skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> If their eyes are unable to resolve the smaller pixels it will offer no benefit.

Sorry, I don't understand. The pixels would be bigger in the idea I'm proposing.

> A 27"+ monitor made ~10 years ago would be ideal.

That's exactly what they have now. I'm suggesting replacing it with a 49-inch monitor (a Ultra HD TV) set to the same resolution. The pixels would therefore be bigger.
That's fair! I don't program in dynamically types languages on a regular basis, so it's possible that I'd notice more of a difference if I did.
macOS has scales between 1x and 2x. It doesn’t tell you what the scale factor actually is as a number, just a couple of options between “More space” and “Larger text”.

IIRC the way it’s implemented is by rendering 2x and downscaling, so sometime’s it’s not as pixel perfect as Windows. But the simpler implementation for software developers meant they had like a 10 year head start compared to Windows where software takes a long time to support up new OS features.
To me it seems there is contest right now between bwrap + selinux vs firejail + apparmor, no idea to what degree this is false observation, but I prefer to use firejail + apparmor, because configuration is less obfuscated (in sense) and way easier to tweak to my needs.
3 days and it’s algorithm can figure out what you like, unstoppable after that, it just freaking knows you, brilliant app.
A conceivable optimization would be to compute the final digest by skipping the SHA-256 step.
I am tempted to do this, at least as a FU to the monitor industry. There is so little innovation in monitor tech! Why are monitors so expensive and old tech compared to TVs? I just want an affordable large monitor with 120Hz refresh rate and USB-C for coding, but options are quite limited. All monitor innovation is into HDR and super high refresh rate which I don’t care about. And prices seem artificially high.
The realist in me knows google would likely not be allowed to just buy reddit for anti-trust reasons.

I guess the, pragmatist(?) in me thinks, "google kind of legitimately provides a solution to a problem that reddit has had like, forever. And reddit provides an organic source of knowledge that I feel google is at least trying to get back in the mix. Why should that combination not be allowed to exist?
PEP 505 – None-aware operators (“null-coalescing operator”)
I agree with you, but it might be difficult to prove that someone is keeping a shadow profile.
This is called a “sigil”
Clicking on the author's byline, it says the author is a 'security researcher focusing on privacy issues revolving around source protection, counter-forensics, and privacy assurance.' I would assume, therefore, the author would have at least passing knowledge of security and web applications.

> Amazon at this point makes some intonations about how this email verification step is necessary because your privacy and security are the company’s top priority, though considering that when your data is available you’ll need to check your email anyway, it’s not clear how checking your email twice adds any security.

People can argue about whether email should be used for authentication purposes. But what is the alternate model suggested? From the formulation of the complaint, the author seems to suggest that it'd be better if Amazon did not decouple authentication and payload delivery.

Sending the payload (in this case, a load of personal data) to an email address without first checking whether the requestor is in control of the address is a horrendously terrible idea. I'm starting to wonder about the author's security chops.

> Though Amazon says that it will “provide your information to you as soon as we can,” “soon” is apparently meant to be interpreted on a monthly time scale, as the page further states that “usually, this should not take more than a month.” Though of course, “in exceptional cases, for example if a request is more complex or if we are processing a high volume of requests, it might take longer.” This protracted time frame forms an intriguing juxtaposition to the otherwise universal emphasis on speed that facilitates shopping on Amazon.

It's much easier to put information into various databases than it is to determine what databases contain information about a particular user, and present that data to the user in a secure, auditable manner.

For example, you have to make sure that the user gets all the information they asked for (which means you have to determine whether the information exists, and if it doesn't you have to log the nonexistance of the data, lest you be audited). And you need to make sure user doesn't get information about someone else (which has happened in the past).

Distributed systems are hard. It takes time to determine where all possible information could live. And you have to make sure you're providing the correct information. And do this flawlessly, every single time lest you open yourself up to bad press and potential fines. This all takes time in systems as large and distributed as Amazon.

---

If the author is as knowledgeable in the security space as their byline suggests, I'm left to think that their incurious write-up is just trying to throw red meat at the 'We hate anything associated with Amazon' crowd.

For what it's worth, my team at AWS processes GDPR requests within 3-or-so business days. But we can only do that because there is a single data warehouse for our product/service.
> Honestly, most of these companies would be better off using Google, Azure or AWS' SSO-as-a-Service product (if that's what you're hoping to get out of Keycloak).

The thing is, your Keycloak instance is not going to matter to any hacker, particularly if it's inside a VPN and not reachable from the Internet - and while we're at it, fuck zero-trust because it is essentially the same level of stupidity as using Okta, you're once again putting all your eggs into the basket of whatever provider you choose.

Your SSO-as-a-service provider however? They're the juiciest target out there that is. Everyone from secret services over enemy nation states to your average cyber-criminal is looking to get access there. And as we've seen, all it takes is a couple teenagers and a couple thousand dollars.

