skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The email in my company all comes from @<company-name>.com. Why would a company keep a separate domain for internal vs external email? Is that common practice?
An undelivered gift is not a contract. This is covered in first-year contract law.
It’s a jet turbine, so I assume the cable is just to lead and control.

A thousand foot of very strong fishing wire https://www.amazon.com/Sufix-Performance-Braid-300-Spool/dp/... is a mere 0.15 lbs, if Amazon’s description is to be believed.

So as a guide wire even with multiple strands (for redundancy) I think 3000 feet is very achievable.
I explicitly told my penetration testers to avoid anything like this.

Invoking and then revoking a bonus email in a year where folks are already hard hit financially and mentally under the guise of “education” is lazy and any security leader who does it is a fool.

Effective security culture builds rapport with business units. This type of nonsense does the exact opposite.

Yes you may have proven a tactical point, but you have just set yourself up to lose the war.
It happens all the time at my work place. I work at a big company and I get emails from random people in the company to go to submit info to random places on the Internet, usually related to employee benefits or surveys. I always report them as suspicious and move on with my work.

Once in a while you'll see a follow up email from the sender saying that they are aware of many people reporting the email as a phishing attempt and that reporting the email was wrong and that link to that particular website is a company approved tool and that employees are required to complete the survey at the link for some department or center's benefit.

This wouldn't be a problem if we had internal websites with standard tools like a survey builder and such, but getting our IT contractor in my org to do the basic functions of their jobs takes a herculean effort, getting them to support a basic internal tool would be a multi-year campaign. I can appreciate how much easier (and cheaper) it can be to use external tools and train users to disobey IT and security recommendations about phishing.

The problem with bureaucracies and hackers is that both will take the path of least resistance, and the hard problem of IT security in large orgs is how to separate the two into distinct categories.
After your recommendation, I went to Amazon and bought one of many used copies on sale there.
> They can’t hire people with good ideas anymore because as we know money isn’t a great motivator

I know tens of people from my past who currently work in Facebook. When I knew then, they were all decent people with long careers in the tech industry. Yet, they chose to work for FB.

A fresh grad son of my ex-Boss is starting his career with FB.

Unfortunately FB's brand is not as tainted, yet, as it should be or as some of us in the HN echo-chamber like to believe.
I'm watching almost any video on 2.5-3x speed nowadays, which is faster than reading. Look for the 'Video Speed Controller' Firefox plugin.
That's UK, no HIPPA per se. Funny enough, the infamous GDPR applies and data leaks are quite punishable.

The Hospital Group is in a quite bad position: 1) the blackmail, in no definition that's ransom. 2) The data leak has to be reported and potentially they will get fined by the state.

As for taking regulation seriously, I guess it does depend on the industry. Where I work GDPR and regulatory breaches are treated more seriously than downtime.
> Most religious books that have stood the test of time have lived up to the hype. The Bible (especially certain books like Ecclesiastes or Proverbs), The Quran, The Upanishads, to name a few. Again, don’t just go in blind, or you’ll walk away thinking none of it makes any sense.

Seeing as how the Quran was "written" over decades and the Bible over millennia, they DON'T make sense. They're both self-contradictory, with various authors pushing various purposes depending on what they wrote and when. There's value in each, but let's not pretend they're towering forks of art with a singular purpose and vision.
Sorry I'm late, had to watch my 3D
I would advise anyone with a get-rich-quick mindset to stay away from crypto. In the short term, people with this mindset can lose a lot.

The get-rich-quick cohort is too quick to sell. They sell after 2x or 3x to "lock in gains" and then sit on the sidelines for the 20x. And then they buy at the top when the hype is at max volume. Then sell after a 50% drawdown to protect what remains of their capital.

However, those with extraordinary patience can do very well. Buy the leaders that are technically sound, with high decentralization, widely accepted with deep liquidity.

Then withdraw it offline, out of exchanges, to a hardware wallet.

Stop checking the price every five minutes.

Maybe once a quarter check the market, read the news, and ensure you remember your pin or seed and that your tokens are still there.

