skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There are also benefits to running your VPN endpoint on your network gateway - otherwise it can be difficult to configure routing tables to allow a user connecting from outside the network to access both internal and Internet IPs from the tunnel endpoint.
No.

Python/C files didn't work in a vacuum. They need dependencies, that is the point of Docker after all.

Capture all necessary dependencies into a single image.
Explain that: Low vitamin D is also common in Africa!

https://theconversation.com/think-vitamin-d-deficiency-is-no...
Snowflake is pretty nice compared to redshift. Though I really wish there copying data out of s3 worked better then it does.
Try clickhouse
Whenever people talk about meritocracies as being real things or potentially real things that merely require everyone to be on board to implement, I always wonder how old they are and whether or not they think they would benefit from being in a meritocracy, and to what degree they think they’ve been screwed over in the past by not being in a meritocracy. IME, they’re almost always little kids up through people working their first job and frustrated that everyone hasn’t perceived their brilliance yet. Or insecure adults frustrated at their lack of success compared to what they think they deserve.

I’m not saying meritocracies are bad- they’re the ideal, they’re generally what everyone wants. Of course you want the best people for a given job or educational opportunity. But when people start talking about meritocracies as if the only thing preventing us from having better ones are people making conscious decisions to have them, I seriously wonder about their life experiences, worldliness, and personal/professional maturity.

For example, it’s common for people to attack things like pushes for diversity as being antithetical to meritocracies, but the intention of things like encouraging diversity is to build the foundation for better meritocracies in the future by helping weed out the things that stand in the way of better meritocracies now. And it’s also very common for those same people to be convinced that if only the world was more meritocratic, they would personally be more successful and everyone would respect them more, because they see themselves as not getting what they think they deserve. Funny how that works, kinda like how libertarians generally think that if only everything was more libertarian, they personally would be more successful, because other people would no longer hold them back. They think some other people would be more successful too, and some less deserving people would be less successful, but their emotional pull for the whole belief system comes from thinking they deserve more than they’ve got and that it must be someone else’s fault. And IME, in practice they’re super wrong about that, but it must be a wonderful sort of fantasy to go through life believing. “I’m better than everyone seems think I am, and it’s other people’s fault that everyone doesn’t see me that way. If only all those other people would see the light and stop holding me back and allow the truly meritorious like myself to flourish!”
It's quite useful, and certainly better than trying to roll it yourself, but it's also surprisingly slow.
Thanks, I do have a 2 TB external drive I can use.
Big query has been great for me.
Wouldn't the typical sign (yellow triangle with camera icon, and text "CCTV in operation") do the work? Nobody will read a letter on a door, but a shiny yellow poster A4/Letter would definitely attract the eyeballs.

Or is it a regulatory thingie, that you "must" have the letter? (genuinely asking - are you in the US)?
Exactly the same experience. The best data lake model and experience I've ever had and will wholeheartedly recommend it to anyone.
The fact that GWB went to Yale made it possible for him to become President.

Elite schools make it easier for people who have money (but aren’t too academically inclined) to get into positions of political power by building credentials and connecting with a community of smart people.
Or gamed it enough to get into the "good enough" pool.
Thanks for the example, but I'm not so convinced that's the reason. The second example shows you respect people's time by starting with a minimal abstract that gets the point across, then explaining the details, followed by a conclusion.

The first example sounds manipulative and disrespectful.
Per your first link:

> What if the content changes on the Hub?

> When a pull is attempted with a tag, the Registry checks the remote to ensure if it has the latest version of the requested content. Otherwise, it fetches and caches the latest content.

If that causes a manifest pull, it counts as a pull and will be rate limited. Yikes! This could lead to wildly nondeterministic behavior.
I'm sure if you break it out by whether they have any responsibilities or not, it would be different. Not generational. My generation was the same.
> I think a better exercise would be to accept that people have different beliefs and encourage constructive debate based on curiosity and empathy.

That’s the goal. Both sides are stuck in echo chambers. We need to pressure them out and acknowledge the others.

It’s pointless listening to and side when they don’t address criticism.
Do you know how much does it cost per month per GB?

I implemented SumoLogic about 5 years ago at another company and it was great. At some point we will need it in our current company (we have ELK, but it is clunky) and it does not compare with what sumo had to offer 5 years ago. But their pricing page has some crap "credit" metric that does not let you compare it.
They are actively working on those features from what I hear. Parquet export, partition control, etc.
My comment was actually intended to play a bit of devil's advocate - I'm not convinced that Apple has a monopoly, and I kind of don't mind living in the walled garden.
Snowflake is the go to data warehouse in my opinion. Redshift and BigQuery are fine, but Snowflake is head and shoulders above. Good community around it and tools for it (dbt - works on other warehouse though). They have the mindshare in the data warehouse market.

