skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There are desks that solve the cable management issue by mounting a tray just underneath the tabletop. If it's such a problem for you, a desk like this is probably worth it.

The portability argument I understand though. I regularly move my desktop between two places and having duplicate cables and peripherals for each one has been very convenient. So seeing that, you're actually right, I would need to either buy a probably fairly expensive proprietary cable or always carry the brick; and an integrated PSU would've been more convenient.

But in the end whether this tradeoff is worth it comes down to your particular situation, and apparently Apple have decided that in general it is worth it. Personally I also don't think too many people move their desktops around that much.

The point about the power brick not showing up on the page I'd chalk up to OCD design, not malice, to be honest. It is at least hinted at because the two pictured cables are different.
https://xtz.news/adoption/gravity-a-decentralized-solution-t...

https://xtz.news/nft-news/tezos-based-nft-music-streaming-an...
> it seems to me this is more about medical experiments

Psychology and sociology are both subject to the IRB as well.

Regardless of their department, this feels like a psychology experiment.
Okay, what other programming languages did you master before? What is so much easier?

I suppose you mean using-aliases for types/namespaces? This is a C# language concept, not a very complicated one, and totally independent of the operating system
Old-growth forest carbon sinks overestimated
Apple’s $64 billion-a-year App Store isn’t catching the most egregious scams
They were only banned after accusing Greg of slander after he called them out on their experiment and asked them to stop. They were banned for bring dishonest and rude.
It isn't a moral issue so the joke isn't relevant. The article I linked mentions that parents hid the real truth of their child's death for fear of judgement. Neither the parents nor the medical professionals were aware of the problem until it was too late, but I guess thats just the fault of bad parenting?
The author discusses this in the corresponding /r/rust thread:

https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/mvc6o5/incredibly_fas...

tl;dr: it's not straightforward, mostly because the standard functionality lives in `core` which doesn't have access to OS support for CPU feature detection.
WTF? They are experimenting with people without their consent? And they haven't been kicked out of the academic community????
Well, the decision can always be reversed, but on the outset I would say banning the entire university and publicly naming them is a good start. I don't think this kind of "research" is ethical, and the issue needs to be raised. Banning them is a good opener to engage the instiution in a dialogue.
I have no clue what you try to say, sorry.
What about organizations like CNN, that spend months and sometimes years on conspiracy theories, only to move on to the next one when the previous turns out to be false?
Here's for reference an example:
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-media-lied-repeatedly-a...
I could see a smaller version of this, without the speaker, having some real potential for preventing musical instrument theft (especially electric guitars), or at least speeding recovery. The AirTag could conceivably be placed in the electronics control cavity of the guitar.
> GraphQL N+1 issues are a thing of the past.

Huh, care to explain this one? I’m using Prisma with Apollo Server without doing anything fancy in my resolvers. I just assumed I’m getting N+1 issues but didn’t bother to optimize yet.
>Can you elaborate

The second Boer war[1] is often seen by historians as the one event that precipitated the fall of the British empire [2][3][4]

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War

[2]https://sci-hub.se/10.2307/42894929

[3]http://journals.rudn.ru/world-history/article/view/1145

[4]https://www.jstor.org/stable/42894929?seq=1
Right. And you would need a larger sample size to determine what % of the time that occurs, on average. But even then, is that useful and valid information? And is it actionable? (And if so, what is the cost of the action, and the opportunity cost of lost fixes in other areas?)
This is utter bullshit. I didn't need a permission or high enough social credit to leave China.
While some people are hard lined enough on this that I agree it sort of becomes weird, I can tell you my beef with ORMs comes from being burned before a couple of times by a super inefficient aggregation ActiveRecord did on GROUP BY queries that it 1. not only took a really long time to figure out why a particular page in our app was loading slow but 2. we ended up having to write raw SQL to fix it.

