skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This approach is also used/encouraged by JUCE: https://docs.juce.com/master/tutorial_rectangle_advanced.htm... (see "Layout by subdividing rectangles")
You can't remove it, really. Check section on "Disabling the ME"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine
No one argued that it should be applied as an axiom. You're responding to an argument that wasn't made.

Also, the "gatekeepers of knowledge" have a mostly.....negative past when you look at the sum of recorded human history. Are you arguing that humans today are just way better and far more trustworthy than the rest of history?
Tongue-in-cheek tales from 19th-century India – podcasts of the week
I see much "car dealer is BS" arguments here but most of them are seems to from US. I'm curious what's happened in US.
Almost. A proper house still has more space, and less noise constraints :).
I am not sure that is the intent of this memo.

> Williams wrote that while counterperspectives and unpopular opinions are “always encouraged” to help make decisions, “repeated interactions that are nonconstructive, cast doubt, assume bad intent, make unsubstantiated accusations, or otherwise do not contribute to a positive environment have a massive negative impact on the team and working environment.”

>He added: “These behaviors are not tolerated.”

That doesn't sound like an unbiased removal of politics from the workplace to me. I think I would be out of the door, too.
And the code: https://github.com/golang/go/blob/dev.fuzz/src/internal/fuzz...

Edit: and here's the mechanism that guides mutations towards increased coverage: https://github.com/golang/go/blob/5542c10fbf19cb199d1659c189...
it's great for me that you've contributed your energy now to this, even though your words are not very nice, and incorrect. I suppose you saw me standing up to a bully sand you just couldn't stand that, preferring bullying to be met with silence and submission. Or maybe it was you got triggered about the Goodreads criticism. Maybe both. By the way the only thing toxic here is you. Pretending people should be silent in the face of bullies. And the only thing bad faith is your biased and self-serving black as white rewriting of my comment history. It seems you've proved my point as you're someone rushing to the defense of toxic behavior on Goodreads and you're also someone who tries to attack people and pretend they're toxic because you disagree with them. Maybe you experience disagreement and standing up against bullies as toxic. Makes sense for a bully like yourself. Sounds exactly like what I was describing. Tho your own hn main account seems squeaky clean beside the above, I bet if we went looking we'd see evidence of abusive and toxic behavior, maybe in your small town community the way you bitch and gossip about people or maybe you've got an account on Goodreads.

It must be hard to scrape out a living especially with all that talent I mean I see where you're coming from. But it's quite sad isn't it to be embittered and feel you should have got so much more ... by now. I get why you'd feel you need to seek these little consolations I just hope that in future you could seek them without trying to harm or abuse others.
well you must be bully. you frame in a completely backwards self-serving way my response to bullying bheaviour. showing you just want people to get abused and be silent, if it's you doing the abuse. nice work, bully. a biased self-serving reading, from someone triggerd by a goodreads critique, married with non-sequitur abusie langauge? girl, oh girl, how surprising.
further triggered by good reads, thanks proving my point. clearly you brook no dissent to your little despotic opinions, now that i disagree with you you pretend i'm toxic. the only bad faith here is that biased reading of yours, and the only toxicity is from you, everything you touch must be like that, no matter how talented you are, because of your willingness to bully and attack and abuse others simply because they disagree with you, while pretending you're not doing so. I forgive you.
This is the most shocking article I have ever read in my life.

From what I gather, Vanity Fair generally seeks to be as shocking as possible. It's part of their marketing strategy.
At the end of the day, it's consumers who drive this technology.
I didn't like it

I'd rather take less courses and focus better on some

on the other hand this approach allowed me to graduate faster
OT, but as a Vienna-based, British dev currently looking for remote roles, I'm glad you're open to the "anywhere in Europe" concept of remote working. Any info on tech stack/skills you're seeking?

Slightly on-topic: I've worked fully remote before, and seen employers solve this by having new kit shipped first to the sysadmin guy, who was also WFH, then when he'd carried out the usual corporate setup procedures would ship the machine to developer's home address. No big deal for a small team, but I agree you might want to outsource that at scale.
That's basically how most modern frameworks do it.

Django-Rest-Framework does that with view + serializer + validators.

A more recent example, with a leaner and cooler implementation is FastAPI, where type hints are also use to declare validation on your end point, while a model is used for serializing the response.
Banning it would make malware encrypt your data for "fun" and not profits of malware groups. Just like viruses in the '90s were written for fun.
Body weight logger:
- Repository: https://github.com/drola/weight-logger-pwa
- App: https://weight-logger.catdad.net/

It's a backend-less SPA, inspired by draw.io.

Product perspective:
I was using MyFitnessPal previously and got tired of all the bloat in the app. Weight Logger does exactly one thing and keeps you in charge of your data. I plan to add integrations with Dropbox, OwnCloud, Google Drive and Office 365.

