skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No good deed goes unpunished.

I learnt this lesson in high school when I disclosed serious security vulnerabilities in the schools IT systems and statewide VPN and firewall/censorship solution. I was effectively expelled (in technicality "asked to leave").

Unless someone is paying you just don't bother. Even if they are paying you stick to the systems in the brief.
Cargo and Poetry treat different major versions of software as effectively different packages by default. However I've seen pushback against upper version bounds (which putting different major versions under different names is an extension of): https://iscinumpy.dev/post/bound-version-constraints/. I'm not sure how to feel myself.
Possibly, I'm not 100% certain though. History says they are capable of surpassing all established western economic metrics.
Any civilization just sophisticated enough to make a boat that can cross the Atlantic Ocean... does not yet have the technology necessary to destroy themselves. Hence, the great filter.
Fowler isn't the author of the linked article. The authors are Tim Cochran and Carl Nygard, which you can see in the byline at the top.
I agree that generally speaking it makes sense, but it's inflexible to deviations. I also think that level designations are largely lagging indicators of skill.

This article does a better job of explaining than I will: https://apenwarr.ca/log/20201227.
My old bus route to work used to amuse me greatly because on it there were two drivers who were the polar opposite of one another. One guy I assumed had previously been the pilot of a commercial airliner because he used to greet everyone who got onto the bus with that sort of demeanor and make announcements etc. Always brightened my day. The other guy was the grumpiest piece of shit bus driver I've seen anywhere in my life who would frequently berate passengers and oftentimes frighten unsuspecting foreigners. Everyone who needed to get to where they were going showed up and took the bus regardless. It's about the least important variable there is and it averages out to getting a reasonably OK bus driver almost all the time across the different busses you take and the different times of day you take them.
Feynman talks on names of birds being irrelevant. Also that there’s a hidden side to science not talked about and just assumed the student will pick up, that your weaknesses should be exposed. Also cargo culting.

Bart Simpsons karate teacher says first we fill your head with knowledge then we break bricks with it.

The article says tutors went on the grand tour. We’re full time live in always available.

The Huxley quote in this comment section.
—————————

I wonder with SEO popularity marketing contests and polarised viscous populations, have people just learnt eyegouges? So now no one has eyes. How can a “naive academic” be produced in a trap filled landscape of litigious deconstruction?

Example, Feynman has a go at the reporter about asking why magnets work. Russels soft speaking. Could “we” allow these things?
If a machine can combine existing information to produce a new idea, then it fails on obviousness. Also, patents have to get through prosecution, which is still a fraught process.
There is a possibilty that Russia reports that through Interpol Cybercrime or via diplomatic channel, then FBI will have to investigate and possibly lock up Brandon.
Continuous updates are not an option here. GA4 is very different from previous versions and has many breaking changes.
Resignation can be a taxation event. If you’re getting taxed on the FMV of the options, you might as well lock in that price? You lose some cash, so that is a risk, but the big issue is taxation at resignation without liquidity.
In Australia taxation at resignation stops being a thing on July 1st, thank god.
That really sucks. I hope your friend is doing better now. :(
> They do allow puberty blockers, which are commonly used in cisgender children who experience precocious puberty, and are reversible. Your claim of brainwashing is unhelpful to any conversation.

Source?

I don't have a good source either way, but I most recently heard the issue described in the economist and their description definitely doesn't seem reversible.

>There are mounting worries about the use of puberty-blockers, which may be given to trans-identifying children from about the age of nine, and the cross-sex hormones that in most cases follow. Blockers have not undergone a clinical trial for this purpose. They prevent bones from developing properly and may affect brain development. When combined with cross-sex hormones they can lead to infertility and inability to have an orgasm. Several countries are curtailing their use.

https://www.economist.com/united-states/2022/03/05/dont-mess...
So those companies would instead need to bring a product to market and maintain it independently? What is the down side?
Gotcha! That makes sense re: HN... Not sure why I assumed calls/puts, tbh.
This seems kind of insane, so many people are using the old version of Google Analytics and have absolutely no compelling reason to upgrade other than Google forcing them. And it seems GA4 is fairly different in some ways, this is going to be a ton of churn for a ton of people. I guess Google thinks there really is no alternative, they can just force people to do extra work for no gain and they'll grumble and accept it?
That’s the example in the original video.
Google buys Micro LED startup Raxium for AR displays
I think what makes these images so impressive is the depth of field — without the characteristic blurring of far and near objects that typically comes with macro photographs, the violins appear to be vast interior spaces.
I'm confused, you say that no data will be lost, then someone replies to you and says all data will be lost, and then you agree with them? What am I missing.
At least in Australia, capital losses do not entitle you to a refund on taxes owed or paid. They just just offset subsequent capital gains.
It's true that the man pages assume C and the calling conventions are based on the C ABI, but it is possible to code the syscalls directly in assembly. In particular Go and Zig have such "bare-metal" syscalls.
Totally disagree. The encoding scheme could give the model an inductive bias which would make rhyming easier. But the lack of such an inductive bias in no way prevents it from understanding rhymes. This model has 10^11 parameters! The embeddings for the encoding are maybe 0.1% of that - probably less I’d guess without looking it up. Converting to a different encoding would use a very small fraction of the model’s computational power.
Any web programming I do, I do in Lisp, and this site was very handy.
GA4 feels like a huge step backwards. Tons of functionality in the previous version is missing or replaced with smart “insights” (where you have to try to describe your query in plain text, which it will always get wrong). A good time to move on to something better.
You can get into legal trouble simply by looking at the source code of a web page you are browsing, as has happened in several famous recent cases. However, the take away from that isn't "if you go into Chrome developer tools you totally had it coming".