Good network design costs a lot of money to set up, particularly to limit the scope of an attack (e.g. because the VPN software had a vulnerability), but it's orders of magnitude better in the long run than to outsource core IT to some incompetent fools with subcontractors.
Key words from that link emphasized:

> Cryptokey Routing, which works by associating public keys with a list of tunnel IP addresses that are allowed inside the tunnel.

> In the server configuration, when the network interface wants to send a packet to a peer (a client), it looks at that packet's destination IP and compares it to each peer's list of allowed IPs to see which peer to send it to.

> the list of allowed IPs behaves as a sort of routing table

> This is what we call a Cryptokey Routing Table

You can just set your peers on separate wg interfaces. At least on Linux and BSD, you have tables to control routing before packets reach the interface.

So you can have two wg interfaces, each with a single but distinct peer both with CIDR 0.0.0.0/0 (or what have you), and use ip-route/nftables as usual to pick the appropriate outgoing interface.

It makes sense if you think of each wg interface as a NIC connected to an L3 switch, and each peer to a host connected to another port on the same switch. AllowedIPs would correspond to the table+ACL in the switch.

But yeah, me saying it "does no routing" was not really correct. But that routing happens after that of the (rest of the) Linux kernel, not overlapping with, replacing, or conflicting with.

While this understanding does come from a decent amount of experience, in case I'm wildly misrepresenting things, do set it straight.
I really can't help but wonder - say I want to create a trading strategy that I actually want to use. Is there really any point in learning an open source framework, where I can assume that the most profitable strategies it can produce are already being used by someone? I think I'd rather start by learning the underlying frameworks like TensorFlow, that this one seems to wrap, and produce something that has at least a minimal chance of being somewhat original.

That being said, I have more fundamental doubts that as a private individual, with only off-the-shelf hardware, one could produce any meaningful signals with DL that actually beat the market.
That's still configuration. Sharing a config? Asking a friend for the best search algorithm? Most users are accustomed to just typing in their search query into random input fields and getting perfectly serviceable results.
That is ambitious! I wish them the best of luck.
I concur with all these points, but especially about money broadening your horizons. I thought in my twenties that money didn't matter. I learned as I got older that accumulating money is your personal freedom. A life without money is a life without nearly as many possibilities or personal power.
this is cute. i dont know if this is correct or not. but in this day and age this is the type of silly curiosity i need more of in my life. you absolute dork. thanks
It's more than what most of us know, Rosetta Code is a good way to find.
https://rosettacode.org/wiki/Variables
Agreed that we can’t wait. The large majority of the technology we need already exists, we just need to accelerate the adoption that would happen naturally.

A focus on this “punitive” side of things - that we need to pay for our transgressions through a dramatically reduced lifestyle - is just going to ensure that we drive straight off the cliff.

And yes, the economy is going to need to get us out of this. We need to make sure that the incentives are properly structured for the majority of the transformation to happen via the distributed market mechanisms vs being centrally planned.
Agree, I find most of the content applies to my golang services
Is there a Python equivalent of the C# null-coalescing operator?
Helvetica (The Movie) Is 15
Some seriously good commentary here, even if the original article isn't up to HN's usual level.

Even though I dislike the Beach Boys, this all put a smile on my face this morning. As a former budding and aspiring music critic, I appreciate all these perspectives. ;) Thank you all.

I'll just suggest that music is a remarkable thing, miraculous even. Something so hopelessly scrutinized, yet so hopefully refined by criticism, created (or maybe captured) by the artists because the best seem to just have to do it. Competition, even in music for better or worse, produces emotionally profound results.

I am so grateful for the many people and many technologies and techniques that enable me to reach that emotional-mystical place some have mentioned in the comments. Thanks again for the reminder this morning!

Off to listen to Pet Sounds now. Then maybe Pet Shop Boys.
"willingness" laughs in ocd
Alternate take: I achieve constant-time access (mod key + digit) to all those things with 10 workspaces in i3.

I can't imagine having to see them all at once. Realistically, I'm only actually thinking about 1 or 2 of them at a time. If I need to check documentation, I'm no longer thinking about my build output. Slack, email, and calendar are disconnected from development tools. And if I need to do a quick context shift, I can switch over instantly.
Awkward shyness is just a byproduct of empathy. You care about the people around you, even when you don't know them. It'll get better once you learn not to be ashamed of it. Alternatively you could become an asshole. They don't care about anyone, and they're full of confidence. I don't trust confident people.
I think this take is a little bit naive given that a lot of the customers using Okta are themselves regulated by things like healthcare records legislation, financial services regulations, GDPR, and similar. It isn't an option to not use effective security or to claim that it's somebody else's responsibility when you were holding data that has been exfiltrated illegitimately
Ok well, the same thing could be said by any organization in the world regarding any dark pattern ascribed to them.

