skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Nowadays, at least on Android (though I think iOS has something similar now?), one can have a work profile, and the employer can only control activity in / monitor / wipe that profile. Most employers have switched to that for personal devices.

Disclaimer: Googler, opinions my own.
Yeah most of this feels like a howitzer for someone just trying to stay away from directly linking their identity to their personal blog.

I guess it depends on your threat model though.
I don’t know if this true, but I’ve heard that the US education system was designed to prepare people for factory jobs. Clock in and out at certain times. Eat meals on a set schedule. Only use bathroom during scheduled breaks. Sit in your seat for extended periods of time. Rote learning. Repetitive tasks. Etc. I don’t know if it is true, but it does make a lot of sense.
A REPL can also be excellent for operations work and ad-hoc tasks. I use it a lot when I need to extract some data from a REST API. Can create a toolbox of methods over time for making calls, and add new ones in an ad-hoc fashion, then use those to script larger tasks. Exploration, analysis, minor ETL tasks, debugging state of deployed systems, etc. etc. can all be enchanced by a REPL.
I really love good UI design and I'm convinced I don't have what it takes but I do keep seeing arguments and interfaces that seem quite weird to me. I would do it like this:

The desire to keep the document (or whatever it is) worked at on the screen during the "hunt" I consider a mistake. When mixing paint on a pallet the eyes are focused on what you are doing. You might want to look up to the canvas and back down again several times but there is never a need to do both.

I also feel drop down menus are a mistake. There (imho) should be a key on the keyboard to bring up the "hunting" screen (perhaps one that can be panned to the left right top and bottom with the arrow keys) and every "button" on that screen should be visually mapped to a key combination. F keys are great for this. First F key for the "button" group, second F key to pick one or a 3rd for 12 x 12 x 12 options.

When folder trees stop working because you have to much in them you should do tags (in addition) that can hold duplicates of the functionality. Then when tags also fail to scale you need a search feature. Each interface "button" or group should have a lot of hidden text by which it can be found. Typing cursive should highlight the italics "button".

It would definitely become a big mess but my gut says it can be sorted out and be equally accessible to people using it every day and first time or rarely users.
It's been admitted that tiktok actively suppresses content on peoples front pages that include visibly disabled users, "ugly" users, fat users, etc. etc. - anything that makes their image look "bad" in their eyes.

Kind of goes against current shoe-horned American societal values of "everyone should be respected, regardless of who, what, how, when, where they are"
> America is not united anymore and it’s barely a state. They have crashed right through failed state into a plague state, unwelcome across the world. In the absence of a humane government, America is now ruled by COVID-19. Welcome to the Plague States of America.

This is unnecessarily inflammatory language in reference to temporary travel restrictions.
Hijacking the thread to say: make sure they've got access to something with exposed innards. Windows is enough of a patched-together mess that it's a good candidate (I'd argue it's better (more messy) now than it was when I cut my teeth on it), but a 'nix with systemd, a web server or a low-voltage electronics kit would do nicely.
Maybe junilearning.com?
> The most reliable projections are saying 200,000 dead and 50 million infected by election day in November.

Yeah, the US will be the first to herd immunity. That's an advantage.
Interesting that you seem to be assuming a particular result from "hearing", excluding the reaction of "I hear you, and I just don't care." which is surely a possibility?
'>I contend the brain by definition is a computer,

I contend the brain is by definition a duck.

It's easy to redefine words.
> While we believe in the power of microchools

I'm forgiving of typos and such things, but as you are marketing a school, you might want to check your spelling.
I wonder how Mozilla will handle this, given that so far they deemed file system access as too dangerous even for extensions, nevermind random web pages…
Hey this is amazing, I didn't know about this! Thanks for the link :)
Show HN: I built Reddit but for research only
All of this labor theory only applies when you're negotiating with a monopolist. Otherwise the company already has thin margins as a result of needing to compete with other companies -- remember all that stuff about Uber losing money? -- and there is little more they can give you without trading it against something else you want, like flexibility or number of hours.

The primary way they could pay drivers more is by charging higher fares. But then there is lower demand for rides, so they need fewer drivers, so some of the drivers lose their jobs. If you think that's a good trade off then take it now -- quit and go do something else. It will cause the remaining drivers to be able to command higher compensation.

Everybody wants to be the one to get paid more and not the one who loses their job, but some of them will necessarily be wrong.
Seriously!
I just today pulled out a raspberry pi I bought in 2011 and was overjoyed that it booted up noobs with absolutely no issues.
There is a short explanation on why heterogeneous cropping is not the norm : Harvesting is just extremely difficult. It's not just a software automation problem, it's building the machinery and tractors, training people, gathering feedbacks... Even if you manage to repetitively grow successful combinations of produces, that's only the beginning of the journey.