There are bounds to what is or should be considered reasonable testing, and if you don't press against them then they will keep moving closer and closer to the point where simply using your own computer in ways the manufacturer didn't intend will be illegal (and that is already happening as well).

According to what the author describes he did absolutely nothing wrong morally or legally, and the attitude of victim blaming prevalent in this thread is a huge problem in the security industry. We should be supporting rather than crucifying him, because one of us will surely be next for looking at a website the wrong way.
> Linux and Windows have had rock solid ABIs for decades now

Except they don't. The OS doesn't have an ABI at all, the specific complier does. That's why there's unique triplets for windows for whether or not you're compiling for msvc or gnu, as in x86_64-pc-windows-gnu vs. x86_64-pc-windows-msvc. Both are x86_64 windows, yet they are different ABI targets.

And even on MSVC windows alone there's not even a single ABI - there's __stdcall and __fastcall which change the ABI on a per function basis, and compiler options that change the default convention ( https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/build/reference/gd-gr-g... ). So to figure out how to invoke Windows' "rock solid" ABI you need to not only know the header & compiler used, but also the compiler parameters.

Similarly, again per the article, clang & gcc on x64 Ubuntu 20.04 can't actually call each other reliably. They don't agree on a few things, like __int128 which is actually documented explicitly by the AMD64 SysV ABI!
I agree the writing has been on the wall, but this is the first official announcement, no?
The trend of "outsource enforcement of laws to civil suits" is concerning - not event "constitutional rights"-wise but also from a "due process" (possibly there's a better term) perspective. The number of prospective plaintiffs who could bring a case on weak grounds that you still have to spend a lot of $$$ defending is wild.
>"Wokeness has gone too far, but I don't really have any concrete examples, I just guess it has somehow haha"

I mean you have to have something to make such a claim in your op. As for Trump, yes maybe they are not precisely but lets be honest

- Using fascist political tactics

- Said explicitly "Hitler did a lot of good things", doesn't seem a great move to have on the record unless its just to appeal to more radical people.

- Hired officials with ties to white nationalist groups.

- Empathised with neo Nazis in Charlottesville, eg Proud Boys.

- Endorses violence on external/opposition groups.

So come on, while themselves are not technically a fascist he definitely responsible for eroding democracy and liberalism. They are a right wing populist. I think it's fair to say sympathiser considering all of this. I feel they deliberately make it murky, more like leaving the door open to more radical people, while still being palatable for the less radicalised. A pretty serious and dangerous situation. Far more than some perceived "woke-ism".
I don't even want that sort of paternalism. With an old-school forum, you knew when you were "done", and you had to come back 12-24 hours later for enough other posters to have said anything worthwhile.
> Great, plenty of time to replace GA with another analytics solution.

Any suggestions or recommendations? I'd be keen on trying something new.
This was the big lesson I learned recently and I whole heartedly agree. It's can be very dangerous to your mental health to not have this perspective if you wind up emotionally trapped in a bad situation.
>Do you have so little respect of your fellow man that you think they are incapable of thinking?

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about the above comment I was replying to.

>They are pointing out this outcome did not happen.

Flattening the curve absolutely does not mean preventing people from getting COVID; it's about lengthening the time horizon in which the population gets infected to reduce strain on the health care system.

Moreover, a personal anecdote about getting COVID doesn't imply an overall policy failure. Just because someone let sick people cough in their face doesn't mean they should wax intellectual about macroeconomics.
A solid rocket engine. It's not hard. Did you mean missiles or drones?
>I am assuming that you are not talking about "formal science", because then your comment would be even more unreasonable

I am talking about formal science. Nothing can be proven in science. Proof is the domain of logics and maths not science. Nothing in science is axiomatic as every supposed "law" is subject to a contrarian observation at any point in time.

