skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I wouldn't call it neutral. It still has a development team made up of people who decide the direction of the technology. You don't like a decision and use a fork - now you're isolated from everyone else who is still transacting on the main chain.

The validation of transactions is a red herring in these discussions - the real question of decentralisation is who is responsible for making decisions about the future of the tech and what happens when people disagree. In that respect Bitcoin is neither decentralised nor neutral. Same as Ethereum.
Flash isn't and wasn't secure and keeping any part of it alive is a huge liability.
They could disable the minefield without the houthis even realizing it. The U.S. military used dolphins to mark 100 mines during Desert Storm. They also use underwater drones to mark and clear mines.
Maybe, maybe not. The author has graduated from High School, meaning they're about to enter college or the workforce. I wouldn't be surprised to see this level of detail from someone at that level academically. Delighted, yes. Would I expect if from everyone? Hell no.

But surprised that a tech-enthusiast and eager learner might have put this much thought into this prank and it's potential consequences, not so much.

Teenagers/young adults tend to have different stressors and other things to occupy their time than the average adult in the workforce, meaning the author likely gave this prank a fair amount of their free time, and that dedication showed through in the amount of planning done.

Additionally it's likely, given they mentioned once or twice in the article they planned on posting a blog about the prank, that they might be hoping to use this on their resume or as a talking point in their career. If they're hoping to go into security or comp sci, this would be a decent feather in their cap and the amount of time spent is easily justified.
Intergalactic number station makes sense. Starting to sound like an episode of Lost
I read elsewhere in these comments that Adobe keeps Flash alive in China. If this is true and Adobe doesn't want China to take over Flash (Re: China & ARM), they won't open source it and they'll keep clones down/DMCA requests going to keep business with China. Just my 2¢.
I wish the Oculus Quest 2 had higher quality cameras. Some of my favourite times in that experience are when I have to see the world through my googles.
What's even more interesting is the new meta-game around interviews.

Algorithmic questions started with Microsoft, who wanted to make sure engineering hires could... program!

The point was to make it as language agnostic as possible and friendly to college hires (since everyone who did a serious CS program did algorithms, there was a common vocabulary). You weren't even meant to study intensively for these, just brush up on your algo class.

But now I keep seeing guides on the internet about "hacking the coding interview" and special "prep material" pushed by influencers (???) on YouTube that claim to be ex FAANG (hard to check). Apparently there's even classes taught at tier two colleges (Waterlo if I recall) that specifically focus on algorithm interviews. Not algorithms, just algorithms interviews. They get interview questions from students and the class is just memorizing as many of them as possible.
Do prosecutors need consent from victims to file charges in cases like this?

Also if you're going to commit a crime and brag about it, don't say "hey well they would point the finger at me anyway and I'm not going to name my partners." You've just told them there are coconspirators, and you don't have a right not to incriminate others.
Ah, 2021, such sad times, where we squash our creativities in fear of the police, where you'd think twice before doing something like one of the MIT hacks http://hacks.mit.edu ...

I do wonder if they could've secured themselves with VPN and "untraceable" anonymous emails (e.g. asking for a guarantee that they won't be sued/charged), although the teenage bragging rights would've been too tempting.

I wonder if it was possible for the hacker to ask a lawyer to represent them anonymously and make a contract, something like the district promises not to file criminal charges, and if they violate this deal they will have to pay a lot of money...
I can think of 300-450 thousand reasons to work at Facebook as a DS, but that's it.
>There is a big difference between Scientists and Political Activists with science degrees.

Not to Google there isn’t.

I don’t want to ever been seen as defending Alex Jones, but everyone should have seen this coming.

When it was OK for FAANG to deplatform a person for legal but annoying things, when it was OK to shadow ban things you just don’t like, not only OK but rewarded to repeat intelligence community lies by saying things inconvenient truths are just “Russian Disinformation”, when someone felt the need to fact-check and obituary of a woman that died of the Covid vaccine, I mean… how many times do we need to slide down it to see call a low traction ramp what it is?

I hate that I sound like a conspiracy theorist, but is it really a conspiracy if they admit to it? This can not continue, I don’t think.

The plan appears to me to push it as far as they can and welcome in regulation as a capture scheme. I have no other explanations.
OK, but also blame the politicians who are all "Thou Shalt Vax".

Telling people "this can cause myocarditis, and here's the people who should not get it" is telling people the truth. But that and a vaccine mandate cannot coexist without people rebelling against the mandate (which is in fact happening).

