intercept. That alone might not be terribly useful, but it can be combined with other bits of information and form a more complete picture. For example, if you know when and where the sub was last docked, fleet movements, regional events that are of military interest, and you have a signal with a message you suspect was intended for them, then that's enough bits of information to be useful.

There are trade-offs. If you're required to minimize the the likelihood of discovery at all costs, then it makes sense to never even attempt communication while underway.
I guess they should start lerning ocean fishing.

Like, seriously. The biggest issue for shipwreck survivors has always been drinking water and exposure. Looks like they don't have a problem with either, so as long as they can catch some edible fish they should be fine in principle.
Sure it does:

> [...] Germany's low fatality rate is because of his
country's ability to test early and often. [...]

> And that means Germany is more likely to have
a lower number of undetected cases
than other countries
where testing is less prevalent

When you test more people, you don't only see the ones who are critically ill (because they end up in the ICU), but also all those who contract the illness, but have only mild symptoms.
Show HN: Testfly – On-demand app testers for $1
As long as you self-quarantine for the recommended 14 days after arriving somewhere new, you're actually decreasing the number of potential spreading vectors by removing another person from the densely-populated area. It's key that you be strict with your quarantine and don't go to stores/gas stations/etc.
At least the RAF is pre-positioning helicopters to the area and has been using larger transport aircraft to move patients from places like Shetland. However, those transport links could easily be overloaded given a full emergency.
The speaking aloud is very suspicious. Why do subjects need to speak aloud? Are they actually decoding neural signals or just picking up artifacts introduced by the physical act of speaking (i.e. electrodes vibrating due to sound, etc)?
Predictions from 20 Founders on How Coronavirus Will Affect LegalTech
And you can push a new VPN on a new VPS with a different cloud provider. Every month. More or less
C is a high level language.

C is close to how a computer works.

Assembly is the next step down, and is not nearly as hard as the internet would lead you to believe.

Step down from that; read a book like "Computer Architecture: A Quantitative Approach", and learn about cpu-s and memory (also Agner Fog's site, official amd and intel doc, many other).

Down from that is electronics (logic gates, 8bit adder, etc., down to transistors and capacitors).

And beyond is physics.

Everything else is either computing theory or buzzwordy bullshit.

To repeat: C is a high level language, no matter what anyone says.
I wouldn't, either. Publishing candids of someone from whom you don't have a release is fraught no matter how public the circumstance, and in any case it'd just lead to her being the butt of the world's laughter for fifteen minutes. If it were me, I'd consider that the damnfoolishness of shoving a phone in a monkey's face had neatly constituted its own punishment.

The monkeys are more interesting, anyway.
FaceTime is E2E, fwiw, although it might not comply with other requirements.
Lesson re how St. Louis successfully fought the Spanish Flu Pandemic in 1918
Covidien stalled because of "Profits" - This is why theres an issue with US Style capitalism.
The primary point isn't wrong, but I am deeply deeply deeply skeptical of this, since the underlying data is of such varying and often miserable quality. A friend of mine in Oregon exhibited all the C19 symptoms, and went to get tested. It took 15 DAYS for her sample to be tested. The test came back negative, but the lab said they had no confidence in this result, given the age of the sample. This is apparently the default testing situation in Oregon.

Given those kind of inputs, how can one say with any confidence when Oregon will peak, and how large that peak will be?

Other states have much better testing and thus can be more confident in their predictions. Some have worse. For most, however, I get the impression that this kind of modelling is somewhere between a wild-assed guess and a crapshoot.
The “problem of concurrency” isn’t about solving embarrassingly-parallel problems by spawning async threads and letting them run. Every runtime can indeed do that, but that isn’t worth mentioning when talking about “concurrency”, because you can also do that by just spawning multiple of your runtime itself. (I.e. if you’re not doing any IPC of note, then there’s no difference between multithreading and multiprocessing. In the web case: you could just use an iframe.)

The “problem of concurrency” is really the problem of having cheap IPC between your threads (i.e. the ability to pass around large amounts of data using small messages/handles), so that you can shape your threads into architectures like a staged data-flow pipeline, or a set of schedulers for an actor system.

JS does not have cheap concurrency. (What would cheap concurrency in JS look like? Well, the ability to make an ArrayBuffer immutable, and then pass the immutable ArrayBuffer to another Worker Thread “by reference”, would be a good start. Add “mutably-immutable by copy-on-write” ArrayBuffers on top, and you could actually afford to pass ‘ownership’ of an ArrayBuffer back and forth, writing to it across multiple threads. Then you’d have something that you could maybe run a multithreaded WASM program on top of and have it run to completion before the heat-death of the universe.)
FWIW, adding some hardscaping (rocks, boulders, cement pavers) and vertical changes (dry creek, small hills with dirt from the dry creek) made my xeriscape look 100x more interesting. There's a sweat equity cost and hardscaping can get expensive quickly, but your payoff is likely a big increase in curb appeal.
The Ethics of Money Production [pdf]
https://daringfireball.net/2020/03/regarding_zoom

https://medium.com/bugbountywriteup/zoom-zero-day-4-million-...

https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/10/20689644/apple-zoom-web-s...
And I bet you physicists argue that transistors are just abstractions of semiconductors
A BAA is a Business Associate Agreement. It's a standard HIPAA document where an entity with PHI (typically a Covered Entity, which is an entity specifically mentioned by HIPAA, such as e.g. a healthcare facility) effectively puts a vendor on notice: we may stuff PHI in your service, you agree to abide by this set of rules and regulations. A big one is that the vendor agrees to disclose when they've been breached, and the timeline on which that happens.