I think the answer depends on the type and load/volume of app you're working with combined with the dynamics, size, and skill level of your team(s). I'm extremely comfortable writing, profiling, query planning, and debugging SQL queries. Others aren't, and therefore having an ORM to query data in the DB with the syntax of the language you're using in your projects makes way more sense, if nothing other in order to speed your team up.
A completely deregulated free-market economy would have no recourse to the courts. Such does not exist. I have no idea regarding the merits of the case but so far we don't know who's to get bitten.
One side will have the definite firepower advantage, enough to deal with other be it puppet, not puppet or whatever.

You choose what this side will be.

Russians have nothing in their coffers they can spare for a puppet project when there will be a battle hardened army a day away from Moscow.

It's the best way for NATO to put Russia on defensive. A solid wall of steel from Baltic to Azov to seal it shut from Europe.
Something a lot of commenters seem to be missing is that in Adam Smith's time, inheritance meant primogeniture. In other words, the eldest son receives all land, which is indivisible and belongs to the eldest son only. (Who is socially obliged to support the other people in the family as needed.)

This ties up a lot of wealth in ways which slow down economic growth immensely.
Apparently any phone with NFC capability can disable any Apple Airtag.
So many comments here refrain, “They should have asked for consent first”. But would not that be detrimental to the research subject? Specifically, stealthily introducing security vulnerabilities. How should a consent request look to preserve the surprise factor? A university approaches you and says, “Would it be okay for us to submit some patches with vulnerabilities for review, and you try and guess which ones are good and which ones have bugs?” Of course you would be extra careful when reviewing those specific patches. But real malicious actors would be so kind and ethical as to announce their intentions beforehand.
> That was done, was it not?

The allegation being made on the mailing list is that some incorrect patches of theirs made it into git and even the stable trees. As there is not presently an enumeration of them, or which ones are alleged to be incorrect, I cannot state whether this is true.

But that's the claim.

edit: And looking at [1], they have a bunch of relatively tiny patches to a lot of subsystems, so depending on how narrowly gregkh means "rip it all out", this may be a big diff.

edit 2: On rereading [2], I may have been incorrectly conflating the assertion about "patches containing deliberate bugs" with "patches that have been committed". Though if they're ripping everything out anyway, it appears they aren't drawing a distinction either...

[1] - https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux...

[2] - https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nfs/YH%2F8jcoC1ffuksrf@kroah.c...
>> https://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~kjlu/papers/clarifications-hc....

"We did not introduce or intend to introduce any bug or vulnerability in the Linux kernel. All the
bug-introducing patches stayed only in the email exchanges, without being adopted or merged into any
Linux branch, which was explicitly confirmed by maintainers. Therefore, the bug-introducing patches in
the email did not even become a Git commit in any Linux branch. None of the Linux users would be
affected."
Show HN: I made a simple online flow chart editor
A new measure of success: Counting hours worked isn’t cutting it anymore
There are two separate issues with this story.

One is that what the researchers did is beyond reckless. Some of the bugs they've introduced could be affecting real world critical systems.

The other issue is that the research is actually good in proving by practical means that pretty much anyone can introduce vulnerabilities into software as important and sensitive as the Linux kernel. This hurts the industry confidence that we can have secure systems even more than it already is.

While some praise may be appropriate for the latter, they absolutely deserve the heat they're getting for the former. There may be many better ways to prove a point.
If Linux was AGPL you would have to

You wouldn't, as system interfaces are specifically excluded as an AGPL enforcement domain. But if the Linux kernel was AGPL, you would have to supply the source code to your NFS clients, since those clients would be served directly by the kernel.
Does that not lead to a system where Google Ads Inc buys placement on Google Search Inc?

In which case, you're still left with your core problem - Google Search Inc can, potentially, manipulate search rankings to sell ad space.
> The dev experience in VS with a copy of ReSharper installed is unparalleled in software engineering.

It's pretty great until you tried out Rider :D, okay it's more or less the same as Resharper.