Never trade. When it doubles or triples, don't sell. When it drops 30% or 70%, don't sell. Just hold 5 or 10 years.

I've never been a fan of the centralized Ripple model, but if I was in your place, I'd examine my motivations. If I need the money now, if I'm looking for a quick buck, then I'd sell to stop the stress.

But if I can take a very long-term perspective, then I'd trade what's left for BTC or ETH and salt it away offline until 2026+ and see what happens.
Immigration cap? Without a cap on H1B the US would have 10 or 50 times the level of incoming immigrants.

Plus H1B is limited to having degrees (or a lot of work experience) in a small subset of occupations.

The US could bring over 1 million doctors in one year if it were legal.

H1B is only one specific case of immigration: generally speaking the developed world allows for unconstrained immigration if you have a job offer. Americans are particularly restricted in hiring foreigners, which is also one reason why it has so much illegal immigration.
This is what happens when a tech company gets a near monopoly for a few years. Their success after Skylake doomed the company.
Let's not go letting credit card processors off the hook, this was barely a month ago. Part of our security team is essentially full-time on dealing with the consequences of actors using stolen credit cards.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/billhardekopf/2020/11/13/this-w...
Well, a combination of objective limitations and FB's ability to execute.
Mammoths and Mastodons seem like even more dangerous elephants (especially aesthetically with their giant horns). So I wouldn't be surprised they acted similarly.

Maybe that sort of thing played a role in various big game species extinction in many places. They seemed scarier, and/or actually were more aggressive during certain phases like Musking.
Could you talk more about how you use it?
https://remarkable.com/store/remarkable-2 says it's for taking notes and writing on PDFs. That's not much to go on...
Sure, but then so is pretty much every aspect of the stock market, IMHO. It's a tool with all sorts of terrible flaws when it comes to capital allocation. A single company being overvalued without a safe way to bet against mass delusion of the public isn't that large of a flaw compared to the systematic over valuations and under valuations, IMHO.

This isn't to say that it's not without its uses, but we should be aware that it has huge problems even if we don't know of a way to fix them yet.
I took several of his lectures during his tenure at ETH Zurich (some time between 2008 and 2014) and it came up at some point.
I really doubt that MSFT is going to go into chips in a big way. That would not pass anticompetitive muster given the lock-in with their OS. Even if they claimed publicly they would sell the chips to anyone, who will believe the deal will be any good or lasting?
Edmund Clarke Pioneered Methods for Detecting Software, Hardware Errors
Read the quote. It doesn't have to be intentional, they may assume some bodies are male when they aren't
How to Create Mobile UI Animations That Meet Users’ Needs
It might be a realistic scenario and thus a "good" test. It still is a total dick move to do this as an employer. Some things you just should not do to your employees. There are a million other fishing scenarios that are realistic where you don't have to be promised money by your employer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yves_Rossy

https://youtu.be/nj-Iwv5NJKg

https://youtu.be/de_YJzKeGKU
Can you tell how such evaluation on a design is done? Is some kind of formal verification, analysis or rather experimentation to figure out its properties normal?

Thank you for your input!
Read it, don’t eat it.
No I agree with your initial statement. The victim is not deprived of data or normal operation. As stated elsewhere it's blackmail.

Adding: Wikipedia is also not necessarily authoritative.
Does "lock it" both allow editing and prevent accidental editing? What's the magic going on that distinguishes between real edits and accidental edits?
If the facts are as you said, that you've repeatedly told them to stop calling you, it may be worth talking to a TCPA Lawyer.
I can give you my list as I've also been watching lots of "old" movies. Though "old" can mean almost anything depending on who you ask. Note: I'm picky so while I love movies if I check my ratings (I take notes because I forget what I watched), it turns out I only like about one out of 10 movies. Or maybe to put it in a slightly better light, only 1 of 10 or so is worth recommending. Some might be okay but not okay enough to tell someone "you should seek out this movie"

Anyway, here's some from my list from the last year (the list of ones I didn't like is MUCH longer and includes many that are highly rated on IMDB)

"Now, Voyager" (1942)

