skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Any good mice you could recommend? I used to use a Razer Naga during my MMO days and I've really missed the side button array, but I found myself replacing them way too often (they'd wear out and start double clicking in just 6 months on average).
Ask HN: Confused as to why YouTube does not have a language filter?
Video consumption platform where language should ideally be an important still does not have a dedicated filter...any explanation we can think of?
I am sure the product people at Apple are seeing $$$

1) Scan devices for copyrighted music, to play your music you need to have it purchased on Apple
2) Scan devices for copyrighted videos, to play your video you need to have it purchased on Apple
3) Scan devices for copyrighted photos, purchase an Apple license to use this photo
4) Scan devices for copyrighted text, purchase an Apple license to use this text

Apple - Think Licensing
How do you know which hash is the correct one? you can

a) check a signature on the hash (current method)

b) check with a central authority if the hash is ok (now that's central control)

c) somehow discover the hash from some other source - possible, but not something users will generally manually verify, and the question of how to trust that hash again quickly comes down to signatures or authority.
I personally think these skyscrapers look great aesthetically but they apparently are plagued with design and maintenance problems. See https://youtu.be/RWX9JmihWpE for a short video describing some of the issues. Between this, the sinking/tilting millennium tower in SF, and the collapse in Miami, I do wonder if these types of shared tall condo buildings are going to disappear.
Current cost of electrolyzed hydrogen is €2.5-€5.5/kg, and the EU hopes to get that to less than half by 2030:

https://about.bnef.com/blog/liebreich-separating-hype-from-h...

$100k for a filling, with many many re-uses, could maybe be feasible today, and $20k should definitely be.

One note about hydrogen production, as I understand it, is that electrolyzers are enough of a capital expense that you want to be running them at fairly high capacity factors. Cheaper energy helps, but cheaper electrolyzers would probably help more.
Well, I dunno about Smokey. Here's there to remind people drinking around a campfire to be careful about it. I can't imagine people sitting around a campfire drinking is a recipe for controlled, limited burns.
Is there a trustable, out-of-band way for users to get the hash? How?

There's a real vulnerability where users get a compromised package and a matching hash from the same compromised repository.
This is a very interesting point. Is there a counterargument to this?
> Interestingly, many of these ‘servant economy’ apps are not unit-economics positive even after years of operations (and far from profitable, as in the case of Uber or Deliveroo).

Is the expectation that these startups will replace human labor with robots/autonomous vehicles in order to achieve profitability?
This is a sensitive topic, so I hope my question comes off as genuinely curious and not invalidating to the OPs experience, but rather a general question about how applicant selection ought to work. I wonder if the OP has some qualities that are weakly or strongly correlated with age (e.g. number of "older silicon valley institutions" one has worked at), and YC was selecting on those factors rather than explicitly filtering based on age.

My question is: if there exists some correlation between a protected class and some other variable X, is it moral to select based on X?

What happens if X is highly predictive of some conventional success metric (e.g. ability to raise a series A)?

Things that come to mind: redlining, use of zip code in credit score prediction, etc. If we deem these immoral, is the implication that we should perform selection within protected classes, and within non-protected classes (e.g. p(X|is protected class)), and guarantee equality of outcome (or non-discrimination of protected classes based on X)?

Note that I'm not saying YC was doing this - might just be standard unconscious bias.
LTS is after all only a euphemism for outdated software ;)
I wish some of the people who down vote this could explain more why. Is it just that they don't like the idea of valuing other life on this planet that highly or that it's not politically feasible because humans are so human-focused?
So once again, what is the difference between this and an authorized list of integrity hash values?

Edit: I misread the latter portion of your post. I see now. Thanks.
The scientific literature says it should

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratospheric_aerosol_injectio...

it is not some crazy idea I came up with. The crazy part is doing it. (Personally I want my own B767!)
Us military isn't exactly known for limiting soldiers exposure to awful chemicals. Seems like all my vet friends and family members have some kind of malady caused by exposure to random toxins.
Yes it is a real concern. If you're running a Linux distribution, chances are you are downloading your packages from a mirror and not the primary mirror for your distribution. This is done to everyone's benefit bandwidth-wise.

However it opens up the possibility that the artefacts can be tampered with on the server. Signing confirms their authenticity. In a (cryptographically secure) hash, there is no 'key' and so anyone can create a valid one for their modified bundle.

Ditto for containers, Android Apps, and just about anything else we use.
Correct, and yet YC has also greatly grown-up from it's humble start of 20K and a flight to find a flop-house in Palo Alto.

I agree with OP's point on the inherant age discrimination within technology, I say this because I was once a biased younger human who didn't have the life experience to understand the other side.