There's so much they can do from a user experience perspective to make it even better. The integration with Numeracy was a trainwreck, but the fundamentals of the DB are there.

Interesting to see they lose so much money, but I bet their margins have to be so thin running on the cloud. I wonder if they'll ever have to go bare metal to make it work.
current crypto is not stable. at all.

challenges for new standards are underway, AEAD standardization is relatively new, ECC is no longer quantum proof, we still have no definite idea on lattice and so on.
Even CHAHCA has multiple evolutions.

DJB, famous and influential cryptographer worked on MinimaLT, a protocol that only uses one primitive and has no negotiation. go check how widespread it is, then think on your ability to convince the world on how good your choice is.

> one just can not keep support for broken clients, however practical it is to update them

In an ideal world I would agree. Not in this one

BTW, I see no difference in version negotiation and primitive negotiation. You can't say "primitive negotiation is bad!" and "protocol negotiation is not bad!". Especially since negotiating protocol versions without crypto primitives is just screaming for downgrade attacks.

If done correctly, it's the same mechanism. if not, both can have the same flaws.

This distinction between protocol version support and primitive support reeks of lack of knowledge in the field (both crypto and protocols), insecurity of the product, and sounds just like an impractical philosophy (especially due to the article renaming many common names of common fields).

Code reuse is a (big) thing. If a software supports multiple "ages", those will be handled with a "registry".

Evolution is another. People have taken huge pains to extend features and capabilities of existing protocols. QUIC is winning probably not only due to google, but also due to its internal versioning of various features.

TLS history showed us that upgrading the cipher list and deprecating the old ones is incredibly faster than trying to update the TLS protocol version. I can really see no reason why anyone would want to go back to the days of unupgreadable protocols and their nightmares
Makes sense. Charging 30% off the top on orders wasn't enough, time to skim a little off the drivers too.
I've found this change can be beneficial even in non-email formats like chat. I have a few theories as to why:

1. When you front-load the explanation before the thing you're explaining (the request), the reader doesn't make the mental connection, so the explanation doesn't do its job well. It functions similar to a thesis statement in writing.

2. People want you to get to the point. The essential part of the message is that you want them to do something. Burying it under a long preface comes across as wasting their time and lessens their confidence that the request will be a good use of their time.

3. People have short attention spans, and if they don't find something actionable in a message quickly, they'll just say, "This seems like a Big Thing — I'll come back to this later."
> Am I really a stronger applicant than somebody else who made less-lucky guesses?

Well, what you seem to be saying is that the selection process is basically randomized among the top candidates already, per the linked article... so, no change needed?
(Me: UX/ Human Factors/ Prod Management background)
A big thing in design is "form follows function". The pages you designed skew heavily to the form side of that equation. From a pure UX POV there are so many visual elements competing for attention that I cannot tell you what is important. I can tell you my heart rate went up while I tried to understand the site, and that now there is cortisol floating around. This is not a " delight" neurochemical reaction.
My preferred Sushi place will recognize me by my phone number and take my order within seconds. Payment in cash at the door. There is no reason why the process could not be quick and hassle free, even using the phone.
> it seems simple to solve politics

This is an interestingly naive take on the issue.

I think maybe you need to look into the concept of Realpolitik - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realpolitik . Basically, it may be the case that the "points" I offer as justification or rationale for what I am doing have absolutely nothing to do with why I'm really doing something, and you may never get enough information to know why that is.

Your suggestion is basically saying something like a Hegelian dialectic could work to produce consensus given enough time, but it breaks down for a number of reasons:

1. There isn't always necessarily some guarantee of compromise. There are positions which simply cannot overlap or bend - for example, if I think everyone should be allowed to live in some area, and you think only one group should be allowed to live there, it's going to be mighty hard to come to some arrangement that works, even with all the logical responses and open dialogue in the world.

2. There's a requirement of true, academic-grade scientific honesty in your method. Any time that's required, someone can simply game it by being disingenuous in a creative enough manner. It's going to be virtually impossible to know when that's happening, though game theory could give some insights into whether lying is a good strategy or not based on the particular circumstances.

3. What happens when your dialogue starts to get into subjects that are taboo / problematic / etc? You may have people that disagree with the exact history of what has happened with regard to wars and other events in the past, and draw their conclusions and positions from that history. Determining what actually happened isn't always possible, and neither is simply telling people to accept a different version of events from what they've been told even if you do have compelling evidence on your side (or can prove the other side simply doesn't have any evidence for their position).

