skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Oh my god, thanks for articulating my feelings and frustration in this way. I'm gonna steal the "GUI is an API for the user" line.
Making sure that at least the health care people are taken care of would be a good start.
I guess I’ve been using this through Nightly, and I’ve gotta say it’s a significant improvement all around. Thinks feel lighter, without having made any fundamental changes.
Intent matters, come on, your arguments are ridiculuous. If one of the aesthetically pleasing files turns out to contain an exploit targeted at Cellebrite software, then it wouldn't be hard to convince a jury that this isn't a coincidence but intentional malware, especially combined with this wink-wink bragpost.

It's not Signal's job to secure third party software, they can intentionally post incompatible data, but it definitely is their job (just as everyone else's, mandated by criminal law) to abstain from any activities that would tamper with evidence. If that incompatible data isn't limited to randomness or crashes but contains, quoting the article "a file that executes arbitrary code on the Cellebrite machine" or "undetectably alter previous reports, compromise the integrity of future reports (perhaps at random!), or exfiltrate data from the Cellebrite machine" then it obviously was intentionally made that way, which crosses the line and at that point yes, it's definitely Signal's fault. If that gets actually executed on a machine owned not by Signal but e.g. some law enforcement agency, then Signal and any involved developers personally may face criminal charges.

It does not even need to involve any computer specific laws (though those are also likely to apply) - if there's an incident where evidence got disrupted, if there's evidence that this incident was caused by "aesthetically pleasing files" developed by Signal, and there's some evidence (e.g. this blogpost) that they made these files knowing that they might result in other evidence being destroyed - that's completely enough, that's tampering with evidence, a felony. Go directly to jail, do not collect $200, don't expect sympathy from law enforcement and the legal system.

In my personal opinion this is all FUD and scaremongering, because actually doing so carries little benefit and high risk for Signal. But, of course, no one can be sure.
I wonder if normal Firefox will ever let users permanently load their own extensions without having to have Mozilla 'sign' them first. I also wonder if they will ever let users permanently disable Firefox from checking for updates.
Thereby probably contributing to / enabling many more tens of thousands of US COVID deaths and the same for suffering, than there need have ever been.
>You do not experiment on people without their consent. This is in fact the very FIRST point of the Nuremberg code:

>1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

Does this also apply to scrapping people's data?
That's fair, but asking for and getting Linus' approval would have at least put them in a much stronger position. They didn't even do that. (And I doubt Linus would have even given his approval, in which case they wouldn't be in this mess.)
Twitter is crawling with scammers and pump-n-dumpers. It's impossible to use it for investment talk. You spend all your time blocking people, and ticker hashtags are abused by people selling their discord channel or other crap. Also, if you express negative emotion toward a stock, its investors go out of their way to dox you or harass you. I had to set my account to "protected" because of this.

Twitter missed out on a huge opportunity. They should have listened to investors who user their platform.
It used to work on Windows. They dropped support years ago.
"@dang" is a no-op.

fhars helpfully changed the title.
Maybe hang out with some cows, pigs, sheep, lambs etc for a lil while. I don't mean in a mass farm with 1000s. In a place where there are one or 2 you can get to know as individuals.
You can basically look at that 80% as the efficiency of the body machine. To a first approximation, once we have all the matter needed to build a body, you are just taking in carbon to oxidize it for fuel.
They do have vaccines that they are manufacturing in country.
$13K USD per year in Azure credits?
Tree tabs is life-changing. I cannot use a browser for anything but light usage without it.
Its not the gui part, its just a full VM.
The MS Office toolbar can hardly be considered a failure in retrospect. It's like Python 3, a very painful transition with long-term positives.
I think we’re mostly in agreement. The ban is clearly the trigger, and it’s pretty transparent.

> For all you and me know, said review will say their processes are just fine which I would personally disagree with but it could happen.

Agreed. For what it’s worth, I don’t actually think there’s much they can really do besides acknowledge it and make sure their ethics board is competent and consulted.

> the ban is the focus – not what led to the ban

I was talking about the ban being the focus of the statement, as it’s the point at which there’s a clear shift from the situation to the fix. This is unfortunate, because to me it is placing the emphasis on the trigger, rather than the cause.

I believe it could have been written in a way that mentioned the ban, left room to investigate, but made it crystal clear that the community concerns and the ban were not the problem. It makes it feel to me as though their primary motivation to investigate is to get unbanned – which, to be fair, it probably is – rather than to be committed to root out alleged unethical practices. Even if the short-term consequences are the same, it’s a subtle but important distinction.

