skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah I still remember that time a mentally ill young man got their hands on encryption and senselessly murdered 50 people.
I don’t think it’s an unreasonable expectation to have a candidate write some code in a screening interview for a software engineering position.

When a candidate flat out refuses to, then this is a huge red flag.

It’s not a perfect system, but it’s the best one we have.

I don’t agree with your whiteboarding assertion.
> The reason it's sometimes a big deal and sometimes not is because of echo cancellation software. But echo cancellation is a hard problem when you don't know the precise physical characteristics of the setup

Sort of. Software can approximate good echo cancellation for most conversations just by bringing down the mic volume when someone else is talking. Most meetings aren't supposed to have people talking over each other the whole time. Add to that the fact that most laptops have decent echo cancellation now and you can frequently get away with it.

It's still something of a tragedy of the commons scenario though. If one person is creating an echo, then the speakers on the speaker's computer will play that echo while they are talking, which will get fed back it to the microphone, creating still more echo. That's when you really start to get major problems, but it's avoidable if no more than one person is using speakers.
> even if you could go back in time, it isn't necessarily true that you could leverage your knowledge of future technology.

Relatedly:

"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats." -- Howard H. Aiken
It's not impossible, but it's statistically unlikely.

> If we were able to make those decisions, why is it that other people can’t?

Because we all come from widely different backgrounds, families, education, get different opportunities, make different choices, &c. It's easy to compare people's lives to our own stories but you can't sum up everything with "if I made it everyone can make it", there are so many variables, the majority of which we can't understand before going through them ourselves.

Regardless of that, if I was part of the 10% or 15% of American below the poverty threshold and you told me "just move to Austria, anyone can make it" I don't think I would take it well

Of course you'll always find people who manage to drastically change their lives, but I'm personally not really interested in the edge case.
Btw I started searching about social mobility and found this, which supports social mobility in the US is pretty poor https://www.visualcapitalist.com/ranked-the-social-mobility-...
And koalas have two on each paw, thumbs up to that.
DNS is for service discovery, not identity discovery and routing. I leave the rest of your questions for the standard to be developed. I don’t have all the answers, but am willing to pay people smarter than me to figure it out. Accept this sub thread as the official Request For Comments :)
Two issues:

1. Water covers ~70% of the Earth's surface. Whales migrate of course but can exist from the poles to the equator;

2. Of the 30% land, for pretty much any species, some portion of that is uninhabitable. Dinosaurs being reptiles likely require hot and wet environments. As predators, T. Rex would be limited by where their food could live too.

The dinosaur era was largely one of a super-continent (Pangaea). A good portion of that was likely too cold or too dry to support such a large predator.
there is this concept termed "too big to fail" -- we're seeing crypto start to find it's way into ETFs.. and then 401Ks.. and then ops.

https://www.barrons.com/articles/a-new-crypto-etf-is-here-yo...
It should be noted that gambling needs to be viewed as nothing more than a form of entertainment. Back in the day, formal engineering schools offered elective courses on the mathematics of gambling. Just know that if you partake in the activity in short stints long-term, they have it so rigged that it is mathematically impossible to yield net gains long-term.

Personally, I think gambling is an atrocious activity. I am not religious in any way, either. I just think it is a horrible activity from a moral standpoint. Also, people who have gambling addiction do actually have one of the worst and self-destructive addictions out there.

There are other ways to gamble in life without actually gambling.
I do something similar whereby I just point DNS traffic at the router itself and configure it per-host by DNAT, as part of the larger WAN horizon zone (eg direct goes to local recursor, wireguard tunnel goes to the recursor on the other side of the tunnel or suitable public resolver, commercial VPN goes to whatever their recommended resolver is, eventually pihole for guest network). Running multiple apps / security contexts / nyms (or whatever else you want to call them) on the same OS instance is just asking for trouble.
I imagine exceptions will be built into the laws exempting certain government agencies and businesses or types of business.
This is where government could perform a useful function. Content creators selling to the government and the government reselling full access of all that content to distributors is a realtopian dream of mine. It seems win-win all around to me. Consumers could go with the provider that has their favorite interface/content/price, creators would have a choice to sell to the govt and receive full draconian protection or sell on the open market and forgo legal protection of their works, and govt could feel good about running such a snappy program that serves all its citizens.
Hey, given that you're "on the ground", in your opinion, what is the mood there and what do you think is more likely:
- no invasion (flex muscles, drills, go home)
- limited invasion
- full-scale invasion
How the coronavirus origin story is being rewritten by a guerrilla Twitter group
Are they unbreakable by the technique actually used by the average EU country though ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_disclosure_law

