skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Modern warfare is eventually just an economic game. How many missiles can you afford to launch, and how many missile defences can you afford to build? (/ how much can you afford to spend on military R&D?).
implementation (also of g and h):

http://www.nsl.com/k/f/

(via comments from 2015)
So your idea is that the world should revolve around developers.

As a user instead of going to one private, trusted and secure store I now have to visit dozens. All of which are going to be competing on price which means they will look to sell my user data to make money.

And what makes anyone think that the App Stores will simply not be dominated by Amazon, Epic, Valve etc like most gaming is today. In which case this is all about transferring money from one large corporation to another.
Over three billion people worldwide now play video games, study reports
> I never quite understood why it failed to gain marketshare 10 years ago while Firefox did.

Firefox was free and Opera wasn't. Geeks don't trust proprietary garbage.
What's the problem with GPLv2 licensed app?
Then they just wouldn't admit to being attacked. Companies would still pay ransoms, but we wouldn't know about it.
“ I was similarly bothered by this, and by the fact that nobody was worried that these students would fail out given that they cheated their way in.”

You would be surprised at how difficult it is to fail out of programs.

From what I’ve seen profs have an unwritten rule to not fail students from school admin, otherwise they might complain and so it’s easier to give a D than fail them completely.
Are the subscriptions portable between the web and mobile apps? Or only valid one place or the other?
interesting neither did I. Globally its still 25% however.
The palintiri weren't evil. They were created by the Noldor (elves) not Melkor or Sauron -- perhaps even by Feanor, who also created the beautiful gems known as the Silmarils. This was in Aman before the elves fell. They were given to the Numenoreans (men from which Aragorn came), and brought by Elendil into Middle Earth. Also called "seeing stones", the palintiri were used to observe and communicate over long distances. They were not used for evil purposes until Sauron captured one, and also when used by those he corrupted. Gandalf even said that it was beyond the power of Sauron to create a palintir, nor could he make them lie or show false images (though he could show select ones, and so deceive). So a stone that can tell only the truth can't be evil, although some beings that used them were.
To be pendantic technically they were before and likely easier (unless they didn't have their records computerized but universities were early adopters there) but there wasn't much of a point in doing so. Grade tampering would be far more likely.

The black hat hacker "ecosystem" has also professionalized from doing it for kicks to doing it for the dough.
Yeah that’s the one. We make pretty extensive usage of it, it’s been great.
The M.V.P.s of This Year’s Conventions? The Digital and I.T. Teams
> However, the legal question of having a monopoly on publishing for a game console has been settled ages ago, and the platform owners won.

I don't believe it has, and I don't believe they do.

The only lawsuit of this nature that I'm aware of is Atari v. Nintendo [1]. All that lawsuit established was that

- It isn't fair use to violate copyright law in the process of bypassing mechanisms used to maintain the monopoly

- While it might be copyright misuse to create those mechanisms establishing a monopoly in the first place (undecided), the court isn't going to grant you a win when you got in the position you did by lying to the government to steal code.

Notably (as far as I can tell) it established nothing whatsoever about antitrust law, which is what is at issue in this case and presumably what would be at issue in a similar case related to consoles.

Is there another case you are thinking of?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_Games_Corp._v._Nintendo_....
I think Apple is probably on the wrong side of anti-trust law on this, but there is certainly a trust benefit (and UX benefit) to a unified payment platform.

The history of mobile/online payments is littered with instances of users being confused/defrauded.

> Users pay for the hardware platform.

This isn't really relevant. Not only is an iPhone worthless without software, but subsidization of hardware by services is very common.
Isn't their company name "CORSAIR COMPONENTS, INC."?

[1] https://www.corsair.com/us/en/about
I've periodically thought I should at some point learn all the single-letter programming languages. Have we covered the whole alphabet yet?
Done correctly, marketing is the act of giving value (usually in the form of information or opportunity) in order to capture value. It's reciprocal at the most basic level.

Unfortunately, too many folks have figured out that they can strip mine the audience by minimizing or ignoring the first half of that transaction.

I can't really despise marketing since I've spent 30 years in and out of it. But I can damn well despise bad, selfish marketing that doesn't even try to deliver any value.
It seems odd to not discuss the more fundamental issues of trusting the infrastructure. All this virtual reality is on top of a physical reality controlled by governments and powerful interests. What happens when said powers declare cryptocurrencies illegal (app store removals, RST packets, etc.), or try to take them over with brute force?
If you look closely, you can often also spot a warm brown dwarf near Uranus.
Imagine if we have an immortal evil dictator(s)
Who would people believe? The CEO or a disgruntled former employee?
If a product aimed at law enforcement, say, doesn't work, but does make law enforcement more arbitrary, then both are satisfied.

