skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I am very interested in having you expand some of these points, because they're not clear to me yet.

> I no longer think that end-to-end encryption is the right solution to human rights problems

I agree with this sentiment. But I don't understand why you consider it significant. Of course, secrecy is (and always has been) a way to lessen the impact of human rights problems. But where was it suggested that it would solve human rights problems?

> But let’s see if there are any uses of encryption — as opposed to signing and securing data - that are truly indispensable to society and are the right and best solution to solve the problem.

I may be missing the point, but if I want to send a private electronic communication to someone (be it an email containing corporate secrets, a chat message discussing a sensitive topic, or a copy of my bank statements)... What do you propose instead of encrypting the communication channel?

> checks and balances among the most powerful entities in the system [...] make sure it’s super hard to maintain a collusion for long

Isn't a collusion exactly the way to break these rules founded on checks and balances?

> you need to focus on architecting the governmen’t technology to be more benign in its rules

This sounds great in principle. But - while I haven't exactly looked - I'm unaware of any government that's looking to be re-architected, or a concrete proposal for how that would look like. Can you point me to an example of at least the latter?
> I understand what you're trying to say but "core components" and "corner cases" are part of the same concept.

Sure! And if you look at the overall concept, it does not become meaningless. To get to meaninglessness requires you separate the two.

"Unambiguous" is a much much higher bar that we don't need to worry about. Something can be 5% ambiguous but still very meaningful.

> Bringing that back to the original thing this is true of any concept or law, including reviewing some remote apps and not others based on what they are for not that they are remote. I'm not saying I agree the way Apple regulates these is good I'm just saying I agree the fact some remote apps are regulated and others aren't isn't proof alone the regulation is contradictory.

It's not proof by itself, but if you can show that there's no good reason for the distinction then it's a strong mark against Apple.
The Wikipedia page for Ground-effect vehicle goes into much more detail on how this worked and why we don't have more of them:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-effect_vehicle

TL;DR: While faster and more fuel-efficient than regular ships, they're as complicated and fragile as airplanes. And since they can't fly, they're at risk from waves and colliding into land or other ships.

Here's another fascinating prototype: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartini_Beriev_VVA-14
I’m a bit hesitant to buy a used electric vehicle, but if there’s a good battery warranty I’d definitely consider it.

A new EV Kona is $37k, not exactly economical to me, but they’re getting there. I’m excited for the future of EV. Thanks for this.
Remember when these came out and how similar they were to the terminal keyboards of the time. For a long time I preferred these over the model M that defined our modern keyboards.
I've tried Prolog. It required thinking in both the specification correctness and it's 'search/match' execution based on how it's specified (with manual path cuts inserted as needed) much more so than these FP languages. Effectively writing a procedural definition non-procedurally. SQL can be like this too but is a small space/number of cases that it's not so unexpected.
People who are not from these countries (Kenya etc.) might not know that the following are already true—

[1] Many people buy phones on loans, because even cheap phones are quite expensive for the average Kenyan.

[2] These phone companies _already_ use device policy based apps to control usage for those who have not paid. The difference is that these apps are actually predatory, they are free to siphon off data and what not, and have the usual shadiness that you expect from apps made by relatively random corps who care way less about user privacy than big cos.

What this solution seems to be doing is providing a way to enforce the device lock policy at the OS level that actually lessens the vice-grip that these companies have on the user's phones and limits the power of the company to only block the phone from use, as opposed to the earlier model where they could do whatever the fuck they wanted on the device using their installed software.
The most manipulative, ineffective, selfish boss I ever had was a really nice, likeable guy.

Promotion is 'hard' because there are very few spots to be promoted int to, it's a narrow pyramid, and people generally want to 'increase responsibility and salary' when that isn't consistent with the reality of the situation.

Feedback is hard because people tend to take it personally.

The entire piece is misguided in the sense that, although toxic managers do exist, it's generally far more complicated. Different situations, different people, different levels of expectations, differing levels of legitimate authority, emotions vs. outcomes etc.. Some people perceive 'loudness' to be problematic, some people don't care (see: inside of a hockey locker room).

Usually focusing on material things, outcomes etc. matter, the rest is not that important. Personally, I try to have a huge latitude for tolerance of different types and don't care that much otherwise frankly. Truly diabolical patterns of behaviour like back-stabbing, not taking ownership of failure - this kind of stuff is quite bothersome - and those behaviours can come in 'nice happy bosses'.
Brain Active Reviews (2020)- a Modern Food Supplement Support for the Brain
I just made a post about this very thing. Can we continue the conversation there?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25030085
Veratasium dug into it in quite a bit of depth. TL;DR: It doesn't do much (if any good). Worth watching, regardless.

https://youtu.be/ZQ--scjcAZ4
Nature vs. Nurture is very much not a settled argument. Although if anything, recent understanding in epigenetics movers the needle a bit more in the "nurture" direction.
Apple is walking a fine line here.

