skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Lightning happens all over but it is relatively rare on the US west coast, particularly in the Pacific Northwest. We had an actual thunderstorm in the fall of 2019 and everyone was talking about it for a couple of days after, it was so noteworthy.
You left off the punchline: But still offer the same mediocre pay and required in office attendance.
If we can't identify any second order effects, it calls into question the validity of the original claim, though. I'm not too impressed by talk of windshield bug splatter count, because it smells a lot like folk 'science' and not real data. A lack of second order effects reinforces that suspicion.

I'm quite sure there's some real science going on, but it isn't as headline worthy.
How are other manufacturers able to have better cameras in their laptops without sacrificing much?
Your argument sounds like one for local investment in fabs. The point is that you develop industry (with subsidies) and the ancillary industries follow and then you (and the rest of the world) are not dependent on a single source.

Of course it's not enough to just pay Intel to open a fab you have to compete successfully with places like Taiwan and have a growing industry, otherwise that won't happen. That's the main risk here.
WordPress is pretty easy to detect even when wp-admin is hidden. People seem to not know theres a json api that exposes a lot of information. It's a good idea to disable showing authors since this can give an attacker information they can use to exploit in a few different ways. We had to do this for a high profile client a while back and wrote a little helpful plugin

I bet they are undercounting a bit since the large content sites will keep their WordPress install outside of public view completely and the site is just headless.

[0] https://github.com/firstandthird/wp-disable-authors
That's not a use of crypto, that's what it does. What is a use for that? I'm with OP on this, I've yet to see a use for it that isn't speculative gambling.
Is there anything in that post that supports this theory?

I recall a study that indicated that as far as small teams go there are only a handful of people (very rare) that actually can bring a team's productivity, happiness, and other factors UP. Rather the vast majority of team's productivity and happiness was largely determined by the worst participant, not the best.

Granted that's all very difficult to measure / defined, but I've found that to be the case personally.

There's so much focus on hiring "the best" I'm not sure that's where the issues are.
The point is in none of the scenarios 2FA isn’t compromised at the same time or is even needed (except in the offline cracking case, where cracking password + token is harder than cracking just password, but with a reasonable password both are practically impossible). Read again. Consider realistic attack vectors instead of repeating dogma.
This doesn't require blockchain. The registrar could charge you a one time fee to buy the domain forever if ICANN allowed it. It doesn't. Permissionless blockchains are especially ill-suited for this purpose because KYC for domain names is a thing.
It takes like fifteen minutes to set things up. Every startup needs a competent Unix sysadmin.

EDIT: a Threadripper will do for CI. Quick as you like.
Why is this a weird interpretation?

1) Bruce says systems that result in catastrophic loss from loss of a password are unsafe.
2) Reading at face value, Bruce's idea of a safe system is one where your passwords are recoverable.
3) Bruce knows that wallets are secured by asymmetric cryptography, not "passwords". Therefore, he must be simplifying for a general audience.
4) Reconciling the previous two points results in an argument for mandatory private key escrow.

It does not make sense that Bruce would advocate for mandatory key escrow, and yet, that is the logical endpoint of the argument he made in his tweet for supporting this letter.
Nice catch, I was scanning for homomorphic encryption, but missed this. Have no idea how else they would implement this.
there was a strong chip industry in saxony decades ago, but they became way too expensive when china came. they are slowly starting to built back there, but progress is slow.

Bosch and Infinion have the fabs there
Another day, another huge GCP outage that impacts every region.
It's been my experience that the more folks that meet a candidate from a diverse set of backgrounds, culture, and experience make for the best data in moving forward with a hire (and for the candidate). Most of the interviews i've been through have been at least three meetings or more. It also can depend on the position you are applying for and the level of responsibility you may hold over other employees. All this being said I really advocate for paying folks for their time beyond agreed upon interview structure. If they want a trial period or an additional meeting with preparation I think it's the right thing to do.
I mean germany/the EU does pay subsidies to (cucumber)-farmers [0], there is literally billions each year flowing into keeping farmers somewhat afloat.

[0]https://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/2013-11/agrarreform-landwirts...
Investing in those (other than ASML) just means the money will go to Taiwan/China. It's no more likely to stay in the EU.
sorry, misspelled infineon
Hiring top talent is both hard and costly.

So many companies hire just a few top talents and fill the rest of positions with average guys.

This works well as the top guys solve the hardest problems and also split the complicated things into less complicated things the average guys can tackle.

If I would start a software business, I would do the same. I would rather direct juniors and give them manageable tasks, solve the most complex things myself and take care of the architecture than hire experienced seniors who I might not afford.