Generally it goes like this

1) you get a notice either from a judge or the police to provide unspecified assistance with an investigation (you are not told even 5 minutes in advance WHAT assistance, and there is a default gag order: if you inform a customer or ... that you handed over their info, you go to jail)

2) if you refuse to do something they charge you with a crime, not providing encryption keys is such a crime

3) look like EU "average" sentence is 2 to 5 years prison, plus 50k euros

One time pads are obviously encrypted, meaning if you see one you know they're a key to something, so if you refuse to decrypt what is encrypted with them (or can't, let's not pretend these people know or care about what is and isn't possible beyond obvious cases like whatsapp), and a police officer cares, you may very well have a choice: decode or face 2 years prison. JUST for not giving a police officer full access, for example, to your phone, nothing else.
This violates my human right to send random garbage messgages to my friends
True, but an added complication is that you have to be really, really careful about your domain. You have to trust your registrar, set up 2FA, and make sure it never expires, etc. So in the end, owning your domain isn't foolproof either, it's also another point of failure (similar to Google deleting your account, although one you may have more control over).

For what it's worth, I use Fastmail + a custom domain and couldn't be happier. But I'd hardly recommend it to everyone for personal email.
> just look it up. They did all of these things and more

Can you provide a single example with a source that proves this? And please provide an example of how he "undermined democracy". Sounds like you watch a lot of CNN.

I agree it should be punished equally not depending on D or R.
You need encryption to make order online without anybody getting your card numbers.
What on earth is it with modern governments wanting to control every aspect of citizen lives ? Why can't they just leave stuff well alone. I think first world politicians and bureaucrats (and second world too now) have far too much copious amounts of free time in the Internet era. This is always the problem with Big Govt.
So this is like half of: https://www.gboards.ca/product/ginni

Reminds me of https://www.artsey.io/
Cook Political Report Partisan Voter Index
I disagree with you that it is off-topic, and the comment itself has nearly as many upvotes as the article.

The comment is short because it the problem with the technology is a simple to describe deception. Many good comments are short.
Yes, that is what they are:

SPL is the very very first thing the ARM chip boots, similar to the old BIOS that was at the front of your HDD?

ARM Trusted Firmware roughly (VERY roughly) analogous to Intel's ME, it is a trusted execution environment for ARM
I need encryption to make sure nobody is listening to my sensitive conversation like legal/psychological counseling. It can be actually more secure than in-person conversation.

Recreational ones are not "needs". Your analogy seems flawed.
Supreme Commander Forged Alliance with the LOUD mod.

Stellaris for grand strategy.

Sins of a Solar Empire for a 4x game a bit smaller and less complicated than Stellaris.
> The soil is basically a growing medium.

This is absolutely false and is the idea that got us to where we are today with heavy tillage, fertilizer application and biocide application. Those practices are demonstrably destroying our environment and are wholly unnecessary.
Not to mention you can't ban encryption without banning freedom of speech.

If freedom of speech exists, freedom to speak what sounds like nonsense to a bystander also exists.
A bit disappointed about the blind commenting here. I have just read the Commission Communication (pdf linked at the top of the article) and can't find anything on prohibiting encryption. They write a few times about how increasing default encryption will make law enforcement more difficult but the only action proposed on encryption is:

> One of the specific initiatives under the EU Internet Forum in 2020 is the creation of a technical expert process to map and assess possible solutions which could allow companies to detect and report child sexual abuse in end-to-end encrypted electronic communications, in full respect of fundamental rights and without creating new vulnerabilities criminals could exploit. Technical experts from academia, industry, public authorities and civil society organisations will examine possible solutions focused on the device, the server and the encryption protocol that could ensure the privacy and security of electronic communications and the protection of children from sexual abuse and sexual exploitation.

So they want to see what can be done without breaking encryption, I guess this could be e.g. hash checks or things like that.

The rest of the Communication is about prevention, victim support and rehabilitation, so really about pedophilia/child abuse, not encryption as a main issue.

There is also a 3-layer-deep link[1] to a proposed new regulation (=eu-wide law) which puts an obligation on providers to detect and report or delete child abuse materials. No mention of encryption and its just four articles if you scroll down to the end, so look for yourself if that sounds problematic. The intro page [2] says it actually just provides a legal base for providers to scan data as another regulation that already allowed this is running out. I have no specific expertise on the matter but assuming that that does not seem problematic?

The issue seems to be that police/ courts/NGOs/... basically have no chance to police as thesr networks are inaccessible and extremely complex to pursue anything. Seems obvious that the onus must be on the providers to do their duty - we all know what a cesspit the internet can be. If Telegram doesn't delete CP (or say beheading videos, calls for lynching, rape videos, ...) then who could possibly do it?