I understand on one hand Apple wants to prevent Epic from installing their own competing app store on iOS, and they also probably don't want to be sued by Nintendo for hosting emulators (even if emulators are probably legal.) It's pretty obvious that a) it's Apple's walled garden so they can mostly do what they want, b) the vast majority of iOS apps are games and c) other game platforms are similarly restrictive.

On the other hand, Apple probably doesn't want to kill Scriptable or Pythonista (and I don't want them to either.) One of the nicest features of iOS (and macOS) is that you can use scripting apps and languages to construct workflows that use multiple apps, access the internet, etc.. Scriptable and Pythonista are also useful as personal programming and learning platforms.

Good luck I guess.
I can recommend this Yoga series. Namaste Yoga. Not only is it shot in beautiful destinations. But it gives you prompts when to inhale and when to exhale. Its basically a 20 minute breathing exercise combination Yoga, you can do from home, during the lockdown. Actually, if you take a hot bath before doing the exercises, its feels even more amazing because your body is warmed up. So its basically synchronized movement with breath, to relaxing music.

Here's one of their episodes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evJ8Siv-u8U
when you are part of the scene, you get access to basically all content... some people probably do it for that reason.
In my observations, consultants can be very well (mis)used.

Very frequently I've seen the pattern where a consultancy is allowed to go in and do everything at the direction of some project overlord.

And, sometimes? That's a -great- thing. Sometimes that means that in fact you are cutting away from all of the existing BS at a company and are allowed to make a real product.

Other times, however, it winds up being one of those things where you quickly realize you're going from bad to worse.
And in this case lawyers role is to implement what EC proposed and MEPs voted in. Elected governments are like management of McDonalds franchise. People can choose chair layout or where napkins are located.
Of COURSE this is the way! Don’t know why I hadn’t thought of this.
Author here if anyone has questions about the 8008.
Government had to implement whatever EC proposed and MEPs voted in. Now they don't have to.
I’ll look into these. I live in the US suburbs on a bit of a budget, and there’s a sweet spot for pricing that IMO hasn’t quite happened yet with most EV. I think the number for me is $25k for a new base model with average range. I hope my next car will be an EV, but we’ll see.
>And I thought to myself "Yep, I'm done here". Unfortunately I jumped ship too quickly and found myself in a job I hated, with a manger who (while not as vocally abusive) was just as bad.

One time, long back in my career, my then-boss jumped down my throat in a meeting for no valid reason. I clearly remember thinking to myself, "Is this it? Is this the day I tell this asshole to fuck off, and walk out the front door?" I decided not to, but I was in full-on job search mode the moment that meeting ended. It didn't take more than a couple of weeks before I gave notice. The next job was for less money, but it was basically my dream job at the time. It was the best move I ever made.

There's no moral or lesson to this story. I just thought I'd share it.
Good to know. Thanks a ton for the ideas. I really hate how helpless i feel about the world sometimes, any push in the direction of action is a good one.
They keep saying "encryption is important" and "law enforcement needs to be able to access relevant data" without ever elaborating why encryption is important, why law enforcement needs access to the data, or even what data law enforcement needs access to. It's just a collection of assertions without any of the insight necessary to have a useful conversation on the subject.

They also completely fail to address the elephant in the room: bad actors already have access to strong encryption and they don't need the blessings of Apple, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, or any organization to use it. Encryption is an idea, not a product. They cannot prevent terrorists from using strong encryption any more than they can prevent terrorists from using algebra.
> Guns are notoriously out of control in Mexico.

How did it get this way? There's laws in place to prevent it. Buying an AR in MX is impossible. How do they get in the country? They should be stopped at the border. Just like hard drugs should be stopped when coming across the US border. Proof that even import controls don't work. We're also in the age of 3d printing and home fabrication. Guns are not going to disappear from criminals hands, only law abiding citizens.

> But it's interesting that you would pick a country with a long-running inter-cartel drug war, rampant police corruption, extremely weak enforcement, and less than a quarter the average household income as somehow directly being comparable to the US.

So two questions here, how did it get corrupt in the first place? What has stopped corruption in the US? If the Mexican citizens wish to end this corruption, how can they? I'm going to disregard the poverty claim because it's just senseless to imply poor people are violent.

> The more remarkable question we should be asking is, with all that going on, how on earth is the US struggling to do any better than Mexico?

Great question! Perhaps violence is just as out of control here as in Mexico?

> No, what Mexico shows is that gun control legislation is pointless if you can't enforce it. I'm not arguing that gun control legislation alone is some panacea; that would be absurd. It needs to have teeth.

What does the legislation having "teeth" entail?