Part of telling people the truth is letting them decide what to do with the information. "Here, I'm trusting you with the truth, now you have to decide the way I think you should" doesn't fly, especially when the truth is a mixed bag. ("Who should not get vaccinated" tells you that the truth is in fact a mixed bag.)
You're a wizard davedx!
Not sure what this adds to the discussion.
true. I am pro-vaccines but anti gov mandate. But modern nuclear is so safe and, arguably, over regulated so it is pretty safe to just support “nuclear
Perhaps you could say “Balena” a few more times, I’m struggling to hear you.
This is a very timely issue that not many are discussing.

Once a creator becomes popular, they often become sponsored, and a lot of the gear they use (which also sets them apart from regular creators) is given to them through sponsorships. It's not an unfair advantage to the sponsored creator, but it does prove to be an unfair advantage to their competitors when you consider they are displayed on each site. Think about an independent film producer competing against a major studio produce a film.. This kind of ecosystem completely destroys the value of independent artists and favors big industry every time. There are literally thousands of talented people creating content totally for free over many years because of the myth of an eventual payoff that is the very basis of modern-day creator funds.

These platforms don't have separate categories for content creators based on their funding and content to fairly display everyone as equals, or among people operating on each level of ability/funding, why? because platforms favor proven earners and big industry -- Thy also don't want unknown creators to potentially replace chosen creators as well in a lot of cases.

Money/Profit drives platforms, not content, and not a concern for discovering new talent, but platforms want independent content contributed without providing opportunity and without paying independent creators for it (of course). Platforms create the dream of discovery and work hard to lure independent creators with the ideal that they can grow on them purely as fish bait to cover the fact that most already engineer their featured content heavily to be pre-determined and fixed.

Don't get me wrong, occasionally new talent slips through, but it's very rare in frequency.

Because top creators make so much, there's an entire network built around them, where platforms promote them and where algorithms keep them on top of everyone else, by featuring top streamers and earners on repeat, and by featuring them on front pages, while unknowns stay buried, without even an occasional mention on a featured page.

If you look at black hat forums, there are hundreds of people paying and faking their way in order to become popular and successful, and even some scammers are making more money off of fake music and streaming than really talented independent artists in music and video production. The current state of social media algorithms is not based on discovering talent, it is based on making companies money, and in covertly limiting user options for choices in featured content to make platform revenue stable.

A better way to look at the process of creating things as an independent artist is to focus on building locally, and in not trying to emulate nor compete with big industry, because the burnout is real, and the chances of growing, lasting, and thriving in massive creator-based ecosystem now are very very slim. Create your own web site, and own your own platform, because if you're an unknown or independent artist, major platforms aren't promoting you as well as a more dedicated online presence can.
Cell-Free DNA Fragmentation: A Potential Low-Cost Cancer Screening Method
I'd find Rudin's argument a lot more convincing if she offered an existence proof, like using the same number of examples to train an equally discriminative SVM or random forest (or hybrid) that can equal the performance of AlexNet in 2012 on the ImageNet ILSVRC (or in another domain where DNNs are SOTA).

Until that can be done, I think few outside academia will invest time or money in alternative non-DNN methods in the hope of competing with today's even superior DNN variants. There's a decade of evidence now that DNNs are incontestable discriminators in numerous domains, relative to pre-2012 ML technology anyway.
All of this sounds like disruption to the status quo, which is a cornerstone of the hacker ethos. I didn’t realize that regulatory capture had occurred in the hacker space. Should google also censor any ads denying security vulnerabilities?

Edit: this may be a bit too snarky but hyperbolic posts appear to have become a norm on this site and it has become all too obvious that these types of posts are more interested in soundbite style shaming than actual discussion.
The primary forecast data is from NOAA while the historical data is from ECMWF (sort of the European equivalent of NOAA).

I’ve been told that my API is easy to use - feel free to let me know your thoughts if you get a chance.
If we are going to just made up magic pockets where infinite money lies, then we can justify whatever we please.

The point of my comment is that it doesn't matter where the money is. Even if you were to pay it through massive taxes to the rich (assume no loopholes, no funny accounting tricks possible), the ones picking up the tab are the poor people of the future, because even if all millionaires are evil movie villains, taking their money will hurt growth, and growth compounds. Reducing growth now can be a catastrophe when compounded over 100, 200, 500 years.
It isn't an either this or that kind of situation. You're imposing a false dichotomy on the issue.

Just because we don't want to stick with the good ol' reliable 1000-years-to-break-down pollution like the way you put it, doesn't mean we should jump on the first promising path we see. Or else you might find yourself in ten years with all the seagulls dead or something.
Well, the way I understood, the parent had to negotiate but succeeded, so he got it for "free" (i.e. paid by taxpayers) - without any fund, tax-free or otherwise. This is an excellent alternative to the option you described as you don't have to worry whether the funds you gathered are enough for the treatment you need. Generally, in Europe, things like cancer etc. are treated for free, i.e. included in your general social security payments that are relatively low.
Get out of what... economics?

