skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> "The SCO–Linux disputes were a series of legal and public disputes between the software company SCO Group (SCO) and various Linux vendors and users. The SCO Group alleged that its license agreements with IBM meant that source code IBM wrote and donated to be incorporated into Linux was added in violation of SCO's contractual rights. Members of the Linux community disagreed with SCO's claims; IBM, Novell and Red Hat filed claims against SCO."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO–Linux_disputes
Major sites that aren't cloud providers already supported IPv4 so there's not necessarily a clear incentive to spend lots of money upgrading equipment and rolling out IPv6.

Only within the last couple months did AWS announce single stack IPv6 for VPCs (i.e. cloud providers don't have a great IPv6 support story)
Oh, let's face facts. I'd do it for food and coffee.
> In general, 12 "is old enough to know better" when it comes to tasting the poison and playing with fire.

It was older than 12 when myself, my brothers, and our friends really started playing with fire ;-)
> A lot of GPs are "contractors" even though they work only for one employer with a provided office and set hours.

Isnt that how many software developers on contract work who have 1 year contracts which are usually renewed.
"Care to provide specific examples of what you have tried and been unable to say because the government explicitly tells you not to? " I would love to, despite your setting up a straw-man argument. I posted a link to this article: http://misc-stuff.terraaeon.com/articles/no-vote.html on Hacker News. It received about 2000 page views in less than 30 minutes before it was pulled from the feed.
Which FAANG is rewriting to another hip language and chasing trends (especially when it comes to infra services??)? I don't mean to be rude, but it doesn't sound like you are talking about any of the FAANGs, this sounds completely made up.
Maybe that can be handled better automatically. Good point, thanks for mentioning.
Because these days, Google search is just as much as about hiding some information as it is for finding other information. It's a product to maximize revenue and utility for its owners. It's hardly about maximizing utility for the end user.
This article reminds me of a documentary that came out a couple years back on HBO Max called Class Action Park. It was about a notoriously dangerous water park in New Jersey in which several kids died or were maimed. Most of the documentary was toned with nostalgia. They interviewed many former employees and people who went there as kids. Many of the interviewees were comedians that told funny stories about the antics that went on there. Most of them viewed the experience through rose-colored glasses. This was a place were a kid could be a kid in an era when parents still allowed that to happen.

Then there would be an interview with a mom whose child died in the park describing how she was so grief-stricken that she walked into traffic trying to kill herself and was pulled back at the last second by her husband. You hear one story like that from a parent who lost a kid and suddenly dangerous waterslides and chemistry kits don't seem that important to a good childhood.
That’s a simplistic view that lacks nuance. There are many scenarios where you don’t have agency.

At some point during the day you will inevitably trust someone else to prepare food for you, give you advice, collect information, enforce rules, etc.

As important as it is to acknowledge your own agency (you’re 100% right about that), you’d be remiss to ignore all the instances where you don’t.
>restaurant industry

A job for teenagers and aspiring actors.

>farm labor

Okay, but we specifically import people to work for low (often illegally low) wages. Work for an adult, maybe, but not much of a living.

>and other unsavory industries.

Same problem as with farm labor, except now it's "unsavory" instead of "honest work".

It's not right to have a bimodal distribution of "high class professional jobs" and "unsavory jobs with low trust requirements". You need a lower-end but respectable place for people to be that's better than criminality, and you certainly can't say "go work in one of those unsavory industries" if you want them to think its better than being a criminal. In American culture we GLORIFY criminality, and loathe low-class "unsavory" work. Why would anyone choose unsavory work over being a criminal in the current environment?
Has quantum mechanics proved that reality does not exist?
Turn your internet router off.
I wonder if the author sees the contradiction between this and an earlier post about doctors not caring if they kill you - wherein the author was appalled, while seeking vaccination against Covid, that no-one was wearing masks properly in a densely packed waiting room.

Because Government mandating that masks be worn, and that businesses have a right to refuse you entry if you don't comply, and likewise mandating social distancing for restaurants/waiting rooms/buses, achieves what the author wants.
She originally only sued for her medical bills but the jury awarded her punitive damages after it was revealed that McDonald’s had been sued several times and never lowered the temperature to levels standard in the industry
Facebook got the only mainstream VR device as well.
Cgnat is a nightmare that no one should be subjected to.
Or just blindly click through these things and let websites track you like the "good old days"
You have a test set that isn’t used during training, separate from the validation set. But in general this isn’t too much of a problem.

For large N sizes the models will tend to converge on the same logic. It’s actually much more of a problem with small samples. Simpler models like linear regressions and decision trees could even be deterministic.
IMHO that's kind of the point; to get a substantially different security posture, it's not sufficient to just rewrite the code but it's also necessary to change the design, and that would not be fully Unix anymore.