Farming is an far older industry than software engineering, don't you think humans already tried that in the past 10 000 years ?
> It's a lot easier for me to read through a list of things in some category

this also creates a fixed 'path' cognitively since you are reading/naming the intermediate nodes on the way to any given task, and the intermediate nodes are consistently located in the same place spatially and in terms of the path. This is not the same as 'funky star button 2/3 of the way to the right and 1/3 down of the sub-scrolling subpanel of the customizable ribbon'
Thank you for your reply.

That's an impressive list of credentials. But it confirmed my suspicion: you don't speak Cantonese, Taiwanese, or Mandarin.

>> You probably don't speak any Romance language outside of English, do you?

> (1) English isn't a Romance language. It is a Germanic language. Romance languages are direct descendants of Latin.

> (2) I actually do speak Spanish, and I studied Latin for 11 years.

I stand corrected.

>> you would know there's massive overlap between them, phonetically

>Languages sounding the same in no way makes them the same language or closer together linguistically. A great example is the vowels in Spanish and Japanese are identical to one another, purely by coincidence.

No. I meant that the same word (or more precisely, character) in Cantonese, Taiwanese, or Mandarin often sound the same or similar, not often enough that they are mutually intelligible, but often enough. Again, you'd have to speak at least two of these to know that.

> (1) Literally the definition dialects vs separate languages is mostly derived from mutual intelligibility.

Let me guess, some euro-centric linguists came up with that definition. It's probably a fine definition in the study of European languages, but it's by no means the only definition.

I will concede, however, that judging by this definition, these Chinese dialects may be more distant from one another phonetically than the Romance languages.

What you are forgetting (and what those euro-centric linguists failed to account for) though, is the shared written form of the Chinese language. Even when a word sounded wildly different in Cantonese, Taiwanese, or Mandarin, they all know it's the same word.

> why it pretends minorities don't exist in China

That's a straight up lie. China has long celebrated diversity and the 55 or so ethnic minorities. These minorities even get special privileges, e.g. not being subject to the one-child policy imposed for decades on the majority Han ethnicity, preferential placement in schools, etc.

> Indeed, promoting Mandarin Chinese among Hong Kong students has been a political task for the Hong Kong government since 1997... The Hong Kong government launched a scheme 10 years ago to incentivize schools to use Mandarin instead of Cantonese in Chinese language classes.

Promoting and incentivizing? What unspeakable evil? Honestly how is this worse than Quebecois or Puerto Ricans having to learn English?

> the PRC wants to pretend that there is one China and homogenize the people of China into a single entity.

China is what it is today because of the shared language, culture, values, heritage, and history. It behooves you to understand that, instead of simply being outraged because China claims your wife's homeland as part of its territory.
The problem isn't remediation for an injustice. The problem is the overt and explicitly racial language and philosophy behind your arguments for remediation. The problem is the inability to remediate history. There is no such thing as cosmic justice.
Middle aged founders are the norm and more likely to take risks because they have financial backing and experience. They're also going to have been exposed to genuine opportunity, instead of a resume builder a college grad might think was a clever idea, and anyone else thinks is kind of a waste of time, as evidenced by the comments here.

It's always been the case, it always will be the case.

With the briefest of Googles you can even find out that's true even in the high-growth tech space:

https://hbr.org/2018/07/research-the-average-age-of-a-succes...
Exactly.

The real question is why does your phone even allow such things to happen in the first place?
You failed to presume that the OP did that and thereafter still came to their conclusion.

Instead, once you realised that the OP had not capitulated to your point of view, you belittled and dismissed it as not listening/hearing

How else does one hear you and then answer: ‘nah you are wrong, and here is why...’
Yeah whatever. As a Third World passport holder I'll take a U.S. passport any day. It's the biggest advantage Americans have and nothing can take away from that, including this temporary travel restriction.
I was merely pointing out that the artwork itself does has intrinsic value, irrespective of who made it and when. As the parent said,

>You'd think paintings have an intrinsic value by themselves,

If paintings didn't have intrinsic value, then there wouldn't be a market for replicas and prints of famous of pieces. Yet, there is a market for such.
In my neck of the woods, GOG offers no-questions-asked refunds, and they also have location-specific pricing and local currency payments. The pricing is usually higher than average though, so they grant extra credit for those purchases.

I'm not sure which location you're talking about where this doesn't apply.
Bizarre thought experiment: if Uber drivers are employed by Uber; shouldn't independent taxi drivers be employed by the city that licenses them on the same basis?

A significant fraction of taxi drivers (>25%) are self-employed. They own their own vehicles and set their own hours of work.

In many cases, they're actually obliged by the terms of their licenses to take fares (actually less independent than Uber drivers). The fares they charge are set by their licensing authorities, rather than being negotiable.
I was just trying to get apples to apples numbers to your equally disingenuous numbers.

