skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The simplest explanation of DDD gaining more and more popularity is that it’s a dead-simple pattern that in most cases leads to significant improvements in one of the hardest and most painful areas of programming - code maintainability.

I'm not sure I'd call it "dead-simple". I agree with the thrust of the article, but the difficulty of DDD is proportional to the difficulty of understanding your domain and the problem you're solving. DDD at its essence isn't really about the code; I think that makes many software engineers (including myself at first) uncomfortable.

There's no free lunch -- DDD is just a (really good) approach to extracting as much knowledge as you can from the domain, with some guidelines for manifesting that knowledge in the architecture of your program. But it's important not to confuse the coding guidelines for the domain modeling.

The problem domain I'm working in has been difficult to get a handle on, because some things have been traditionalized or operationalized to the point that it's sometimes hard to find someone who knows why the domain is how it is. (I'm not saying those people don't exist; but they're less easy to reach.) It's taken nearly a year for the team I'm on to build up a sufficient domain model. It was anything but "dead simple". Worth it, though? Absolutely. But it's likely to be hard going unless you're already domain experts.
macOS 11 Big Sur may brick your 2013 – 2014 MacBook Pro
Why was that downvoted?
This describes all encrypted and short lived messages.

Edit: Removed the word "literally" because it was incorrect and caused distraction from the actual argument.
Fauci cautions that a Covid-19 vaccine won't eliminate the need for masks
> I provided a counter-example to demonstrate that your statement was an exaggeration.

Which counterexample is that exactly? Your counterexample involving a store is incorrect -- the store's email would still be authenticated for a smaller amount of time which would allow your server to verify that it is a valid email that came from the store's servers.

EDIT: Since you responded with an edit, I suppose I should as well. Btw, you can reply to comments below, but you have to click on the comment's permalink/timestamp (the thing that says "1 hour ago") first.

I didn't see the comment you are referring to because it was a very high up ancestor. I only saw the comment I replied to which doesn't mention courts nor third-parties, which is why I asked you for an explanation. Please don't jump immediately to the conclusion that I did not read your comment.

Regarding the content, hamburglar's sibling comment is spot on. Non-repudiability shouldn't just be an afterthought. Accidental non-repudiability can have negative consequences itself. For one, relying on the kind of poor man's non-repudiability that DKIM gives you leaves powerful central entities with the ability to forge email while convincing almost everyone that it is legitimate.

From reading everything that you wrote, I think that your thesis is that email, specifically, ought to be non-repudiable. That might be a worthwhile idea, but it should be presented as such at the forefront. If others agree that this is a valid and useful concept, then a non-repudiability mechanism could be added to email explicitly, just as DKIM was added. But don't use DKIM for this, since it is a poor substitute.
How would Yelp know whether or not my call to a local restaurant ended in a sale without listening in on the phone call?
This is untrue. As somebody that just defected from OSX to Windows I can tell you that you're missing out. Windows became a more stable and usable PC where everything just works. My 2 year old top of the line MBP was replaced by a
3 year old Dell XPS 13 after 10 years of OSX and I hate to break it to you, but Windows changed.

I replaced the MBP since the I had to replace the thinnest keyboard in the world, but I had problems with BT, WiFi, crashes, random external monitor glitches, no support for two external monitors via TB 3.0 (look it up, same hardware works under windows!!). Ask my diehard OSX fan coworker that just had to upgrade OSX just to get wifi working at home. I stayed for Windows since my MBP stopped working a week after I got the keyboard replaced and to be honest I really can't bother to move back. Everything just works here.

OSX has left the domain of the power user and has been relegated to into the domain of the consumer user that likes the Apple marketing.

I am monitoring the situation with ARM CPUS closely and that would be a motivation to switch back, but right now it feels my next computer upgrade will be windows based high end laptop. Better OS and better price performance are hard to argue with.