I'm not a Java developer, but i suppose IntelliJ will give you quite a similar development experience as Resharper/Rider?
The question is also: "Will this research have benefits?" If the conclusion is "well, you can get access to the water supply and the only means to prevent it is to closely guard every brook, lake and river, needing half the population as guards". Well, then it is useless. And taking risks for useless research is unethical, no matter how minor those risks might be.
Agreed, in fact the review process worked and now they are going to ban all contributions from that university, as it should be. I think it all worked out perfectly
Gitlab: Free Certification Pathways
It depends.

Does creating a vaccine justify the death of some lab animals? Probably.

Does creating supermen justify mutilating people physically and psychologically without their consent? Hell no.

You can’t just ignore the context.
The university reviewed the "study" and said it was acceptable. From the email chain, it looks like they've already complained to the university multiple times, and have apparently been ignored. Banning anyone at the university from contributing seems like the only way to handle it since they can't trust the institution to ensure its students are doing unethical experiments.
None, but if cops think that you are liable you will be persecuted. There were instances when having a contract with a lawyer would be interpreted as if you were intending to break the law [0]. So you can imagine how little evidence will be required.

[0] https://news.tut.by/society/700543.html
Advanced Face Recognition with Python
Combined with their lack of awareness of a possible breach of ethics in their response to Greg, I find it hard to believe they did not mislead the UMN IRB.

I hope they release what they submitted to the IRB to receive that exemption and there are some form of consequences if the mistake is on their part.
Well, an investigator can follow the money ...
This is no better. All it does is increase the size of the research team. You’re still doing research on non-consenting participants.
Of course people don’t want to compete. Too bad.

Capitalism is about increasing efficiency / resources through brutal competition.

Just don’t let them make laws giving one group special treatment. Like banning the competition.
CorticalCafe Computer Generated Hologram (CGH) Kit (2010)
While some people are hard lined enough on their anti-ORM stance that it sort of becomes weird, I agree with you that my beef with ORMs comes from being burned before a couple of times by a super inefficient aggregation ActiveRecord did on GROUP BY queries that it 1. not only took a really long time to figure out why a particular page in our app was loading slow but 2. we ended up having to write raw SQL to fix it.

I think the answer of whether to use one depends on the type and load/volume of app you're working with combined with the dynamics, size, and skill level of your team(s). I'm extremely comfortable writing, profiling, query planning, and debugging SQL queries. Others aren't, and therefore having an ORM to query data in the DB with the syntax of the language you're using in your projects makes way more sense, if nothing other in order to speed your team up.
""At this next vital election Britain's survival as a Great Power will depend on the existence of a well-organised Party of the Right, ready to take over responsibility for national affairs with the same directness of purpose and energy of method as Mussolini and Hitler have displayed.... That is why I say Hurrah for the Blackshirts! ... Hundreds of thousands of young British men and women would like to see their own country develop that spirit of patriotic pride and service which has transformed Germany and Italy. They cannot do better than seek out the nearest branch of the Blackshirts and make themselves acquainted with their aims and plans."

1st Lord Rothermere, The Daily Mail (15th January, 1934)

https://spartacus-educational.com/Jmail.htm
Why would I use it over DataDog?
> Google was around in the 1930s, I find it hard to believe they would have come out in full support of the Nazis

Google supports China though, and that's not too far removed. You know people back then didn't believe that Germans ran camps despite all the evidence. It seems like the same thing is happening now - there is evidence of camps in China, but people happily buy products because it is cheap and companies wipe their faces and continue to do business there.
You know in the 30s IBM has provided the infrastructure to run those camps.
So you are making a bold claim here.
The University approved this research. How can one trust anything from that university now?
> Just tumble your coins!

