skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Thanks for providing the source about encrypted backups, that's chilling.

Can you provide sources for other claims in your comments? I want to read up more on what sorts things these apps do.

Apple is by far the best when it comes to privacy relative to the others. Would you trust Microsoft, Google, or literally any other company (even Canonical Ubuntu) more than Apple?
So it would me even more deadly if they were taking Prednisone?
Organise Your Analytics with QueryStash
Does this work with hidden services though? There’s no exit node when you visit a .onion site, because client meets server inside the circuit.

I suppose there’s still two entrance nodes, one for each side. But unlike visiting the clearnet over Tor, neither side is aware of both at the same time.
I totally agree. The only thing that's worth testing is the API that's being exported and that can usually be transcribed almost directly from some specification document. Everything else is just implementation details.
Standups are also for people who like the illusion of control that comes with knowing what everyone is working on and having a say in every single decision/work.
The government represents the people and is created through established political process. By refusing to work with it you're showing disrespect to huge portion of the population which elected it. I mean it won't ever be a healthy environment if you pack your things and refuse to play if the other group won the vote.
Just published this article since I figure these sorts of "check lists" are good especially for new coders. Let me know your thoughts or if you have any feedback on it!
> 3. Singleplayer games are dead

That kind of became a meme last year (?) when EA exec mentioned it as a reason for scrapping a title... a few months before they released some top-earning single player games that pretty much proved it wrong.

There will always be single player games. We just got an explosion of multiplayer in the last decade because lots of people have networks which can support it, some new genres became popular (battle royale), and skins are good for monetization. But single and multi player can coexist just fine.
I admire this man’s perseverance for no other reason than his own curiosity.
Managing Multiple Passwords Easily and Securely With a Password Manager
They’ll still have to sift through tons of no longer context-relevant content. You’re also expecting the user to rationally know his context in terms of your chosen categories, and worse, to put in the work to formalize them for your engine at every session.

There is no information in any content or a previous interest matrix which guarantees any real-world relevance in the next session. Instead, it’s likely the user exhausted the utility of their previous topic matrix. The effect is that the moment you determine content relevant to their context, they’ve already been sufficiently informed. I’ve tried algorithms far more advanced with ML/Lebesgue measure theory, which were technically optimal, but with practically laughable results.
I'm talking about abandoning the 230 safe harbor protections (since this bill would render them worthless), and instead requiring in their TOU that posters agree to assume full liability for content they post, and also agree that anything they post can be removed for any reason. Existing users would be prompted to agree to these terms, and if not their accounts would be wiped.
Since Lumberyard doesn't support Vulkan I doubt that this is using Vulkan at all. Most likely DirectX 12 or maybe OpenGL.
Wow, thanks for the tip, looks like a great podcast!
> the fact that simple rulesets yield complex behavior that is hard to predict and/or derive using all kinds of models

I don't think this is the paper's "finding" at all. Sure, the Game of Life indicates that simple systems can result in complex, emergent behavior. But, exactly for being a simple set of rules, it is trivial to create a Game of Life implementation (or following this paper's definition, to solve the problem of predicting the nth next state, given the current state).

The findings are rather that neural networks, despite its universality and prediction power, have a hard time learning parameters that solve this trivial task using a minimal architecture, so they require a larger amount of parameters or a very good initial set of weights ("lottery ticket").
U.S. election officials turn to signature-verifying software in mail-in surge
Many many CIA agents sent into China have disappeared. If an agency with the greatest set of resources on earth are getting busted regularly what hope does the average Joe software engineer have.
It's actually the fiscally conservative thing to do. Every study around social programs show they grow the economy more than they cost it. But it's hard to get folks to release their "crabs in a bucket" mentality.
It comes up regularly on the subreddit for tech support stories, /r/talesfromtechsupport. Just a few:

https://www.reddit.com/r/talesfromtechsupport/comments/22ke8...

https://www.reddit.com/r/talesfromtechsupport/comments/c24q2...

https://www.reddit.com/r/talesfromtechsupport/comments/flgsn...

https://www.reddit.com/r/talesfromtechsupport/comments/65cam...

https://www.reddit.com/r/talesfromtechsupport/comments/bks9e...

https://www.reddit.com/r/talesfromtechsupport/comments/9wrsc...
I think you may have some misconceptions. Julia is not compiled ahead of time. A function does not spring into existence until the definition of the function is executed. Same applies to a struct definition.

In a statically typed language you might write a function that takes an integer like this `foo(x::Int)` but in Julia it is completely possible to replace the `Int` with an expression that returns a type object. Meaning you actually run code at runtime to figure out what the defined function should actually operate on.