"Boom Town" (1940)

"The Best Years of Our Lives" (1947)

"The Little Princess" (1939)

"Destry Rides Again" (1939)

"Baby Face" (1933)

"Adam's Rib" (1949)

"In a Lonely Place" (1950)

"It Happened One Night" (1934)

"The Woman of the Year" (1942)

"The Awful Truth" (1937)

"Broken Arrow" (1950)

"The Lady Eve" (1941)

"His Girl Friday" (1940)

"12 O'Clock High" (1949)

"You Can't Take It With You" (1938)

"The Far County" (1954)

"Random Harvest" (1942)

"The Bad and the Beautiful" (1952)

"The Philadelphia Story" (1940)

"Cry Danger" (1951)

"This Gun For Hire" (1942)

"Casablanca" (1942). I didn't get it at 23 where as I shook from crying at 50. Basically I needed to truly feel Rick's loss and what he was going through (Bogart's character). At 23 I didn't. At 50 I did. I suppose you could have similar experiences to Rick at a younger age or you could never have them and then not have it do anything for you.

I don't think any of them are "lesser known". Basically I just look up IMDB. If it's rated > 7 and sounds mildly interesting I'll take a look. Tons of them don't work for me. Those above did. As recent examples of ones that didn't "The Strange Love of Martha Ivers" (1946), "Dark Passage" (1947), "Waterloo Bridge" (1940), "The Bishop's Wife" (1947), "Spellbound" (1945), "Fort Apache" (1948). Those are just from the last 2 weeks (^^;)
My first thought as well. Increasingly I dont want a Web App, Blog, CMS, or whatever it is. I think all of that should just live on my computer as a simple App. Upload the HTML and we are good to go.

Basically going back to Front Page.
I came here to suggest we inform the Franchise Tax Board that we have evidence Elon is still in California.

But apparently this idea was already... in the air.
Isn't the reason for the problem is that multiple branches and tags may have any given commit? Same as in CVS? It seems like the problem is the UI that assumes that only a single branch may have any given commit.

---

BTW, whilst at it, any chance you can fix search by user-id? Currently freshbsd.org/search?project=freebsd&committer=phk doesn't produce the expected results.
You should check out Designated Survivor. I love West Wing but I also love stuff like 24. Designated Survivor is basically a perfect lovechild of the 2 series IMO. Relatively fresh, exciting, and really well made.
Stoner by John Williams and Crime & Punishment. I love TBK and other of Dostoyevsky's works but C&P really resonated with me
This video is not what I think of when I say "smear campaign". I think of the election interference hysteria, the whole "enemy number one" business. US media, not Navalny.

I watched the video too so I am part of the 10M. It's very well made. Most people don't have a pinboard with string on it a-la Silence of the Lambs. I got a chuckle out of the tropes.

Look, you and I have to work for a living. Who pays Navalny's bills? And no, I don't believe him when he says it is "anonymous donors". Putin is scum, but I don't think Navalny is who he says either.

More importantly, I think this whole "Russian bot" meme is incredibly damaging. Dehumanizing your opponent is standard practice for war, and this feels exactly like preparation for one. I love both countries. I have ties to both. The last thing I want is for them to fight.
But I don’t see them having a decent argument. Apple will (rightfully) say this gives their customers (who pay $$$ to get on their platform) a choice. They’ll also argue that “opt-in” is the right way to go for this kind of choice.

Facebook’s argument is “but it isn’t in our customer’s interests”, and they may add “if Apple adds such a feature, it should be opt-out”.

That first argument doesn’t have any value. Why would any third party have to accommodate Facebook’s advertising business? The second one is extremely weak, as ‘the world’ is moving towards, or already arrived at “opt-in is the only good choice”.

