skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If I were Mozilla, I'd probably be very careful in my wording, even though Google actually does have an interest in keeping Mozilla and Firefox around to be token competition and point at legislators they don't actually have a complete monopoly on everything web because... hey, there is at least one other major browser out there with a wholly different codebase from ours!
I don't know how you came to this conclusion because the abstract specifically addresses this:

>In lab experiments, we find that while criminal justice professionals see failures to appear as relatively unintentional, laypeople believe they are more intentional.

It's exactly the opposite of your stance.
Actually, they said,

"I do have a problem with them being the best [six things], at the SAME time."

It's reasonable to read that as the OP thinks the number should be less then 6.

Yes, they also said other things, but I think I'm giving them a fair read of that sentence.
the webster in me thinks that's how the word ought to be spelled, maybe web developers will be the vanguard.

what's unfortunate is that http is self-consciously inconsistent about the spelling: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/Re...
> There's also no way to use a different messaging backend on iPhone with the stock messages app.

Sure there is. It’s call SMS.
Safari does not behave as you've described. The subdomain (for example, 'gist' in 'gist.github.com') is displayed.
I completely agree. Everything is baked in to be slow. There is no way around it, I don't think you can write super fast interpreters like with Javascript - I might be wrong, but so far it hasn't happened.

For general use cases the performance is fine, but only thanks to the hard work of C/CPython/Cython programmers who give up Python's rich expressibility to gain this performance. It seems like you simply have to use another language to get anything running fast.

Having said all that, Pyc seems interesting as it apparently compiles Python. Has anyone had any experience of this?
France mourns teacher Samuel Paty, as government mobilizes against Muslim groups
Also for youtube, how many people are now able to make a living producing content which they fully own and have control over the means of distribution?
You can use both. They each solve a set of problems that only overlap partially.
Anyone know if there's an integration with Tree Style Tabs[0]? They're a gamechanger for browsing the web, and it'd be nice to see what tabs are contained.

[0]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-ta...
The lack of them in MobileSafari discourages any legitimate developers from building on them, imho.
A few others:

- Temporary Containers[0]

- Google Container[1]

- Google Container w/ Integrations (YouTube, AdTech, Apps, etc)[2]

- Reddit Container[3]

There are a few others[4] as well, but I've found the Temporary Containers solves the 80%.

--

[0] - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con...

[1] - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/google-contai...

[2] - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/google-contai...

[3] - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/contain-reddi...

[4] - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/search/?q=Container
TIL I'm missing a muscle.
Yes, that's what it means. They do scan when/if you visit them. I'm not a native, but "is scanning" doesn't sound right here because it means that it's happening right now. However, the title says "the browser" (i.e. the browser of whoever visits) and that is not happening right now, only when that browser does visit. So, I'd say that "is scanning" should go with "browsers" (i.e. they are scanning the browsers in general, not a specific browser).

But anyway, the sentence means what you think it should :).
> Almost everyone who gets called to court has been legitimately ticketed or cited for doing something.

Most people do something most days that could be legitimately ticketed or cited, if only a misdemeanor. The more interesting question is (at least statistically speaking) who actually gets them and why.
> I've heard that learning Vim can make this much more effective.

This doesn’t surprise me; Talon is a lot like Vim.

They’re both modal: Talon’s command mode roughly matches Vim’s normal mode, and its dictation mode roughly matches Vim’s insert mode.

Talon’s ordinals apply to Vim operations (normal mode) as well: operations can be preceded by a number which normally says how many times to do it. Talon’s “go left ninth” would be 9h or 9← in Vim. (h goes left one character.) “One zero third” is more cumbersome because in Vim it entails switching between modes (Talon and Vim modes don’t match precisely), but starting in normal mode, a1<Esc>3a0<Esc> works to append 1000 where the cursor is. (a to enter insert mode after the current position, 1 to type a 1, Escape to return to normal mode, 3 to say “do the next thing three times”, the next thing being appending a zero.)