> Apart from anything else, it means the police can de-escalate themselves from assuming that they might get shot during any encounter to assuming that if they don't get close enough to get stabbed, they're less likely to be in immediate danger. That's a good thing.

So then if the police are overly violent, or if they were to take control, then what? Wasn't a majority of the left just rioting over police being too violent? You want to throw your trust entirely into the hope that they are sane?

> It seems reasonable to you that your position requires me to undergo an experience so traumatic as to prevent rational thought? Think I'll pass.

How is the desire to defend one's self irrational? This just seems like pure opinion, and slightly scary. Again, for those in immediate danger how do they defend themselves? You clearly lack experience in any traumatic event, and are now running around saying that because of your lack of experience, nobody should be able to defend themselves with firearms. Really?
It's a feature to protect the sender's privacy.
Well, I don't assume malice, I can stay in a superposition. It could be malice, it could be incompetence, and it's important to be able to discern between the two, and that's purely contextual.
It's much less work to convince one country than dozens.
Azerbaijan uses bots and Fake Social Media Profiles to spread Lies [video]
if anyone is curious: https://en.qoobers.com/
These are super cool, especially the motorcycle game. Amazing what can be achieved mechanically.

Colour me jaded but I imagine these were pretty inexpensive back in the day which certainly brings some interesting perspective on the current prices of mechanical watches, most of which are doing something much simpler (granted on a much smaller scale, continuously for years on end, and with more durable materials, but still).
If social status is that important to someone then I think a second-hand genuine iPhone in decent nick would send a better message than a fake new one. Maybe even an old 6000 series Nokia. Like the person is more authentic and looks after their things, and only buys what they need. I could be wrong.
I don't see how this can be made any more obvious. What you call stonewalling one side calls preventing damage. It's from your point of view that it's progress. The stonewalling actually serves a purpose. If both sides can't agree, nothing happens. The gov is essentially frozen. You want control to force through policies that the other side doesn't want. You claim the right doesn't want to work together, but this is opinion. There's clearly evidence of them working together. Your complaint is you don't have full control, therefore bad. "But we should work together."

Just admit it, the dems don't want to work together or compromise at all. Nanci Pelosi made this very clear recently.
The Zimmerman telegram was from WWI and was intercepted by the British, not the Americans.
For feature analysis (should we enable this new feature) I think Bayesian approaches are far better.

I work in a slightly different space, which is qualification of builds (this assumes you have feature flags and code, and the code shouldn't enable features, but it may include refactoring, as well as the code that will later be enabled by a flag etc.)

For this, I originally wanted to push my org to do things in a more Bayesian, but it didn't work. What did work was forcing org leaders to sit down and actually decide how costly true positives were, and therefore how much developer time they were willing to sink into chasing ghosts.

If you can say "we expect to spend 4 hours of developer time investigating an alert here", and 1/10 alerts will be real at our current sensitivity, then you can decide if these things are alright.

Ultimately we can't control all the variables (our sensitivity requirements are informed by things like SLOs that we don't directly control), but it does help make informed decisions about prioritization.

The type m/s stuff is really neat, although in my space we don't care too much about those, although that may be because we have conventionally gargantuan sample sizes.
If you take a screenshot in the camera app, it's both!
Whatsapp was just an example. There are other messengers out there and also the Email with SMIME and PGP is possibly affected.
Why would you want to find the motivation to "develop a career" if you neither have to nor have the motivation for it? You are free to do what fulfills you, makes you happy.

Personally, I'm a Basketball coach for 8-12 yo kids twice a week. I wish I could devote more resources towards it, since it truly is the most rewarding experience I have on a day-to-day basis, but a man's gotta pay the bills.
With tax subsidies, many models are in that range now.

if you don't have the income or the desire to take advantage of the tax subsidies yourself, you can still get them through very generous leasing programs that most manufacturers are offering for electric vehicles.
This is a neat interactive visualization. For a primer on statistical vs. practical significance I’d recommend this article: https://www.statology.org/statistical-practical-significance...
Eric S Raymond: Abolish “Codes of Conduct” and all the Orwellian doublespeak that goes with them. It's less bad that people sometimes got their feelings hurt than it is to institutionalize a means by which dissenting opinions are crushed under the rubric of “not nice”.

100% agreed. And the reason why we can't have nice things. Co-opting by people with bad intentions, posing as saviors.

Edit: for the fast downvoter:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8609

The cost of a culture in which avoiding offense trumps the liberty to speak is that crybullies control the discourse.
Director is used in lots of places
GitHub Whoami via SSH
> "The extinction rate is based on how many species are on Earth and how rapidly they're going extinct," Curry said. "And no one actually knows the answer to either one of those questions." About 90% of living species — largely insects — are probably unnamed, Pimm added. And if researchers don't know that a species existed, they won't know it went extinct.