Your point seems to be that folks should not follow health orders since the odds are good for most people, and that you will do your part to make sure folks will get what they deserve?
I do not believe the solution is to increase robotics to support this field, I think the solution is much more about a paradigm shift from over-optimization aka mono-cultures to a more holistic approach that increases the human-nature connection. We have to heal ourselves to heal the planet and while technology can help, software engineers will not be the heroes on this front, it will be more traditional stewards of the land.
> It’s not that other nations don’t want to welcome Americans, they just can’t. The point of a passport is that a sovereign power vouches for its bearer, but America can’t vouch for the health of their citizens at all. America’s public health regime is far less trustworthy than Liberia’s (which is actually quite good). Its sovereign is mad.

> At the same time, you can’t trust Americans. Americans have poor hygiene (low masking rate) and at least 40% of the population can’t be trusted to even believe that COVID-19 exists, let alone to take it seriously. They’re likely to refuse testing, not report symptoms, break quarantine, and generally follow rules. Americans have a toxic combination of ignorance and arrogance that makes them unwelcome travelers.
This defeats the point of 2FA if you can turn it off without that second factor. In your example, if you don't have that authenticated session then you're still screwed... so you must design for the worst case scenario. The risk of 2FA is losing a device, which is why a proper design has other safety backups, such as backup codes, or leveraging a combination of other accounts that can vouch for you and humans in the loop.
Spare me, corporate profits reached all time highs and the stock market soared during Obama's terms. Yours is not a real argument.
> but everyone should know you suck at servicing that level of load

I think that mission is pretty well accomplished, right? I mean it is basically a meme at this point that Google has declined to spend the money that would be required to offer high quality interactive support for unpaid consumer accounts. Apparently people value their services more than they are concerned about the risk of needing support.

So, within that framework, the important question for both the consumer and for the service provider is what the best security trade-off is to accomplish their various goals. I think there's a pretty compelling argument made in this thread that the current stance is more optimal that requiring reauthentication for the vast majority of stakeholders.
No, but there's reason for the US government to spy on you, if you are a problem person.

Why do you assume industrial espionage is the sole reason for a government to spy on you?
(I’m trying to recall the Lightspeed bug from memory so I may have some of it wrong.)

It all boils down to poor state management in a single algorithm.

The algorithm allocates a kernel object, then sends off a subroutine to do some work.
(The subroutine happens to run in another thread but that’s not really relevant to the bug.) As part of its job duty, the subroutine is supposed to free the object after its work is done, but only if condition A is true.

If A is false, the subroutine won’t free the memory, and it’s implied that the main routine is supposed to free the memory instead.

Now the issue is that there’s no common code that checks condition A. Instead, the main routine and the subroutine have slightly different ideas about whether condition A is true or not. The condition’s logic is pretty simple so it’s understandable that the kernel developer decided to write the same condition in two different places and two different forms (instead of e. g. factoring it out into a macro).
Still, they managed to get it wrong.

The result is that in one particular case, the subroutine thinks A is true. So it frees the object. When the main routine gets back control, it thinks A is false (due to the duplicated, slightly wrong logic), and frees the object, too.

There’s only a small time window between those two frees. But the window is large enough that a userspace thread, if it tries often enough, can force its own object into the place where the kernel object used to be,
just in time before the double free happens.
I downvote posts that are capriciously off-topic or intellectually lazy. People who post those kind of things regularly don't belong on HN in my opinion. Your post seems like an interesting view, especially given the argument that others share it.

(Just upvoted you. Thanks!)
People today are generally not limited by the historical context from which they come. Your parents' individual personalities and ability to raise you does matter, but broader historical context matters very little, unless we try to make it so and that generally just causes conflict.

People in wheelchairs are on the other hand affected by the presence or absence of wheelchair ramps.
I actually remember the discussion on that. The reason 64-bit port didn't happen can be tracked to 1 key difference between Windows and Linux.
On 64-bit Windows, the sizeof(long) is 4, while on 64-bit Linux it is 8. While this looks superficial and has known workarounds like INT_PTR and intptr_t, it's a deal-breaker when you want to marry 2 huge codebases that aren't using these workarounds properly.

Microsoft had enough resources to painstakingly go through massive amounts of existing code, catalogue the differences and eventually deliver WSL. A small enthusiast group behind CoLinux would never commit to anything like this, since it's hard to imagine a less rewarding and intellectually stimulating job.
Google and Ubuntu Join Forces to Make Desktop Linux Even Better
I did this! Through an organization called the Student Conservation Association https://www.thesca.org/
Its just more complicated than it needs to be. Esp I have a hobby project with tiny usage.
To put a finer point on my comment, I'm claiming that it's not something that needs to be handled. Women can handle it in the same way they can handle a cloudy day or a man not racing over to hold the door open.

