skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
At a guess, it was likely a tradeoff between security and computational cost.

I used to do freelancing for an ICT magazine and in early-to-mid 00s ran some numbers, as part of an article I did on limitations of applied cryptography. You can't do 1024-bit math on 32-bit or even 64-bit integers. Not without bignum libraries, which in turn make use of applied number theory. Under the hood the multiplication of two large numbers is an O(n^2) operation.

Performing an RSA or DH calculation with decent desktop computer in ~2003 took about 20ms with a 1024-bit number, and 80ms with a 2048-bit number. IIRC the first was expected to be theoretically breakable in a decade or so, assuming Moore's Law held true. The second was thought to be computationally infeasible for at least 100 years. These days the professionally paranoid use 4096-bit keys. (Or more recently, the nice 25519 curve which is more compact.)

So raising the security margin from "reasonable" to "paranoid", back in the day, would have required 4x the hardware investment to serve the same amount of traffic, and it would have imposed severe latency issues for everyone. We also have to consider the fact that most commercial secrets have a shelf life of years to a couple of decades. So before "E2E for everyone" became a thing, there simply wasn't widespread interest for crypto that could protect personal secrets for a lifetime.

With regards to using cryptography for personal privacy, cypherpunks were well ahead of their time. It's only become a mainstream issue in the last 5 years or so.
I didn't state it supports 100% compatibility, and it is still better than being stuck with an OS ABI from the 70s, that is only meaningful when the underlying OS is written in C anyway.
Apple would talk about the "MHz-myth" a lot. While it's true that MHz doesn't equal performance, Intel was doubling the PowerPC's performance most of the time. The G3 saw Apple do OK, but then Intel went back to dominating in short order. The PowerPC never matched Intel again.

My memory is more like they leapfrogged each other from time to time. The first generation of PowerMacs such as the 6100 absolutely spanked contemporary PCs (100 Mhz 486s and 50 Mhz Pentiums if I remember correctly). It was by no means obvious at that time that Intel would catch up.

What killed PPC was the interested parties (IBM, Motorola, Apple) squabbling over CHRP, and Motorola being unwilling to work on a part that would fit the thermal envelope Apple wanted for laptops. The fundamental architecture of PPC is sound, or at least, sounder than that of x86.
How does the Mars base communicate with Earth?
How would the NSA gag-order work on a Canada-based organisation with open source code worked on by devs around the world?

(Libressl is developed by OpenBsd)
Yup, it's a really good exposition of the process most math goes through before it is fully "rigorous". In one of Alan Kay's talks he mentions how Euler basically got all his proofs wrong but his intuitions were almost all correct and some people got PhDs by making his arguments more rigorous [0].

Gian-Carlo Rota has a similar story about most of his proofs being wrong but generally having the right intuitions and being on the right track. The paper is titled "Ten Lessons I Wish I Had Been Taught" and it's really good. He gives advice applicable to any domain where sharing knowledge is the key marker of progress: http://www.ams.org/notices/199701/comm-rota.pdf.

--

0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKg1hTOQXoY&feature=emb_titl...

[~ 8min 15sec] There was a mathematician by the name of Euler. Whose speculations about what might be true formed 20 large books. That most of them were true. Most of them were right. Almost all of his proofs were wrong. And many PhDs in mathematics in the last, and this, century have been formed by mathematicians going to Euler's books, finding one of his proves [and] showing it was a bad proof. And then guessing that he, his insight was probably correct and finding a much more convincing proof.
Schema-less and schema-ful are better be split into schema-for-parsing, schema-for-validation, no-schema-invented-yet.
According to the GRPC website, the technology is completely tied to protocol buffers? Seems like an odd and specific dependency to have for something like that: https://grpc.io/
> reaching for React/Fluttr/Angular/frontend-framework-de-jour when all you need is to show and hide divs and maybe do css or scroll animations between them is, in my mind, an equally bad decision.

Do people really do that? To me, that reflects bad frontend engineering practice. Even so for something like that, I'd use jQuery or something similar, because it's a much nicer API than the DOM.
I know that of course this Romanian example isn't. We used to send a truck full of help for the Romanian kids two decades back every year or so.