So there is nothing known at compile time, because everything happens at runtime. However when a function is called for the first time, then the JIT compiler will compile it and store the result. But it will store different compiled versions of the same function depending on the type of the argument it was called with. If you call the same function later with the same type of argument, it will reuse a previously compiled version.

If this is all very unclear. You could look at an article I wrote contrasting static typing with how typing works in Julia: https://medium.com/@Jernfrost/types-in-c-c-and-julia-ce0fcbe...
Not to split hairs, you started out suggesting that the world is destined toward a future where an institutional source of journalistic truth no longer exists. Then you propose how to force one back in. More interesting to me is, how to live better in a world without one?
No, I agree; this site regulates what topics are valid for conversation.

It's the rest of your comment I take issue with. Wake me when dang rolls tanks into a public square.

(... and I'll use my own logic to defend Facebook any day of the week. It's their site and their rules. If anything, I think the employees who believe they should be responsible and forthright about their policies there instead of pretending to neutrality are in the right).
Undismissable full-screen modal that forces me to get all cookies? Not gonna read it mate. You would expect an advocacy group to try and get their message out...
Everyone should keep in mind your points when thinking about improving the situation. The current setup does have advantages for both consumers and developers.

Did the majority of the app revenue end up flowing through the Apple by chance or did the rules that setup facilitate that system? As you said, consumers who spend money have largely chosen the Apple walled garden.
You have 30 days to recognize your mistake still with this new plan
I think 5G can definitely help here, assuming it provides faster and more reliable connection.

It used to be unthinkable before 4G for people to watch videos everywhere on their mobile phones.
I was wondering why the article kept repeating details in re-worded ways as if they happened to other people. I didn't even realize that different parts were by different authors.
No. I am saying I respect the political process and the will of those people who voted for the current government. We argue, we vote and then we accept the consequences and work with each other not pack up and cry like 5 years old.
> Rather than say "Your channel will be deleted for unexplained copyright infringement" they could say "Videos X, Y, and Z contain copyrighted material at timestamps X', Y', and Z'. This material has been claimed, you may dispute it, because this is your first infringement we will allow you to correct the issue, etc."

Other than the timestamps that IS what happened here. The creator knows the exact videos that were flagged, and the creator had the option to dispute it - which they did, and the channel was never actually deleted as a result. It's still up: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCf5WyhQHoYKy2ZcY1l51w7A

The situation is now that the claimants can either drop the copyright claims or sue him (this is stated in the video at timestamp 2:40). Neither of which involves YouTube, and YouTube isn't going to delete the channel unless the claims remain. That is, if the claimant opts to sue the creator.

As for timestamps, not all takedown notices must include such information. Notably DMCA takedown requests do not, and Google cannot require more than the law does on those. If Google failed to forward the notice along, or refuses to, that'd be something to be upset about. But we don't have evidence that they didn't, only that the data from that claim was not manually entered into a database to be shown in a pretty UI. But given the channel in question, it seems likely that it's just the entire video in violation.
It refutes your claim that developers will end up having to support alternate app stores or risk losing on market share. Despite the potential for greater revenue on the Amazon Appstore, developers don't seem to be flocking to it.

People seem to be buying into Epic's own claims of self-importance. They may be the ones to have finally advanced grievances against the App Store to the lawsuit, but they do not- nor should they- have the ability to frame the entire discussion. Their standards for openness are debatable.
Ah, see, I love black liquorice. I always thought people who hate it just lack an adventurous palate, but at least it was an opportunity to relieve them of their black jellybeans.

It turns out I was simply ignoring a clear biological signal that the substance is dangerous, in the pursuit of pleasurable sensation.

Ah well. Wouldn't be the first time, and won't be the last!
Something can be harmless or even beneficial at one dose, and fatal at another dose.

People have died from drinking too much water. Or breathing too much oxygen.
> The logical conclusion then is that the only device that should be allowed to be manufactured is a personal computer.

I would be comfortable with a high quality legal encoding of the Your Device principle:

"To the extent a device, or part of a device, behaves like a general purpose computer or could easily and reasonably be made to behave that way if not for artificial restrictions placed upon it by a vendor, the effective owner(s) of the device or part shall have the right to use and control the general purpose computer aspects as they deem appropriate."

"Effective owner means those using the device as if they own it, so where a device is technically rented or licensed from a vendor, the renter or licensee is deemed the effective owner for application of this principle".

Details of what that means in practice for non-obvious edge cases would be fleshed out by precedent and the courts I guess.

