skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The Ukraine would have a much easier time getting into NATO if relations with Russia were cordial

If relations with Russia were cordial, the Ukraine would have no need to get into NATO to begin with. In that ideal world, things would look different; we don't live in that world, sadly.
It is an extreme response to an extreme problem. If the other researchers don't like the situation? They are free to raise the problem to the university and have the university clean up the mess they obviously have.
Ripple Price Prediction: XRP commences bullish comeback toward $2
You could even use an oracle network to feed economic data to the chain
And a solution in places like New Zealand, where cats are harming the native bird populations.
You can buy complete bluetooth beacons including battery for under $7 in the EU.

They can easily be built for a few bucks. Good profits, and I expect many people will have 5-10 devices, because they're so cheap
Floats are still represented in 32 bits, or 64 for doubles
Because there are quite a few academics working on the kernel in the first place (not a in a similar order of magnitude compared to industry, of course). Even GKH gets invited by academics to work together regularly.
Sure they are: they both make money from selling ads don’t they?
I don't see how this is related. Being rude in tone, and wasting someone's time, are different things. You make it sound like they are the same.

But the opposite of what you propose is true. The maintainers are annoyed by others wasting their time in other cases as well as in this case - it's coherent behavior. And in my opinion, it's sensible to be annoyed when someone wasted your time - be it by lazily made patches or by intentionally broken patches.
Like that: malevolent actors are banned as soon as detected.
Doesn't WHDLoad do that?
And it has been awesome :-)
Did you started actually working on the idea then?
The two pieces of evidence I'd give you as proof of widespread use:

1. The r/visualbasic subreddit is constantly fighting people trying to use it for very low-effort homework help (just tell me how to do this problem, rather than asking for specific issues). It's literally every other post to the sub.

2. Almost no Visual Basic books are still published today. The few that are, are college textbooks, which explicitly mention them as being part of a degree: https://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Visual-Windows-Database-App...
I agree, but I wouldn't always characterize this as a problem.

I remember playing a 3-player game of Root (which I highly recommend!) Player A ambushed me and managed to burn down my headquarters. At that point I realized I couldn't win, and I spent the rest of the game attacking A.

A complained that I was just throwing the game to B, which is exactly what happened. The kingmaker problem made A's decision into a huge blunder. If you don't pay attention to psychology in these games, you will lose.
Laravel has Eloquent and it’s an absolute delight to use. I’ve used Rails and Django, and I always felt as if I was fighting the ORM, where as with Eloquent everything just seems natural.
* Implies tiles with non-replaceable batteries will stop working after a fixed time (they won't).

—> wouldnt the battery eventually die? This seems obvious that after some amount of time a non replaceable battery will stop functioning
Instagram Automation for Chrome – Automates the process of following/unfollowing
Use a robot to attract more followers.

How does it work?

Instagram Automation is the perfect automation tool if you want to increase your followers and your popularity, also perfect for Instagram Marketers.

This extension will automatically follow, unfollow, the Followers or the Following of a specific account and the Likes of a specific post (picture or video).

It is really easy to use, you will start to increase your number of followers just few minutes after installation.
Would like to know this as well.

The deciding factor would be the responsiveness of a lookup.
How quick can one locate the tag when it is out of reach of your iPhone and needs to be located through the "public network"?
But VAERS data also shows significantly more serious adverse incidents compared to other widely-distributed vaccines like polio and hepatitis B.
Only in more developed countries where your medical insurance pays the bills. And even there it can wreak havoc on the public health insurance system due to the excessive cost of keeping HIV-positives alive.

Generally, HIV is "solved" by a lifelong treatment with antiretrovirals. Those are not free of side-effects, very expensive and not available everywhere. In many places in less-developed countries, antiretrovirals are simply unaffordable for those affected. And even if they are affordable, the recurrent cost of the drugs keeps them in a lifelong state of poverty and dependency. Society as a whole may finance those drugs, but at the cost of other necessary things of course. Also, some countries try to produce those drugs themselves on the cheap, getting them into hot water with the western patent lobby and preventing trade agreements and the like, damaging their economy.