There is a big problem if those top guys are gone.
Huge exploit that existed for 3 years is the only unrealistic thing in your list.
I completely disagree, 100 billion might sound like a lot of money, but it's not. It's going to take like 20 years to build/assemble right? That's like 5 billion a year the EU GDP is 17.9 trillion per year. It's worth it just to keep all these physicists and engineers employed.
It works for me on current versions of Firefox and Chrome! :) (On the desktop)
ASML should demand 30% of profits, like Apple does with its App Store.
They tend to have very left-wing/socialist friendly governments, and instead of just building better products locally the governments have decided to just keep you from buying foreign things. Electronics are particularly hard to make and a desirable market, so they tend to have high tariffs or other limitations.

Famously in Brazil they had a very inward facing economy (propped up mainly by the socialist candidate Lula, who was later arrested on fraud charges). But one of the things they did was build a Blackberry factory which was a big deal at the time, however the phones were always years out of date and generally terrible
> domestic semi companies (NXP, ST, Ericsson, Nordic, Infineon, Bosch, AMS, etc.) are only competing for relatively low margin chips with high competition

Then maybe they should compete? (though those are not small companies - and with most products that are not as popular with Intel but are popular in other areas)

I think they missed the ARM boat, possibly. But they should go and ask for a slice of that money.
> please name me another EU company

There isn't any. That's because EU taxes and regulations make running a large-scale business less attractive - and because there really is no market for another big-chip manufacturer; if you want to break into that segment (even if it was a 'fair' market), the only way to compete is on the price, and that China can do better.
See also

HN Replies Data Security Incident
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26968908
> So we've established asking the police to do their job is OK

No, we haven't.

A reply heard during oral argument has no binding precedential force.

(And, even if we had, restraining orders are issued by courts; so we would have established that a court of law asking police do due their work is okay.)

> And we know money is speech.

“Money is speech” in the sense that expending your money to publish speech, not in the sense that giving money to people you are trying to sway is speech. (The political speech cases you rely on for that were about independent expenditures for public propaganda, not bribes to politicians.)

> So does that mean it's legal for me to "ask" the police to investigate someone or something by giving them a few million dollars?

No. For the multiple reasons stated above.
re: censorship, prove to us how you would go about censoring an Ethereum transaction please?

re: timestamp, prove to us how easy it is to build a distributed and tamper-proof append-only ledger without a BFT consensus mechanism?

The technology is absolutely the focus of this discussion here.
I disagree: there are often different ways to implement a design pattern, so IMHO a design pattern is an abstract idea in the same way monads are.

The main difference is that design patterns have 'fuzzy' rules whereas monads are more precisely defined.
The reality of the situation is that blockchains are a mostly useless and inefficient datastructure that by and large don't solve any real problems. I find it insulting that I can't say this without someone labeling me a "nocoiner." Yes you can make money with them, that isn't the point. Sometimes an algorithm can just be bad. If you can't look at an algorithm objectively, maybe consider that you're not trying to discern the reality of the situation?
Why so many startups stop talking to users and why it's a bad idea
One of the most important and biggest mantras in the startup world is user-centricity. "be close to the user, develop solutions for problems people have, product market fit is all about the user's needs". This is all true and should definitely be cultivated, because one of the many advantages of a startup compared to larger companies is its massive flexibility - and that includes the ability to work close to the user and make decisions quickly. Of course, I'm only talking about product development here.

Why do so many startups decide to prioritize the user's basic needs lower once the supposed PMF is reached? Because the solution obviously meets what the user needs (because, by definition, product market fit can only be achieved when the solution provided meets the requirements). However, there is a problem with this: users change their needs from time to time.

This happens slowly but steadily, of course. Like the frog that is slowly boiled and doesn't notice because the temperature barely rises noticeably, it is important for companies to keep a constant eye on the thermometer. Even the biggest companies in the world with the most established products lose their relevance as soon as they stop evolving.

In the early stages of a startup, it is en vouge to talk to your customers and find out in close interviews exactly what needs exist. Customer support and sales then do this in later stages as they work closely with the customer, but product development often forgets to build clear structures into their work that allow them to record and analyze the customer voice.

Reading the customer's mind is also important for vertical product development. But it's also exhausting and doesn't bring any money directly into the bank. Listening is one thing, recognizing patterns and taking action is another.

I very often made the mistake of developing products that no one needed and working on features that were based on assumptions. So often that I now hold lectures in universities on how to work closer to the customer and validate needs.

Because this is not enough for me and I have seen many great founders fail, I decided to found Watchwork.

