skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
iMessage for Android would immediately be abused to spam iMessage users, something that’s nearly impossible to do today. Apple issues server-side hardware bans any time an Apple device sends spam via iMessage, which makes it stunningly expensive to spam iMessage users - but since Android is an ‘open’ platform, no such protections are possible to require or enforce there, as they can simply be rooted around.

I expect Apple would release iMessage for Android in a heartbeat if the effort were invested to make it truly user-proof with crypto-locked bootloaders and proper defenses against rooting. However, that day is not today, and that day seems unlikely to ever occur for the wider Android ecosystem. So iMessage likely won’t either.

(Footnote: This thread and its usual focus on “iMessage should be open to non-Apple hardware” has been repeated on HN many times a year for the past several years. No one has yet offered an alternative solution to “identifiable Apple hardware only, with hardware bans for anyone that spams” that would as effectively protect iMessage against spammer. Especially before the first message is sent, and without heuristic false positives.)
That way leads to high numbers of boxes with vulnerabilities, which may be "fine" for non-technical folks. That's not the audience linux serves however.
I get that different parts of a service truncating the password to different lengths is a problem, and that it's a different (perhaps worse) problem than the one that causes site operators to limit password lengths.
I hadn’t heard of SimAirport, but you’ve just made a customer, very much looking forward to playing it this evening.
This book is really good: https://www.manning.com/books/the-design-of-web-apis

It even spends the first few chapters talking about API design in general (not just for REST) with really great, intuitive examples.
I wonder how often in "normal" companies (not FAANG), workloads shift to non-parents due to typical inability of management to alter timelines along with the realities of a situation?

For example, if parents are given a bit of slack or simply have more sick days due to real life responsibilities, but project plans are not altered accordingly, are those without children feeling the pressure to compensate?

I have a suspicion this is a problem in companies where investors have expectations of quarterly growth, returns or exit plans, and not much of an outlook to create a healthy long term business.

Disclosure: Am manager, not parent.
I'd be interested to see an application of sortition as a government principle. It's government by random selection, similar to jury duty, and was used by ancient Athens.

Wikipedia lists out the disadvantages, so nobody is claiming it's a perfect system. But I think it could eliminate many of the problems with modern "democracy", including gerrymandering, lack of diversity, distrust of "deep state", lobbying. Everyone would feel included, and I think that's important. A big part of our modern problems are due to the feeling of being left out: racial and religious minorities on one side, less-educated on the other, which creates the huge chasm of us-vs-them that shouldn't exist.

Plus it would make government boring again, so we wouldn't have this widening gulf between citizens on party lines and 24/7 smear campaigns on the national news. News would actually report news, imagine that!
I am not sure I understand your scenario in enough detail to understand the actual attack. At any rate the identity is established on the basis of Alice's public key. That is the part that is fixed. If it is, say, 2048 bit RSA then that is what Bob uses to confirm that a particular message is from Alice.
irq11 is right. This is scaremongering garbage. They can't report on cases or deaths (because those tell the whole story) so they make up this crap. Then scared idiots upvote it. The brainwashing of HN continues...
Absolutely, these are medical definitions. People don't understand these definitions but are trying to play Doctor Scientist on the internet.
Funnily enough, as an anarchist, I never heard before that removing the government (or hierarchical use of violence) would remove violence from the world.

There are plenty of ideas on how to keep law and order in an anarchic society.
I recommend you to read The Machinery of Freedom (by David Friedman) or check out a summary here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTYkdEU_B4o

TLDR:
One way to keep order is having private law enforcement / private insurance you voluntarily subscribe to. This can be provided by multiple companies competing on the market.
These entities can agree between each other on how to settle disputes, use a third party private arbitration system or physically fight against each other.
A war between law enforcement agencies would be expensive and hard to predict, so I think these businesses would pick peaceful resolution over war.

How contracts are resolved by law enforcement agencies can become a selling point, letting consumers decide with their wallet what kind of laws they agree with.

Charities can collect money, voluntarily provided by citizens, and pay the fee required to protect people without money.
We can't. It would be a huge privacy violation, and it would give anyone who actually did want to manipulate this site a handbook on how to do it.

But there are deeper reasons. I wrote about this the other day: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24356496.
Ask HN: An ancient Egyptian prayer once posted on HN?
Hi guys.

I have been looking for a Hacker News submission, in vain.

The submission was about some prayer that was inscribed in an ancient Egyptian pharaoh's tomb.

The inscription was about a prayer that one would recite to go to heaven.

Here are the only clues I have about it.
- It was between 2019 and August this year.
- It was a Wikipedia link

I have tried looking for it using regex, but cant seen to find it.

