skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> you could be banned from one service and suddenly everything connected to your account is also banned.

That has been the main criticism of pervasive SSO since the beginning. It's even worse with Google. At least with github it seems to have ben an actual human telling you to fuck off!
> The website you are accessing knows nothing about your device,

That is not correct. WebAuthn supports attestation of a hardware key storage, which means site operators can refuse to accept your keys unless you use a device from a white list.
At every point in our society nothing happens unless someone or something causes it. So it's easy to carry that idea over to how the world/universe was created. There must be someone that created it. It's the simplest answer that makes sense in our minds. We have a good imagination and can come up with ideas of how something was created. Add to that how easy we believe what others tell us, especially people we respect, then we have what's needed to create a god and the need to worship him/her/they/(?).

We seek an answer but there is no answer. We can never know how our universe came to be. We don't have someone to tell us and we can't go back in time. We think science might help us but science has limits that we can't overcome.

There's also the overwhelming fear of death. Religion gives us relief by teaching that there's an after world. No one has returned from death to tell us all about it so we have no absolute answer. So anything you believe has a chance of being right. I choose to believe that our spirit continues. It works for me.
It's a bit of a mess really. Musk fired the deputy general counsel the other day, commenting shortly afterward that he had only learned about the man's previous stint in a similar role at the FBI on Sunday. People quickly pointed out that Musk had actually commented on the tweets about that person and his FBI connections last April.

I feel that what we're seeing is largely investigation theater designed to validate a particular outcome rather than a real inquiry. If you consider this from an information/hybrid warfare point of view and think of Twitter as territory, then it's reminiscent of highly engineered plebiscites that precede or follow invasions to give them an aura of legitimacy.
And now I want to listen to Running up that Tree, by Ape Bush
The current implementation shows that there is already an issue of openness. Requiring Apple or Google's password manager to manage and sync the passkeys is an issue. Google explicitly stating there is no planned support for "Local user verification" or "Passkey sync" shows they don't plan on support interoperability. A company following proper password hashing protocol means that repeat passwords isn't an issue. Pushing for 2FA using TOPT/HOTP protects people who reuse passwords and accidentally has one compromised.

Until open source, free roaming, implementations of passkeys exist that expose the private key to the end user, it's effectively a locked-in ecosystem. I still haven't seen a good reason to replace tried and tested pass+2fa with passkeys. A simple push to force non-sms 2FA is an existing solution to the problem passkeys is attempting to solve. A compromised password is much less valuable now than it was even a few years ago. Even if you miss when a password was compromised, companies that care about security have started sending those "a new login was detected" emails that would alert you of any concerning activity.
I came across the same realization after disconnecting from twitter. I am signed into multiple places using twitter. Even though I have deactivated my account, I have to reactivate every time to login on a site like disqus.

FB, Twit, Goog, need to separate oauth login from the rest of their service.
It will amazing. In Europe main reasons for banning will be "Russophobia" and "Natophilia". And in Americas "Groomer-o-phobia" will be top reason this year.
> "overconfidence/hallucination"

For sure, I asked chatGPT to generate code for a certain embedded device to interface with a specific pH sensor and the result was totally bananas.

There is no reason to believe that niche and bespoke requirements will be swallowed up in an efficient, reliable, repeatable package in the very near future. It can be taught, and will be, but I don't think it'll be too snappy.

> immensely pump their productivity, more with less and all

The more I use chatGPT, the more I think this is the case. There are too many loose ends to tie, too many semantics to clarify and realign, and so on. It's immensely powerful today, but perhaps we sometimes forget how much we've learned and how far we've come.

I felt a little doomed on my first go with chatGPT, but now the shock has worn off. I'm optimistic that it'll be a useful tool. The more I play with it, the better I get at prompting it, the more I think alright – I can actually see this being useful one day. It might actually be a useful way to rubber duck problems, generate stubs, review rudimentary implementations for improvements, etc.

Given its current limitations and how deep they are entrenched by limitations of its design, I suspect it will require a significant breakthrough to overcome them and truly replace people.
All my service logic is written with Node.js. It executes fast enough. Now it’s as fast as Java (except arithmetic) and probably similar to .Net. The performance problem is not instruction speed or anything to do with the CPU. The performance penalty comes from GC. Java and C# are also garbage collected. I believe Go is not.