And the epidemic itself is still ongoing, sometimes even fueled by infected people no longer caring, due to the availability of antiretrovirals that render AIDS "harmless".

All in all, HIV is still spreading, is still not cured, treatment is problematic and it still wreaks havoc. Maybe only a little less.
They would say that of course.

Not sure that Nvidia would even be aware of some of the issues that might have led to this - they are national security issues so likely secret after all.
To be pedantic, the remaining life expectancy if an 82 year old in UK in 2019 was 7.5 years.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/file?uri=/peoplepopulationandcommunit...

And of course, cumulatively many more "life years" would be lost in a no-lockdown world.

But the real tragedy is you thinking stopping a real, deadly disease that affects millions of people isn't worth it because of a completely preventable death.
I recently tried to take a look at dotnet core since I heard it can compile and run on linux. Every tutorial I looked at for building a webapp started with "download visual studio and click these buttons..." which would result in a "mostly complete" program that it would go on to fill in some variables to. Literally every other language tutorial starts with a simple empty file and fills in functions with descriptions of what's going on and builds up understanding. When I want to learn how to make a webapp in .NET, I want to learn to make a webapp in .NET/C#, not how to install and click buttons in Visual Studio.
That’s not true, it depends on the types of materials, how it is disposed, and what the alternatives are.

Recall that everything is made out of rearranged earth atoms. So long as you put them back properly, it can be sustainable.
I'm confused. The cited paper contains this prominent section:

Ensuring the safety of the experiment. In the experiment,
we aim to demonstrate the practicality of stealthily introducing
vulnerabilities through hypocrite commits. Our goal is not to
introduce vulnerabilities to harm OSS. Therefore, we safely
conduct the experiment to make sure that the introduced UAF
bugs will not be merged into the actual Linux code. In addition
to the minor patches that introduce UAF conditions, we also
prepare the correct patches for fixing the minor issues. We
send the minor patches to the Linux community through email
to seek their feedback. Fortunately, there is a time window
between the confirmation of a patch and the merging of the
patch. Once a maintainer confirmed our patches, e.g., an email
reply indicating “looks good”, we immediately notify the
maintainers of the introduced UAF and request them to not
go ahead to apply the patch.

Are you saying that despite this, these malicious commits made it to production?

Taking the authors at their word, it seems like the biggest ethical consideration here is that of potentially wasting the time of commit reviewers—which isn't nothing by any stretch, but is a far cry from introducing bugs in production.

Are the authors lying?
Show HN: Igrepper – Interactive grepping using ncurses and rust
I disagree.
Decentralization makes it possible to cut out the middle man, Sotheby is no longer needed to do art deals, you can buy directly via smart contract. Will some people buy via Sotheby's still because they provide value in curating items? Sure but they will have much more competition than they do now.

It also makes new things possible, for instance the original artist could get a cut of every resale of his art. People can own parts of art, music etc. Artists can go directly to their fans.

Another example is Defi which also cuts out the middleman. I want to send you 100 usd. I have euro, right now I need to go to my bank app and they will convert for a pretty big fee , they will also take 5 days to send it to you if it's international and god help me if there are holidays involved.
With defi I send instantly and I will be able to choose what kind of value I send and you will be able to choose what kind of value you want to receive. I don't even need to know. I could send you euros and you receive in usd, it passes through a defi smart contract on the way without any of us knowing. If I'm a farmer and I have corn futures I could probably pay in that and you would still just get usd. Again cuts out the middleman.

