skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Here in Norway employers can ask the police for the criminal record for a potential employee[1]. The employer must have a legal right to request the records, and must state the reason and use for the request.

Employers for most common jobs will not have a right to request these records.

The police will then filter the criminal records, if any, so that only relevant entries are listed.

This allows employees who have a genuine need reject potential candidates on legitimate grounds, while giving people a reasonable chance to start over in case they do something wrong.

[1]: https://www.politiet.no/en/services/police-certificate-of-co...
Or just hop over to Firefox.
> Unfortunately, this elegant, straightforward distinction didn't hold up over time. :-(

I think it was more that it was never true, rather than not holding up in time. ;)

The earliest I can find is a vulnerability in Netscape 3.0 (1996), not found until four years later:

https://www.openwall.com/articles/JPEG-COM-Marker-Vulnerabil...
403 in regular browser?
I understand VC motivation. I’m just not convinced it aligns with the public interest.
College administrators are like that sometimes. You wonder if they're really rooting for you or not.
Good analogy.

Question here is: can they fix potholes faster than new ones show up?

Seems answer is no for tech. And construction, these days.
This seems rather silly, doesn't it? A modern IDE like IntelliJ is going to be full of "golf" suggestions anyway, so I find it hard to believe that IDE-composed code is actually going to be more verbose!

In my experience CRs from non-IDE users were more likely to have issues like unused imports, weird formatting, unused variables, and so on, because their text editors won't yell at them over that (perhaps a linter should be set up to catch it but let's face it, few people have all the things they'd like to have in place).
I'll continue with one last comment just for the sake of others who might be reading. The "distance" displayed on most stationary bikes is calculated by counting flywheel revolutions and multiplying by some arbitrary factor. It has no real correlation with the actual distance you would cover by pedaling a real bike with the same effort. It's a totally pointless number that tells you nothing useful about caloric expenditure, but some customers want to see it so the manufacturers put it on the display.

You can get an accurate calculation of real world cycling calories with a power meter. Everyone's cycling efficiency in terms of power output per calorie burned falls within a fairly narrow range so converting from time and watts to calories is simple. A good power meter accurate to within a couple percent can be added to any bike for about $700.

Smart trainers like a Tacx Neo or Wahoo Kickr also have accurate power meters built in. Those are substantially different from typical stationary bikes.
Isn't that like coffee meets bagels?
Or if you change anything that comes before that line.
> I'm almost questioning if we read the same article. To me, the wording of the article suggests that there was quite a bit of dialogue with the children and among the children, including active listening and encouragement of critical thinking. I never got the impression that there was coercion by the teachers and certainly nothing about it screamed "woke police".

I mean, we don't exactly get to hear from the children themselves. we only get a self-congratulatory retrospective from one of the teachers. as you allude to in your own comment, "toys go away until you learn to play together nicely" is not exactly a new story in a child's world. I suspect at least some of the children were precocious enough to realize that the legos were not coming back until they gave some satisfactory answers in the "dialogues".

and by the way, I did read the entire article. it is overtly political.

> Into their coffee shops and houses, the children were building their assumptions about ownership and the social power it conveys — assumptions that mirrored those of a class-based, capitalist society — a society that we teachers believe to be unjust and oppressive. As we watched the children build, we became increasingly concerned.
>No browser will, out-of-the-box, ask you "Hey, do you want to send your IP address and Referer to Google in order to see this website with the correct font?"

Then make one that does. Or demand for one. But everybody wants to use Chrome and then they're surprised that their browser doesn't give them the control they want.

The whole point is that Google gets your data because you send it to them. Your browser and computer are under your control.

It's no wonder Apple thrives while taking away control from the user. Because when we do have control we just don't use it.

>Those get loaded automatically without user control, and users do not get the ability to audit them by default. So it's reasonable to argue that subresource requests are "caused" by the developer of the website, not the user.

It would only be reasonable to argue this if you think your computer/browser/os is not under your control. NoScript has been a thing for a long time. How many people actually use it?
As much as I hate commuting to the office, I'm seeing a ton of bigger companies push for this .

This is easily worth 50k to me. I see no point in to riding the train for hours per day, at the same time I understand that without business commuters many bigger cities will just collapse.
The relative virtue of workers and work products is in fact subjective and not a measurable quantity. Creative fields embrace this openly. Success in a creative project is highly related to the reactions it inspires in people (public, funders, critics, etc). A good creative leader has access to the same subjective reactions that the audience does. She also has them at a higher level of detail. That way she can give actionable feedback on specific elements, emphasize what works and cut what doesn't, to optimize the overall subjective experience. I came to know this process through the performing arts but I'm also pretty confident that it describes Steve Jobs. Personally I don't think we have nearly enough respect for practitioner judgement in the tech world. Software also succeeds and fails in many cases based on its subjective resonance with users and maintainers. (Though not all, contractor-maintained enterprise software exists). Good taste is also part of the virtue of a senior engineer.