And then what would be the driving force of progress which results in all that wondereful green technology?

Technology as a human concept is about solving problems, and throughout history, it's sometimes been about solving problems caused by previous technology. Unless we suddenly get struck by a movement to get back to an agrarian civilisation and stick there in perpetuity like an ultra strict Amish-like society, there's simply no way to escape the race with ourselves where we need more and more technology to fix the problems caused by the previous technologies.

Yes, eventually we'll fail. Or escape to the stars and sacrifice other planets to our selfish genes. But that's ok, eventually the universe itself will fail, you can only slow down entropy for a tiny bit.
Hydrogen requires minimal modifications to gas turbines, notably the combustors need to be swapped out.

Storage and distribution works the same as for fossil methane (pressurized in cave systems/old gas wells).

Production is simple, and we yes, the efficiency is around 20-30% round-trip.
But that's enough to handle up to ~30% of electricity supply with less than 2x overcapacity.

And that's assuming you don't just slap carbon capture on a gas turbine you feed with fractionally distilled oxygen (>99% should be easily enough) and enough exhaust back-feed to not melt the turbine blades. A diesel would probably deal better with the combustion temperatures, though.

And Fischer–Tropsch can turn captured carbon into piston-engine-suitable liquid fuel, if you'd need to.
There's a workaround to support pretty much any FF extension at this point -- but you have to create a "collection" with your firefox account and then point your Android FF install at that collection. Not too hard, but a little bit of a PITA. If you're like me and maintain the same couple dozen extensions on every FF install, though, it actually works pretty well.
I see that Michael Burry wasn't based enough to keep his account publicly accessible so that everybody could see how ignorant he is in conflating gender with sex.
What about engineering social attractors so that people just move away from their habits and start doing things differently ? availability, social mirroring can be leveraged to migrate people from one lifestyle to another, without relying on policies.

After all marketing is all about making the masses move a certain way..
Sounds exactly like those frivolous complaints that afaik are prohibited by DMCA.
Can you create an intentional collision, and also have the counterfeit have compilable code? (Or, in other circumstances, intelligible English text?)
Ignoring punctuation, capitalization and spaces, you have

(26 ^ 1024) / (2 ^ 160) ascii texts, which is too large for python to do the division.

Thinking harder, that's:

>>> (13 * (160)) * (26 ** (1024 - 160))
586015382205826960727672544401463871212215837535709025412643135464856100047507808667927549205890681326798481562717865671371914861707033271010401105757243098374422354323280335989456977123883814519788789676409601028611595593846201622073508573113400508407626532918150795408521721900638322896979964584478287370459866751451622413984067802115006844002721198098126119299044037305285971873899685570443731713584345786693414215895940310733413089663439828136700053588516077484775302179979357918243214847406310224703621807862576801557249657421436718532619781248154845297450962161296162654285951879462181582579086975207170674079727507724939279192338763731562331681240184746490930657625088527012496974579965412172847315257089070105214466289197177909463176672954181773739345690793807307314187284671422149249630372138364687234076394633405015375177710973043617082884089261346079718819448519032937091364439564690325014717871376537803759701695837030040255807318892621674241958398030180530294671920834183657715967728968579955163053146309746677182369005157209730333605691785063279407829717681098919238400049142795696195708090541066855775773950462556018168019660329830112434789524857886670766484791538540247307849949305926757172442880517278313785940979709167536140659937329357336156000509320395656047604973761134700992358740522602445520136787846575269569119611476145342798153931437530464566322510167663230985347176517861376

If you restrict it to words, assume that there's only 1000 words in the English language, averaging 5 letters each, you get:

(1000 ^ 200) / (2 ^ 160) which becomes:

>>> (500 ** 160) * (1000 ** 40)
684227765783602085411977335590779360976690401306892466678255997993062052092705371819647552911192178726196289062500000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

There will be massive numbers of realistic texts that match any given hash.
I have some SQLite databases that are chewing through over 1K writes per second in production (WAL=on).

Is that with synchronous full(2) or normal(1)?

