skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Indeed, I recall the stink when this came out: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jul/28/queen-secret...

She used "Queen's consent" to make sure she is the only person in Scotland who is exempted from a law designed to cut carbon emissions.
The Xbox doesn't show a Windows desktop when you plug stuff in. Your constant trolling on Linux threads isn't appreciated.
What is terse syntax? I can parse lisp and C, how would this be different and challenging?
That is true when you’re playing in your browser.
On the mobile app (at least the iOS version) you can request computer analysis for your game done on the server.
It's not an OSHA mandate.
(2014)

I've always been so thankful that English uses an alphabet.
a) The complexity of a Chinese (or say a Japanese typewriter [1]) must have been an engineering/production/maintenance nightmare
b) The manufacturer has to pick which words you have access to, there will literally be sentences and words that cannot be written. (or, you end up with things like "extra double good")

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_typewriter
SG-1 isn't atheist. It's Gnostic. Gnosticism is one of the earliest Christian heresies (directly addressed in the New Testament, which was written in just the few decades after Christ, so very early) that was built on the idea that matter is bad, we're imprisoned in it by the false God (the God of the Bible in real Gnosticism), and that by the possession of the secret knowledge of gnosticism, you can transcend your earthly existence to become pure spirit, which is good. Anything keeping you from that is evil. Gnosticism also perfectly well fits with the material world being quite evil, and all the "false gods" running around fits in with that.

The Gnostically-transcendant "Ascended" beings also decided to not interfere with the material world, except for a couple of rebels. Those rebels were also portrayed as basically being wrong; both rebels in SG-1 also made enormous mistakes and the universe would have been better off if they also stayed hands off, and the Ascended were correct they shouldn't have done anything. (I would consider Atlantis more ambiguous on this point.)

When I say it "is" Gnostic, I don't mean that they were pushing Gnosticism per se. I just mean, that's the fundamental setup of the universe. The Highest Reality shown is Ascension. It would be a rational conclusion in that universe (though not the only rational conclusion, but a rational conclusion) to conclude that the only goal worth pursuing is Ascension. (In fact it was a bit jarring to me in some ways that the characters did not address that more fully at times.)

The show's Gnosticism doesn't seem to have included the particular idea that we were imprisoned in the material world on purpose, but it has pretty much everything else about it.

So bear in mind I mean this descriptively, not proscriptively; goodness knows I'm not advocating for this myself. I'm just saying that just as the Lord of the Rings is established on certain ultimate principles spelled out in the first section of the Silmarillion, the SG-1 universe is at its core, very Gnostic. I don't mean this as a good or a bad thing, just a descriptive one.

In fact a Gnostic would consider responding to the universe with atheism as a reasonable one to some extent, because the material world has nothing worthy of worship in it. They would just claim that there is still something better, to transcend the material world into pure spirit, but if you didn't know about that, atheism would be the next reasonable response.

(The ideas of Gnosticism can be further traced back in the mythologies of the area, like Greek and Roman. If you get early enough versions of the myths and read them with the mindset of the time, or read the philosophers of time, most of them also had some variant of the belief that life involved eventually moving into the pure spirit world, sometimes in good ways, sometimes in bad. Given the nature of the show and its relationship with mythology you could come at it that way as well. But it ultimately still strikes me as fairly Gnostic, rather than the older mythological interpretations. YMMV; if you know enough about this sort of thing to have opinions you are welcome to them by me.)
The minimum requirements were/are about pushing new HW sales and nothing else.

A large portion of devices that were arbitrarily blocked, had no issues running the previews even with all the new security stuff. And on top of that none of the supposedly "new" security stuff is actually new. Its all been in Windows 10 for a while.
Indeed, that's the core of the argument made in this article here (from 2009) which is arguing for a return to cobbles / bricks for Georgetown: https://georgetownmetropolitan.com/2009/01/16/why-not-allow-...
FWIW if you don't care about attestation, Webauthn-L2 has client-side helper functions like getPublicKey() that allow you to do the handshake without parsing any CBOR https://www.w3.org/TR/webauthn-2/#sctn-public-key-easy

If you want to check attestation you still need to parse CBOR (and whatever attestation format is inside.)

I used this for a minimal webauthn implementation which is under 300 LoC https://github.com/arianvp/webauthn-minimal (WIP)

However only Chrome seems to implement the L2 spec so far. It feels like Webauthn is basically abandoned on Mozilla side of things as they still haven't finished implementing L1 (It's missing all the CTAP2 stuff) whilst it has been out for more than a year. And there have barely been any Webauthn-related commits in the past years.