This isn't pedantry. Astrology has not been proven or falsified. Neither have religions. That's why religions are so popular. Maintaining an unbiased outlook towards all things including things that sound fantastic is the epitome of neutrality. Heliocentricism at one point in time sounded just as absurd as astrology. Galileo was exiled for his ideas. To make sure we don't exile a man for presenting a previously unknown truth we must listen to the other side despite how contrarian it sounds.

>Theology is a big can of worms, but these big objects should be broken down into smaller pieces: whereas science cannot possibly prove or disprove the existence of a "God" (depending on the definition we use, and the characteristics we ascribe to such an entity), science does very much inform us on the boundaries within which, or outside of which, theology can reside. For instance, we know that it is impossible to transform water into wine, at least in any real sense and in conditions relevant to biblical texts.

Science cannot prove that you can't turn water into wine. This is an assumption you made by stringing together tidbits of anecdotal knowledge. That is not science. It is just a reasonable assumption, but an assumption nonetheless.

Put it this way. What sort of scientific experiment can you run to prove definitively that water can't be turned into wine? What sort of trial should be run and how many times do these trials need to be repeated before you can say definitively that water can't be turned into wine?

You likely can't think of a way. And this is because it's impossible. Literally. At this point in time you may not be able to put your finger why it's impossible, but even without knowing why you'll find that your unable to think of an experiment that can pull off a proof.

To bring it back to the main point. Your assumption that astrology is not true is reasonable, but it is still an assumption. Due to the fact that it is an assumption we must always be open to alternative explanations to make sure we don't make the same mistakes we did in the past.
The FBI needs to make it very public and clear that doing this for a foreign state results in a much higher penalty.

Organised and pro criminal are not dumb. They know what brings the heat.
> We continue to improve our core product so it can build point-to-point links in ever-more-obscure situations.

I'm not sure how high priority this is. We've been wanting a way to force traffic over a private network, for example, but it's still not possible. It's really the only thing we've asked for for our business, and we hope they will introduce it soon, it's easier keeping a lot of ACLs in one single place.

To clarify, we are a happy paying customer.
Computer Security Goes Microscopic – Firewalls Don't Stop Dragons Podcast
Hire a team and build your own fucking software then. That's the other option if building a business around someone else's free work isn't perfect enough for you.
Or, it’s a virtuous cycle of people recognizing a valuable tool and giving back to its ecosystem by developing for it (even if that’s not intended–it’s a second-order effect).

It can also be seen on another axis, that of organic growth versus what each new miracle language tries to be, which is a centrally planned and all-encompassing solution, which isn’t possible without the entire rest of the industry just stopping and waiting for it all to be made to work.

C already works. So people work with it.
This is so CURRENTYEAR. We're reaching levels of slacktivism so fucking stupid I honestly don't know where we go from here. I thought changing "master" to "main" was fucking stupid, but this really takes the cake. I foresee a future where someone does this for all Texas IPs because they delusionally believe it's being ran by neo-Nazis, that Texas is a fascist state.
I don't know why you would call the conquistadors "enlightened". I'm talking about a civilization that's developed planet ending technology...and yet managed to not end their planet.
Ugh lol dude are you for real? Do you actually trust tech companies to decide what is best for a given persons personal growth?
I don't want to say yes but damn if we don't have a lot of military might, and as much as an American I want to say stop spending it who will fill the void? We're probably the least bad of all possibilities, and if you disagree, please teach me because I'm legitimately open minded!
Industrial espionage is not involved here. This is just reverse engineering that escalated into something that might be misconduct.

Espionage would include things like illegally surveilling the competitor's networks, bribing their employees for information and credentials, using malware to create backdoors, social engineering, blackmail, poaching their talent and incentivizing unethical disclosure of trade secrets, and cracking systems that explicitly bar access.

Reverse engineering their product through public IPs is legally acceptable up to CFAA boundaries, which are fuzzy, and it's not clear what kind of exploits were involved in this situation. They may have been relatively benign reverse engineering, or they may have been something associated with civil and criminal penalties.
Yes, I think it is reasonable to know what's appropriate and what's not. I'm not in infosec.
Breaking Points. Krystal and Saagar are fantastic.
Not me but my friends: My first job was at Sendmail. A few friends exercised all their options when they left, writing checks to the company for 6 months of salary.

A decade later they company sold for a fraction of what they took from VCs, and no one made any money (and only the VCs got anything back).

Ten years before they could finally write off their loss!
That doesn't sound like they were using SSL for authorization. SSL (in the usual use case) just ensures the client to server connection. You can e.g. use special installed certs for accessing VPNs, but I don't think that's the situation here. It just seems like the client was expecting some domain name to serve some endpoints, and he just MITM them to proxy it to his own servers. That's not hacking because here SSL isn't being used for authorization.

