skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You might find some more thinking about this in the field of Computational Science and Engineering (aka CSE). This is related to computer science, but distinct (often a separate department).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_engineering

Some universities call these "Scientific Computing" as well. E.g., https://gradadm.seas.upenn.edu/masters/scientific-computing/

There is even an industry journal (closely linked to high performance computing). Of course this CSE is said to mean "Computing in Science and Engineering" (just to add confusion):

https://www.computer.org/csdl/magazine/cs/2022/01

Here's a paper that touches on some of the challenges of implementing proofs (and other scientific theory) in software. https://f1000research.com/articles/9-1192
You have the same problem with MS or Google, and Google probably isn't going to kill Gmail/Drive anytime soon. If it's a core service you're fine.
This is not increasing the percentage-based cut (referral fee), this is increasing the fulfillment fee which is size/weight based.
This is a pretty weird article. I get that the author is unhappy with members of her cohort who are rich because of inherited wealth and she doesn't like conspicuous consumption of "natural wine" but the idea that natural wine is emblematic of these problems is just weird to me?

It's not as if inherited wealth, greenwashing, landlords, or conspicuous consumption were just invented within the last couple years by older Millennials with inherited wealth.

Similarly,

> As the growth limits of free-market economies are approached, the logic of late-stage capitalism dictates that new markets must be identified and aggressively pursued.

Identifying new markets isn't "late-stage" capitalism... It's just capitalism, period. Many people also believe that capitalism inherently leads to wealth inequality unless efforts are taken to stop that.

This whole article seems to be implying that the situation is some sort of moral failing of people who drink "natural wine" but if there's a problem here it's the underlying inequality, not the choice of wealthy people to spend money on veblen goods?
> nobody who claims they are a "free speech absolutist" can stay consistent with that declaration after even one or two simple questions.

Try me.
Sweetened water? Probably contains some tea too? It should probably be cheaper than that and at the same time not even worth ingesting.
Ask HN: Which way for storing client's RSA public key is correct?
For end to end encryption, client should pass his own RSA public key to server after every re-login. Client should have a dynamic RSA public key. Client may have the same credential but with different RSA public keys. Client will generate a RSA key pair randomly after start the app for the first time.

In other words, client will login from different devices at the same time.

For now all user sessions are stored in Redis server using Django(Python) framework as backend. Other user info are stored in PostgreSQL database.

I am thinking about 2 approaches for exchanging public keys between client and server.

*client sends his login credentials and public key to the server, then server will verify the credentials, then*

1. Server add client's present pub key into his login session (redis server). Server will read client's pub key from Redis server to encrypt data. Later on, server will pass the encrypted to client.

2. Server add client's present pub key into PostgreSQL database with some columns, such as foreign_key to user_id, client_pub_key, valid_until, created_at. All the RSA key validation will be handled by the Django(Python) server. (I'm worried querying client RSA keys everytime from database will drag down the performance)

Which one do you think is modern, secure and fast for End-to-End encryption for user login from multiple devices?

Some better designs?

Appreciate your comments!
Correct. The FAA is set up to be default quite conservative (small c... "Reluctant to change things without a lot of work"). This makes a lot of sense given what they do (an amortized cost to public health over decades is a lot less likely to get people fired than a private plane falling out of the sky into the middle of an elementary school because the engine failed mid-flight due to a new fuel changing the mean time between failure in an unexpected way), but it does mean that even when things are understood to be safe and proven safe, simple inertia can keep the FAA from certifying them until someone lights a damn fire under them.

Although on this specific topic, I almost wonder if you could make a case that the unleaded avgas is safer not for public health, but for the private pilot and therefore the public in terms of the FAA's main understanding of safety (IE don't let planes crash). How much is a pilot's reasoning capacity compromised by chronic lead poisoning due to the necessary handling of avgas and breathing in fumes that they must do in operation of their plane?
Such events is the moment when news agencies reveal their true faces. Compare how different outlets want to frame the narrative.

Axios: "Elon Musk goes into full goblin mode". This outlet pretends to be neutral in quiet times. They usually frame the narrative by omission of inconvenient news.

Reuters: "Elon Musk makes $43 billion cash takeover offer for Twitter". That's plain and factual.

RedState: "Liberals Absolutely Lose It Over Elon Musk's Hostile Takeover Bid of Twitter". But they don't pretend to be neutral: it's in their name.
a physical jail cell and a faraday cage and you'll only need to tighten the chains a little more!
E-banking security. Configured a dedicated hardware laptop with default network policy outgoing to denied. Manually configured a very limited set of IPs for the banks sites used (no DNS server allowed, static resolution in /etc/hosts) and OS packages. Second step (or factor) done on a dedicated phone hardware too (no sim card used). Automatic browser startup at session open with tabs open for the banks website.

