skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This shows only the headings of the 5 categories and then empty bars on Firefox... could you offer a pdf or picture as an alternative download for people who don't use (I suppose) Google Chrome?
The innovation revealed by the Mossad here is that you can now smuggle in a satellite controlled semi-autonomous gun assembly, then put it together in ambush, select a target from the other side of the world, and finally self-destruct to destroy the evidence. The closest alternative to extraterritorial assassination would be to fly a covert drone into controlled air space or do a drive by shooting/bombing.
ISP mitigation is usually simple. Figure out what the destination of the attack traffic is and null route[1] that, pushing those null routes upstream where possible. If the destination IPs for the abuse are too diffuse and/or the upstream won't do it on their routers where they presumably have more capacity to drop than to forward to you, you're still limited by your connection bandwidth on the connections the abuse is flowing. Depending on the use case, sometimes you can do pretty well by cycling your legitimate traffic across a large block of IPs faster than the abusers can cycle their abuse traffic, but it depends on relationships and APIs to control null routing of your upstreams. More sophisticated things like only block traffic to/from port X, or throttling rather than blocking aren't generally available (but would often be super helpful if they were).

Anti-DDoS services are quite a bit different, they generally have obscene bandwidth, and BGP advertise your attacked IPs, so they can get the traffic, then they "scrub" the traffic and provide it back to you over a tunnel (or something). Scrubbing can be relatively simple stuff like rate limiting UDP and especially fragmented UDP (which is usually stuff coming from reflection attacks) or more complex stuff like looking at TCP options to determine good vs bad traffic and only letting good traffic through, or tracking TCP SYNs and only letting retries through, plenty of other stuff with TCP state machines (or half state machines, if they're only seeing the incoming traffic and not the outgoing traffic). Oh, and they usually charge you gobs of money.

[1] if destination == IP, drop packet
That's way too cynical a view. It's often accurate, but it certainly does not describe all relationships. I've been married 8 years now and it's not at all like that. It's not a fairytale either, but it's a real love. While we've both grown and changed a lot, we haven't grown apart.

There's hope, and it's a tough dating world out there, but if you have your attitude is over before you start.
The end of the original article mentions that he is talking about England as opposed to Wales. Your article only mentions Wales.
China isn't very good at letting go of grudges, it seems like.
Snowdonia is in Wales, not England.
You appear to be disagreeing with my disagreement with "the us couldn't win a fight with a bunch of villagers with ak47 for 10 years"

How does your point support the original claim? You and I are in agreement that fighting alone can't solve the problem of Afghanistan, but I don't see how that bears any relationship to judging the fighting.
Is the guy who wrote this Orwell reincarnated?
I'm not so sure about that. I haven't checked the distances, but the claim is that the author has seen a 610m peak from a 150m observation tower, and that it is 150 mi away.

The line of sight radio/radar horizon across the surface of the earth is well known and easy to calculate (1) and for two sources at different heights you can just add them. I get this as being about 94 mi, less than the stated distance.

(1): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_horizon
Define "winter". Is it defined by funding, or by real-world results?

If funding, then maybe. You point to some promising signs.

If real world results, then it may thaw... slightly. Formal methods are not going to become very mainstream, though, unless they scale linearly with code base size. Real world code bases are too big for anything else.
Other VPN software will change out their lower layers for wire guard, while keeping things like key management as is.
> I may be getting over my head here)

It may be so, however my own need for clarification was the same as yours. If ISP xyz operates a /16 ip block, and only forwards source packets from its /16... Then, I guess, my question: how do spoofed packers usually travel past their first hops on their route to the target?

[edit] after-thought: I imagine attackers might easily spoof their source as any of their ISPs /16 or /8. Feels like that's not entire story here though.
And it's not like the crazy hours are necessary in any way other than to create a cutthroat competition for artificially limited residency spots. Why has the AMA decided to destroy the health of those whose job it is to preserve the health of others?
I was wondering if you would mind being a bit more specific about your criticism towards React and the JS community?

