skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> What do you do when you have the hash of everyone’s eyes?

The same thing you do with everyone's Amazon purchase habits, porn watching habits, and their social media behaviour: sell it!

The only real question is to what end, and to be honest one need only look at the dystopia the CCP are creating with their survielence model in Xianjing to see how pernicious this all is when it's in the wrong hands.

You have entities hell bent on creating some sort of minority report type prediction system, though to be honest I think it's more like Psycho Pass at this point: one where their is a clear divide between classes of people and their obedience to the system, which I guess in this case would be 'the Orb.'

In psycho pass it's a sort of Hivemind of the most brilliant to the most violent members of society to try and predict any and all possible outcomes.

Silicon Valley tropes have bled into real life for far too long, be it wokeness, to the fomenting of discord via social media as a business model to sway elections (something intelligence agencies and political parties have clearly made use of) or create discord in Society and to be honest it's exactly why SV's influence has to be curbed. The honest answer to what they will do with the data is: we can't possibly know, and that's why it shouldn't be done.

Auroracoin was trying to achieve a UBI drop in Iceland as a response to the calamity from the 2008 financial crisis, with noble goals but failed in 2014, and while I think it is something that I think should warrant more focus from developers and VC money it's hard to envision how they completely bypassed how Microsoft's ION [1] has been working on ID on the Bitcoin blockchain for years they could have built on top of.

I'd normally lambast anything MS has done, but it's open source and operates over the most secure network, why are we allowing Altman and his YC/SV cronies to hi-jack the narrative that collectively those of us in this space have been working on trying to address this in a trust-less manner for nearly a decade?!

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auroracoin

1: https://topbitcoinbuyer.com/2021/03/26/microsoft-launches-id...
Gusto buys Remote Team in bid to support more international hiring
There are systems like the PS3 SPEs and DSPs where you only have normal access to local on-chip memory and have to explicitly initiate DMA to access external memory.

But that's just bad for running general purpose software that can require more memory than available locally since it means you have to do memory cache management in software which is going to be much slower than letting the hardware do it.
It's a visually beautiful movie and it works better in telling the story than the original movie because it's being broken up into two decently long films.

The dialogue isn't fantastic, but it doesn't detract from the experience, IMO. I'd recommend watching it.
I watched it last weekend and my expectations were pretty low. Plus it was 2-1/2 hours which (for me) isn't a good sign.

I loved the movie and can't wait for the next part. I watched it on HBO but kind of wished I had seen it in a theater for the big sound and huge screen. I thought the movie was beautifully shot.
Would you care to share what you think the valid view points against encryption are?

For my own part, I find it helpful to remember that questions over encryption have been ongoing for several decades. Historically, the arguments boiled down to shouting about CSAM, terrorism, drugs, etc. Mostly it tended to be really be about law enforcement agencies wanting to have the unfettered powers of surveillance.

What's perhaps most interesting to me is that the prevalence of encryption seems to have done very little to stop the FBI from catching people. I know this next point will be contentious, but perhaps there's room to question why these people who are indeed not idiots are so against encryption for you and me.

So yes, you're absolutely right. Let's look hard at our viewpoints and biases and expertise and paychecks and ask ourselves - why does the FBI want us to not have encryption? Why do we want it? Who has the valid view points here?
Well people can short Tesla. I heard this under evaluation among solo traders. But Tesla is having a lot of money in crypto afaik. So it often may seem, their profit in cryptos increases their total val.
When I was at CERN during 2003-2004, a common discussion theme was about merging the threading libraries on ATLAS HLT projects (there were three if I recall correctly).

which never happened, because the reasoning was each of them had different tradeoffs and no one wanted to loose their specific library.

I wonder how many of them are now in use.
It's probably because they don't want to lose users.

If you have FB, and I have Twitter, and we can chat, why would I ever make a FB profile or you a Twitter profile?

The mutual exclusivity is the competitive advantage. All these companies are competing with one another for your eyes. It wouldn't make sense for them to give that up for no return value.
> Turns out that I was missing something:

Indeed. It's not safe under x86 either.
Historically subscriptions have subsidized ads at newspapers and magazines and not the other way around.

If you know somebody shells out $189 a year for a subscription to The Economist you know they've got more money to spend, e.g., they are qualified customers. "Free" OTA Television, on the other hand, is crammed with ads for personal injury lawyers, Medicare advantage, and other ways to spend other people's money because the people watching don't have any of their own money to spend.
> Frances Haugen's own motives

Motives aside, whether she is acting as a mole for intelligence agencies to gather support for enabling more 'round the clock surveillance of wrong-think under the guise of "blowing the whistle" is a defining factor.
Pidgin works with a surprising number of modern services [0]. I used it last year on my 32 bit computer that couldn’t run the official discord client.
Agreed. The article is a giant stretch of logic from the start. There's this at the bottom, though, that I think is worth reading:

> All tech giants share a desire to digitise the world. What is left unsaid by Apple and others is that digitising the world entails surveilling it: recording everything, making it taggable, trackable, searchable – and hackable. Of course, asking tech companies not to digitise the world is like asking builders not to pave over natural areas. Unless society sets limits, that is not going to happen. That’s why governments create protected areas when it comes to building.
What method did you use to determine which/if anyone implementing CRDTs did not write a blog post?

