skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
FreeRADIUS is great, and I wouldn't use anything else.

But to increase the adoption of EAP, what would be better is a super simple daemon, you point it at LDAP or a file, and it sets itself up for PEAP or EAP-TTLS and you just have to point your APs at it. FreeRADIUS is far to complex for most use cases.

I note that many APs now come with nice web interfaces and can integrate with LDAP and Active Directory directly, which is a great step forward.

Ideally AD would support something like SRP directly so you wouldn't even need server certificates.
Yes? So what? Should i have written Gentoo derivative? Maybe shouldn't have typed so fast...
"Dodged a bullet there" is often used in hindsight, where you find out something was terrible after you avoided it for a different reason.
Location: Atlanta, GA

Remote: Prefer onsite, but open to remote

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: Python, Java, Javascript (including Node.js, jQuery, React), C#, and others (listed on resume)

Resume: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1_8y3V_NmKfueQPpEPvLCpx6gEA...

Email: mellott.joshua@gmail.com

Hello, my name is Josh. I recently graduated from Georgia Tech and was planning to start working full time in Atlanta but unfortunately my offer had to be pulled due to the ongoing health crisis. I have had some internship and co-op experience doing software development, and I am looking for a company that will allow me to contribute to their work and foster an environment where I can grow my skills and professionalism. Feel free to contact me if there's anything I can clear up for you!
> the term is still used today

Not the term, a term. They're different idioms with completely different meanings, both well-attested historically. "Huckleberry" is not a corruption of "huckle bearer" here or anywhere else.

Doc Holliday isn't quoted as having ever said the phrase, by the way. It's taken from historical fiction, in a context where "I'm your huckleberry" -- "I'm game", "I'm up for it", "I'm your guy" -- makes far more sense.

"They say you're the gamest man in the Earp crowd, Doc," Ringo said. "I don't need but three feet to do my fighting. Here's my handkerchief. Take hold."
Holliday took a quick step toward him.
"I'm your huckleberry, Ringo," replied the cheerful doctor. "That's just my game."

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Tombstone/4PnFRfNtyhYC?...
There is no way to enforce what is an expected input to a function, once a system grows large enough.

This is exactly what typechecking does for you and is the reason I think trying to build any large system without them is a bad idea.
I honestly can't think of anything more "missing the entire point" of a language like Logo than "I could write in assembler faster...".
Try reading my whole comment instead of jumping at phrases that match your political attack target.
They are making a very big bet on snap, I would expect most of their desktop apps to be slowly moved there in the next few years. At that point apt would be kept around strictly for essential system packages and (hopefully) for server usage.
That might work nicely for plain TCP traffic, but it's not very useful for TLS encrypted connections by itself.

An attacker wants to decrypt the packets passed on as the man in the middle without alerting the victim. A big red "insecure connection" browser warning due to an untrusted certificate used by the MITM can easily thwart the attack.

To make this work, the attacker needs access to a CA the victim trusts to sign certificates on the fly. If the attack is limited to a single target page, stealing the associated private key from the legitimate website operator is an option, too.
I think the request is more for guidance about how to do it right.
Because Docker is a really shitty way to package applications. You don't package the application, you package an entire linux distro, with it's packages, and your application into a single opaque blob. Normal package managers just package your application in a more simple manner which works in conjunction with your OS, not on top of it.
On a level you've just shown they're pretty simple in nearly any language. I do use state machines quite often in my code but mostly on a different level. Multiple threads communicating to each other via home grown PS bus
I was looking at smol and it seems to have a good pattern for working with all the other run times.
OP may very well have, by benefit of IQ alone, a shot like that, but the intention of the society is squarely to place him under the rest, without a way to atone or make right. If he's part of the set, he's part of the set. Whether his membership in the set does him the same harm as another in the set, that we may debate about.
Some quick thoughts, they may be incomplete or ambiguous but hopefully will provide some idea:

- A wiki combines content and organization of that content. This is a strength (documents know about each other) but also a weakness (the organization system must understand and support the types of documents it contains). I'll expand in the next points.

- When I use a filesystem to organize, it doesn't need to care what types of documents I throw in there. In a wiki you are typically led to keep copies, not originals, of such alien document types, as attachments to a wiki-supported document.

- If you are willing to commit to a certain organization filesystem (this is not optional in a wiki), you can usually hyperlink documents using your filesystem's url format (e.g. gdrive urls).