Not saying that's the case here, but one could be forgiven for assuming that a lot of 'predictive policing' stuff is snake oil, but dangerous snake oil.
True, but I think it would be acceptable in this situation:

- the queries only affect the time after which the "local domain" hint appears. They don't influence the time until the main search results appear.

- if the result is cached, the additional roundtrip is only for the first hostname entered after a network change.

- the two "random hostname" probes can be executed in parallel, so it should not result in more than one additional roundtrip.
Me too, I've chosen Apple devices, mostly because I like Apple's Continuity features and their walled-garden mindset. In particular, I really wish Apple would push Apple Pay and Sign-In with Apple more: I already trust Apple with all sorts of private data (Face ID, iCloud Keychain, etc.), I don't want to also have to evaluate PayPal/Google/FB/whoever as an alternative sign-in or payment vendor.
If you invert the colours in the chart, you also get the consequences of their failure modes. In designing tokenization schemes some years ago, we used a trust model like this, and the basic problem reduces to the adage, "a security system is only as strong as its recovery process."

In the case of the field of trust models Vitalik has illustrated, trust comes down to the questions of: do you have a way to tumble your root of trust, do you leave it static (like an HSM with destroyed keys), or do you federate. The answer is of course, "it depends..." In the case of the balance of consensus, proofs, and anonymity (e.g. ZK) the application defines the needs.

The issue I think is that these problems are all negatively defined and presume a threat model before a use case. They are artifacts of that threat model, in that they wouldn't exist if they weren't a reaction to it. These things (blockchains and their applications) are essentially criticisms that allow people to organize and defect to a certain extent, but they are lacking a quality of essentialness I can't seem to find a name for. It's like they aren't discovered things, but just artifacts of a constraint. Such fun to read his stuff.
Structures of Problems
> The more I think about this the more concerned I honestly am as I am not even sure how to implement many paradigms correctly without this basic deconstruction stacking order property

Don't you just define a destructor[1] and make it explicit? Or maybe I'm missing something subtle here?

1: https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/destructors.html
> Apple does not and can not scan for malicious behavior within that security framework anyway

They have been doing this since the beginning of the App Store.

We know they scan binaries for use of private APIs so it wouldn't surprise me if they are looking for other ways to get around the OS.
Apple enforce the rules capriciously, and change them on a whim.

Almost certainly, they allow Spotify and the NYT because iOS customers and potential customers would object too much if they were removed from the store.

A well as the 30% tax making all apps worse in quality by removing money from development, the unpredictableness and unfairness destroys many businesses before they even start.
That's not really feasible. For very obvious reasons you can't tell every employee in a company "we're going to have to fire loads of you in a couple of months; please work out a plan to deal with that".
Ask HN: How to Make eBook Interactive
Hi HN
How can you make your online ebook more appealing and interactive what libraries can we use
Whenever I read Vitalik's work, I find myself convinced that all of society and its various problems can be boiled down to incentives and their alignment or misalignment.
Show HN: Practical Python – Python projects for beginners
The American Institute for Economic Research (AIER) is a 501(c)(3) economic research institute located in Great Barrington, Massachusetts. The institute aims to promote individual sovereignty, limited government, and "a society based on property rights and open markets."[3]
The play store is getting worse and worse. It will eventually end up being just a bad.

Meanwhile every iteration of Android is getting more locked down because of "security". No more external cameras etc..

The future look bleak until we get a true open source alternative running on open hardware.
Well, those two statements aren't referring to the same thing. The law they reference is something found in Systems Theory.

It may be useful, also, for you to read these two pages:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_law

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

The difference between Law and Theory (in scientific discourse) is not what you believe it to be.
Assuming N isn't 1, they should be able to survive a ban by a single government. Can be extended to multiple governments
That's not how tumblers work. There's no way to link the input and output addresses when you go through a tumbler.
Single sign on is indeed the reason. However, I don’t agree that this behavior is a good thing - as an industry we’ve failed; we’re inconveniencing a large chunk of users because of an implementation detail. SSO should’ve either been implemented transparently in the underlying protocols or the browser (like Kerberos actually is) or at the very least provide separate login pages so that regular users can bookmark the right one and avoid wasting time if they are not using SSO.
Unfortunately going from iOS to Android is out of the frying pan into the fire. Android is much worse from a privacy point of view. You can easily see this by just spying on network traffic and DNS requests from the device. It's constantly telling everyone about you.

Your choice in mobile is walled castle or forest full of thieves.

I suppose there are open source phones around but I don't personally find them that useful yet. The main things I want to do with a mobile device is interact with services like Uber, Lyft, Netflix, etc., and get directions. I suppose directions exist via OpenStreetMap but can you reserve an Uber on a Linux phone?
funny that you mention shitty agile we do that too
school store textbook sales
Ask HN: How do I get over a boring tech stack at work?
I have a job where I am actually making a positive impact on the world.

