skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Exploiting loopholes is virtuous for many of the people in the industry. It demonstrates your attentiveness to the rules.
Is there any evidence that signature matching is an accurate way to ensure correctness? As a useless anecdote, my current signature looks _nothing_ like the one on my state issued ID from 10 years ago.

Something that someone else said is quite important here: the time to fix these things is before an election, not afterwards. It doesn't take much imagination to see how invalidating large quantities of ballots after-the-fact is a dangerous road for a democracy. Put the rules and methods in place prior, in a bipartisan way.
In a thread about people fleeing from California to other states, particularly Texas, it's certainly an appropriate comparison. Even more so when you consider Texas is about the closest in size and population except with nearly opposite politics. Comparisons are useful when talking about something in relative terms. Absolute statistics don't mean much in the context of moving from one place to another. You can say California is terrible but within the realistic options, not really. I didn't present any skewed metrics.

You twice pointed out illegal immigrants with emphasis on their contrast to "tax-paying" citizens but failed to connect it to any deeper meaning. So what if they've given them driver's licenses or paid for children & young adult healthcare? At least they've made attempts to integrate them, ostensibly recognizing their hardships and to prevent them from engaging in crime or becoming homeless.

Wildfires are easily preventable if you draw the line at individuals not lighting shit on fire in arid areas or private companies better maintaining their infrastructure.
It's possible to parse that quote two ways, but it's pretty easy to find another source (or read the Senate report yourself)

To quote The Intercept[1], on Paul Manafort in the Senate report:

One of Manafort’s closest aides during his time in Ukraine was Konstantin Kilimnik, who the Senate report identifies as a Russian intelligence officer. Kilimnik also served as Manafort’s liaison with Deripaska.

While he was working for Trump during the 2016 campaign, Manafort stayed in contact with Kilimnik and gave him the Trump campaign’s internal polling data, which showed that the key to defeating Clinton was to drive up negative attitudes about her among voters.

The Senate report says that the intelligence committee “obtained some information suggesting Kilimnik may have been connected to the GRU’s hack and leak operation targeting the 2016 election.” The report adds that “this information suggests that a channel for coordination on the GRU hack operation may have existed through Kilimnik.” The report adds that in interviews with Mueller’s prosecution team, “Manafort lied consistently about one issue in particular: his interactions with Kilimnik.” Manafort decided to “face more severe criminal penalties rather than provide complete answers about his interactions with Kilimnik.” The Manafort-Kilimnik relationship, the Senate report concludes, represents “the single most direct tie between senior Trump campaign officials and the Russian intelligence services.”

To emphasise a direct quote from the Republican-led Senate Committee: "the single most direct tie between senior Trump campaign officials and the Russian intelligence services."

Now it's possible that Manafort was doing this because he was greedy and getting money from the Russians (he was getting paid by them), and it's possible to argue that it wasn't collusion because Trump fired him.

And of course "collusion" is a messy thing anyway - there is no clear definition, and no crime called "colluding".

The whole report is worth reading[2].

[1] https://theintercept.com/2020/09/03/trump-russia-senate-repo...

[2] https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/docu...
> A lot of languages are doing single static binary deploys now

As a developer for more than 30 years, I find that statement quite interesting. When I was a kid I was very happy to find a way to compile Basic to an executable like I was doing in Pascal and C++. For me is the standard way of thinking about applications.

Is it a common experience to actually have to ship many files for one application? I thought that it was just common for the web as it fits how HTML evolved not for anything else.
>selectively ignoring things like this

Oops. There's failure point. You're using an article about a really narrow set of facts with limited implications to try and support a profound generalization that is totally out of proportion to what's described in the article. That is a completely out-of-control leap to be making.

And as others have pointed out "the media ignores..." is a subjective reaction, not something established by the articles, and those votes have been covered by mainstream outlets.

And the articles don't show any fraud, and they don't show anything that would change the outcome in Georgia, and they don't show anything that warrants systemic skepticism of the election writ large.
I think the synthesis of both of these narratives goes like this:

Google had been wanting to get rid of Gebru for a while, for both good reasons (based on her emails and tweets she does indeed seem like an incredibly toxic personality and I sure wouldn't want to work anywhere near her) and bad (retaliation against the lawsuit she filed last year, which is both unlawful and incredibly unethical). They picked this paper as what must have seemed like a clean reason when she made the threat to resign, but taking her up on that threat has blown up in their face because everyone can see their supposed rationale doesn't hold water.

Taken as a whole, neither side looks particularly sympathetic, which makes it easy for partisans to latch onto the bad behavior of whomever they dislike.
It's not a question of being smart, it's a question of reading about these things, reading what people have previously said, thinking hard, asking questions, and getting engaged and involved.