- I have found repeatedly over time that the very ease of use of multiple documents across a wiki leads to people spreading information across multiple items "because it's so easy to navigate". But, similar to my impressions with codebases where functionality is heavily spread and atomized across a multitude of files and small functions/classes, this can hinder the ability to grasp or comprehend the compete intended contents of a document. (see http://number-none.com/blow/blog/programming/2014/09/26/carm... for more about atomized code)

- As outlined in the article, wikis tend to have to duplicate a lot of existing document editing, layout and rendering technology and standards, and very rarely reach the level of power and quality that dedicated tools have. In keeping with the intent to make them easy to use and navigate, they end up making the easy stuff easier (great for non-tech or beginners) but the hard stuff harder. So, for something trivial they are great, for complicated stuff they become a hindrance. I can't remember the last time I wrote or formatted something in Notion and didn't feel like I was fighting a 2-decades-old word processor.

- Extra customizability like Notion offers, make it quite powerful but also exacerbates the above point, because it's not just the basic built-in feature that may work half as good as they could, but the customizations end up in a similar state (because it's not a full app development platform).
Any rational discussion about price relationships should include a “bubbles excluded” caveat.
Location: Orem, UT, USA

Remote: Yes please! On-site is still good though.

Willing to relocate: Yup.

Technologies: Focused on Rust, C/C++; experienced with and open to Python, C#, web

Resume: https://linkedin.com/in/erichdongubler/

Email: erichdongubler@gmail.com

---

Interested in looking for making the Rust ecosystem grow, esp. in domains where C/C++ are used right now (I find FFI and resource constraints exciting). If you want a Rust expert and somebody to ramp up others on it, pick me! I've got a broad and deep skillset that makes me especially suited for mentorship, navigating your software ecosystem, and learning your domain fast.
Isn't there an obvious reason? The US outsourced everything physical to other countries. You can fill stadiums in the US with finance, marketing, software, and business experts.
That stuck out to me as well, but it makes sense as an incentive for companies to create better products. Why pour money into R&D to develop new products if you're restricted to charging existing prices? Might as well just develop the existing product and save on the R&D costs.
It would have been trivially possible to use the Web PKI here if APs advertised an FQDN instead of a short text string as their visible name.

If you were signing into "Starbucks.com" then logically we can arrange that the AP needs to prove it has a certificate for starbucks.com or some-wifi-made-up-prefix.starbucks.com or something and it could use the Web PKI to make that work safely for everybody.

But APs do not have FQDNs. The WiFi industry has talked about trying to get to roughly the same place by a circuitous route, but the problem they run into is: Who is allowed to call their AP "Starbucks" and why? If you decide it's fine we'll hide a signifier elsewhere, then the user doesn't know why this Starbucks and that Starbucks don't interoperate. Their experience is disappointing and even if you claim it's for security reasons they're left puzzled.

However, there is no need to involve "deploying certs" anyway.

You can use your existing (very likely) Active Directory or similar and single-sign-on infrastructure to allow employees WiFi devices to prove who they are to the WiFi AP, without giving away any secrets. There are an impressively confusing array of different ways to do this, but the good news is that even the really terrible ones are safer than a PSK.

You can even federate this system, a good proportion of all degree institution students and staff in the industrialised world have EduROAM, their laptops (iPhones, whatever) connect to any AP that claims it is EduROAM (maybe in Venice, or New York, or Sydney) and they tell it their email address with their home institution (e.g. where they're employed or registered to take classes) and then they give that institution credentials to connect. The local institution can see that e.g. OK this NYU student is on our network, and if there's a problem (looking at PornHub in class? Not here) they can tell NYU about it and if necessary blacklist a problem user. But they don't get credentials for the user, and the user doesn't get local credentials. No more need for toxic "guest" networks for visitors.
Learning a new framework in a familiar language might take a few weeks. A few weeks for a new language is really fast!
Enlightenment DR 0.24.0-alpha1 Release
Because there are so many different Linux distorts out there. I feel like at least one of them should be as newb friendly as possible.
I think you mean

# see __magic_numbers.py
itertools.combinations(X, number_of_things_in_a_pair)
But strings are not generic types...
Dictators are using the coronavirus to strengthen their grip on power
Instead of a refund, I'd prefer a free trial period (possibly with limited functionality) so I could evaluate the quality of the software before laying down my money. Knowing I'll need to go through the hassle of getting a refund if it doesn't work out makes me less likely to try the software in the first place. Contacting customer support for a refund is an unpleasant process at too many companies.

Also, as to your original question of why people are reluctant to pay for software, it depends a lot on the software. Much of the software that people sell (e.g., a game for a phone) is less useful to me than a cup of coffee, so I wouldn't bother downloading it even if it was free. And even if your software is useful to me, it has to compete with lots of free alternatives that are very good.

There are also the security/privacy risks that comes with installing software from unknown providers. A widely used open source program would be easier to trust than an app from some random person on HN that I've never heard of.

That said, I do buy software that's useful to me. For example, I buy tax prep software every year, and I pay for e-mail (Fastmail) and a web-based RSS aggregator (Newsblur).
It is documented, but the documentation is unfortunately not authoritative: https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/journal-fi...

