skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The only difference is that in companies the people being harmed are the owners of the company, and they are the ones with the power to do something about it, either by firing the CEO, or divesting of the c9mpany and investing in its rivals.

In government we all get harmed, and the only way to exit the situation is by abandoning ones homeland.
They had no intent to find vulnerability in the code they intended to find/proof vulnerability in the review process, totally different things.
> The people banned didn't do anything wrong.

There are ways to do research like this (involve top-level maintainers, prevent patches going further upstream etc.), just sending in buggy code on purpose, then lying about where it came from, is not the way. It very much is wrong in my opinion. And like some other people pointed out, it could quite possibly be a criminal offense in several jurisdictions.
Hiding last seen is useless as the online status cannot be hidden. There are various apps that exploit this for money so you can stalk anybody…
I watched a video by a successful streamer giving advice to new streamers on how to build a career in that industry. He said that all these ads and partner programs aren't even worth it, unless you're one of the top 1%. The pay is relatively low (the platform takes a large cut) and you often have to sign over exclusive rights. He said that donations (using external services) and most importantly Patreon are the best way to go. So I just block all ads and sponsor segments, and donate a few bucks here or there.
That's a catchy hook but terribly misleading!
Who would want to write code in C?
I think the creator of TSDX has shifted focus to turborepo.com
You wouldn't use a framework like react/vue with this.
It is a companion project of htmx (1) which takes a different approach than your typical JS framework. There is a recent JS Party podcast (2) with the author if you want to learn more and have a better understanding of the motivation behind these approaches.

1 https://htmx.org/

2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJdxR6qoUOE
Seeing how the 'original' SARS-COV2-19 virus spread, if you are concerned about a variant, then likely it's already in your population.

The speed of the virus is much faster than the speed of the public health infrastructure. Maybe upping the tempo of our human controlled reaction is something we can focus on in this pandemic.
When you engage in chumbox journalism don't be surprised that all your content gets treated with suspicion.
I agree, I enjoyed using it and found it very powerful, but it was tricky to organize the code in a way that kept things simple, and there weren't many great examples to draw from in the documentation or elsewhere. I'd love to see what a large multi-provider Pulumi deployment looks like when it's done the right way.
This is one of those projects that sounds neat at first, but the more you think about it you're left with an overwhelming question of why. Since serverless platforms charge you per API call this would be tremendously more expensive than just about any other approach that already exists today as the game would be making tens of thousands of API calls per user per session.
Would make sense if he withdrew small amounts from an ATM incrementally, but if he withdrew say $5k and then his web footprint went dead it draws a lot of red flags.

Although it depends who your adversary is at the end of the day.
It is also quite easy to pull the wool over an IRBs eyes. An IRB is usually staffed with a few people from the medicine, biology, psychology and maybe (for the good ethical looks) philosophy and theology departments. Usually they aren't really qualified to know what a computer scientist is talking about describing their research.

And also, given that the stakes are higher e.g. in medicine, and the bar is lower in biology, one often gets a pass: "You don't want to poke anyone with needles, no LSD and no cages? Why are you asking us then?" Or something to that effect. The IRBs are just not used to such "harmless" things not being justified by the research objective.
It's time for the "Ron Brown* Vacation" story from dotcom boom 1.0.

I was a tech project lead at a semi-famous internet portal startup, so worked across departments picking up staff for my projects. The DB guy assigned was Ron Brown. Went to onboard him and he wasn't at his desk. I ask the guy next to him. "Oh, he's on vacation this week."

I came by the next week. No Ron Brown. Where is he? I got a very specific story in response: "He was in a fire, he had his feet burned." Terrible! So I got someone else assigned as DB guy.

Never saw Ron Brown again. About six months later, I was down by his desk. Asked whatever happened to him. "Oh, last week we discovered he just stopped showing up to work, so we just fired him yesterday!"

This was in a company of <200 people, and certainly there were less than 10 DB experts, all onsite. So I'm sure these days it's totally possible.

*Name changed to protect guilty.
> Intrinsics are usually fixed in a couple of days

This is only helpful if everyone who builds the software is willing and able to use a bleeding edge version of a particular compiler. By comparison, using inline assembly will fix the problem for everyone, immediately, usually without anyone needing to use a different compiler or compiler version.
When I worked in Russia, that was a common way to pay corruption fees for running a business. The way to go was to "employ" some person who never showed up to work, and pay "salary".