Would be very grateful if someone helped me find it.
Edit: This comment deemed unsavory by desi HN gang.
How does banishment from society work? What happens to people who refuse to leave and still use the roads?
It’s not anecdotal, Zoom applies significant audio filtering and “enhancement” as well as selectively attenuating “non-primary” speakers.
I couldn't believe it when I read it.

And they say the society in Manusmriti is much more misogynistic than this book! And this book is bad. Really bad.
> 1. My neighbour having enough food to eat and a warm house is a form of wealth FOR ME.

I want that too, but it's unrelated to a wealth tax or the existence of billionaires. I'd argue the wealth tax dis-incentivizes growth and makes it less likely your neighbor could have enough to eat and a warm house. We can and should improve the lower bound of society, but you don't do this by taxing wealth and dis-incentivizing growth.

> 2. If wealth that is generated is taxed, this means that it is harder to accumulate wealth, this means that the people that do manage to accumulate wealth have better qualities than the people that do so in a tax free environment. And thus they make better decisions about how to allocate their money.

I don't think this follows. Maybe it's harder so only the nastiest people attempt to do it and fight more with each other since their wealth decays over time? I don't have strong opinions on this, it's just not very compelling.

> 3. Billionaires are not accountable to anyone for how they spend their wealth. This is fine if they are all like Musk. But they are not. Of the countless number, only two are trying to build rockets to Mars. Counter examples are Osama Bin Laden and the guys who funded the NRA. If the wealth is taxed then it is fought over in a shared space in which we all have a say, no matter how small.

Yeah - on this we agree, there should be restrictions (there actually are some on political contributions and obviously things that are illegal/sanctioned). Limits on how wealth translates into political power should exist and probably need to be better. This is a different issue than a wealth tax and dis-incentivizing growth.
Probably a lot, but mild heart inflammation just isn't a very big deal. It's a common complication of viral diseases in general.
Closing an Open Problem
Entirely voluntary in the sense that flatpak enforces sandboxes which the application tells it to enforce. If the app asks for full system access flatpak doesn't deny that. It kind of destroys the purpose of a system built to run third-party code. If I download a malicious app from flathub or some other repo which asks for full system access flatpak doesn't do anything in the name of security.

Note: I'm not making a value judgement about flatpak's sandboxing, merely describing it to the best of my knowledge.
The parent comment was specifically talking about free software, not open source software. The latter is commonly produced by large companies, but the former is much rarer.
> Not all computation is subjective, but some computations have a subjective viewpoint.

No, you're interpreting them as such. Computation is objective. The only thing is that obviously your outputs depend on your inputs.
https://pico-8.fandom.com/wiki/P8PNGFileFormat

The images are RGBA PNGs. So for each display pixel there's a byte for each color channel and the alpha channel. The two least significant bits in each byte are a quarter of a PICO-8 data byte. Those bits are read from a channel byte and concatenated in RGBA order to get a data byte.

Using the LSBs for each channel means the those swizzled bits won't contribute very much to that pixel's color value. At worst it would just look like noise in the image.

Also by putting the data inside the image data of a PNG it won't be stripped off by some optimizer or hosting service.
> I mean the crap really seems to float to the top of society.

This is a somewhat bizzare argument IMO.

Even if you assume that sociopaths are over represented higher in the hierarchy, base rates force you to acknowledge that most sociopaths are at the bottom.
Google Maps 101: How AI helps predict traffic and determine routes
Edit: I read OP’s argument the wrong way. So my comment below is based on a misapprehension.

———-

This is foolish. BMI is used to estimate population averages. But waist measure is vastly better. Someone with a waist of 31 at 5’6” actually has close to ideal portions, if you’re talking about a man. (For women you need the hip measure too).

That’s a waist to height ratio of about .47. A person with that waist probably has a high muscle mass + low body fat.

Now, if the same person was 155, 5’6” and had a 34 inch waist, they are almost certainly overweight.

https://trustyspotter.com/blog/perfect-male-body-measurement...
https://www.omnicalculator.com/health/Waist_Height

Both people will show up as “overweight” in population averages, which isn’t an issue as edge cases balance out over the whole population. But you’re talking as though such a person with a 31 inch waist should actually lose weight.
You call that roundabout word-salad concoction impressive?
Your thinking falls apart when you consider that children are a choice. And often a selfish one at that. You are not afflicted with children, you make an active decision to have them and everything that comes along with that. I would of course not begrudge a coworker for taking time off to deal with cancer, for example, but when you decide you want kids? That's a different story.

The other part of this discussion that gets left out is state vs. company responsibility. In the US, the state has generally failed when it comes to supporting parents, so people have turned to companies to fill the gap. However, it's not clear to me why companies should be the ones to do that. The state needs children and eventually benefits from them. Companies do not.
Ohh, my beloved ice cream bar, how I love to leeck your creamy center!
> Wait! What's going on here? We just imported pathlib.Path - why are we getting this new functionality? Thats because we imported the fastcore.foundation module, which patches this module via the @patch decorator discussed earlier.