Also, they couldn't make breaking changes to the format or it would prevent people from reading their own old log files after upgrades
Ask HN: Where do you buy your hardware components from?
In the old days there were a plethora of online businesses to buy from. Nowadays it's easier to buy from New Egg or via Amazon. Where do you buy your HW from?
For my low-aesthetic zine (https://freezine.xyz), I just have a git repo full of html and css files i edit by hand. it's not that hard. most of the new pages start out like this:

!doctype html
<meta charset='utf-8'/>
<title> the page </title>
<style> h1 { font-weight: bold } </style>
<h1> Hello, world </h1>
<p> here's some body text </p>

I do all the writing in html, it's really not that bad. I'd start simple and only add more complicated steps if you want to. It's not that hard to add a python or node or Makefile or whatever script that takes a folder full of markdown files and creates another folder full of html files.

I should say, you probably have different goals than me, but as a full time engineer I wanted to make this site as easy as possible to work on and not get stuck fiddling around with configuration or other bullshit timewasting stuff that doesn't actually help me get my ideas out. It's extremely refreshing to work this way :)
While I definitely agree that FOSS is good enough that makes it paying for software that does the same thing less appealing, the average person that I talked about in my post doesn’t use and usually isn’t even aware of FOSS.
The one reason why you will love BillBored
I wrote a blog post a while ago: https://www.wtf.horse/2017/09/19/common-wifi-attacks-explain...
FYI, most people don't let capitalism define what something "is" (in italics, even).
Well, I blew it yesterday, not knowing that Python really does do a > b > c expressions as a special case.
The problem with SQL windowing functions (OVER ORDER BY, LAG/LEAD, RANK, etc) is that they are nondeterministic.
Why? 8-bit assembler was simpler and easier to learn than most programming languages. It kinda had to be, given the constraints on CPU's at the time. (And drawing text or graphics was simply a matter of setting values in a memory-mapped frame buffer. Quite trivial, overall.)
So much this. Have seen apps where there were 4 diff string types brought by external dependencies and then like 3 or 4 more to deal with from diff Windows APIs.
Go has a shorter time, and that’s the measuring stick in this area.
Internet Writer Workflow: A Poorly Conducted Case Study
That'd be a lot more data to push, and not be able to record specific data or alert on anything. I don't write enterprise medical software for a living, I just think hundreds (? thousands?) of video streams isn't necessarily more reliable or elegant in its simplicity than rushed out new software. There's always a (many) trade-off.
Cultural Creatives
Umberto Eco’s Antilibrary: Unread Books Are More Valuable Than Read Ones (2015)
> This is exactly what typechecking does for you

Having types, isn't a binary choice. eg Generics, plain objects, functions, pointers. There are inevitably gaps in how the type system can ensure your what your outputs will be (even if it's a halt).
What's interesting to consider is whether the results would differ:

- if one bought the book and built the trading algorithms against historical data as programming exercise,

- then tried them in a real-world context.

Restated: is the math really that magical, or is it a question of scale/volume, or is the fairness of the market a mirage?
A Man Who Runs 365 Marathons a Year
> For comparison, last week we caught a significant race condition in another Kubernetes-related project we maintain called Helm (written in Go) that has been there for a year or more, and which passed the race checker for Go. That error would never have escaped the Rust compiler, preventing the bug from ever existing in the first place

While the possible security benefits of Rust is interesting in software like Kubernetes, it seems like this whole blog-post is an implicit RIIR proposal for the Kubernetes ecosystem from a Microsoft software engineer which isn’t going to happen anytime soon.

> Rust has made great progress in the past year with its async story, but there are still some issues that are being worked out.

On top of that, there are still many crates that aren’t using async-await yet and most are not even 1.0, thus are not stable. I would not touch such crates if they are still immature or even unsafe.

Realistically, a Rust Kubernetes is possible but practically the effort of a production ready version is measured in years.
I`m not so sure about ownership, sure it's nice to be able to brag no GC and being memory safe, but this has a huge complexity cost..
IMHO adding to the compiler a GC/ASan for the debug mode (to detect double free, use after free, leaks) is a valid option.
Bounties are a good way to solve this. Invent a new therapy? The government buys your patent for a sum proportional to the value created (not to the dollars invested) and releases it to the public domain.
When I do it, anymore I refuse to do it with standard partitions. LVM makes this whole setup much more painless in the end since you can nearly endlessly change the splits without dealing with copying and moving partitions around when a change is needed. I wouldn't recommend thin provisioning for this kind of setup though since it carries some burdens when things fill up.
Alternatives for Ucraft
What other options can be installed on a website server that will create the drag/drop/wireframe bootstrap html5 css builder functionality that is available at weebly launchaco or bubble?