Both Talon and Vim value this sort of consistency in being able to build bigger things from smaller pieces.

So I imagine Talon would work quite nicely with Vim, once you get talon to shift out of the way in some cases and let Vim handle those things. (It’s similar with browser extensions that let you interact with the browser Vim-style: when the page in consideration has extensive key bindings, especially Vim-like things like j/k for down/up, the extension actually gets in the way.) I expect you’d find that having used one made learning the other a good deal easier, since they’re working in just the same ways.
> "impeding the lawful function of the DEA by [continuing] to market its opioid products to more than 100 health care providers [...] and by reporting misleading information to the DEA"

and

> "Purdue made payments to two doctors [...] to write more prescriptions of Purdue’s opioid products. "

Those are the crimes for which the 2.5 Billion and 225 million are proper, justified atonement and they're all good with society now, then?
Was just coming back to this thread to say I use the Multi-Account Containers extension to isolate my Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and Google Search sessions from the rest of my web browsing, and I highly recommend it.

The terminology is a little confusing: Containers or "Container Tabs" is a session-management tool that's baked into Firefox, while Multi-Account Containers is an extension on top of that that allows you to automatically sort specific domains into containers, so when I open e.g. a YouTube link it automatically appears in a YouTube container, which knows nothing about my Google account. IMO the functionality of the extension (which was written by Mozilla) should be added to the browser itself.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/multi-account...
GCA10 1 day ago [–]

I like Graham's points about overconfidence, peer groups and (judicious amounts of) ignorance, all of which he champions quite strongly. But drilling deeper on "rate of change" is an undervalued element that deserves a closer look.
The best innovators are really good at taking Version 1.0 and figuring out what rework will turn it into a better 2.0, and then 2.1, 2.2, 3.0, etc. This is an identifiable skill! It can be cultivated. Once you've got it, the failings of Version 1.0 do not ruin your self-esteem. You just get to work on fixing them. And not enough people think about this systematically.

One of my favorite museum stops of all time was the British Library, where a glass case held Paul McCartney's first draft of "Yesterday." You could see, cross-out by cross-out, how a somewhat awkward ballad got turned into a pop classic.
The reason Facebook Container exists is because the UX of the generic version is awful. Trying to created a new container to always open a site with has something like half a dozen steps.

And of course we won't get a dedicated 'Google Container' from Mozilla because despite all their hot talk they know what side their bread is buttered on.
I've always found FSMs useful as a visual guide for REs.
My Celeron boxes spend most of their life at ~6W, burst to 15W. Drives are all attached via USB, but since these are Intel Broadwell based Celerons (5 years old now! wow, long in the tooth. time flies), there are 4x USB3.0 root complexes that can run pretty much full tilt.

Trying to go lower power doesn't feel worth it, particularly when the hard drives drink so much power.

I feel like I'm spilling the beans sharing this, but ServeTheHome has has an excellent "TinyMiniMicro" series on ~1L size mini-PCs, which are used in businesses a lot. They are much beefier boxes than my little celeron, now often 6 core with way higher clocks. They come with 35W and 65W cpus, but even the couple generations old models still tend to idle at ~10W & otherwise sip power only as demanded[1].

If power is your concern, get rid of your small hard drives. Switch to ARM? Meh.

[1] https://www.servethehome.com/hp-elitedesk-800-g4-mini-tinymi...
I suggest you read my next post below.

BTW, have you ever thought about the fact that cancer deaths are still very prevalent despite all the hyperbole from thousands of researchers say since 1950—yes, hyperbole deliberately spruced up to attract funding and to gain newspaper headlines.

The facts are straightforward: had 0.1% of the promises about improvements in cancer treatments that have appeared in the many tens of thousands of professional research papers on the subject over the past 70 yeas had actually come to fruition, then the disease would have all but been eliminated by now.

