skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Right, that's why I said "I'd say a very long time, probably centuries", not "for eternity".

>But isn't that how it's often deployed? "Don't look at me, blame the previous boss!" is an age old diversion strategy.

It sure is, which is why I made that remark. My point is this kind of misuse doesn't automatically make the original claim false.

Also, the mirror-image claim is just as frequently deployed: don't look too closely at the skeletons in the closet; we now have a magical clean slate.
Unity is in a decent position to be a world dominant company as ar/vr arrives if it can avoid being just yet another vector of ad spam.
Which is why there are accessibility settings for exactly that.
The audience isn't really Apple. It's regulators.
Can you please not post like this, or like the comment upthread?

If you know more than others, that's great, but in that case, please share some of what you know so the rest of us can learn, and definitely please don't put down those who know less, even if you find them annoying sometimes.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...
> provided it works

Ay, there's the rub!
Deliver your messages encrypted, not mess up video quality when sending to/from Android users, sends messages over WiFi just to name a few.
Anyway you cut it, all options being discussed or proposed puts the burden on women.

I think this is the first issue to address.

Contraception is for the woman to learn about, pay for and take, same for plan b, pregnancy tests and even abortions.

Pregnancy costs are for the mother to pay, for the mother to learn what to do about it, how to handle. Raising a child is for the mother to do. Shame related to all this is for the woman to endure.

I think any argument for forcing a woman to X, Y or Z would be much stronger if some equivalent contribution was provided to them for the service which they would be obligated to provide.

If all this education was provided properly and for free, access to all these paid for and readily available, if society or father's had to provide adequate in-full financial compensations without lengthy court battles, if father's were forced to be there at various step of the pregnancy, donate their own blood or organs if needed due to medical complications, take care of the child fully if the mother doesn't want it, etc. If women were given full pregnancy work leaves at no reduced salary, etc.

If you had that, you could posture to make abortion illegal, maybe minus certain medical related complications and maybe a few other scenarios like incestual rapes and all that.

Minus all that, I think it's hard to have a discussion about forcing someone to do something against their will, which will incur health repercussions, lifestyle changes, lifelong time and money commitments, and physical and mental pain.

We don't force people to give a hungry man some food. We don't force people to share their property with others. We don't force people to care for the elderly. We don't force people to pay for others medical expenses.
According to the sources I was able to find, iOS and Android collectively make up more than 99% of the smart phone market. There isn’t any significant market share outside of Android because there is no significant market outside of Android.
One way looking at it is that carrier job is only to provide data service. They should not be in the business of messaging. Users (and market) will chose to use whatever messaging service they want.

This even applies to voice. I rather do Signal voice call than carrier voice call with most of my friends. Better quality, encryption, etc.
I think there's something to it. I wore myself out on 'proper' development (C) nearly two decades ago. I just recently picked up Python because I was reaching the limits of BASH but didn't want to dive too deep.

Getting started hasn't hit that "ugh I hate doing this" nerve I typically get from writing code
I think the difference is that South Africa expanded the voting population such that the election results completely changed. It replaced the entire government in a single election and the old rulers haven't gotten any power since, that isn't what happened when other democracies expanded the voting population.

Not sure how it should have been done, the old rulers were associated with apartheid so of course the population would want to replace them, but totally replacing a government in a single election and starting over from basically scratch doesn't seem to lead to good outcomes.
Not only that, but these are complaints coming from non-iPhone users, by definition, which means it is totally up to Android what color their messages are displayed in.
So, you're asserting that the color choice of the bubbles ten years ago was unintentional? That whatever developer coded it had no instruction, Jony Ive & Steve Jobs were silent, and they used a random number generator to pick the hex code?

And additionally, you're asserting that its impossible to change or improve? That its just such an intractable problem which we inherited, and changing it would be such a herculean effort that its not worth moving the needle on?

I've never seen the codebase for the iOS messages app. I believe, even acknowledging that, its probably an absolute mess of legacy code, and I have a ton of sympathy for the developers working on it. I also believe, even acknowledging that, that changing one color is something an intern could do (and because its a big tech product org, there'd be fifty user studies and three orgs of product managers involved and Tim Cook would get a say in it, but those are manufactured problems. Also, let's be clear; if Jobs were still alive & in control, even all those manufactured roadblocks would be torn down, if it were a change he cared to prioritize, because that's the kind of leader he was).

Inaction is Intentional. Inaction is Intentional. Inaction is Intentional.
Apple commits many UI offenses, but the alleged illegibility of SMS messages is BS.

Not to mention that Apple's messaging is hideously broken in more ways than Android integration. iMessage will simply delete your phone number from its "can be reached at" list, which breaks years-long threads with a single (iPhone-using) friend into inexplicable new threads.