Or did you observe that 100% of the people who blogged about CRDTs implemented CRDTs and then wrote a blog post?
After sharing hundreds of top hit articles in hacker news, this is my first personal post :)
Sure. There aren’t enough crazy-rich people to be significant, just like at the other end there aren’t enough people having 12 kids to cause significant expense to government child benefits schemes.
Sure, but

1. a lot of people also find that entire situation to be such incredible bullshit

2. the counterargument discredits itself when it employs the mental gymnastics needed to explain that inconsistency
> It’s also worth noting that end-to-end encryption is necessarily broken as messages to (and from) WhatsApp, Signal and Telegram pass across the bridge(s). The bridge(s) operates in Element’s trusted EMS environment, with no content scanning or datamining, but currently bridged conversations are not stored end-to-end encrypted in Matrix (they will be in the future).

As a Signal user, I kind of don't want this to take off. I like knowing that when I message someone on Signal, it's for their eyes only. It feels like this service starts fragmenting some of the privacy guarantees of the bridged providers.
It pays to draw a distinction between objects and relations. Relations manifest themselves when more than one object is involved. A pair of objects is an object; it is a physical relation between pairs, the isomorphism if you will, that we call "number 2"; it manifests itself in cases when pairs can physically "snap" together solely due to the fact that their cardinalities match. I think it is the fact that a number (a count, in this case) is not tied to a single object (e.g. a pair) but rather expresses the potential of a certain physical interaction between several objects that makes understanding this difficult.
George R.R. Martin also wrote his books on a DOS machine running WordStar 4.0
Just adding from an experience researching solar for a condo development - if you want the fire department to try to save your house, you need to be able to cut the panels off, grid connection or not.

Likewise, putting panels on both sides of the roof makes it difficult, if not impossible, to vent a fire through the roof. The figures are ever changing, but the additional weight of many panels can also be a consideration when fighting a fire.

Really urge anyone considering adding solar panels on their home to speak with their local fire/ems prior to installation/signing a contract to be sure you know their requirements (and in many places this is still evolving).
Realistically, for a lot of projects, if it's open for 60 days without activity it's not ever getting fixed. If anything, things like stalebot make the issues list match the reality of the situation more closely.
In terms of normizing surveillance, Apple is late to the party. The truth is "personalization" is a euphemism for surveillance. This language slight of hand has been popular with Google, Amazon, etc.

Per "The Age of Surveillance Capitalism", it's not the surveillance to fear per se, it's how our own meta data and such is being used against us. Now. This info isn't simply predicting behaviour, it's being used to alter and modify our behaviour.

I'm not giving Apple a free pass. But to call out Apple and not the others gives the masses a false sense of truth.

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/otm/segments/living-und...
If they're the parasites, what was Facebook and co?
I hope they will, and I hope their cloud servers run Linux.
Pandemic vs. Endemic: 'This is it' is the consensus among some Covid experts
There was a good recent episode of Late Night Linux Extra[0] where the maintainer talks about Pidgin and how it compares with Matrix.

[0] https://latenightlinux.com/late-night-linux-extra-episode-32...
> "volatile" does not mean what you think it means; if you're using it for anything other than interacting with hardware registers in a device driver, you're almost certainly using it incorrectly.

Another "correct" use of volatile is a hack to prevent compilers from optimizing away certain code. It's pretty rare to need that and often you can just use a lower optimization level (like the usual -O2) but sometimes you need -O3 / -Ofast or something and a strategic volatile type def to keep everything working.

A classic example is Kahan summation algorithim. At -O2 it's fine. At -O3 or higher it silently defeats the algorithm while appearing to work (you get a sum but without the error compensation). Defining the working vars as volatile makes it work again. This is noted in the wikipedia pseudocode with the comment "// Algebraically, c should always be zero. Beware overly-aggressive optimizing compilers!"

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

Of course -O3 might not be any faster anyway but that's another topic.
I think if you've read the book, it's a good watch. But the movie does very little character building, or maybe it tries to do too much of it too fast. Without the preset idea of what the characters are about, I could see how the movie might be a bit flat.
Doesn’t seem fair for those people without retinas to scan.

