skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> There are endless mountains of theoretical vulnerabilities[1], and no one (certainly not including Xen) tries to mitigate them all blindly.

I mean, not nobody. That's sort of the raison d'etre of OpenBSD.

We're talking about a distro that wasn't affected by the latest round of speculation vulnerabilities in AMD's SMT implementation because as soon as they heard about Spectre/Meltdown they immediately realized that SMT was gonna be a giant pile of sidechannels and disabled it on all processors, even the ones that were believed safe at the time. They take "defensive engineering" extremely seriously and will mitigate anything that seems plausible.

That was controversial at the time (extreme performance cost! and AMD isn't affected so why do they have to suffer!?) and they ended up being right, there were more vulnerabilities to come based on SMT leaking data to the other thread.

Nobody mitigates implausible/theoretical ideas that don't seem likely to work, but, a good software engineer certainly should be mitigating things that seem like reasonably feasible extensions of existing attacks, and hardening their environments in general to mitigate the impact if something should pop up. That's not extraordinary foresight, that's just part of the job.

Linus's decision did not follow good engineering practices, and there are examples of other OSs and distros that did do it properly. Xen may or may not not be one of them, it's certainly possible to accidentally fall into a safe path (as AMD likely did on Meltdown, given the broad multi-vendor scope of the vuln), or the "right path" could simply have been easy for them to take, but nobody should be defending Linus on the basis of "nobody could have known". The decisions he made were unsafe and incompatible with a defensive-engineering mindset, and he was told this at the time.

Linus's "why are we doing all this over a handful of broken intel processors" mindset is exactly the trap that OpenBSD avoided falling into. They knew it wasn't just going to be just a handful of broken intel processors, SMT is fundamentally a shared resource and once they saw the basis of Spectre-style sidechannels they knew SMT was gonna be a steady drip-drip-drip of vulnerabilities across all architectures. That was very foreseeable, when I saw the OpenBSD thing at the time it was like "yeah, probably gonna end up being a good call...".

For another "yeah, probably gonna be a problem down the road": KPTI really needs to be enabled-by-default on AMD processors. The Prefetch+TLB attack is still un-mitigated in hardware and AMD relies on KPTI for protection, but still recommends it be disabled by default for performance reasons. The data bleed rate is faster than Meltdown and it's really past time to turn it on by default regardless of what it does to AMD's benchmark numbers. It should have been on-by-default in the first place, and now it's actually got demonstrated exploits leaking kernel memory. Another risky, non-defensive call from the Linux tech-leads.
> but it does beat handing someone a post-it note with my email on it

When does this ever come up? I have never once in my life ever felt the need to copy down a printed email, url, or phone number. If you're a company rep, you have a website I'll just Google, if you're a person you have social media or I just hand you my phone to enter your phone number.
How do children who exhibit behaviors that the doctors and parents stereotype as opposite-sex benefit from having their natural development blocked with and/or overwhelmed with opposite-sex hormones?

Most parents are fine with gender non-conforming children (in the parent's mind of course - the kid is just being themselves). It's not a panic for them to ask why modifying their child's body to match their toy choice is so important.
And the scientific revolution first required the protestant reformation. The catholic church's stranghold on europe first had to be broken before the freedom that ushured in the scientific revolution could come about.

And the protestant revolution probably could not have happened with Gutenberg's printing press.

Gutenberg's Printing Press > Martin Luther and the Protestant Revolution > The Scientific Revolution > The Industrial Revolution > Teletubbies.
> Were there no other places in Europe, Asia or the Middle East that didn't have the same deforestation issues?

There certainly were, I remember reading that most of what is now France (Gaul, back then) had already lost most of its forests in the present Île-de-France region, i.e. Paris and its surroundings.
Another pedantipoint for you. Save 'em, collect 'em, trade 'em.
The EU executed a similar warrant some time ago, not only in banning new ICE cars sales by 2035, but also banning "highly pollutant" cars in the centre of some cities in a short time period and making a lot of changes in cars to pollute less and to have more active security systems (making all cars more expensive).

The only movement this warrant has made very effective is making citizens have FUD about what car to buy and what not to buy, making some people settle with their old car for longer time than they expected waiting for better prices and better infrastructures for EVs, and making others to buy a new petrol engine cars to replace their Diesel one to be able to enter in city centres in the next years.