But that is not proof it can't work, just like how one bad parent isn't proof all parents are bad.

But a skilled government can gather more data and insights than any one individual, so it stands too reason they could produce a program that's better than what many or most parents can come up with on their own. In fact, that is precisely how modern day education ages 4-16 started out. Near universal literacy is one of its fruits. Why not more?
It was different times back then I'd argue, you could basically do 5+5 in a shell and get hired and shipped of to New York, but they where also forced to be constrained enough by the hardware to become clever after getting the job.

2018 Apple had 20 million registered developers and it has only increased since then.

It's still very easy to become a developer right now (sambo found it to be the easiest path forward for example, from no experience at all), but the trend is quite scary. I have frankly no idea how it look when I turn 60.
I am almost certain that no crypto invented today could withstand 100 years of technological progress (i. e. computing power, possibly even mathematics).
BlueLeaks
As far as I know, SBE was designed with financial protocols in mind, though possiblity more order entry (FIX-SBE) than market data. I'm not saying it is the case but it's possible that it's more suited to the IEX market data that the article uses for the performance test than capnproto or flatbuffers.

I will consider it in future though, while I'm familiar with SBE it's not one I'd have thought of when thinking about serialisation.
Yes. They are the ones buying the C-series envelopes.
I did misspell it in my comment. It definitely should have (should've? :) ) been written as "could have".
This isn’t usually case. There’s an “inverted bell curve” of failures. You get a lot of early failures then few in the middle of the lifecycle and then rapidly growing failures towards the end. It’s difficult to predict what that curve looks like and it depends on a combination of engineering, supply chain and luck.

You can usually work out where a product is on that lifecycle by looking at the amount of spare parts available on eBay. They are usually stripped down towards the end of the cycle rather than repaired as the rate of repairs is increasing. This is a good time to sell repairs as you have lots of cheap parts and lots of broken things on the market and no appetite for people to buy complete replacements.

Case in point on the bell curve, my 2018 MBA lasted two weeks before it died.
It is not normal aging progression.

Think about this, do you think laptop designers designed laptop to expand with the laptop? No, I don't think so. While there might be a tiny bit of space allowance I have never seen a laptop that has been designed to "grow" with its battery.

Not every swollen battery is a bomb that is going to blow, but do you really want to risk it? You have no way of determining whether it is safe to use or not and for this reason you need to treat is as unsafe.
adobe, microsoft, et al. also faked the fix and incorrectly fixed it by exporting into other formats in a broken way. locking in makes sense from a VC point of view.

from my point of view the only way to guarantee is to use software that provides open file formats and develops their features around those open formats. inkscape and sketch seem to be doing this
Forgot to mention: -

If you still have problems after switching to wired, it's almost certainly bufferbloat. (Avery Penwarr has a nice writeup about this, getting usable video calling with his parent's low-end ADSL connection.)
SQL vs. NoSQL mindset for everyone
And try getting a home builder to install Ethernet. They just look at you with a blank stare.
I’m still on my original magsafe from 2014
"Humans can survive on Mars"?

Check your priors.
> why have we started downvoting the comments we don’t like?

Something about human nature...? there is a downvote button there and it feels empowering (?) and satisfying (?) to see someone you disagree with go grey
It's a distinction in machine learning, too: discriminative approaches vs generative approaches, calculating P(Y | X) "learning to assign a classification to a given thing" vs P(X | Y) "learning common features of things with a given classification".
You mean this? https://twitter.com/Infoseepage/status/938837890494169088

Looks really bad for longetivity.
Less so recently. T440 and later are a terrible for reliability. Endless battery, charging problems and dead ports around the 4 years mark or so. In fact my T470 has just decided it doesn’t want to recognise any external batteries. Thankfully it has a few months support left on it or it’d be going in the trash (Logic board failure is common on them).