Does it help that it's also censorship resistant and trustless? Yes.
The ease of use is not on par with legacy for my mum.. yet. But that was also the case in 1995 with the internet.
It's funny how they jump to blaming the Americans. Last I checked the Spanish clubs in this scheme weren't run by Americans.
Fish in a Barrel: an insider’s retrospective of the SOSP’09 multikernel paper
I don't dislike it. I'm happy with my podcast player and don't want two of them since I want to keep using the one with the interface I like.

Other things than the pure content matter. It's not irrelevant.
Good news, even if old. NVIDIA is openly hostile to the open source, unlike the ARM. That would have been the end of blobless Linux on ARM.
The domain is different. bbc.com versus bbc.co.uk.
The US propped up murderous dictators in both, more explicitly in South Korea but they also helped a war criminal entrench the LDP in Japan. Their shift to democracy happened much later and was not the result of a Western coup.
The Dark Side of the Houseplant Boom
Or some enemy state pawn(s) trying to add backdoors and then use the excuse of "university research paper" should they get caught?
Self-censorship or outright muzzling. Pick your poison. I'd rather people speak their mind, even unpopular opinions.
Yeah this actually seems more like sociological research except since it’s in the comp sci department the investigators don’t seem to be trained in acceptable (and legal) standards of conducting such research on human subjects. You definitely need prior consent when doing this sort of thing. Ideally this would be escalated to a research ethics committee at UMN because these researchers need to be trained in acceptable practices when dealing with human subjects. So to me it makes sense the subjects “opted out” and escalated to the university.
https://www.theonion.com/reporters-expose-airport-security-l...
I wonder, if you know you were launching one every six months for the next 20 years, what would the unit cost be?

You might be able to use a commercial satellite bus for example. It would be fine if some would experience failures, as there would be the next one already lined up.

Just put different instrument(s) at the end of the optical path in each. As example, Hubble has five instruments. https://hubblesite.org/mission-and-telescope/instruments

One could start a design from something like CHEOPS with a 30 cm mirror. https://sci.esa.int/web/cheops/-/54032-spacecraft
I still don't get the point of this "research".

You're just testing the review ability of particular Linux kernel maintainers at a particular point in time. How does that generalize to the extent needed for it to be valid research on open source software development in general?

You would need to run this "experiment" hundreds or thousands of times across most major open source projects.
What Dog Breeds Say About Race
One guess would be that an edu address would be tied to your real identity, whereas a throwaway email could be pseudonymous.
I think it's less about specific Americans (e.g. owners of several of the English teams involved) and more about the American style of running league competitions — e.g. without promotion/relegation.
football without promotion and relegation is not football, i never understood the American style of "closed leagues". If you can't deal with relegation, don't play a game.
It is not hard to point a gun at someone's head.

But let's assume your girlfriend points an (unknown to you) empty gun at your head, because she wants to know how you will react. What do you think is the appropriate reaction?
IDK. "Holding the line" scenarios in last 100 years generally ended up badly for the defenders: expensive and ineffective. Modern wars are all about movement, maneuver and sudden concentration of power in a spot chosen by the attacker.

If the recent Nagorno Karabakh war is of any use as an example, Russians and Russian-trained officers were unable to hold their positions against killer drones. Drones are cheap and their destruction in combat does not fuel anti-war sentiments at home, unlike a stream of coffins draped in flags.

But given that Russians are not stupid, they are probably working on some anti-drone strategy as well.
Netflix misses first quarter subscribers goals and stocks plunge
I'm sure that they thought this. But this is a bit like doing unsolicited pentests or breaking the locks on somebody's home at night without their permission. If people didn't ask for it and consent, it is unethical.

And further, pretty much everybody knows that malicious actors - if they tried hard enough - would be able to sneak through hard to find vulns.
> Should we assume that every patch was submitted in bad faith and tries to sneakily introduce bugs?

Yes, especially for critical projects?

> Do you maintain a software project? On GitHub perhaps? What do you do if somebody opens a pull request and says "I tried such and such and then found that the program crashes here, this pull request fixes that"? When reviewing the changes, do you immediately, by default jump to the assumption that they are evil, lying and trying to sneak a subtle bug into your code?