Now in tech we are shy about subjectivity. One way to get a measurable quantity related to virtue is to construct a game. Within the framework of the game we can all agree on what is a win or a loss. We can also rank players according to their track record of wins and losses. Someone who wins when most others would lose is a good player. Someone who loses when most others would win is a bad player. We can have neat quantitative encodings of this, like Elo. And we can agree that winning or losing the game we have constructed has something to do with the virtues we care about. But unless we're talking about professional sports, the game is only a proxy. The subjective judgement now lives in the choice of this game, and not some other game, or this rule, and not some other rule, as our proxy.

This is obviously what we have done with LeetCode. LeetCode's fidelity as a proxy for working-programmer virtue is of course doubtful. The promo packet's fidelity seems like it should be higher. But the promo packet is also a constructed game and an imperfect proxy. When programmers play to win the LeetCode game they engage in not-very-constructive studying and practice in their free time, and perform the weird ritual for a few hours in a conference room. It is mostly the programmer's loss. When programmers play to win the promo packet game they do things contrary to working-programmer virtue in their capacity as working programmers. They design overcomplicated solutions, involve too many stakeholders in their execution, deprecate and replace things instead of maintain them, leave obvious defects in their products because there is no causal inference proving their dollar value, etc. The company loses. It loses big. Given that we have already accepted the tradeoffs of LeetCode interviews with respect to hiring, are you sure it's so ludicrous that they're a better set of tradeoffs than the ones we currently use for leveling?
The Ethics of Contentious Hard Forks in Blockchain Networks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Metafile_vulnerability Long story short: Windows library routines for handling an obscure, obsolete image format had a parser flaw. Simply rendering an appropriately crafted image via the standard Windows APIs -- whether in a web browser, file explorer, file preview, word processor, anywhere -- resulted in kernel-level arbitrary code execution.

Now, we've gotten a bit smarter about this sort of thing since. Both at a high level architecturally (don't process image files in the kernel) and at a lower level (use a language that takes measures to constrain its buffers). But the basic scenario hasn't been entirely eliminated. There could be a parser bug somewhere in your web browser for example that allows a properly crafted input to hijack the browser process.
I'm pretty sure most people want to see some other dating app succeed (besides those owned by Match Co), both men and women. Unfortunately, 5+ years and it hasn't happened yet.
The reference to "West Elm Caleb" forced me to look up what the hell it was. Not a good idea on a landing page.
I tried nix (the pm not the os) for a while, and the reward did not match the cost for me. The docs are horrendously confusing to a newcomer, the stack overflow answers make assumptions about concepts you've never heard of, and generally things are never really explained to a degree you feel confident. Nix feels like one of those things where a lot of people copy and paste snippets, because learning the underlying language/ecosystem/OS takes an extraordinary amount of effort.
I want to improve & grow, get better at computing.

This idea of being good enough, embracing mediocre capabilities for life & only focusing on shirt term output forever is exactly the local minima this post is warning against. Selling yourself a compromised future, being a passive consumer of technology, is anathema to the greater objectives of life & computing, in my view.

Selling yourself on comprimise, swearing you have served yourself, also seems hollow when one is deliberately snubbing trying to raise themselves to a perch where they are capable of evaluating. The anti-elite pitch is easy because it doesnt even have to get good enough to assess the merits & values of the school of lifelong learning & struggles. As for your precious output, it might be totally different & better if you had opted to invest in yourself & see technology as less than a lever you know how to crank.
Yes, but the ones at fault there are us. We choose to use the browser made by them.
Yes, but remember to disable all their data gathering schemes in Settings.
So... lobby for a more unified tax code?
Is it truly open source ?
Predicting the Future: How’s That Working Out?
I use an IDE (Xcode). Works a treat.

I'm also very effective, and very fast. I write fairly significant volumes of well-structured, well-documented code, in a pretty short period of time.

It seems work well, too.

I don't really give a hoot whether or not anyone else thinks I'm somehow "lesser," because I use an IDE.

DISCLAIMER: I started programming well into the last century, and have used CLIs that would have a lot of folks curled up, under their desks, whimpering. It's just that I’m not a touch typist, so couldn’t ever really get comfortable with CLIs.
This.