If you know React well, it seems like there are things that everyone can learn from or think about. Would you use vanilla JS or other frameworks and why?
Ambiently cools by emitting more heat than it absorbs -- pretty nifty!
There are quite a few contrived scenarios in there, but I don't disagree with the last paragraph. For some people that sort of thing (not without effort, patience, understanding, caring, etc) can bring both spontaneous adventure deep discovery. Others are fortunate enough to find it primarily with one person.
Performance-wise I understood that their BASIC interpreter ran atop an interpreter in another language, which made BASIC quite slow. This at least seems to have been a questionable idea.

But I liked my TI-99/4A and it got me into programming (with help from my father).
It costs money to sell shoes. You have duties, warehousing, distribution, employee salary, marketing costs, rent, insurance, expensive photo shoots. And if you're manufacturing original designs, you also have a year-long lead process, manufacturing obligations and scheduling, sample management, maybe even material procurement.

The cost of the shoe ends up only being a third of overall costs. I'm also not going to sell everything, but I still need to keep buying inventory to keep the machine going.

If I don't sell the product at least 3x what I paid for it, there's no way I can maintain sufficient capital to keep a business running and hedge against risks.
When I read the title i was hoping it will shorten my path. Alas, not so. Slightly on a tangent, but fits with the "all things"...

I have been trying to extricate my family from Google & Apple ecosystems. This requires various servers. At first, I was going to do something like a rackmount server with KVM, Docker, or similar virtualization. Turns out, the cost of a handful of RasPi4B8Gs (~$75 x n, where n is server per service) is less expensive then running a full server (~$1500+).

Now just to find the right and stable software packages that are relatively smooth transition. :/

I currently have them set up as my DNS & filtering, & DHCPD, working on calDAV, cardDAV, VPN, and file (& bookmarks) synch.
>>Ironically the old fashioned matchmaker who only took a fee after the wedding had much better aligned incentives.

And that, right there, is probably the key principle for a solid matchmaking app...
and mossad/israel isn't a terorrist state? Are you serious?
So basically they dislike the UK enough it didn't change their opinion of them.
As a QEMU user, why would I ever allow a Windows VM to talk to a real TPM? The entire point of a VM is to isolate Windows in a predictable and secure manner. Giving it access to a unmanageable coprocessor that has been designed to undermine my own interests completely destroys this goal. Hopefully this restriction will simply be cracked in the popular Windows torrents, or better yet some real TPM keys leak for use with emulators. But more likely by the time any application specifically requires Windows 11 to run, Windows will have faded even further into irrelevance.
No, his claim is he can see it from Anglezark, and he gives the viewpoint altitude there as 298m.
That doesn't actually work very well for shoes and apparel. Demand is hard to forecast due to changing consumer tastes, and lead times are too long to adjust orders up or down quickly.
I don’t own them, so I don’t benefit if you buy
I would love the US to step up it's arms sales to Taiwan.
The only local enemies capable of containing Iran is Israel. Even the Saudis are afraid of Iran. Hence the Abraham Accords and a peace treaty between Israel and Saudi Arabia is imminent. And Israel isn't intimidating every single one of its neighbours and trying to control them and starting proxy wars with them. And committing acts of terror against random Iranians all over the world. So Israel have the moral upper ground here.
They’re also selling regular glasses, no tint.
Now I'm curious too - if you decide to do it, let me know :D
That's never going to work but it very well could lead to ISPs very strongly herding customers to use their own managed routers. They already push for that for customer support purposes, using this to start automatically snooping on "malicious" traffic within a customer's network would be a big step in the wrong direction.