PS: If you're a developer and you're still clinging to OSX, try it - the whole experience is next level (compared to the whole brew ecosystem). Download WSL for windows, get Ubuntu from windows store and use the Windows Terminal to experience native Ubuntu. Hell if you're using VS Code, all you need to do is type "code ." from Ubuntu to open VS Code in Windows and develop in native Linux.
https://thedailywtf.com/articles/The_Complicator_0x27_s_Glov...
You'll probably want to look into using Emacs as a server. Emacs creeps up on you, you'll be surprised looking back on this comment in a year.
People Are Calling Elon Musk a “Space Karen”
There's a fantastic Long Now seminar by Michael Frachetti that talks about discovering previously unknown sites in Tajikistan, as well as the trade dynamics in the region:
https://longnow.org/seminars/02018/feb/26/open-source-civili...
Here is the actual quote: "once counterparties have authenticated each other's messages, the legitimate need for authentication is gone". Yes I used quotes in the "do X" sentence, but nobody will mistake it for a literal quote, because it contains "X" in place of the actual thing. Anyway, do you think there is something wrong with my characterization of that statement?
We could catch a lot of criminals if we every OS had a backdoor that the police could access. So, are you in favor of that?
It's a double blind study. Nobody (including the researchers) knew who was getting the vaccine vs a placebo until the end of the study. That's the point. So both groups were taking the same precautions. So roughly none of that 95% is attributable to difference in precautions.
That diagram is the living embodiment of the "corporate has asked you to identify the difference between these pictures" meme
Who is downvoting this? You shouldn’t be able to down
vote without leaving a substantive comment.
Some sources that could be useful

https://ourworldindata.org/excess-mortality-covid

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...
Non-repudiability makes perfect sense in a bunch of different financial cryptography settings. People really have trouble with the idea that all cryptography isn't the same, and that it's specialized to different problem domains. It's part of the reason we still have janky old PGP.
In the quote I presented above, the author wasn't making a technical argument, but a moral one.

If you or the author are presenting an argument why repudiation is necessary on technical grounds, I will admit ignorance and defer to the experts.

But my reading of the blog post was that it is not a technical argument. It's an argument about morality, and specifically the author used political examples. If the author did not want lay people to argue about the moral implications, why did they use non-technical arguments?
The system notifies you about software updates from time to time, and you are trained to install them for security.

The Big Sur update is notified in the same way. It gives the appearance of being just another big software update.

Unlike Windows, Mac OS updates come out more often, about once a year for major version, and every couple of months for minor version. Despite the marketing fanfare, they are not as big a change as say jumping from Windows 7 to Windows 10.

Ok, maybe you still want to take care with a new OS. Like with Excel three days before filing taxes. (Though when do you expect the accountant to upgrade? They are always doing someone's taxes.)

Maybe you do try it in a VM first, and decide you like it, it works well for you. Some people try new OS versions in a separate partition. You can do that on a Mac, just like on a PC. It seems like it ought to be safe, because you've kept the old installation on as well. Just like on a PC, you can choose which to start up using the built-in boot menu.

Being sensible you take a full system backup first. Usually, with Apple, a backup is pretty good. You can reinstall from a backup provided the system can boot. Macs have a reinstaller built in. By analogy with a PC, it's more like "imaging" a Windows or Linux system, and as if the PC BIOS had built-in tools to restore from a backup image.

Following that analogy, the problem here is that Big Sur nuked the BIOS! It can't even reboot from external media, or the recovery partition. If a Window OS upgrade did that we'd not only be unhappy, we would also be rather surprised that we can't boot an external USB key to recover.
Why your buildpack Docker images were created 40 years ago
Apple proposes that programs such as Tunnelblick be modified to use a different method to accomplish the function that the system extensions currently perform. The current Tunnelblick developers do not have the time or expertise to use the new method Apple proposes and have no plans to do so. It is possible that someone else will develop such an alternative method and make it publicly available, but there is no way to know if or when that will happen.