So the legislation here is intended to give providers the legal right to check content. What's the alternative? Should the internet simply be lawless?

1. https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=69213

2. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/fighting-...
PostgRest allows doing something very similar to this but in a safer way:
https://postgrest.org/
I view it differently in that even if breaking encryption allows for the arrest and wiping out of all child pornography, the damage to the non-porners is too great to warrant.

Similar to how a jury trial requires unanimous agreement among 12. This leads to some true criminals not being convicted, but it provides the benefit of many more innocents not being wrongfully convicted.

I think the “criminals will break the law anyway” is a dead end as it bypasses the moral decision that society needs to make of whether privacy is worth some tiny percent of evil doing.

One day we’ll have the ability to have mental implants that block bad things. Similarly, we’ll need to decide whether that is worth implementing if it means bad trade offs. The argument isn’t that criminals will skip the implants, I think the important argument is whether putting implants in all the non-criminals is worth the effort.
390 deaths from swimming pools every year in the US. 390 > 0, ban all swimming pools.
What’s the difference between a computer and a “mobile device”?

OP made a pointless semantic separation.
Whitest-ever paint could help cool heating Earth, study shows
What an absolute shitty source.
Ah, that rare combination of someone who doesn't know vim, but does know of vimtutor. Let me get my butterfly net.
Also, it's mandated by the SEC. There are obligations on you, your employer, and (if your broker is in the US) your broker to ask you, and to inform each other.

So it's kind of on the honour system - your broker probably won't ask you for payslips proving you don't work in the industry - but a lot of people are incentivized not to let it happen.
> One time pads are obviously encrypted

Not obviously - you could have a 1GB blob of encrypted data, or a 1GB blob of random numbers, so there is plausible deniability.

You're right that they're vulnerable to a rubber hose attack, but it's not a slam dunk case in court.
There is a supported theory that at one point there were 10,000 or fewer humans on the planet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toba_catastrophe_theory#Geneti...
Death Note: L, Anonymity and Eluding Entropy
A large part of all this is about raising awareness, not so much about actually solving the plastics problem through recycling. More people having hands-on experience with the realities of recycling is a good thing.
Vim tutor is great :) I used it myself when I was learning
There's no logic in it as the article misstates the acural legislation and intention. Read the linked documents and its pretty obvious (I left a longer comment below).
Some Americans own guns for subsistence hunting as a source of food.
Just use an email server outside the EU that will not respond to EU warrants. Almost all email transfers are protected by TLS these days. So the authorities won't know you are using encryption in the first place. If they suspect you of something they would have to come to you to get your IMAP password to check if your email is encrypted.

PGP is, as before, a technical counterargument to this sort of oppression. Perhaps the powers that be need to be again reminded of its existence. After all, the proposal is to backdoor all encryption software. That is simply impossible.
Why do you say that? Do you really think that noone can have a genuine interest in combating child pornography or terrorism?

My intuition is exactly the opposite: That many have a legitimate wish to combat both child porn and terrorism. Many people work with that every day and obviously they want to do a good job. And one effect of limiting crypto would help that. (That doesn't mean in itself crypto should be limited; but I don't see how writing one side off as "just an excuse" and basically offering a conspiracy theory helps anyone. Better to just say "it's unfortunate about child porn and terrorism, but it's the price that must be paid / here's another way to combat that", if that is what you mean.)
Blaming Soros for Black Wednesday is just silly, the blame rests entirely on the government.

And in any case, “screwing a whole nation”? Are you serious? Black Wednesday screwed the Tories, not the UK. Poor monetary policy cost the UK a few billion pounds, small money in the grand scheme of things.
Care to share which company?
Is there really anything more productive than JS/TS for these kind of things?
Barter economies have never existed. Myth starts with Smith.
> Oklahoma lawmakers have passed a bill that they’re pretending is about protecting citizens when it’s really about their contempt for anti-racism protesters.

It’s really hard to make sense of what is happening here when this publication is editorializing so aggressively. Is there a better source for this?
After reading the source material, this HN post sounds like political spin bullshit that's arguing in bad faith - but it would take more time than I have right now to figure out the truth.

Edit: Here's the actual regulation in question: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/interim-reg...

I haven't read it yet - but I'd guess my comment below that I made without reading it is probably not understanding what it actually proposes.

Edit2: Skimming it - it's not even clear to me it's about encryption at all? But about allowing creating laws around getting companies to participate in blocking child abuse imagery (that many are already doing voluntarily)? Am I missing something? I don't see anything about requiring unencrypted communications of these companies. It sounds like it's even just allowing certain practices that may have already been in place prior to some other EU privacy law?

---

Child abuse imagery is a real problem and though I'm sympathetic to the difficulty fighting it, encryption ban is not the right tradeoff.