You could make a compromise here and require ISPs and network vendors to support a common notification protocol to identify devices sourcing malicious traffic. Most ISPs already have systems in place to send notification messages to customers that are sending botnet traffic. You could mandate it for all of them and let the customer decide if they want their router configured to automatically block a device they were notified about or just record the MAC address and send the ISP a URL the user can visit to view the device sending the traffic. You could make it friendly to the unwashed masses and still put detection on the ISPs and not give them privileged access inside every customer's network.
Could you rephrase your question?

The parent was suggesting basically that the US is not a Goliath (in expeditionary war).
Amazon Prime (annual), Disney Plus, Spotify, Netflix (4K).

Amazon Prime for the fast-delivery and other shopping perks (Prime discount on books).

Disney Plus for the Marvel content.

Spotify: This is probably the best bang for the buck. We use this every single day.

Netflix: The only streaming service that actually has quality shows and decent recommendations.

Rant: Prime Video UI is embarrassingly bad compared to Netflix, and it feels like they stopped all production of any interesting show because of COVID. I'm still looking forward to the Expanse (December?) and Mrs. Maisal (in 50 years?).

We had HBO Max at one point. I can't get into any of the shows at the moment. We really liked Barry, which it seems they've put the next season on hold indefinitely. Raised by Wolves was good... but again, who knows when the next season will come.

For me, 3-4 services is the most I'll consider anyway.
Governments want to be able to control monetary policy which to a great extent requires control of currency. It’s totally essential to the management of modern economies.

If Bitcoin or some yet to be invented tech surmounted all the technical obstacles it’d still be smashed by government for undermining monetary policy.
Sorry, I’ve completely missed your point (despite reading it. Sigh), and as you say, I’m agreeing with you.

I’ll leave my comments unedited unless you’d like them gone.
I don’t agree with this person’s comments but I don’t think they should be told to shut up either. They have an interesting viewpoint.
Women are, in general, hypergamous, meaning they are looking for men who are "above" them along some dimension: wealth, status, looks, education, etc. I can not find the link, but I read somewhere once that something like the "top" 80% of women are competing over the "top" 20% of men. In other words, the "bottom" 80% of men are un-dateable for those women. That is how you end up with the situation described.
That's nothing compared to the professional voyeurism performed by Google and Facebook.
I got a virology textbook in 6th grade that I fell in love with, and then started doing at home biotech stuffs with a GFP transformation kit from BioRad that my teacher let me take home in 7th grade. Bit unconventional!

For an amateur, I'd recommend 2 things: go to as many conferences as possible (I'm not sure in other fields, but in biotech I think it is important) and get somebody else to pay for you hands on biotech experience.

Don't listen to your biology professor; he's probably part of the problem.

There are a ton of market inefficiencies. Ginkgo, for example, mainly uses metabolic engineer's knowledge to create challenging new products. What if we could automate the job of metabolic engineering? Though in the end case, it all comes down to if you can make money by solving that market inefficiency, which in biotech, is not always true.

You also have to be in the treacherous middle ground of "not doing bullshit" but also "doing shit". Talk to lots of people to figure out where that is. Happy to call if you'd like!
Apparently you can just throw around words like "terrorist" against the enemies of US and the genocidal state of "Israel", and then killing innocent civilians is now justified. Who are the real terrorists?

It's just the same old story, a group of humans justifying murder for their own self-interest, and their brains coming up with the most bizarre nonsense to try and rationalize it. Some of the people even consider themselves "rationalists".

The same justifications could be used to justify stuff like the holocaust, but who cares about logical consistency?
Can you direct me somewhere to learn more about Gatling's ethos?
I wonder what, if anything, will replace dating apps. As someone who tried dating apps for a while, I never had much luck with them. I ended up meeting my wife in person at the LGBTQ center at my college, we were friends for awhile, started dating, then got married a couple years later.

I'm not sure what dating apps optimize for. It's easy to say "for hookups!", but it seems like a very low% of matches on those apps lead to any kind of in-person connection, date or hookup: anecdotally I think I had a few hundred matches on Tinder, but only went on ~10 dates / hookups as a consequence. For most matches, the conversation would fizzle after a few messages. Maybe it's different for straight people?

