skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The should pivot to recruiting Canadians, Mexicans, Singaporeans and Chileans who are still eligible to work in the US.
This is a bit of an aside, but...

What I think is getting obscured in all of the overheated rhetoric about race is the fact that all humans want a tribe. We want to feel like we belong to something greater than ourselves.

I'm Canadian, but I can imagine if I were to move to France to learn French it would be similar. Many people would be welcoming, but some might be impatient with my shitty French and say/do rude things. I'd probably end up affiliating with other Anglophones because we'd all be going through the same journey.

Expecting people to completely suppress this tendency towards in-group affiliation seems, frankly, unscientific. Most of the popular proposals aimed at "eliminating racism" seem likely to fail, or even backfire, because they treat racism like it's something evil people do rather than a byproduct of our tendency to connect more easily to people like us.
It’s also a nascent movement so it’s not surprising that many people don’t understand it. There are many successful policies that began with very low public support.
> What exactly do we gain from building better model of climate change? Knowing where it's going to hit us hard?

No? Models are useful for making predictions.

If somebody like the POTUS tells you that nuking thunderstorms would be great against climate change, you don't have to just take their word for it. You can input that into your climate change model, and it will tell you how much of an impact this will have, and whether the impact is good or bad.

The difference between a better model and a worse model is that the better model will agree better with reality.

A shitty model, like the one POTUS is using, might tell you that nuking all thunderstorms would be great. Then we go ahead and do it, and we all die.

A better model, like the mental model that every 14 year old child that starts studying physics and radiation has, might tell you that nuking thunderstorms is a pretty bad idea that would kill us all due to dozens of reasons.

Given that we cannot make accurate predictions today of what the weather tomorrow will look like. If you want to predict the 50 year impact of more subtle changes like, e.g., covering the Sahara with black mats, you need a pretty good model to get an output that isn't multiple orders of magnitude off.

So..... what do we expect from better climate change models? Avoiding the apocalypse to begin with. Worth every penny.
Wassenaar Arrangement
It's currently worse due to the lack of E2EE history/password sync and increased metrics collection (even the new tab page tracks you).

Chrome has E2EE history/password sync, which allows you to specify a sync encryption password that is different from your Google password.
Agile has long been a caricature of itself but a very profitable one. Tools like Rally and Jira will make most experienced developers long for the days of reasoned waterfall. SAFE, Jira and Rally add so much overhead that a methodology for efficiently navigating that bureaucracy will be its next "revolution".
In my experience hour-long standups are routine. Sprints are "timeboxed" deadlines. Customer interaction is as rare as finding hen's teeth.
Communication ends the first time anyone on the team realizes its blowback.
Agile delivery trains are usually runaways. The effect of daily standups has become the equivalent of Prisoner of War torture techniques; wake up! what have you done! what will you be doing! How many story points? How much time? on and on... every F'n day.
Agile dead?
No, its being refactored in the Gitmos of Silicon Valley.
Show HN: Chordata Motion, the open source Mocap system has now opened pre-orders
> but the top 1% make like 35k a year on average, and everyone else makes peanuts or zero

Where do you get that idea from?
It has always been various forms of recreational exercise equipment. When you fall in love with cycling, rowing, weight lifting, etc, you can see a dramatic improvement in general lifestyle health and mood.
A couple of lines of code to enforce domain black lists if the relevant activits apply enough pressure.
There's a countervailing effect where the more often you do something, the better you get at it.

You're right that the absolute number of errors will certainly rise, but the fraction of attempts which have errors will likely fall. As legacy certs expire, the aggregate quality of certs will likely be higher.

A secondary question is whether the gain in security is worth the required effort. Obviously Apple believes this, and LetsEncrypt is pretty easy, so even for hobbyists, it's probably at worst an annoyance.
Not sure what your point is. The new Edge is also based on Chromium, and Chrome has parts which aren’t open source.
This summary should emphasize that it's a 398 day _maximum_.
You've convinced me to try it out.

My personal knowledge management project, Gthnk (gthnk.com), would appear to plug in easily as a Source - without any special plugin necessary. I really like what you've made!
The question should be the other way around. Dedicated servers are not cheap per-se, they're just being sold at the market price.

The question should be, why is AWS so expensive on all fronts (not just the hardware but also bandwidth)? And the answer is again because the market lets them get away with it.
A look into Pegasus: Google's SOTA text summarization model
Apparently there's also PXE boot and HTTP booting [0], but you'll need to use the firmware from the RPi4 UEFI project.

Hoping to play with this soon as I just received my RPi4 yesterday.