It would not limit what devices can be manufactured, but it would place a requirement of access and control on some kinds of devices.
Ignoring the technical cost, keeing Trash files indefinitely (or for unexpectedly long periods of time) has to be at least a bit of a privacy kerfluffle risk for Google, right? People freak out when they do a GDPR data request and find just how large and long a memory Google has of their searches and locations. They likely would be even less happy finding out Google has held on to files that were long ago deleted for important and/or personal reasons.
Canada is OK with the Twitter folks because PM Blackface has good optics.
Seven Sketches is a nice introductory read, giving examples of how CT may be used model practical problems and introducing concepts along the way.

"Programming with Categories" [0] is probably the best resource to start, the course notes are great and the videos are easy to follow.

Also yes, Awodey is much more in-depth and technical.

[0] http://brendanfong.com/programmingcats.html
So, let’s apply this same logic to accessibility. Let’s say the government says “devices must have voice over functionality”. Ok, great. Apple puts that as an option, and we’re done.

The same applies for if the government said “you have a right to install apps of your choice”. Apple adds a setting in the settings menu. You still get your locked down device by default, and much like blind people, people who care about controlling their device are given that option, too.

What you’re arguing is akin to saying, “I’m not blind, so Apple shouldn’t ever even have a Voice Over option, because it’s not my preference, even if it’s just in the settings”.

There’s a false dichotomy - Apple can still keep it locked down by default. You still get your device just as safe and sound. And much like accessibility settings, most people wouldn’t bother to find the setting, and if they did, they would have a big warning (and of course Apple could have another big warning on every install, as well as keep all their sand boxing and permissions access rules active).

There’s no loser here. If grandma digs deep into the settings and ignores multiple warnings, it seems she is proficient enough to take on the risk. Forcing blind people to not have any voice over because grandma may accidentally turn it on and have a bad outcome is a weak argument.
I had success using Cython for performance (numerical simulations mostly). nogil is your friend for multthreading.
The Future of Identity: Self-Sovereignity
I think it's an important detail to point out that legitimate transactions mostly aren't vulnerable to the "Dark Forest" issue. A lot of comments I'd seen on the original "Ethereum is a Dark Forest" blog post seemed to be under the impression that this was a general Ethereum issue affecting normal users.
Free speech is the right to not be arrested for speaking. It's not the right to not be punched in the face for saying stupid things (there is a separate law for face punching).
LPT: schedule your standup for the 15 min before lunch. It’s an almost automatic way to ensure that it finishes quickly. No one wants to be the one that’s making teammates hangry. It also means the meeting never interrupts a developer’s flow since they were going to break for lunch anyways.
Can you honestly say this license is trying to solve for the same problem, rather than just carving a niche for your own business at the expense of other businesses, e.g. other startups who might be able to offer a better service contract to the public cloud vendors? Because it's hard for me to imagine it differently the way these are worded.

This is my main problem with this type of licenses, none of them really seem to have any interest in actually getting the public cloud vendors to compete or buy services or contribute (financially or otherwise) to the upstream project. It just perpetuates the problem because now your company is the one doing it by telling customers they have to sign your agreement and can never buy from any other vendor. I'm sorry if this is an overly negative assessment but I just can't see it as much more than passing the buck when there is no attempt at reciprocity, through copyleft or through some other means. (As much as I had criticism of the SSPL, at least it tried to have this)
I would always buy it in bags.
In the 6a. shell benchmark, what's the modern equivalent of the "+" option in sort from the below line?

od sort.$$ | sort -n + 1 > od.$$
Planout: Developer Friendly Experimentation Tool by Facebook
I've been following this work really closely, thank you! Making IPFS work with Nix is amazing work and it will be pretty incredible when every Nix server can act as a cache automatically.
> Of course, when they first wrote this, I imagine keeping trash indefinitely had a nearly nonexistent impact on the bottom line, and now there's probably several datacenter racks worth of drives dedicated to storing and replicating trash.

Why is why they don't just let everyone upload HD videos to Youtube.

Oh wait
> By the way, it may interest you to know that Hootsuite is a Vancouver-based company.

That would explain the terrible name.
Yes. Only the paranoid survive era Intel is rolling in its grave.

They used to do everything - legal or otherwise - to stay on top. Now they're not even bothering with the legal stuff.

AMD would have played ball, because it would have benefited them just as much.

Post Sandy Bridge the x86 license was probably proportionally more valuable to them than to Intel. If it went away, Intel still had their fabs, which at that time showed no sign of danger.
On the teams I've been on that are actively doing software development (not in some pre-coding phase where we're still figuring out requirements or something like that), if there wasn't a stand-up individuals created an identical coordination mechanism in an ad hoc manner. This tells me that there is something valuable to stand-ups, even if we don't always love them. If a team's stand-ups are not effective, there are lots of things you can try: refocusing the team's attention, have someone other than the normal "stand-up leader" guide the conversation, or change the time so that it's next to another interruption (for example, right before most people get lunch... this has the added bonus of incentivizing people not to ramble).
I'm not sure how I feel about this. I do appreciate that in the Apple ecosystem, "I'm not the product". There is a level of trust with their products and services that I do feel thankful for and will continue to pay for it. I do not want a different app store. I do not want to have apps direct access to the fundamental iOS services.
Don't get me wrong, I really like a lot of the companies that have formed this coalition but I don't think their ask is right. I cannot honestly read about the impact to democracy, primarily because we are unable to define and protect what is private data and what is public, and then agree to what is being asked for by this coalition of partners.