I don't know how this is going to end, but there are a lot of sacrifices people can't do, and others that people doesn't want to do, and I don't know any country that is doing a decent strategy in this matter. I would say we would use public transportation with combination of some kind of car sharing in most urban areas, and private owned EVs in more remote and rural areas, where having a private parking spot is common and you can install a charger without problems.
Doesn't make sense, Roman engineers discovered steam power but it was cheaper and easier to use slaves. It's more of a problem of demand. Why would I need a loud clunky steam engine when I can hire a dozen slaves who will not only row my boat but clean, and perform whole bunch of auxillary tasks?
I may have been radicalized during my short time in the academic world, but IMO, conferences are a really bad setting to disseminate new ideas. They just don't favor it. In practice, you have people preaching their ideas, a lot of people not listening, and a few misunderstanding. Nobody else.

Spreading ideas is better done on paper, with guided discussion, and without time limits. Or, in other worlds, on something like paper-split hierarchical internet forums.

Conferences can be useful to discuss and work over known ideas. For that, they should always bring papers that are already published, and had some community attention. The idea of debuting new ideas over unprepared people is antagonistic to that goal.
I want to work on boring languages that let me focus on domains, not tools, and even so I work with Rust and have done in my last 3 or 4 roles. If you do systems programming in a startup, Rust will be there.
I guess you have little exposure to the industry. My experience is the vast majority already use Word or something else which supports DOCX. I cannot think of another format which practitioners have easy access to and would use. PDF just needs to go away for this process.
All good points, which are part of the reasons I used other languages, but I'm back to C after weighing in those pros and cons.

There is no perfect language, C just seems the best for me to get job done.
Mastercard and Binance Will Partner to Enable Retail Store Crypto Payments
Ah, that might be because of the backdrop-blur on the navigation bar. Weird that it’s causing graphical issues on your phone.
The way I put it is that it's a shame to ruin a perfectly good hobby with a job.

My background is all computer science and I work building those CRUD apps. However, my hobby is mobile dev, simulations, and hacking. I don't think I'd be happy doing those things with bosses and customers telling me what they need.
Selvä
Roman economy and military power is considered to have been at it’s peak around the time of Marcus Aurelius, who ruled 120 years after the death of Caligula.

Then again Romans didn’t really practice ostracism either…
That's literally what they said in their first sentence.
And this is why I love HN so much haha
The only reason I have some faith in this, is that it's enough for Verizon to make an announcement. While Musk doesn't mind looking bad, Verizon is much more risk averse and I assume they've done their homework
Maybe I was mistaken. I just looked into this a month ago and I thought you could submit everything electronically except for the old passport itself.
>Why would complex financial agreements keep the Romans from large scale automation?

Because the ability to amortize your costs is a boon for outpacing smaller firms. Basically, the more cash you can get your hands on that you can defer the lump sum payment on the more you can build out and thus the more you can produce. It basically becomes a positive feedback loop (this includes state subsidies indirect and direct which I'll leave as a generalized foundation for the sake of a clearer argument).

>The Romans had modularized home construction so that they could scale and that doesn't happen without financial incentives and some level of an industrial revolution.

Modularity was born out of the immediate demand for the product (housing). Note that modern, capitalist, economies build on the basis of volume whether it's housing, smart phones, clothes, and so on. And it can do this due to the fact that costs are amortized over the payment of debt along with the state subsidization as mentioned. Essentially, capitalism fuels itself through debt and state based subsidies (ex. interstate highways subsidize trucking yielding higher profits than would be possible if interstate highways were wholly private). This includes the inducement of markets (ex. prior to the trans-continental railroad the US markets were regional at best and most international trade was by sea for commodities such as cotton, gold, or ores).

Also, Roman upper class had no social need to turn their profits into more profits. They would often build themselves villas, have lavish feasts, and many other temporary luxuries in their place as their social standing was more based in that than in sheer monetary/accounting wealth.

>Rome's problem was always crony capitalism and the fact that any Voltaire's that might have existed would have been violently executed by the state. Without freedom of thought you have no Industrial Revolution.

This here is your primary error, capitalism did not exist prior to the the 17th century (merchant capitalism) at the earliest. Yes, there were loans but nothing to the complexity or legal arrangements that even a modern small business loan has in terms of legal and social dimensions. Today, debts can be carried by corporate entities. In the past though, loans were only to be held by the person or people who agreed to them. It was a rare concept that loans or debts could be owned by someone else (ex. one nation conquering another taking on their debts which is a new concept) which is an important construct for financial capitalism to emerge from industrial capitalism.
Sure, pound locks were an obvious incremental improvement back in the early centuries AD when the Romans built probably the first artificial cuts in the UK.

But it took heavy loads of coal and the economics of canal operating companies halving the coal price in Manchester to convince people it was a good idea to invest in building artificial ditches up hills all over the country to return a profit[1], which of course then opened up scope for new industrial enterprises alongside them. The Romans were perfectly capable of that level of engineering, but they focused on other things, even closer to home.

Agree that "it's all about coal" is too simplistic, but coal was a big deal even before steam mills and trains were commonplace.