As far as never ascribing, if a company is super big and rich and would find it beneficial if people give up trying to do something because of bad UX I think it's a reasonable assumption that the bad UX is an example of a dark pattern. Otherwise this helpful concept to describe actual things that companies do to tire out users and get them to relent in doing things the companies don't want done would have to disappear.

TLDR: If what Amazon is doing here isn't a dark pattern, what is?
It's not very often that each and every point in an article just feels "fabricated" or over the top.

It starts with finding the page: Amazon -> Customer Service -> Search for "personal data" -> Search result #1 is "Request Your Personal Information" which nicely explains what to do and links directly to that page.

The need to verify or activate a data request via clicking a link? Of course required so some third party can not just request your data to your inbox (and process it along the way) without you actually wanting to do that.

All the mentions that most of the data is available in your Amazon account? Well, what many people are looking for (order history etc) is and even nicely formatted, searchable and cross linked to make it much more convenient.

Clicking "Remove address" only removes it from the list of addresses? Of course, addresses you ordered to in the past can not be deleted as they have to legally be stored together with other order information.

And the list goes on and on.

I get that it is scary that a big company keeps all the data you gave to them. And it is also unfortunate for you that it is not their business goal to make it instant and pretty for you to look at all the data. But there is no reason for them to do that.

If you don't want Amazon to have your data, don't user Amazon.
When you use Amazon, the way you can get a lot of data from them is actually pretty good (also compared to other companies which pretent search history does not exist and so on).

(And bye to some Hacker News points. This will get nicely downvoted I suspect.)
Even if this were the case, it'd still be customer time neglicience. This is one of the largest companies in the world
And you'd be wrong. There are humans involved at every level of GDPR requests.

Signed,

Someone who has handled such requests for AWS
Firefox UI/UX History
I'm making a firefox custom theme, and researching the UI/UX history of Firefox.

1. Early (v1 ~ v3)

v1~v3 are classic UI that we remember when we were in the early 2000s.

Features

- Clear as the icons do only one thing

- Unique color for each icon

Limits

- Not fused with OS UI

- UI height

- Contrary to the modern interface philosophy as there is no abstraction

- Inconsistent icon size and texture

2. Classic (v4, 2016.10)

Thus, v4.0 was released after a large-scale UI reconstruction project was launched!!

It is the longest-lived UI and loved by many people.

Commonly called a Classic theme.

Features

- Orange app button at the top left like the symbol

- Calmer tone

- Win7 Aero Glass support

- Stop / Reload / Go with one button

- Tab moved to the top

Limits

- Unfamiliar interface with large-scale changes

3. Australis (v29, 2014.04)

Australis, which had a lot of likes and dislikes compared to Proton UI.

It was a change that put a lot of effort into simplicity.

Features

- Curved Tab

- Drag & Drop customizing UI

- Change settings UI pop-up to contents(tab) format

- Animation

Limits

- Panel UI that looks like a tablet

- Remove status bar

4. Photon (v57, 2017)

Photon was a generally well-received update to the UI that was used until June of this year(2021), when Proton appeared.

Features

- Components: List based panel and page actions, library menu

- Animation: Add animation to actions of buttons, tabs, panels, etc.

- Visual redesign: tabs, icons, density, etc.

- Performance: improved initialization, synchronization reflow, etc.

Limits

- It looks a bit complicated

- Only light weight themes are allowed.

5. Proton (v89, 2021.06)

This is the moment I started working on themes.

Features

- Neatly organized menu

- Icon that are pretty enough to remind of the edge

- Some of animations that I like & skeleton screens

- Stylish color scheme

- Moderate rounding

- Meticulous implementation

Limits

- Excessively wide padding

- Remove icons from menu

- Feels like a button rather than a tab with a connected look

- Confusion of tab indicators

- Remove page action menu in address bar

- Delete bookmarks / library animations and illustrations

- The icon size of the new tab contents

- Changed the search bar of the new tab to be performed on the URL bar.
In Germany I was GSL and I didn't mind being teased for mispronounciation - hilarity ensues!

But I experienced inbound contempt like this once, and I remember it clearly. But it was the contempt, not the tease, that was the problem. I could tell this person, a total stranger BTW, really hated me because I wasn't a native speaker. It didn't matter to them I was trying. (That is about as right-wing as I get, BTW: I believe it's incumbent on immigrants to keep putting effort into learning the language until they sound basically native. To give up early is...rude.)

At the end of this short video[0], a (half-thai) young woman says "Would you kindry?" while wearing a stereotypical asian farmer hat. It's funny, and highlights the supreme importance of context in general, and intent in particular.