I guess if you want to be part of the new world currency you better not have any disabilities or disfigurements.
Writing a Simple Intellij Plugin
The unsolved mystery of the Putney Pusher
Just out of curiosity, is there any interop that you'd personally benefit from? I'm unfamiliar with schema.org's more ephemeral schemas and how commonly they are used.
It's all little too perfect isn't it. I think the CIA connection scenario is certainly worth keeping in back of mind.
You're way mistaken; there are absolutely people who recognize that these bots suck and also dump on the GitHub community for its tendency to abuse bugtrackers for dumb stuff like support requests and general project discussion. This comprises like half of my GitHub-related comments on HN. (The other half includes complaints that the GitHub generation has rendered the word "wiki" meaningless by applying it to things that are clearly not wikis and then taking an IDGAF attitude if you bring it up. The author of the blog post here is among the guilty.)

Good bug discipline isn't new. It was understood at least 20 years ago and widely practiced with Bugzilla. GitHub and the types of users who go for it, though, seem to have a bent on organizational and operational regression. It's more important to chase self-actualization by doing things that feel productive because they keep you busy rather than thinking critically about how to actually be productive, apparently.
???

SV elites have understood that you can wrangle money and control out of unsuspecting and uninformed consumers for decades. Which is exactly what they are doing here via. a new shitcoin; they get both control and money!

I'd say they are very much in touch with the real world.
All judgement is "up to me". And how does your claim about observation and measurement fair when subjected to its own criteria?

Also, the "is-ought" problem follows from a particular (very problematic) metaphysics. It does not follow from an Aristotelian understanding of metaphysics.
> The theorems about the efficiency of a free market assume perfect information.

Huh? That comparatively freer markets make people better off in the real world is an empirical observation, and doesn't rely on theorems. (You can make a few assumptions and prove a few theorems, if you want to. But it's not essential.)

> If someone reads Consumer Reports and decides that brand XYZ is making a good product they want to buy, but brand XYZ switches to producing lower-quality products in between when the review is written and when the reader buys the thing, then we lose all the benefits that the free market was supposed to give us.

Eh, there's a simple fix that people intuitively implement already: trust brands more that have been around longer.

Assume the delay between the review being written and you buying stuff is eg a quarter of a year. Then, simplified, someone who goes only for brands that have been around for at least ten years only runs at most a 1 in 40 chance of getting duped like this.

By the way, the name for the scheme you are describing here is an 'exit scam'. See eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exit_scam

I challange you to find some econ papers that describe exit scams as externatilities.

> The externality is the cost of staying informed.

Btw, that's not an externality. That's just a regular cost.
> Ham radio, for which you need a license issued by the government, the very same government which took down the internet.

But as the government is now the enemy, why would somebody refrain from operating without a license? And managing from being found, of course. OTOH, hams from other countries may refuse to communicate with unlicensed users, splitting the network...
> Parts of the group's embargo fell apart Friday night, and some participating newsrooms posted a batch of articles ahead of the weekend.

That is such a shame, and reflects poorly on those who saw fit to break ranks. However, the overall idea is sound and, I think, positive and encouraging.

I've worked on editorial CMS tools linked to interactive planning modules (open source, and with a stripped-down SaaS variant in the offing) that could be spun up really quickly for such cross-outlet access/collaboration use cases.
I have seen plenty of comments by engineers here containing wildly incorrect statements about nuclear power. In general engineers seem to overestimate their own competence in areas outside their immediate professional experience.
In Maslov's model the volume of needs would probably graph to an ellipse instead of a triangle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs
There was far less verbal exposition than could have been. For example the mentats and their importance due to the Butlerian Jihad is never explicitly mentioned but only hinted at in subtle ways (which is nice).
Which bridge is it? Mautrix/whatsapp does require an Android instance of whatsapp.
The radioactivity is minimal. BUT - if you break the glass or scrape it (for example with cutlery while eating) you can release shards and/or dust which may contain alpha emitters.

Ingesting those is a bad idea, even if the glass is a very weak source.

Side note: turns out that mid-century Fiesta Ware was made with uranium glazes (nice colours...) and it's definitely not 100% safe if broken or chipped.

Even if you ignore the radioactivity, uranium is quite a toxic element in its own right. Glass should be chemically stable under normal use, but glazes definitely aren't.
I can’t tell if this is serious or not?
It's generally accepted that open published CVEs push vendors to actually patch their software, instead of covering up and ignoring bugs. It also gives you a heads up that the software your running has an issue and you need to update. It's tempting to think that making this knowledge publicly available gives the bad guys a roadmap, but in security you really can't just assume that because a vulnerability isn't public knowledge the bad guys won't know about it.

Frankly with the proliferation of the vulnerability black market, lack of public disclosure of CVEs would mean that only the black hats know it.
My Programming Earworms
The top comment on this post [1] says the exact opposite, that the reason they are off-grid is precisely for the reliability.