I remember saying "software is a young man's game", I cringe at times of the hubris of the earlier me, it's really funny how time works.

Now I'm an executive as opposed to a hotshot programmer, with the responsibility to help lead a team of diverse humans. I marvel at the brilliance of some of the talent that is emerging in the software space and yet I wonder if we aren't doing enough to teach ethics and help humans address their biases earlier.

But we idolize the hackers who burn through their days and nights converting caffeine, beer, snacks to functional software and hardware.

Even Elon Musk slept on the assembly line of the Tesla plant, so it's not like executives are liberated from this self immolation.

As for those who self-fund or are solo founders in general, you've got a hard road ahead of you, finding those early believers (co-founders) is mega important, I've never been able to make something of serious consequence without a team of hardworking humans to help. When the startup days are hard, they are there to cheer you up, when you're crushing it, they're celebrating the wins. I will say that the best companies are a team game.

OP, I really wish you the best of luck, reachout if you ever wanna, it's nice to vent.
>Because Heidegger's writing is so difficult and so open to interpretation (and re-interpretation), many philosophers disagree strongly about what he actually meant.

There’s a bit of a joke out there about Heidegger’s difficulty. “Heidegger is impossible to translate - especially into German”
I really wonder what all the China talking point sorts will do the day China not only beats us on emissions per capita but also on total emissions? What excuse to continue doing nothing will they pivot to then? India?

https://spectrum.ieee.org/china-closing-in-on-thorium-nuclea...
You don't appear to connect some people having no choice with their lack of choice being exploited.

The issue with people discriminated against is discrimination. The solution is not devising some totally new form of employment that has no security, no benefits, etc. so that people we hate can feed themselves. The solution is stopping discrimination (which btw, has been successful...it isn't a panacea). If you offered people doing these jobs the chance to take a normal job that paid the same, they would mostly take it.

And the problem is that many people who work these jobs can't "support their family" (again, ppl do this work because they have no choice). These jobs aren't unlocking some new source of productivity. Uber has not made taxis faster or cheaper. Uber has just unleashed a bidding war where prices get driven down (benefitting relatively wealthy people) as activities that were formerly "jobs" are now self-employed. For people who drive taxis a 10% drop in income is material, for people who take taxis a 10% drop in prices is immaterial. It is that simple.
Well, our current choices may be between 2 fallacies.

First one is the one you described, and the second one is that given the changes in climate that it's even possible to contain these wildfires using mechanical means, such as trenches and water drops.

It may not be.

The question then is which one is the lesser evil.
It's like the author is unaware of why people invest in VC's and why VC's invest in companies. Is it actually possible that he thinks that VC's have "helping the world" as a primary goal? That is too funny. Their goal is singular: to make as much money as possible. The end.
There’s not much you can do about it if you want a decent smartphone. On Android Google also can do on-device scanning since forever.
The thing is, if it doesn't worl on arch, chances are good that it doesn't work on any other Linux Desktop OS.
https://archive.is/FhZfN
That's not control.
It’s one thing to have a company build and keep secret such a system from everyone, from the ground up.

It’s a different thing entirely to do a minor extension to a system that they rolled out publicly that already essentially does this!

The first one will almost certainly be noticed, and will be clearly illegal/violate contracts, and can therefore be identified and rooted out.

The second one you could do for groups of people or targeted individuals trivially and would be under the radar and probably never noticed - and could be denied unless truly rock solid evidence existed. Which would be easy to avoid existing if you used the same mechanisms (but different types of matches) you were public about - in a closed ecosystem with a Secure Enclave, for instance. It’s not like anyone is going to be able to do step-by-step instruction debugging on the code running on their iPhone!

There is a long history of this happening. Not everyone is as blatant as the stasi - and even then, no one knew who was working for them or what was tapped until the whole system collapsed and their records became public. It still took a long time to unravel.
No. You don't have a "job" if you work for most of these companies. You are self-employed.
> Why is a hash not sufficient integrity verification?

not necessarily endorsing the need for this, but one reason is that if the hash and file are hosted by the same site an attacker who compromised the web server can trivially change the hash to match their payload. With this system, they would have to compromise both the web server and the signing server.

You can also leverage this to trust a binary even from an unknown source because the signature will match and confirm authenticity regardless of how trustworthy the source of the binary is.
The vaccines were never supposed to prevent infection 100%. Since the very beginning they've had varying degrees of effectiveness, this was widely reported every day since before the emergency authorizations in November 2020.

They are functioning as advertised, as intended, as expected.