Companies I worked for were branches of American ones. They were receiving funds from US, paying salary to software developers, and did not sold anything on local market, no cash was used, hence the workaround with fake employee.
UBI directed to those who spend it is essentially universal because it's up for grabs for anybody else
It sends a strong message - universities need to make sure their researchers apply ethics standards to any research done on software communities. You can't ignore ethics guidelines like consent and harm just because it's a software community instead of a meatspace community. I doubt the university would have taken any action at all without such a response.
It's actually becoming more frequent due to BGP speakers being increasingly multithreaded. In the olden days, if you were overloaded, that also meant no more keepalives being sent. With the power of multithreading you can now simultaneously be overloaded and still send keepalives! :D
From my experience yes they are rare. So rare, I've never heard of a radio station that uses U87s. I've only ever worked on one radio show and we had an SM7b. You can watch a lot of radio stations live video streams these days and you will probably not find a single U87. It will be all RE20s and SM7Bs. It isn't as if a radio station has a single mic. So the calculation is ($3000-$400) x number of mics purchases per year. Radio stations use their mics for hours and hours everyday, they get a lot of wear and tear. Additionally, the SM7B is a dynamic mic and is probably more forgiving in noisy environments than a U87. I know Joe Rogan is a podcast not radio but he makes millions of dollars off of his show and he uses SM7Bs.

I will also say, the NPR person interviewed seems to have a negative view of the RE20 and SM7b compared to the U87. Despite the low cost, SM7Bs are actually popular studio vocal mics. One was famously used to record Michael Jackson's vocals on Thriller (actually it was an SM7 but I believe the SM7B reissue is almost identical). When recording voice, there normally isn't a "silver bullet" mic that is the best for all voices.
A lot of studies show that people very rarely change their beliefs - like very few people even in the U.S. changed from Republican to Democratic or back - states changed their colours mostly due to demographic changes - red and blue population had different age breakdown, birth and death rates, and different migration/naturalisation patterns which mostly determine changes in voting outcomes. This is even more true in case of such much much deeper rooted thing like this one. It's obvious: you have a cultural problem, and you can't change people (well you can, but it's called brainwashing and is illegal everywhere but maybe North Korea), so have to replace people.

Mafia isn't about people being literally forced to do something with the fear or death - such an approach totally doesn't scale, even Sicily is not a Nazi death camp. It's about deeply rooted tradition to say, "respect your village elders" and "don't put your family to shame by exposing issues". And people don't even realise they have those beliefs, everyone taken separately just acts "normally", letting the whole society be exploited. Just reducing proportion of people having these beliefs in the first place - to some percentage giving "herd immunity" from them because these informal links need to be able to sufficiently propagate - solve the problem.
Looking forward to watching this when I have some down time... But, whew, I did a double-take when I saw "VR/ML workstation"
Signals: .NET based framework for developing enterprise and SaaS applications
I was going to make some sarcastic response to the effect of "iT's EvErGReeN" but this is basically the only answer. You don't do individual releases of your microservices any more than you do individual releases of the classes/functions in your C++ project.
how about on install you prompt to opt-IN to this "feature"?

posthog or not, your target market is more sensitive to this telemetry crap than GP.
Totally agreed that it's invasive. Same for the "typing" indicator, which also can't be disabled. If I'm writing something longer than a sentence or two, I usually just compose it somewhere else and then copy/paste it into WhatsApp, just to avoid feeling observed.

The fact that those two things can't be disabled actually makes me want to use WhatsApp less. I doubt I'm alone in that. Makes me wonder if Facebook's "engagement" stats account for those types of disincentives.
Angry Greg is doing a great job. Effective, and completely without expletives or personal insults.
Thats all well and good but I've taken the same position as OP when discussing with colleagues and they unironically held fast that the serverless model is essentially closer to a functional/pure programming model because its "serverless", i.e. stateless.
Sure, but there's no evidence of that.
IRB makes a decision based on the study protocol/design, so if you intentionally mislead / make wrong statements there, IRB approval doesn't really mean anything.
> I don't like this university ban approach.

I do, because the university needs to dismiss everyone involved, sever their connections with the institution, and then have a person in a senior position email the kernel maintainers with news that such has taken place. At which time the ban can be publicly lifted.
It's definitely killing a mosquito with a nuke, but what are the alternatives? The kernel maintainers claim these bogus commits already put too much load on their time. I understand they banned the whole university out of frustration and also because they simply don't have the time to deal with them in a more nuanced way.
You want a Fast, Good, and Cheap project?
>It sends a strong message

At a cost to mostly people who didn't / and I'll even say wouldn't do the bad thing.
Source code: https://github.com/justinliew/DOOM

Demo: https://developer.fastly.com/solutions/demos/doom/
> A small company in the PRC, for an example, might see more intensive review.

Which is a bit silly, isn't it? Grad students are poor and overworked, it seems easy to find one to trick/bribe into signing off your code, if you wanted to do something malicious.
Sending those patches is just disgraceful. I guess they're using the edu emails so banning the university is a very effective action so someone will respond to it. Otherwise, the researchers will just quietly switch to other communities such as Apache or GNU. Who want buggy patches?
Cool idea. I would be more enthused if it came from another company though. It seems like all the "green" projects Airbus does are aborted.