A GC bottleneck is encountered when information processing frequency sustainably exceeds processing speed for long enough to encounter a problem. This is extremely unlikely to encounter in real world operation but easily produced during performance stress tests. I have found that I can send web socket messages up to 450,000 per second (on my laptop) with a total message processing frequency of about 60,000 per second. That means I can send messages fast than I can process them on the receiving end, which produces a storage problem. After about 450,000 messages message processing drops to a speed of about 300 per 5 seconds waiting on GC. Since this is a per socket problem I cannot imagine this ever becoming a real world problem. Nonetheless, I don’t suspect Go would have such a bottleneck.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFuR17YDpVk
That isn't real horizontal scaling, they are just doing a single vertically scaled writer and read only replicas, just like they do with RDS. It probably is using the same infrastructure for it.
It seems to be at least supported by gcc and clang, I am not sure about Microsofts compiler, however I thought clang could produce compatible binaries?

This seems to be a non issue?
It's just patently ridiculous that machine translation might NOT be a net benefit.

Ok. Let's assume that you're right, and apply the same logic to AI writing code:

Everyone gets free access to an AI that can write buggy-but-kind-of-working code for an app they can describe in plain English. If someone wants a basic app, for any reason, they just have to go through a series of prompts and they get something deployable out the other side. This democratizes coding, it enables and empowers millions of people, and it means anyone who wants an app of any sort can have it basically for free. Yay!

The downside is that the development industry shrinks by 90%.

That could be a net benefit for society, and I have no doubt people who want an app right now but can't afford to pay devs would absolutely think it is. I don't think you can assume cheaper access to worse products is necessarily a good thing though. There are downsides, like the consolidation of service provision into the hands of a few companies. For example, if you want translation today and you don't have a ton of money you're pretty much stuck with what Google will give you, with all of Google's biases.
1960's French government and current days French governments did not really have the same mindset on many subjects.
> With hindsight I think that I should create a per customer account on GitHub, just in case something bad happens to Travis.

Is it too late to do that?

My immediate line of thinking to this thread of "sometimes you have to use an account to sign in" was that then you'll need to create a new account specifically to sign into that service. If you have to sign into that service. Maybe I'm weird, but I tend to even use a DuckDuckGo e-mail when I sign up, so that a specific service is in no way linked directly to me and so that I can stop forwarding e-mails from any specific service.

To be fair, I sort of wonder why Github has an API that allows 3rd parties to star projects with your account. I get that the author of this post on HN is responsible for not reading the "clicked through pages" part of the processes and that they should consider themselves sort of lucky it was only abused for star farming, but why do we have that sort of "facebooky" functionality on Github in the first place?
I'm a big critic of MS and Github is just-another-acquisition to them to monetize users. To that end, the permission to allow a third party to engage in bannable behavior, using someone else's account, is promoting bad actors. MS has lots of experience with this and it will likely be addressed (prohibited outright) in the future. Too late for some.
You missed the "...and buys us a multi-million dollar holiday home in the Bahamas" from that sentence, surely.
RDF is the JSON of graphs.
OWL is the Json-Schema of RDF.
They perfected it to an art this year!
You seem very set on keeping this top level thread on the topic you believe you won the argument on, and are refusing to discuss anything else in a very condescending tone. Just thought you should know your thinly veiled attempts at controlling the conversation to "win" aren't going unnoticed.

I'll also add that you're wrong about the topic of the thread, bavell's point is absolutely on topic and the only reason you're refusing to engage and call his argument a red herring is because you know he's right and don't want to admit it.
It’s still required to complete authentication. If you don’t present one of them, your authenticator will not function. It’s used to unlock the private key.

It’s not the website confirming your second factor, but the Authenticator. And that’s on purpose; I don’t think I’d want a website being able to store a copy of my biometrics.
> Edit: Morally why would someone be obligated to pay attention to the majority? Morality isn't up for mob rule

During a pandemic and public health crisis? It absolutely is.
"Thank You For Your Service", but with a typo on the middle letter.
I'm surprised nobody has raised the trust argument... Who guarantees that the WASI blob has no hidden backdoor?
They have a famously known video surveillance system.
What are you “nope”ing exactly?

The comment you are responding to states one thing (Github banned NopeCHA) and asks an other. (If the ban was done by an automated system)

Which one of these two are you saying “nope” to? And what does google login has anything to do with these?
No thanks, leaf blowers and other lawn care equipment is pretty damn noisy.

That and the crushing car dependency.
There are more than 3 compilers out there....
The MMSE is still a useful clinical tool today, simple enough to be administered with nothing more than a pen and a few scraps of paper.