I’ve just replaced it with an iPad Pro and will use my desktop for everything else.
For the record, since nobody mentioned it in the past three days or so, SyncThing does not sync extended attributes, which makes it lose data (mostly metadata, but _useful_ metadata like file tags, and other info that traditional apps store alongside the data fork) when syncing some macOS files.

YMMV, but right now it find it more useful for source code trees than media projects (or any kind of macOS bundle).
My understanding is, that short sellers look for reasons to assume a company is over-valued (for whatever reason), calculate an more reasonable evaluation and then short sell for that value.

Doesn't mean it is always fraud. Oesn#t mean they are always right. But more foten thn not, they seem to be very rational about it. Given the amount of money they are moving around, they better are.

For Tesla, it means that, more likely than not, it has nothing to do with Elon. And more with things like:

- Is Tesla a car manufacturer or a "tech" comapny? If the former, it is over-valued, if the latter, it is much less so.

- Some, I'd say questionable, business deals. E.g. the Musk family bail out of Solar City, the sometimes not so clear intercomapny lending between Musks enterproses (SpaceX, Tesla,...)

- Musk seeming lack of focus on Tesla, he does work drectly on a lot f other ventures in parallel

- Musk's pubic behaviour, which seems of compared to other CEOs. Especially in the car industry, which has again a ot to do with the first point

- Corporate governance, that seems to be abit strange in Tesla's case. Normally, when publicly traded comapnies have that kind of trouble with the SEC, it is a bad sign.

Sure, Musk plays a role in all of that. But liking or not liking him is, IMHO, the least reason why someone would put millions at the table to short Tesla.

Regarding the big four, so. If you think back to the time before Enron and SOX, it was a lot worse. Since then, the Big Fur had split up operations, auditors have to change every coupe of years.

That being said, they could a lot stricter. I was way to deeply involved in one audit once, and I wouldn't have signed of balance sheet. Well, they kind of did only bcause the subsidiery I was involved in contributed a tiny fraction and everthing else added up. But still.

Also, Wirecard is a German company, so a lot of the SEC rules don't apply. Doesn't make it any better so.
After a vacation in, then, Czechoslovakia I received a letter from the police. The letter was artfully folded so that the text would overlap at 90 degrees (if viewed with a light source behind the folded letter). I always reckoned that was done to scramble the letter from unintended reading.

Normally the C3 or C4 envelopes used by government would be printed on the inside with a mass of letters, but in a way that matched with how the letter paper inside would be folded.
I've had the opposite experience - both my 2008 plastic Macbook and my 2011 Macbook Pro had enough quality issues in their first 3 or so years that I switched to other manufacturers.
When starting to learn/write JS, I found a few of these basic name-shortening functions from HN's own JS very useful, and well-named:

function $(id) { return document.getElementById(id); }
function byClass (el, cl) { return el ? el.getElementsByClassName(cl) : [] }
function byTag (el, tg) { return el ? el.getElementsByTagName(tg) : [] }
function allof (cl) { return byClass(document, cl) }
function hasClass (el, cl) { var a = el.className.split(' '); return afind(cl, a) }
function addClass (el, cl) { if (el) { var a = el.className.split(' '); if (!afind(cl, a)) { a.unshift(cl); el.className = a.join(' ')}} }
function remClass (el, cl) { if (el) { var a = el.className.split(' '); arem(a, cl); el.className = a.join(' ') } }
function html (el) { return el ? el.innerHTML : null; }
function attr (el, name) { return el.getAttribute(name) }
function tonum (x) { var n = parseFloat(x); return isNaN(n) ? null : n }
function remEl (el) { el.parentNode.removeChild(el) }
function posf (f, a) { for (var i=0; i < a.length; i++) { if (f(a[i])) return i; } return -1; }
function apos (x, a) { return (typeof x == 'function') ? posf(x,a) : Array.prototype.indexOf.call(a,x) }
function afind (x, a) { var i = apos(x, a); return (i >= 0) ? a[i] : null; }
function acut (a, m, n) { return Array.prototype.slice.call(a, m, n) }
function aeach (fn, a) { return Array.prototype.forEach.call(a, fn) }
function arem (a, x) { var i = apos(x, a); if (i >= 0) { a.splice(i, 1); } return a; }
function alast (a) { return a[a.length - 1] }
function vis(el, on) { if (el) { (on ? remClass : addClass)(el, 'nosee') } }
function noshow (el) { addClass(el, 'noshow') }
function elShow (el) { remClass(el, 'noshow') }
function ind (el) { return (byTag(el, 'img')[0] || {}).width }