[1]not all of them did, obviously. But at least they had limited liability corporations by then...
Speaking as somebody who moved to Finland, and struggles with the language, that's some good satire.
No amount of reason will help with the unreasonables.
no niin.
2023 is the year of Linux on the phone!? :)
It actually seems like a sane choice to me. PDF is good for rendering, but horrible for parsing. DOCX is a ZIP file with XML data. Maybe ODT or whatever would've been a better choice, I don't know what the format is like. But if you disregard the usual knee-jerk "but it's Microsoft!" reaction, it doesn't seem like a bad choice.
man I'd be super careful being handed anything in Colombia. Scopolamine is a real danger down there.
I actually do have a lot of exposure to patents, and I know everyone uses DocX already. I'm just saying that that web page doesn't say why they chose DocX, only why you should use DocX.
I believe they were saying those things as if they are specifically related.
Even old well known tools can be optimized and reimagined; just take the Plumbus and it’s recently upgraded Plumbus X!

https://youtu.be/JGaBU5cKluU
Nice try, finland
>do I really need to implement the Into<T> trait and use x.into() to do a conversion? Isn't it better if I just write the function that I'm using explicitly?

Firstly, you would implement From rather than Into. Into is blanket-derived for From. So if B implements From<A>, then A also implements Into<B>.

And no, you don't have to do this. If the function is never going to be generic, there's no sense in writing it that way. Solve the problem at hand, you can always go back and add abstraction later.

I really like Rust. I hear people say that it's hard, but I don't think it's harder than the problems it solves.
It's said because meat consumption is a blip compared to all the things people do, most of those vegans and vegetarians included. It's also difficult for anything lacto-ovo vegetarian to get all they need without relying on imports way away from their home country.

You'd arguably do more staying flexitarian but getting your produce as local and seasonal as possible to cut out the emissions caused by transport. And maybe not taking that second transatlantic flight. Notice how neither of those are pushed half as hard as "go vegan and save the planet".
> All dereference and array accesses must be statically verifyable, rather than causing sequenced exceptions

This is such a pipe dream. In so many cases you will not be able to verify array index statically except by having the programmer write assert statements which the compiler could do automatically when it can't prove correctness (like the java JIT which can lift out bounds checking from loops).
I never said it was a bad choice, only that they didn't say why they chose it.
Useful for dinner, networking events. Use them as source for their full name so i can find them on linkedin to connect and/or to put their info into my contacts. I never save them.
That is not exactly what they propose. That is, however, the proposition, because of the way browser makers bundle permissions.

I suggest that DDG proposes, "Trust us with access to many things, most of which we promise we won't even look at, none of which we will ever keep." Given that the extremeness is the result of browser makers, I think DDG has earned my trust. Your mileage may vary.
I do the same thing, and second the Moo.com recommendation. I splurged and got the tri-layer card for mine.
You being ignorant to how devices work isn't the same thing as your device secretly spying on you.

Your phone literally can't make a phone call without having initially shared data with Apple and your telco. This isn't some privacy-invading norm, it's the literal spec for cellular devices.

That's why when you go to Apple, give them your details and activate your phone - you are knowingly engaging in a relationship with them. This isn't some point of controversy - it is literally you making a choice about which phone you wanted to buy. You choosing to ignore Apple's and your telco's privacy policy which outline the types of data needed to operate the device really isn't something you can blame them for.

The point I'm making, which I think is lost here is that people like yourself are painfully unaware how dependent your device is on the manufacturer to function. It's a point of tedium because your type will rant on about privacy without having any understanding about what is privacy, what is essential data for the operation of the device - and then jump to literally absurd conclusions with the little information you have garnered.

Secondly you acknowledge that there are ways to limit the functionality of your device by providing less data to the manufacturer. So clearly something is working upstairs, but the compromise in that is you have limited functionality - in which case I question why you purchased that device to begin with.

Finally you are naively unaware about the differences in how your personal data is handled between Apple and Google. They are not in any way equivalent, and you've made many incorrect assumptions that Apple are doing things that Google do with Android, despite their public statements, privacy policy and 3rd party investigation that confirms otherwise.

In short you sound like a tinfoil idiot. You're not interested in facts, you're interested in mudslinging, and it's patently clear that you're happy to lie in order to do that.
Yet, many of these same swamplands are also sequestering carbon at a prodigious rate. People dig up and burn the peat they once sequestered it all in, for fuel.

So, we would probably be better off with more of even-though-methane-burping swamplands than less.
QubesOS uses Xen
Ah yes. The Bush and Trump tax cuts were not bribes from the public purse. Just sound fiscal policy.
This is a way better configuration system than AutoKey's (not AutoHotKey[1]) clunky GUI.