Remember their last electric plane? Canceled before the first flight. Meanwhile a couple startups are successfully retrofitting electric propulsion on light aircraft.
(Post coffee) Cars have radiators to cool the operating structure (e.g. engine block), but that cooling's ancillary to power produced, no?

Carnot cycle was what I was grasping for.

Original point being that in a thermal engine, increasing your temperature gradient by increasing your high-temperature side (while holding exhaust constant) leads to more potential power.

Or IOW, a thermal engine that doesn't burn hot somewhere isn't going to produce much power.

(Electric being a completely different ball of wax)
Then when checking the results are half the speed of what the compiler spits out and the fun is gone. At least that's what happens to me...
Pathetic, it did not work at all, they told em whenever they missed a planted bug.
I'd bet that it was inspired by the Sokal affair. The difference in reaction is probably because people think the purity of Linux is important but the purity of obscure academic journals isn't. (They're probably right, because one fault in Linux will make the whole system insecure, whereas one dumb paper would go in next to the other dumb papers and leave the good papers unharmed.)

The similarities are that reviewers can get sleepy no matter what they're reviewing. Troll doll QC staff get sleepy. Nuclear reactor operators get sleepy too.
good call about 07 numbers being more attributed to youngers.
I took the 06 range to maximize the chance to get valid/active numbers.
AMD's deprecated Mantle API re-implemented atop Vulkan
Cancel Linux! Anyone?
I find it rude as well, but it’s an important point for those producing AR tech to de-stigmatize.
> None of those people did anything wrong. Putting the onus on them to effect change to me seems unfair. The people banned didn't do anything wrong.

Some of the people banned didn't do anything wrong. Others tried to intentionally introduce bugs into the kernel. Their ethics board allowed that or was mislead by them. Obviously they are having serious issues with ethics and processes.

I'm sure the ban can be reversed if they can plausibly claim they've changed. Since this was apparently already their second chance and they've been reported to the university before and the university apparently decided not to act on that complaint ... I have some doubts that "we've totally changed. This time we mean it" will fly.
To play Devil's Advocate, I suspect that this would if different results because people behave differently when they know that there is something going on.
A search on the linked mailing list seems to include a lot of this junk:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nfs/?q=@umn.edu&x=t
The tone of Aditya Pakki's message makes me think they would be very well served by reading 'How to Win Friends & Influence People' by Dale Carnegie.

This is obviously the complete opposite of how you should be communicating with someone in most situations let alone when you want something from them.

I have sure been there though so if anything, take this as a book recommendation for 'How to Win Friends & Influence People'.
Perhaps the research just simply shouldn't be done. What are the benefits of this research? Does it outweigh the costs?
That's not really testing the process, because now you have introduced bias. Once you know there's a bug in there, you can't just act as if you didn't know.

I guess you could receive "authorization" from a confidante who then delegates the work to unwitting reviewers, but then you could make the same "ethical" argument.

Again, from a hacker ethos perspective, none of this was unethical. From a "research ethics committee", maybe it was unethical, but that's not the standard I want applied to the Linux kernel.
On the other thread, I suggested this was an attack on critical infrastructure using a university as cover and that this was a criminal/counter-intellgence matter, and then asked whether any of these bug submitters also suggested the project culture was too aggressive and created an unsafe environment, to reduce scrutiny on their backdoors.

Talk about predictive power in a hypothesis.
Problem is people don't understand exponential growth, whenever the R number if >1 you're totally screwed, even if just 1 person is infected
"There's an old saying in Tennessee—I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee—that says, 'Fool me once, shame on...shame on you. Fool me—you can't get fooled again.'"

I don't care what they say - greatest president ever.
This was approved by the university ethics board so if trust of the university is by part because the actions of the students need to pass an ethics bar it makes sense to remove that trust until the ethics committee has shown that they have improved.
They do weigh at their marked weight (nowadays at least). But you’re right they’re just slightly modified kg plates.
I have a theory that while the university's ethics board may have people on it who are familiar with the myriad of issues surrounding, for instance, biomedical research, they have nobody on it with even the most cursory knowledge of open source software development. And nobody who has even the faintest idea of how critically important the Linux kernel is to global infrastructure.
> no one denies that 6-fingered humans are humans to start with

I see what your issue is. I haven't noticed this previously, but I think you're just attacking a straw man at this point. Rarely you can say something with 100% certainty and science takes account for that. It's fine to make generalizations. If we didn't do that and only sought absolute truths, we wouldn't get too far and it'd invalidate entire fields of science.
Research without ethics is research without value.