I suppose it’s a form of honesty, and I could instead embrace its transparency.
I used to have that, but it stopped working with the last re-Lisp of my moderation software. It's on my list to redo it.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20652146

Some of this stuff will eventually get open-sourced and/or integrated into HN for everybody.
>Why is this a revelation or surprise? Your employer provides you with equipment and applications not for their benefit, not yours, and I think this is perfectly reasonable.

A draft is a window into what someone was thinking before they edited or censored their thoughts. Even when people have been notified they don't own the equipment and nothing is private, they generally rely on not being that closely monitored that they can be held responsible for a message they didn't send to anyone.

Google themselves got screwed in court in precisely that scenario, where there were autosaved drafts of some emails that showed what execs were thinking prior to the actual sending of a message. It was ruled valid to produce, but that doesn't mean that everyone has to agree that's fair.

If the top people at Google think that composing an email is private, I think that's a pretty good hint that it is typical on planet Earth, even if it's not actually true.

If you are going to avoid revealing your thoughts while composing a document, then you would have to do it on some other system and only transmit the final version. That's somewhere from cumbersome to infeasible, and people just don't do it.

It seems approximately equivalent to the expectation of privacy in the restroom at work, to me.
New Video Hypes Up the JingPad A1 Linux Tablet
How many people are gonna use WebMIDI. In the meanwhile every user is affected by the UI.

That’s not a defense force constantly changing the UI but the UI is arguably one of the most important features for a browser to be competitive.
"and we admit that a full accounting for these actions is necessary before our ban is rescinded" is a valid (albeit even less common) form of making sure that they are held accountable. Nonetheless, it is important that the accused admits it.

The common case today is that admitting you are due to account for your actions is the same as admitting that you are at fault. I have been denied jobs because I have admitted that to being accountable for my decisions, whereas I got the distinct impression had I simply not accounted for them they wouldn't have cared.
Except that patch is clearly BS! You can't patch a double-read vulnerability by checking for a capability; that's not a thing that works. So either the description is wrong, or the patch is wrong, or both.

And the point of the reverts is that the kernel maintainers don't have the unlimited time that would be necessary to re-review all of these questionable patches for probable malicious underhanded C, so they are reverted for now for triage (not permanently).

For the linked patch, I would judge it possibly malicious as it leaves the identified vulnerability in the kernel for later exploit by the attackers, namely, the UMN research team.
But compute in general performs better and all non-windows io is way faster.
IP bans often result in banning an entire house.

"It was my brother on my unsecured computer" is an excuse I've heard a few times by people trying to shirk responsibility for their ban-worthy actions.

Geographic proximity to bad actors is sometimes enough to get caught in the crossfire. While it might be unfair, it might also be seen as holding a community and it's leadership responsible for failing to hold members of their community responsible and in check with their actions. And, fair or not, it might also be seen as a pragmatic option in the face of limited moderation tools and time. If you have a magic wand to ban only the bad-faith contributions by the students influenced by the professor in question, I imagine the kernel devs will be more than happy to put it to use.

Is it really just the one professor, though?
With touchscreen laptops I don't mind a more touch friendly mode. Though ideally it would only take extra space when touch input is available on the device.
> You'd usually approach a review in good faith.

> it's the linux kernel. Think about what it's powering and how much risk there is involved with these patches

Perhaps the mindset needs to change regarding security? Actual malicious actors seem unlikely to announce themselves for you.
That link is 48t per household, so its pretty close to the 16t per capita. Depending on what you say household size is.
The great Polish Sea (2006)
A colleague at my work from Hyderabad's cousin has it, I don't know how wealthy he is, but he got a bed yesterday in a "good" hospital, I guess there are some areas which are way more affected then others?
> They plan to go to the Moon, to the Mars etc. The were planning planning and planning all the time.

To be fair, I also plan to go to the gym, so I understand their struggle.
Governments would be absolutely salivating at the prospect of such simple censorship if they owned the search engines. And be under no illusion that all without exception would abuse that power in some way or another.
I love this project and I'd love it more if there was a discription on landing page about WHY it is privacy-friendly (as it seems to be one of the greatest benefits).
So, it turns out that sometimes programmers introduce bugs into software. Sometimes intentionally, but much more commonly accidentally.