Developer perspective:
For work I mostly do web apps where every inch of the (desktop) screen is covered with numbers and buttons. We churn out features and try to squeeze as much information on the screen as we can. In contrast, Weight Logger is about simplicity and working well on mobile devices.
It's also the first time in my career that I get to use my own app every morning. Surprisingly this gives me warm fuzzies about programming. I was at a point where I was starting many different hobbies (electronics, 3D printing, woodworking...) to escape somewhat emotionally dry world of software development. In day to day business we value pragmatism more than code we're really proud of. Feature requests come in before development is complete on the previous one. Weight Logger reminds me every day that it doesn't have to be that way and that I can still find positive experiences within software engineering.
A-LIGN Arti Lalwani Honored in 2021 Women Leaders in Tech by Consulting Magazine
Imagine you had airplanes be built the way they wanted, crashing from time to time, not starting and having people work on the wings to fix things in flight.

If this was something done for fun and without impact on people then nobody would care.

Suddenly, a Monday morning, someone says "woah, this cannot be - you have to fix this". But this is not fixable, you have to build a new plane from scratch, or completely review the existing ones. Planes would be grounded.

Now a software company: typically your old plane flying by more or less miracle (when it flies). You cannot fix it, you have to rebuild it. Either you ground the company and force them to build something new, or you will always have legacy.

The legacy is not fixable - it simply is not. You need money to redo everything and if you do not have the proper pressure then it will not happen.

Then, building a new company/software can be done the right way. This is not even difficult, I would even say that having these constraints will help in the overall quality. But this is a new software, not a "fix" of the old one.
I will, thanks. I never had a chance to catch up on the "state of the art" in typing systems.

I'm not even sure if my "types as a set of tags" idea makes much sense - perhaps it decays to what is typically understood as types. Or perhaps it hits computability problems.

I did some mental experiments on a "set of tags" type system last night, and I quickly realized the complexity will be around deciding when to keep a tag (property) on a type, and when to drop it. With a set of tags being open, a function could not possibly know about them. This creates a problem.

Consider a function like: Sort([List[T], ...], [Function([T, T] -> Bool)]) -> [List[T], Sorted, ...]. Takes a list and a comparator, sorts the list, attaches a "Sorted" tag to return type, retains all other tags. Looks like a reasonable definition. Let's look at the use cases below (with P being some applicable predicate):

- Sort([List[Int], P) -> [List[Int], Sorted] -- OK!

- Sort([List[Int], NonEmpty], P) -> [List[Int] Sorted, NonEmpty] -- Awesome, exactly what I want!

- Sort([List[Int], Foobar], P) -> ...? Should it be [List[Int], Sorted, Foobar]? But what if Foobar designates some business rule that depends on the element ordering? How is Sort supposed to know?

Without knowing a tag, we'd sometimes want a function to drop it, and other times want the function to retain it. I have no idea how to solve this at compile time (or even at runtime, without crippling the tagging system).
It is an introductory course, there is going to be a lot it does not cover.
>I think that with the fact that fabs/custom silicon are becoming much more accessible

I don't think Google making their own silicon gives any indicator that it is "accessible". If anything, to me it indicates that only the most wealthy companies can afford it, and when they do, they are not beholden to anyone to make the final product open or accessible to anyone else.

As a side note - if you're invovled in CPU design or layout (like a friend is), you don't need to worry about money. If, however, you're a circuit design/PCB layout guy, then you are competing on a global level with people who will get the job done much cheaper.
The furor about the lab leak theory isn't solely due to the 3 hospitalized workers, but also due to a well-sourced article [0] written by a editor of the Science section of the New York Times (as well as for Science and Nature), Nicholas Wade. Those two broke on the same day. Papers hadn't been covering the theory in depth since last summer.

In my opinion the most damning part of the article is the section about the human-adapted furin cleavage, I recommend reading that part. The working assumption is that we should find people with precursors to covid without that furin cleavage adaptation, and we don't. If China wants to prove it wasn't a lab leak, they'll need to find instances of the virus that predated that adaptation- as was the case with SARS.

[0] https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-peop...
Important to know that many of these institutional accademics are glorified henchmen for state and business elites.

Someone pays their research grants jobs etc. That someone has a central banking system to preserve.
There is a problem though. Without access to source material of any real journalist (not a reporter) you have no way of knowing whether whatever they're saying is true.

Marketplace of ideas is just measuring the average of views at best and fringe views may on occasion be valid, or not. It is also gameable by promoting "truthy" or plausible explanations with no data behind them.

In this case, it is irrelevant what the source of the pandemic was, securing the labs doing viral research to BSL-4 is prudent. The only issue faced is one of funding, which is vastly insufficient to maintain these facilities.
Or at least placement in remote locations with quarantine in place to prevent leaks.