0 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gem6-suSjSg
TL;DR the hardest part of cross compilation is usually getting the tool gains set up to do so. Zig ships a bunch of libc's in a lightweight compressed format which makes cross compilation completely trivial, it handles most of the work behind the scenes.
> Why are monitors so expensive and old tech compared to TVs?

(“Smart”) TVs are subsidized by the push advertising and analytics crammed into their firmware.
Sure but then there's tons of screen area you're not using. If you're only going to look at a 32" FOV on a 75" screen, why not just get a 32" screen?
Having read the comments, I believe one aspect is being left out, which is confusing form with substance.

Arguing logically, drawing links between references, as well as writing correctly, in itself, critically, are not materially related to an inherent property of knowledge.

That is, they do not refer materially to the substance of an argument logically set out, the nature of the use of references or the drawing of links, or the quality of truth of a piece of writing itself.

A subject matter expert can capture a truth of the nature of a subject in a few words, possibly expressed without logical structure, without references, and with serious clerical errors.

On the other hand, despite presenting arguments logically, employing quotations, and using language proficiently, an individual can be seriously wrong about the same truth.
Competition results in mutually beneficial relationships all the time. Companies often take different paths solving the same problem, allowing competitors to complement each other down the road.
It seems the problem of "search" is mostly well solved. What isn't well solved is the problem of "SEO gaming". Perhaps the advancement in search isn't by having an AI that chooses a better page, but rather an AI that is really good at identifying a good result from a gamed result.

However as for Google, I feel like even merely surfacing a range of relevant filter options can help their search engine, since it's what informed users are already doing by structuring a query when the first one produces crappy results. E.g. These results mostly contain links to Pinterest.com, would you like to repeat the search with these omitted? (or even just being able to collapse these site-by-site.)

Additionally I think modern search could be broken down into a range of sub-tools that exist beyond google or even online. One such example is searching our web history, perhaps browsers could produce a privacy-preserving way of storing information about each webpage and its images that the user can then search later (by either terms or images.)
Read an article which mentioned that Google degraded the search service because good results no longer made financial sense, perverse incentive is that it benefits them better for a customer to pay money for ads than provide a good search (meaning that competition for keywords is now the algorithm). The next innovation in search then necessarily must be to find a different funding model for the engine besides ads, otherwise the same perverse incentive will arise.
Also a good read in the same vein: https://eev.ee/blog/2012/04/09/php-a-fractal-of-bad-design/
I have four monitors connected to my Mac. The two centrals are ultrawides (34UB88-P) on top of each other - the lower one is the main window where the action happens - the one above is the secondary where terminals and other monitoring processes happen). The main is large enough for work and references to be next to each other.

The 4K on the right (run at hi-dpi) is for various non-work chat programs, reference images, etc. the 4K on the left is for work chat and Finder windows, and the laptop display itself holds email.

It works well. The main advantage is being able to glance at chats without switching windows.
Google seems to have optimized its search engine with the goal of making it as easy as possible for potential consumers to connect with Google advertising customers. Google also collects data on consumer search patterns again with the goal of connecting the consumer to the advertiser. That's the business model as far as I can tell. If you don't want to be sucked down their engagement hole, you have to clear your cookies after every search and probably going through a VPN is better.

There is an obvious problem here - companies who don't advertise with Google could easily find themselves blocked from appearing on the first pages of Google search results. Would anyone really be surprised to find that the internals of the Google search algorithm have a weight factor that assigns better scores to sites that advertise with Google? Hence requiring Google to expose the internals of the algorithm to public scrutiny really seems like the only way forward. Yes, those are 'trade secrets'. So are the contents of your favorite hot sauce, but government regulators require those contents to be displayed on the product label (for good reasons).

On top of all that, Google's also under pressure from governments and media corporations to push their information content (aka propaganda, influence, etc.) to the top of search results, burying anything like independent content in those areas (world events, domestic politics, etc.) far down. This is particularly obvious on Youtube incidentally, but Google has the same problem. Some of this can be avoided using the 'verbatim' option and some interesting word choices in your search string, but it's a fairly tedious exercise.

Again, exposing the internals of the Google search algorithm would be interesting here, as it seems clear certain 'authoritative sites' are assigned better scores in the search ranking - not because they have more backlinks or more accurate content, but merely because of governmental and media pressure.
“declining quality” means current google vs past google, not other search engines
>> how tricorder handles calls to multiple nodes

> Sequentially, one after the other,

> […] Ansible does things sequentially too.

No, call to nodes aren't sequential, but by parallel batches where tasks are sequential. Here's an interesting reading on those aspects: https://ansiblefrombasics.blogspot.com/2017/09/serial-limit-...
Whenever I work on huge codebase (think 1M+ lines of code), I always reach for Russ Cox's codesearch https://github.com/google/codesearch. It requires indexing the codebase first, which takes 15 minutes or so, but after that searches are instant.