Been operational for a few years. Minimal maintenance. Great peace of mind.
I thought skiving was only a Scottish term - is it commonly used where you are too?
It works alright on a few hundred lines but not on thousands. It truncates the output. Or at least my SQL client (Sequel Pro) does.
Inflation of inflation
While this is all true, I think the reason why people so often run underpowered tests is not because they "lacks a firm understanding of statistical power" but because we have not made a compelling case for an alternative. UXR surveys? In my experience that is even more underpowered than AB tests. User testing? Often just as subjective as gut calls.

Gut calls (ie product sense) seem like the only real choice, but I think there really needs to be an argument made for WHY that is the way, rather than just against other options.
Europe’s first multilingual, generalizable AI model
"Groceries are 8% higher than last year. Dollar stores: now dollar-and-a-quarter stores." - so, is it 8% or 25% ?
Even in the photo I can see things not under lock.

And in basically every store I've ever been in that sells perfume, the bottles are stored behind a counter or within a locked case.

Are we really making a case for regime change based on a photo of one aisle in a store tweeted alongside an obvious exaggeration?
> Ugh, my main point is that the concept of "free speech" in the US is not relevant at all to the question of whether a private entity can remove you from their platform for saying something they don't like.

and i'm saying that you appear to treat social media and digital identity as some superfluous luxury that can be revoked without consequence from an individual as punishment (or for more dubious reasons), much like how republicans view health care and social welfare: with the notable exception of the US and one or two others, every country recognizes that private corporations must provide health care (or the means to it - i'm talking about the equipment, education, etc. being provided largely by non-governmental institutions), and citizens must be allowed to access to it regardless of who they are and what they've said, or even done.

yes, you are correct that the constitution does not prevent private corporations from removing content that they do not like, that is the point here. there is no question over the legality of such removals, and i don't think anyone here has tried to raise one.

i'm not trying to smuggle constitutional/government mandate, i'm explicitly trying to discuss the notion of whether or not it should exist.
Drive's organization is a usability nightmare and I hope someone at Google has a plan for this. Shared with me is a graveyard, file permissions are a nightmare to manage, and repairing mistakes is painful to impossible.
It has terribly outdated info today. MDN does everything it does but better and always up to date yet MDN almost always shows up after w3schools in my results
I’m not convinced Twitter changed political discourse. It just lowered the price of a microphone to a point that I can get public-transit levels of discourse without leaving my home.
It's a difficult topic, I don't think any country has found a humane way to deal with terrorist organizations.

US chose to bomb Afghanistan into the ground, China chose to establish very strict social controls. Both are terribly inhumane to innocent people in those regions, but what are real alternatives?
There's a good one in the article!
I think it's such a hard question because the line moves in accordance to people's position in their culture and society. Even oppressed/marginalized people can have very different circumstances. For example, the 80s-00s were very homophobic, particularly in certain areas of the country, but one thing I had in my favor was a parent with their own household that supported me. That meant that if, say, my dad pushed the issue and was an ass, I just stopped visiting. And likewise, once he'd come around (took 3-4 years), if his family had been an ass to me, they would have lost us all because my immediate family was behind me.

I also tested well enough (I was the top scorer in the county on all of our standardized tests) that it was worth shutting up about my being a big fat homo.

That's a very different situation from a gay kid in an Evangelical home in rural Alabama in the 90s, or (moving outside of sexuality) an African American family in the US South in the 50s.

Agency is very tied into a person's individual circumstances, and trying to legislate rules and policy around that is a nightmare, particularly given it can change on a dime. (My MS diagnosis knocked out a fair chunk of my agency).

I think most people's instinct is to try to protect the most vulnerable, but that may end up stifling conversation to the point where the group dissolves/can't hold itself together OR opening people to being poached away to other groups OR other groups with different norms outcompeting or attacking that group.

We need to be careful not to monkey's paw ourselves.
That's the same possibility: "Employees are ineffective, because the product has no need for them".
> You are "reading between the lines" and seeing statements that aren't actually there, then claiming bad-faith communication on others

You simply claiming that does not make it so.

>Finally, saying what you think another is thinking or going to say, as in Putin's actions and motives, is very far from SUPPORTING those actions and motives.

Yes, there was no disagreement on this point. The point is that "Putin will view X as a provocation, so we shouldn't do X" is an unconvincing argument, because Putin has already claimed his own actions were provocations against him. There is no world in which Putin will not either find or invent a pretext to do what he wants, and call it a "provocation".