Much easier said than done:

- it costs money
- most tumblers aren't safe at all (who's to say they aren't operated by the govt or that they don't keep logs)
- in some cases, you might not get your coins back at all

Coinjoin for BTC is a better approach, but it's also far from easy to use (need a special wallet) and is basically useless until it sees mass adoption.
No.

The greatest motivation for Crypto success are hatred and fear.

BTC is succeeding because people hate/fear Central Banks printing money , so people love BTC and hate Central Banks.

Ethereum doesn't put itself up against the printing of money but against companies instead. Google, Apple, Spotify etc. People don't hate those companies and to the extent that they do....they manifest their hate by asking Government to tax them more, not migrating to a super hard to use and super costly decentralized platform to undercut their power. The consumer doesn't think in those terms.
I just wanted to highlight that S&P/Oakland is one of the top 3 or 4 security conferences in the security community in academia. This is a prestigious venue lending its credibility to this paper.
Honest people don’t see a lock and think, “Ok, they don’t want me going in there, but I bet they would appreciate some free pentesting.”
If you have signed a contract that states that "all intellectual property you produce during your employment belongs to $COMPANY", it would be a harder argument, I think.

I have had contracts changed to carve out the "on my time, on my kit" exception (and, yes, I am quite antsy having to involve any of my own equipment in anything work-related).
How does it compare to MikroORM? I was researching different ORM options and almost wanted to give up until I discovered MikroORM, which is simply great.

Edit: After quickly going through the intro, I prefer MikroORM, it's simpler.
Did you happen use google to search for misdeeds by google?
I would check their ties to nation-state actors.

In closed source, nobody would even check. Modern DevOps has essentially replaced manual code review with unit tests.
It’s a lie, that’s how it fits.
Using the same rocket ten times instead of once is an order of magnitude improvement. Why shouldn't it be possible to do even better than that?
I know you are joking, because they actually list alternatives: https://alternativeto.net/software/alternativeto/ Big kudos to them.
But one can modify Postgres without changing the wire protocol, so the driver may be the plain, original one without custom modifications. The AGPL doesn't mandate that the protocol must be ratified by some standards body, only that a "Standard Interface [exists] for which an implementation is available to the public in source code form".
I doubt an university e-mail gives you significantly increased trust in the kernel community, since those are given to all students in all majors (most of which are of course much less competent at kernel development than the average kernel developer).
Human review was done after the patch was merged into stable, hence reverting was necessary. I’m confused why these patches don’t get treated as merge requests and get reviewed prior to merging!
Time-Saving Tools for Web Developers and Designers
IDK about the rest of Europe but in Spain soccer is highly tied to local cities/towns and lesser cathegory leagues, as if the big soccer teams were built up from the smallest grounds.

Trying to convert that into a "Hollywood" soccer kind with "fireworks", elitism and expensive/luxury consumerdom/PPV like is the recipe for a disaster and to dis-joint the huge regional fandom of each team.

On major events such as finals, my province's capital city's population rises from ~200k people to nearly 500k-1 million in the streets, it's crazy.
This is a huge stretch. It’s more of a technical or operational experiment. They are testing the review process, not the maintainers.
This really isn’t true.

A simple search through VAERs shows negligible difference between j&j and moderna/pfizer
I meant the same set of subjects they wanted to focus on.
They reported unethical behavior to the university and the university failed to prevent it from happening again.
What Is Self-Awareness?
By your logic, you allow recording people without their consent, experimenting on PTSD by inducing PTSD without people consent, or medical experimentation without the subject consent.

Try to introduce yourself in the White House and when you get caught tell them "I was just testing your security procedures".
No bugs were introduced and they didn't intend to introduce any bugs. infact, they have resolved over 1000+ bugs in the linux kernel.

>> https://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~kjlu/papers/clarifications-hc....
"We did not introduce or intend to introduce any bug or vulnerability in the Linux kernel. All the
bug-introducing patches stayed only in the email exchanges, without being adopted or merged into any
Linux branch, which was explicitly confirmed by maintainers. Therefore, the bug-introducing patches in
the email did not even become a Git commit in any Linux branch. None of the Linux users would be
affected. The following shows the specific procedure of the experiment"
The argument isn’t having no eyes is better than some eyes. Rather, it’s commonly argued that open source is better for security because there are more eyes on it.