But yeh; in general webauthn is a design-by-committee dumpster fire; unfortunately. U2F was conceptually way simpler.
>Except Defender/Malware Protection...

I just checked and it can definitely kill malware protection so I don't know where you got that information but it's false.

And even without checking, being able to disable malware protection is a necessary feature in any OS, for SW development and debugging activities, so I would assume malware protection could be easily killed without a problem by the user with admin privileges.
Formal methods and distributed systems. I'm also fairly knowledgeable about quantum computing.
My hypocrisy does not affect the soundness of my argument. I may be a hypocrite, it doesn't mean that I'm wrong. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
If we're going down rabbit holes, then the internet is to blame. Oh wait, the internet is made up of a bunch of computers. Computers are to blame. Oh wait, computers require electricity. Electricity is to blame.
If you want your communications to go to the government, I suggest you make a zip file and send it off to them. Personally I don't think any phone, tech device, or anything else should have spying software on it. It should require a specific warrant for a person, place, and time limit. The government has Far Too Much power already, we don't need to give it any more. Sure it allows criminals to do crime but it also allows the rest of us to carry on our lives without being spied on at every turn.
> Tumblr reacted by adding an extremely aggressive "adult content" filter

Which they were already preparing. It wasn't a reaction to the app store removal - they had been planning it for months and this just prompted a quicker activation.

> so they wouldn't get their app permanently removed from the app store

No. They were going to do this regardless of the app store snafu. You can't blame Apple for this move on Tumblr's part (but you could possibly blame Apple for perhaps overreacting to "a few reports" although I don't think we've ever got the full story of what went actually on...)
I watched a few videos of him and I am just watching this video > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNy2PO3K4MQ

Wow....I always thought he was recording those videos from his bedroom and wanted to spice things up with tacky RGBs. Wow.......wow....
> the authors rarely see anything of this money

IMHO it's not rarely but never, I'm not aware of any plausible scenario where any author would ever get a single cent of that payment.
I think there is a flaw in the author's analysis: It's based on a fixed cost-per-length model. Not all roads cost the same to maintain. A downtown city street that gets heavy, continuous use will have to be repaired much more frequently than a sidewalk-less rural road that gets ten cars per day on its busiest day. City streets are also more complicated to repair, often having sewer pipes and electrical lines buried in close proximity, so are likely more costly to repair each time, too.
This article is a good summary, but I think it still doesn't drive home the point. I didn't really grasp ideology until I watched (don't wince) Slavoj Zizek's "The Pervert's Guide to Ideology." I understood the textbook version of the word, but seeing it explained over and over in multiple film contexts and then calling that back to history really drove home the point: how ideologies are an effective tool in manipulating humans. I highly recommend this film even though it is popular to both adore Zizek and dunk on him (like all people he has his faults).
Adir Shamir did long time ago: https://eprint.iacr.org/2012/584.pd

tl;dr: 98% of BTC in circulation at the time belonged to 2% portfolios.
It's 2022, so perhaps the committee will approve features from C++17.

Now, all things considered, having used bgfx in various languages, I think the Orthodox C++ approach leads to quite clean code.
Price is a function of supply and demand, so trying to isolate one or the other doesn't make sense.

Why does it matter how many people are associated with a particular wallet? The wallet with $150 worth of Bitcoin has the same amount of security as the wallet with $15M, and it's considerable. The protocol itself has never been hacked, despite holding nearly $1 trillion of value.
In the US, people have meager upload bandwidth. I assume to deliver a comparable experience as serving from the cloud, P2P would require much more upload bandwidth for individuals.
You’re right - I hear other less fortunate parts of the world are ready for their turn to get overworked and underpaid. Not like it has to do with the fact they hold the worlds largest populations or anything. Nah, you’re right. Their boards should tell them to raise prices and reject all else. Who cares if the kids don’t eat?
"In a Godless society, Government creates the panopticon."

Or something. It sounds profound.
I tip my fedora to you good sir.
Sure - I agree! But, it exists and it's widely used already. The C working group should concentrate on standardizing existing practice and not start striking out on unproven and weird new syntaxes and keywords.
Lenovo vendor locking Ryzen CPUs with AMD PSB
As Žižek says, everything is ideology. Even shit.
Uh, well I just started working a few months back...but I can say I haven't noticed this at all.

This particular passage stuck out to me:

"Bring your whole self to work" was the Big Tech mantra. Tell people about your cool hobbies, share your politics (if you're far left only), share your sex life."