With watchwork, companies can make their customers (and churnees) their north star. Smart feedback flows paired with analytics help founders, product developers and also other teams like marketing and co to constantly keep an eye on the needs of their customers.

So far, I'm working on the product in a closed beta - after all, I don't want to just preach, I want to practice.

In doing so, I am clearly focusing on three points:
- User centricity
- Clear design systems for intuitive handling and better scalability
- Small and fast iterations for hypothesis validation

So far so good. Now it's time to talk to customers!

- Gabriel
Yes, Bosch just built a huge factory in Saxony
"5-by-6 pixel array"

These are not exactly high res images.
One round, possibly with several people, should be enough.

5 rounds seems insane, 1 seems inefficient. Why 'waste' the time of several busy employees to interview a candidate that one person could quickly rule out in one interview.
This article entirely misses the mark on the reasons why scaling is difficult. I’d even go out on a limb to suggest they havent experienced solving these problems before.

There are lots of factors that impede growth and yes the raw talent is one of them. But the other factors like technical debt, product debt, poor leadership, lack of alignment, all contribute to “not shipping”. You cannot realistically solve these problems with engineering talent alone. Without a system or structure to enable them even the least “talented” engineer would be rendered useless.
It's about national security. A fab is necessary for national security
Same. Paper has no downtime.
Follow the corridor at the far right to get to some enemies! :D
This reads like a positive framing of Jacque Ellul's critique of technique:

> The characteristics of the technical phenomenon are Autonomy, Unity, Universality, Totalization. Technique obeys a specific rationality. The characteristics of technical progress are self-augmentation, automization, absence of limits, casual progression, a tendency toward acceleration, disparity, and ambivalence. [1]

Supposing the harm Google does (e.g. ambivalence towards individuals harmed by algorithms) is a direct result of this totalizing impulse, maybe it's time to question some of the fundamental assumptions present within.

1. https://ellul.org/themes/ellul-and-technique/
Ensuring a strategic supply against encroaching French cornichons?
Not to mention the power required to continuously accelerate.

Or what happens to anything hitting you when you're traveling at that speed.

Or needing to turn.

Every answer is just a disguise for four more problems.
This should be a blog post because it's a thing that management is willfully blind about.

Not every manager is a leader but every leader must find some way to manage and mentor people to their greatest collective success.

Management is demanding other people set up the fishing gear and complaining when enough fish is not caught. Management also requires paying the fisherman, sorry the "recourses" the least amount of money possible because all that matters are the shareholders and next quarter.

Mentoring is teaching people why fishing makes sense and the best ways to do it with the materials at hand.
It will be on engineering and product management to know what is a trivial vs. non-trivial feature and decide the product roadmap. This is not a question of what is the valuable feature.

I’m saying if you have an organization that can’t ship anything, then you need to right the ship by promoting a mindset of actually building and shipping value. The value is not determined by the ICs.
BeReal’s a fascinating infrastructure project. The design of the app is that, within 2 minutes every user receives a notification and uploads 2 images. That’s an amazing traffic spike, and they’re already having trouble scaling—some users not getting the notification or it takes up to a minute to upload the images.

I don’t want to make predictions, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was impossible to scale an app of that model to the same scale as Snapchat, for example. It will be hard to keep BeReal’s growth from leading to a degraded user experience.
The 10X engineer might be a myth, but there's a real danger to ending up with a an organization full of "mediocre" talent that can't ship a good-quality product.

Nearly every IoT product I buy seems to be staffed with those mediocre teams, resulting in apps that are practically useless.

I'm not going to say that some "top talent" won't be toxic to an organization, but having _nobody_ in those top spots to help mentor and bring up the level of more junior developers in an organization is a recipe for shipping nothing but bad products that make nobody happy.
>Of course it was a significant discovery, but honestly it would have been a far more interesting if we detected literally nothing.

Well you would have needed the LHC to confirm that, too, right? As a totally uneducated person just remembering media and online discussion about it at the time, I think the most interesting possibility was the detection of entirely new particles, which didn't happen.