My hypothesis is there's a "Market for Lemons"[1] problem here: take a pool of potential matches on Tinder. The pools narrow like so:

100% of people are on the app (given)

x<100% of people will match with an average person (picky)

y<x% of people will message or reply to a message[2]

z<y% of people will go on a date / hookup with someone[2]

People in each pool will be selected out of the swiping pool, leaving the people left for you to swipe on being, on average, less committed to ultimately going on a date. For example: people in the `z` group will get into short/long-term relationships and stop using Tinder. People in the `y` group will be busy texting with someone they met on Tinder (using pickup lines, etc.) and swipe less. Etc, etc.

I'm not sure how a dating app would solve this issue. Traditional ways of finding partners, like meeting people at a bar or hobby group or at college, doesn't either: it's just there's a benefit to making friends or talking to people beyond trying to hook up or start dating them. Most people, if they make 5 friends at a college club but don't start dating any of them, are still happy, I would think.

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

[2]: Why would people match or reply to a message, but not want to go on a date? I've anecdotally known several people who do this: some just wanted validation from random strangers, some are just shy and would theoretically want to go on a date but didn't work up the courage to actually do it, etc. etc. Lots of reasons.
Marriage and kids can be a very happy and enriching experience, for all involved. I'm not disputing that. (I had 15 years of magnificent marriage and have two amazing young adult children. I wouldn't trade that for anything.)

But this assumption that two people who find each other a perfect match now will still feel that way in 5, 10, 20, 40 years is just unrealistic. It would be much better if people understood that we are all unique, and we all grow and expand in different ways. Sometimes a couple grows in the same way (and usually they do, quite a lot); but sometimes one of the couple grows in a different direction - discovers something important to them which pulls them away. It doesn't mean there was a problem with the other person or the relationship. A very simple example is when one person finds their career developing and fulfilling, but the other partner has a happy life in a certain town, near their family, friends, etc. To stay together, one of them probably must give up something very important. But to realize that a parting doesn't mean losing connection, it just means going separate ways, is natural.
I don't see the solution, should we self-censor all humor to the point of the lowest common denominator?
For every organisation with one 10x person there's another 9 with mediocrity.

No matter how much we may strive to hire better, overall there's a need to not only rely on having the best people.
None. I'll be dead.
While I disagree with this comment, I think that others who disagree should post substantive comments instead of snark. Shallow dismissals are missing an opportunity to refute claims you disagree with.

Unfortunately, I think most of the points here are spot on.

#2 (swiping is for physical excitement) and #4 (an offer of money creates incentives for un-genuine behavior) seem indisputable and deserve to be addressed

#1 (few life-long partnerships)

According to some random web site [1], about 45% of US marriages end in divorce. This seems to support assertion #1.

#3 (online communication does not compare to the quality of in-person communication): Seems like a no-brainer assertion to me, HN posts excepted... (j/k). Of course the online communication is supposed to lead to other opportunities to get to know someone better, so it should really be compared to hanging out in a bar or something. Which I would expect is also (relatively) ineffective at helping find a partner.

I mean, really I think the claim that there are few life-long partnerships is not relevant. A relationship needs a place to start and grow. Later failure of a relationship that "could have" worked out isn't an indication that the filters applied at the start are not functioning correctly.
We 100% need a shorter week

The advantages are numerous but one of the key advantages is increased productivity.

A 4 day week = a 50% longer weekend.

(Knowledge) workers are more productive with this extra day off meaning there is almost no drop in output from the employers perspective. From a personal perspective, I get much less work done on a Friday than on a Monday

This increase in productivity has been documented in many studies and is one of the main reasons I started https://4dayweek.io
I wrote up an article on hosting email in an S3 bucket. It does mean your email is in AWS, so not sure if that is any better.

https://markw.dev/aws-free-email/
At some point, we're going to have more and more users behind NAT and IP address looks even worse as a device for banning someone. Them making impossible journeys and changing country every five minutes, however, provides more useful information.
I read that comment not as "re-write everything in Rust", but more "rewrite a subset of components in Rust where it might help with security and resiliency".