Ever go overseas? Try putting a local SIM into your USA phone somewhere else, and watch your phone "forget" all of your contacts. Seriously: WTF? Suddenly all of your contacts are unrecognized by number. It's idiotic.
Very interesting read. I heard about this proof and who solved it, but glad to read the background of this.
> Performance-sensitive applications are still going to go for something native.

What’s up with Java in HFT stuff then? I’ve never understood this: from what I understand in order for it to work, you have to intentionally avoid doing many allocations, and that seems like you’ll be throwing massive amounts of the ecosystem (Javas biggest strength) away.
> in any terminal

I agree; the "in any terminal" part is paternalistically redundant - any software developer who recognizes the npm command will know what to do with it.
> Also, you can't bring out a desktop PC based on Linux because that a very slowly growing market segment

Wouldn't bet on that one
I still remember the glory that was Google Talk back in 2005-ish. And you could connect to it from other xmpp networks. It's insane to me that the current google chat app (a neglected box within gmail) is WAYYY worse than it was almost 20 years ago.
I've been in a team where Platform/Infrastructure Engineers handled everything Terraform and it was great. You just described what you wanted to them and they did it. Developers never touched a .tf file.

Then I moved to a team where Ops write Terraform but also expected developers to contribute. They pitched this as "Developers should be able to make small changes". Turned out we had very different understandings of the definition of "small".

I'm currently in a team with no Ops and developers are fully responsible for managing infra all the way to production. The Terraform implementation is an absolute mess. There is, however, an understanding that it needs fixing and Ops support has been promised.

My answer to "Who should write Terraform" is it's the Platform Engineers. A developer can maybe optionally pitch in if they feel confident enough but ultimately Platform Engineers should own the platform.
The ability to run sandboxed workers from a PostgreSQL-based queue sounds useful all by itself, particularly for multi-tenant SaaS applications that need to do compute-intensive tasks on untrusted inputs. The difference, of course, is that in this case, the worker implementation is part of the application, not a user-defined script. How tightly are the work queue and sandboxed worker runner coupled to the rest of the product?
I agree with all this. Java is a great application programming language.

But bullen was arguing that Java is the best for servers of all types, which is what I object to.
The oppression in the US appears to be on the procedural side of things rather than the laws themselves. The impression I often get is that in the US the enforcement of such laws is rather more capricious and hard to predict than in Europe.

I think what most Europeans find difficult to understand is quite how partisan the US system is and how little support is available for those caught up in legal difficulties of this kind.

Just my impression of course, but impression seems to be what a lot of it is about.
This is a US thing, right?

Haven't received an SMS from a real person (in other words, all SMSes I get are 2FA etc) for, at least 5 years, maybe 10.

Even people who use iPhones don't send SMSes, MMSes or anything as obsolete (including RCS). Everyone just seems to use WhatsApp and Telegram (or if they don't know any better, Viber). Locale: Central Europe.

So, why would anyone stick to the obsolete stuff? Are there regions of the US which have cell phone signals but no Internet access?
I don’t see how this is a problem. If you want to use an inferior method then it should be opt out (like you are doing) instead of the other way around.
Hacker News can be a pretty negative eco-chamber at times. The same post can either generate very positive or very negative comments, just months apart. Not a new phenomenon (remember the post by the Dropbox founder? "Why do I need this when I can rsync").

That said, if all the non-constructive negativity is filtered, there are often gems buried in the comment section, with genuine constructive criticism. As a neutral observer it's relatively easy to find them. If I was emotionally involved with a project, however, I'm not sure I'd read the threads.
Google will allow you to use (and they prefer, and you should too) a Security Key. I use this wherever I can. I don't Tweet, but if I did it would be secured with Security Keys. I have Facebook only inside a single contain on one machine, secured with Security Keys. And so on for many services. More services should do WebAuthn.
I wasn't the one who said I was living a frugal life.
objective-c is living its final years

.net would have been dead without the community driven mono effort

C "was", it would have been dead if it was still

Notice the pattern?
That's a weird reply when a market has mostly two players. By definition there won't be any other significant market share.
Probably many things are clear to me that are not clear to you. Some of them are things I'm wrong about. Others are things I know more about than you do. In yet other cases, the difference in perceptions stems from other causes. It sounds like abortion is in the second category.

You might want to consider that the kind of inflammatory language you're using tends to make productive argument much less likely.