This is what undermaintained open source looks like.
There are associations of sex workers that advocate for their rights. Unclear if that's the kind of work they'd want to do.
Look (listen?) for the cagey answers:

"Is this Restaurant X?"

"I can help you place an order!"

"But is this Restaurant X?"

"I can take your X order when ready!"
FWIW, I am pretty sure I agree with you/OTR, but the IETF Messaging Layer Security (MLS) people disagree for not-always-trivially-dismissible reasons (indirect link because I am lazy).

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25101825
There is no way to know that in 100 years we'll be able to take care of the nuclear waste. Thinking otherwise is hubris. Nuclear is a total gamble on whether we can keep it safe for decades.
In the old days, someone who wanted to send you this kind of content would build and sell hardware for you to receive and play it (like a DVD player).

Online streaming services have, in part, scaled so quickly because they run on the general-purpose computers that people already own. So they don't need to bear that hardware cost. These general purpose computers have been fertile soil to grow and nurture the seeds that software companies scatter to the winds.

How interesting it would be if it comes full circle with specialized hardware being required on each PC to receive the content stream.
Yes, because the certificate is not valid for the site they linked to - it's only valid for the ASCII-named site. Everything seems to be working as intended here on the browser side.
They're saying that sure, the name youtube-dl might well imply it's specifically for downloading things from YouTube, but that doesn't mean it's specifically for downloading video from YouTube.
> List of Safari Updates - Just, why? Why is that attached to an OS release?

Since a few versions, you can actually get the latest safari on the previous OS. So even if safari is the one thing you want you don’t need the update.

> In particular, messages will take up 20%+ of the release content to essentially highlight the ability to put emojis and faces on everything.

Messages in particular probably needs the new OS due to catalyst updates.
REST API Fuzz Testing Tools from Microsoft
Everything you said is factually incorrect. The China lockout happened after the virus was already here, champ.
If a gig worker reguarly goes to multiple grocery stores (which is pretty common, moreso than for individual shoppers), there might not be much benefit for grocery store workers. The ability to transfer disease between grocery stores might increase risk in a major way. It's also not clear that interacting with one high-risk gig worker is better than interacting with twenty low-risk remote workers.

I'd be wary of coming to strong conclusions here without data; you can easily come up with plausible arguments either way.
Try Windows - it's the best interface to experience Linux from :D.
That's quite interesting, do you mind if I update the article and cite you as a source? (OP here.)

One a Linux LiveCD, I've sometimes connected to the internet and installed non-default packages; is something analogous possible with Windows 10 installer image, or is it only the tools that come on the disc?
Rather interesting that GitHub decided to restore access 1 day after receiving the EFF's counter notice, instead of waiting 10 days.

As a brief legal recap, in 1998 the DMCA added §512 [1] to US copyright law, which established a mechanism for shielding 'service providers' from liability for content posted by users (known as 'safe harbor'), but only as long as they follow formal procedures (known as 'DMCA takedown') to respond 'expeditiously' to remove content when they receive a notification claiming infringement, but also to restore access "not less than 10, nor more than 14, business days" after receiving a counter notification claiming the removal was a mistake.

In the post, GitHub implied they removed the youtube-dl repo after receiving the RIAA's formal takedown notice in order to 'comply with laws', and the law also required them to restore access after receiving the EFF's formal counter notice. However, the counter notice was sent yesterday and they restored access 1 day later, not waiting the legal minimum of 10 days. In restoring access so quickly GitHub isn't fully complying with §512, opening themselves up to liability if the RIAA decides to pursue legal action.

Perhaps a symbolic gesture to restore access a couple weeks before they would have been legally required to restore access anyway, but nonetheless interesting to see their willingness to set aside §512 safe harbor protections in the future if their reading of facts suggest a takedown claim doesn't have merit.