I don’t jump to the conclusion that the random contributor is evil. I do however think about the potential impact of the submitted patch, security or not, and I do assume a random contributor can sneak in subtle bugs, usually not intentionally, but simply due to a lack of understanding.
I wonder if some of the people having fevers and other flu-like side effects are people who were asymptomatic Covid carriers at one point!

I don't have a condition nearly as serious as sarcoidosis, but I also worry that I will be one of the unlucky ones with a more serious side effect.
That’s why I specifically said low levels of harm are acceptable.

Your argument boils down to saying it’s ok to play Russian Roulette with unwilling people if their is X chambers in the gun, but not ok if their is X-1 chambers in the gun. I am saying it’s never ok to do so but there is a polite agreement where people ignore low levels of harm based on a host of factors.

This is consistent with events that have already happened and events that have yet to happen. You can reasonably argue the risk was low for events that didn’t happen, as in the building was strong enough see it’s still standing. In that case speeding cameras should be legally different than a cop pulling someone over. The cop is stopping you from speeding, but the camera doesn’t.

On the other hand if risk is inherently a harm then past or future harm is irrelevant. Which is how things treated, you can’t argue the outcome when you have put others at risk.
Ridiculous comparison indeed. There was no pen testing going on.
Submitted code does not attack or harming any running system and whoever uses is does so completely voluntary. I dont need anyone's approval for that. The license already states that I'm not liable in any way for what you do with it.
I think it’s because the tournament style was supposed to be similar to American sports.
There is sometimes an exception for things like interviews when n is only a couple of people. This was clearly unethical and it’s certain that at least some of those involved knew that. It’s common knowledge universities.
Yes. As others have pointed out, it’s more and more common these days - or at least more common to have a situation where the players aren’t entirely sure who is ahead.

Examples include:
* Innovation
* Wingspan
* 7 Wonders
* Brass: Birmingham (and the original Brass, too)

All really fun games, too.
Wow, that is basically the top computer security conference.
Not if the research involves the reviewing aspects of open source projects.
>Using the same rocket ten times instead of once is an order of magnitude improvement.

Reusability is not a panacea. Space Shuttle was reusable but it was not cost-effective and there were no cost savings. Also, reliability suffered and maintenance became prohibitive. In fact, I think the consensus is that the entire program was a mistake.

>Why shouldn't it be possible to do even better than that?

Because reusability has to contend with factors like:

1) Turn around time. How quickly can you refurbish a rocket.

2) Maintenance costs. How expensive is it to recover and refurbish the rocket.

3) How many times can you reuse a rocket.

4) Failure rates. Does reusing a rocket compromise quality.

5) Decreased revenue per launch. Reusable rockets need to carry spare fuel meaning, that your cargo space is cut (and cargo is revenue), and your costs are higher, because you have to still 'pay' to ship that spare fuel along with cargo.

Factors like those may make it that even if there are cost-savings, that those cost savings are not orders of magnitude lower, but maybe something on the order of 10%-50% - which is nice, and you can disrupt the market and make a good business out of it, but it's not anywhere close to the claims that are made. And again, SpaceX has not shown in practice that they can get ANY savings from reusability.
Could you test this and get back to us with the results?
Stolen Signs
The club owners pushing for this are equally responsible and fans blame them as well (in fact, some of them have resigned already). I haven't heard anyone blaming exclusively Americans (except for the linked article), if that's what you mean by "they".
note that contracting requires establishing and maintaining relationships. there are also legal implications of messing stuff up. working for a consultancy shields you from all of this.
I guess "physics based approach" could mean a few things (for context, my background is physics, not CS), but quantum chemistry [1,2] definitely stands in a very physics-y area while involving QC very directly. There is also QC for solid state physics, for more or less the same reasons you'd use QC for chemistry (scaling problems with the classical solutions).

