skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don’t really understand how the camera could work well when you have a row of light emitters placed right in front of a row of light sensors. Seems like any microabrasion or dust or smudge of grease on the area of the lens will cause significant aberration, unless they simply cut off the leds in the area around the lens while in use. It should have a similar effect to trying to take a picture of snow falling at night with a flash: all you see is the brightly illuminated noise up front
The host names wouldn't even need to resolve at all outside of the local network. Only the challenge subdomain _acme-challenge.foo.bar.org so certificate transparency will of course expose the existence of foo.bar.org but it wouldn't need to expose anything at all about those DNS records if you wanted to restrict them to only the local network.
What upgrade treadmill? Most people use pre-paid phones until they either break down or get stolen.

Most non-techies that I know don't even have updates enabled, because they don't want UI to change under their feet (typical users where E icon == Internet).
> A coworker of mine was able to connect me to a GoDaddy executive. The executive attempted to get the security team involved, but nothing has happened.

That part was really shocking. I can see why you might be stuck with a low-level support tech that can't and won't help you, but not being helped despite having this level of attention is horrible.
Right after he releases his tax records following the completion of the Mexican wall.
I've come to the conclusion that many of the powerful in the UK view the nation primarily as a means for personal gain of one kind of another, and have no particular attachment to the UK's history, culture, and people, indeed, many of them seem to view the English (in particular) with barely disguised contempt.
"Election chaos" must be how dictators, globalists and statists feel about it.

Poor NYT, it wasn't going to be chaotic when Trump's odds were 34%...
That would result in what was described above. You are taking unnecessary risk by committing to place an order at some point in the future. You might not be so sure a second from now.
Legal Theatre.

Bureaucratic / political butt covering theatre.
React is simple it's just a few hundred lines of code, it's easy to understand in an afternoon. Just make sure you pull in a JSX transpiler, and something to do your routing, oh and you'll want something to store your state of course, don't forget that - oh remember to pull in the right version of the transpiler that support decorators for your state management (you do know what decorators are, right?). What do you mean you have a conflicting dependency in your existing codebase? Just fork that repo and upgrade it, that won't take long and cause a bunch of other problems.
Yes but they are not as crowded as stations - especially if there's a hiccup in the schedules; cf [1] and [2]

[1] https://news.sky.com/story/thousands-of-train-passengers-str...
[2] https://london.web2ua.com/london-is-crippled-by-commuter-cha...
A History of Punctuation
While Grafana allows you to monitor metrics provided by Prometheus and Alertmanager allows you to configure alerts also based on these metrics, Gatus allows you to directly monitor your service(s) by sending requests to them at interval and evaluating the conditions that make your service(s) "healthy".

As mentioned in the README, Gatus can double as automated user acceptance tests to check if, for instance, an endpoint that you expect to return X has Y instead.

Let me know if that's not clear enough, I can provide more a in-depth example :)
While Ecuador was a good choice then, it changed since: see the fate of Julian Assange.

The last update on how he is treated:

https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252487666/US-decision-to...
>>OOP is fundamentally a paradigm about modelling a mutable world

Many interesting points in this comment, but I am not sure about the mutable part of this assertion. I see those two concepts often presented as fundamentally intricated but modelisation is an effort of abstraction not tied to implementation choices, and objects can be perfectly immutable.

Using these words, I would simply say OOP is fundamentally a coding paradigm about modelling a system, nothing more. And that is why it has been so successful.

Using OOP and avoiding mutability when appropriate, I would say you get most of FP benefits without abandoning the modelisation capabilities and objects features.

And more and more FP constructs are now integrated in OOP languages. Then APIs can become more important than the language itself.

That's what have been demonstrated by modern Java in my opinion.
recent comments about the article, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24329014
You should not be reading the Illiad to check a box. My advice is to approach it as a serious historical work and engage it with a mindset of trying to understand a culture that is very distant while providing clues of similarity to modern life.

As an example, the boring part in the beginning is the names of ships and tribes enlisted to sail to Troy. What I am thinking while reading these parts is why this list was so important and the sheer complexity of organizing all of it. You are talking about months if not years worth of preparation and yet it's reduced to this almost data-like catalog where you can get the sense that the message is: "We have a lot of friends... and we are coming."

And this isn't to say that you should hold it as Truth. What I am saying is that this work had a profound cultural impact over the course of hundreds of years similar to the The Bible today. It will take work to enjoy it and you should only approach it if reading literature of this kind is of interest to you in general.
Agreed.

In fact, it smells like the author doesn't know what he's talking about; in my experience "That will break for the following incredibly subtle reasons:" is usually about React fundamentals such as being deliberate with state mutations.