No matter what anyone says or does, as long as Ukraine still exists as an independent country, Putin will say, it is engaged in "provocation" which necessitates eliminating Ukraine as an independent country.
He said he'd keep it. I don't even know what this gets mentioned so often. He has barely ever talked about it.
I've been writing programs for myself since I started programming on a Tandy Level I. I'm always working on some project or other. Most of them are too big for me, but I do them so I can learn how the real things work. Currently writing an html user agent, but it's not even off the ground yet. I have a program that uses something like genetic algorithms to play go, but it's not doing very well relatively speaking. I wrote a program to resize files using an underlying floating point grid whose size you can specify that tends to work okay. It's slow, but I use it for resizing files for smaller displays and just to tinker with.

There are staples I keep coming back to. I'm always trying to write a reverse ray tracer that shoots photons from light sources and tracks them around to see if they hit a pinhole camera, but they are of course way too slow. I've played with some ideas for compressing images, and I've taken a few runs at the hutter prize (compressing wikipedia). Writing a massive text-based old-school rogue-like is something I keep coming back to.

I used to mod games, and have played with some programs designed to edit different file types I was trying to reverse engineer. I've played around with trying to optimize sha-256 hashing, but haven't gotten anywhere. I also have tons of shells scripts that do various things.

I usually write in straight C these days, though I've tried various programs in D, Free Pascal, Ada, Java, assembly, Perl, BASIC (back in the day) and probably others I've forgotten. I remember in high school writing a game with a friend for one of the early Tandy machines in assembly on paper and then hand-assembling it to machine code and using poke in BASIC to put it in memory and then executing it. We didn't have access to an assembler.

I haven't ever given out any of my code, I just use it to play with ideas and to keep my skills up.
If you don’t already have redis in your stack, stick with postgresql for now. You can always optimise later, but a proper machine (not a crappy public cloud VM with heavy throttled network storage) can handle a lot of SQL transactions before introducing redis is worth the effort.
As a PhD student, I wrote a script that fetched my Uni’s menu each day, parsed the PDF and displayed a Gnome notification of the main course right before lunch time.
How do they know it's cosmic rays and not something else?
yeah, SimpleChains definitely won't be useful for the next large language model, but there's a lot of very small models in the world from physics, to pharma, to high frequency trading. Having libraries that are optimized for these usecases is a major benefit for a fairly large niche of users.
“ also heat up and burn tissue, which can definitely cause cancer”

Where do you get that “fact” from? I have never seen any reputable source say that heat, even to the point of tissue damage, has any affect on cancer.
Most of the market called out the Fed for using the term "transitory" considering the Government was printing money left and right. Now we have had a huge inflation jump as predicted.

The Fed had access to the same, if not better, data than everyone else. A big part of shortages was a rise in demand.
What is "the will of the people" with regards to Twitter?
I think a critical point here lies on what exactly you're accomplishing when you're programming. A person could spend a lifetime on improving Google's ad network, make an incredible amount of money from it, and for all that have not accomplished very much in the sense that we care about accomplishment.

One question that comes to mind is "What would happen if everyone did this?". To me, it seems straightforward that we don't want everyone writing proofs to switch over entirely to programming, nor do we want everyone coding to switch over entirely to writing proofs. We would want a certain proportion of people doing proofs, and other proportion doing programming. Each person's own experiences and talents would determine which one is more useful, but on-balance we might have some proportion p doing proofs, and 1-p doing programming.

So, the question of "Can the same individual accomplish more with programming than proofs" turns into 2 questions - the situation that person is in, and also the global context of whether society is doing a good job at maintaining p provers and 1-p programmers for the overall benefit of society.

For my money, I think society has made p too small. There are way too many good reasons to go into software engineering as opposed to math and CS (namely $$$$) and as a result the social benefit of proofs is under-explored. I don't think however, that I would accept very bad odds for that bet like 1:100 or 1:1000. Proofs (and the societal structure, academia, that has been created to create proofs) have their own problems and as such it's very hard to even determine what p should be.
In true HN fashion, first-mover / market-leader Sonos isn't even mentioned yet.

The reason there isn't a standard (other than Sonos, or those discontinued Chromecast dongles) is that you need the following to work seamlessly:

- network attached DAC of some sort (in-speaker, or not; don't care)

- iOS app

- Android app

- the top 10 streaming services

- radio streaming directories, like TuneIn, or the open source ones.

- airplay

- Chromecast

- network / device auto discovery

- sound synchronization

- power management

- desktop apps

- NFS/cifs/etc bridge

- hdmi/fiber/??? bridge

- N.M surround sound (for N = 2, 3,5,7,9 and M=0,1,2)

- Some battery powered, waterproof speaker that works in direct sunlight on hot days

- Hardware distribution at places like IKEA, BestBuy, Amazon, etc.