However I also work with the most boring tech stack in the world:

- ASP.NET MVC 5, Entity Framework 6 and some ASP.NET Web API 2

- jQuery/Bootstrap on the frontend

- Our "DevOps" is an Azure VM running Windows Server 2012 and automated with PowerShell

Our Azure bill now cost as much as an average European developer. That is absurd for a business with less than 250 paying customers. The main reason is a slow horrific monolith.

Should I look for a new job? I live in a small European country. Even the slow-moving sectors like banks have embraced microservices/Kubernetes on the backend and SPAs on the frontend. I fear I am slowly becoming a dinosaur. I used to think dinosaurs only worked in banks.
this is amazing, replaces reddit for me as the videos are the best part, esp the new reddit which loads way too slow
You've missed my point.

I'm saying that the market value of actually performing an illegal act of extortion is higher than the market value of a zero-day, either on one of these markets or via bug bounty.

I'm arguing that the price is different because of the risk of getting caught and going to jail, not that there isn't a market for security researchers to sell exploits to criminals without otherwise getting their hands dirty.
Short version of the usual argument: GPL says you can't add restrictions on what a user can do when you distribute an app. App Store terms of service do add restrictions, so distributing an GPL app through the app store is a license violation.
Yeah you gotta bribe the right people or it’s a crime.
Though it may be depressing to contemplate, death is an essential element of a fitness function, a requirement for evolution in the broadest sense. No death would lead to either depletion of resources or a stagnation of growth that would inevitably lead to extinction due to inevitable and unanticipated catastrophe.

That said, a reduction of suffering may naturally lead to extended lifespans. However, the elimination of mortality is something altogether different.
The first part of the filing reads like it was written by Apple's PR people, not their lawyers.

The antitrust issue is tying. Apple may be able to insist on a cut of things you buy via Apple. But products which create their own world in which other non-Apple things can be bought are a separate market. Apple's use of their control over the first class of sales to demand a share of the second is tying a sale in one area to a sale in another. That's not permitted by US or EU antitrust law.
The mix of font styles in the PSYCHE title strip on top really bothers me. Are there any typography experts in the house that can explain what concepts could be behind that choice?
GDDR also uses a ton of power (per gigabyte) and has very tight signaling tolerances so it can't be socketed. Not a good choice for laptops (power), desktops (not socketed) or servers (both reasons).
Currently e1000e is problematic even in relatively new hardware.

On Windows, they publish WHQL certified broken drivers.
Bought the book and trying out the lesson 1 notebook, but man, I can't seem to make this work. Colab can't import fastbook with the GPU runtime, and the TPU and CPU ones are too slow. Gradient gets a little further, but fails with "self.recorder already registered" on the "#id first_training" cell. Maybe I'm too dumb to be a data scientist, but I didn't expect to have to do this kind of debugging right off the bat.
This is how I feel on the phone with comcast. It's just business
Also, if you prefix a hostname with "http://" or "https://", it won't be treated as a search.
So what it it wasn't random, but captured 90% of the population?
I'm not personally religious but I'd be very careful before assuming religion, an institution that's been with humans for thousands of years, was a net negative.

I think humans probably have some innate desire for institutions with religious-like properties. And as we've become more secular over the past 60 years, there's been an increase in people that seem to be making politics the replacement, which may end up being more destructive than theistic religion ever was.
Yeah, admissions isn't really about who can succeed at the school (since basically anyone who gets in will be fine).

While you do get some education, I'd argue the majority of the value is the signalling the institutions provide by being selective.

It's about forcing scarcity for social status.
Plum has some interesting ideas, if you're interested in a different approach to this problem, check out https://www.twobird.com

Disclaimer: I work on it!
It's discussed in the document starting at page 10 under 'The Reorganization and the Acquisition Transaction'.
You are confused, twofold:

"Systems Theory" in above refers to a field of study, not a name for the idea they were discussing.

And your assertion about Laws and theories is incorrect.
Hey was before the Epic thing and that seemed like the start of the recent events.
Hey HN!

this is still a work in progress but would love any feedback. I've taught a lot of beginners Python and there are always the same two problems

a) Setup: everyone is like 'just use conda' or 'just use x', but in honesty setting up Python is a nightmare even in 2020 and it's a huge tripping point for beginners. I was really happy to start using Repl.it to teach beginners as it sidesteps all the set up issues until they've caught the 'programming bug'. (disclaimer: repl.it sponsored this project but I initially reached out to them as I liked their product so much)

b) "I don't know what to build" - even after learning to code, beginners often lack inspiration or ideas.

I tried to solve both of these problems with this course. It's not meant to substitute a "normal" course - the theory of data structures, algorithms, and even basic functionality like looping and conditional logic is not explicitly covered. The idea is that people will do this alongside a theoretical course (or just the Python documentation) or shortly after.