[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512
DARPA isn't afraid to ask the easy questions I see /s

Too bad agency, DARPA included, wants to pay enough to have people work on these problems for extended time periods. It's good to see some funding for high-risk work but there just isn't enough anymore.
Thanks for sharing that link, it's quite informative!
Managing CUDA install on Windows is a big PITA too
It's a problem that fixes itself quickly. Things suck for a few months, then it's done. Rip the bandaid off quick.
This lists 2 RCTs (related to Covid-19 + a few others for other infections). One is very small (16 people), the other is dubious, it seems to be the one that combines with hydroxychloroquine "standard of care". (I believe this was discussed on HN before.)

It almost certainly won't reduce death rate by 25%. Very few medical interventions have an effect size that large.
You've made your own argument against your point. There are rules about all those things. You speed too much or in the presence of a cop, you'll get pulled over. In my state, you go more than 20 over and you have a mandatory jail sentence. There are strict rules and crash tests from insurance associations for all vehicles to reduce the risk from car crashes.

Furthermore, as a bicyclist you can manage your own risk and the risks aren't correlated. Viruses don't listen to Fox News or MSNBC. You can't wish away exponential growth. Just because a car crashes into your bicycle, doesn't mean that three other crashes occur in close proximity. I'm sorry, but your comparison doesn't make any sense.
The bumper on your car is probably plastic. It will survive 1500 kg moving at 8kmh. If you bang a lens, the most likely breakage will be the precision optical system going out of whack. By the time the housing cracks, that’s likely to have already happened as well.
I had a couple great summers working as a trip leader for a summer camp. It was a pretty old-school no-electricity-for-the-kids experience. Lots of awesome dawn bike rides before breakfast, traversing bits of the Appalachian Trail, and planting seeds of socialist thought into the minds of children from extremely wealthy backgrounds.

Two actual conversations:

"So, Kevin, what do your parents do for a living?"

"Oh, you know, the usual... My dad's a neurosurgeon and my mom's an editor at the new york times."

---

"It's been a long eight weeks, Jimmy! Are you looking forward to seeing your parents?"

"Well... actually I'm heading to a six week music camp tomorrow."
You can navigate to files in Emacs using `find-file` (C-x C-f with standard key bindings).

That should prompt you to enter a path, which, without any customization, should perform very similar to a shell prompt in terms of using tab for file completions.

A huge improvement to this in my opinion is the use of a completion framework package. I use ivy[0] but helm is also popular and there are others.

The main draw in this case is instead of having to tab through completion candidates, they appear as a vertical list which is updated as you type. It also allows more advanced filtering, for example by regex which I find a lot easier to use than shell completion which only supports prefix.

For example say I want to navigate to a directory called `the-project` but I always forget whether it's named `the-project` or `a-project`, it doesn't matter because I just type `project` and would see `the-project` as an option so I'd navigate to that and select it (using `C-n` and `C-p` to navigate the list).

If that isn't what you're looking for then another option is `emacsclient` [1] which let's you open files in an already existing Emacs process.

[0] https://github.com/abo-abo/swiper

[1] https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/EmacsClient
Fair, though I think it's still true that it's a very difficult threat model.

Also worth noting that email clients typically tell you about new logins/clients (though I don't think their way of doing it is particularly robust).
> Being able to prove a fascist dictator who was killing people for being gay, was secretly engaging in gay acts themselves, might help your cause of protecting gay people.

How?
This seems like pretty dishonest framing from the article. The government was quite explicit about why it was important to procure this product without due scrutiny (https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4353?ijkey=369744d6c8b0...). They urgently needed a lot of tests in order to do surveillance testing, and the normal standards of quality for medical tests don't matter enough to delay pandemic surveillance until they're satisfied.

More generally, I think this clearly demonstrates the problem with claims of politicization: the question of which corners should be cut to address a public health emergency is inherently political.
FastAPI Added to PythonStacks
> Semiconductor engineering is still a career suicide though, that haven't changed in the last few decades.