- A healthy used hardware market

- 10+ year support lifetimes on the speakers + amps (note: discrete, cheap DAC dongles could disrupt sonos on this point)

And other things I forgot about.
Don’t get me wrong; I’m not a fan of the free market and “corporations as people”. I’m just pointing out what I view as an odd hypocrisy, that being that deregulation is a good thing except when it isn’t. Maybe I’m wrong though, I’m happy to have my mind changed
Apparently not -- https://www.etymonline.com/word/skive

Interesting etymology though, I love when you see a random PIE root show up in so many languages.
I was glad CA did this, because suddenly every big box store is selling electric lawn equipment that was designed in this century. Just a few years ago I went looking for an electric lawnmower and they were still using 6v lead acid batteries for 20 minutes of runtime on a 12" blade and cost a small fortune. Two years ago suddenly everybody has affordable lithium powered modular battery systems. Granted, they're all made out of cheap plastic, but getting people actually buying them is the most important first step in getting good and affordable equipment.
There is Airplay 1, which is the only widely supported protocol I'm aware of. See for example https://github.com/mikebrady/shairport-sync.

There is also DLNA, which is actually a standard. I think it's rarely supported for push audio streaming since the protocol is poorly specified.
Why don't they just increase the fees? Calling it a surcharge implies inflation is temporary which it isn't!

Is this a marketing gimmick for the generations who have never seen inflation before?
Can’t really call yourself a free speech absolutist at the same time though unless you’re comfortable with blatant lies. Malicious/manipulative speech is still speech
Thinking about how an extrusion die is made, I imagine it's tricky to make very thin fins and to put them very close together. Copper work-hardens significantly too, which may be a factor.
So Twitter was at $70 per share a year ago. So what? Jack Dorsey was CEO a year ago, too. The share price was $33 less than a month ago.

But, despite an absolutely incredible roller-coaster news cycle, things have been definitely trending down at Twitter ($33/share last month), which was reflected in its share price. The current executive team (and Dorsey) had wasted time focusing on things that didn't matter instead of things that did matter.

Boards have several fiduciary duties to the shareholders. As an all-cash offer, this generates for the shareholders a substantial return with NO RISK, and so the board has a serious legal obligation to carefully review this offer and make a decision.

If the board elects to reject this offer, then their reasons for doing so need to be very clearly elucidated, because, as Twitter is a public company, they would have to see something in their crystal ball that the rest of the market does not.
In college I would buy a can of Arizona Iced tea at the local drugstore and then walk over to the McDonalds and buy two Cheeseburgers for a dollar each. You can still-almost-do this over a decade later (a cheeseburger is usually over a dollar depending on the state).
“Stalking” is doing a lot of work there, it's publicly available information. The account isn't literally tailing his jet.

If you're a billionaire and buy a private jet you naturally have less privacy than other people and that's the breaks. If you go on SNL hold wild press conferences you will have even less privacy. That's the cost.

You cannot be rich, ostentatious, and private. Gotta pick just two.
> surely you must recognize that you are likely in the minority of e-mail users?

No, I don't recognize that. Citation needed.

> didn't trump's twitter platform get banned from all the common cloud providers? is it that much more ridiculous to think that they would be unable to colo with anyone?

I don't know, but as to your last question, yes, that's ridiculous, as there are thousands of datacenters out there.

Besides, Trump's twitter platform is not a person. It's a business with many more resources than the the vast majority of individuals have. It's dangerous to start from the principle that this organization should have the same rights as a natural person.

> two or three, really. and many areas in the US are limited to one or two.

You're talking about mobile providers. I specifically mentioned mobile and VoIP and you cut that part out. I'm done here as you don't seem to be willing to have an honest discussion.
I've at least studied a lot of what other legal scholars have to say on the topic.

I think even the most staunch free market advocates understand the danger of monopolies. I think the same strain of thought makes them understand the danger of oversized government.

And so many of these companies are very arguably monopolies and should be either broken up or turned into a utility. In many people's minds, there's been what looks like a quid pro quo to do favors for government officials in order to avoid sensible efforts to regulate these essential communication platforms to even 1% of the level of say financial institutions.

Twitter may be a microcosm, but Twitter, Facebook and Google's communication platforms are responsible for enough speech to flip elections, to endorse or suppress vital information, and topple regimes. It's not something to be taken lightly.
Why would he sell shares? He would have to pay income tax on that. He will borrow against it obviously.
They do, now. Many stores in SF malls that formerly had 2 entrances now close one, and post a security guard by the other.
He also said he was making a Tesla Roadster. And a Tesla Cybertruck.
What would a non-flawed plan look like? One that results in everyone having "correct" beliefs? I'm pretty sure it would be a great deal worse than what we have now.
Speaking about enlightenment, isn't it strange that Elon Musk is into politics now? I mean he wants to go to Mars, his project was "Flyin' mother nature's silver seed to a new home in the sun", and now he goes right in the opposite direction. Did he have any major setbacks with his Starship?
> Also, for the love of God, stop calling it a democracy.

The US is a democracy though
I wonder how many people with some clout have decided to forego Googles business offerings because of a bad personal interaction with them.