> Facebook employees who refused to comply with a warrant would absolutely be thrown in jail

I think it is very unusual for employees to end up in jail because their corporate employer was found guilty of contempt of court. In particular, I don't think any ProtonMail employee has ever been thrown in jail. We know about cases where companies have successfully refused to introduce cryptographic backdoors into their software; even in the case of the unnamed climate activist https://www.techdirt.com/2021/09/10/protonmail-turned-over-f... ProtonMail was only ordered to provide his IP address, not inject backdoored encryption into his browser to steal his email.

We also know about cases, for example in Germany, where police have injected malware into customers' devices, and as I understand it, companies are required to assist in this. This is not the established law in Nebraska, although it is surely happening covertly in the US in some cases.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32399495 it's backfiring already!
A perfectly sane reaction to art.

Most people are not aware there can be a difference between "art I love" and "masterpieces of Art History".

You do not have to appreciate La Joconda or the Last Supper,just as you might like the art from your neighbor. Both are fine.
If apple made them all the same color I think bullying would change by around 0%
Absolutely.

Google can't act indignant that Apple isn't following their lead after they tried, and failed, repeatedly, to follow Apple's.

Google wanted a proprietary messaging service like iMessage for Android. They failed. They failed so many times they gave up and became champions of RCS, a standard the carriers were limping towards supporting.

Google pretending they're now champions of open standards and Apple is the big-bad meanie is ridiculous.
We're not, so it isn't.
Blue is the default, because iOS always tries iMessage first in preference to SMS.
> if you plot the number of deaths of the inquisition (a few thousands over a century), then those of the french revolution (in the 100ks), napoleonic war, ww1, ww2 and nazism, and then the wider communism, I see an exponential increase.

That is of course very selective; I have no read Pinker's book, but I don't think he argues that horrible wars never occurred, just less so.

It's important to keep in mind that the population has also grown in the intervening period. For example, Caesar's conquest of Gaul cost the lives of about a million Celts, with a further million enslaved (estimates). While "1 million" and even "2 million" seems low compared to, say, the second world war, it was a huge percentage of the population, up to as much as ~25%.

There are many such truly staggering figures if you look at history. No one really remembers it in the same way as we do more modern atrocities, which is why we can have fun Asterix & Obelix cartoons about it, but the numbers of historical battles are often truly staggering.

I don't know if Pinker was right or wrong, but I do think you really need to actually look at the numbers to get a good overview throughout the centuries and you can't just rely on "armchair analysis" for this sort of thing, as there will be a strong bias towards more recent events.
Yes I am a bit more optimistic than the original commentor on the issue, but I have to agree that it's clear outside pressure is appearing. I don't necessarily mean W4, I can see the need for a company to serve the commercial interests of the community and I think this is a good way to do it. Perhaps W4 might even shield Godot from some of the negative incentives of influential donors.
> easy to learn

What exactly do you mean? Learn the basics? Become productive? Memorize the entire specification? I'd argue C isn't significantly faster at any of these than most other languages.
If you like Alfred, you'll love Raycast. Never had a product completely replace another one so easily.
If I as a SaaS provider get my SSO SAML integration via a provider like Okta or Auth0, the auth provider pricing itself is also on a "call us" tier, with a per-federation pricing in the low four figures for each individual company connecting to me via SAML.

It's pretty insane, so I'll state it again: To have a company connect to my SaaS via SAML, I as the SaaS provider have to pay my auth provider $X,000 per year for the privilege. Not counting the base enterprise tier pricing for the auth solution itself. So then I have to roll my own solution if I want to provide it for free, and I get the joy of supporting the long tail of broken SAML implementations on both the service and identity provider sides. For free. In a perfect world SSO wouldn't be a shitshow and everyone could have it for free, unfortunately that is not this world.
Sounds like other people in this thread already get a lot of iMessage spam, so I guess you've just been lucky? And it shows that this attestation junk doesn't actually curb the spam problem, so it's just an analogue of security theater.

Anyhow, sure, if you want to give away your freedom to actually own your devices, just so you don't get spam... I guess that's your choice. I just don't want to be locked into a system where that's the only choice.

Regardless, iPhones also receive SMSes. If it's impossible to spam over iMessage, they'll just use SMS. If it becomes impossible to spam over SMS, then presumably Apple can implement similar measures for iMessage that don't require us all to have hermetically-sealed, locked-down devices.
Replying to everyone who said to use Google Authenticator. I in fact did fall for the devious wording that implied no other Auth app would work but never fear, even that is not an option for my account now that I'm checking. The only available options are physical security keys (which I lack), phone numbers (which I won't disclose), and tapping a notification on an Android phone (which ties me even more into the Google ecosystem and I'd rather not pick). I'll appreciate any comments if anyone knows how to get a TOTP going with Authy for Gmail, don't assume I know everything and I'm willfully ignoring it!
> If he were a black woman you'd never dare suggest that.