Data only weakly suggests a composite and does not categorically exclude natural origin. Leak of a natural or modified virus would be just as bad. Same if it's from consumption of rare animals sent from remote places or research on the samples from them. In either case, only different degree of luck is required for a pandemic.
Heh...20 years is almost enough for me to forgive them for killing infocom :-P

Once 'graphic adventures' came out, poor old Zork was fed to the grues..
> the more material you put into your house, the less vulnerable it is

I think you have cause and effect backwards.

Yes, if you want to build a more secure house, you will need more material than another house with equivalent functionality. However, a bigger building isn't magically more secure than a smaller building.

If you walk into my house, I will detect and kick you out almost immediately. If you walk into our office building all you need is a hardhat and a confident stride and you can get anywhere you like. Hell, people will probably even help you get there.

Which makes it similar to code. The smallest app in terms of total 'material' builds up its queries with string concatenation. It takes a lot of 'material' to prevent those kind of injection vulnerabilities. And yes, a data access library that helps you with that is also 'material'.
Yeah, what's happening now considering those quotes makes me feel sick. It's damn terrible really.

Thanks for raising them, it puts the matter into proper perspective.
Show HN: Kwayet – We built something that you want and it's not another WhatsApp
It indeed looks like fun, but everything's dependent on the people that lecture you

You may meet great ones or terrible ones, just like with everything.
Re Azure, what makes you say that? Can you be specific?
It the classical definition of end to end encription: you encrypt it and use _our_ channel to send the keys to the recipient of the message. We promise ( rotfl) that we won't look.
> For example, software is still stuck in the dark ages where the idea is better training / better programmers / more punishment will prevent these sorts of failures.

What is your source on this? This goes against what anyone at any company where I have worked at ever believed.

No-fault root cause analysis, process improvements, inherently safer practices, languages, libraries is what every place aimed for. I don’t even know what you might mean by punishment?
I was not clear, I am not advocating for any of these countries to change the status quo, I'm just advocating for them to accept the status quo.

That's why my arguments look like shallow, it's because indeed it really is a shallow problem.

Japan would gain everything to accept that these Russian-controlled islands are Russian after all, China would better accept that Senkakus are not Chinese, and so on.

They do not loose anything, and they -- as I said -- gain the privilege to be able to spend their vacations there, buy resources extracted there, and many new friends as well as a largely more peaceful atmosphere towards their resident foreigners.

The only reason they don't do that is an irrational one. As I said, again, it's just to not loose face. Lol.
There was a month or so after I moved back to Germany from the Netherlands where my own accent when speaking German was super noticeable to me. Otherwise I don't even hear my own accent when speaking English even though it is undeniable there when I listen to recordings of me.
wait - 20 years? what did they release in 2k? I remember them from the 80s/90s??
Do tell more.
Thanks for correction, I think that's still an alarming rate for a specific mission to fetch samples of Bat feces for virology research. That should be a clear, undisputably abnormal indication of something wrong.
> One of the reasons games do this is the data is compressed, so a "patch" might be indistinguishable from a real update.

Does this happen with more advanced compression algorithms? I've rsynced zip files of different versions of internal software and the diff was always much, much smaller than the entire package.
And here I thought the executive director of the Global Financial Markets Center would be a real man of the people.
No, not really. Both are just a statement of fact.
Money laundering is a similarly difficult problem. Most of the rules are written in a "spirit" manner, instead of a "prescriptive" manner. With AML (anti-money laundering), you often hear the term "red flags". They are signs, but not a source of absolute truth. I could foresee something like AML in the form of corporate computer security coming soon. In the same way that Sarbanes-Oxley forever changed corporate accounting after the Worldcom and Enron accounting scandals of early 2000s (top execs now need to sign-off on yearly account) -- imagine if top execs need to sign-off on corporate computer security. As I see it, CTO-cum-head-of-security will soon be signing yearly audit documents in blood.

And the trick to making AML regulations effective is massive fines -- fines so large that they genuinely affect quarterly earnings and stock prices. The same could be done with corporate computer security regulations.
Given the recent topic on the government's forming of a taskforce to manage investigations into ransomware attacks - I wonder how much of a big deal ransomware would be in a world where linux used ZFS by default. I have read reports of users running ZFS who were easily able to shrug off a ransomware attack but I don't know how that would play out in general. Could widespread adoption of ZFS significantly blunt ransomware attacks?
"A lot of emerging viruses are well adapted to humans…"

This is literally not true.

Most virologists say the way this virus works is unlike anything they’ve seen or expected so they can’t imagine how a human would have engineered it. Why do you think your feeling about the virus’s level of adaptation trumps the experts opinions?