https://news.ycombinator.com/hn.js
I think 7 years is probably at the high end. I work in a small company that started about 8 years ago, and most of the MacBooks (mixture of Pro and Air) we bought initially failed after 3 to 5 years for a range of issues (even the "second generation" have had failed units).
In Denmark you can get the envelopes that will fit an A4 folded in half easily, but I’ve see full A4 envelopes and those which require four foldes more often.

But postal mail is almost a thing of the past. I think the last two “letters” I recieved was a new credit card and the keycard with one-time code for my government issued digital login.
I’m sorry, but am I being downvoted for being factual? Docker sets up a HyperKit VM (which brings with it a fair amount of overhead, since it includes a complete Linux kernel and a sizable userland). overlayfs runs inside that VM image.
> One theory, Japanese wear masks. They didn't until the lockdown which was late

This is untrue. People in East Asia wear masks a lot more than any place else even without a pandemic. I started seeing a lot of masks in Tokyo in January itself. Softbank tested all their employees and the ones who were working in shops had less infections than the ones who worked at home, even though the number of people WFH were much lower than ones who worked in shops. Which gives a very solid backing to the theory that masks + personal hygiene is enough to keep this pandemic under control.

Source for the softbank tests - https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/SoftBank-condu...
The counter-argument I've heard to that is even if a fetus is a life (debatable), "pro-lifers" are requisitioning a person's body against their will to sustain that life. Which is inconsistent with what we as a society would do in any other similar situation. For example, organ donation. We don't even assume consent to use the organs of dead bodies, let alone force live donors to surrender their spare kidneys.
Some combination of "the children!!" And while we aren't the centre of terrorism, that doesn't stop the "encryption promotes terrorism" idea that so many ill informed people seem to have.
This is if you get long lasting antibodies from an asymptomatic case, which seems to be unclear.

This seems to be early researcher needing more confirmation, but see for example here: https://www.newsweek.com/coronavirus-antibodies-lost-10-wuha...
This is a good approach as it helps you solve a lot within CSS. Want to show the subpages of a selected menu point? Just use a css selector which changes their display state.
This comes up a lot but is it actually a valid argument at all?

In what real life situation would you want to divide 1 foot by 3 and get an integer as the result? If you're cutting materials, you usually want a given length, not 1/3 of whatever you happen to already have. So you're doing addition and subtraction, not division.

Also, it only works when you're simultaneously converting from feet to inches, and only when it's 1 foot! It's no use dividing 1 inch by 3, or 10 feet by 3 or almost any other length really. Though you could do a little maths to get 2 feet / 3 = 8 inches. But 4 feet / 3 isn't called 16 inches, it's 1 foot 4 inches which is pretty complicated to work out compared to ordinary decimal maths.
Is this computer science books? Seems like great computer engineering books but I have only read a few of the suggested ones.

Is there any math or science in those books (aka, could I write a paper from it)?

Anyone that have read them that care to chip in?
Visual studio does schema validation for JSON and gives errors inline. There is a big list of supported schemas built in and you can define your own. Never actually looked at the format personally.
Once upon a time, I figured out the reason why 'gh' is so inconsistent. It used to be its own sound, but that sound has vanished from the English language.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gh_(digraph)#English

'ti' pronounced as 'sh' is only in french loan words afaict.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latin-script_digraphs#...

I don't yet know how the 'o' in woman becomes an 'i'. When I do, I'll have finally cracked the whole of ghoti.
100 Mbps is enough for 15-20 HD video calls using modern codecs. Gigabit is great for backups, but for ordinary use 100 Mbit is fine.