I would suspect your shrill infantilization of women and the vicarious outrage on the behalf of women is something much harder to handle if you want to minimize the handling women need to do.

How many people reading this even saw or knew about the uncropped Lena picture until they saw men on HN/Reddit nodding vigorously at each other over over how many women pass on STEM because of it.

I see outrage like yours and wonder when was the last time you actually polled a woman's opinion on something like Lena. I'd wager 95+% of women roll their eyes that a cropped Playboy shot even moves the needle.
Tiktok does have gaming content, although I have no idea how to quantify how popular it is.
It's somewhat comforting that that's the case. For argument's sake, we can pretend instead that the 'a' in gmail.com is the Cyrillic 'a' for one of the addresses.
Switch from a well paying job instead of just getting another cheap phone?

Of all the hills I am willing to die on, getting another phone isn’t one. Especially if they provide a credit for your cell phone.

https://www.teamblind.com/post/Amazon-Cell-Phone-Reimburseme...
This is a really big stretch in interpretation but also in plausibility, since Latin is a dead language.

But if it were true, then you'd have it your way: it'd also be inappropriate in professional settings that don't naturally necessitate it.
That's like saying Twitter is not Twitter because we can type more than 140 characters now.
> If people say evil things that cause harm, go after them for the harm.

You'll need to define what an "evil thing" is. For example, in the race statistic example, you make it clear that depending on exactly what was said, you may or may not be responsible for the harm.

You'll also need to define "cause." In cancel culture, no one "forces" companies to fire people, they just put companies under economic pressure, much like boycotting.

I think the key issue is what you mentioned earlier:

> whether it's possible to know the content is false

Where there's some threshold of belief whether something is true or not; for example, it might be fair game to share a New York Times article, knowing that they're generally true. But someone on Twitter?

Also thanks for talking in good faith, it's refreshing to talk to someone who genuinely engages in discussion as opposed to trying to win.
Uber Eats outage in multiple countries, 'Internal Server Error“ reports
There's plenty of companies that don't fire employees for the things they do outside of work, it's been like this for ages, why should this become a normal standard all of a sudden? Just to appease the ever changing feelings of others? Unless I actually breach my company contract in some fashion I don't understand why what I do outside of work has anything to do with my company, in fact, unless I'm some executive, it shouldn't ever matter.
That also explains a whole lot of French tech jealousy politics and their many stupid failed ventures. They always were moronic control freaks essentially and won't change, the only solution is to replace the damn fools.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, their cloud CDN scales down quite nicely, to the point that I get occasional bills for 1 cent for monthly usage. (I experimented with hosting some static things there years ago and left it up because it was costing too little to justify moving elsewhere)
I agree America looks that way, but how different are reality and news? For good and ill. I get the impression that the ratings-grabbing parts of news alternate between chest-thumping tribalism and nut-picking.
I guess the flip-side is that CS is so welcoming and inclusive that tech conferences will invite former sex workers and celebrate them. No slut-shaming from the techies!
>Surely the burden of proof is on someone claiming something is impossible?

You can't prove a negative in this sense. In general, we know things are possible... but we never know if things are impossible.

And, don't call me surely.
You've created a straw man and called it a crazy fallacy. No one believes that speech doesn't affect behavior.

But there is a cost to allowing speech to be offensive to certain races, groups, or lifestyles.

There is also a cost to restricting speech such that no one feels offended.

Which cost is higher? Which cost are you willing to pay? And furthermore, what is actually an effective plan. Is it realistic to think you can shut people up from being offensive? Is that even a workable plan?

Many people feel that the cost of restricting speech so that we can protect groups is vastly higher than the cost of allowing offensive speech.
PHP was part of the IIS packaging and was marketed as a seamless integration option. That's probably why they worked on builds themselves.
Appearance is vague to the point of being an argument without merit. If someone can SHOW something to be dissimilar in kind not degree then it would fall upon the recipient of that argument to refute it. It is not enough to point and not explicate. One could point at our pre civilized ancestors and point out hunter gatherers can't fly to the moon or build a computer and would never do so. One could go further back yet to the prior species that would someday become humans and point out that their present limitations and claim that one could never produce the other. Both assertions would be obviously wrong only because of the advantage of hindsight.

I do not accept that there is a difference between computation and thought without some meaningful definition of thought.
Given that the miners who were on strike all worked for the National Coal Board, and that coal was converted into electricity by the Central Electricity Generating Board, it seems like a pretty major failing of nationalised industry to me, yes.
With those assumptions, it seems fair to state that, given enough time, any sufficiently large group of humans will commit an atrocity against an internal or external minority.

Shouldn't then societies try to structure themselves against this tendency?