That said, it's certainly better if your exam subjects are suffering from dementia, so they can't memorise the answers ;-)
None of Paradox' games are turn based, they're real time (but pausable). Their own description for the genre is "grand strategy", which is IMO between what is classically understood as "RTS" and "4X".
C23 and AVX512 greet them.
I've made some assumptions, which on reflection could be incorrect.

My Tacx Flux does a spindown test where you spin it up to a high RPM, then stop pedalling and it measures how long it takes to stop. I guess it's actually trying to get an accurate measure of the resistance being applied.

A heavier flywheel will be harder to spin up, but will also take longer to spin down at the same resistance, so maybe that doesn't make a difference.

Pressing something against the flywheel would make the trainer think it's applying more resistance than it really is, so I'm pretty sure that would work.
> Is being on call really a sign of low status?

For all practical purposes, above a certain level of management, you are implicitly on call all the time. However, the bar to clear to engage you gets higher the further up the leadership layers you go. A manager of a handful of teams comprising about 100 staff gets engaged for less serious fires than the CEO, but both are "on call". It might take the board of directors chartering a helicopter to get to the CEO's fly fishing cabin during the CEO's vacation if a situation warranting such presents itself, but the CEO is absolutely on call 24x7x365.

The complexity of what engages the on call person I suspect is what connotes status. Called for clearing out disk space: low status. Called for application outage that has stumped multiple technical teams: higher status. Called for a production outage impacting the next day's C-level reports that requires engaging other management: higher status. Called for heading off a shareholder proxy battle: even higher status.

Note here complexity doesn't solely reside in the technical realm, but frequently is rather a blend of technical factors, social factors, and quickly making impactful decisions in low-information situations.
Maybe a way to handle this kind of situation would be to create a dedicated Google account?

(I haven't encountered the situation myself, didn't try it)
When I saw the domain my mind first jumped to this list of highest search engine ad cost per clicks: https://www.kantar.com/inspiration/advertising-media/the-mos...
There is GNU Taler but whenever you see it being talked about on hacker news you will find comments that border on conspiracy theory even though when you look at the technical design of GNU Taler it offers more privacy than Bitcoin or Ethereum.

Apparently providing both privacy to buyers and following AML and income reporting laws at the same time is crossing some line because "the government is always wrong".

It is kind of like following the law is frowned upon in the cryptocurrency space which is why any competitor that can actually follow the law must be nipped in the bud.

I don't believe crypto users care about privacy except maybe when they use Montero.
Standards like WebAuthn support attestation of a key storage, so the site can see who has manufactured it and can choose not to trust weird DIY or open source solutions without an attestation certificate.
> The thing is, America is very big. For perspective, America is just shy of the square mileage of all of Europe - but America is just one country... and it has half the population of Europe.

Every time Americans use that argument to defend anything that is wrong with the US policy, it looks crazy to people who are looking at the situation from another place around the world.

Neither size nor population are arguments for anything. There are gigantic countries on the planet that do not have America's suburb/car problem. They not only have well-run cities, but they also build fast trains and whatnot. The main trick is in not setting up entire urbanization and infrastructure to maximize profit for real estate, automotive and oil industries by spreading out people to immense areas like in the US. So, in that regard, the people who say that the 'suburban American dream' was a scam, they are right: It can be sustained in a few very rich regions. It is unsustainable for anywhere else. Even in those rich regions it causes many problems ranging from inefficiency to traffic congestion in the cities where the suburbanites have to go to work.

> When I visit mega-cities, I see overt drug usage on the streets, trash everywhere, homeless camps everywhere

Those have nothing to do with the concept of cities but everything to do with the US policies that prevent social services with public spending in order to maximize the tax breaks for the corporations and the rich.

> We don't get to tell each other how to live.

Actually, they do - you are spending their tax money for your inefficient suburb in a much higher rate than your tax money that they are spending for their city. An inefficient system is inefficient, even if those who run that system can afford to run it - like your local prosperous suburb. For the regional infrastructure in your own locale to be affordable by your suburb, a lot of taxpayer money will have to be spent for the society-wide infrastructure. So that the costs of being integrated to the larger infrastructure can even be affordable in your region regardless of its prosperity. From the larger power network to the transportation and communication networks, from production & supply chains to judiciary, police, even defense & military.

There is no small region that can afford the modern local amenities that they have without having a much larger society making those possible through society's aggregated spending regardless of how rich the region is.
They’re incredibly smug about it too, as if getting born with a silver spoon in your mouth is somehow far more commendable?
I thought the history of denying access was interesting. I wonder if other poorly behaved companies could be forbidden to acquire even small things if it is just to - you know - shut it down. Like you did last time?
I work at Amazon. The internet would be in trouble. I know very little about the fulfillment side of things, but I would expect things to stop there pretty much immediately. There is of course automation, robots, etc. but also many people in the loop and once they vanish I'd expect things to enter some kind of passive failure mode. Hopefully these failures would be isolated from the rest of the services.