If you've got a suggestion of a way to catch those bugs, please be more specific about it. Just telling people that they need "better protection" isn't really useful or actionable advice, or anything that they weren't already aware of.
Russia: We’ll leave International Space Station and build our own
Yeah, agree with this 100%. Really want to support creators, but I’m also specifically paying not to see ads. Would also pay for a higher tier were it available.

Ideally the terms of any such new higher pricing tier would preserve creator profitability (versus whatever arrangement they have now), but not sure how realistic that is once it all comes under Google’s purview.

I note that a lot of the best creators seem to put their private sponsorship arrangements at the back end of their videos, so at least you can switch away after the content is over.
I'd disagree. Organizations are collections of actors, some of which may have malicious intents. As long as the organization itself does not condone this type of behavior, has mechanisms in place to prevent such behavior, and has actual consequences for malicious actors, then the blame should be placed on the individual, not the organization.

In the case of research, universities are required to have an ethics board that reviews research proposals before actual research is conducted. Conducting research without an approval or misrepresenting the research project to the ethics board are pretty serious offenses.

Typically for research that involves people, participants in the research require having a consent form that is signed by participants, alongside a reminder for participants that they can withdraw that consent at any time without any penalties. It's pretty interesting that in this case, there seemed to have been no real consent required, and it would be interesting to know whether there has been an oversight by the ethics board or a misrepresentation of the research by the researchers.

It will be interesting to see whether the university applies a penalty to the professor (removal of tenure, termination, suspension, etc.) or not. The latter would imply that they're okay with unethical or misrepresented research being associated with their university, which would be pretty surprising.

In any case, it's a good thing that the Linux kernel maintainers decided that experimenting on them isn't acceptable and disrespectful of their contributions. Subjecting participants to experiments without their consent is a severe breach of ethical duty, and I hope that the university will apply the correct sanctions to the researchers and instigators.
I sincerely hope they didn't just do that because someone whose empire is built on Linux rang them up.
There are so many security flaws in critical software that you really don't need to inject vulnerabilities. You just need your engineers to find, catalog, and script exploits for them - ready to use whenever needed.

If you do inject vulnerabilities you need to assume your adversaries will find, catalog, and script an exploit for it. And you risk your reputation loss if you do get caught. So I'm sure it has happened, but I bet not that often.
Tried it, don't like it much:

- icons are thinner than before, making them harder to see (hmm, they're actually inconsistent, some are thick - search icon, and some thin - navigation icons)

- lack of countours makes toolbar input fileds harder to discern (I can still have separate search field, so at least that's good)

- popup menus have no countours either, making them blend into the page if it's white, like most pages are (https://megous.com/dl/tmp/20210422-015250-ff89.webm)

- everything is bigger for no reason

- new colors are meh, looks like random variants of grey + tinted background for the toolbar, which looks very out of place. just keep it grey, it would look less out of place

- a step back IMO
> The main thing DNSSEC does is create outages.

It was not that long ago that the same thing was being said about TLS.

I like my DNS to be validated. I don't see what the big problem with that is. Just don't enable the checkbox in your DNS resolver if you hate it that much.
Like a UI Lindy effect[1]?

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect
Leaves may blow around some, but on most of the forest floor there isn't anywhere for them to go. Some of the leaves get eaten or turned into fungus or whatnot, but those die off too and eventually return to the air.

There was a time in the Earth's history where this wasn't the case. During the carboniferous phase plant life didn't decay and biomatter piled up on the forest floor in miles-thick layers. The CO2 levels in the atmosphere dropped so low that the planet was verging on an iceball at times. The carbon balance was only maintained via enormous forest fires in the oxygen rich atmosphere.
Unfortunately that's not new. It was previously listed as Sponsored Top Sites. At least it can be disabled easily.
They have to investigate and also apologize accordingly in the name of the university.

Saying the researcher is the only responsible of a work that is managed by the university (with things such as probably funds and for sure resources) is just wrong.
Firefox does not pass the second test for me on macOS.