Some of this stuff is hard,and you're not expected to understand it without work. So don't just flip it off and say "I'm not smart enough" ... recognise that with work you can understand it, and if you choose not to put in the effort, that's your choice.
Ah, yes... that only works if we are not being actively manipulated.

In ideal world all people would be weighing evidence, try to think logically and appeal to timeless, basic principles.

Unfortunately, the world is not ideal and (what a shocker) half of people have less than 100 IQ.

While it is easy to see through most lies most of the time (the logic just isn't there), the goal is not to fool everybody. It is enough to fool just enough people to sow confusion.
Subscribe to GoRails for brilliant screencasts (many free, some not). Also look at the official guides. It’ll probably still really familiar tbh!
This leaky bucket approach seems ineffective, ignores the root cause, and likely emboldens people adhering to these ideas. As bizarre as it sounds, I think the root cause for the rise in supply and demand for misinformation is the decline of the church/religion. Couple that with technology and it's uncharted territory. Many people need something to believe in, whether it's luck, god, nature, whatever, beliefs are complex frameworks that order a chaotic world. They help people handle a number of difficult circumstances from inequality and injustice to fear and uncertainty, to loss and sadness, to dealing with difficult people, finding motivation, the list goes on.

Like religion, conspiracy theories fill many of those voids, but they are much better equipped to thrive in the 21st century. Where churches build communities in buildings, conspiracy theories form communities on social media and internet forums. Where churches hold the carrot of an afterlife or ultimate application of fairness, the conspiracy theory holds the carrot of a future leak or whistleblower leading to your team's ultimate victory and subsequent righting of wrongs. Where church uses god as the reason for everything, conspiracy theories use mini-gods arising from issues, responsible for all sorts of machinations and plots. Where churches use imperfect human leaders capable of hypocrisy and moral shortcomings, conspiracy theories often lack formal leaders, and when they are present, the bar for morality is low compared to the alleged crimes of the conspirators. Churches ask for money, conspiracy theories ask for time. Churches offer boring lectures on people who lived thousands of years ago, conspiracy theories are engaging and tie directly to real world events.

Whack-a-mole with ideas that keep popping up does nothing to solve the underlying issues: there are many people out there who feel empty in some way and they are desperate to fill that void with just about anything. Containment of misinformation has failed and will continue to fail, just like prohibition of drugs fails, and abstinence only sex education fails, and religious persecution fails.

I think the best approach is to ignore, minimize, monitor real-world impact, and organically counter. With that approach you avoid creating martyrs, and you can exploit a major weakness conspiracy theories possess compared to formal religion: Conspiracy theories operate in the realm of the living, there is no promise of truth in death as with many religions. Because of this, very few conspiracy theories truly stand the test of time, eventually they're either disproven, evolve to become too outlandish, or simply become boring and fizzle out.
> Anyone trading on a time scale of less than a few years is basically always optimistic. Buy and hold is generally the safest strategy.

I find it mind boggling that people can still believe so deeply that infinite growth is possible on a finite planet.

Just looking at climate change as one example, in 20 years or so we're looking a serious portion of the planet being uninhabitable. We'll be having trouble producing enough food to feed people. And climate change is just one of the many systemic problems that we're facing.
In Britain, faggots are a kind of old-fashioned meatball; in India, Marico is a large cosmetics company; everywhere, a chink is something found in metaphorical armour; as you say, nips are anatomical features visible in cold weather; on cat forums, Coons are a popular breed; on dog forums, bitches are half the subject matter; on biblical hermeneutics and science fiction forums, one or more Whores of Babylon may be discussed; on a physics forum, it will be hard to discuss the Wheeler-Feynman interpretation with reference to advanced but not retarded waves.
and i should add that this constraint is one of the reasons why some products get discontinued. right now, I'm dealing with migrating a dependency that has some breaking changes in an old section of my codebase that nobody has touched in years. I have to change it, because the dependency is changing, and I cannot continue to depend on the earlier version.

Happily, it is a simple enough update (and frequently these changes are automated by whomever is actually changing the library). But when this is something that needs extensive reworking, the project might get turned down instead.
What sort of complexity was the S7's passcode? 4 digit pin? more than 4 digits? short password? longer passphrase?

Also, which Android versions? Stock Samsung or an alternative rom? (My S6Edge is "stuck" on Android 7 without replacing the OS with a non Samsung alternative. My S4 is running a much newer Lineage Android version...)
> What happens when an adblocker is sold and the new owner secretly installs spyware to steal all of your passwords and cookies?

Is there not a whole chrome extension review process?
Interestingly, I was at a party last weekend and one of my friends took half a tab. He opened right up, was willing to talk about his long term relationship and how he feels, which is something he doesn't do often with us, his best friends of so many years.