It would not be enough to provide new, more secure options; and not enough to make them the default - to actually reduce the attack surface, you'd want to remove the nonsecure options, if required, at the cost of compatibility.
I asked my tiny ISP about IPv6 support a while ago. They said they have no plans "but you can buy a static IPv4 address if you want to run a server".
Last week I heard “the answer to 99 of 100 questions is money,” and now I can’t stop applying it.
It just sounds like, more or less:

$ diff3 -m my-file pick-file-parent pick-file
I'm not certain that a 3rd party would read that as something I agree with, so I'll just note:

1st paragraph - that looks like someone bearing the costs for their bad decision personally to me. Which is why they should be the one making the decision.

2nd & 3rd - yep. That comes close to the extended argument for why it is stupid to legally mandate wearing seatbelts. The level of threat required to enforce a minor requirement is absurd. People shouldn't be subjected to that sort of legal hazard without a high bar of justification.
The danger is not just that Google may one day delete your data, maybe. The danger is that an advertising surveillance company that has leveraged its ad surveillance into hundreds of billions of dollars per year in revenue has access to (and uses!) 100% of your personal correspondence, today and every day, no maybe.

Additionally, they regularly turn such data over to government snoops, without due process or probable cause, something that storing your data with them enables. This is a terrible thing for a free society even if you don't yourself personally care for or value privacy, as you opt in everyone who corresponds with you without their consent by using these systems.
Automation is expensive, but so is human labor. Once you cost in all the human costs, like paid time off, the variability in performance, administrative overhead, etc. it can be a lot cheaper to automate. Which is exactly why it's done. As for cases, I worked in automotive assembly line robots. Upfront costs are high, sure, but nothing compared to the legacy costs of the dozens of the unionized human labor they supplant. (I'm not against unionization btw, only bringing it up because it tends to - fairly IMO - sway the power to the worker in terms of higher wages). An automation tax would at least make up for some of the lost revenue that supports societal infrastructure. It would also sway the economics to extend the time horizon of when it usurps specific segments of the labor economy. Automation is never fully automated, so I would consider it all augmented. It just tends to shift the labor towards fewer and more skilled workers.
It's really disheartening that these support channels are so poor. I had my bank account terminated recently for a valid support request the bank didn't want to deal with as it would require a change to their concrete support script.

My girlfriend had her Tumblr account terminated by some automated process and Tumblr won't respond to her. And this was devasting to her, because not only was it content she had spent a long time curating, but there were many friends of hers that she only had contact with through Tumblr due to her wish to protect her offline identity. To suddenly lose dozens of good friends overnight due to a software error was insanely depressing for her.

The effects of these account terminations can be far-reaching. After watching the effect on my SO, I have to wonder how many suicides have been precipitated by an unfair account termination?
Do you have additional data on this? Carrier grade nat equipment or hardware that supports tunneling ipv4 over ipv6 seems like it would be a very small percentage of a consumer network buildout cost.
I find it difficult to imagine a situation in which you could use the library without copying the library. How would you obtain the code to execute it? Someone must distribute it to you, and/or you must copy it. Those are the governed actions.

EDIT: note that the GPL broadly doesn't impose restrictions on interacting with a program over a network ("using" a server), which is why the AGPL exists.
So you are saying that because one kid in a million wins a Darwin award using a chemistry set, the other 999,999 can't have one?
When the giant Equifax hack happened creditors had to start doing more diligence to make sure they weren't allowing fraudulent borrowing since it was happening so frequently.

So optimistically maybe having lots of information public and easily searchable like this ultimately leads to a similar outcome. Like maybe it forces us to stop using date of birth to verify identity since it's so easy to find anyone's date of birth.

If the information is going to be out there maybe it's safer for everyone to have it than just a few people. If just a few people have it, and they use it to screw just a few other people, there's no pressure to fix it.

Or of course maybe that's wishful thinking.
>> This is a world that has nearly ended the manufacture of private aircraft that any individual with a private pilot's license and enough money can purchase.

Fortunately home building aircraft is alive and well. Check out your local EAA for more info.

On the other hand, Burt Rutan quit selling plans for planes after someone did utterly stupid things and the family tried to sue him. Many home builders are reluctant to sell a plane they built for similar reasons.
If you have invested a lot of time and effort in an opportunity, that looked really good in the beginning but really bit you in the ass, then it can be incredibly difficult to let go. Especially when there is a mixture of bad luck, unfair treatment and one's own mistakes, it may take a long time to get over it all.
I am confused. Don't you have to create your own videos first and then upload them to YouTube? Or is that a common practice that for people to delete their local copy of videos after they upload to YouTube?