[0] https://rpi4-uefi.dev/status/
I remember using The Boxer, console based editor last century. This was on OS/2, but I seem to recall it was available for Windows too. Not sure though.
> sheds some light
If people took a high-tech test and were told that that advice was personalized, imagine how much better compliance would be though.
Does it also apply to certs issued by a private/own CA or just public certificates?
Suppose we spend $20B to discover that the standard model remains intact. Then, physicists request $100B for the next supercollider, only to discover that the standard model remains intact. At what point does a society say “no” to future requests without being deemed “anti-science”? Without worthwhile results, economically, adderall enhanced physicists are no different than trailer park meth heads when they’re both eating government cheese.
They explicitly say in the article that it does not involve ray racing, of which ray marching is a subset.
You misunderstand. ISO 5426-2 is a standard specifying the encoding previously used for the text of the standard; it isn’t the encoding used by the desktop-publishing programs themselves that said standard refers to/affects. (After all, the standard is only tangentially “about” desktop-publishing.)

In the context of the standards document and its accompanying encoding, yes, sideways-Q — the exemplar of the mark — is already a defined character; and so Unicode could just adopt it directly from that source character-set.

But my point was twofold:

1. in the source desktop-publishing files that the standard documents, sideways-Q isn’t a character. It’s an embeddable shape. This shape is the ‘reality’ to which the character in the standard is a reference. Like the difference between a real floppy disk, and the floppy-disk emoji. Making it out to be one would be like encoding a game of hangman drawn on a page as a standard “hangman glyph.” Not the same! Loses meaning!

2. Even if the standards document didn’t have its own character set where sideways-Q was defined as a character, but instead just took a particular desktop-publishing program’s sideways-Q shape and plopped it inline into the text — the fact that the text refers to the mark, requiring you to be able to see the rendering of the glyph to know what it was talking about means that that “sideways-Q exemplar” would inevitably become a Unicode codepoint, in order to encode this document successfully. (In fact, if the standards document were entirely-analogue, e.g. typewritten; and the sideways-Q were drawn onto the page after the fact; then it’d still make it into Unicode in the process of digitizing the work.)
Sell custom decks of cards.
In other words, shut up and calculate? :)

That's an interesting POV, "if it looks like a duck... it doesn't matter that we don't understand why".

I agree with your point that (as per evolution) there is no reason why we can't just set the initial conditions and set it running and with luck/wise choices (tho the latter implies some understanding, which we don't have) an AGI will emerge.

However, I don't see any evidence of that despite the impressive power of GPT etc.

One reason why is that while I agree that "meaning is use", the use in the human case is in our interaction with the world and our inner thoughts.

The use in the GPT case is more of a Chinese Room style affair, isolated, unthinking and without motivation or interest.

During the typing of this comment I've considered a myriad of things, some related, some not - for instance, going to get a coffee in a minute, turning away to respond to a Whatsapp message. This motivated, conscious and subconscious context switching is just one example - let alone the myriad emotions, memories, feelings, inner life and experience that drive and inform it.

Intelligence as surface is only plausible in the philosophic zombie sense.

And we have nothing yet that comes near to mimicking even that general intelligence at surface level, just (massively impressive) powerful niche-explorers and domain entity generators like GPT.
I think that falls into a class of tradeoffs that using various tools involves. With a higher level of functionality the designer of the tool must make decisions about how to implement the functionality. They can provide options or configuration to tailor behavior to an individuals preferences but that increases friction when getting started with the tool.

I'm using a a much less capable tool for managing my notes called `mkdocs`. It converts a collection of markdown pages to HTML that I serve from a script running on a Raspberry Pi (`python3 -m http.server 8100`) `mkdocs` provides Github integration but I keep the repo on a private server so I don;t have to worry about private information leaking. Point is, It does nothing with directories so that is completely under my control. It links the pages hierarchically but I can insert links between pages and to images. Manually.
While I sympathize with this viewpoint, as a physicist I think there is a fairly persistent misunderstanding in the public about just how disconnected current particle physics experiments are from application to everyday life.

Essentially none of the particle physics done since the 1960s has had any application outside of fundamental knowledge, with no prospects for it having those applications in the future. At best, and even this is stretching a bit, there are indirect benefits of developing the machines that are needed to explore this frontier (i.e. like some of the argued benefits of space exploration).

Whether that changes the calculus of whether these things are worth the price is still a question (in my opinion: they are), but I don't think making analogies to applications of discoveries of fundamental physics operating at very different energy scales is a good argument. The development of quantum physics (lasers, MRI, etc), while a frontier at the time, is essential to understanding commonplace things like the cohesion of solids or the properties of metals or semi-conductors (say) at room temperature. To my knowledge, there is nothing outside of astrophysical objects and the early universe that depends on knowing what is at the current frontiers in particle physics (or even what was the frontier in 50 years ago).
Basecamp’s Hey: A Missed Growth Opportunity (So Far)
Show HN: Hacker News front page in the style of a print newspaper
I read it as a sarcastic response, but sure enough a /sarcasm tag would be appropriate
And the Romans perfected the art of building long and straight roads, some of which still are in use today.
I think Sentinel wouldn't count as a "platformer" because you don't do any jumping (IIRC) - it's more of a tactical puzzle teleportation game. Not sure it'd count as "true 3D" either, really, not on the Spectrum anyway - it drew polygons onto a huge buffer you could pan around but the perspective never changed. But it was ludicrously impressive at the time, definitely.