Custom hooks are some of the most useful and fun code to write, in my experience.
You really hit the nail on the head here. It’s so easy for people to see something that took years to create, and pick out the one or two flaws in it. Meanwhile, those flaws are exponentially small compared to the benefit that an idea might have had.

That’s a bit abstract. Basically a lot of good cake from OO. It’s not all good, sure, but polymorphism is a pretty darn good idea. Substitutability is a good idea. OO won’t solve all of your problems for you, but it isn’t inherently creating your problems either.
Non-us citizen nor lawyer, but doesn't a pardon require a conviction? Has Snowden been convicted?

Does _anything_ obligates the President to pardon anyone?

And why would those points you listed invalidate a pardon? If Snowden was considered (by courts, government) to be a whistle blower by legal definition, he wouldn't need a pardon, right?
Ah yes, yet another occurence of adaptationists trying to shoehorn literally every single trait into their framework. It's basically intelligent design that doesn't say its name.
I created the real time interface using Gradio: https://github.com/gradio-app/gradio

Original model here: https://github.com/trekhleb/machine-learning-experiments
This might be going off-tangent but I really find things like this fascinating! Reminds me of the Motif of Harmful Sensation[1], one of those tropes that sound fantastical and absurd even in fiction but is actually in real life.

[1] http://www.artandpopularculture.com/Motif_of_harmful_sensati... (Not TVTropes, because I also consider TVTropes as "harmful sensation".)
Yes, I generate a client cert and give it to you, that's not a problem - you aren't trusting the cert at all.

I can secure my servers with my own CA, again that's fine - I trust myself.

If you want to verify my servers signed from my CA though you would need to trust my CA.

Currently that means you would need to import my CA's root certificate. That's bad, it's also the way many corporations work, I've had third party suppliers try to get me to trust their own internally generated root certificates too.

A better solution would be for the user to be able to import a root certificate for use for a set purpose. I'm happy to take foobar inc's certificate to authenticate *.foobar.inc, but not to trust anything else.

For some reason browsers don't allow that - it's all or nothing.
eDonkey2000 has been dead for a decade and a half now - https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2006-sep-13-fi-donke...
We don't trust government to govern as much as we trust the free market.
> Would the perpetrators just want a really low turnout, hoping one side is just smart enough to not listen? Or is it to just instill more confusion?

Demoralization. Destabilization. Crisis. Normalization.

Crisis Is Time of `great Opportunity'. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSVn3paVwgU
I'll give it a shot. When you place an order for 1000 shares of AAPL for example your order is sent to a bunch of exchanges and you are supposed to get your shares from the 1000 cheapest shares available to be purchased. If your order gets to exchange A where a HFT is operating they might sell you 100 shares at $131.99, but then the know there is someone buying AAPL. they send orders on faster networks than you to buy up all the shares at other exchanges for 131.99, then list them for sale for 132.00. Your order arrives, and depending on order type you'll probably buy those up that milliseconds earlier would have been a penny cheaper.

For you this is only $9.00 more than before, but doing this all the time is where HFT makes money, without really offering any benefit to other market participants.
Huge discussion still active on the front page:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24356741
I'm not talking about supplements, I'm talking about drugs. Many of them are on drugs and they are notoriously secretive about it. It's difficult to study supplements on bodybuilders because they are on stuff they won't tell you about.
SUAVE – Conceptual level aircraft design environment)
I have two such gmail accounts! I got one early on—around 2005 or 2006 which receives a gross ton of spam, so eventually replaced it with one that uses my initials and then my last name which is way less trouble. I got my brother on board around the same time. He just uses our last name at gmail. I'm sure he gets his share of crap.
Radioactive-State: Making React.js Truly Reactive
Probably more so that React is gaining complexity in order to lock-in with features. I see a similar pattern with Jest and snapshots feature.

I guess the single boon to the lock-in theory is that JS devs will happily spend time rewriting code to the latest, hottest framework.
I also disagree. If you are able to pass leetcode style test you have a very good chance at getting into a FAANG. It seems to be all they really care about.
Honestly I'm surprised they're not penalized by Google, given that pretty much any search result page does not contain any of the words in the search result snippet, in my experience.
They nailed the landing of the booster and I yawned.

Amazing.
Switzerland’s ‘Crypto Valley’ Birthed Ethereum and Never Lost Its Cool (2019)
what VR setup would you recommend for someone without any? I've got a ps4. I don't want to overspend on deprecated / imminently-obsolete gear, but would love to experience it at home. is there a sweet spot beyond "toy" level but short of $$$$?
I think hooks aren't really making React more of a black box, but just that it's invalidating a lot of people's incorrect mental models on how React works. (It's like C's undefined behaviors in that sense.) And the reason why a lot of people have these incorrect mental models is that React is a very thick abstraction.