I am defenitely not blaming the person in any way. I just don't understand this behavior after have seen this for several times. Why wouldn't you keep your local copy? It just doesn't make any sense to me.
>>Care to provide specific examples of what you have tried and been unable to say because the government explicitly tells you not to?

Looked at Canadian news lately? I am not even talking about those blocking a major bridge or anything like that. They are seizing bank accounts of people they politically disagree with, or supported "indirectly" those they politically disagree with.

"Without the freedom to transact, you have no other constitutional rights"

>>People dying in auto accidents costs the government money in lost economic activity as well as things like medical care.

WOW... you understand you are providing an authoritarian justification for literally controlling everything about a persons life. These type of justification for the imposition of state authority into peoples life is one of the main reason I continue to oppose single payer healthcare for the US.

This idea because it would cost the government money in medical expenses is all the justification the government needs infringe on my personal autonomy / liberty is frankly terrifying, but less those then the idea of "less economic activity" being justification. That is freaking dystopian right there, am at a loss that anyone could think that is a valid justification for state power / authority
IMHO we aren't seeing these developing countries as early adopters of mass IPv6 or having local-only services move to IPv6-only due to lack of IPv4 addresses.

Like, I fully understand that they would be feeling much more pressure to migrate, but I don't see that this pressure working; and if even they aren't pushed to IPv6 then why would the western world do so?
> Users are unable to distribute

You're talking about distributors.
How large is the index?

How do you manage that between RAM or SSD?
AutoML is good most of the time but there is still a place for custom model development in particular applications where you to adjust and tune parameters.
Yeah I was joking too
> In this sense we are the government.

I'm not your property, either.
I agree. But no one except you is suggesting that it does! No one except you has said anything about anyone being the governments property. You've invented a line of argument to be concerned about.

As another user said, your line of reasoning doesn't at all follow. I've tried to point that out twice now and I guess you don't want to acknowledge that.
Yeah, they didn't repeal it because it was racist. They repealed it because the enforcement of it was biased. That's an important difference and omitting it can lead to misinterpretation.

As it turns out, their data showed that the vast majority of people already used helmets. Those who don't are mostly those who can't afford it, and fining them won't make cycling safer for anyone.

The bias in the enforcement was substantial: black cyclists got 4 times as many tickets as white, and nearly half of the tickets were issued to homeless people.
> I don't believe "scientific code" is fundamentally different from any other code, I would go with following normal development practices

> 1) review design ("don't reinvent wheel")

> 2) add tests

> 3) make code review

> 4) version control

> etc.

In my experience, this is pretty quixotic and will lead to your failure as a scientist. Basically nobody is writing tests. Code review is pretty much unheard of. There only "design review" comes from your journal's peer review process and generally has nothing to with the code. You can jump through all those hoops while your colleagues keep cranking out papers.
And then you come across dictionary or like and discover that yeah, sometimes things aren't sorted as strings, but weird things are done.

Like "the" word, or person with some titles... While ofc. the title itself is sorted in that position...
> I just thought this is an interesting problem to others.

Frankly I doubt that it is. I bet the number of people who have encountered this problem is quite small: most developers don’t use C#, of those most of them have not written code that uses this ConfigurationBuilder thing, and most of those probably never noticed any problems. There might only be a dozen people in the world who have had a similar problem! It could even be unique to your hardware, or your software configuration, or even to a pattern of behavior.

The problem with asking this kind of question is that you are looking for someone with deep expertise or who has already encountered exactly the same pitfall as you. Instead of asking for a solution, it would be better to ask how to _find_ a solution. There are more people who can answer such questions!
Did you just conflate Hacker News with the government?
Is there any better performance? As far as I see there's not meaningful difference.
Phrase exclusion syntax is described in Search Tips. For patents, it’s appending -patent to your search term.
You just proved my point: that's a domain, not a URL.
Ask HN: Safari 7-day storage limit, ideas for improvement
Following some of the discussion on "Safari now supports File System Access API with private origin" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30394737) and that it's limited just like all other storage in Safari to a maximum of 7 days without a repeat visit, I started wondering what could be a better design for evacuating storage.

The limited time for storage was announced by Apple as a privacy measure to combat tracking. But that falls apart rather quickly if a site that a users opens and closes a second later gets the same time limit as a site that the user actively engages with.

So I'm thinking this might be better handled with something like the Media Engagement Index for media autoplay policy (perhaps only Chrome implemented that index).

Here's an example that would only apply to first-party storage:

- User does not interact with website (scrolling, playing media and clicking external links would not count as interacting)

No storage allowed and it's cleared shortly after the user leaves the site.