The two thoughts that entered my mind were insects and 'define species'. There could be so many minor genetic mutations in the insect world that have offspring but quickly disappear. How large a trait difference or population is needed to qualify as a species?
Amen to Linux Phones. We need more choices!

I got so sick of these kind of shenanigans, I built a simple, non-mobile phone with a Raspberry Pi 3B+, a Raspberry Pi 7 inch touchscreen, and a Logitech headset. It runs off Wi-Fi or Ethernet only.

It does voice and SMS only, but it does what it does very well. I wrote all the software myself (Python3 and C).

I've been using this as my daily driver for over a year now.

I'm planning to make it available to the public soon. All of it will be open source, of course. My goal is an open source alternative to Apple/Google.
This is called the tragedy of the commons.
Unfortunately, the "UAC is not a security boundary" meme bears repeating here.

There are many similar such UAC bypasses, e.g. https://github.com/rootm0s/WinPwnage#uac-bypass-techniques and https://github.com/hfiref0x/UACME.
I saw this today, it uses starship.rs and looks pretty decent https://twitter.com/malfaitrobin/status/1325076698182848514
Exactly, we should farm fish (indoors, on land, to avoid pollution).

Wild populations should be left alone entirely.
>Only nation state actors might be able to do that.

Nah, all it takes is a good spear phishing campaign like the iCloud celebrity nudes leak a few years ago
we value encryption

we like stuff to be easy though

for thousands of years people used codes that couldn't be broken

but we got lazy

wah wah

lets break security
If you are talking about the “fraud” donnie diaper keeps making up then I’d hate to tell you that they have been fact checked and proven wrong.
Sure it’s possible, although it appears to be unlikely. But in the worst case I can go without a phone. Fortnite was a great example of how the platform > any single app. I sided with Apple completely.
It's called a side channel.

The amount of information _sent_ really is 1 bit.
> unless the other boat has cannons and rockets, which a fishing boat is unlikely to have.

Well, you say that, but they have been known to use bombs.

> Sea Shepherd said fishermen threw rocks that broke the ship’s windows and tossed gasoline bombs that briefly ignited a fire on the Farley Mowat’s deck. [0]

[0] https://apnews.com/article/db582591f91d4747abc0fefc520257af
Sure - "GPT-3 style" here meant "something along the lines of GPT-3" rather than anything specific to GPT-3 actual capabilities. The context being dystopian sci-fi thought experiments :) (That said, I suspect you could train GPT-3 to automatically get vetted into some fairly nasty places if you so desired).
Overreacting is equally dangerous, I could argue that if they were really killing the freedom to communicate we should fight them as we would fight an enemy, possibly going to war, armed.

That's not what's happening here.

It might be useful to remember that our communications have never been encrypted before a few years ago and they haven't been less free.

Also: encrypted communication but clear text metadata kinda defeat the purpose of encrypted communication.

If I know where, when and who was involved in a call, I can easily tell that two people chatting and ending up in the same place every time both their partners phones are away from home, could be cheating

If I call an ambulance at the same time and place where an accident happened but the ambulance doesn't report a second vehicle, guess who probably didn't report an accident?

Privacy and secrecy are a broader subject, it's good we discuss about it, it's not good to blindly trust WhatsApp or Facebook with our data.

Bad as it might be, I have more control and trust more my state than a private company on the other side of the World.
Well, no point in over-engineering a solution, right?

To put it another way, sounds like they moved fast (and maybe broke a few things?), put together an MVP that meets their needs, rolled it out, and are now likely learning and gathering feedback for their next iteration... sounds like they fit right in around here!

(This thread reminded me of something a cow-orker used to say: "If it's stupid but it works, it's not stupid".)
Scientific research has not found much evidence for transmission by touch, known in the literature as fomite transmission:

"The principal mode by which people are infected with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) is through exposure to respiratory droplets carrying infectious virus."

-https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3...

You see this in the guidance by major health organizations. For instance the WHO clearly says:

"Current evidence suggests that the main way the virus spreads is by respiratory droplets among people who are in close contact with each other."

It probably can happen. But contact tracing hasn't found much evidence for it: the majority of infections can be explained by close contact from an infected person.

Re: masks, surgical masks and cloth mask far from 100% effective against small particles, with filtering efficiencies of 50% or less common though the fabric. Filtration is even less when you take into account air that bypasses the mask (the reason why your glasses fog up is because of air that isn't being filtered).

Also, very large numbers of people use them incorrectly, eg by leaving the nose uncovered, and leaving gaps. I don't think this is a matter of education: people know what correct wear is, and don't do it because it's much easier to breath if you defeat the mask's filtration.

Most people aren't wearing masks around family and friends anyway.
That assumption is called elitism. Drop it and you’ll have a much easier time in life. Assuming an entire political base is just stupid shuts out huge opportunities in business, friendship, love, and personal growth.
It doesn't work all the time, but it works well enough.