For a long, long time, I thought that to provide the values that React brings, the UI framework being a black box is inevitable. Almost all React-esque libraries including but not limited to React, Preact, Mithril felt like a very thick abstraction over the DOM APIs.

But then I saw Crank.js[0], and that felt very intuitive and a thin abstraction, while retaining the good parts of React-esque libraries. I don't really know why it feels like that - I'm guessing it's because it uses native JS features that you already have a good understanding instead of some magic that happens in the React runtime.

I'm very looking forward to it, and I would like to urge everyone to try out Crank.js if you feel that React is now not intuitive enough.

[0] https://crank.js.org
What is TDD and why it hasn't developed critical mass? (2018)
You're discounting the applications far too readily !!! I'm absolutely convinced there's lots of open space for video apps.

Heck, maybe the Zoom ubiquity might have removed barriers for entry !
The point was about the trust in government's response. The other one tried to play nice. At least Snowden didn't let the system crush him for free.
Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning change security's future
Inventive Examples of Virtual Reality in Education
I think something to note on this as I already see this in the comments. There's always the suggestion of "Yeah that's easy we could do that".

To this I'd say it totally depends on the usecase, I've seen 10s of tech teams build this badly and end up causing more harm than good, some even just static config files that require a build to change which totally defeats the point.

I think looking for an open source tool is great, to this I'd say consider the following :

- Before anything else, you'd definitely want the ability to turn the flags off per environment (dev/prod etc) without having to deploy code.

- Do you want to control who can manage features? Quite often you'd want to enable non-tech people to manage / test features.

- How scalable does it need to be? Some people might want to just not have to worry about serving thousands or millions of flags.

- Do you want to serve flags based on users or maybe even groups of users? I've seen attempts at this but then you start having to worry about setting traits and building some sort of rules engine.
This is a symptom of a lot of developers thinking they have to write code exactly like everyone else (or at least, strictly adhere to "best practices"). It's a very subtle disease, but I've noticed it again and again over the years.

Reading between the lines, this is a criticism of hooks if they're viewed as a wholesale replacement for classes; from experience I'd argue they're not—they're just a convenient tool for simplifying common patterns. I'd imagine the author knows that to be the case and instead of just using classes where appropriate (or where they wanted), they had to rationalize using hooks because of the aforementioned "but everybody else is using hooks" problem.

I suffered from this behavior for years before I realized it was impeding my work. The term that came to mind for the phenomenon was "The Invisible Developer:" a non-existent developer sitting over your shoulder always judging you for your programming choices. That developer doesn't exist. If instead how "in fashion" your code is is the standard on your team: you're on the wrong team.
Most users don't have to switch between platforms but those who are obligated to do like I was, consistency cross-platform is removing a level of friction. Most of the time $work provides me Windows and I run my personal laptops on Linux (mostly Fedora) for the last 10 years. Some of my colleagues were running OS X. It was messy to switch context all the time to explain, learn or replicate stuffs when you are not in a IT/SE environment or even tech-savvy places. One lab we had people on Windows/OS X/various Linux distributions for office desktops and calculation servers on Linux distributions. When software are not consistent across platforms, it results on a lot of friction and lost time in meaningless conversations about "How to do X/Y".

The only time I am ok with inconsistent cross-platform is between desktop/mobile because the UX and means of interaction are fundamentally different.

Electron is a middle ground (that if I can avoid it is better) but sometimes ease to use prevail on ressource-hungry applications. The other alternatives (imgui, vulkan, etc.) seems complicated at best and I am not familiar in of with GTK/Qt port on Windows/OS X to know if they are a pain in the ass to develop with.
I agree that it's certainly not a substitute for a proper security setup, but it definitely makes an attackers life easier - up to the point where it may get interesting to automate this. So as always, it's a tradeoff. Both options may be acceptable (and I've run a setup where I'd have internal names exposed on public DNS for years), but you need to be aware of the tradeoff to make that judgement.
Here’s the paper: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280134421_New_Theor...
The point is that if everything is in a single giant "library", and it burns down, then everything is losf forever.

But if there are copies here and there, there is much more chance that at least some will survive the centuries.

Eg, single point of failure vs redundancy
Yeah "black box" is the totally wrong phrase/metaphor here.

"Black box" means you don't know what happens INSIDE the box. A very succesful software abstraction might be a black box, this isn't generally considered a negative in software. A good "black box" is completely predictable from it's interface, even though you have no idea what's actually going on inside of it.

To me, "accessing disk IO" is a "black box", I have only a vague idea what happens inside the black box when I ask to read or write bytes; and I don't need to, because it works reliably and my very simple mental model of how it works serves me. (If I was doing realtime or high performance or something, I might need to go inside the 'black box', making it no longer a 'black box' that you can't see inside, but I am not and have not).