Still, it is the realpolitik that is the strongest reason why this cannot work. I could spend all day having pleasant dialogue with you about something, but if at the end of the day my personal interests are controlled upstream by someone paying me, blackmailing me, etc. or if I simply have a power lust, there's no reason why my actions will necessarily line up with my purported ideology or public positions on issues.
> Provocative, but covered Feet; Any gender

What, uh, exactly are "provocative feet"?
Would probably be better to have abstractions on the protocol level rather then raw ip or radio.
How did Fall Guys get it so right?
Have a look at DeFi.
75 years of test validity research say we DO know how correlated tests are with every conceivable definition of "quality." Your comment suggests you just haven't bothered to look.

Multiple attempts on tests don't help very much. We have 75 years of reliability research to show that. It's not single sample estimation. It's a couple hours to collect A LOT of samples.

Of course, money for tutoring, better schools, and highly-educated parents help with test outcomes and are a barrier to socioeconomic mobility. The basic problem is, random selection aside, no one has proposed a fairer system. Read Animal Farm at some point to see what happens when you have revolutions against an unfair system, without proposing something better to take its place..

But my basic point is you're confusing things YOU don't know with things WE don't know. We know a lot about tests, their upsides, their downsides, and alternatives. It's not like there aren't scientific conferences on this stuff.
Unity's done great things in its space. I worry about its long term prospects against the likes of Epic, who are going to be able to vertically integrate Unreal Engine with the epic games store and thus compete in ways Unity can't. I think a better business strategy would've been acquisition that could've given them that synergy, but I can also understand that, for the owners, the biggest cash out may not be what they're going for.
> So then they have to...

Why do they have to?
try weightlifting - this is the fastest way to increase bone density
We tried it for a hackathon and after a day or so we got some stuff going. Of course it's a monster engine, but you can learn it as a side project, then after a month you can start building something. I don't see why a solo dev couldn't handle it.
Announcing EthicalAds: a privacy-focused ad network for developers
They're free to download, but IIRC you're still abiding by their EULA. Apple are threatening to revoke Epic's EULA license. If that happens, Epic would be using the SDK "illegally". (This is all speculation, IANAL, feel free to correct me if you have a better legal understanding of this)
In relation to the Golden Gate Bridge construction, it was mostly financed by the son of Italian immigrants turner banker, Giannini; his bank also lent to people devastated by the 1906 earthquake in San Francisco. The "Bank of Italy" changed its name to "Bank of America" [0].

From the article linked at the bottom of my comment [0]:

> A. P. Giannini, President of Bank of America, was legendary for his dedication to the development of the San Francisco region. A native of San Jose with a blue-collar background, Giannini believed that banks should lend more freely to working-class people, whom he believed to be fiscally responsible. Following the 1906 earthquake that destroyed much of San Francisco, most banks closed up shop, but Giannini set up a makeshift desk and issued credit "on a handshake and a signature" to families and small businesses in immediate, desperate need. His investments built a foundation for San Francisco's economic recovery.

Also, it's ironic that A.P. Giannini was what we would call today a "college dropout", which is particularly "cool" and "popular" in the San Francisco Bay Area. From [1]:

> Giannini attended Heald College but realized he could do better in business than at school. In 1885, he dropped out and took a full-time position as a produce broker for L. Scatena & Co.

[0]: https://about.bankofamerica.com/en-us/our-story/building-the...

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadeo_Giannini
No More Excuses: Lazy Load Your Images
"qualify" is nebulous. When professors accept PhDs, they are looking for people who they want working in their specific labs. It is much more like applying to a job than applying to undergrad. I have pulled candidates from the pile who had sub-par test scores but excellent writing skills, for instance, because teaching good writing to adults is much harder for me than teaching computer science. Similarly, I've taken students who reached out to me with ideas for followup on my papers over students with great test scores who didn't seem to care what they worked on. Random sampling is a terrible strategy for PhD admissions.
Their flagship product is Artifactory, a polyglot artifact repository, which is used throughout most of the Fortune 100.
For an infotainment system, or even things like AC and fan speeds, this sounds pretty cool.

But for the dataplane software responsible for dashboard clusters and the like, this scares the hell out of me, because linux isn't an RTOS and because of all the ways you'd ahve to protect that system from anything else running on that same kernel (eg: an update to applecar play or android auto adds/exacerbates a resource leak). If the vehicle system was designed with linux in mind from the beginning, having linux handle the data plane startup and restart as well could be ok (because you'd probably make user-space programs with direct hardware access to dedicated hardware and priority that preempts the kernel to make the code as predictable as possible), but combining the dataplane for driving the vehicle with infortainment into a single OS scares me. A container or two could work here, but now we're talking about running a container at a priority high enough to linux to fuck off it's in the middle of something, and the base OS would need to be locked down decently hard as well to ensure misconfigurations wouldn't bork that dataplane container.