And in the run-up to the LHC, I think there was a lot of hope in the possibility of finding stuff, but maybe there's not as much hope now.
I'm a fan of the MakePython ESP32 dev kit. It's reasonably priced and the ESP32 makes it possible to do nice things.
https://www.makerfabs.com/makepython-esp32-starter-kit.html

I used it for our Toit tutorial:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1K-TYea7jbYfj2ecMUmr0T0zd...
For which language? but generally I use the common/default/stock compiler for any language.
If there is a conflict with China, maritime routes will become much less reliable than they are now, after 75+ years of peace and 30+ years of a unipolar international system.
Personally, the seller refusing to sell if you get an inspection is such a huge red flag I would never enter the contract. The house could be in a state where it should be condemned, and you wouldn't be able to tell.
Indeed, but this isn't the regulation we need unfortunately
Yes, also at 18Bn it is a HUGE factory ehich will make the area more attractive for smaller players. I think and hope they know what they are doing
This is spot on and I feel a lot of the comments here miss this context. Germany has tried this before and it was a gigantic waste - they build a fab somewhere at massive cost, claim it as victory because it's "invested locally", zero ecosystem materializes around it, and ten years later the fab is obsolete and shuts down. It helps nobody except the chip company.
For anyone confused about heat and temperature (which in everyday speech get often mixed up) here is a good thermodynamics recap about the definition.[0]

A lightning strike can heat up the air around it because of its relatively high electrical resistance; up to 50k degrees[1].

The change in temperature (average kinetic energy of the air molecules) itself can be seen in the lighting flash (creating for split seconds an awesome "plasma channel", effectively ripping apart the molecules in its dendritic way through hundreds of MV) and consequently heard (if near enough) as a pressure wave, a quick rolling thunder rumble.

Relative to the vast amount of air around a typical lightning discharge event with its characteristic current flow [2] this "temperature" cannot sustain itself so it disperses very quickly. However under the right conditions (flammable materials, humidity etc.) this can jumpstart the chemical process of "burning". Because of the multitude of variables this ain't straightforward [3] as often depicted in movies. So, no the lightning itself cannot "damage" the integrity of a safe but the secondary effects of the environment around it i.e. continuing heat source.
(For convenience I've left out the scenarios regarding possible EMP damage and its secondary effects).

[0]https://www.khanacademy.org/science/chemistry/thermodynamics...

[1]https://www.weather.gov/safety/lightning-temperature

[2]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6953689/table/e...

[3]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6953689/#!po=85...
This was an awesome response and you absolutely nailed it.

A vast majority of our customers actually have some sort of internal bot built. It's quite limited usually and largely focused on the "creation" portions of an incident. Most commonly create an incident channel, create Zoom, link to a few integrations, and that seems to be it.

But depending on who you speak with that can be enough which is totally fair. Especially when complexity and incident volumes are low.

And yes agree not every user on the platform will value it the same. An SRE vs. someone in legal will find different value out of it. Our goal is to make this accessible to the entire org not just engineering teams.

Thank you for the feedback on the pricing page as well!
Well, if you have any alternative than gas pipes please let us know. Germany is already pushing for green techs. And, gas coming from another part of the continent is always more expensive than neighboring countries? Yes, they shouldn't have dismantled Nuclear Power. But after an incident in Japan, many people were nuclear phobic so can't blame politicians alone?

That being said, I do agree that paying 5.5bn of taxpayers money to foreign tech is silly. Such money can be easily used in investing local companies which will provide more employement and ROI to Germany.
>it will pretty much solve the trust issues deep fakes are causing.

It's a nice piece of tech, I can see it being used in court for example, to strengthen the claim that a video is not a deepfake.

However, that's not "the" problem with deepfakes. Propaganda of all sorts have demonstrated that "Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it". As in, with the proper deepfakes, you can do massive damage via social media for example. People re-share without validation all the time, and the existence of deepfakes add fuel to this fire. And I think that we can't do anything about either.
In this book, a space flight to Alpha Centauri uses an asteroid which is constantly accelerated at 1g for half the flight, then constantly decelerates at 1g for the second half of the trip:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sparrow_(novel)

That eliminates need for "artificial gravity" and really drove home to me that 1g is really the limiting factor for long range human space flight.
> Remote might work to make a decent product, but I don’t think you can build something great.

Gitlab, Automaticc, Cockroach Labs...So many companies dispute this point.

The open source Linux team is fully remote for christs sake.

Meanwhile Microsoft is office based.

It seems to me the opposite of what you're saying is true.

Remote companies make great products, office companies make average products.
Good old <local school>...
Once that happens, a criminal could notice your password is more of a pattern than a full random password (of typable characters).

But in order to do anything beyond hacking the single compromised account, the criminal would have to reverse engineer my algorithm, which, as you said, nobody would bother doing.

In addition, the algorithm is complex enough that it would be hard for a casual observer to distinguish the embedded domain name from general password randomness.

Your scheme ideally would rely on not tying all your accounts together with the same email address

That is true, but this only becomes relevant when an attacker is manually searching for my email across multiple password dumps (as opposed to an automated credential stuffing attack), which means I’m being specifically targeted.
Pretty much. When you start noticing that folks you respect and enjoy working with are trickling out at an ever increasing rate, that's the universe telling you that you should probably be looking around.