skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Totally locking down a computer to just a pre-approved set of software is a huge step towards securing it from the kind of attackers most individuals, companies, and governments are concerned with.

No, it isn't. It's a way for corporations and governments to restrict what people can do with their devices. That makes sense if you're an employee of the corporation or the government, since organizations can reasonably expect to restrict what their employees can do with devices they use for work, and I would be fine with using a separate device for my work than for my personal computing (in fact that's what I do now). But many scenarios are not like that: for example, me connecting with my bank's website. It's not reasonable or realistic to expect that to be limited to a limited set of pre-approved software.

The correct way to deal with untrusted software on the client is to just...not trust the software on the client. Which means you need to verify the user by some means that does not require trusting the software on the client. That is perfectly in line with the "zero trust" model advocated by this memo.
Which is why indoor dining rooms should still be closed. Pretending we aren't living through a pandemic that is respiratory in nature is fucking madness. Maybe if we had locked down harder for longer and treated this thing seriously in the beginning we wouldn't be almost two years into this with no end in sight.
In languages like C “string” isn’t a proper data structure, it’s a `char` array, which itself is little more than a `int` array or `byte` array.

But these languages don’t provide true “string” support. They just have a vaguely useful type alias that renames a byte array to a char array, and a bunch of byte array functions that have been renamed to sound like string functions. In reality all the language supports are byte arrays, with some syntactical sugar so you can pretend they’re strings.

Newer languages, like go and Python 3, that where created in the world of Unicode provide true string types. Where the type primitives properly deal with idea of variable length characters, and provide tools to make it easy to manipulate strings and characters as independent concepts. If you want to ignore Unicode, because your specific application doesn’t need to understand, then you need cast your strings into byte arrays, and all pretences of true string manipulation vanish at the same time.

This is not to say the C can’t handle Unicode etc. just like the language doesn’t provide true primitives to manipulate strings, instead relies on libraries to provide that functionality, which is perfectly valid approach. Just as baking in more complex string primitives into your language is also a perfectly valid approach. It’s just a question of trade offs and use cases, I.e. the problem at the heart of all good engineering.
Based on everyones input, posting consistency seems to be paramount. Time is super limited so I struggle a bit with posting too much but I'm starting to find a flow with recording, slight editing, and posting.

Would love to see your channel if you are open to sharing it.
I've on the other hand yet to find one Apple service that I'd actually want to pay for. Apple Music might be the closest one, but I'm probably not subscribing after my free trial ends. I had the free Apple TV+ trial when it launched for like 9 months and I barely watched it.
makes a of of sense too when you spend a of of time learning new things. I've. put time into video games or learning a new programming language and found myself initially struggling. Yet the next day, things I struggled with just make sense without much effort. I've gotten to a point where I view the time reading the material as a passive endeavor, I practice enough to feel like I'm not too stressed out but getting a bit of challenge. The real test comes the next day after sleeping on it.
You're missing out on loss aversion. Losing something you already have is far more stressful than not getting something that you don't.
Hang glider and paraglider pilot here. Surprised to see paramotoring being brought up on HN. Even more surprised to see the founder of ayvri posting in the same thread!
And yes, I'm a user, though not OP :p
Objectivity, monopoly is not a bad thing. Even the law doesn’t consider monopoly a problem in itself,

Abuse of monopoly is a problem.
You're usually only at the mercy of the server because you don't control the client; a free YouTube client like VLC remains useful. A free Microsoft Teams client would be useful. I allege that free VNC clients are also useful, even if there's non-free software on the other end.
I use a JSON specification to manage interchange. I repeatedly reference the necessity of data interchange formats (e.g. a well-typed JSON schema). Interchange formats mean applications couple to a specification. Not to a code base. Which I'm sure you're well aware since apparently we've been in complete agreement the entire time.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30105910

At its heart, it is very similar.

Comment above does a good job at describing the distinction. It's more than just re-usable HTML/CSS/JS, that's just how they're making it accessible to others. There are entities associated with the HTML/CSS/JS mapped alongside the component, which is the core benefit here.

https://blockprotocol.org/spec for more info on how they're mapping data as entities
Are these "intelligent" investments? Or just complex adaptive systems which are theoretically digestible by you but you don't even bother?

Honestly, I wouldn't bother putting my money into a 401k - I would stash it away, let a little rot away with inflation and use it to start a business that provides real people with a real product and pray. That seems like a more sure-fire way to get across the line.