They also publicly stated that Apple’s opt-in doesn’t apply to Apple’s own adverts. _If_ that’s correct, they have a good point, but I think that’s a very, very big _if_.
Even Lynx/Links is super fast on the supported sites.
I’m Comic Sans
TBH I think it's fine to prevent access to updates that update the app to work with the updated OS. That is work and I think it's fair to charge for it.
Spotify's plan to dominate audio ads
In which ways does Scrivener remind you of Google Keep?
Whisper Hello to Etherpad 1.8.7
I’m sure there are many great articles to be written arguing for and against Intel being finished... but this is more kabbalah (sorry, “gap trading”) than insightful business case study.
Yes that was an _exception_ unless you believe all (or most) of the sex identity assignments of historical human skeletons are suspect.
I'm unfamiliar with corporate expectations regarding phishing emails—are you not supposed to click on links sent from an internal email address? The article clearly shows the email coming from an @godaddy.com address, and I'd think that them misconfiguring SPF/whatever is a much bigger deal.
What is the status of ARM at AWS? There were rumors of them making their own silicon as well a few years back.
No, obviously out of ~300 films produced in 30s and 40s each year, 90% or more were dross. What I've meant is:

1. The best films of this period far surpassed my expectations from the technical point of view. And there were a lot of decent-to-exceptional films produced at the time; I could name at least 50 american films worth watching from 1930 to 1950. In comparison, I could hardly name 10 films from 1951 to 1960 that are at least decent (and yes, Paths of Glory, named below, is the best).

I think it was mostly due to the fact that all personnel, connected with the creation of a film at the time were still largely pioneers at the field and they had all possible expertiese in it (films in the 60s and especially in the 70s became noticeably more amateur; 50s suffered due to McCarthy). Movies were still relatively new and there were a lot of innovation in it each year. On top of that, it was a time of the Great Depression and high unemploymend. Hollywood were one of the better off industries and so were able to easlily atrract best of the best.

2. Even B-movies from rich studios had high production values. From the same 1941 I could easily recommend for example The Gay Falcon - Irving Reis - RKO/Nothing But the Truth - Elliott Nugent - Paramount/Charley's Aunt - Archie Mayo - 20 Fox. All are relatively simple, but well worth the watch.

3. What's more important, the 30s and 40s cinema had its own unique style and dynamic, very different from later decades. I'd say it was closer to Imre Kalman and Franz Lehar operettas, rather than more convential movies we are used today. It was, if I may say so, a thing-in-itself, hardly comparable with what came later.
> email headers are easily spoofed.

Not if they've properly deployed DKIM and SPF - which, if they have a phishing problem, should have been among their top priorities.
He had to refill for a 22 miles trip, it does not mean that it has a range of 11 miles, it means it's less than 22.
Have you heard of this scrappy little upstart company called Apple? I heard they also do their own chips and OS...
An updated way to calculate the likelihood of extraterrestrial civilizations
I’m assuming Facebook is not so incompetent they can’t show an ad to its intended audience. I think the main issue is to do any sort of ML or user based targeting, you need to have a minimum amount of data to make good judgements in an auction. But then you realize you have multiple ads that are competing against each other and another ad might convert better or most important of all: pay more. Thus even if you have an ad which is targeted to that specific user, it might not get shown. Sometimes it is better to not show an ad at all. With all these trade offs, the result can sometimes look quite bizarre.
> voters will always vote for lower taxes

I hear this a lot, and I'm just not sure that's supported by evidence whatsoever. Partially because, well, here you are, ostensibly arguing for higher taxes, but also because the effective tax rates (in the US) on individuals have skyrocketed by... ~2% since 1979? It's hardly like the vast populace is voting anti-tax consistently - that flies in the face of both tax rate history and government spending (and the populist movement in general!). So, TLDR: _some voters_ will always vote for lower taxes.

https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-averag...
> some people
Y you can configure access rights for each person you shared the page with.

> some parts
Some parts of a page? I don't get this. Get that part into a nested page then?
>Like how you can just "flick" your screen onto another computer in the same room

Arcan does that but with windows.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQlOQDKd5cc

And X11 could so something similar then.
Ask HN: What was a book that changed your life?
If there was one book you’d recommend for everyone to read over the Christmas break. What book would that be?
Plenty of people submit their own blog posts every day. I do not see anything being promoted or sold here.
> "None of our patients' payment card details have been compromised but at this stage, we understand that some of our patients' personal data may have been accessed."