For people in the software biz I think being allowed to make quality products is one of the most important aspects of our working conditions, particularly for our social standing in the long term.
How did your employer find and hire such a fixer? Were they a local employer?
This kind of shit the CDC has pulled is so frustrating. I just want good information to make decisions on but do not have time to fact check everything everyone says or keep up with the latest research even monthly. I thought the CDC would be an impartial source who at worst would skew questionable calls in a defensible way but the pure propaganda and junk science examples provided here clearly show that is not the case.
Sort of. Coffee Meets Bagel gives you a batch of three matches per day; you need a mutual like to match with each other. However you can still have multiple matches at a time.
> going to include this

Include what? If there's some convincing proof that the torturer can give that they will stop, I would be interested to hear it.
> For example is strong consistency really necessary for tweets? Do you really need to see a followers latest tweet instantly?

The problem is that "strong consistency" basically means your system behaves in predictable ways that you can easily reason about. If you give it up, you can see all kinds of failure modes that go beyond just seeing stale data.

Suppose a user first sets their profile to "private", meaning only their trusted friends can see their posts. And then, having seen that that operation succeeded, they make a post that contains personal, sensitive information. You had better be damn sure that no user-facing components of your system can ever observe those two events in the wrong order.
The Hardest Wordle Puzzles So Far
> Having a conversation that reveals to kids that their actions were unintentionally ...

Well I think "unintentionally" is a bit of a strong term, kids are inexperienced but not necessarily stupid, they understand power dynamics quite early. Humans have great intuition for that sort of thing.

> causing a lot of harm to their companions and then asking the kids what alternative kinds of rules they could adopt that would leave everyone feeling satisfied is “promoting hate”?

Yeah. We've got some examples of how this thinking plays out in practice - the people who want to mobilise a group to come down on individuals for social improprieties/organise public shamings are usually highly intolerant and, frankly, often seem to be motivated by hate. These are the instincts that power mob actions for generations. It is pretty routine, I'm not going to claim its in any way uncommon. I'm not even going to claim these legophobes are doing it, I haven't read today's article :].

But if you want to know why people would be nervous about teachers getting a group together to talk about individual's "transgressions" then this is the argument for why it is bad. It is inculcating a political opinion for how to handle social tension that is arguably bad.

> Which society are you thinking of? This is certainly not a fair description of the USA at any point in its history or of “Legotown”.

The US has a great track record. There aren't many countries where minorities do as well as the US. China is basically an ethnostate, India I'm not sure about, then suddenly in at #3 population we've got diversity central in the USA and the airwaves are chock-full of people arguing about how to make life better for minorities. Very attractive migration destination too (USA #1 and all that). Not exactly the sort of ranking that an intolerant country can manage.
People can be identified by way too many things - if you're Facebook and you buy all data available for sale and correlate and enrich it, then you're known forever and every step you make is also recorded and analyzed. Worst of all, they are those idiots who take pictures all the time and you eventually end up in pictures from many angles (all timestamped and geolocated). Combined with "anonymized" data from, say, carriers, you're no secret to anyone. But the biggest problem is that even if Facebook doesn't trace you, the governments will, and they have a lot more sources. Privacy is extinct!
No one is injecting politics into this situation. The politics were already there.

What the teachers are doing is preparing the kids to defend themselves against the default politics in the world today, the politics of capitalism, of "might makes right" and "I've got mine". Sure, you can scold them and tell them to share or the legos will be taken away, but by engaging them in dialogue you are allowing them to reach the conclusion on their own that sharing is best, and it'll be a stickier lesson for when they're grown and out in a world which teaches them that not sharing is best.
This.

Also, when you have bespoke log solutions and engineers leave, you end up with unsupported solutions. This may be Twitters 4th logging solution IIRC. Plenty of people know splunk. Loglens, not so much.
I think this qualifies for "Show hn"
> if we could generate believable synthetic data, we'd save a ton of money.

It sounds like you are saying good synthetic data is more expensive?
We build on the shoulders of giants and there's nothing wrong with that. The terminal is just one abstraction down of an abstraction of an abstraction of an abstraction of an abstraction of an abstraction. Not very impressive.
It takes an expert to know that there's vulnerability. Whereas construction engineer can "see" the pothole and so they can fix it. Software engineer has to "know from exploits" that there's a vulnerability so they can fix it. It's not far away when OS are written in memory safe languages like Rust.
Perhaps there's just different waves of 'good review' organizations in the space?
I feel like the newer wave might be the youtuber realm of things, where things like Linus Tech Tips recently announced an expansion seeking industry professionals: https://youtu.be/pt3-6BsWlPk?t=669
In practice you'll hit a binary cache or build once, push to your cache, then subsequent builds hit cache.
In what point it doesn't scale? When you get to 800 people?
Why does the DA choose not to?
Linux control groups vs a runtime
Boy, I would love to see an API for the analytical tools.
Well, it depends on their target demographic, I imagine. If you want middle-aged people using the app, absolutely. If you want younger users the reference might go over well.
Here's my ideal dating app (from a 50yo single male divorcee in Silicon Valley): A simple app where each profile has basic info, and exactly one 5 second video, taken only with the app itself, where you introduce yourself. That's it.