Wikipedia: "In science, computing, and engineering, a black box is a device, system or object which can be viewed in terms of its inputs and outputs (or transfer characteristics), without any knowledge of its internal workings."

But that's not actually what OP is talking about.

The author is not actually complaining that it's a "black box", he's complaining that the inputs and outputs of black box are too hard to understand, that the mental model of what the black box does is too complex, that it's no longer predictable what it does.

This article might get upvotes because people agree with that basic conclusion, it matches their experience. But it's a pretty poorly written article. It has no examples or evidence, and it's central point is poorly expressed using the wrong terminology or metaphor.
I don't want to be "that guy" but this seems like extra hassle and to be based on a false analysis:

>You probably want a fast screen capture and maybe the ability to add text... There’s no need to jump from ap [sic] to app to do something as simple as taking, editing and sharing screenshots.

On OSX, the built-in screengrab function already allows adding text and arrows/boxes etc. to screen grabs. And, for those not on OSX, using something like Yandex Disc [0] allows the same functionality via its built-in screengrab editor.

I'm not seeing why people would opt to do a roundtrip via a 3rd party website, when it can all be done with a locally installed app [and in the case of OSX, a built-in one]

[0] https://disk.yandex.com
Another question is why does it take so very long in human scale for all these things to happen? You'd think scanning for a valid data frame and flinging bits onto the glass would take under one frame, so 0.01s?
>So speaking as someone with adult ADHD who is getting by without medication with the right lifestyle choices

How do you do it exactly? Without ADHD medication I can't function on a basic level, and even then it's pretty hard. (Yes that's just ADHD, I tried every antidepressant and mood stabilizer under the sun for years before getting diagnosed with ADHD)
I think Paul Graham went to the UK once to try to find technology investors. Once. (Can't find that essay right now.)
Any recent popular languages with similar support for types of Ada? Is such type system being costly to implement the reason not many other languages pick up the feature?
Ok but what is going to change? Is anybody going to be held accountable? Is Snowden going to be pardoned? If the answer is no to any/all of this, then this is just window dressing.
I just tested this on my iPhone XS with both an old AM radio and my SDR receiver, and neither seemed to cause any kind of signal or interference around the 930-980 KHz range.

My dad, a radio engineer (who worked for one of the US' largest AM radio stations for a decade), also tested with his XR and couldn't find any signal. I'm wondering if either it is limited to the iPhone 7 and/or 8, or if the Twitter OP might have a faulty unit?

Has anyone else been able to replicate the result?
Planning Observability of Your System
It's a metabolic intermediate of the citric acid cycle - the cycle is needed to reduce electron carriers (NAD+/FAD) which are then used to drive the electron transport chain for making ATP. In simplest terms: it's an important part of aerobic respiration.

That being said, it can be synthesized de novo very easily so long as your cells have enough glucose/fatty acids and enzymes are functioning properly. It's even formed directly by deamination of glutamate. I'm not sure these results would be very transferrable to humans.
Although the article is too generic, or not detailed enough regarding examples of what he states, I have to agree with what he is trying to say.
React hooks are a mess, or at least code based around it tends to be. We have had our share of hooks based applications and they've become unmaintainable when reaching a certain size and I am glad that we are back to class based components wherever we can. In may opinion this comes down to the fact - as he states - that the mental model (what will happen, when I do this) is not simple to grasp, thus not predictable for many people.
>> I generally stick the * on the left with the type.

> Not a problem, but :(

In a declaration, * is a type modifier. E.g. `int a;` declares a variable of type "int" named "a". `int* a;` declares a variable of type "pointer to int" named "a".

The only time this doesn't work is if you stick multiple declarations on the same line. That's annoying to me, because it means you're breaking the "declare variables as close to their first use as possible" practice. It's not K&R C any more, you don't need to declare everything all at once at the top of the scope.

Also, to prove that `` in a declaration is part of the type, note that K&R style function declarations (no argument names, just types) are still valid C (though I'd strongly discourage their use). So `void func(int a, int b);` is identical to `void func(int, int);`. It's very different from `void func(int, int);` that you'd get if you assume the `` goes with the `a`.
I was going to say - the main reason why I like Hooks is because it's a lot simpler to reason with compared to classes, and it makes it easier to avoid whole classes (heh) of bugs.

If anything, React is becoming less of a black box, with a 'simpler' API. It's just that in the process to moving to or learning the new API, people are understanding they didn't actually understand React before. They're now being made to confront that.
Slightly disagree, Tor hidden services are fantastic to implement decentral signal/rendevous services with no single point of failure. I'm using this in my app https://cryonet.io

Love the fact that it works in many places where plain UDP solutions fail.

Once two nodes are connected via a Tor hidden service, other p2p channels can be established and are more appropriate to transfere large files.