Ostensibly, that can be thought of as a more extreme version of your "pick an index and stick in it" approach. The reality of it is that we don't know which one of these choices is the right one - it may be so that cryptocurrency will make you trillions! Or that the Roth IRA will have 70% of the people who stick their money in it as actual millionaires despite them only making $70k a year for 30 years.
Nope. Not that I could find, not without pulling the repo and installing it somewhere. Quite an oversight. I don't want to watch a video, I want to click on the damned thing.
Depends on your definition of "need". But most people I know that use it enjoy it a lot, and especially collaboration features that they didn't have in desktop software.
Just write all your variables in Cyrillic. Nobody will recognize it, and all hell will break loose on older compilers
No, you had members of the dying tribe do that. Time will tell if this is the same thing or not.
This is the case for all companies in the world eventually. China will overtake the US economy in the next 5 years.
You're thinking of cgroups, which is what you gives you per-process group resource limits. Namespacing gives you quite a bit more than that. You can have all services running as the same user but still not able to see each other's data. You can have all services get a unique IP address even though they're on the same kernel. You can have them all listen on port 80. They can all read from the same socket file from their perspective but it won't actually be the same file. You can have them all use different DNS providers even though they're just delegating to /etc/resolv.conf. You can't do that with just static linking. Containers give you quite a bit more than incompatible dependencies being able to run on the same host, including features that can only be provided by a kernel, not a language runtime. They allow you to use arbitrarily many different languages. You can run third-party applications you can't rewrite in Java to get a WAR or force them to statically link.
ah, so you didn't read the article I guess, because it never says that they don't work 100% just says the evidence that they do isn't great, it also covers what the writer sees at downsides (cost) to masking children. Its fine to have differing views but you should probably focus your arguments on the substance of article. The author laid out several very compelling paragraphs to back up her point along with sources cited, so I'm sorry, but if the only counter argument you can come up with is "its bullshit" you should probably quit the debate club.
Did you talk to your bank? Getting police involved is nice and all but often times the banks themselves are a lot more helpful!

Also, depending on how it was possible for the scammer to "steal the bank account" in the first place you might be entitled to damages or something, though that heavily depends on your legislation and where your bank is located of course.
This should be obvious from your comment but I think it's worth calling something out explicitly here: a bank that does that is mandating that you accept either Apple's or Google's terms of service. That's a lot of power to give to two huge companies.

I think we'd do well to provide the option to use open protocols when possible, to avoid further entrenching the Apple/Google duopoly.
No one uses cryptocurrency for non cryptocurrency purposes. It is like an ouroboros, consuming itself in real time.
> appeal to those that have a vague idea of what their money is most-physically represented by?

It attracts people who want to make money easily. A crazy amount of people who have no idea about the tech aspect of crypto are "investing" and active in crypto social groups. Just go on the major subreddits and read a few threads, it won't take long to see that a very large portion of them are kids/teenagers who invested a few hundreds or less in the hope of a 1000x pump, these are the people who get scammed.

Everyone says they're here for "the project", "the future of currencies", &c. most of them are here to make a quick buck
I thought Face ID used mostly upper half of the face such as eyes, nose, temple to construct an encrypted facial model.
> It’s fine to say with hindsight that vaccine predictions were wrong...

It's also fine to say I'm not inclined to trust the opinions of someone who has been repeatedly and demonstrably wrong in this fashion.

I know Biden got out over his skis on a number of statements, but can you cite the CDC ever making this claim? The wording they were using in June 2021 was reduce infection. https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/p0607-mrna-reduce-ri...

"I also feel that I can't spread it to others" is a confident, evidence-free, and wrong statement.
Widgets are back!
Try to think of one. It's not simple. For example, someone who has a bomb big enough to blast their way in surely has better targets.
Man, I wish Steve Jobs were alive to witness the total domination. I imagine he knew but perhaps not to this extent.
~20 years ago this was true (for the US at least, and they had run into antitrust problems as a result) but nowadays it's more like 75%. ChromeOS is very popular in K-12 and macOS is decently common in University/Tech and not unheard of for the average consumer either. Traditional Linux is still marginal. This is only counting traditional desktop computing.
Every year I get older those DOB selectors take longer to complete.
I was so disappointed that didn't turn out to be the case.
The Zuck has called. He wants his Libra back.
Exciting to consider getting the benefit without having to engage with a learning curve that has a long runway!
Forensic Watermarking for Pre-Release Content
I wouldn’t be so sure. Fundamentally this is a control input/feedback/positioning/power problem - one we don’t currently know how to model or control in an automated fashion.

With the right mental model and control/power systems, it wouldn’t have to be much different from riding a unicycle. Helicopters have similar issues (it’s a bit like balancing a spinning bowling ball on the end of a stick in practice - yet many people are licensed and safe helicopter pilots)

I’m guessing it’s something that not everyone can do, but something a large percentage of people (20%+?) can do if they spent the time learning and it was systematized usefully.
I clicked thru the video and listened to him. While I don't thikn what he said is intelligent at all, at best, what he said is "you have no right to spread misinformation".