- User interacts with website

Storage allowed and cleared in 45 days without a repeat visit

- User spends more than 5 minutes on site (perhaps within 24 hours)

Storage extends to 90 days without a repeat visit

- User input into form fields or adds files

Storage extends to 180 days without a repeat visit

Each repeat visit would extend according to the rules above or at least 30 days if no interaction. The score could also be used to set the storage quota for the site.

I do know that the current time limit only applies to storage APIs including cookies accessible via scripting (HTTP only cookies are not limited) but my interest is in sites that can store everything on the client side without any user data (including cookies) going back to the server.

This could even open up the possibility for Safari to sync data for sites that get the highest engagement scores (180 days), which would be a great feature since no storage is synced today (in any browser I know of).

Is this something worth trying to get implemented (and perhaps in other browsers as well)?
It would seem, in a post-COVID 2022, writing from cash-is-gone Shenzhen, the welcome mat of the PRD-sprawl with news today of Canada's anti-protest crackdowns, Korean epidemia, and Chinese naval lasers off the Australian coast, that Gibson understated the human appetite for autocracy and big governance and overstated the facility of megacorps to succeed from nation states as the dominant social architects. Having worked in Samsung HQ, corporate dystopias melded with neo-Confucian or other East Asian culture-derived hierarchies are very much real. Only the AIs and some smart materials are yet to come. Synth-food is on the mark and flying robotics is technically here but not yet accepted by regulators. As someone I met from a major Chinese tech company yesterday said, as he confided corporate think-tank strategic future visions of a phone-free 5G future where smart surfaces like taxi windows beamed real time computing from the privacy-unobtainable corporate cloud and autonomous facial identification precluded antiquated rituals of QR-code based mobile payment, nobody cares about privacy and convenience is king. Gibsonian dystopia is already here, it's just not evenly distributed.
I think the "trustworthiness" dimension can be a little questionable. The Discussion section does bring this up - "This may be because synthesized faces tend to look more like average faces which themselves are deemed more trustworthy". In a sense, the model produces faces with less detail (or "average" looking faces). However, if you look at all the faces, they are "high quality" headshots. Would generated faces of, say, mugshots still produce higher levels of "trustworthiness"? Not to place any type of judgement on the individuals with a mugshot, but you would be generating a vastly different type of face.
I've heard the paperwork to get a military service exemption is not worth it unless you're visiting frequently
> arbitrarily stretched past the 10 minute threshold for YouTube monetization.

So do you blame the creator or Google who makes these rules?
Why would he work for free for Google in the first place?
Two origin theories that spring to mind are...

A) People of African/Melanesian/Aborigine heritage can have hair that is near impossible to wear a helmet with

B) Sikhs. I know in my country that they're exempt from motorcycle helmet laws provided they don't exceed 50km/h.
You are throwing the past two (three?) decades of research and development in software engineering if you insist on tightly coupling code structure to implementation and rejecting design patterns.
And `ScopedTypeVariables` is infamous for not being suggested
A place with a strip club and a school in essentially the same building, that wouldn't fly in the US.
What the heck is going on in Greenland?
The pics aren’t validated at all. I just take pics of the sidewalk in front of me and send it no scooter in the pic at all
I'd guess Cricket's book(s) published by O'Reilly can guide you deep enough. Of course, developments since their publication are not covered, but you can still learn a lot.
Flesh doesn't melt. The coffee was hot enough to cause third-degree burns. Specifically, it was 82–88 °C [1].

I couldn't find a definitive "correct" temperature at which to serve coffee. It seems that people typically want it at 60 °C when they drink it [2], but since not everyone wants to drink it straight away, often coffee shops serve it hotter than that.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restau...

[2] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230106152_At_What_T...
US Federal Legislation Threatens Pets, Zoos, Aquariums, and Biomedical Research
The ones I give my opinion on agency on are ones where people do have agency.

> At some point during the day you will inevitably trust someone else to prepare food for you, give you advice, collect information, enforce rules, etc.

Trusting someone is something entirely different from having agency.
I wonder what the right rule is. I think if I were running a Web 2.0 site, a deactivated account would still allow log-in for, say, 60 days, but present only an account admin panel with four options:

- Appeal the deactivation, with guaranteed human review of the account if above the, say, 20th %ile of account age

- Download your text and media assets

- Send a message to social connections with an e-mail where to reach you

- Truly delete everything within the next 24 hours (right to be forgotten, etc.)
DJB did have a proposal called AutoIPv6 which had both interoperability between v4 and v6: https://web.archive.org/web/20021017164820/http://cr.yp.to/p... . So in theory it's doable, but in practice I don't think the technologies used worked out.

Ultimately tunnelling and anycast is the way to do interoperability.
My understanding is in this case the user doesn’t have the originals; they’ve truly lost 7 years of labor.
Not great from google, but you need a basic bcp/dr plan for common scenarios especially if service provider goes down for whatever reason.