What this research demonstrates is that you can quite easily slip back doors into an open contribution (which is often but not always associated with open source) project with supposedly the most eyes on it. That’s not true for any closed source project which is definitely not open contribution. (You can go for an open source supply chain attack, but that’s again a problem for open source.)
I agree with what your saying, but have no sympathy for the rag that is the Daily Mail
> GraphQL N+1 issues are a thing of the past.

This one I will believe when I see it. It would be a general solution to cache invalidation.
in short the separate engine process allows them to combine every findX call you make during one tick of the event loop into a single SQL query, following the dataloader pattern, so you don’t have to implement it yourself. i’m sure @nikolasburk can shed some more light if you’re interested.
Not my problem, is it? I have to use the same tools as the rest of my team and those tools are as fickle as a teenager's mood.

There are ways around those problems but nobody from the core team even attempted it (one example: have a stable set of sub-commands that get translated to now-modified-in-next-version internal APIs; is that really so hard? almost every commercial dev has to do it).

But no, let's throw the devs under the bus every time we change our minds.

See, that's why a lot of people hate the JS ecosystem, and that's why this perception will not change anytime soon.

All languages have idiosyncrasies. I'd be an idiot to hate on JS in particular because literally all languages I ever used have strange and weird deficiencies. But that's not it. The ecosystem and the tooling (and for some languages, like Erlang/Elixir, the runtime is also included) make all the difference to novices or casual dippers.

If that experience is bad, then the JS ecosystem will remain the same old meme of youngsters experimenting at the expense of everybody else like it has been viewed for 6+ years now.

---

Don't think I am blaming you for anything. I just ranted and vented. A lot of devs lack the insight to be able to look from the outside and say "hey, if I was coming here for the first time I'd be puzzled by this" -- and that grows to be a big problem when enough time has passed.
> A lot of people claim that there's a lot of eyes on the code

And they are correct. Unfortunately sometimes the number of eyes is not enough.

The alternative is closed source, which has prove to be orders of magnitude worse, on many occasions.
This statement is certainly provocative (great that it was the first thing picked up here :D) but I'm happy to explain our rationale for this a bit more.

SQL is an impressive technology and has stood the test of time! Yet, we claim that it's not the best tool for application developers who are paid to implement value-adding features for their organizations.

SQL is complex, it's easy to shoot yourself in the foot with and its data model (relational data / tables) is far away from the one application developers have (nested data / objects) when working in JS/TS. Mapping relational data to objects incurs a mental as well as a practical cost!

This is why we believe that in the majority of cases (which for most apps are fairly straightforward CRUD operations) developers shouldn't pay that cost. They should have an API that feels natural and makes them productive. That being said, for the 5% of queries that need certain optimizations, Prisma allows you to drop down to raw SQL and make sure your desired SQL statements are sent to the DB.

I see Prisma somewhat analogous to GraphQL on the frontend, where a similar claim could be: "Frontend developers should care about data, not REST endpoints". GraphQL liberates frontend developers from thinking about where to get their data from and how to assemble it into the structures they need. Prisma does the same by giving application developers a familiar and intuitive API.
FYI: I help out with the Ruby Pixel Art Week 2021, April 19th to April 25th - 7 Days of Ruby (Graphics) Gems.
The Ruby Pixel Art Week 2021 presents a new Ruby graphics library every day from April 19th to April 25th, see https://planetruby.github.io/gems

Day 1 features the chunky_png Gem -
Turn Pixelated Billie Eilish and Lady Gaga Portraits into True 24x24 Pixel Art, see https://planetruby.github.io/gems/pixel/01-chunky-png