Even though a lot of online sources suggest BAAs are only for Covered Entities, that's not strictly speaking true. The standard form document doesn't require the buyer to certify they're a CE. It makes tons of sense for vendors of CEs, themselves bound by BAAs, to bind _their_ vendors to BAAs! If there's a decent chance your customers put PHI in your service, there's a decent chance they put PHI in your support system, and they don't really care if your support system is something in-house or Zendesk when that happens. There's also a good chance that PHI might end up in your logging system, and from there in your Slack instance, and... before you know it everyone's signed a BAA with everyone.

The life-hack consequence for that is that you can just collect BAAs from anyone who will sign them and now you have disclosure timeline guarantees.
I probably could have chose a different wording, but everything you've just said is exactly why I suggested it; C isn't a language just anyone should be writing about, especially when it comes to security
"like complaining about the quality of a highway once they intentionally break through the guard rails"

Your metaphor brings to mind an image of someone who can see the guard rail, and then deliberately chooses to expend quite non-trivial effort to break them. This is not an accurate metaphor.

As I'm not in the metaphor fix-up business, because I believe they tend to mess us up in precisely this sort of way, let me simply directly point out this gets it backwards. The default is that you will write a program shot through with undefined behavior, and you must make quite substantial, intellectually-challenging efforts above and beyond the intellectual challenge of writing something in C at all that at least sometimes works, to write your program in a way that doesn't have UB in it. It has no resemblance to driving down a road in a normal fashion and then bashing guard rails down.
But is Rust a more faithful model of HW?

I'm happy to accept that C sucks (it does) and that Rust and others are superior (they are). But if you stop at the quoted statement, you've not said much. I upvoted the submission blindly, then read it, then un-upvoted it. TFA is not useful. It would have been better to not write TFA at all. There already are many many very good articles about how Rust is better than C.
>The brain is massively complex, we still don't understand the ways that it computes and learns in detail except generalities such as using electrical and chemical signals, neurotransmissors, and some knowledge of architecture and region differentiation.

Again, not really. Broadly speaking, the AI community is pretty far behind the neuroscience community in terms of understanding the basic principles underlying how brains work. https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/principles-neural-design
Something that surprises me is that while family infection has been identified as an important factor to viral transmission to the elderly, we haven't converted hotels into isolation units and given people hotel credits to spend.
>> Are people just looking for things to be mad at Zoom for at this point?

Having been a really happy user of Zoom for more than couple of years - I have referred many friends to use it succesfully. Despite that it looks like Zoom has legit issues that are surfacing. However I have to say it cannot be ruled out there might be some negative PR going on too since I can't help see using any Zoom alternative! Everything else pretty much sucks.
I consider myself a Steve Klabnik fan and even I was surprised to see this at the top of HN haha. Just goes to show you can never really predict how these things will go.
Business Associate Agreement.

A contract which defined how protected health information will be dealt with by the provider and how HIPAA provisions will be followed (ie: provider will do X but you need to do Y to be compliant).

https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/covered-entities...
/Applications is writable by admins. There is no O/S security model to bypass.
It’s a weird thing to do, but I don’t find it particularly concerning, no. You launched the installer after all. (I do use Suspicious Package to quicklook pkgs myself, FWIW.)
There's a difference between research and engineering. Is this system impressive? Definitely! It's a complex engineering effort, and highly tuned to solve a specific problem - beat the Atari benchmark.

Does it teach us anything fundamentally new? No, it still has horrible sample complexity and does not generalize to anything outside of Atari unless you completely re-tune it. And I don't mean re-train. I mean changing the architecture and assumptions. That's different from projects such as e.g. AlphaZero or MuZero.

IMO this would've been more appropriate to be published as an open-source system so that it can be applied and tuned to other problems as opposed to a research paper. As research, nobody outside of DeepMind can ever reproduce this.

You are completely changing the topic with this:

> While Never Give Up (NGU) is not fundamentally new, it is an important step in computers learning. You need to be able to generalize solutions to problems where you don't have contextual information

We're not even talking about NGU, we're talking about the paper linked in this post. This specific paper proposes little new in that regard. It just engineers a system to do this specifically for Atari games by taking a previous paper and changing some parameters. Neat, but it's not some kind of breakthrough.
Business Associate Agreement, which defines the legal requirements between two parties sharing HIPAA data.