I can't see this happening at any true big tech company, maybe at a startup or something. The writer seems a bit disgruntled to me.
> That doesn't explain why they didn't develop their own long before then. They could reverse engineer the tech and materials science for fighters and spaceships but not energy weapons? Come on.

Your confusing two terms there. Retrofit doesn’t mean to reverse engineer. It means taking hardware and placing it elsewhere. Earth didn’t know how to build a hyperdrive but, with help, they could take someone else’s working hyperdrive and install it into their own ship.

That seems a reasonable jump in tech imo because at no point in SG1 did they say Earth knew how to design their own hyperdrive.

> It's simply implausible that they would not have prioritized developing their own energy weapons with an eye towards making them more accurate, rather than simply throwing their hands up and saying "bullets are more accurate".

I agree but you’re trying to apply real world logic to a TV show. Stargate isn’t even intended to be hard SciFi.

At some level there needs to be some suspension of disbelief because naturally the writers are going to prioritise what makes a compelling story. The fact is that SG1 does a much better job at technology progression than most soft SciFi.
> I consider myself a Frequentist

Grab the pitchforks!
Apologies, it looks like I indeed misunderstood what you were trying to convey.
>> It all comes down to the exact nature of the content

It seems evident to me, from the reading the HN comments, that there is hardly any sort of agreement about what the "exact nature of the content" actually is.
Good points. However, on-demand streaming has changed people expectations around content availability. A weekly show on linear TV makes sense when it's topical (e.g. Countryfile or news-related), if it's a reality contest with a finale (e.g. Love Island, The Apprentice) or a prestigious drama with cliff-hanger ending.

Even the idea of TV channels makes little sense today unless those channels reflect a genre or theme (e.g. The Arts Channel or the Horror channel). I suspect most people in the UK would struggle to describe the purpose or differences between BBC channels. Streaming services (including iPlayer) reflect what probably makes sense to most people - the genre or theme of the programme. BBC linear channels are increasingly irrelevant.
> Well, this is one reason why the last three places I’ve lived don’t allow phone usage in the polling station and have processes for getting another ballot

Do they kindly ask people not to use phones inside the polling station, or do they actually bodyscan people for electronic devices when they go in the booth? Because if they just ask kindly, that's not preventing anything.

Finland also has processes for getting another ballot, but only until you cast a ballot. You can't invalidate a ballot that has already been cast. So that means you can go in the voting booth, take a picture of how you voted, and then ask for another ballot. This would be sufficient to fool anyone trying to buy votes en masse, but it wouldn't fool the spouse of the voter, who could be physically present at the polling station.

> none of the electronic systems can survive that level of control either

Some of them do, actually. Some electronic voting systems craft proofs which are convincing to the voter, but only to the voter. This means that the voter can cryptographically verify that their vote has been cast correctly, but the voter wouldn't be able to convince a potential vote-buyer how they voted, because the voter could have potentially forged the proof.

> Banking has key differences, though, which I think are significant: you can do non-anonymous audits, you don’t need deniability, and most importantly you can restore losses after the fact.

Yes, online banking is a much easier problem. Despite that the actual implementation is garbage fire from 1970s. I was just trying to say that getting people to trust a complicated system is possible (e.g. people trust online banking, despite it being a complete garbage fire). Therefore, it could be possible to get people to trust a cryptographically verifiable voting system as well.
Have you considered that having a pleasant, well-moderated community is part of the draw (and, perhaps, even an explicit goal) of lichess? Such things are apparently expensive to run.
Bitcoin’s Dominance of Crypto Payments Is Starting to Erode
I guess that's a literal interpretation but the OP's comparison serves the same purpose. It's sad that he has an edit option where he can clarify/correct to phrase it differently if he chooses to but continues to have it stay the same.
“If he said "If you hire bottom of the barrel American developers" then nobody would have said a thing.”