I can see how this might help in couples therapy.
Thank you, but unfortunately I haven't read any books on the topic, most of my opinion is based on blog posts, HN submissions (checking /latest almost every day), youtube videos, etc.
Yes, and that's why so many people are leaving.

California won't accept that it's destroying its tax base and so will fail.
I think the commentor was as much concerned with the namespace pollution: to some people on the left, there doesn't seem to be a "right" (or even a "center"), anymore, only a "far right". This isn't because because they all share the same views, but rather because there's a lack of nuance to the language used by many people in discussing politics.

(I say people because the same thing occurs in reverse when talking about "extremist leftists")
It also determines who your children's peers will be. Selecting into a highly rated school district means all the other kids' parents did the same.
Indeed. There is a cocktail of pill to consider taking before MDMA: it's piracetam, magnesium, vitamins, anti-oxidants (all these contribute to improving the trip, minimizing harm and preventing hangover[1]) and Viagra/Cialis. Even if you are young and healthy (and especially if you are - AFAIK Viagra is kind of unsafe to mix with other stuff if you're old).

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwTqlw8yGnI

But don't ever take Viagra (I don't know about Cialis) with MDMA alternatives like 6APB - that's supposed to be a particularly cardiotoxic combination.
I've written a not-so-small-anymore Lisp implementation, and wouldn't call it cohesive. Even a one-person design won't be cohesive without a laser focus on cohesivity, which guides every design decision, and which sacrifices compatibility with anything existing, also.

> Why can’t equality operators be extended to user-defined types?

That's a loaded question where a bad answer is worse than no answer.

I have taken a crack at it by inventing a concept called "equality substitution".

Equality for a new user-defined type is defined using a one-argument method, which takes an instance of that type itself. When an object of that type is compared with something using equal, then that method is called, and the return value is used instead; that is then iterated on. If an object has no such method, then its identity is used: the opposite argument must be that same object.

Thus, custom equality works by substituting some ordinary object: hence, "equality substitution".

For instance some employee object may have an equal function which returns the employee ID (an integer). Then employee object whose ID is 42, is equal to the integer 42, and therefore any other employee object whose ID is 42, or any other non-employee object also which returns 42.

To make it safer, the function could return a cons instead like (employee . 42), where the type symbol appears in the car. That cons is then equal only to another cons which has employee in car and 42 in cdr.

Equality substitution neatly solves the problem of hashing also. The hash able implementation uses the equality substitute of an object as the key: that's the value it hashes, and that's the value it compares.

The programmer need not define a custom hashing function, which is an error-prone, low-level task that we would not like to foist upon application programmers.

Now, not everyone will find it appealing that (equal non-cons-object '(employee . 42)) can yield true. They might say, if you believe that no answer is better than a bad answer, why on Earth did you do such a thing?

> Why pathnames?

Portability of code among very diverse historic operating systems, installations of which are no longer in deployment.

Pathnames in CL may be a pain in the but, but they are arguably a better abstraction than raw strings.

Mainly the thing that is wrong with CL pathnames is that the spec leaves certain behaviors implementation-defined in such a way that two people writing a CL implementation on POSIX, say, will end up with different behaviors. There is more than one way that POSIX path strings can correspond to pathnames objects. Oh, like for instance in foo.tar.gz, is "gz" the :type? Or is "tar.gz" the :type? That creates ironic situations whereby we can't port a Lisp program to the one single plaform using two implementations of the language, such that the behavior is identical!

A new revision of ANSI CL could solve this: it could specify that on Microsoft Windows, the correspondence between pathname objects and strings is such and such, and on POSIX such and such, and so forth.
> And those species lose their territory as soon as a bigger, meaner creature wants it. Their "right" to their territory is only as strong as their personal ability to protect it. No one else will help them.

Indeed, and the same for the state.

> Unless that's what your advocating for when you talk about property rights,

I'm not advocating for anything, just correcting some misconceptions.

> then rights absolutely do come from the state.

No, they do not. Rights are a social fiction that arises from mutual cooperation and are continued through repetition and intentional performance. It is true that actors whose actions are colored by state power can participate disproportionately in this process of evolving norms.

> Most of us think property rights mean what's mine is mine no matter who wants it, not that I lose it as soon as someone takes it from me or hires someone to do so.

Yes because the norm of property requires that theft, robbery, and things of that nature are violations of that norm.
“Beating 80% of other news sources” is completely orthogonal to being right. HN could indeed beat out 80% of the alternatives and still be brutally wrong.

And that’s long before we discuss the tendency of specialists to over-extend into other fields with predictably bad results.
> or, have mandated open apis that _force_ products to integrate.