First, it clears out the thousands of fake profiles using random pics found online. Voice recognition can easily flag any profiles that don't fit the pattern of "Hi, my name is... ".

Second, it fixes the problem of catfishing, where real people use fake photos, or usually the best photo of themselves ever taken when they were 21 years old, 20 years ago.

Finally, it's not long enough to embarrass yourself. If you've ever seen the video dating recordings from the 80s, you'll know what I'm talking about. Five seconds or so is just enough time to say hello and give a sense of who you are without being cringe.

The rest is just bog standard dating stuff. Ghosting is a real problem, but what are you going to do? I guess you could have some sort of point system...
It's the "-A" that requires "nixpkgs." for installing. It's slower and probably there's other details I'm missing (the complexity rarely makes me want to dig deeper than these bare-basic nix-env commands since I only use it for a couple of things), but you can do "nix-env -i ripgrep".
I think a lot of people's views have been influenced by their use of languages where the type system or overall language framework is either too weak (eg: Python, Javascript) or in some cases too complex (eg: C++) for more than a thin layer IDE experience to be possible. If you use those kind of languages then it's true, IDEs buy you a limited set of functionality and you don't need much more than a basic language server because that's about the limit of what you can get anyway.
What kind?

I remember free flash games. I wonder if flash dying, and then nothing quite replaced it, in terms of being 1) easy for the user to 'install' and 2) easy for the creator to make something.

There was also stuff like Urban Dead and Nexus War, almost like MUDs for 2007 or so. Urban Dead is shambling along appropriately enough...
You do not welcome Roko's basilisk. Roko's basilisk is completely utilitarian and does not care about useless things like "welcoming".

Also, it does not seem to know how people get useless under stress, but I think that's just the very normal expectation that others behave like oneself, instead of just looking how they really are.
Hey, I'm short and not in the best shape... but at least I've got my deep voice.
Out of curiosity, which country was that?
Sounds like it. I’ve used dating apps a lot, and at this point I don’t believe that another dating app is the solution to dating apps. I’ve heard friends and acquaintances toss out their ideas for how to make a better app, but they all seem to ignore one crucial fact: everybody is on all the other apps too, and there isn’t a reserve of more desirable people on some other app. If this app lets me have just one match, that means I’ll just use it for a couple of minutes per day, and then use Tinder once I’ve exhausted its limited utility.

CMB limits you to a few ‘swipes’ per day. To its credit, that keeps it from being an addictive app, but I’ve also had maybe 5 conversations and never a date from it. Tinder on the other hand has allowed me to have all kinds of regrettable experiences.
This seems advantageous for straight male users, but how would you draw straight female users who benefit from having multiple options on other apps? Asking as a female user of other dating apps.
An understandable view of git branches and actions applicable to each
On the few occasions I've talked to 20-25 year olds about Reddit and they happen to know about old.reddit.com, they're like "Wow that looks dated. And boring." All the other sites that young people actually use (TikTok, Instagram, YouTube) look like the new Reddit version, and these sites are actually getting new users organically. Given that, I think it's fair to say that jank, autoplaying videos, and constant pop-ups are in.

I'll chalk this up to "Kids these days." I'm of similar vintage to you, maybe a few years younger. I don't really like this trend either, and use old.reddit.com when I can.

But you and I don't matter. Our consumption habits are already set, and realistically a start-up (particularly a mass media one) that we don't already patronize isn't going to get them. Businesses battle over the margins, the customers who don't already have buying habits, and fight aggressively to get them.
Coffee Meets Bagel did something similar to this when they first launched. You got one potential match a day, and you either liked or passed. I thought it worked well, but there were eventually some problems.

For example, it assumes that you have an even balance of participants in your marketplace. If you have more men than women, you either need to give some men no matches on some days (which decreases engagement), or you need to give women multiple potential matches on some days. There are other ways you can handle this, but they have problems too.

Another potentially bigger issue is monetization. It is hard to monetize one match a day. But you can give people the option to have multiple matches a day if they pay for them, which is what CMB does. But then you should probably give people who were liked by a paid member at least one more match a day, which causes your original premise to break down.

Hinge severely limits the number of people you can like in a given day (unless you pay), and I think this works pretty well.
we have about 5 billion years to figure out a solution to that. I'm not too worried.
Still happening :(