FB has actually implemented something good here, basically encrypted communication but users can report imagery (so a user can choose to send an encrypted log of a chat to FB for review).

I have a friend at whatsapp and a lot of work goes into shutting down groups sharing child abuse imagery and clever ways to detect them even though they're encrypted (sometimes you don't even need to be that clever really).

See this: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/09/28/us/child-sex-...

It's possible to see this as an enormous societal problem that deserves attention, and think that an encryption ban is still a bad idea for all the reasons technical people think it is. Like most things, the policy argument here is nuanced. Just because banning encryption is the wrong thing to do does not mean that the child abuse imagery concern is false or misplaced.

I think the argument in favor of encryption becomes stronger when conceding the severity of the child abuse imagery issue. Dismissing it out of hand is simplistic.
Technologycatalogue.com welcomes Rockstart as new investor
I suspect that has a lot to do with billing monthly for an annual plan. That leaves people deciding whether to continue paying for a service that they are not using or paying out a penalty in excess of the monthly rate to terminate the service. Both options leave the impression that the company is trying to punish the customer. Contrast that to paying for a year upfront, where the customer is more likely feel foolish for paying for something they did not need.
In times where one of the biggest messaging application providers is able to leak hundreds of millions of personal records, I'd rather don't want governments to make laws to expand that risk to all of my private conversations as well.
That future is not going to happen. Read the underlying documents and this lobby article just misrepresents what is in the actual legal/policy documents
Please forgive me if I'm misunderstanding the scope of the proposal, but without a modifier "Ban E2E Encryption" would mean:

* Any party who is the exclusive holder of the private key of an asymmetric key (and uses it) is basically in violation of the proposed law(s)?

* So, literally, someone who uses an SSH-only server (given all data-in-transit is also encrypted) is in violation of the laws (given they aren't willing to provide the private key when asked)?

* No more end-to-end encrypted communication with your attorney or physician?

* A student project that implements a one-time-pad is illegal now too?

* What about encryption that is e2e for all intents and purposes, but is briefly decrypted, then re-encrypted on a zero-log private (proxy) server as one of its hops in the round-trip?

* Does this mean quantum encryption is completely banned now?

* By that measure, quantum internet is completely illegal, no?

* What about the fact this means governments will have to go through hoops to get a special blessing to use it--meaning they'll use it less often in practice (humans)--meaning more of their confidential data will be snooped. How about the fact that traffic that looks like e2e is probably now gov. traffic--making all of that traffic a more identifiable target?

I'm obviously preaching to the choir here...the problems abound--would love to hear more y'all hypotheticals that illustrate how garbage this is.
The moment encryption becomes illegal is the moment political dissidents, whistleblowers, reporters and every person in between are criminals.

We forfeit our freedom to express any idea or thought that deviates from the current list of acceptable thought patterns.

Suddenly you and all your thoughts or actions are subject to tracking by any government, any government official, any corporation and any malevolect actor.

The government already has a monopoly on violence, what's next?
I’ve seen replicache before and definitely very interested to use it. Will replicache be self-hostable in the future?
Why does desalination produce brackish water (this is a new term to me)? From context I expected "brackish water" to mean water that is saltier than seawater. But when I look it up, it's apparently water with salinity between fresh water and seawater.
I think we should shut down Netflix because it is a huge waste of energy that could be better repurposed elsewhere. Who are you to say Netflix is more useful than Bitcoin?
They don't think the rules will apply to them.
Your theory:
If you pay Pelosi more, she'll stop insider trading. On top of her +$100M net worth, where her salary pales in comparison to trading gains. You just have to pay people more so they stop abusing the system.

Found the Congressperson here.
VAR is Video Assistant Referee, i.e. an off-field (human) official that manually checks calls using instant replay: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_assistant_referee

I don't follow association football at all and was unfamiliar with the term; based on the comments here I was guessing it was maybe some sort of machine learning algorithm.
Suppose you had a choice between living in country A or country B. Country A bans encryption but allows assault rifles. Country B bans assault rifles but allows encryption. Which would you choose?

I think it is obvious that country B is the better choice than country A. A lot of people (including myself) have zero interest in the hobby of recreational assault rifle ownership. But banning encryption has the potential to cause massive harm, both economic, and in terms of freedom of speech and freedom of thought. If the government wants to control what you say and think, taking away your freedom to communicate out of the government's hearing is a great first step. By contrast, taking away the freedom to own assault rifles has far less impact – I don't have that freedom in the country in which I live, and I don't even notice it, because I have no interest in owning one. But I definitely would notice if the government tried to ban encryption.
Encryption is used by criminals and terrorists.