You might say this was justified but it's turned out that this type of hyperbole is not befitting of science, and that it's been largely responsible for the enormous drop in the public's approval rating for science over this time. (I'm not saying it's only cancer researchers (although they top the list), essentially it's all researchers these days.)

Don't say this isn't true, do your research. In the 1950s almost everyone believed in and accepted science—even though this was the time of the A-Bomb and bomb development, back then, people could still differentiate science per se* from the bad applications of science.

Now, 60 or 70 years later, I know scientists who, when, say, they go to a party, will disguise their real professions, so bad is Science's PR. (I'm even in that league but I'm less sensitive about it than some.)

Anyway, I'd suggest to you that in comparison with these professionals, my hyperbole pails into insignificance.

Ha, so you reckon my hyperbole is dramatic and done only to fish for points. That implies you actually think about such matters and consider points important (most of my posts never make it even to two). Franky, these post would altogether be much better of without them. For the record, your assertion isn't true (not that I expect you to believe what I've said).
Anything in Spanish. Anything technical.

Also, for searches that "really matter" like when trying to get real work done, I end up trying them out in Google anyways to see if I missed anything. At which point, I wonder why I'm using DDG at all.
Why not distinguish between fire the physical phenomenon and controlled fire the application of fire to heat up objects or provide light?
I'm a huge Dapper fan.

To be fair, I have never really done a full blown project with entity framework.. but I seem to always need a bit more control than it's offering. So I just created a simple repository framework (inspired by https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtXpYpZdOzM ) overlay in which the functions end up calling dapper.

The beauty of this is it's pretty simple to setup the overlay, and allows complete control of what is going on. I have a need for "dynamic" table names. I don't think there is even a way to do this in EF (at least not a simple way), but when I have my own repo overlay it's really a piece of cake. I just tack on whatever specific function input I need to help define what the resulting table name is that its great.

This is probably not the most common use, but a simple repo overlay to a micro orm is not much work and gives full control.
facebook and porn are still driving tech forward
Mozilla gets too much Google money to do that. I've asked for them to do a first party extension for this, and they have "no plans" to do so.

Unfortunately, I don't trust a third party extension with this either.
Fortran Coarray is far beyond simple Fork-Join. It enables one-sided remote memory access, something that is impossible with OpenMP or CUDA, as far as I am aware, and requires the highest levels of skill to do it right in MPI.
Given how many people somehow manage to “work from home” at the drop of a hat, wouldn’t it be easier to list those who somehow reject reality and insist that office presence is required.

Also perhaps list those that require other equally ridiculous things, like wearing a tuxedo to work every day.
Unrelated, but could you please expand on how firecracker fits within your stack?
For what it's worth, Jaeger, one of the most popular FOSS tracing servers uses ES/Cassandra for storing it's traces.
Archive interview questions of top CS/IT companies
> Data from market research firm Datanyze suggest that YouTube is four times the size of the next-largest platform

I have a hard time believing their figures,

Youtube is only 4 times bigger than Vimeo?

Well Vimeo is making 100M visit per month [1], Youtube is making 30B [2]

[1] https://www.similarweb.com/website/vimeo.com/#overview

[2] https://www.similarweb.com/website/youtube.com/#overview
So the ad business, which generates all the revenue is split off from everything else. All the various services including search die b/c they can't self sustain and all that's left is an ad platform akin to the former double click scenario. Now what?
Opinion|Wanted: Online gamers to help build a more stable Covid-19 vaccine
To be determined. We're hoping to contribute and use what's going to come out of hyper's h3 efforts (we use Rust for our reverse-proxy). There's not much there yet though: https://github.com/hyperium/h3

We're not in a huge hurry to support QUIC / H3 given its current adoption. However, our users' apps will be able to support it once UDP is fully launched, if they want to.
Just fyi, Julia has a fantastic and very fast C foreign function interface, just like Python.
Test what you are testing. Are you testing a method or function? Mock its inputs. If your test of a function fails because an API or a database is not available, that's approaching an integration test. If there's a question of whether there are too many mocks being used, the dev may not have thought out a testing strategy well enough. Be certain of what you're testing.