[edit] 'aactical' isn't a word
Misses the point. The concern is all historic traffic being vulnerable to a single encryption failure.

Short cert lives make certain decloaking much, kuch more difficult.
You're right in many respects; I'm requiring the users to make a leap from the title of the page 'Gif Directions' to uploading a video, which will become the directions.

I had to strike a balance between short, pithy explanations which make an impact and drowning in waffle.

But as its a v1 I have lots of time to improve, thanks for your commment :)
And how the fact that you are quoting from some manual contradicts the fact that speed is different because of different pipeline depth?
> the way to have more hackers at scale is to grow every software engineer to be a security conscious engineer by default, such that they are constantly looking for vulnerabilities throughout development and deployments to production.

Most companies I’ve worked for have encouraged this to a degree. However, there are some major objective mismatches when trying to fit security engineering into product engineering. It’s great to understand the OWASP top 10 and read up on basic issues to avoid (like SQL injection), but I don’t think this proposal is very realistic for a few reasons.

Security engineering requires deep knowledge of protocols, networking, system design, etc. that a lot of product-oriented engineers just don’t have enough context to own that responsibility outright. New vulnerabilities are being researched on a regular basis. How do I keep up with netsec research while trying to stay current in my primary skill set? You might as well suggest to a front end dev that they should start rolling operating systems.

On top of that, pen testing can be incredibly time-consuming, and putting that responsibility on engineers who are focused on shipping as quickly as possible is going to cause problems. My performance as a product engineer is tied to my ability to ship, not testing my feature against every known attack vector out there.

We’re better off trying to change the culture of making everyone a half-assed security engineer by fostering a culture that treats security as a first class citizen.
>> Doesn't explain the entire lack of tool marks, though.

> Because they didn't use tools. I've watched telescope mirrors ground to incredible precision by hand, no tools.

Good one. That doesn't work on non-convex polygonal shapes. Notably, the faces are not just identically curved, as one would get by interfering faces. They are both flat.

>> Or the lack of embedded shells.

> Use rocks without embedded shells.

The rock faces in the quarries have embedded shells. Only the cut faces of rocks from those quarries lack them.

>> inside corners

> Use drills, clean up with files or blocking. Remember the Pharaohs had essentially infinite resources to do that for one box. He would have used the best masons, paid them well, and gave them the time they needed.

Infinite labor doesn't help in a box. Only one or two masons would fit. We know what their rock drills were like; they had a minimum radius measured in inches. And, again, no tool marks.

You don't get to define out the unknown by inventing excuses to ignore it; that is the same as inventing aliens. It takes actual work.
Same. I skimmed through all comments in this thread and still have no idea what this service does.

From the intro video it seems to be a service that converts a video to a gif.
"Technology should improve so we can slide into a dystopia in harmony"
But the standard model is already broken by known experiment results... Now is a race to affine results (or find more new phenomena) and navigate through the possible new theories.
I fondly remember INT 21h, and reading the 40Hex magazine along with Ralph Brown's interrupt list.

I was recently working on generating some assembly language output and I added the ability to generate a breakpoint at the start of my executable.

It took me an embarassingly long time to realize that the reason my executables were crashing, not dropping into the debugger, was that "INT3" was assembled differently than "INT 03h" - I knew I needed 0x03, and I knew it was the one-byte form of the instruction (0xCC) rather than (0xCD 0xNN), to ease patching, but .. yeah.
This approach seems nice in that it fast-tracks the common case and only delegates if needed.

> it allows to handle all operators by defining a single method,

That's nice and pragmatic too.

Back to the subject of this submission, I suspect the coerce idea could be bolted onto Wren without really breaking or changing much of anything (just an additional branch in the error handling of Wren's builtin Num type). That would allow Wren to grow it's own numpy-like library someday.
Spending on cern doesn’t mean not spending on covid research. So far cost per physicists hour at cern really has not been that crazy. Compare to space missions where often the physics teams are 2 orders of magnitude smaller...
Valid point for EpiPen, but a part of the reason for the US price gouging was physician prescribing - there were/are non-equivalent EpiPens available in the US (different, but still effective). Doctor choose or don’t know to prescribe it.

The beta-blockers is also valid, but back then (mid-20th century) the EMA (or constituent countries) were consistently approving faster than the FDA. It wasn’t until the 80’a when the FDA was revamped to be more like the EMA.