This is a recipe for disaster. Too much magic that makes it harder to debug. Especially for junior developers or people less experienced in python.

I've seen fast.ai code and in terms of good practices it violates a bunch for the sake of convention. A good example is the `from module import *`.
> people coming in voluntarily agree to the penalties

In a sort of ceremony where you swear to follow the rules of the - oh I don't know, country? - that you're joining?
Influential NLP Papers on Google Scholar
They do, but it doesn't work to point at the person when you've broken the rules yourself. Otherwise we'd end up in a downward spiral, because it always feels like the other person started it and did worse and you were just reacting. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...

We do try to do both-sides moderation when we can, because it makes the medicine easier for everybody, but we don't see everything that gets posted here. If you see a post that ought to have been moderated but hasn't been, the likeliest explanation is that we didn't see it. You can help by flagging it or emailing us at hn@ycombinator.com. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...

Re trolling: people are too quick to invoke the t-word when other users are propagating views that seem wrong, especially when they seem perversely wrong. We seem generally to be able to handle disagreement that's within (say) a standard deviation from our own views, but outside that, it's hard to assume good faith anymore—it feels obvious that the other person must be manipulating or lying somehow. That's not a trustworthy feeling. It probably comes from our being hard-wired for smaller groups than the ones we encounter online. In much larger groups that are spread over many places, the distribution of opinions is much wider, meaning that each of us is certain to encounter opinions that seem perversely wrong to us, just by the natural functioning of the community.

In reality, the world is a much larger place than our spectrum of feels-like-normal opinion allows for, and HN is a large enough sample of the world that this mismatch comes up here a lot. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23308098
It is a hacker news rule that titles cannot be clickbait or inflammatory.

This title unquestionably is missing critical context, and arguably crosses the line into clickbait.
Patents come off as the same problem charging fares for inner-city busses causes. A lot of places have realized that just operating, maintaining, and sustaining the overhead of ticketing, processing payments, and managing the many complications that arise is often not worth the money being made if most people are using annual passes or some such. Same with subways, toll roads, etc.

In many of those cases it makes way more sense economically, especially considering time-value of private parties involved, to just stop trying to charge entirely and have the revenue come from elsewhere.

I feel it is blatantly obvious in modern society patents (and copyrights, IP in general) operate this way. That the bureaucracy required to put them on a "reasonable" timetable of government granted monopoly whereby society can broadly benefit from the innovation isn't worth the legal, public, and private overhead in maintaining a system that is obviously defunct and outdated.

Thats part of what lead me to IP abolitionism, anyway. In practice very few "small" creators file patents, those that do rarely have the means to enforce them (or copyrights), and those that have the means don't have the time because they are too busy creating.

Yes, once something you made is out there without IP anyone else can take it, build on it, or just simply repackage it and reuse it. So get your money out of it before its out there, kind of like how anything else you sell works.
> Individual choices lead the way, society only acts after enough individuals have been affected, not before.

So you are saying there is no way to act with foresight? We can’t get together and decide to curtail individual choice so that we avoid a tragedy of the commons?

I don’t think throwing our hands up in the air and just continuing to destroy commons after commons is a good strategy.
Lets be clear here. When you say child you're referring to teenagers, not prepubescent children.

The question is whether or not a 15 or 16 year old can consent to non-harmful sex, and the answer is obviously yes. At that point they are sexual creatures with their own urges. two 16 year olds having sex is not harmful in any meaningful way, many many people start having sex at 16 (or younger) and go on to be just fine.

At this point, as far as I'm concerned, it's been clearly established that young people under the age of consent _CAN_ actually consent to sex.

Statutory Rape is not about consent, it's about manipulation. Due to the differences in life experience between a 16 year old and a 20 year old, the 20 year old can manipulate the 16 year old to give that consent. This does not imply that the sex between them is implicitly harmful to the 16 year old, just that it's immoral for a 20 year old to do this sort of manipulation.

It's also clear that a 20 year old can rape a 16 year old. Actually rape. And they'll be charged with rape, regardless of the age of consent. This is because, by definition, with statutory rape the 16 year old DID consent.

And one last piece of evidence to show clearly that you are wrong here.

It's possible for 2 25 year olds to have sex and statutory rape charges be brought. How? Because one of them is mentally handicapped.

Because Statutory Rape is not specifically about the age of consent, or giving consent. It's about the coercion of someone who is not considered mentally capable of protecting themselves from said coercion. It's about the morality, not about any sort of inherent harm of the sex itself.