That's what I usually go by.
For TLS 1.3 (a large fraction but not majority of today's HTTPS servers) let's go step-by-step like the article:

Random: Now all 32 bytes are random

Session ID: This will now all be random if we've never talked to this server before or if we believe it speaks TLS 1.3

Cipher suites: There are newer suites [with much shorter names] for TLS 1.3 because some parameters are now fixed.

SNI: This is still there (work on Encrypted SNI which became Encrypted Client Hello is ongoing)

NEW Supported versions: Compliant servers pick the newest version they recognise from a list the client provides.

NEW Key share: A TLS 1.3 client proposes one or more (Elliptic curve) Diffie Hellman key agreements. Most servers will accept one of them.

OK, on to the Server Hello...

Random: Again all 32 bytes are random unless the server speaks TLS 1.3 (or newer) and has the impression at this point that the client does not. In this case the server overwrites a few of the bytes with the ASCII "DOWNGRD" (downgrade). A TLS 1.2 (or older) client sees no significance in this, but a TLS 1.3 client is alerted that somebody is meddling, because it's extremely unlikely that a server randomly spells "DOWNGRD" and also only knows an older protocol version.

Also, as a special case TLS 1.3 servers scribble over the entire random byte sequence with SHA256("HelloRetryRequest") if they wish you to try TLS 1.3 hello again with a different key share because all your proposals were unsuitable.

Session ID: The random nonsense from the client is echo'd back in TLS 1.3

Cipher suite: Still whichever suite the server picked.

NEW Supported versions: TLS 1.3 or better servers will echo back versions they support.

NEW Key share: Assuming the Client's proposed key shares are acceptable in TLS 1.3 the server answers with a share of their own here and then...

In TLS 1.3 and newer everything else is encrypted. Client and server have performed DH key agreement, so now they both know a random secret which they will use to begin encrypting any subsequent messages.

Certificate: is an example of something that's now encrypted. Also in TLS 1.3 the specification follows real world practice that this isn't necessarily a "chain" just one leaf certificate plus any other certificates that might help the client reach a trust decision.

The TLS 1.3 protocol is a relatively nice shape in its natural form, but what you see on the wire is spelled very weirdly because this is the only way for it to pass various rusty middleboxes and not blow up poorly implemented legacy servers out there in the real world.
I'd reverse it and say you should have a status for when something is done discussed about, and implementation path is clear "Ready for development" or something like that. Then people who are looking for things to develop, they filter by that. Anything that is not "Ready for development" either needs triaging, or another type of closure.
Don't see why this is any better than the existing solutions...
Breaking up Google, for example, would help, not hurt Mozilla. It would eliminate monopolistic nonsense around Chrome, while not removing incentives for Google Search to pay Mozilla.

A lot of intermediate approaches -- such as firewalling business units at Google -- would achieve similar effects.

I didn't read this as "do nothing." I read this as "think through consequences."
Thanks for this! Sorry it had to come about as a result of injury/disease. Hopefully you're not going to hurt your vocal tract -- are there precautions you take against this?

My interest currently is in voice-assistants and developing something like a personal assistant / code-monkey / grad-student.

I did have a stroke a few years ago, from which I've recovered, but it made me realize that almost all of my work, hobbies, aspirations, are tied to fairly extensive hand-eye integration. It's good to start building a Plan B before I need it.

On a(nother?) side-note, my 88 year old dad still codes and his experiences have really shown me how bad we are at accessibility, as a developer community.

One final thing -- watching you work in this way highlights for me how low-level a lot of the stuff we do as developer is. There's a certain amount of just text massaging that seems irrelevant to what we're actually trying to get done (although it can be fun/soothing/aesthetic).