Regardless, even though some may prefer failures like Mediator or Thalidomide, I just don’t think there is the political appetite to tell folks “yeah, the drug turned out to hurt people, but that’s the price we pay for having faster approvals”.

Logically it makes sense, but when it’s your child who is hurt by a drug, people get very risk adverse very quickly.
Reducing winning down to body counts is precisely what was the problem with Vietnam. Materiel, production, logistics, money to fund it all.

It would be more precise to say the Russians were an American mercenary army. They were pretty much funded by them, most materiel was US produced and delivered for free.
Interesting idea :-). Have you seen something similar done somewhere else?
Eating close to sleep disrupts fatty acid metabolism and is generally not a good idea. If I remember correctly, it also lowers melatonin.
EDLIN has been removed for quite some time, its successor, EDIT.COM, has not survived the let’s-get-rid-of-efficient-software Windows XP era either.
No... web of trust is an important aspect to https.
As long as you first create a root certificate then you can create how many certificates you want.
I disagree. Doing science is one of the best ways for us to spend money as a society. The money spent there is not "wasted", a lot comes back in jobs, training, better technologies. Moreover, it is money that goes into society, not into the pockets of a few scoundrels linked to billionaires. This is an extremely retrograde view of science, in my opinion.
This highlights why it was so irresponsible to create CRISPR babies, and why you take things slow in science. Don't let the analogies about bio being programmable just like a computer fool you - it's not that easy or that simple. Bio is messy and complex.

Note: looks like these findings are from preprint, and so still need to undergo peer review. This is a phenomenon that was anticipated however based on the science, even though as the article states there some controversy around the specific mechanisms at play.
I think generally being a hacker is a mindset. Being able to answer a question like "how can one be a good hacker" is fundamental to that mindset.

I dont mean that in a dismissive way, I mean that to hack you are tinkering and figuring things out with your own mind rather than asking others.
If they are using plaintext passwords, I wouldnt be suprised their next step would be using MD5 or SHA1 or self made crypto...
Letsencrypt is broken or an incredible pain in so many different setups its not even funny.
Wells Fargo fraud only impacted foolish people who don't check their bank statements. If you did, you complain and the accounts go away.

Many banks were insolvent after 2008. The government fixed that.

Libor fixing us too complicated for most to understand and it mostly hurt you if you didn't ship around.

I'm fine with fraud as long as it mostly hurts those who can't be bothered. Still a happy client of Wells Fargo.

Wirecard has the problem of impacting diligent people who will actually take action against them.
This. Based on the offerings I saw, Paypal is noticably cheaper than other options for basic small business use case ( minor ebay shop, small online store ). The charges are straighforward and easy to predict. Compare that to most other providers and you find yourself digging through reams for legalese with fees calculations that are ridiculously complex and, seemingly, designed to deceive.

I am not a big fan of Paypal and heavens know it has some major issues to address, but the entire field kinda sucks in its own unique way.
The Art of Subversion
You can pretty much always add value
My understanding is that connection has already been made through several robust trials.

There may be drugs that raise blood pressure, but not mortality, but so far we haven’t actual data on one of them.
Similar effort from 2018: https://github.com/rep-movsd/see-phit (discussed at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14896455)
A dog.
That comment doesn’t reject getting applicable results from physics research nor does it claim it didn’t have such outcomes; it says the amount of expected applicable results should not be the (sole) number to use for deciding whether to fund research.
With the tightening of certificate trust, demise of self-signed certificates, etc., is there any remaining way to establish a consumer-oriented HTTPS server on a local network? Thinking of things like routers, printers, and self-hosted IoT devices here. Some of the label printers we support at work have simply atrocious workarounds to get them to work, and I'm wondering if it's the manufacturer's fault or if that use case has been completely abandoned in the push for tighter security on the Internet.
Yeah more crappy for profit media spreading outrage. The news/media is always negative ...tired of it and tuned it out/enjoying life without it!
As a buyer none of that is my problem. PayPal sucks for sellers, but because buyers want it, it is used.
EDIT: Sorry, replied to the wrong comment!

---

cf. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211025:

> This change will affect only TLS server certificates issued from the Root CAs preinstalled with iOS, iPadOS, macOS, watchOS, and tvOS.

> This change will not affect certificates issued from user-added or administrator-added Root CAs.
La atmósfera del planeta Tierra
If Letsencrypt was the only CA left I would call it a big failure. Without a choice there cannot be trust.
La atmósfera es una fina capa de gases de los que dependen los seres vivos de la Tierra, y nos protege de los rayos ultravioleta y de los meteoritos.
I'm bothered by the attempt to suggest we either have a particle accelerator or a global warming research centre (or whatever it was called). I can't see why they are related, and imagine there is room for both.

I don't think human knowledge and striving for it should be reduced to a question of what the practical benefits of it are - that sort of thinking didn't put man on the moon.

So overall, not a very well argued position from my perspective.