Clear your cookies since the internet isn't even allowing you to see other information.
Another thing I’m not sure the “independent contractors” who work for Uber for X get: workers’ compensation.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers'_compensation
Third is the political problem. The international community has some tight limitations on who can refine Uranium. That's reasonable in a lot of ways as an effort to limit nuclear proliferation, but countries don't exactly like being put in the position that they can produce nuclear energy but only if 100% of their supply chain is outsourced to current Western powers.
Is that stupidity though? All it takes is one side that is evil enough to be willing to sacrifice as many lives as necessary to accomplish their goals.

They may have well known how many lives it would cost and did not care.
Why would they get severe disease when they get infected? Even most humans don't, let alone other species with different receptor setups. The virus is absolutely in non-human animal populations almost everywhere, and is not a candidate for eradication.
If I'm on call (OC), I'm responsible for the uptime of the system even after hours. So If I'm planning on going hiking, I will inform the secondary OC, or delay plans to a weekend when I'm not OC. Generally I do tend to avoid getting heavily inebriated (although of course there are times when this is unavoidable).

I'm not judging, but just pointing out that I've certainly experienced a different OC culture in the US.
Afghanistan opium poppy cultivation 1994-2016
It's not ideal of course, but I don't think it's fair to say I'm not helping. Almost nobody wears a mask that truly filters what they exhale - their main functions are to trap moisture and stop you projecting droplets with your voice. My mask does capture a lot of moisture, as evidenced by the condensation inside, and the valve redirects my exhalation sideways, so I think that's likely at least as good as the cheapy surgical-style masks which are common.

Also, I tend to take the view that the best tool available to me to not spread Covid is to not catch Covid. It's apparent to me that relying on the people around me to wear masks and be sensible is not a viable strategy for avoiding transmission events. When the prevailing attitude is that the pandemic is over, I do not feel it is selfish to protect myself to the best of my ability.
PPAs work great until they don't, because it's just some random guy building the packages half of the time.

The last time I seriously tried to use Ubuntu was probably 8-10 years ago and I ran into a lot of trouble trying to get up to date graphics drivers via PPAs. I also remember being tired of having to go find a random PPA for every piece of software I wanted. Most of the time I would just find some random blog that provided a "PPA for up-to-date package X" and ultimately felt like what I was doing wasn't really any better than downloading random MSIs like you would on Windows.

With Arch though you get the AUR which quite literally has every piece of software you could ever want and is at least managed and maintained in a central place so you're not just adding random PPAs for everything.
Exactly where is this name calling? Please unflag this so we can continue the discussion.
I was chronically dehydrated for much of my life because I can't tell when I'm thirsty - my mouth doesn't send me the right signals. About 8 years years ago I bought a 48-oz Nalgene bottle which I fill up in the morning. It's big so I have a constant visual reminder right there on my desk in front of me, and I have no problems finishing it off and often refilling it in the early evening. It's absolutely improved my health.
I feel like there's a third option here, though, in that Apple is very likely trying to get ahead of what's likely to be requests from the government that they won't be able to just not abide by. This already happens to every hosting and storage provider and it's entirely plausible that politicians will start publicly wringing their hands to try and justify an actual invasion of privacy where "the government" will be able to scan devices (and even require it from manufacturers) in the interest of "saving the children". This (and I realize it assumes good intentions on behalf of the actors involved) seems to be an attempt to get ahead of that kind of situation by saying "we'll scan things if we're 99% sure they're breaking the law" but we don't want to violate people's privacy. The iCloud vs Facebook comparison is great and noble and all but how long do we honestly think that'll stand up before the politicians move past that argument and onto the next one.

When it stops being about the children, it'll be about the terrorists. When it stops being about the terrorists, it'll be about whatever the next excuse is. This seems like a compromise between those unfortunate scenarios - upholding privacy (we don't see the content) while still attempting to solve for the problems that privacy inherently allows for (we can still identify CP).
Loggers make big waste piles and then burn them.
I can assure you I'm not asking as an advocate for accepting FB to be pre-installed. I'm asking to know truly how vile it really is. At this point, I assume FB knows enough about everyone to be able to ID them without confirmation via logged in FB app.
It gets a little more nuanced than that; if you want to blame forest management, you have to tackle the fact that the majority of California's forest is Federally owned.

Quibbling over the degree of culpability and denying the existence of climate change entirely - remember, in that exchange, Trump said he thought it'd be getting cooler soon - are not the same, either.
The future is here and it tastes of cyberpunk.
Echoing a sibling comment, that thread goes down the conspiracy rabbit hole very quickly. A few inaccuracies I noticed before giving up:

* "Remember, only 13 deaths out of the 36 passengers on the airship died." This skips the crew deaths (who also died at about the same rate).

* There were a bunch of photographers present at Lakehurst as it was the first crossing of 1937. The audio recording was not scripted, the original disc records a pressure wave which is followed by Morrison exclaiming that the Hindenburg is on fire.