The more interesting question is how long AWS and retail services would continue running and how they would fail. I don't think anyone could say. All people worldwide vanishing in an instant isn't a realistic scenario to plan for—if it happens, then the world has bigger problems and in any case, who would be around to execute the recovery plan?

Still for the sake of the thought experiment...I'm assuming in this scenario the world sees fit to keep supplying the data centers with power and other utilities, but no one has access to the buildings, tries to get in, bomb them etc. In this case, I would expect things to fail gradually, then suddenly and catastrophically, in the period of a few days to a few months. Failure should happen mostly independently by availability zone.
On a previous project, we reached the limit of 32 billions of unique IDs (Neo 3.2 if I remember well).
And had to wait for the next version so we could add more data.

I left the project.
But, as far as I know, there are still planes maintained and authorized to fly in the sky, so I suppose the DB is still up in production.
Contracts. You need legal terms that your users must agree to in exchange for your goods and services.

You have two options: transparency or dark patterns.
I grew up working class 20mn from Monaco. That place has been an excellent introduction to the notion of inequality.

It is quite unique. The entire riviera’s economy is focused on tourism, but Monaco takes that to the next level : it is a city designed to attract the ridiculously rich and extract as much money from them as possible while they are there through a carefully maintained wealth signaling culture.

My go-to example is this : a couple of years back I visited the region with some friends and took them to Monaco one day. Obligatory visit to the Casino, around which two things had changed :

- the park in front of the casino had been redesigned. You know how airports force you to go through the duty free, or IKEA has you walk around the entire store to find the exit ? Well that’s what they did with that park, the only way to the casino is through the (luxury brands) shops
- in front of the casino itself, there was a new statue with a plaque. The plaque states « artist : anish kapoor. Donated to the principality of Monaco by miss so and so »

Nothing says « wealth signaling » like donating an anish kapoor to Monaco.

When I say that culture is carefully maintained: the Monaco police will turn you down at the city entrance if you’re driving a beater. They have asked me to take a detour rather than drive my crappy moped in front of the casino. I general, Monaco only exposes you to luxury and incentivized you to show off by burning money.

The default tip to service staff is the highest denomination bill. When the currency changed, it went from the highest francs bill to the highest euros bill - easy conversion.

I could go on and on about how ridiculous this all is, the permanent yacht completion in the port, the luxury sports cars stuck in a permanent traffic jam (locals drive mopeds), the dozens of « out of touch oligarch » stories, the looks of disgust and disbelief I’d get for wearing regular clothes…

In the flip side, Monaco treats their workers well. I have worked a few summer jobs well and everyone I know in the area works is has worked in Monaco. The minimum wage is higher, low income jobs get more after tax than before (there is a « prince’s bonus »). You will at least double your income from tips if you work in the service industry.

Like the article says, The country has been good with its population, allowing them to benefit from living in a playground for the rich rather than displacing them. As a result the royal family is well liked, and it’s not uncommon to meet the prince at places where the workers hang out.

If you think Donald trump has good taste in interior design, love the smell of money and tax evasion or just have a lot of money you’d like to get rid of, visit Monaco !

More seriously, I’d recommend paying it a visit if you find yourself in the vicinity. It is a unique place that will be of interest to curious folks.
Pe be persuasive
Why are you being so condescending?
I would flag assigning a return value to a string_view in code review. Same as assigning to a pointer.

Yes, it’s one more thing nudging the programmer toward unsafe use, but this is C++ we’re talking about: only the strong survive.
It is very likely that there are specific constraints. There have to be or you will get a PR disaster. Happened to a lot of former AIs.
I don't think it 'needs' to be done secretly so much as big companies cannot be bothered to get into fights over every moderation, and find i more economical to avoid legal liability by not saying anything at all. They don't bind themselves with any promises to do so in their user agreement (which is naturally tilted fully in their favor, since their most avid users are not their customers, as such), and a calculated indifference means less overhead than clear communication. Is that infuriating to some people? Sure, but it's how a lot of businesses operate because it's in their economic interest.

Again, you're not a customer. The advertisers and data brokers are the customers. Keeping this in mind is why I lose little sleep over being shadowbanned and having my visibility limited on social media.