EDIT> The last point is why I can't give a fark about Vim/Emacs/whatever debates and obsessing. It seems like it might be fertile ground, but IMNSHO it's a trap.
I like it but the trains are too small. It's be b better if they where an arrow showing direction and wwre buffet than the line.
Facebook and Instagram Wrongfully Factchecking Nigerian Police Brutality Protest
People sharing their #endSARS images on Facebook or Instagram are having their posts factchecked as false. With the factcheck thinking it's about Covid, maybe due to the SARS name similarity
Sure, evolution pressure favors easy spreading, but if sick people stay home or go to the hospital, and non-sick people go out, then that pressure is to make the host sick less often.

Early estimates for mortality in Wuhan were 3-5%. Later estimates kept dropping, and are now at 0.39%.

Most viruses do not make the host sick, and the longer it's been in humans, the more likely it is that this is so. If the mortality rate is dropping (the article's assertion), but the WHO says none of the existing treatments has been shown to work, then the simplest explanation is that the virus has evolved in that direction. Given that the virus is very new in humans, there's nothing surprising about that.
OK. I think some people mistook me as making a value judgement about C++. This is not true, I am merely saying I have doubts that Rust has had a serious impact on C++ design (yet; if it does it will start showing up soon, though.) If you don't believe me please carefully reread my comments; I really wasn't trying to say anything overall good or bad about C++, just observation about trajectory.

My personal opinions on C++ are not very positive, but it's a language I literally grew with. My experience is that C++ code very gradually became more stable and less buggy. The thing is, some of that is just improved discipline, some of it is static analysis, etc. But a lot of it, is genuinely C++0x/C++11 and features that built on top of this.

So the idea that Rust showed up and suddenly C++ cared about safety? I don't really see it. I think C++ developers started caring about safety and then Rust showed up because of that.

P.S.: While the borrow checker and ownership semantics is really cool, I think a programming language's ecosystem and the 'best practices' it lends itself well to have a greater impact that people completely miss. Rust, Go, Zig are all clearly trying to foster a culture of writing more correct and complete programs. Error handling doesn't just feel like a couple control flow mechanisms you can use, but a responsibility that you have. Modern C++ is getting better probably more because of this than any committee; although I really wish the Expected type would've gone somewhere, since I feel Rust's `Result<...>` type and Go's multiple-return with `error` are being proven right as ways to handle errors robustly even with their caveats. (I've heard Zig's error handling is really cool too, but I haven't had a chance to write a serious Zig program. I'll get to it soon.)
What a crock.

Insys pharmaceuticals used this[0] rap music video to push their sales. Insys VP of sales was in the mascot.

While tasteless, harmful, degrading, moronic, and frankly, childish, that video is nothing compared to the decades of racketeering orchestrated by the sackler mob.[2]

One iota less than the sacklers deaths in prison and disgorgement is a miscarriage of justice and slap in the face to everyone in this country.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtwFZwjCSTE

[2] https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/10/startling-documents-reve...
So you admit that it's not ridiculous to have text messages on one's laptop, good to know.

> The fact is that there is no ODNI analysis or documentation on this.

Of course not, because there's no intelligence pointing to Russia as the source of this, which kinda undermines your whole conspiracy theory. You do nothing whatsoever to support that with evidence, which is itself an admission that it's bogus.

That last quote is basically how the original Russia conspiracy started, BTW. You know that we've untangled the citogenesis a long time ago, right? They bootstrapped the conspiracy with the original FISA warrant against Carter Page (one of our own spies against Russia, who provably worked on an opp against them not too long prior), leaking some things to the media, then using the leaks themselves to bolster their claims for the FISA warrant.

But unlike that, which relied on anonymous leaks (since de-anonymized by Strzok & co's text messages), the drip drip drip here is of stuff like Hunter's signature matching the form of the one from the legal papers, having recordings of him calling the repair shop for his laptop, having pictures of him with a meth pipe, etc.

But sure, go on and tell us how that compares to the Russian conspiracy's anonymous leaks of unverifiable information.