The bottom line is the resource permissions weren't scoped right, like at all, and no amount of SSL is gonna fix it - that's what logins and tokens and oauth and that whole dance are for.

Sorry, endpoints aren't doors of a house, where "waltzing in just because it's unlocked is breaking and entering." They are protocols. Merely "talking" to open protocols is/should not be a crime.
Why are you assuming such extremes? It's not about having 0% competency in execution, 100% competency in planning. More like you might be average at executing and excellent at alignment.

Ex: 10-30-50 like described here for PMs but for engineers instead: https://twitter.com/shreyas/status/1055725977769136128

It's silly to assume that all engineers will have similar levels of competency in all areas, but that is how career ladders are structured.

More on it in this article: https://apenwarr.ca/log/20201227.
https://github.com/sustrik/libmill/blob/e8937e624757663f5379...

They wrote a macro (or in this case a set of macros) to transform that into valid C code.
I do wonder about a future where JavaScript gets non-enforced optional type annotation syntax[1] which is and if said syntax will be slightly incompatible with TypeScript. That would be a little awkward for Deno, wouldn’t it. However I hope that if JS gets type annotation syntax that it would be a strict subset of TypeScript—or at the very least future compatible—for this very reason.

1. https://github.com/giltayar/proposal-types-as-comments
Naive question. Sorry. I don’t do web app cloud micro service analytics sort of things.

I’m used to quite a bit of verbiage in HN posts about Google ruining the internet with commercialization and ads and analytics and that sort of thing.

But the comments here of which I’m a naive observer I guess, seem to be of a “how dare Google change what is an essential part of our tools!”

Is this just a case of different HN subcultures taking time to post to each other? Or is it just my lack of understanding of the nuances of which part of modern web apps is good and/or evil?
Horror story: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11200296

From danluu’s well argued article that options are mostly bad: https://danluu.com/startup-options/

With the opposite argument from yosefk in Israel: https://yosefk.com/blog/stock-options-a-balanced-approach.ht...

I agree with danluu, and strongly disagree with yosefk. My experience in New Zealand is the payoffs for equity are far worse because the rewards versus the risks are so bad (because VC is batshit mental in NZ), and I expect the problems are equally bad in other countries. The USA is an outlier.
Ben.world
The resulting paper: https://sci-hub.st/downloads/2020-01-31/3c/10.1007@s40993-02...
Thanks, now I can see why they went in that direction. It makes sense in this context.
Since I never use function keys, mine default to doing the system behaviors.
I'm sure you meant it in jest, but yeah, if you are going to do something illegal at least try to cover your tracks. Naivety is not a virtue.
Long term personal growth in what direction? And on Twitter? Facebook? Not to be dismissive but Twitter does what Twitter does best when people shout their opinions into a void or stick their job title up and LARP as the authority on X and Facebook does what Facebook does best when it filters blogs and baby photos to your newsfeed and you meet groups of people around a shared interest or hobby or arrange outings with large groups of people.

YouTube maybe could be optimized that way, but if the banners they stick in my way that take no feedback and accept no dismissal as an invitation to never return are any indication they would do a hatchet job tweaking their algorithm in that direction. What they do very well is introducing me to new music and interesting videos on old tech and games. Absolutely fantastic entertainment platform and probably no more addictive than television was but I feel like I’m also the only one that likes the YouTube algorithm.

Also that kind of tweak would just be paternalistic nonsense, on principle.
It is absolutely not the case that the author described something absolutely legal. I don't care if you think it's "victim blaming"; I am making a simple positive statement, not a normative one. People will get hurt buying into what you're saying. There's no "reasonable testing" exception to the CFAA. You're very unlikely to be prosecuted for doing this stuff, but it's not that unlikely that you will get wrecked with legal bills reaching that conclusion.
Well, one big one is lack of tail call elimination. If you can't write even a simple tail-recursive algorithm in the language, it's not a functional programming language.
How Wars End...
How Charles Dickens Made the Novel New
Ask HN: Best Resources for Learning Docker?
I make apps and will start using docker - what are the best resources to get started?

Video / Article / Short Course / Book recommendations are all welcome

I'll dedicate 1 month to covering the 101s:

- basic commands

- avoiding footguns

- debugging

- iterating to solve problems and errors quickly

- security and access

- anything else?
Note that only a very small part of the TAOCP books is in assembly language. My count from a few years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14520230

Another way of counting is that the book "The MMIX supplement", which contains the MMIX equivalents of every single page/section/program in Volumes 1–3 that is affected by the details of MIX (the book is not by Knuth but the preface indicates Knuth reviewed it very thoroughly pre-publication), is 224 pages long.

Volumes 1, 2, 3 are together 672 + 784 + 800 = 2256 pages long (and Volume 4A is 912 pages). So roughly, less than 10% of TAOCP deals with either MIX specifically, or assembly language in general.