That's different from calling for somebody to be censored. And even if he's technically incorrect to say that people don't have the right to spread misinformation, there certainly are limits on the first amendment that could cover this situation. For example, if Rogan said something super-duper irresponsible, like "Everybody should immediately inject pure bleach into their bloodstream. It will cure covid", that is in fairly strong grounds for the first amendment not applying/being restricted in this case.
We're already working together for all practical purposes. I get it's often unchallenged when people are overly negative about the future especially in a younger crowd but you're not doing yourself or us any favors and your options seem ludicrous.
A Democratic Scandal Is Unfolding in Denmark
> Is that really a problem? In practice wouldn't it just mean you can only use employer-provided and certified devices?

That's fine for employees doing work for their employers. It's not fine for personal computing on personal devices that have to be able to communicate with a wide variety of other computers belonging to a wide variety of others, ranging from organizations like banks to other individuals.
The VTuber point is pretty awesome. TBH I'd be way more comfortable behind an avatar, I might invest in a rig.
I have some experience in live videos (used to work on FB Live and Horizon Venues) so this might be something I can pull off
There is no legal right to be protected from infection. It appears nowhere in the US Constitution.

The virus will be around forever and everyone will be exposed. You can't seriously expect people to spend the rest of their lives wearing masks.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinion/vinay-prasad/94646
Learn Solana with Flash Cards and Spaced Repetition
From the article:

> This is especially true among younger people who are digitally savvy but less financially literate.

> People ages 18-to-39 were more than twice as likely to report losing money to social media scams as older adults last year.

Seems like maybe we should be protecting the "young know-it-alls" from themselves?
I think the "power guzzling" claim is kind of ridiculous, considering that crypto currency consumes a tiny fraction of power compared to that of fiat currency.
Disliking the hype and speculative aspects makes sense, but consideration for comparison shows energy use isn't a concern
I strongly suspect that playing the piano is banned due to the possibility of social gatherings of people in close proximity to each other listening to the piano - not contracting covid from the piano itself.
QBASIC and QuickBASIC are more of an IDE with features like no longer requiring line numbers. There were apparently four example programs.
And their policies around communications apps clearly aren’t abusive.
I have some old ski goggle 'defogger' that's worked well for me. I assume it operates on the same principal. It's kind of a waxy stick that you rub on and spread out with a cloth.
Here's an upvote for good-faith feedback! :)
I agree (except, having also had personal experience of this situation, I think journalists do overplay the personal danger bit).

The cause is exactly what you say: the incentives are all wrong for accurate investigative journalism, which is what we need to keep the powerful uncorrupted. Unfortunately this is because the internet destroyed the business model for news, and there's no putting that genie back in the bottle. We need a new business model for investigative journalism, and while plenty of people are trying (including Substack in the article, who seem to be doing OK), none have really cracked it.
yes, please copy and paste this at the top of every covid thread. i can't believe people still believe 2 years on that there is "something" we can do to stop covid. it's endemic, assess/mitigate your own risk and move the fuck on.
They're actually regulated to be completely unfair. Any regulation ensures no randomness in results. You're guaranteed a percentage loss due to regulation. When you walk into a casino you're wittingly consenting to being scammed.
> No, for example in IT they are connected to the "commerce union" but it doesn't include an agreement to adjust by inflation.

Most factory jobs do have those agreements though.
Yep, it's as meaningful a programming task as 'reverse this double-precision float'.
It sounds like what Argentina needs is Paul Volcker, not Nelson Mandela. What would Nelson Mandela do?
Give me a break. Those teens can choose between Twitter, Youtube, Discord, iMessage, Signal, Telegram, TikTok, Reddit, Twitch, along with, you know, the rest of the public internet.

But 90% of them will still be doing all of this on an Apple device. Yet you think Facebook is the company to worry about, not Apple?
Easily avoided if you care, by simply buying Android. Apple can’t stop that.
No, Covid is low risk if you are vaccinated and elderly/at risk and extremely low risk if you are younger (vaccinated or not)

It’s endemic. Its not going away. We are all going to get it. (Me: triple vaxxed, had covid 2x)

Getting vaccinated is a personal heath decision (which I encourage)

Time to move on.
You bury the storage deep underground in an area with no natural resources, and put no sign over it. Security through obscurity: why would some future civilization dig hundreds of meters deep, for no conceivable reason?

I'll concede that if there's some sort of civilization collapse and records of waste repositories are lost, and if some future civilization decides to dig in the area of a waste repository, and if said civilization lacks knowledge of radiation poisoning, then unfortunately yes said future civilization will be harmed.

But how does the extremely remote possibility of all these hypotheticals occurring stack up against the certain harm caused by fossil fuel pollution and climate change?
Let's try an (thought) experiment:

Put a tennis racket in front of your face. Does it impede airflow? I think the answer is clearly no.

Put a plastic bag over the your nose and mouth? Does it impede airflow? I think the answer is clear yes.