If you're getting lag and dropouts with a wired connection, the problem is most likely bufferbloat.
My grandfather never had a formal education and I've seen old articles of his with citations in three different languages. That was in the early 1900s. In the early 2000s the majority of my high school classmates were trilingual and most of the world is already multilingual[0]. So I don't think 4-5 languages is a big difference from the current status quo.

Plus, you know, since it's a Romanian company you could all just learn Romanian in addition to the 2-3 languages you already know. Instead of only interacting with other cosmopolitans IT monkeys you could go interact with the locals and/or upper management for once. The local Romanian teenagers could get programming internships without having to learn English too. If fry-cooks can learn Spanish you can learn Romanian.

Who knows how many potential Linus Torvalds are out there working menial jobs in rural Finland because they failed English in high school.

[0] https://www.linguisticsociety.org/resource/multilingualism
Really depends on the on the mouse implementation: g pro is only 80g. It’s hard to get a wired mouse much lighter without a honeycomb shell (mice in that style can push into the 50s).
We need some kind of way to get rid of the bad crops within police departments. This is a world-wide problem. I believe the issue is (lack of) accountability. Police officers are not held accountable for their actions. Which is a problem if their actions are severe (e.g. murder, but also racism).

However, the question is whether the reason you mention is a valid one. I believe a better one is that police officers stay home when they are supposed to work. In which kind of profession do you not get fired when you refuse to (show up on) work? Especially when there is unrest and violence on the streets, you are more in demand; your services are needed even more. In such times, staying home is akin to being a deserter in time of war.

I do not understand how one gets away with that. How do they? What is their leverage?
Not for the observer on the ship.
Here we go again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_hypersensitivi...
"The majority of provocation trials to date have found that such claimants are unable to distinguish between exposure and non-exposure to electromagnetic fields. A systematic review of medical research in 2011 found no convincing scientific evidence for symptoms being caused by electromagnetic fields. Since then, several double-blind experiments have shown that people who report electromagnetic hypersensitivity are unable to detect the presence of electromagnetic fields and are as likely to report ill health following a sham exposure as they are following exposure to genuine electromagnetic fields, suggesting the cause in these cases to be the nocebo effect."
Wikipedia article has links to scientific studies.
The real question I have is where is this money going? I've looked at positions at NSA, and I know at lease one person that works there. They aren't making heaps of money.

How are they recruiting so many qualified individuals?
> Barring some global unavoidable catastrophe, there is no reason to think we are going anywhere very soon.

If only we didn't live during a huge ecological disaster that is threatening to destroy the livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people directly, with unforeseeable consequences for the rest of the world; which the major powers of the world are unwilling to act in any significant way to curtail; and which seems to require a re-structuring of the entire world's economy to actually solve...

Looking at the world right now, we know one thing for sure: none of the trends we see today will be relevant in 100 years. One way or another, the world will go through massive changes whose scope can't be predicted.

One possibility is global warming will continue unabated until we have hundreds of millions of people migrating from rapidly submerging areas (Bangladesh being one of the largest concentrations of population in the world living a few meters above sea levels), most likely followed by some kind of global war to prevent or redirect the massive migrations.

Another is that the global economy will be completely re-created to stop the production of greenhouse gases dead in its tracks, almost certainly in a non-capitalist system, since capitalism simply can't deal with externalities. The required political and economic shifts are hard to imagine, and the resulting world is equally hard to predict.

And of course, we are still always a few madmen away from nuclear war, with many of the world's most tense regions having nuclear weapons aimed at their enemies. Could global warming start a resource war between India and Pakistan that would lead to them using their arsenals? Could Israel decide to use its illegal nuclear weapons to attack Iran in a "defensive first strike"? Could the US decide that its interests are important enough that, as its soft power wanes, it could launch a bomb at some country to remind everyone of its hard power? Could the Europeans spark a new war, either among themselves or against some common threat, and feel the need to use their nuclear arsenal? Could the Chinese? As long as nuclear weapons exist, they are an ever growing threat.

Remember that just in the last few years, the long standing US-Russian non-proliferation treaty was unilaterally ended by the US, signalling a vast increase in the risk of nuclear weapons actually seeing use again.