Feedback appreciated :)
I wouldn't have been eligible to work for them anyway, given who their customers are and that I would not be able to get a security clearance as a foreign national (yay for headhunters not bothering to do their homework).

The rest of your argument is just nonsense, sorry. If that was the case, then why to pay a recruiter to actively reach out to me? It is not like they don't have enough job seeking applicants at their doors, even today.

And they certainly did even 10 years ago when the above has happened and all the bad press about the shady stuff Palantir is/was involved in had yet to come out - before Facebook scandals, before Cambridge Analytica (where Palantir was involved), before Trump election (Palantir's founder Thiel is big Trump's donor), etc.
> Ignorance isn't stupidity. But it may be classified as stupid to purposefully remain ignorant

Exactly what I was trying to say. I have no issues if someone is ignorant about something, and is actually trying to learn, even unsuccessfully.

But if someone won't even try, they get no pity from me.
You don't "have" to do anything.

If I don't want to sell my product on the App Store, or if I have to make you pay more for it, I risk losing you as a customer. That's a trade-off every developer is aware of. Most apps that can publish on the App Store, will still publish on the App Store. On the PC, Epic sometimes has to shell out a lot of money to get an exclusive release, because a lot of people just use Steam.

However, a lot of apps can't publish on the App Store, because of the strict anti-competitive rules.
Complemented, and AI-piloted, but not replaced. There are significant positive scale factors in aerodynamics. Larger jets have much better thrust to weight ratios, allowing them to move faster, travel further, maneuver better, and carry heavier and longer ranged weapons and sensor platforms.

Light drones and big expensive aircraft will both exist in the future and play separate roles. They also won't interact much, aside from a fighter group spearheading a drone group. A drone swarm is too diffuse to be a worthwhile target for a fighter's weapons, but a fighter is too fast to be engaged by a drone swarm.

Air battles of the future will likely be conceptually similar to air battles today, but with light drones replacing bombers with guided bombs. An initial wave of fighters will contest air superiority. If they achieve it they will use it to launch long-range attacks to disable a small number of anti-drone hard points. Once the way is clear a wave of smaller, slower drones can swarm in and bomb a large number of targets with precision.
I feel like a lot of conversations and articles recently speak to an inadequate understanding of risk, and planning for risk.

Risk is made up of at least 2 or 3 components: what is the probability something will happen? And, if it does happen, what is the impact and how will you mitigate that impact?

For example, you may believe that a change to a website you are deploying has a low probability of taking the website offline. If it is taken offline, it may cost £X per hour in lost revenue, but you’ll leave the old version running on a standby server, so it only takes a few minutes to switch back. That’s a much more thorough understanding to 1 aspect of risk than “this rollout is low risk”. Once you have that understanding, it’s reasonable to discuss how to reduce the probability of an outage (better testing?), as well as how to reduce the impact (staged rollout?) or to speed up the fix if it were to happen (practise?).

In COVID terms, we should be discussing the impact of decisions in the light of future pandemics. Could we invest now in reusable PPE, so that next time we don’t have a global rush on the disposable stuff? Do we need to educate the public more readily about reducing disease transmission to reduce the likelihood of a pandemic in the first place? I’m not a doctor, so I have no idea on the specifics, but the likelihood of any given pandemic will always be low, so what is the impact of the decision if there is one and does that impact need to be mitigated? (even if it is less efficient to do so...)
> For me, "great" means a team that consistently values quality, puts reasonable effort into application design and maintenance, and makes thoughtful decisions related to project goals and end-users.

My 2 cents...

I don't think it's about teams. IMO it's about company KPIs. Most industries value speed over everything else for a reason: survival. Nearly all companies use KPIs, take a look at the KPIs and you'll be able to spot which companies value quality over speed and vice-versa.

The values you're looking for can be found in specific industries that cannot afford low quality. I'm thinking Aerospace, Health, Military etc. Keep in mind that on the flip-side these industries are very slow on "shiny new tech" adoption, for obvious reasons. You might not enjoy working with cobol :^)

Another good fit could be software companies, especially in the security space like 1Password for example (no affiliation). By "software companies" I mean companies who's product is software and not companies that are using software as means to an end. The first group has much stronger incentives in delivering reliable software.

Quality software can be found in many open source projects. The fact that the code is public increases the level scrutiny. HAProxy, SQLite, the Linux kernel and PostgreSQL come to mind as well known high quality open source projects.
I don't think "marketing" is to blame here.

Spam never seems to lead to a legitimate businesses (having to unsubscribe from legitimate newsletters and such is annoying)

And lots of products and services seem to want to extract data and money, but that also feels like it is a result of "product" departments, not the marketing departments.

I do agree with your overall sentiment: It is really annoying to do business with lots of companies out there.
Sound summary. You're welcome.