* "Mary Jane" can be a real person's name.

* "Hugo Eckener, former head of the Zeppelin Company, Charles Rosendahl, commander of the Naval Air Station at Lakehurst, Max Pruss, captain of the Hindenburg and most of the surviving crew believed the airship had been sabotaged.". Eckener stated that it could be sabotage when he was first told the Hindenburg had gone down. He later backed the static spark theory.
> The world’s most powerful VC investors are funding an economy where technology allows a ‘ruling class’ to command an ‘underclass’ of servants with the swipe of an app.

The author is British, interestingly one of the few society that's actively protecting it's monarchy. You can't be more layered than that: you'll never ever be like these people, and the British people see nothing wrong with it nor these people having servants. They actually prefer it! But the little guy having someone deliver him lunch, that's "problematic".

> 85% of Uber drivers are from Black, Asian or other underrepresented backgrounds (similar statistics can be found for Lyft drivers in the US). In 2018, almost 60% of gig workers in the UK were 18 to 34. We talk about people working in dark stores and dark kitchens, out of sight, out of mind — exactly like the servants who waited on Western aristocracy (and colonialists) in the past.

Is this by design? Why else allow so much unskilled migrants?
To take this one step further: Adding surprise semantics like capturing time (and the dev not being aware of it) will lead to security vulnerabilities (side channels because the code is essentially timestamping when various parts of the code are hit) as well as privacy issues (PII leaking, clock skew leaking, whatever).

My thesis is that computers are so full of unwanted unneeded things like this that there is no engineer who knows them all as well as having a good understanding software engineering as well as infosec. Most vulnerabilities are due to lack of understanding how the primitives work, as opposed to flaws in reasoning (the former is clearly distinct: the summary provided to save him from spending a month looking at the implementation is inadequate).

I have designed UUIDs myself and they are simply a long random bitstring. The random part is already necessary because we need sufficient randomness for crypto to work in the first place. IETF likes to "engineer" things.
Spyware is older than smartphones, but back then we called it "spyware", not "ooh, the latest Android!".
Not an unreasonable request, and don't be surprised if it affects phones outside of China too. https://www.wired.com/story/apple-china-censorship-bug-iphon...
At least as much as a signature check, and if you send a hash to somewhere to look it up it reveals more about your system than the signature verification does. If you fetch a list of trusted hashes, the source can customize it more precisely to what to tell you is ok than if you verify a signature.

How is telling you "don't trust this hash" any less "Apple-esque control of remotely disabling the ability for softwareto run" than something saying "don't trust this certificate after $date"? (E.g. the recent-ish Apple outrage was that they switched to uploading hashes over just verifying signatures)
If you want to play this fairness game, I don't think it comes out in the US's favor. The US alone has emitted 25% of the cumulative emissions up till this point, far beyond its share of population. Why is it China's job to sacrifice for the sake of our mess? Why did we get a 100-year head-start using cheap fossil fuels to develop our country and they don't?

https://ourworldindata.org/contributed-most-global-co2

My point is, playing this blame game is not helping anything. It's a global problem, so we all have to contribute. The atmosphere does not know or care about national boundaries, so we need to do as much as possible. The fact is, America has high emissions per capita, and the resources and know-how to fix it.
Of course the diagonal orientation is important, but I guess that's probably the first advice you found when trying it out, so I won't repeat it. So, yeah, they aren't necessarily for everyone.
That's just an incorrect usage of an integrity hash. If you obtain a resource from another party other than the original vendor, you need to verify integrity.

If the vendor itself is compromised, then I can understand such a system.
Maybe you didn't understand what I wrote.

> Not if it puts my life at risk.
I would hope so as well. However, my hopes for these policing algorithms have been dashed too many times. The potential for abuse is just too great without effective laws and appropriate procedures. We've seen the results at YouTube, Pasco County Florida, the UK, and Facebook.

There is a reason that a key part of justice is being able to face your accusers. Secret algorithms are being used to abrogate this right. You can't cross examine an algorithm. Expert witnesses to contradict its expertise are too expensive for most defendants. Then the developers of the algorithm can claim with plausible deniability that the algorithm is 1 in a trillion accurate.

It's essentially the new bite mark analysis and polygraph pseudoscience used to elicit false admissions of guilt or convince gullible juries. "We have the hash of your photo George, we KNOW you are a pedophile. Just admit it and you can go home. We'll go easy on you. We promise!"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksibilla/2021/04/26/lawsuit-...
Surveillance Under Surveillance
The real world alternative is healthy competition.
The Grid Book, by publication designer Jan V. White: https://archive.org/details/gridbookguidetop00whit