And to head off one argument that I KNOW is coming. The age of consent in Japan is 13, pointing out that the age of consent is 16 in many places in western civilization is not meaningful or useful here. It doesn't change the ideas that I've presented in this post.
You believe that Canonical will remove the ability to install from deb?
Buccaneers were Named after their Culinary Pursuits
Mathematicians should stop naming things after each other
Isn’t this too much of variability. For example it projects India’s population range from 0.72B to 1.71B . That is like either being number one by a wide margin or dropping to 10th spot or lower.
Exactly right. He won the money game, he couldn't feed his ego with that anymore. Now he is feeding his ego with philanthropy. He literally couldn't spend it all on himself. So he sprinkles it around with his name attached. People don't cheer when I give pocket change to the homeless, yet it is a similar percentage of my net worth.
The transition in Chromium packaging is understandable from a maintenance point of view. However, the general argument that you can just keep using the system without using snaps "just fine" doesn't really hold if the snaps begin to replace rather than supplement software that used to be packaged without it.

The same is also somewhat true if first-class tools such as Software (as in the "store" GUI) begin to push snap packages as the first thing, because then you will, by default, need to go through additional steps to find the packages that you want, and which used to be available as the first choice.

You can still do things, of course, but it might be that you need to start getting around the snap-centric design choices more often, and at that point it doesn't come at no usability cost to you anymore.

I don't actually use Ubuntu at the moment, so I don't know how much that is the case now, but if it is (or if seems like it's going that way), I understand the frustration.
Very interesting to think about. Here's my interpretation of the argument: Suppose you have some system X whose dynamics are those of conscious agents in a world. For example, maybe X is the real world. Suppose that the agents in X really experience consciousness. Now suppose we apply some one-to-one function f to X, yielding Y = f(X). Then Y contains all the same information as X. So who's to say that the agents in X have consciousness but the agents in Y don't? Now by an inverse argument, suppose you randomly encounter some blob of random dust, Z. Then you can always come up with a one-to-one function g mapping Z to X, X = g(Z). So apparently the dust Z already contained all the conscious agents in the universe. Conclusion: The conscious experiences of all agents are present in all sufficiently complex blobs of random dust and all sufficiently complex networks of mathematical relations.

One issue with this argument that hasn't been brought up yet is Kolmogorov complexity. Must random blobs of dust Z will be algorithmically random, not containing any real structure. In that case, the complexity of the function g that decodes Z into X will have to be huge. Essentially, the decoding function g itself will have to contain all the information that eventually ends up in X. So the information about conscious agents isn't really in the dust Z, it's in the decoder g.
> 22 percent had very low-quality evidence.
One of my favorite tech talks of all time. Really worth just sitting down and truly listening to its full length, regardless of what programming tradition you come from. I wrote some commentary on it related to a different HN post here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10568382
I have been hoping to find this for nodejs one day :( sad. I really miss my .net days
There was quite a bit I had to do with generating the right set of serial number + I think two other numbers that escape me, using I believe clover. I also had to do a good bit of hand modification of the vmx file leveraging the generated numbers. It took a good bit of googling. I wish I remembered the details better.
I think the point is it "could" work on Linux, but a significant portion of devs consider that to be be a bad method of solving the problem.
Author here if anyone has any questions.
You're right. To which the teller can reply, "I've crafted an encoding where you are tortured for billions of years."

The idea is more about swapping out the substrate of your current subjective experience than creating a new encoding of your current universe. The book has the convient liberty of actually jumping between simulations/encodings to illustrate this, but it's ancillary to the main idea.
I don't think anyone considers the American civil service to be much of a model for anything.
>But you’re talking as though such a person with a 31 inch waist should actually lose weight.

No, I'm not. I never said such a thing and I have no idea why you're building such a strawman.

Waist measure has nothing to do with this story. This story is about COVID-19 comorbidities, of which being overweight (which is medically measured using BMI, not waist measures) is one. BMI is all that matters in this context.

If you are 5'6" and 155 lbs, you are classified as overweight and thus are considered a high-risk person for COVID-19. That has nothing to do with "you should/should not lose weight".

And the broader point is this: if you see any stats saying "most COVID-19 deaths were overweight people", you shouldn't feel any sense of "safety" because you think "well I'm not overweight, I wear size small!", because there's a good chance that a lot of those COVID deaths wore smalls, too.
200-Ish Days Later
Does this not sound the slightest bit naive to you at this point? It'd take a sweeping article 5 convention or a civil war to "fix" this.
This is absolutely awesome. As someone who is still using Winamp daily, I'm thinking of replacing my shortcut with a script that, before launching the executable, opens the .ini file and writes some random skin's name in the property, so that at each execution I'll be shown a different skin.