Reminds me of a statement put out by White Star Lines in 1912:

"None of our passengers payment card details have been compromised but at this stage, we understand that some of our passengers personal lives may have been affected."
Pro tip: anyone that actually has knowledge about the way to make money trading a company isn’t blogging it for free. If they are trading with that information themselves it would lose effectiveness by sharing. If it’s truly valuable information but they aren’t using it then they are selling it, not giving it away. The only free stuff on Seeking Alpha either has no value or the author is attempting some variation of a pump and dump scheme.

Edit: I’ll acknowledge that a motivation for giving away information is to push your “premium service” but this just doesn’t work with financial stuff. You can’t give away free “alpha” because once it’s out there it isn’t alpha, so anyone trying it isn’t going to make any more money than anyone else. So it’s a terrible way to sell your service except to people that are too dumb to realize it. Plus, buying calls to protect a short isn’t some novel information worth paying for. Only chumps are paying for premium advice from someone that uses that as their taster.
My 9th grade English teacher read the Iliad to us, explaining words and phrases as he went along. It was an incredible experience. He also read Romeo and Juliet in the same way. I considered it a great gift to allow us to experience the truly great literature at that age, in a way that I think most of us could understand and appreciate.
For one-offs, picking the favorite is good enough for most players. Thy are just seeking entertainment and maybe to win a little money. For instance, in a race between two candidates priced at $0.70 and $0.30 (ranging from $0.01 to $0.99 before resolution), many players are happy to pick the favorite indicated by the market.

Of course, if those prices are accurate, then they will lose money in the long-run after fees. For players who are betting more frequently and over a longer term, it's like any other speculation: You might assess the $0.30 underdog to have a 40% chance of winning. She is still the underdog, but you profit over the long run by buying her at her too-low price. Those players are scooping that value wherever they can find it.

For major electoral events that involve a populist with a large, loyal, and misinformed fanbase, the value pretty much finds you. Both of the described groups are making lots of money because the markets are wildly mispriced.
While that may be the case, an undelivered gift is still worlds different than an undelivered bribe.
"Crash," his 1973 novel, is excellent, as is the 1996 movie adaptation directed by David Cronenberg starring James Spader.
Security is important, but it does not trump any other consideration.

Will they next send employees emails claiming their loved ones are in danger, because that is something real hackers might do? Would you consider that ethical behavior? It's actually a pretty common scam, at least in my country (normally done to defraud old people, not to steal company secrets, but still).

I'd expect to see a very convincing study that would show that this type of emotional response is crucial for accurately training people to recognize real phishing before I accepted in any way that this was ethical. Absent strong evidence in this regard, this is utterly disgusting.
It's a choice between comfort and survival.

There are more humane ways to train an army than to make them think of situations where someone is trying to kill them, but... if that comes at the expense of worse training (and therefore actual higher likelihood of death) then it doesn't do anyone favors.

The fact that so many people fell for this test means there's something (obviously!) around this scenario that makes it particularly sensitive and mistake-prone for people. Your IT department may chose to avoid it, but people trying to phish you, won't.
For Windows 10 yes, but for Android it's in the share context menu, so easy to use in fact that my mum and dad have been using it for years to send each other videos and pictures of trips and outings at blazing fast speeds, for them it's just magic as it works and they don't need to understand what's happening under the hood or fulfil any technical prereqs.
Do you have sources to back up your claims of spyware?
Out of curiosity, how does the app make you enjoy the process? I took a quick look and it seems to have the same basic progression that most classes have, I assume the paid courses are different and better but I can't see them.
This is not true. There are jetpacks with 20min of flight time. They could have launched off a boat or the nearby shore.
This headline was true two years ago. And the news continues to get worse.
Wasn’t the parallel port male and the 25 pin serial port female ?
That’s an excellent point. Yahoo uses yahoo.com for their public email service. Google uses google.com for their internal (employee) email addresses.
Python2:

>>> type(type)
<type 'type'>

Python3:

>>> type(type)
<class 'type'>