[1]: also this is not easily confused with another similar program when searching like AK/AHK.
I applied for my first career job (read: first job that wasn't "you don't get a living wage" retail, and which actually used my degree) 4 years ago. It's the job I'm currently still at. When I applied, it was for an entry level position at $35k. After the interview, I was offered a senior position instead for double that salary. Apparently, my current salary after 4 years of $81k is still on the low end for a senior app dev; go figure.

So on the one hand, expecting a six-figure job out of the gate is ridiculously naive.

On the other hand, over the past few months, I've gotten more and more tired of the very idea of money. Everything from "do you deserve to enjoy yourself?" down to "do you even deserve to live?" (and everything in between) is decided by how much money other people are willing to give you, meaning employers have a massive, slavery-like chokehold on employees. Meanwhile, most people don't even understand what fiat money is, but they're greedy about wanting it because under a certain amount, you suffer and die. Literally. Which only happens... because other people are greedy about money, too, for the same reasons. It's a vicious cycle. (BTW, the answer to "what is fiat money?" is "anything that represents a promise to complete a trade". That's all, it's just promises, but we treat it like it's a deity that we must worship lest it send its wrath upon us and kill us.)

Anyway, rant over for now.
> Cloudflare.NetworkEngineer

Ah, that explains a lot. Not that anyone else couldn't do such a thing, but I feel like even amongst more "hacker" types it takes a relatively specialized background to pull a trick like this (at least statistically; I'm sure there are outliers).
> You are one of these 88 people

This thread is getting enough attention that I'm highly doubtful this message was only sent to 88 people. I saw the email, thought "I haven't subscribed to any HN digests lately", and deleted it.
That's got to be your car, otherwise the number is insane for one person. Maybe check if something is drawing more power than it should.
That's a fair point, and I'm wrong to imply that, at least in the case of the "Loot Train Battle", that the problem is with GRRM, since IIRC, the books have not yet reached that plot point (and I haven't read the books).

But I do think it's fair to still critique the TV show, fantasy trappings and all, for shallow and inconsistent world-building and logic. The Loot Train Battle is an event that is symptomatic of the showrunners rush to wrap up the sprawling threads that they so carefully rolled out in the earlier seasons — by season 7, teleporting across the continent was just an accepted thing, and that correlated IMHO with a rise in incoherent and unsatisfying subplots.

What I liked about the early seasons of GoT was that even for a fantasy world, there was a real sense physical space. Many of the 1st and 2nd season's developments arise because distance is a factor — e.g. the time it takes to go from Kings Landing to Winterfell, from Winterfell to the wall, etc. The Red Wedding results because the only sensible crossing from north to south is controlled by a long-declining minor House.

Not sure how the showrunners could've worked around GRRM creating an improbable situation where Kings Landing is supplied by The Reach/Highgarden (again, haven't read the book, so maybe this is not the case?). But the showrunners seemed dead set either way to depict a big dragon-vs-army battle, logistics be damned.
> can't even muster the energy anymore to give Rust a serious try - although I'm considering I'll have to do it in the future anyway, given that the hype hasn't ebbed away.

I'm in the same boat. I've been in this industry for a long time and generally good at spotting hype. I try to avoid the endless wheel reinvention that goes on.

That being said... I hate to be the Rust evangelism strike force, but give it a try. The hype is not ebbing away because there's substance there.

IMHO it's the first real alternative to C and C++ that brings a beneficial paradigm shift without sacrificing performance or the ability to code close to the metal. You can write systems code that is provably safe in terms of catastrophic memory errors and is orders of magnitude less likely to have threading bugs. (It's still possible to leak memory or have a deadlock, but it's harder to do and easier to diagnose. More importantly neither of these errors are likely to lead to catastrophic security vulnerabilities.)

As with C there is definitely a learning curve. New C programmers get crashes all over the place until they get it. New Rust programmers get beat up by the borrow checker and other type system stuff until they get it. Luckily they've put a massive amount of work into making the compiler's errors comprehensible.

After getting good with Rust I am now more productive in it than C and C++. It's the first attempt at a C replacement I can say that about, and I've tried a few. The only other languages that are more productive than C are higher level languages with fat runtimes not "close to the metal" languages.

Edit: the part of Rust that garners the most complaints is async, and I'm still a bit on the fence about it. It's usable but needs work in the standard library to solve the "async runtime lock-in" and dependency hell problems. Also needs some better libraries in general. Most of the issues with async are in the libraries (or lack thereof) not the language. It was a mistake not to have the async runtime in "std."

But honestly the fact that you can do async this way safely in a bare metal language is impressive, and the only way to do that much better is fibers (a.k.a. coroutines, go-routines) and that generally requires a fat runtime. Go just compiles a fat runtime into all your binaries to get goroutines.