However they promise to safeguard the data, I don't think they have a sound business model / sound business principles / a long enough pedigree of protecting user data for me to trust them.
I also see what all of this is about - just a redistribution of the pot of money. This is not about anti-competitiveness, this is not about an Apple Tax hurting consumers (https://www.theverge.com/21445923/platform-fees-apps-games-b...)

I honestly hope that if Apple does lose the anti-trust case, that they split the iPhone into one that allows these non-Apple stores and services and another that offers a Apple managed ecosystem.

I for sure will chose the one that is governed by Apple.
> There are some that strive to be fair and prioritize informing rather than inflaming their audience.

Name three.

It's been a while since I saw one. Even BBC sometimes succumbs to clickbait, and the inverted pyramid is all but forgotten in the journalism world.
Have you considered a manual workaround? Print the docs and put them in a trash can at home or work. This gives you offline access, even without power.
Gmail trash deletes. It's Drive trash that doesn't delete.
> It’s also pretty telling that Tor was partially developed and funded by the US government.

Times were different then. The US was fighting wars to topple dictators and spread democracy.
Mainly just trying to call a distinction between nations & people that did get their own a chance, versus people who still had to live under other's laws & who we attempted to restore fair rights under law to.

In one case, the oppressors left & sovereignty was restored.

In the other case, the law decided it had to change to try to bring itself into alignment with some basic human rights & regards.

I do think the people living under now-more-just law still struggle, still face discrimination, and are victim to a system that was imposed on them & a system which does not favor them. I don't think it's unreasonable to identify this gap, and this "one way street" attitude seems, to me, restorative & to be what equity & justice demands. And at times, it feels like it's still not enough, that some people- some persistent negative forces- remain fixed & focused on exclusion & discrimination & their biases, in a way that makes me think perhaps these victim-folk do deserve entirely higher levels of freedom from these oppressive forces that they still face, beyond merely our ongoing & too-controversial attempts at rebalacing.
Near future concern is unethical and overt implanting of chips in people
> Which made me curious: how does a relatively unknown open source project do this

There's a lot of money behind it. A number of people are paid proper wages to work on IPFS full time.
The ethics of speech protection and laws are a complicated subject - I strongly agree that being moral judgements into punishments is a dark road that has led to a lot of racism and other discrimination in the past... but justice isn't blind and unmoving, justice should evolve to reinforce changes in ethical thinking in society at large. There have been several prominent incidents recently that have shown that the portion of legal enforcement relying on societal norms in the US has been broken, I think due to our general acceptance that greed and money are good and having those things means you've succeeded in life.

Legal judgments that leave a bad taste in your mouth shouldn't be ignored but examined to see if the laws that we have actually fit the society we're trying to maintain - people shouldn't be arbitrarily persecuted for actions and ex post facto protections are very well intentioned and wisely put in place to protect against some really heinous abuses - but questioning whether the law should be changed to prevent future incidents isn't bad - it's how our legal system evolves.
> Many many CIA agents sent into China have disappeared.

Source? This doesn't sound like the sort of thing with reliable public statistics?
Police confiscate 345,000 recycled condoms in Vietnam
Area 120 is not "real" google. It's Google's startup incubator, kind of like an internal YCombinator.

Most Area 120 projects get killed by design if they don't show enough success early on.

Using an Area 120 product is like using a new Product Hunt product:
You have to realize the Lindy Effect applies
The fallacy on display here is false equivalence. I agree that both parties bend facts and exploit logistical loopholes to serve their own interests. I agree that it's easy to find examples of hypocrisy in both parties. But Republicans do these things so much more frequently, and, especially now, so much more nakedly and freely, that it's actually a categorically different thing. It's totally disingenuous to say they both do it and therefore they're both the same.
> Which made me curious: how does a relatively unknown open source project do this

There's a lot of money behind it. A number of people are paid to work on IPFS full time.
The creator should have requested the notice be forwarded to them for further inspection. We don't have the notice, we just know the details of it were not entered into YouTube's UI.

But given the channel in question, the notice & details are really not a mystery? If you cover a song, and get a copyright strike, is it not fairly obvious what the strike is about?