This is so true. I am currently a hardware engineer and planning to switch to software. If you are not in Nvidia, Apple or other mega-growth hardware companies, you are suffering atleast 40% paycut compared to software industry and also working about twice as hard, using obsolete tools and flows, and almost no opportunities for technical advancement or significant impact. Meanwhile the annual raises are cost-of-living adjustments. Its truly depressing.
There's no evidence that youtube-dl actually hurts youtube

What do you mean there's no evidence? There's no evidence it doesn't hurt them either.

you could just as easily say it makes people want to watch more youtube

Not if videos are ripped and uploaded on Facebook, which has been a problem for them for past few years.

There's also no evidence of any of the other things you said.

There's no evidence against it either.

in the hopes they'll get some money out of it

From a guy who maintains an open source tool? Those guys sure have a lot of money.
We (ZeroTier) figured out a workaround that still works as of Big Sur.

https://www.zerotier.com/2019/08/21/how-zerotier-eliminated-...

Figuring that out required reading Darwin source code. It was not easy. We are investigating a DriverKit approach for the long term in the hope of eventually getting rid of this weird hack.

If you don't need L2 "tap," then there's utun which is wrapped by the VPN network extension API. That is more standard, but also more limited. Not only is it L3 only but more importantly it's hard-blacklisted for Bonjour/mDNS and has other issues doing multicast.
This is why I disable bluetooth on mobile device and never install brand apps.

Complete disrespect of privacy. Locations using this technology should be required to inform their customers.
They should be able to. It would be easy. But it is faster and cheaper not to, and companies are not single omniscient monoliths. Each department has their own targets, quotas, and deadlines, and while I doubt anyone at the top of Apple said anything along the lines of "ignore these devices", the ball was dropped somewhere in the chain of command, and the fact that nobody picked it up (along with experiences with past Apple updates) suggests to me that QA is much lower priority at Apple than some other places.
Market Basket Analysis 101: An Introduction
The headline ignores the fact that the covid forecasters have changed their model over time to be basically what the paper said to (based on the initial model from March done in great panic). So this story is really nothing. Models improve over time if you have enough time.
The iOS Covid App Ecosystem Has Become a Privacy Minefield
Benchmarks of Composer 2.0 vs. 1.10
This situation reminds me heavily of the Simpsons. I can't stop thinking about this: "Aurora borealis this time of year?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=Rj0Tj8dnrYw
I welcome the vaccine (am a pro-vaxxer), but have no plans to be part of the first wave of recipients. Am fine beta testing games, but not eager to beta test a vaccine.

I think this perspective gets lost amongst concerns about anti-vaxxers - I don’t think 30% of the US is anti-vaccine, but >1 are skeptical about being a lab rat for something with a fast-tracked testing phase.
Market Basket Analysis 102: Alteryx Designer and Python
Interviewing Venture Capitalists
I bet the experience differs a lot for different people and different cultures. My mother has diabetes and is in the vulnerable age group but from all the adults I know, she and her friends around her age are the people who were the least concerned about the virus since the beginning of the epidemics. No isolation, no masks, they just don't care and even get angry at the attempts to keep them isolated. And to be fair, I totally get it. Kind of, it is better to die standing than to live kneeling. We'll all die sooner or later.
Not very lockdown friendly.
No doctor should be writing that email in the first place; it would be an example of such a flagrantly negligent treatment of PHI that cryptographic signatures and reputability are kind of irrelevant.
Sometimes I think people don't fully understand how cool the term rewriting is in Mathematica where it continuously expands on anything from text to functions to images and audio...it's pretty neat.
"On Saturday, Musk took to Twitter to clarify the situation surrounding his health — but, like a raging Karen in a checkout line, succeeded only in muddying the waters further."

Is this truly the state of journalism in 2020? I can't stand copy like this, but I guess I'm the one to blame since I clicked on it.