I would happily suggest to quickly move on after getting a generic "not moving forward" response to anyone regardless of their own race, gender, age etc.

What's the alternative?
People get into all sorts of trouble trying to reason axiomatically about "Zero Trust". It's definitely a problem with the term, and a strength of "BeyondCorp"; BeyondCorp can only mean the one set of things, because it's meaningless outside of Google's branding. But everyone feels like they can work out what "Zero Trust" should mean. So the first thing you have to do is, you have to rewire your brain to read "Zero Trust" as the marketing term of art that it is.

The OMB ZT stuff is a reaction to USG breaches, and I think in particular the OMB hack. There's a "before" state and a desired "after" state.

In the "before" state, you're one of the 2.1 million federal employees, and you start your day by inserting a PIV card into a reader, and with that, you're given access to an intranet that in turn gives you access to a bananas number of different things that nobody can keep track of or secure.

In the "after" state, each service is responsible for establishing its own tight trust boundaries, and instead of providing a network dial tone that people mistakenly assume is a proxy for trust, the USG infrastructure provides you with end-to-end authentication for requests regardless of the network you're using.

As far as OMB and NIST talking about ZT goes, the major problem you're trying to solve is that there are a zillion federal agencies --- way more than you think there are, like you know that there's a Department of the Interior, but also under Interior there's a Susquehannah River Basin Commission with 100 employees, and there are other agencies that have like 4-5 employees. And what you're trying to do is provide a security strategy and a toolbox and a set of best/worst practices that you can apply across all of these organizations, to replace what I understand to be the status quo ante strategy of "stick it on the VPN, pretend we've kept it off the Internet, and call it a day".

The other important subtext to all of this is that there's a huge give and take between USG and industry, where USG tends to take its lead from what's happening in industry, but it also participates in the industry in that it is one of the largest customers for technology products, so the industry is intensely interested in what it does. So when USG decides to demand "Zero Trust" for its agencies, and sets out a standard set of requirements for ZT, industry goes nuts making sure their products are responsive to that standard.

The good thing here is that the OMB memo is smart, and ZT as construed by the current administration's IT people is a pretty good baseline security strategy, so in this one instance the USG is being a force for good, in that it's aligning a lot of industry work around a strategy that people should be seriously considering adopting anyways. And I think there's pretty broad recognition/agreement about that in the "security community" (hate that term), so when USG (here: NIST) does some big new thing about ZT, it gets a lot of positive attention.

... is how I understand all of this.
We do not perceive anything directly. Our perceptions are constructs tuned by sensor sample inputs. But we can only sense small amounts at once and must create a simulation for it to make any sense at all.

But there is a delay in sensor data, and if we waited before trying to finalize the constructs then we would always be behind and not be able to dodge falling rocks or anything. So the simulation must not only integrate over samples and time but also be predictive.
Thank you for this. Especially your first two paragraphs I agree 100% and I think those points are closely related to the Wikipedia article.

Along these lines I could add that in Saskatoon, despite at least three men being murdered by police and many more kidnapped by this practice, only two officers have ever been convicted (for unlawful confinement). There are hundreds, perhaps thousands of things to say about this story.

Which is why I found it surprising that the top comment was about drug use and violence in Inuit communities. As I measure it, this is at least two logical "hops" from the topic of the 'starlight tour' story in Saskatoon. Furthermore these topics are extremely sensitive in this context. Violence and substance use have been (and still are) used to justify the practices that you described above--in particular separating children from parents.

I don't know how to say well what is in my heart now. In what I have written, I am afraid of sounding like a person yelling accusations on the internet. This is not my intention. I am bringing this up in a spirit of honest dialog. I often choose to say nothing rather than risk saying the wrong thing, or even saying something in the wrong way. I think in a perfect world we would discuss these topics without fearing the shame of feeling this. Even as I type this, I feel a thin film of sweat on my hands. I am again afraid of saying something wrong. People on the internet might yell at me. I am equally afraid of giving anyone else the feeling of being yelled at. I wrote and deleted, rewrote, and redeleted this comment and my earlier comment a number of times. But I click "reply" with the hope that we can all somehow make a better world, and that we won't get there unless we try to talk about it. I am trying to learn my history, I am trying to learn how to talk about it. I hope I have written this in line with what is in my heart, which is a desire to better understand and be understood. And for every one of the comments on this topic, I am glad that so many people clicked the same "reply" button to openly share their thoughts.
Zig? Odin?
Okay, so does it really happen?

To me it sounds like it’s a civil case where domain specialists need to prove the wrongdoing in court.