What's your SQLITE_THREADSAFE mode?
And people who say political flames like this surely don't trust the government, right?
> Anyone in the field will tell you that this is an absolute disaster of a post because it sends the signal to other young aspiring cybersecurity professionals that this is OK

Maybe a bit overzealous with the reaction here. OK, sure, the OP could have been even more serious about this but literally the first labeled section is "DISCLAIMER" and says:

> With that said, what we did was very illegal, and other administrations may have pressed charges. We are grateful that the D214 administration was so understanding.
You and me have very little choice in how we live our lives. Our available options are determined by market forces most affected by a small few people in a handful of boardrooms than consumer behavior at large. Your choices in the marketplace are limited to options that capitalists have determined were profitable to produce in abundance.
Serious question. What, if any, instruction do kids these days receive regarding what's allowed on computer systems?

I remember in high school poking around a network drive until I found an executable with the name "SEND" in the name. I had a sense that it would send some kind of message somewhere, but I honestly didn't know where or to how many people. I was quite surprised when all the screens in our computer lab froze and, five seconds later, my message appeared on all of them. (I later learned that my message appeared on every desktop screen in the school!)

I'm not sure exactly how they found me out, but I was called into the IT admin's office a couple of days later. She was furious with me. I told her the truth. I didn't know what exactly would happen when I ran that command, but she didn't buy it. Fortunately, nothing ended up happening after that.

I've wondered to this day what exactly they could have done to me if they decided to press whatever legal authority they might have had to its fullest extent. I was never told "don't go to Z:\" or "don't run any program other than those on this list." Even after I was found out, I wasn't ever explicitly told that my actions constituted unauthorized access.

It was a different, perhaps more innocent (or ignorant) time back then. How much have things changed now?
Opinions on this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdSjyvIHVLw
> Nuclear power has inherit risks that are not present in other forms of modern energy generation

Aviation has inherent risk that are managed more than adequately, making it the safest mode of transportation around.

Similarly, nuclear power has inherent risks that are managed more than adequately, as evidenced by the fact that the only major accident in the last 30 years, Fukushima, caused one (1) victim.
Unlike the development teams at a software company, though, the development teams here do not have any special privileges over the software. They only have "control" for as long as their users continue choosing their forks.

If a second "development team" sprung up and had more user support than the existing team, there is literally no advantage the current team has to control the software.
SHA-1 will still work fine for the purpose of git. It is just no longer considered secure for cryptographic operations, such as digital signature, that doesn't mean that you can't use it for other purposes, like git does. Using it is still fine and will ever be fine.

Making the hashing algorithm exchangeable would have introduces complexity in a software that is already complex, and also less efficient (one of the reasons git was created was speed for large project like the Linux kernel) for no real purpose. If you want to change the algorithm, given that you will break compatibility with all existing repositories, tools, and clients, you make a fork of git because you are changing too much.

I don't see why migrating to SHA-256. The collisions are still very unlikely to generate accidentally, and sure, if you want to do damage to a repository you can create one on purpose, as you can as well commit some hooks that contains malware, or alter the git history in any way you want, so what's the point?
By the time all needed nuclear reactors are built, there won’t be anything left to sustain. Time to first watt for nuclear is so atrocious it isn’t even funny. You could install and end of life an equivalent amount of wind, solar and batteries for the same money and time (…hyperbole, but maybe not).
Your comment doesn't address the point of the article. The author isn't talking about Ethereum itself, which they acknowledge up front can comfortably be considered decentralized.

The point is smart contracts. They are code, and they have to get updated if there are bugs. How do they get updated? Well, in the simple (and common) case somebody holds the private key and updates it. That's centralization, obviously.

You can get arbitrarily complex with how smart contracts are updated. You can have multisig, where 2:3 have to vote to update, or you can have actual voting, or you can even do voting by stakeholder in the contract.

But whatever you choose, it's fully a function of the smart contract itself what level of decentralization it achieves, and not at all about Ethereum.
That is my worry. They are putting in a development near my house so I'm watching them put in a lot of pipes using a large amount of energy (6 high horse power tractors emitting a lot of CO2 for weeks on end). If those pipes last forever (as currently expected), then overall the impact is low, but if they start degrading we will be spending even more CO2 to replace them.

Though a part of me wonders how much more it would cost to put in a subway when they already have the ground dug up.
I don't know. I feel like a lot of the people here celebrate their former exploits as though they weren't committing the computer equivalent of rifling through unlocked desk drawers and graffitiing the walls. They seem so surprised that overworked and underpaid public servants don't appreciate that.
Scalpers exist when a company chooses to ignore the supply demand curve. The value of a Ps5 is much above the asking price, which is easily seen in the price scalpers are asking. This is similar to video cards as well right now, or tickets to many sporting events.

Scalpers essentially make it always possible for a customer to buy a product if they want it enough ($$$). Otherwise, it's more of a lottery system, if the product is not priced well enough.
I don't follow. That video, while interesting, seems to be complimenting European city planning and critical of American city planning. I don't see how it's making a case for American zoning.