Rust can certainly help with the latter, but very few projects will ever have the funding or time to achieve the former.
Sounds like you've read the OkCupid blog post that used to be online, before Match decided to buy OkCupid and censor them.
The court that prosecuted the Nazis (and others) would like a word.
It’s the same government that did the original deal.
Did you do this on purpose? Faukus would sound the same as faux-culs (false ass) which is slang for hypocrite.
Wow, that's mind-blowing. It does seem so romantic, to consider how people might have imagined a far away land.
if it truly fit the bill, they'd have already destroyed it.
It's a skill that can be learned.
The routing need not be symmetric. If I've got two /24s and two ISPs, maybe I advertise each /24 on only one ISP, for traffic engineering purposes (I want to steer some of my clients to send through one ISP and some clients to send through another), but that doesn't mean I want or need to send the return traffic back through the same way it came in.

Also, the routing/BGP configuration is often separate from the filtering config, so making sure things are synchronized can cause problems.

It's far less time intensive as an ISP to just not filter once it starts getting complex. After all, you don't get a lot of customer service calls when you let ill-advised packets through, but you do get calls when you break things by dropping packets your clients were authorized to send.
Ask HN: Kicking a stalker out of a Google account
I've been helping a female friend get rid of an ex who had login access to her google accounts and added spyware to her android phone. I factory reset the phone, logged out of all devices, changed 2FA to a different number, and of course changed the passwords. Yet his iphone still popped up on the logged in devices somehow. This time I reset the authorized devices list too, but that shouldn't have been the issue unless he knew the new password right? Any ideas? Also it is a shame that this rare but dangerous scenario is not more user friendly.
Wow, that's a great photo.

I grew up in Wicklow town and we could see Wales occasionally. If my dad said "you can see Wales today" what he was really saying was "the weather's great today".
If they did not exclude France, the acronym would have been FAUKUS and we can't have that ;-)
> Why is this resource asymmetry unavoidable? It seems reasonable that a new protocol could solve it.

Protocols are trying to avoid this problem. For TCP there exist SYN cookies to reduce the amount of work a host has to do. For QUIC retry packets exist, as well as anti-amplification rules. However applying those mechanisms also has a cost. One is you still get computational cost not to zero, since you still have to receive and reject packets. And the other cost is now your legitimate users are experiencing a latency penality due to potentially requiring another round trip.

The latter means you don't want to make those mechanisms the default, but rather use them selectively in certain situations.

The former means even if you apply countermeasures you are not fully protected. If you get flooded purely by the bare amount of packets and the system stalls just from handling them, all the higher level mitigations won't work very well anymore. That's the difference between a DDoS and a DoS - the DDoS might not even need an asymetry in cost, it just brute-forces the system down.
Only Three Countries in the World (Officially) Still Use the Imperial System
Past places I’ve worked they did a lot of monitoring, it was a for profit place and cared a big deal about metrics. So they would regularly remind us that you have no expectation of privacy (which is true), but I always laughed when people would be shocked to hear management talking about people checking personal email or banking (just before smartphones being prevalent). But now I trust my employer more but they don’t need to see anything I’m doing. So my work laptop is pure work and then I have my Pinebook pro or iPad nearby if I need to do any personal things. Great to compartmentalize.
Not at all, brother, I appreciate the mutual respect and engagement. Thanks for making HN a great place :-)
Blocking outgoing spoofed packets requires time and money.

No carrier will shut down an ISP paying them 100k/month just because of some spoofed traffic.
Well, they have to start somewhere. It makes sense that they would be picking the lowest-hanging fruit.