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28998847
To play Devil's Advocate and use your own point against you;

Some software engineers might be experts in the domain of encryption, but there are other professions who are experts in the domain of National Security.
Correct, but that does not mean its unfair. It just means being late, in the same way that I didn't buy early Apple stock. Nothing prevented me from buying that stock, the opportunity was equal at the time.

Whilst anybody is forgiven for not knowing about the very start of BTC at some obscure mailing list, since then there has been a decade of mainstream media exposure, a huge amount of time to acquire BTC. Failing to make use of this enormous time window is on the individual.

If I have to believe the below articles, miners own less than 10% of supply, so the gold comparison is misplaced:

https://insights.glassnode.com/bitcoin-supply-distribution/
Speaking from personal experience as a former FB employee (but 8 years ago at this point): It was pretty easy to put all the bad press out of mind, because so much of it was obviously mistaken and uninformed. Media coverage of Facebook is overwhelmingly written by people who don't know how websites or tech companies work, and who don't know how to evaluate or even acknowledge the tradeoffs involved in the subjects they write about.

To be fair, this is how media coverage of most things works. High quality criticism is rare, and you have to seek it out. Thoughtful people do seek it out. But as a matter of personal experience, the fact that most criticism is low quality makes it easy to ignore without losing any sleep.

On the other hand, maybe the press is much more negative now, and the situation is different? Could be. I've been out for too long to know.
Back in the day and for a little while platforms companies thought to at least have a common language (xmpp). Then they thought it would be a better idea if we all had 10 different apps on our phones for text messages.

There's no reason for standardization and interoperability not to be forced on these companies.

When you sent a physical letter you have to follow some standards on the envelope addresses, when you make a phone call to the other side of the world people can still hear your voice, same for sms, same for email, but apparently sending a string of text via internet in a standard protocol is an unsolvable problem.
Its not like that switch was a surprise that advertisers, apps, and investors weren't aware of. Privacy and tracking has been a focal issue for a long time now
Apple can probably also afford to spend more. Like, if going from 7nm to 5nm early puts an extra $30 per laptop chip on their chips, that is probably fine for Apple; they're charging the same for a base-model M1 16" MBP as they did for the Intel one, but their costs are almost certainly quite a lot lower (the markups on higher-end Intel laptop chips are enormous, and they also don't have to pay for a GPU).

For AMD, that might be a much larger deal; on the low-end that sort of price increase would give them a lot of trouble. Apple doesn't really have a low-end (even the chips in the Intel MacBook Air were quite expensive), giving them more flexibility here.
> you pay a monthly fee for someone to man-in-the-middle all your communications.

All Matrix homeservers and bridges are open source. I self host some of them myself. Have been doing that long before Element One was a thing.
Super off topic but does anyone go through these with a fine comb and pick the ones you want?

Link different devices? No way. Select personalized ads? Sure!!
> this is another equipment update that will need to dealt with.

Even in planes with only 'steam' gauges the changes are minor — you won't need any new equipment.

Currently: direction indicator is set to magnetic. When planning a flight you take true headings from charts and have to convert them all to magnetic. You then fly magnetic headings.

After the changeover: direction indicator is set to true. No need to convert headings when planning a flight. You fly true headings, and the only conversion you need to make is when setting the DI from the compass.

(If you don't have a DI you can still pre-convert all your headings to magnetic and fly those. You'll need to mentally convert runways headings etc. though.)
Apple made accessing a devices IDFA (device fingerprint) a permissioned resource. Needless to say it is not a popular permission to grant.

Cross-app activity can't be tracked without this permission. So if you see an ad for a product on facebook, then you pop over to Safari, search for the product, and purchase it, facebook can't attribute that sale to that ad.

The consequence of this is that goal attribution (like sales) for ads is harder, so FBs models can't learn as well who would be interested in the products. You'll see less relevant ads and companies' cost of customer acquisition will go up.

It's easy to imagine a world with less effective ad targeting since most media doesn't have effective targeting. Think pharmaceutical commercials on TV.

My own bias: I run a niche D2C brand whose business model got wrecked by this change!
> HN is a bit schizophrenic on this topic.

What if there was a way to send private message, in a decentralized manner, and where it's not even possible to tell if the recipient has actually read the message or not?

There are blockchains using ZK-proofs allowing to do that today. Not only it's decentralized so "fuck corporation surveillance/profiling" but it's also highly unlikely uncle sam and its offsprings can break the elliptic curves and ZK-cryptograhy in use by these blockchains, so "fuck state surveillance" too.

But then it's using the word "blockchain", so HN is pretty much against it.

And instead HN as a whole shall root for "secure" messengers that are leaking metadata like there's no tomorrow while explaining that they're the best thing since sliced bread "because they're easy to use".

Go figure.