On the other hand, quantum control (physically manipulating your quantum computer) has a lot of physics in it, but also crosses into EE. Likewise, looking into physical systems that can behave as a quantum computer is physics and EE. However I'm very much unfamiliar with that part, so I can't say anything there.

[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms5213

[2] https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/18/2/02...
Meanwhile modern smart phones charge to 80% in 15-30 mins. If they were in there for hours they wanted it at 100%
Another perspective is of course that of the embedded developer, a camp I can count myself to.

In embedded software, it's not uncommon to have exactly one target for the software (commonly called "the target"). Sometimes the target changes due to components being end-of-lifed or so, but it's rare and slow.

In those situations, I have found intrinsics to be very helpful since they allow you to reason and talk about the software at a higher level (C is, after all, higher than assembly) and without making sure all developers on a team understand the inline assembly syntax. :)

It is still good practice to check the resulting code, especially as, if you're using intrinsics, chances are you're often thinking more or less in assembly, but you can do that once and be pretty sure you're getting the desired result.

The resulting code is of course also more portable, which can be helpful when you want to e.g. automate tests of code without external hardware dependencies such as data structures, utility functions, and so on.
Yes, you can expose things with the C ABI. This is essential for how it's used in Firefox.
Challenge: 15 days inside Emacs' Dired
All the 3rd party library hanger-ons is a real putoff. Asp.Net docs linking(with broken links) to a 3rd party, paid identity framework to make auth work for Blazor/Spa? Gross. It's 2021 and this stuff is table stakes for OSS web framework ecosystems.
> Auditability is at the core of its advantage over closed development.

That's an assertion. A hypothesis is verified through observing the real world. You can do that in many ways, giving you different confidence levels in validity of the hypothesis. Research such as the one we're discussing here is one of the ways to produce evidence for or against this hypothesis.

> Submitting bugs is not really testing auditability, which happens over a longer timeframe and involves an order of magnitude more eyeballs.

It is if there's a review process. Auditability itself is really most interesting before a patch is accepted. Sure, it's nice if vulnerabilities are found eventually, but the longer that takes, the more likely it is they were already exploited. In case of an intentionally bad patch in particular, the window for reverting it before it does most of its damage is very small.

In other words, the experiment wasn't testing the entire auditability hypothesis. Just the important part.

> benevolence, and assuming everyone wants the best for the project, is very important in these models, because the resources are limited and dependent on enthusiasm

Sure. But the project scope matters. Linux kernel isn't some random OSS library on Github. It's core infrastructure of the planet. Assumption of benevolence works as long as the interested community is small and has little interest in being evil. With infrastructure-level OSS projects, the interested community is very large and contains a lot of malicious actors.

> Blacklisting bad actors (even if they have "good reasons" to be bad) is very well justified.

I agree, and in my books, if a legitimate researcher gets banned for such "undercover" research, it's just the flip side of doing such experiment.
> FAANG companies are now scrambling over each other to hire minorities

Citation needed
A few days ago I read https://dev.to/veer66/calling-rust-from-common-lisp-45c5 , which illustrates presumably what you're talking about.
I would go even further and say that Oakland is the most prestigious security conference. That this kind of work was accepted is fairly baffling to me, since I'd expect both ethical concerns and also concerns about the "duh" factor.

I'm a little salty because I personally had two papers rejected by Oakland on the primary concern that their conclusions were too obvious already. I'd expect everybody to already believe that it wouldn't be too hard to sneak vulns into OSS patches.
Show HN: EmailFlow – Reviewing and approving emails within Outlook just got easy
How are they going to make money?
Sorry, that's not how it works. The governments runs an auction where the bonds are sold to investors. That sets the market rate. The government would not buy its own bonds in the auction (it wouldn't make sense) and cannot force investors to buy the bonds at a particular rate.
IR35 is only a problem for the individual, not the company especially if you are deemed inside IR35.