Also, wow. How fast is the new Firefox?
While annoying I see the benefit as a user and addon developer. It protects less sophisticated users from abuse. Though I do prefer Chrome's opt in to a dev mode without a whole separate binary.
What's extraordinary about the claim?
The consequences of being ddosed are not exactly the same as the consequences of being stabbed. I think you'll survive this terrible, unlikely ordeal.
The thing is, the person owning the place you rent is looking at their asset appreciating under you. They are going to either: raise your rent to keep pace, or, sell it out from under you to someone who will rent it out for much more than you are paying. You should not count on your rent being stable in your calculations. They may still make sense, they may not.
Short Animation Films
In Firefox, I would like to see the workspace feature which is already exist in Opera. It allows to you separate tabs as groups like Work, Project, Music etc..
ORMs are great when you have to update large graphs of objects. They are not great for querying. The performance of querying is so unpredictable in an ORM that it's better to handle these read queries by hand. Things that tend to screw up performance are the N+1 query problem and generated SQL causing bad query plans. One needs to get to know one's database query planner in order to get the best performance, and that requires dealing with the raw SQL.
Yeah, it's really annoying that if you want to introduce some async behaviour in a function, you end up having to deal with it at all the call sites

In the intro section I walk through adding a fetch to some code that jams text into a button and you can see how you don't end up having to change your code to do it: you just write the normal linear code with a fetch command in it:

https://hyperscript.org/docs/#introduction

<button class='btn primary' _="on click fetch /clickedMessage then transition opacity to 0
put the result into me then transition opacity to 1
wait 2s then transition opacity to 0
put 'Click Me!' into me then transition opacity to 1">
Click Me!
</button>

The fetch, wait and transition commands are asynchronous (in javascript terms) but to hyperscript it's all just linear code.
> The professor gets exactly what they want here, no?

I don't think they're a professor are they? Says they're a PhD student?
It appears this is the hackers website, and that they are going to be demonstrating multiple methods of duplication/fraud/"theft". For Act One, they legally created a duplicate that is indistinguishable from the original. (?)

From the FAQ:

"Won't your claim of the NFT digital asset association be easily disproved through the blockchain?

The blockchain proves ownership of the NFT token itself, and its association with a specific digital asset. There is no legitimate way to prove that the NFT that I have created does not in fact have the same association and attribution to the digital asset as the original NFT. This is due to the fact that there are no legally binding requirements in the world of NFT, and that the artist/creator is purely selling through an "Honor System" approach. All we have is their word that they will only mint one NFT for that digital asset. They can in fact mint it again as many times as they wish, and they can set whatever price they decide on, and from whatever wallet they chose to do it from. There is no way for anyone to disprove that the NFT token minted by me was not in fact done on behalf of the digital asset artist/creator."
Funnily enough, I just installed windows 10 on a old computer for somebody, and the new office online that's installed defaults to "ribbon simplified" view which looks like the old office before ribbon
Whitespaaaace, whitespace everywheeeeere.

The year is 2070. Advances in ultra-high density displays have finally realised modern designers' wet dreams of having fonts whose lines are only 1 micrometre thin.

I can't think what's more idiotic in those screenshots. The ungodly amount of whitespace, or the checkboxes-turned-slideswitches (despite the fact that the "slide" metaphor doesn't even make sense outside of touch interfaces), the gray-on-gray colour scheme ("accessibility, what's that?"), the neon-blue accents marketed as a "calming, fresh new design"...

Come on.
I'm familiar with the economics of mining, I don't know why it is thought that Chia was supposed to change that.

Their initiative is a GPU mining alternative which utilizes less power. The point of my comment was to emphasize that they have achieved exactly that.
I'm starting a SAAS where for $15/mo we'll provide you with physical storage for your computer!

Join the movement at https://i-was-up-till-3am-and-this-is-what-passes-for-humor.... !

(/s, obviously)
I think an interface that could be defined and iterated on is what Mozilla used to have with their chrome UI specification layer, and I think they mothballed that a few years ago? At least I think it was called chrome, it's not exactly easily searchable anymore.

Edit: Actually, I think I'm thinking of XUL? I'm not sure how much it's still the standard for Mozilla UI specification or not.
Here's a few answers from folks so far:
- Check out Takachar, might be along these lines: https://www.takachar.com/
- Distance to transport the biomass matters a lot as well, so need to find something that makes sense closer to you than shipping biomass around the world
Probably science journals should suspend publication of any human research done in UMN. That might get this issue the attention it deserves. These were human trials without IRB pre-approval, but IRB condoned it afterward?
Scratch all that, let's just change it anyway and optimise for the following metric: looking good in screenshots (notice how trends like ungodly amounts of whitespace, flat widgets, flashy animations, are all explainable by optimising for subjective style over usability). For fuck's sake.
If you're on Android, YouTube Vanced now has built in support for SponsorBlock. It's great.
And if Amazon buys location data on union organizers and their contacts? If farming conglomerates buy environmentalists locations? If General Electric, or other military-industrial giants, buy anti-war activist locations?

It won't stop at burgers.