Unbelievable that this could have passed ethics review, so I'd bet it was never reviewed. Big black eye for University of Minnesota. Imagine if you are another doctoral student is CS/EE and this tool has ruined your ability to participate in Linux.
A university-wide ban helps in converting the issue into an internal issue of that university.
The university officials will have to figure out what went wrong and rectify.
Fair. You are either part of the solution, part of the problem or just part of the landscape.
Basically mindfulness before it was a thing
It’s just a shame there is no mechanism in the license to withdraw permission for this so-called university to use Linux at all
> the response from the researcher saying these were automated by a tool looks like a potential lie.

To be clear, this is unethical research.

But I read the paper, and these patches were probably automatically generated by a tool (or perhaps guided by a tool, and filled in concretely by a human): their analyses boil down to a very simple LLVM pass that just checks for pointer dereferences and inserts calls to functions that are identified as performing frees/deallocations before those dereferences. Page 9 and onwards of the paper[1] explains it in reasonable detail.

[1]: https://github.com/QiushiWu/QiushiWu.github.io/blob/main/pap...
Yeah, and any discussion surrounding hard forks was allowed right in the open on /r/bitcoin and bitcointalk, leading to informed node operators.. oh wait, that didn't happen, people got banned.
How come there's no ethical review for research that interacts with people? (I mean it's there in medicine and psychology, and probably for many economics experiments too.)

edit: oh, it seems they got an exemption, because it's software research - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26890084 :|
Starting a new project is always exciting. Everything starts with an idea of a certain product that needs to bring some value. The idea is developed and documented by the product owner and then communicated with the development team that needs to build it.

The development team will go through the docs and there will be some communication going back and forth to understand the details and to align over the deliverable. The project methodology is irrelevant in the sense that all involved parties are speaking a different language which eventually makes it harder to align and understand each other.

I remember during high school, together with my friend, we've started developing a tool for managing salaries for one accountant and he wanted to be able to change the system time. Thinking about it and discussing it with the accountant it turned out that he wanted to be able to add a record in the past. This discrepancy in communication, speaking different languages, having a different communication language can impact the decisions that we are making when developing an application.

This brings us to the point, how hard will be to find a common language across different roles? This is where Signals come into play as a concept. Signals align all involved parties by asking the right questions:

- Who should be able to execute this process?
- Is this particular person granted to execute the process?
- What are the preconditions that need to be fulfilled before we execute the process?
- What are the steps of the process itself?

Once the documentation is delivered to the development team they will be able to map it outright and avoid missing out on the details.

When starting the project, in development terms, we tend to reinvent the wheel, and yet it ends being an ellipse. Every project starts with creating a blank solution, setting up the project hierarchy and boundaries, bringing some code base from previous projects, and trying to glue it out. This means that there isn’t any standardization on how we can effectively run, extend and maintain projects in the longer run. Not to mention when a person needs to join the team or to assist with some other active project in the organization. Fear of the unknown is the boss.

Signals' purpose is to fill the gap in this problem. When starting a project, you will have everything set up for you so you as a developer can focus on the business logic. For both beginners or senior software developers, Signals offers you development practices that will make your professional life easier and more creative.

Marjan Nikolovski
CEO, Emit Knowledge
> What serious borrower needs to pay 10% to access credit?

People who can make more than 10% trading?

Lending protocols aren't doing anything different than what banks do: allocating inactive capital to those who can make use of that capital and are willing to pay for it.

Interest rates are high because of A: market volatility, professional traders can easily make more than 10%, and B: information asymmetry, large capital pools haven't allocated to these pools.
> You can test the process without pushing exploits to the real kernel.

No, you can't, because that is the test! If you manage to push exploits to the real kernel, the test failed. If you get caught, the test passes. They did get caught.
I am writing this as someone who is very much "career academic". I am all on board with banning the whole university (and reconsidering the ban once the university shows they have some ethics guidelines in place). This research work should not have passed ethics review. On the other hand, it sounds preposterous that we even would need formal ethics review for CS research... But this "research" really embodies the whole "this is why we can not have nice things" attitude.
It's no more misleading than saying it runs on bare metal. If I flash the correct motherboard ROM chip with the necessary bits to play Tetris in the UEFI (or completely replace it), would I be running closer or farther from "bare metal" than this is? Am I still on bare metal if I choose to use GRUB for loading up the game? Do I become an OS if I use GRUB instead of embedding that logic within my binary?

We call things BIOS and Boot-loader and Operating System by virtue of history, not necessity. It could even be confusing to a newcomer looking into development closer to the hardware and being told that all these programs are fundamentally different, instead of just being instructions and data getting shoved through a bunch of tubes in the processor and PCB.