Yep, I mostly agree. Except, defining APIs is pretty much the realm of software engineering more than regulations.

I mean, we don't want to have regulations that essentially say:
"all companies selling platforms (god knows how we're going to accurately define what a platform is; let's ignore that for now) must support development against open apis such as HTML 5" and then realize that 5 years later nobody wants to write apps in HTML 5 but the shiny new thing called Flash that Adobe has developed. (My memory fails me; Flash is the hot new thing right? :P)

Anyways, it feels like society has reached a point where regulators need software skills if they're going to tackle societal impact of big tech. We need super smart folks from software _also_ become super smart folks in law and become members of congress. :D Or, maybe we need congress to sign up for #learntocode. Cross-functional skills FTW!
I disagree. Lodging goes on the market all the time, but its market value is highly specific. There is no equivalent property to compare the corporate housing to.
The thing that is most interesting to me is that this is a major R&D program being done literally out in the open. These prototypes are being put together basically in an open field or under a tent with SpaceX sharing loads of information on the technology, price targets, mission profiles and so on. And yet nobody is coming close to matching them.

Even if another company decides to try to replicate what SpaceX is doing, they're now at least a decade behind.

Nobody has the present institutional knowledge that they have.
Rust and Deno qualify as a "single executable" for what I need, but you're basically correct. It's not quite as dependency free as a Go binary.
I don't know - not sure anyone does.

Christine Peterson claims to have invented the term in 1998.

https://opensource.com/article/18/2/coining-term-open-source...

But at least this much is not true - we can see it being used, in context, at least as far back as 1996. I think people involved in this project at the time say it was a common term back then as well, but I can't find a reference for that now.

http://www.xent.com/FoRK-archive/fall96/0269.html

And they certainly don't own it - they wrote a whole article on their own website still available about how they don't own it!

https://opensource.org/pressreleases/certified-open-source.p...
"Windows installation now requires you to be logged in with a Microsoft account (no way to set it up with a local account)."

That's not exactly a true statement - you can make a local account, depending on Windows version, but have to jump through hoops to find that setting.

I do get the point though.
He condemned white supremacy only after receiving more backlash than he expected. Don’t be a revisionist we were all there it was just three years ago. The old adage is than when white supremacists believe you’re one of them you might as well be.
A loan is not (usually) taxable income. Taxable income is used to pay back the loan.

This keeps people's capital invested longer term, which is part of the purpose of capital gains tax incentives.

In other words, it's not a loophole. It's working as intended.
yeah but I got the runaround. You're right and I should see someone else. Thanks for the encouragement.
As far as I can tell "True" and "False" in any context are way more like popular consensus rather than some natural immutable objective state.
Unfortunately for a lot of us outside the US, this is just a dream.
I think his is a point that (as a person of color in the us) I've been afraid to say out loud. Nobody ever calls me racist, but when someone eventually does, I know what my response will be: "yes, I am. And so are you".
Developing walking robots when the wheel has been invented is not big business. Walking is good only for special purposes. Walking is not energy efficient. Their military mule looked cool, you rarely saw it doing anything that small wheeled unit could not do with better range and less maintenance.

Their new pivot towards wheeled logistic robots is acknowledgement of this fact. They still try to push probably unnecessary "legs with wheels" with Handle.

What robot revolution needs is nimble hands.
There is no constitutional process for disputing an election, there are only rules on the electing process itself. This is uncharted territory and will remain so unless the supreme court creates a new precedent.
So, after 4 years of constant unfounded public "Russia gate" allegations, now it is too much to look into hundreds of sworn wittness statements, video footage, statistical anomalies, and whatnot, for even a few weeks?

That type of behaviour is what is fishy.
> our only security advantage is being a small target

1. If a 3-letter agency requests access to your on-prem data you'll know about the request and know which data is compromised.

2. You now have to trust your hosting provider. This is almost the same as being a small target, but not quite because you need to worry about all of their employees AND all of your own. There are 1k+ employees to attempt to compromise at Gitlab, and you have no control over or contracts with any of them.

3. Expanding on 2, given the disconnect between Gitlab and your own organization you open yourself up to new kinds of attacks like social engineering an account takeover, or expanding an email breach to a source code breach.

I don't think any of that matters for most people, but your attack surface area is increased with current cloud tech.
Great flight!

Elon tweeted that the header tank pressure was low:

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1336809767574982658

There was also a substantial green flame coming from the raptor engine used for landing. Group consensus over on /r/SpaceX is that it was copper burning. We're amazed the engine didn't explode sooner.
The Future of Breathing – James Nestor [video]
They don’t get “irrational”, they just lie. Most lies happen semi-subconsciously.