1) Citation on "most" please. The world is a big place, so you will be able to find a citation for any opinion. If you are going to say "most" then please back it up with a source.

2) gain-of-function research doesn't require a human to engineer a new virus. It is a way to essentially speed up evolution and allow nature to do the heavy lifting. You're arguing points that no on here is making.
Convenience at the cost of _literally-everything-else_ is a trend we should maybe start to counter with more determination.
its more the shagging one of her employees, rather than the shagging it's self.

In the same way that clinton was impeached over monica.
I've inherited a pretty bad codebase written in PHP and JS, mostly Dojo. Its UX is based around a lot of dialog windows. Some dialog windows' contents are too big, so that a scroll bar would appear. One issue they had before I came in was that in those cases, the save and close buttons in a bar at the bottom of the dialog would also end up at the bottom, so they had to scroll all the way down.

This issue had been open for years. IDK if the previous developer had a look at it, but the interim guy - some PHP consultant - spent a few days trying to fix it.

I added `position:sticky` to it and fixed it in minutes, everywhere. Not to boast or anything, but that's all it took. Okay fine I am boasting that my google-fu was slightly better than the other guys.

Didn't know about the `loading=lazy` attribute on images yet, mentally I was still thinking of plugins and JS libraries that take care of it for you.
> " said it would cost 100 times as much to match the clarity."

Based on what, exactly? Do you have any sort of verifiable information to back up that claim?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and you are making some very extraordinary claims. You seem to be very firm in your beliefs, but completely unmotivated to actually put them to the test.

Do you really honestly and seriously believe that a $25 set of gimmick speakers can match a set of $2500 studio monitors for sound quality, on even a single performance parameter, let alone overall clarity and low distortion?

I can only conclude that you are utterly delusional and that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, which a cursory glance at your comment history confirms.
What’s “CSP”?
Thank you very much! Did you compile this by yourself?
The government is trying to regulate the fast-growing $650B subscription economy
I would love more details!

Could you please link the voxel engine? Which version of Minecraft was this?
Spiderbot, spiderbot..
Hey, thanks for the response.

> You identified you're niche wrong, i think. Your description is literally targeted for developers and your landing page too.

That's a good point. Being a dev myself, I probably projected what I'd care about a bit too much.

> Local businesses that already have a website, don't need another one.

This is an interesting one. When I initially started researching businesses, I found about 1,000 of them, with terrible Wordpress sites. I'd say about 100 of them have updated their sites ever since. Which means some businesses do indeed look for, find and then go with a company to update their site.

> Agencies use their own tools for site creation and are hard to convince.

Yup, not going after them.

My target market is (was supposed to be) small businesses with terrible Wordpress sites, or no websites at all.

I may rethink the positioning a bit though, as these comments have been very helpful in elucidating some issues with it.

Thank you very much :)
My reaction to this presentation would have been... let's just say, less gracious than the author's.
>> When Trump himself floated the lab-leak hypothesis last April, his divisiveness and lack of credibility made things more, not less, challenging for those seeking the truth.

Bullshit. It was the media which rejected this theory. How is this also Trump's fault for suggesting it? Are they also going to rewrite this part of the record?
There's nothing technical stopping you creating further NFTs for the same work, and there's nothing legal stopping you selling them, unless you enter into a separate legal agreement that makes the NFT irrelevant.

It occurs to me that selling an NFT is like entering an artwork into a copyright registry, then selling the paperwork (without the actual copyright). To be fair I can imagine the original copyright registration docs for eg. Gone With the Wind being worth something to collectors.
Yes, so let's just also install their own security cameras and microphones in our homes for marginal benefits at best.

I'll make you an offer: i'll send you one of my microphones and cameras. Let's just assume that I already know everything about you, so let's don't worry about it. You won't even notice it's there. Would you have problems letting me see and hear your life?

I promise i won't send you spam emails.
> most people will have a disability (not necessarily permanent) at some point in their life

I've got an eye infection when I was a teenager. It has strongly tinted my vision white, so for a couple of days I could only see outlines of big objects highlighted by skylight.
From this experience I found I could still walk my usual routes without wandering off the road, as I could recognize familiar telephone poles, trees, I even remembered all the ruts in the road.
> It's physically impossible to build a house that can't be broken in to

Specially if an entity with a nation's resources is trying to get in.
This is an interesting point. If the relentless drive to reduce cost in IT is the root cause of so many corporate computer security issues, why isn't corporate accounting (which is covered in the US by near-draconian Sarbanes-Oxley rules) not similarly affected? I point to regulations.

Further, would the same be true of giant pharma companies that create drugs that we ingest? ("Oh, skip those tests. If a few people get injured, we'll pay hush money.") Why don't we see it? Simple: Incredibly strong regulations in US/EU/Japan (the "big three" for global drug regulation & approval).