Because there is no existing, racist, “bottom of the barrel” stereotype around American devs.
Too many jargons and catch phrases and few precise definitions/example on how this OS or concept would actually work :\
> Early data from Tonga's violent volcanic eruption suggests it is the biggest blast since Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines 30 years ago, volcanologist Shane Cronin says.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/459657/tonga-eruption-likel...
Pint is a Prometheus rule linter
Agreed. I can't imagine that people with even stone tools wouldn't figure out "hey, staying dry is nice" and make at least primitive roofs. A simple thatched or broad-leaf roof (e.g., palm/banana leaves) is not exactly hard technology to figure out.
Meh, since there's no hard registry of identities of owners, if someone would make and popularize an inequality index, that index would simply be gamed (e.g. by artificial splitting of accounts) to show whatever is most beneficial to show, as soon as a gameable metric is used for a practical purpose (e.g. making better investment choices), it ceases to be useful for that purpose as it gets manipulated, see Goodhart's law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law .
What's the closest the fediverse has to tumblr?
HN doesn't allow inline links like the web intended. So you either get footnote style or the raw link text (possibly with non-human-interpretable query parameters), and either way is hard to read and interrupts the flow of the text.
Not really. The low health tracks aren't just sped up, they're compositions in their own right. Because of that, a separate track ID makes total sense as they are different music tracks.
Yes, I concede you are 7% correct, leaving me 7% dead wrong.
Can they run advertisements? For Curries, football, and other English things?
This is my experience as well. I am a PM in Edge team and we take user feedback in our app extremely seriously. There are entire teams which parse the user feedback and add bugs for them. All top feedback is expected to be fixed under a specific SLA and these metrics are often tracked at leadership level.

In fact, for a lot of feature teams fixing the top user feedback issues is often part of their OKRs.

So yeah, I don't know if there are groups in MS which really don't consider their users' feedback, but from what I know that isn't the common behavior.

MS has its faults - every megacorp will have its own share of warts, but this specific one, i am not sure I can believe.
Not only inline it, but also optimize it away (eg. _cleanup_free char *ptr = NULL; the cleanup path just disappears in places before ptr is assigned to a non-NULL value).
You can use the cleanup attribute and a flag to detect early exit.
How do you know it’s not obvious? Road quality is a pretty standard complaint in small town America.
I've been reading polemics and tutorials for at least 12 years now arguing for Bayesian methods over Frequentist methods. They all seem persuasive, and everyone seems to be convinced that Bayesianism is the future, and Frequentism was a mistake, and the change to a glorious future where Bayesian methods are the standard way to do stats is just round the corner. It hasn't happened.

Meanwhile I've never read a real argument for Frequentism and I don't know where I'd find one, short of going back to Fisher who is not well known for clear writing.

What is going on? Is the future of Bayesian statistics just more and more decades of books and articles and code notebooks and great presentations showing how great Bayesianism is? Is it just institutional inertia preventing Bayesian stats from becoming standard, or does Frequentism have a secret strength that keeps it hegemonic?
Reminds me of friends who got under the thrall of a[n explicitly] religious cult. You can’t reason them out of it, because their faculties of reason have been short-circuited by the linguistic circularity of the cult. You can’t appeal to what should be their reluctance to cause distress to the people who care about them, because their hearts belong to the cult now. You just need to wait and see if they snap out of it. They often do, and it’s surprising.

Perhaps cult deprogramming techniques can help woke people. I don’t know anything about them, but it’s worth looking in to .
I took it to mean that the idea has escaped into the wider world and its fate is no longer tied to its originator's alone.
Record, replay and measure user flows in Chrome
Tell us, this language 10x more efficient than Java, what is it?
I agree on the sentiment, but quoting from your own link:

> Be kind. Don't be snarky.... Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.
> This concentration not only risks to threaten blockchain's own premises [...]

BTC was designed specifically to avoid any kind of _state control_ and by _state control_ I mean something along the lines of a central bank. Adding protections here and there will inevitably lead to a system that is similar to current financial system with all the bells and whistles.

I think you're missing the point: BTC tries to sell lack of any kind of control (or protection, however you want to call it) as a _feature_.
There is a lack of cybersecurity investments in almost every industry. The issue is that the executives making the decisions 1) Usually aren't knowledgable about CyberSec and 2) don't justify the investment because it's not something they can physically point at and take credit for. .
But if you leave those squares all empty it won't keep the original pattern, so I'm not sure how that can be right.
> i think you're missing the point of the continuum between centralised and decentralised systems

I'm mostly missing the point in this continuum where I can start listing pros instead of just cons. There are fundamental reasons why we haven't reached this point and may never reach it, as I (and many others) highlighted before, and these haven't changed for the past 5 years.
I’m actually surprised how cheap the server cost is , given the scale of linchess… Great job!

Recent years, I have a feeling that HN commenters would assume server cost should always approach $0, not matter how big, or how different a real world online service is different from their single page web app side project :)

For any server cost sharing posts, we’ll see people making comments like “I can run this under $10/month” . Ha
So no.

People are competitive and compare themselves to others everywhere. If you think otherwise, then 1) share something real that supports your belief, and 2) consider that whatever bubble you’ve constructed for yourself is misleading you.
Of course it can be regulated. Countries are working towards that already. It's already a taxable asset. Nothing about the blockchain makes bitcoin harder to regulate.