Put a food sieve over your mouth and nose. Does it impede airflow? I think the answer is probably no, but there's room for doubt.

Clearly, something placed over your mouth and nose does not necessarily impede airflow - it depends on the properties of the material it is made of. Some materials obviously have no impact, some have a lot, others are inbetween.

So the question is: why you conclude without careful measurement that a given mask would impede airflow? Presumably you have some intuition about the material and what you know about its properties ("It stops X percent of all particles above a certain size!") that lead you to conclude that it's somewhere between a food sieve and plastic bag, rather than a tennis racket and a food sieve. But there's no "common sense" here. How can Goretex fabric allow water vapor to pass freely, but not allow water in liquid phase to pass at all? You cannot explain that using common sense, but again, you have some intuition that you can use common sense to reason about the properties of masks.

I should also stress that the 20-30% number comes from a 2009 paper on the reduction in airflow. The increase in breathing effort could be less than that, unchanged or more than that, depending on a large number of factors. Example: sitting on a sofa in a comfortable temperature and being very relaxed ... you are already breathing fairly shallowly, and the increase required to overcome whatever effect the mask has will move you only to a condition you are in very regularly anyway, and so will likely be unnoticeable (there's also the "X percent of a small number is a small number" aspect). By contrast, if you are exercising near V02max levels and in excellent cardiovascular condition, you are likely already breathing almost as hard as you can, and so breathing harder due to reduced airflow is likely to challenging to impossible.
neither

it requires you to:

1. mess with a device

2. and then the device to be used (with the proper password)

3. and then you having access to it again

At lest that, for certain attacks maybe multiple iterations of this, not sure.

So it's not braking the main security model: Device Theft = Data Theft protection.
I haven't had issues with hardware other than the butterfly keyboard, but I have been astounded at issues with first-party software. For the last 48 hours podcasts have just not worked on my iPhone 13 Pro Max, for instance. Apple Music is a disaster. This might not be a QA really but OS updates have introduced bugs and constant crashes for those products for me.
Interesting that they seem to have one global address for each coin - so we can go look at their transactions[0][1].

Note that the ticker on the button is obviously fake (the truncated addresses line up with the addresses here but not the txs). 45 ETH transactions and 19 BTC transactions over 3 days. Here[0] we can trace the one time they moved BTC so far: A CoinJoin. I'm not sure how Samourai's joins work these days but it doesn't look like JoinMarket so I'm guessing that or Wasabi.

The majority of incoming are exchange withdrawals.

[0] https://etherscan.io/address/0x53F6656DE60C7c92317dCBed4E034...

[1] https://mempool.space/address/bc1qgv9vntpdvyedgr3lj9p5az0hxa...

[2] https://mempool.space/address/bc1qgv9vntpdvyedgr3lj9p5az0hxa...
Right. But if I include an arbitrary link to a cryptocurrency mining script in my comment right here, hackernews' website won't load it into your browser and start executing it as soon as you view this comment, with no interaction needed from you. If they did, that would be bad.
Going off Wikipedia, Windows is approximately 75%, macOS is 15%, and other OS's (ChromeOS, Linux) make up the remaining 10% [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_syste...
There is no serious analysis that presents this scenario with any certainty.
"Give me 1btc and I'll send you 3btc back" is not logically refutable in the strictest sense of "logic".

It's obvious, socially/culturally, that this is a scam; why would anyone give people money after they get money?

But logically, no. This is not a "logically refutable scam". Unless you misunderstand what logic is.
Well, some of us DO care and that you don't like him doesn't mean that he should be censored. This is the position of a moral busybody.

Here's a thought: If you don't like his show...don't listen to it. Start your own show that points out everything you think Joe Rogan gets wrong. I'm pretty certain that if you were to do that, he wouldn't be calling for you to be censored.
The more obstacles to life we find the better--it means it's less likely that why we don't see ETs is that intelligence is inherently self-destructive.
I still get around 5 robocalls of people trying to scam me a day. Scammers are not just part of cryptocurrency. Businesses scam legally all the time.
By "here" I assume you mean "Earth"… Responsibility is not a thing humans are good at.
> After all, it's the concentration of nuclear material that makes them dangerous, since all that material originally came from various mines on earth.

Spent fuel is a lot hotter than what came out of mines on earth-- for a few decades.

All the other waste isn't very concentrated in absolute terms, but putting it in one place can make sense.
In Taiwan we've been wearing masks for over 2 years with near zero complaint at school. I have to remind a few kids a day to put it over their nose. We've had Omicron here for awhile, but it's still only a trickle of cases, with no exponential explosion. The policies here, with contact tracing, quarantine and masks, have kept things open and people from dying. I don't understand the hesitancy.
Tell Google to make Android better.
Meaning that Zamyatin got it wrong, too?