Really, i'd much rather have it (keep it?) the way airplanes are designed where the dataplane and control plane for manuevering the vehicle are entirely separate from any other systems on the vehicle down to at least vlans with well-defined APIs for the maneuvering system reporting data to less-critical systems.
Dtrace was GPL'd and it is available on Linux now. Although, it is too little too late as BPF based tools are already here and offer more flexibility.
I don't want to beg Apple or Samsung or Microsoft or Google to be given the ability to program a computer. I don't know if you realize it, but that is the way things are headed now.

To be supremely clear - You can support convenience without compromising on these ideals. What you seem to be alluding to is a "kiosk" / zero-maintenance feature, or an OS mode with stripped down functionality that makes things simple and convenient for people who need it. I am not opposed to such functionality whatsoever. It is an orthogonal issue to having control over your own computing devices.

>Why isn't there room for both models? Why can't there be tightly managed platforms, totally open platforms and then anything in between? The mere existence of iOS doesn't prevent people who don't want the rules imposed by iOS to pick some other solution. Yet ironically you want to dictate to Apple how they should be able to run their platform while complaining they are too restrictive?

What choice are you referring to exactly? Or rather, is there even a choice in the market?

Has the market "spoken"? Things don't just happen by themselves. What's wrong with demanding things from companies? Don't we demand that manufacturers stop using supply chains that exploit slave labor? Don't we demand companies spend money on workers' safety? Don't we demand that companies pay a living wage? Don't we demand companies to respect our privacy? Don't we incentivize companies to donate to good social causes? These things were considered not mainstream-important at one point in time. What a horrible time we would be living in, if people would have just said "take it or leave it". Even in a capitalist society, we have a long history of getting companies to focus on things way more important than money.
Their spam is so annoying I would never consider their product. I've had to block them from all of my email accounts.
The community here is understandably very anti-surveillance, but you're right about the purpose of intelligence.

When we talk about intelligence and counter-terrorism, it's more about preventing terrorist attacks than reacting to them.

The UK is more open with statistics than the US — their most senior counter-terrorism officer claims that they foiled 22 terrorist attacks from March 2017 to September 2019 [1].

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/sep/09/foiled-terro...
Much like the github link, you're confusing slices with arrays. Slices can be nil (data=nil, len=cap=0) or non-nil (data points somewhere, len and cap are what they are), but arrays are just arrays, there's no such thing as an uninitialized [3]byte.
25 million miles is completely inadequate testing to make any such statement. The prevailing traffic fatality rate in the US is 1 in 125 million miles. 25 million miles means that the information is extremely insufficient to make any statement about comparative safety. In fact, making any such statement would be mathematical malpractice and criminally irresponsible. This also ignores the fact that unless those miles were all driven without any human correction you are actually testing the safety of a combined human+software solution which had better be better than just a human alone otherwise the system actually reduces safety.
Snowflake is by far the best data warehouse I have ever used. I would use it at any job where data warehousing was a keystone of our work. Really 10/10, not even close.
This is what I'm taking it as. They probably have special access in order to get their engine ready for the latest iOS updates. This move on Apple's part is very abusive. People elsewhere in the thread are comparing Microsoft, but Microsoft wouldn't cripple developer tools because an app from a vendor abused its guidelines. Any store willing to do this has gone too far.
This should have a [pdf] tag in the title.
MS should just buy them and put out of their misery.
We don't. But the reason why isn't because politicians don't like to follow rules, it's because they are following the rules that their constituents provide. Even if you disagree that they are following what is best for their constituents, they are following what their constituents want.

The simplistic view is that politicians will be voted out if they don't have enough followers. Right now in the US anyway, (and maybe other places, I hardly have time to keep up with US politics, let alone politics for other countries), the electorate wants entertainment. So they are receiving it. They want sound bites and bumper stickers. They want short speeches with easy to remember catch phrases. They want social media fights and they want news that entertains.

And thus, politicians are giving them what they want because that's their job.

I am the electorate. I helped build the system that we have now. The only way to change it is to get more and more people to want to be informed in different ways. As long as people want what they are getting right now, it will continue down this path. Will it change? Of course. When will it change? I have no idea.
Vitamin D has less to do with sun than you think. Low Vitamin D levels are also common in Africa. So don't take Vitamin D just because you think you're not outside long enough:

https://theconversation.com/think-vitamin-d-deficiency-is-no...