Bonus: Free Open Source solutions with active dev communities
While most statically-typed functional programming offer some approach to composition similar to Swift prototols, the concept goes above and beyond the idea described in the article you posted, which relates more to the idea of programming with immutable data.

So similar compositional techniques to Swift protocols would be typeclasses in Haskell, traits in Scala, module interfaces in ML languages (which have to be used at the module-level via functors instead of at the value-level like the other examples), etc.

Edit: I should have read to the end. I stopped after reading a few paragraphs of what looked like a basic interface vs inheritance discussion. Turns out, at the mid-point, he introduces an "alternative" to that approach, which is indeed more or less functional programming. As much as I like functional programming, (his "Value-Oriented-Programming"), interfaces are often quite useful when programming in the large.
Despite a fall in fintech deals Stash closed $112M in funding
Are we talking consumer-grade PC hardware, or base components?
It may well be Canonical's fault and they just screwed things up...but regardless, if they haven't managed to ship it in usable form in an off-cycle release, it's not ready for LTS. In fact after the last time, they said they would only try again when they could go a full cycle of 3 non-LTS releases with reasonable results before it would land in LTS. And their expectations before shipping in the off-cycle didn't seem too crazy (ie the X11 compatibility layer not constantly crashing the whole session and taking out all the user's applications) but still weren't met in time for 18.10. I think they're slated to try again now for 20.10.

> Admittedly I haven't used Nvidia

Yeah, that. Not supporting ~half the video cards in the world sounds like a clusterf*. I know it's largely nvidia's fault, but at the same time, I have a lot of investment with them, and none w/ wayland.
They prove a lot more, e.g. that if you have an oracle that can guess the total amount of memory needed beforehand, during runtime the malloc call will never fail if you stay under the amount.

But of course it's rabbit holes all the way. Whatever application uses this allocator also needs to be verified, where then you need to prove that there is never a sequence of malloc/free calls that will exceed this limit.
Sure. You can see it in action at http://darklang.com/launch/demo-video (also, we've gone through our waiting list, so we're pretty much adding new folks who sign up immediately, if you want to try it out).

The main idea is that you when you make a change (let's say, you type a key in the editor), that change happens directly on the AST (the internal set of objects that represent the program). So for example, if you're seeing:

let x = 5
x + 2

we represent that internally as `Let ("x", Int 5, BinOp ("+", Var "x", Int 2))`

In a normal programming environment, you type up text, and the parser converts it to the internal representation. With Dark, we always keep everything in the internal representation. That means, if it isn't a "syntactically" valid program, you can't create it in the first place.

In practice, this means that if you type, for example, `z` in the middle of `let`, in a traditional language you'd get an error like `lzet is not a valid token` and in Dark, the `z` just wouldn't appear (nothing would happen). So it's not possible to get a syntactically invalid program.

The overall idea with Dark is that programs are always live (and also safe). So to make that be true, we need to ensure that you don't spend a period of time in a state where we can't understand your program (such as when the syntax is invalid).
It's whatever you're used to, but using sexprs means you don't need to write parsers because you have the read function. In Lisp, it's important to give the user access to the parse tree.

Since the S-expression syntax for Lisp was chosen, there have been at least three documented attempts to replace it: Lisp 2, CGOL, and Dylan. Lisp 2 syntax wasn't implemented and was only ever used in textbooks, and CGOL and Dylan were never popular and are no longer used. All Lisps today use S-expressions (but Clojure has [] and {} as well as ()), as do some Prologs, as well as a few other languages such as CLIPS. Readability is taken care of by the prettyprinter.

For arithmetic expressions, I agree infix is easier to read because that's what maths uses. For complex formulae, I wrote a Lisp macro which accepts infix notation and I'm sure other Lispers have done likewise.
> They have plenty of money. They have lots of smart people (insert your "stupid banker" joke here) working for them. They have lots of highly-paid analysts that make these decisions.

People also said the same thing about Washington Mutual. And about Bear Stearns.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Mutual
I made this comment slightly selfishly because my wife and I left downtown Seattle about 10 years ago to live in a remote area in North Central Washington near the North Cascades National Park. We haven't looked back.
In theory Haskell supports braces and semicolons but in practice nobody uses them, leading to bugs like this one:

https://github.com/haskell/haddock/issues/12
The tough part of these regulations is that patient blood is spilled on both sides of the tradeoff.

A: If you allow a drug that ends up causing more harm than benefit

B: If you ban a drug that would have caused more benefit than harm.

So making these regulations is about finding the balance between A and B.

The problem is that a type A error causes a huge scandal. Those who took the drug and died are known by name and there is terrible publicity.

But a type B error only causes people who would have died before to still die. Nothing new has happened, and there is no outcry.

So the pressure on FDA to err on the side of never having any type A deaths, while allowing possibly millions of type B deaths is enormous.